Russia today

[blindpig]

Ben Aris: Putin tells Russia’s oligarchs that the return of Western business will not be easy or cheap
April 5, 2025
By Ben Aris, Intellinews, 3/19/25

[Transcript of Congress: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/76474]

Russian President Vladimir Putin told the country’s leading oligarchs that Western companies that “slammed the door” on Russia when they left the country after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine will not be allowed to repurchase their assets cheaply or regain their former market positions.

Speaking at the annual Congress of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RSPP) in Moscow, he said that businesses would not be allowed to exercise option agreements with their partners to buy back companies. These agreements were widely signed as part of a raft of takeovers and MBOs.

“If the niche of a Western company is already filled by a Russian business, then … as we say, that train has left,” Putin said.

Nevertheless, the climate is warming and the Kremlin has said it is open to restarting cooperation with international firms and the Russia market is open to them again thanks to the positive attitude of the Trump administration to restarting commercial ties with Russia.

The RSPP meeting was held on the same day as Putin held a 1.5-hour phone call with Trump where the two presidents explicitly talked about restarting business relations.

Trump and Putin share a “mutual interest in normalising relations” thanks to “the special responsibility of Russia and the United States for ensuring security and stability in the world,” the Kremlin’s statement reads, The Kyiv Independent reported.

“In this context, a wide range of areas in which our countries could establish interaction was considered. A number of ideas were discussed that are moving towards the development of mutually beneficial cooperation in the economy and energy sector.”

“A future with an improved bilateral relationship between the United States and Russia has huge upside,” including “enormous economic deals” and “geopolitical stability,” the White House added.

Putin has already instructed the government to monitor potential buyback deals and scrutinise each case carefully. While companies such as Renault, McDonald’s and Henkel had negotiated exit terms that included buyback options, the details of these agreements remain undisclosed.

Renault famously sold its stake for a nominal one ruble but has a buy-back option for the same amount. However, the AvtoVAZ president Maxim Sokolov, the Russian partner in the joint venture, said last month that if Renault wants to return it will have to pay $1.3bn to regain its stake, as that is the cost of the excess investment the Russian company had to make following the French carmaker’s exit.

McDonald’s will more than likely not be able to retake control of its extensive franchise at all. Its business was completely taken over by the copycat franchise Vkusno I Tochka (Tasty. Period), which has continued to roll out restaurants across the country and claims to have surpassed the American chain’s financial results after the first year of operation.

Putin’s comments are motivated by the expectation that even if Trump offers sanctions relief the process will be slow and protracted. Sanctions imposed on Russia and its businesses are unlikely to be lifted entirely.

“We should not hope for complete freedom of trade, payments and capital flows,” he said, adding that even if some restrictions were eased, Western countries would find alternative ways to create obstacles. He argued that the global economy was entering a “new spiral of economic rivalry” and that Russian businesses must be prepared for further challenges.

The Russian economy, Putin said, would inevitably experience a slowdown as a result of sanctions and the high and sticky inflation it has caused, but should remain stable. Inflation control and maintaining low unemployment levels would be key priorities. “The Russian economy should become a “safe haven.” A dramatic decline in growth rates of the national economy should be prevented,” he said.

Putin asserted that Russia had adapted to sanctions, which earlier this month he argued were actually a boon for the Russian economy as they have stimulated investment and innovation. The exit of multinationals handed entire business niches over to Russian entrepreneurs, fully formed for kopecks on the dollar, in one of the biggest asset transfer events in Russia’s history.

“The Russian business skilfully used the exit of Western companies and took the niches earlier held by them,” he said. While some foreign firms wished to return, Russian companies would be given priority. Those that had continued operating in Russia under different brands would be “treated with respect.”

The Kremlin has tasked the Cabinet with establishing a framework for Western firms wishing to re-enter the Russian market, ensuring fair commercial conditions that will be judged on a case-by-case basis. However, Putin made clear that returning companies would not receive financial advantages.

“The Western businesses will not be able to repurchase their Russian operations for modest amounts of money. That train has left for Western companies, whose niches were occupied. There will be no privileges and preferences for the ones returning,” he said.

Discussing global trade, Putin claimed that “it will not be as it has been before,” and warned against reliance on Western legal frameworks for investment protection. “Only fully sovereign countries are capable of dynamic and progressive growth in the interests of their people. The majority of European countries lost their sovereignty and faced serious problems in the economy and the security sphere as a result,” he said.

Meanwhile, Russian business representatives held talks with Robert Agee, President and CEO of the American Chamber of Commerce in Russia, regarding the potential easing of sanctions in specific sectors. Trump’s special envoy, Richard Grenell, also met officials in Switzerland to discuss possible Russian gas exports to Germany via Nord Stream 2. Additionally, Moscow and Washington are exploring economic cooperation in the Arctic, including natural resource development and trade routes.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/04/ben ... -or-cheap/

******

Head of the State Construction Supervision Department of the Russian Ministry of Defense has been arrested
colonelcassad
April 5, 14:09



The head of the State Construction Supervision Department of the Main Directorate for Control and Supervisory Activities of the Russian Defense Ministry, Yuri Kozhevnikov, has been arrested on charges of corruption

. Kozhevnikov is charged with several episodes of bribery (Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
He faces up to 15 years in prison for the charge of bribery on an especially large scale.
The case will be heard behind closed doors. The court denied the request for house arrest and shoved Kozhevnikov into a pretrial detention center.

Putin's repressions in the army continue!

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9765208.html

Chubais's property and money have been seized
April 6, 15:15



The Moscow Arbitration Court has seized the property and funds of the former head of the Rusnano corporation, Anatoly Chubais, and seven other former top managers of the company. Security measures totaling 5.6 billion rubles were imposed on the claim of the Rusnano company itself, which is demanding that the defendants pay damages in the amount of about 3.9 billion rubles and an additional $20.45 million (about 1.7 billion rubles).

Ah, the remnants of former luxury, the rest was taken abroad.
It was necessary to grab it while it was still in Russia and shake down its foreign accounts.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9766951.html

I'd suggest an ice pick.

German engineer passes on information on semiconductor production to Russia
April 6, 9:04



German engineer passes on information on semiconductor production to Russia


Dutch Allege Russian Agent Infiltrated ASML and NXP to Steal Technical Data Needed to Build Factories Capable of Making 28-Nm Chips

Engineer Herman A., 43, is accused of secretly transferring confidential technical information from ASML, NXP, and TSMC to Russia, allegedly to help build a 28-nanometer chip factory there, the NRC said. He made about 40,000 euros in illegal earnings and faces 18 to 32 months in prison. While Herman A. alone could not have stolen complete semiconductor designs and equipment, a coordinated group could have potentially helped build semiconductors in Russia.

German Herman A. is accused of supplying Russia with confidential technical materials from ASML, GlobalFoundries, NXP, TSMC, and GlobalFoundries, including semiconductor manufacturing manuals and various chip manufacturing machines. Investigators reportedly found that he had received 105 internal documents from ASML and 88 files related to TSMC.

The materials did not contain detailed blueprints for building wafer manufacturing equipment or anything more significant (like the fab itself or manufacturing technology). However, they were marked as confidential and could have helped build a basic semiconductor line capable of producing chips using 28nm technology. Investigators believe he shared the data via cloud storage and messaging apps and passed on a USB drive in Moscow, allegedly making around €40,000 in the process.

“Herman A.” is also reportedly linked to an attempt to purchase chemical vapor deposition equipment, possibly as part of an effort to outfit a future chip factory in Russia. However, the equipment was first diverted to Israel and then never delivered, according to the report.

In August 2024, he was taken into custody following a tip-off from the country’s intelligence agency. A month later, ASML and NXP were formally informed of his espionage suspicions. His case is currently pending in court, with authorities suspecting him of having ties to Russian intelligence. Both firms are involved in the investigation and have filed complaints against the former employee.

While the agent would not have been able to steal the blueprints for all the tools needed to build a fully functioning semiconductor manufacturing plant in Russia, a network of such spies could potentially do the job to set up a semiconductor manufacturing facility as well.

Before his arrest in 2024, he had a successful career in semiconductor design and manufacturing. In 2008 and 2009, he interned at the Imec research center in Belgium. After that, he joined the Greek research institute NCSR, and then began working at GlobalFoundries’ Fab 1 in Dresden.

In 2015, he joined the Dutch startup Mapper, which was developing maskless lithography technology based on massively parallel electron beam writing using 10,000 to 13,000 electron beams. In 2012, Mapper received financial backing from Rusnano, a state-owned investor in high-tech industries, and built a small MEMS (microelectromechanical systems) manufacturing facility in Russia.

When Mapper went bankrupt in late 2018, ASML acquired its assets and staff under pressure from the Dutch and US governments to protect the technology. Herman A. was one of more than 100 engineers who moved to ASML, where he ran machines to manufacture electro-optical components. Today, ASML employees describe Herman A. as a “short” man, while others say he was a dedicated but reserved technician who had difficulty communicating. However, according to the NRC, Herman A.’s name appears on four patent applications related to ASML, the most recent of which was published just a month ago. The documents list multiple inventors, and it’s unclear whether Herman A. played a significant role in the innovations.

An analysis of his digital activity shows that in December 2020, he twice accessed restricted files he didn’t need. The company’s internal security systems did not issue any warnings at the time. Experts interviewed by the NRC believe the leaked data included presentations and manuals, but not the master plans needed to build chip-making machines or an entire factory. His contract ended in 2021, when ASML outsourced his work.

After ASML, the agent applied to recruiting agencies for research work, but was unsuccessful. In January 2022, during the pandemic, he took a temporary job at NXP in Nijmegen as a technologist. In May of the same year, he contacted a company in Nijmegen to request a price for a used chemical vapor deposition tool from ASM International. The equipment was originally supposed to be sent to Germany, but he later changed the destination to Israel. The goods were never delivered. It is now being seen as an attempt to gather spare parts for a new facility.

According to statements by his ex-wife, he was in contact with Russian researchers by the end of 2023 about setting up a 28nm chip manufacturing plant in Russia. At the time, Russian companies were blacklisted and could not obtain advanced chips from reputable suppliers, whether distributors or manufacturers.

https://vk.com/wall-177228143_28370?w=w ... 8143_28370 - zinc

If they really managed to steal the technology, then we can only note a successful act of industrial espionage. This is exactly how it should be done.
Since they won't sell us the technology, we need to develop it ourselves and simultaneously obtain similar information using intelligence.
Good luck to our intelligence officers.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9766591.html

Google Translator

[blindpig]

RUSSIA’S PLAN TO BECOME A BANANA REPUBLIC



by John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

Until recently it was impossible to grow bananas in Russia except in the greenhouse of Count Pyotr Sheremetev at Kuskovo. That eighteenth-century establishment was so costly to operate, the fruit was a rarity meant for the tsar’s table, and not too tasty either.

More than two hundred years of Russian banana history have elapsed since then with the revolutionary outcome that bananas have become the most popular fruit among ordinary Russians – and the bananas are now much tastier than the aristos ever knew. The reason is that almost all the bananas eaten in Russia are grown in Ecuador.

That was until a year ago, when an American plan to recruit the Ecuadorian government to the Ukrainian side in the war against Russia intervened at the same time as the Ecuadorian humpback fly threatened to leap out of shipments of bananas as they landed in St Petersburg and Vladivostok ports. In February 2024, a partial ban was imposed by Rosselkhoznadzor, the federal sanitary inspection agency, on the importation of Ecuadorian bananas.

This has cut the total tonnage of banana imports to Russia by 21% in 2024 compared to the average annual tonnage of the period, 2018-22. For Russian consumers this has meant a banana crisis — fewer fruit in the market to buy, and at a rising price. Over the two years 2023 and 2024, the average price for a kilogram of bananas as measured by Rosstat grew from 80 roubles to 146 roubles – a jump of 83%.

While banana growers in India, Turkey and Indonesia then offered their own bananas to fill the supply gap, government officials announced in Moscow they were considering domestic production. In November 2024 Oksana Luth of the federal Agriculture Ministry announced she was studying a national greenhouse plan for commercial banana production. Andrei Platonov, head of a grower organization called the Association for Development of Subtropical Agriculture, told the press that the growers in his group would soon launch a homegrown banana crop for the first time. “If everything goes well, by the end of this year we will show you bananas grown in Russia,” Platonov told Tass.

On this prospect, President Vladimir Putin has reversed himself.

Putin is the only official in Russian history to have inaugurated a line of banana boats carrying the fruit to St. Petersburg – except that when he did so one Monday in March 2010, the banana boat line had already been operating with specialized refrigerated containers for several months, and with other transport technology for several years before that. The real reasons for the president’s banana interest were, firstly, a move by a St. Petersburg importer named Vladimir Kekhman to establish a commercial monopoly of the imports, driving his competitors into bankruptcy; and secondly, Gazprom’s campaign to lobby the Danish government to drop its opposition to the laying of the first Nord Stream gas pipeline on the Baltic seabed.

That story was first told here. The banana skin proved to be a slippery one. Kekhman’s business collapsed in the British and Russian courts, and his Joint Fruit Company (JFC) went broke. Much later, in September 2022, the Danish government secretly assisted in the destruction of the second Nord Stream pipeline off Denmark’s Baltic Sea island of Bornholm.

Putin then revealed that he is the first Russian leader since Sheremetyev to be growing bananas himself in a greenhouse at his Moscow region dacha at Novo-Ogarevo — and to have invited the press to film the fruit ripening on the tree. That was nine months ago in July 2024.

On bananas Putin has not so much slipped as reversed direction. In 2014 the President was sure, he told a meeting with agriculturalists, that “we are not going to grow bananas here, but we have many crops that can certainly be very competitive.” Eight years later, in June 2022, Putin acknowledged: “No matter how hard we try, we will be unable to substitute bananas, despite our achievements in plant selection, of which our colleagues have reported today. We can, of course, produce them by using LNG to maintain greenhouses in the required condition. But it cannot be produced commercially, can it?”

Putin answered that question seven weeks ago. “Mr Manturov [Deputy Prime Minister, former minister of trade and industry], who is present here, is nodding his head. We discussed this matter with him. I have already spoken about this: just as in agriculture, when agricultural producers begged us: ‘Just don’t let anyone else into our market, we will do everything ourselves.’ Except for bananas, of course. But they started growing bananas, too. It’s a bit expensive, though, and it’s not necessary.”

At the Kremlin, necessity is measured in response to public discontent and then to lobbying by interest groups, or vice versa.

Accordingly, it has been announced that bananas may soon be officially designated for state support for the growers. Sergei Izmalkov, the agriculture minister in the southwestern region of Stavropol has declared that “in order to qualify for certain measures of state support, it is necessary to give bananas the opportunity to be an agricultural crop in the Russian Federation. The Ministry of Agriculture of Russia is working in this direction, and I think there will be results in the near future.” Izmalkov’s plan calls for federal funding of fifteen hectares of greenhouses to be built at the regional town of Nevinnomyssk at a cost of Rb1.4 billion.

Mikhail Minenkov, administrative head of Nevinnomyssk, has confirmed that the banana- growing complex is being built, with the expectation that the first crop will be harvested and distributed commercially in a year’s time. According to Minenkov, passion fruit, mango, avocado, almonds, and pistachios will also be grown at the Nevinnomyssk plantation. “The project is new and interesting for the country and for the region,” Minenkov has told the press. “We have experience in projects in the field of agriculture. Once it sounded strange for Nevinnomyssk that we would grow apples and cherries, but today these projects have been implemented.”

Telephoned last week for a progress report on how his bananas are growing, what the harvest volume will be, and what price for consumers, Minnenkov asked for an email, but then refused to answer the questions.

In fact, there is the general policy that in conditions of wartime mobilization and the hostility of both Ecuador and Denmark, Russia ought to be producing bananas, and so the budget money ought to be going out to growers in the southwest. In practice, however, they have no bananas.

For several years Russia has been one of the top-ten markets in the world for eating bananas.


Source: https://www.worldstopexports.com/banana ... y-country/

Russian data reports, together with summaries from the international Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), indicate the import volume and value have been slipping slowly since 2020, when the total tonnage was 1.47 million tonnes, until 2024, when the total had dropped 21% to 1.16 million tonnes. By the end of last year, one banana out of every fourteen grown worldwide was eaten in Russia.


FAO, “Banana Market Review, Preliminary Results 2024”

In December 2023 then Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky visited the Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa in Quito, and requested that Ecuador transfer its Russian-supplied Mi-8 and Mi-17 helicopters and infantry weapons to the Ukraine. Noboa, a US-born and US-educated heir to the largest banana-growing fortune in Ecuador, had been elected narrowly a few weeks earlier. He agreed to the deal with a US promise to replace the Russian-made transfers with US arms reportedly worth $200 million.

Moscow then warned that its contract of arms supply with Ecuador prohibited third-country transfers without its permission, and this was refused. The ban on Ecuadorian banana shipments to Russia followed; the humpback fly, megaselia scalaris, was a cover story.

Noboa then retreated and promised not to supply his weapons to the war in the Ukraine. He faces re-election later this week.

Over the intervening months Russian banana importers have been diversifying their sources of supply, starting with India and Vietnam. A much earlier undertaking by the Kremlin for investment in banana-growing in Venezuela has failed to materialize; that had been a Kekhman venture.

LEADING BANANA PRODUCERS IN THE WORLD


Source: https://worldpopulationreview.com/

Large retailers have reported buying test batches of bananas from India, Costa Rica, Colombia, Brazil, Turkey, Egypt, and other countries. Although the Rosselkhoznadzor ban on Ecuadorian was quickly lifted, the shift by Russian supermarket buyers had already begun, cutting the volume of Ecuadorian imports to their lowest level in more than a decade.

There have also been repeated public cautions from Russian agro-industry experts against spending the vast sums of money required to support domestic banana cultivation. “Everything can be grown in space,” Dr Pavel Krestov, Director of the Botanical Garden Institute of the Far Eastern branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Vladivostok, was reported as telling the press. “But the question is at what cost. A banana requires a long period of time for fruit formation – almost a year. All this time greenhouses need to be heated — that is, throughout the winter. The areas that will be required [for industrial-scale cultivation] are large. It will be very expensive.”

Following the visit to Moscow of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in July 2024, Putin called in national television to reveal that he was growing bananas himself at Novo-Ogarevo, and had entertained Modi at his greenhouse.


Reporter Pavel Zarubin points to the bananas growing in President Putin’s country estate at Novo-Ogarevo. Source: https://t.me/zarubinreporter/2987


The greenhouse at the Kuskovo palace estate of Count Pyotr Sheremetyev, built as a summer residence east of Moscow in the mid-18th century.

Moscow economists are predicting that neither the diversification of banana import sources nor state spending on domestic plantations in the southwest will stop the price of bananas rising; the forecast for banana inflation by the end of this year is 12%.

The impracticality of the Stavropol region’s Nevinnomyssk banana project has been pointed out by economists in recent press reporting. For a state investment of Rb1.4 billion, the output is planned to be just 4,000 tonnes. However, for domestic bananas to become more than a Sheremetyev-Putin rarity, the expert estimate is that at least 280,000 tonnes must be produced. The cost of this would be about Rb100 billion – that is equivalent to about 10% of the total annual investment in the fixed assets of entire Russian agricultural sector.


“Sweet and smooth: Russians want to eat domestic bananas -- economists have expressed doubts about the realism of these plans” – Izvestia, March 17, 2025.

For the time being, the impossibility of the Russian fruit becoming a top banana is not acknowledged in the Russian press by ministry officials in Moscow or in the southwestern regions contending for federal budget handouts. Experts quoted in the press over the past decade, including botanic garden academics and grower lobbyists, have been contacted for this report. They too prefer not to slip on the subject and say nothing.

https://johnhelmer.net/russias-plan-to- ... more-91356

*****

Landslide for Lukashenko as Belarus reasserts sovereignty and independence
One of the positive side-effects of Russia’s SMO in Ukraine has been the deepening cooperation between Russia and Belarus.
Proletarian writers

Sunday 6 April 2025


President Lukashenko has helped his country defy all the odds and repel all attempts to turn it into a vassal state with a broken economy and a comprador ruling elite. Rather than allowing its people to be turned against one another and transformed into cannon fodder for imperialist wars, Belarus has steered its own course and built further on the industrial and agricultural base it inherited from the Soviet Union.

The triumphant re-election of President Alexander Grigoryevich Lukashenko on 26 January, with a whopping 86 percent of the vote, was a further indication of the Belarusian leader’s wild popularity. And it was notable that in the same election the runner-up was Sergei Alexandrovich Sierankov, standing for the Communist Party of Belarus.

Predictably, Lukashenko’s victory was denounced as ‘fraudulent’ by US, British and EU imperialists. These stories were all re-run on 25 March as the president was being sworn in for his seventh term.

President Lukashenko came into office in 1994, and during his three decades in office he has been painted by western politicians and media as a cross between a lunatic and a strong-armed dictator guilty of all manner of eye-watering crimes. This depiction has been very much in the vein of the same gentry’s characterisation of Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe and Libya’s Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. But what is the reality?

Lukashenko heads a state that was noted during the Soviet period both for its successful collective farms and also for its strong industrial base. Whatever else he may have said or done, President Lukashenko’s real crime in the eyes of imperialism is to have played a progressive role in helping to preserve large elements of that Soviet agricultural and industrial sectors, and even in helping to extend them.

For instance, ‘Belarus’ tractors, a legacy of the Soviet period, have become something of a global brand in recent years, and the Belarusian collective farm system has also been maintained. President Lukashenko himself was a product of that system; he was a very successful collective farm manager, and he still comes across as a genuine outdoorsman today.

(As an aside, if you ever want to see a wood chopping masterclass, look up the lumberjack Lukashenko online. He can demonstrate how to find the weak point in a log, and show how just a gentle tap in the right place will cause it to fall easily apart.)

Lukashenko is a product of the Soviet system. He’s often described as a “Soviet man” by his opponents, who appear to consider this an insult, but he himself has never shied away from the label. He regularly expresses a certain admiration for Marxism-Leninism as he understands it, even though it’s clear that he’s not a Marxist-Leninist himself.

During his inauguration speech, the president emphasised the continued industrial and technological development, despite an onslaught of western sanctions aimed at destroying Belarus’s economy and bringing down its government:

“The Belarusian state model of development has become a challenge to the system of pseudo-liberal values. And the fact that we do not retreat and do not bend frankly irritates our opponents and enemies. That is why we have been hit with a waterfall of sanctions …

“The space industry is fully developed in the country. While we started with the production of equipment for space technology, today we participate in international research programmes, launch satellites and train specialists. We have built the first nuclear power plant. With the opening of the Belarusian National Biotechnology Corporation, we have mastered technologies available only to a few countries of the world.

“We have also found our niche in such an advanced field as digital technologies. Our optics and microelectronics are in demand all over the world. We are known as the home of the largest Belaz vehicles. Every tenth tractor on the planet comes off the MTZ assembly line. And there are also MAZ vehicles, electric buses, cars, etc.”

The Belarusian leader also explained that by implementing a rural development programme, the country has not only ensured its own food security, but in many areas has become one of the world’s top ten food exporters. “This is all of us, the new Belarus, the country of workers and creators. We have become strong, significant and noticeable,” he said. (Lukashenko: Belarusian state model of development became challenge to system of pseudo-liberal values, Belarus Today, 25 March 2025)

Pro and anti-imperialist forces
There have been many pro-capitalist reforms made in Belarus over the years, but attention should be drawn towards the words of communist leader Sergei Syrankov:

“For the first time since 2001, the second place among real candidates was taken not by a liberal nationalist or any other puppet from abroad, but by a supporter of deepening socialist reforms. This shows that Belarusian society after 2020 has received the necessary vaccination against these viruses.

“Liberalism and nationalism have become unacceptable among the citizens of Belarus. It is clear that we are approaching the implementation of those provisions of our programme when the social ills will be completely eradicated from the life of our society.”

Syrankov was referring to the attempted overthrow of Lukashenko’s government in a colour revolution-type event in 2020. This coup attempt ultimately failed because Lukashenko’s government was able to mobilise the support of the state machinery and of the great bulk of the population. Belarus’s people made it clear that they did not want a government of the liberals and so-called ‘nationalists’ (ie, the pro-imperialist elements) led by west-appointed ‘celebrity wife’ Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, the Juan Guaidó of Belarus.

Even though there is genuine domestic opposition to Lukashenko, and there are people within the Belarusian working class who have disagreements with things that he and his government have done, it is clear that the masses choose to go along with Lukashenko because they understand that the most vocal ‘opposition’ leaders are tools of imperialist reaction who want to do to Belarus what has been done to Ukraine.

Attempts to use the national question continue to fail
Belarus not only retains strong elements of Soviet industry and agriculture, but it has also preserved the Soviet nationality and languages policy. Co-equal status is given to Russians and Belarusians inside the country, and the Belarusian language is supported alongside Russian, just as it was during the Soviet period.

The so-called ‘nationalists’ in the so-called ‘opposition’ (in reality bought-and-paid-for stooges of Anglo-American imperialism), never tire of complaining that Belarusian culture and language are being ‘extinguished’, hoping thereby to stir up sectarian divides among the people – and their accusations are widely repeated by western politicians and commentators.

But the truth is just the opposite. Most Belarusians speak Russian as their first and preferred language, but just as was formerly the case in the Belarusian Soviet Republic, so today in the Belarusian state, the Belarusian language and all aspects of Belarusian culture, including literature and music, are actively promoted.

To assert otherwise is an outright lie, just as the Banderite fascists in Ukraine lied when they asserted that the Soviet state was eradicating the Ukrainian language and culture. In both cases, this attempt to stir national divides and nationalist sentiment, to present one section of the population as being ‘oppressed’ by another, is a device aimed at grooming fascistic proxy forces that could eventually be used to cower the general population and overturn a sovereign and anti-imperialist government.

And we have no need to speculate about exactly what this looks like; it played out in all its hideous reality on the streets of Ukraine over the last 30 years.

Lessons of Ukraine
We can only imagine how different Ukraine would be today if its people had been able to put forward a similar figure to Lukashenko in the 1990s instead of finding themselves dominated by a string of pro-imperialist comprador gangsters. In particular, we note that President Lukashenko has remained sympathetic to the Communist party and consistently acted in coordination with it.

Whatever the ideological and political weaknesses of Belarus’s communists, they have defended the gains of the Soviet era and the sovereignty of the country.

By contrast, their sister party in Ukraine was actively kept out of power by the machinations of the local comprador oligarchy, which may well have had help from the comprador clique of Boris Yeltsin in Russia during the 1990s. During that immediate post-Soviet period, the Communist Party of Ukraine was a serious and very popular political force, and all means were used by the domestic oligarchy and its imperialist backers to defraud it of election wins and then to undermine, sideline and destroy it.

Tragically for Ukraine, neither the Communist party nor the people were equipped to put up the necessary fight that would have prevented a series of pro-imperialist ‘leaders’ being imposed on them after the fall of socialism. Whenever any leader attempted to run a middle course between aligning either with Russia or with the USA/European Union, he was ruthlessly removed by the imperialists.

The rest were outright stooges of the west who simply sought to maximise their own payday by facilitating the sale of Ukraine lock, stock and barrel to imperialist corporations, leading the country into the horrific situation in which it now finds itself.

It is thus greatly to the credit of Lukashenko and his supporters, as well as of the Belarusian communists and the wider proletariat, that they have found a way during this exceptionally difficult period to maintain the country’s sovereignty and independence and to keep a viable and relatively self-sufficient economy going.

Deepening the Union State with Russia
This has been further secured by the strengthening of the Union-State agreement with Russia, whose terms were for many years a source of friction between the two countries as Belarus tried to avoid being merely ‘absorbed’. The agreement has been steadily enforced and deepened, however, since the west-backed coup attempt in Minsk 2020 and the launch of Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine in 2022.

The two countries now have a genuinely shared defence policy, with a large contingent of Russian forces based in Belarus and the extension of Russia’s nuclear umbrella over the country, meaning that external military intervention by any of its more rabid west-backed neighbours has been rendered virtually impossible.

Belarus also has extensive trade and military agreements with China. Indeed, Chinese detachments carried out joint training exercises with the Belarusian armed forces near the Polish border in July 2024, leaving Nato war planners gnashing their teeth and sending the Polish reactionary regime into a predictable tailspin. The exercises came just a week after Belarus announced its entry into the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO).

Although the emergence of Belarus as an independent state was the result of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and therefore something that no one in the progressive world was happy to see, the fact that it has survived as a sovereign state in close alliance with the Russian Federation is a genuinely progressive development that should be supported and applauded by all socialist and anti-imperialists.

The efforts of the Communist Party of Belarus are now focused on transforming the “left turn” that they say Lukashenko has been making into a more sustained socialist turn. And the relatively strong performance of the Communist Party of Belarus in the recent elections indicates that there is growing support for such a programme amongst the Belarusian population.

https://thecommunists.org/2025/04/06/ne ... ependence/

******

“We underestimated Trump!” Vyacheslav Nikonov on ‘The Great Game,’ 7 April

The complete quotation from today’s edition of The Great Game, part one, was:

“We underestimated Trump! We had wanted Biden to win because it would have meant the self-destruction of the USA. But now we are watching the tsunami that Trump has created… This is a revolution…”

Indeed, Russian elites have been watching developments in the United States very closely ever since ‘Independence Day’ last week when Trump unveiled his plans for a universal tariff on all goods from all nations and targeted tariffs against the greatest offenders in bilateral trade as evidenced by whopping trade deficits for the United States.

Since Russia is not on the list of countries about to be hit by tariffs, because sanctions against it are already so far-reaching, the Russian commentators can take a disinterested view in what is going on and why. Well not entirely disinterested, because they are concerned that the popular wave of protest that swept the United States this past weekend, with a vast outpouring of citizens bearing signs denouncing Trump in more than 1400 cities and towns across the land, egged on by the Democrats, who were revived from their stupor by the collapse of stock markets in the closing days of last week, may seriously weaken Trump and render him unable to continue his rapprochement with Russia, a policy that also does not enjoy popular support according to latest poll figures.

As for the tariffs themselves, last week’s Evening with Vladimir Solovyov talk show revealed far more acceptance of their necessity and correctness than you hear or read in American mainstream media. I heard a very cogent defense of the tariffs based not on their value in bringing industrial production back to the United States but in their stopping further rises in the federal debt which was reaching unsustainable levels. Indeed, the panelist who advanced this explanation said that Trump intentionally diverted attention to reindustrialization to avoid creating panic by divulging the dangerously weak state of American finances.

In these past few days, analysts in the U.S. have deciphered the formula that Trump pointed to as the determinant of the de facto level of tariffs practiced by America’s trading partners. As they make clear, the percentages in his table are in effect just the ratio of trade deficit to bilateral trade. The intent of the tariffs is to cut off imports as much as possible and so to reduce the trade deficit to zero over time. Moreover, if the trade wars lead to recession that is also all to the good, since imports of all kinds will fall precipitously and domestic energy costs in the United States will fall, as they have already begun to do these past several days. These deflationary trends will offset the supposed inflationary tends coming directly from the tariffs.

Note that Russian state television news programs have had massive coverage of the tariffs issue drawing on all major mainstream electronic and print media in the West.

****

One other fear that has been expressed on the Russian talk shows including on The Great Game today is that the way out of domestic political crises is often war. Trump is in growing trouble. Today he is meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington, and Netanyahu is in even greater trouble back home in Israel. Surely, they will be conferring on a military solution to their problems, namely a joint attack on Iran.

The risk of such an attack is considered to be quite high if you listen to the panelists on the leading Russian talk shows.

As we know, tomorrow officials from Iran and China will be meeting in Moscow with their counterparts to discuss the Iranian nuclear program.

The talk show panelists are saying nothing about the possibility of Russia and China coming to the defense of Iran should Trump proceed with war plans against Iran. However, somewhat enigmatically Vyacheslav Nikonov, main presenter on The Great Game and a member of the State Duma said that tomorrow he will be introducing into the Duma a discussion of the terms of the Russian-Iranian Comprehensive Cooperation Agreement that was signed in January. What this means we may find out in a day or two.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2025/04/07/ ... e-7-april/

******

The delicate role of Russia in the Caucasus chessboard

Lucas Leiroz

April 8, 2025

Moscow needs to act carefully to prevent tensions in the Caucasus from being used as a justification to increase Western presence in the post-Soviet space.

The conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, especially concerning the Nagorno-Karabakh region, has always sparked intense discussions and divisions in international politics, with Russia’s role often being the target of criticism and misunderstandings from pro-Western lobbyists on both sides.

The accusation that Moscow is “selling weapons to Azerbaijan” is a recurring argument in anti-Russian circles within Armenia and the Armenian diaspora. However, a deeper analysis reveals that Russia’s policy in the region is much more complex than a simple matter of supporting one side in the conflict. Russia’s position has been one of seeking balance, which is often misinterpreted.

The first issue to address is the perception that Russia has been an unconditional ally of Armenia, especially in the context of Nagorno-Karabakh. While it is true that Russia played a crucial role in supporting Armenia during the First Nagorno-Karabakh War and was the only country to provide any assistance to Armenia during the 2020 conflict, the reality is that Moscow has never promised unconditional support to Armenia in the long term. From the beginning, Russia positioned itself as a mediating power, seeking peaceful solutions to the conflict rather than aligning definitively with one side. This mediating stance was characterized by proposals for a peaceful and balanced resolution, with clear suggestions for resolution that, however, were rejected by both Armenia and Azerbaijan over the past two decades.

In 2019, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan directly withdrew from the negotiation process, which ultimately contributed to the escalation of the conflict and the outbreak of war in 2020. This event underscores the difficulty Russia faced in trying to maintain a power balance and positively influence both sides. The pressure on Moscow increased, as any failure to engage with Azerbaijan could have led to a loss of influence over the country, pushing it further into Turkey’s orbit— being Ankara still an important and active NATO member, despite its differences with Europe. In this context, selling arms to Azerbaijan became seen as a strategic necessity to maintain Russia’s influence in the region.

Moreover, Russia has been a supplier of high-quality weaponry and military equipment to Armenia, often at affordable prices or even free of charge. A clear example of this was the provision of Iskander missile systems, delivered exclusively to Armenia, marking a significant step in strengthening Armenia’s defense capacity. However, as one of the world’s largest arms exporters, Russia could not afford to ignore Azerbaijan’s military needs. The sale of arms to Baku should not be seen as unconditional support for Azerbaijan, but rather as an attempt to maintain a mediating position, with the intention of balancing the forces and preventing Western and Turkish influence from expanding further in the region.

However, the international dynamic has shifted. The rise of the West, particularly through Turkey, the United States, and Israel’s involvement in supplying arms and intelligence to Azerbaijan, has transformed the geopolitical landscape. The presence of advanced NATO technology in Baku’s arsenal now represents the main game-changer in the conflict. Russia, once the only great power with direct influence over both sides, now faces a growing challenge as Azerbaijan strengthens its alliances with Western powers.

At the same time, Armenia has maintained a complex foreign policy history. Since the 2018 regime-change operation promoted by the West, the country has engaged in a wave of alignment with the West, particularly the European Union. More recently, in response to the chaos generated by the “new Trump era” in the Collective West, Armenia has taken steps towards a new strategic approach with Russia, but it is still early to assess the true scope of these changes. However, the hysterical reaction from parts of Armenian society to Russia’s actions in the region, such as the sale of arms to Azerbaijan, is paradoxical, considering the country’s own attempts to distance itself from Moscow and strengthen its ties with the West.

Ultimately, the quest for a greater power balance in the South Caucasus region reflects the complexities of Russia’s foreign policy. Far from being a simple arms supplier or partner to one side, Russia has acted in a way to maintain its strategic relevance, seeking to preserve stability in the region and prevent Western influence from expanding. In a scenario where global powers seek to consolidate their zones of influence, the power struggle in the Caucasus remains an arena where every move by Moscow must be understood within the context of geopolitics and strategic interest, rather than as a mere question of political alignment.

It must be understood that all Western powers manipulate the conflict in the Caucasus with the ambition of justifying their geopolitical interests to occupy the post-Soviet region. Russia, on the other hand, is genuinely interested in maintaining peace, preventing one side from unilaterally inflicting violence upon the other. Moscow seeks stability and security throughout the surrounding region, while NATO has always seen the Caucasus as an interesting source of tensions to destabilize Russia’s strategic environment.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... hessboard/

But what about them bananas?))

******

Russian Duma ratifies 20-year strategic pact with Iran

The vote in Moscow came days ahead of a historic summit in Oman between top US and Iranian officials

News Desk

APR 8, 2025


(Photo credit: Russian State Duma/Handout via REUTERS)

Russia's State Duma ratified the comprehensive strategic partnership agreement between Russia and Iran in its plenary session on 8 April, Sputnik reported.

“The agreement lays a solid foundation for expanding the comprehensive Russian–Iranian partnership in all areas, including defense, counterterrorism, energy, finance, transportation, industry, science, and technology,” the Russian news outlet stated.

The treaty was concluded for 20 years, with the possibility of a subsequent five-year extension.

The agreement was signed by Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Iranian counterpart, Masoud Pezeshkian, before being voted on in the Duma.

The Russian president stated, “The partnership agreement between Russia and Iran aims to create conditions for stable and sustainable development” for both countries and the broader region.

Putin added that “Russia and Iran are pursuing independent paths on the global stage and are resisting external pressure and the application of illegitimate sanctions.”

Russia and Iran have been targeted by harsh US economic sanctions in recent years.

Regarding the agreement, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated, “Iran and Russia, as two large and powerful countries, play a prominent role in shaping the new world order.”

“Iran, with its strategic location at the center of energy geography and international trade, and Russia, as a country with endless resources, advanced industry, and extensive influence, have enormous potential for cooperation,” Araghchi added.

The comprehensive strategic partnership agreement between Russia and Iran replaces the current security agreement signed by both countries in 2001.

The Duma ratified the treaty as trilateral consultations were underway in Moscow between Russia, China, and Iran on the Iranian nuclear program.

The consultations “will discuss various aspects related to the nuclear issue, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and UN Security Council Resolution 2231,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghai stated Tuesday during his weekly news briefing.

The three countries previously held consultations on Iran's nuclear program on 14 March.

The US and Israel are demanding that Iran enter negotiations over its nuclear program. They claim Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon. Iran has stated that its program is for civilian use and that nuclear weapons are un-Islamic.

On 7 March, US President Donald Trump sent a letter to the leadership in Tehran asking for direct negotiations.

Trump's letter issued a clear threat – negotiate or risk a bombing campaign against the Iranian nuclear program.

The US president later reiterated this threat, saying in late March that “If they don't make a deal, there will be bombing.”

Trump told reporters on Monday, following his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, that Washington will be “having direct talks with Iran, and they've started.”

However, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that Tehran will only engage in “indirect” nuclear negotiations with the US via Oman.

https://thecradle.co/articles/russian-d ... -with-iran

[blindpig]

Normalization of Relations Faltering & Lavrov Answers a Teenager's Probing Question
Karl Sanchez
Apr 09, 2025



I’d hoped to report some information about the trilateral talks between Russia, China and Iran yesterday in Moscow, but the lid is sealed very tight and as far as most are aware nothing happened. My search for information wasn’t fruitless as I discovered what I consider to be a somewhat alarming revelation about the state of reestablishing normal diplomatic relations between the Outlaw US Empire and Russia. During The Phone Call on of 12 February 2025 between Putin and Trump it was decided to reestablish normal diplomatic relations and a meeting dealing with that question took place in Riyadh on 18 February 2025 in Riyadh between teams led by Lavrov and Rubio. That resulted in a period of six weeks until the end of March for normalcy to resume. One of the first steps many predicted since it would be the easiest sign of good faith by Trump was the repatriation of the diplomatic properties stolen from Russia during the Obama and first Trump administrations. However, nothing of the sort has occurred, which is clearly one very good reason for a good deal of distrust to exist on the Russian side. Here’s the TASS report I discovered on the topic:

Russia is prepared for a serious discussion with the United States regarding the return of diplomatic property wrongfully confiscated by Washington, Ambassador to the United States Alexander Darchiev told Russian reporters ahead of the Russian-US consultations set to take place in Istanbul on April 10.

"We will also have an in-depth discussion about the return of illegally seized diplomatic property to the Russian side, which is of critical importance for the restoration of normalcy in the entire bilateral relationship," Darchiev said. According to the diplomat, the next round of Russian-US expert consultations is being held "in line with the directives of the Russian and US presidents to their foreign ministries to restore the operations of the diplomatic missions of the two countries."

"This is about addressing the 'toxic legacy' of the previous US administration, which imposed severe restrictions on the activities of Russian diplomatic missions in the United States, including limitations on diplomats' movement within the host country, financial and visa restrictions, and severely diminished interstate relations," the ambassador emphasized.

"Certainly, such aggressive actions, which included the outright seizure of six diplomatic properties belonging to Russia, did not go without a response," Darchiev noted. As a result, according to him, "a complex web of problems has been created, which is now being untangled through joint efforts by the Russian and American delegations."

The Russian Foreign Ministry previously announced that the Russian delegation at the April 10 consultations in Istanbul will be led by the ambassador to Washington, while the US delegation will be headed by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs Sonata Coulter.

The last Russian-US consultations took place on February 27 in Istanbul at the residence of the US Consul General and lasted for over six hours. [My Emphasis]

I’ll first note the rank of the diplomats involved in these talks is rather low and add no talks were conducted at all during March on the fundamental issue of relations restoration. IMO, a large mismatch is present between the priorities of the two presidents—Putin wants the correct reestablishment of relations and return of properties prioritized in order for a modicum of trust through deeds to be established while Trump wants to immediately enter into negotiations regarding the US defeat in Ukraine since his bragging he could bring that about immediately upon assuming office was turning into a BigLie to get him elected. As Russia’s new ambassador to the Outlaw US Empire notes, the work needing to be done is as complex as the “web of problems” that developed from the Empire’s illegalities, and that’s why I’m mystified that no talks on that big issue occurred at all during March and should have been initiated by Trump since he’s the one so eager for a deal that only a restoration of trust can provide. And from that, we can assume the hesitancy of Putin to agree to anything forwarded by Team Trump since no activity is happening in the #1 area of Putin’s concern.

Trump’s clear addiction to instant gratification causes him to speak without first thinking about what he’s about to say. The he’s “pissed off at Putin” because Trump’s unable to deliver on any of its proposals isn’t Putin’s fault. Trump clearly has no control over Zelensky or the Nazis behind him, nor does he have control over an EU/NATO that wants the conflict to continue and thus won’t agree to any attempts by Trump to end the Empire’s involvement. Indeed, in the past several days we’ve had several important links that prove the Empire’s involvement from the outset just as I’ve postulated that pin the tail of guilt onto Trump as well and Obama/Biden. It’s quite possible that Trump’s cognitive disorder that many have noted results from ADD—Attention Deficit Disorder—a cognitive learning disability that’s become very common nowadays thanks to environmental pollution and likely contributes to his need for problems to be solved ASAP.

The European problem and its ties to its genuine history is involved ever more in the Ukraine situation. Gym rats who’ve read Lavrov’s interviews and press conference answers already know his views on European history and how it shapes today’s events. The winner of one of Russia’s many contests, in this case “Media Class” in TASS’s 2.0 competition, the prize was to ask Foreign Minister Lavrov an interview-type question:

Question: My name is Vasilisa Pankova. I am in the 11th grade, and I am the winner of the Media Class in TASS 2.0 competition.

Sergey Lavrov: Congratulations.

Question: Mr Lavrov, thank you very much for finding the time for our interview.

This year marks the 80th anniversary of the Great Victory. I am participating in the competition with the support of the National Center for Historical Memory. If we in Russia honor the memory of those who defeated the Nazis during the Great Patriotic War, then the West is trying in every possible way to "forget" and distort our history. Is it worth "shaking them up" somehow?

Sergey Lavrov: This is not the first year that we have been trying to shake them up. Indeed, long before the start of the special military operation, there was a tendency to consign history to oblivion, and quite intensive attempts were made to put the winners and the defeated on the same level, to undermine and denigrate the role of the Soviet Union.

In our contacts with German diplomats over the past seven or eight years, at least, the idea slipped through our minds more and more often (I am conveying what they told us, the meaning was this) that they had paid everyone for everything and did not owe anything else to anyone. It was a wake-up call.

Now, when we see how Germany has openly proclaimed the slogan of remilitarization, for this purpose it has changed the Constitution, will collect money in debt in order to implement an armaments program worth 800 billion euros in 3-4 years, when the ideology of Nazism in Germany is already beginning to come out more and more, despite the constitutional prohibitions and the verdicts of the Nuremberg Tribunal, this is alarming.

The matter is not limited to Germany alone. In the same row are the Baltic countries, which simply live with Russophobia. In my opinion, without it, they can neither fall asleep nor wake up. This includes a number of other countries. But in general, we are now witnessing another "wave", when Europe has again taken up arms (looking at some faces, I want to say "opened") against our country.

After all, before the Victory in the Great Patriotic War, in World War II, all world tragedies began with the aggressive actions of Europeans: the Napoleonic Wars, the First World War, and the Second World War. It was only after World War II, when Europe was weakened, that Americans became the leaders of the "free world." After that time, they initiated most of the conflicts on the planet. Before that, all the tragedy came exclusively from Europe.

During World War II, in addition to the countries that officially fought on the side of Adolf Hitler (including Italy, Finland and a number of others), almost all other European countries (neutral countries) participated in the battles on the side of the German army. For example, the French–-yes, they had the Resistance Movement. But like most other European countries, the official authorities in Paris obediently surrendered to the will of the victors and continued to live as if nothing had happened. But we will never forget the role played by the Resistance Movement. This is just one example. Official French troops took part in the battles on the side of Nazi Germany, including in a number of punitive operations. There are many such examples. Now that the anti-Russian "wave" is rising, attempts are being made to blame the Soviet Union for the beginning of the war, not even to equate Hitler and Stalin, but to present Stalin as the main culprit of what happened. They, of course, cause great concern.

What is behind this? Germany probably wants to regain its former greatness and genetically, for this purpose, they break through their old Nazi instincts.

As for the rest of the European countries, some want to erase the pages of their national shame, collaborationism and connivance with the Nazis from history as soon as possible, while others see Nazi ideology as a new tool for maintaining their positions on the European political scene. We will fight this.

Forgetting history, one's spiritual and moral values and roots has become one of the main reasons for what we are now witnessing in Ukraine. There, precisely because of the inculcation of oblivion of everything that was in the past: Russian roots and the vast territory that at that time was part of modern Ukraine and began to be used by the Americans and Europeans to bring to power in this country the openly Russophobic Nazi regime, which declared war against its own people. Having seized power through an illegal coup d'état, calling those who disagreed with it terrorists, he began a real war against them using regular armed forces, aviation, and artillery. The West connived at the actions of this regime to exterminate the entire Russian part of the history of these lands. And it was the Russians, such as Catherine II, G.A. Potemkin and our other glorious ancestors, who developed these territories, built Odessa, other cities, ports, factories and plants. The regime that came to power as a result of a coup d'état decided to erase all this from the memory of the people in order to obediently serve the desire of its Western puppeteers, who have always dreamed of creating a direct military threat to our country from Ukraine. We need to fight this.

For quite a long time, we have been annually promoting a General Assembly resolution at the UN on the inadmissibility of the glorification of Nazism. The overwhelming majority of states vote for it. Over the past couple of years, the West has been quite "vilely" trying to "kill" this resolution by introducing amendments equating Nazism and the crimes of Nazism with what is happening as part of a special military operation. But that did not prevent the resolution from remaining on the agenda of the General Assembly. It was again adopted by an impressive number of votes. This will continue to be the case. We are carrying out the same work at UNESCO and within the framework of other international organizations, such as the CSTO, the CIS, and the SCO.

All these things are important in order to prevent us from once again rallying half of Europe under the banners of Nazism, neo-Nazism, or even the whole of Europe against our country, as is actually happening. They began by pumping Vladimir Zelensky with weapons until complete "victory" and Russia's "strategic defeat" on the battlefield. Now, realising that this is not working, they are saying that it is necessary to send their armed forces to the "battlefield." First of all, the French and the British, who are simply obsessed with this.

I hope that not everyone has forgotten the lessons of history. Many European leaders (and there are more and more of them) are beginning to understand the deadlock and catastrophic nature of such another attempt. I am sure that voters will make their choice when they go to the polling stations again.

Our policy is aimed at ensuring that the sacred memory never leaves history and the memory of all generations, including the future. It remains unchanged. We are convinced of our historical, moral and human rightness. [My Emphasis]

IMO, Lavrov needs to move the date for the Outlaw US Empire’s responsibility for all the bad happening back to WW1 when it censored George Seldes exclusive interview with defeated German Army leader Paul von Hindenburg shortly after the 11 November 1918 Armistice where he admitted Germany sued for peace because it knew the weight of the American forces would be impossible for Germany to overcome; thus, there was no “back-stabbing” by anyone as Hitler would use as his #1 BigLie to gain control over Germany (available in You Can’t Print That!). But we must also admit the role the US played in the crafting of the Versailles Treaty that called for punitive reparations to be paid by Germany so the entente could repay the “loans” made to them by the Americans—”loans” that in the past were always cancelled after the end of the many European wars. Indeed, Wilson went to war specifically to ensure the allied victory so the “loans” would be repaid.

“We will” and “We need to fight this” and his closing remark that genuine historical memory must continue into the future—I would say far into the future until the annual 9 May celebrations fade away into every ten years then every 25 and so on until the 200th anniversary in 2245, when perhaps Nazism will finally be erased from active practice globally. The concern of course is with now and the near future. Where the young female reporter graduates to after university is unknown, but her current affiliation points to her possibly becoming a historian or perhaps a diplomat. I have no doubts about how Russia will behave towards the rise of EuroNazism as we’re already seeing the rhetorical pushback that’s backed by what Putin said could be done with Oreshnik. We need to closely watch NATO’s machinations in the Baltic Sea region as that’s the one region where it seems NATO hopes to provoke a confrontation. However, as stated by many clear-eyed analysts, Russia wants only one thing from Europe—to be left alone to pursue its own development. It has no desire for any further European lands or peoples to oversee as it once did.

And what of EU/NATO blustering that it will rebuild its armaments industries and remilitarize with 800 Billion euros it will likely steal from Europeans via some sort of Eurobond? Since much of Europe’s deindustrialized, the process will need to commence from the underground up—the resources that must be excavated to convert into the materials to build anything. How much remains after all the war material made since 1800? What fuel will be used for energy? It appears that a series of industrial supply chains will need to be created from scratch. And since Europe lacks so much of the above before even getting further into thinking about how this might be accomplished, where does it propose to find all those things? Can they even be found? And surely 800 Billion euros won’t even come close to being enough. Will Europeans willingly sacrifice their standards of living so another war machine can be built that Russia will destroy when EU/NATO attacks it? The only way is for Nazism to rise like a rocket over the next year for any of that to begin. RT reports on a new poll out of Germany:

According to a new Ipsos survey released on Wednesday, the AfD has 25% of public support, while the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and Christian Social Union (CSU) bloc trails at 24%.

Compared to the previous poll in early March, the AfD gained three points, while the conservatives dropped by five. Support for outgoing Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s Social Democrats (SPD) remained unchanged at 15%, while the Greens slipped to 11%, and are now tied with the Left Party, which gained two points to reach its highest level since December 2016.

Given what Merz has already done and said post-election, the slide isn’t surprising aside from it not being greater. Here’s what Maria Zakharova said about the above topic at her weekly briefing today:

On the potential catastrophic consequences for regional and global stability as a result of the "activities" of the main instigators of the war in Ukraine - the EU and NATO

On April 3-4, a meeting of the NATO Council at the level of foreign ministers was held in Brussels. The event was further evidence that the member countries of this military-political bloc do not abandon their efforts to militarize Europe, continuing to nurture confrontational plans against our country. The alliance still believes that Russia is a "long-term threat" and will remain so even after the end of the Ukrainian conflict.

Preparing for an armed conflict with us, which, according to NATO, may occur in 4-5 years, the countries of the North Atlantic bloc plan to radically increase military spending. There are growing calls to reach figures of 3 to 5% of GDP. Members of this organisation spend huge amounts of money–-more than a trillion dollars annually-–on military purposes, while their economies are "bursting at the seams" and the process of deindustrialisation of Europe is underway. The number of problems in the social sphere has reached a critical mass. Does anyone else have a question about the peaceful nature of the alliance, as NATO assured us? I don't think so.

The situation is similar in the EU direction. The topic of increasing military spending was actively discussed at an informal meeting of the EU Foreign Affairs Council at the level of defence ministers on April 2-3 in Warsaw. The task has been set to inflict a "strategic defeat on the battlefield" on our country. To this end, the EU intends to spend more than 800 billion euros on military needs in the next four years.

In line with global aggressive plans, NATO and the European Union are building a policy towards Ukraine, which is destined to play the role of a victim in the geopolitical confrontation with Russia. The "collective West" intends to continue supporting the Kiev regime–-Ukrainians "must fight." In the first three months of this year, the countries of the North Atlantic bloc have already allocated 20 billion euros to Bankova. The alliance does not demonstrate the slightest desire to set its puppets up for constructive negotiations on a peace agreement. On the contrary, NATO is doing its best to add fuel to the fire. At a meeting in Brussels, Secretary General Martin Rutte openly spoke in favour of "the front line moving not from east to west," but in the opposite direction. In other words, they just want the battalion commander to push off the Urals with his foot. NATO ideologists are pushing for this.

According to Brussels, the strengthening of Vladimir Zelensky's position will be facilitated by the ridiculous "coalition of the willing"–-this is some group of concerned maniacs, the most radical part of the alliance member states, which is eager to take a direct part in the conflict in Ukraine on the side of the Bandera regime. The "barkers" of this group of adventurers–-Great Britain and France–-convene summits and meetings of the chiefs of the general staff. At the same time, they do not realise that their reckless actions could lead to the largest armed conflict involving nuclear powers since World War II. [My Emphasis]

When the histories of England/UK and France are examined, their basis for motivations against Russia become rather clear—French alliance with Hitler during WW2 is still fresh as is the immediate planning by Churchill—Operation Unthinkable—at WW2’s end to resume the war against the USSR with the aid of Outlaw US Empire atomic bombs. And of course, there’s Churchill’s 5 March 1946 Fulton, Missouri Iron Curtain speech that officially spawned the Cold War only 10 months after Germany’s surrender. There’re many excellent reasons for Russia to be very wary and extremely cautious in its relations with the Outlaw US Empire for it could easily relapse into the same ideological frame as EU/NATO. A select few analysts are calling for Putin to make a deal with Trump before the opportunity gets killed—literally. I’m not one of those. Russia knows what it needs to do and that’s to create a security situation that favors it along with the rest of Eurasia, and it’s very likely it will need to construct that itself along with its Eurasian partners. I hasten to add that Southwest Asia is also part of Eurasia, meaning the Zionist threat to humanity must also be resolved.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/normaliz ... -faltering

******

Exchange in Abu Dhabi
April 10, 17:11



A prisoner swap between Russia and the United States took place in Abu Dhabi.

Russia released Ksenia Karelina, a citizen of the United States and Russia who had been sentenced to 12 years in prison, — WSJ.
The United States released Artur Petrov, a citizen of Germany and Russia who was arrested in Cyprus in 2023 at the request of the United States for allegedly exporting microelectronics.
The exchange was negotiated by CIA Director John Ratcliffe and a senior Russian intelligence official. CIA Director Ratcliffe was present at the Abu Dhabi airport where the swap took place and greeted Karelina when the United States picked her up.

The swaps will continue. The UEA is pleased to retain its role as a mediator in this matter.
The CIA and SVR continue to quietly discuss future swaps.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9774579.html

Google Translator

[blindpig]

THE THREE STEPS — WHICH WAY IS FORWARD, WHICH WAY IS BACKWARD IN RUSSIA’S WAR FIGHTING, PEACE NEGOTIATING STRATEGY



By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

Kirill Dmtiriev (lead image) is the Stanford and Harvard educated official appointed by President Vladimir Putin to persuade American businessmen to invest in the profits to be made from dismantling US economic sanctions against Russia.

Today at the Kremlin (April 11), he tried again in fresh talks with Putin and Stephen Witkoff, President Donald Trump’s negotiator.

Dmitriev was just fourteen years of age when he first arrived for schooling in California where neither he, nor anyone else, had ever heard of Vladimir Lenin’s 1904 booklet on the difference between revolutionaries and opportunists in politics; Lenin’s title had been “One Step Forward, Two Steps Back.” All Russian adults schooled before Dmitriev know that phrase.

But on April 4 in Washington, when Dmitriev invited Russian reporters to ask whether he had made any steps forward in his talks with the Americans, he replied: “Yes, definitely. I would say that today and yesterday we made three steps forward on a large number of issues.” Either Dmitriev was making a mockery of Lenin’s three steps, or he was revealing his total ignorance of them.

At home in Moscow no one has dared to fault Putin’s emissary for transforming the direction of Lenin’s three steps. Nor has anyone asked Dmitriev to say concretely his three steps are, or in what direction. The closest he came to that in his remarks in a Washington park were that he has been discussing “possible cooperation in the Arctic, Russian Direct Investment Fund head Dmitriev proposes setting up fund for Arctic projects in rare earth metals, in various other sectors where we can build constructive and positive relations…[and] active work on restoring air travel.” One of the “other sectors” Dmitriev mentioned is an Elon Musk project to fly to Mars.

That Dmitriev is proposing to open sectors of the Russian economy which are legally closed under national security control – at the same time as the US is escalating its military power projection from Greenland to Alaska – has been noted by the Russian Foreign Ministry, which has been trying to curb Dmitriev’s powers, as well as his tongue. Dmitriev has retreated, ingenuously telling the BBC: “first of all, I am focused on economics and investment, so I don’t comment on political issues.” Then he did just that. “There are already very good results. So the stop of the hitting the energy infrastructure is a major, major result. And frankly that is a good result for Ukraine.. for Russia, for the world.”

Dmitriev was referring to President Putin’s undertaking to President Trump during their telephone call of February 12 to halt Russian strikes on Ukrainian energy targets. This partial ceasefire by the Russian side has been ignored by the Ukrainians and their US and NATO advisors. Although the Kremlin notice warned that “in the event of a violation of the moratorium by either party, the other party has the right to consider itself free from obligations to comply with it”, there has been no Russian retaliation yet.

When Lenin had begun his three steps a century ago, he warned: “When a prolonged, stubborn and heated struggle is in progress, there usually begin to emerge after a time the central and fundamental points at issue, upon the decision of which the ultimate outcome of the campaign depends, and in comparison with which all the minor and petty episodes of the struggle recede more and more into the background.”

In the record which the Russian and American negotiators have been making since the presidents’ telephone call, the outcome to date is nothing but “minor and petty episodes”. Dmitriev is the only Russian official to say otherwise.

At the first round of talks in Saudi Arabia on February 18, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov disclaimed there had been agreement on anything but a programme of talks to follow at the sub-ministerial level on ceasefire measures in the Black Sea, and on the restoration of regular operations between the State Department and the Foreign Ministry. “We didn’t just listen”, Lavrov said in briefing the Russian press after the meeting, “but we also heard each other…This does not necessarily mean a convergence of positions.”

The subsequent talks which have followed have demonstrated almost no “convergence of positions.”

The negotiations between Andrew Peek and Michael Anton on the US side, Senator Grigory Karasin and Colonel-General Sergei Beseda on the Russian side, held in Riyadh on March 24 discussed Ukrainian proposals for a ceasefire on the Black Sea, including Odessa port, and the resumption of Ukrainian grain exports. The two sides failed to accept a joint communiqué of what they had agreed.

Instead, the Kremlin issued a detailed outline of agreement for the Black Sea with preconditions. These were “the removal of sanctions imposed on Rosselkhozbank (Russian Agricultural Bank) and other financial institutions involved in ensuring international food trade (including fish and fish products) and fertilisers, their reconnection to SWIFT, and opening of relevant correspondent accounts; the removal of restrictions imposed on trade finance operations; the removal of sanctions imposed on companies producing and exporting food (including fish and fish products) and fertilisers, as well as restrictions banning insurance companies from working with food cargoes (including fish and fish products) and fertilisers; the removal of restrictions on servicing ships in ports and sanctions against ships flying the flag of Russia, if they are involved in food trade (including fish and fish products) and fertilisers; the removal of restrictions on supplies to the Russian Federation of agricultural machinery and other goods used in the production of food (including fish and fish products) and fertilisers.”

In the US communiqué, the Russian sanctions terms were ignored.


Source: https://www.whitehouse.gov

Instead, the US said that in principle it would “help restore Russia’s access to the world market for agricultural and fertilizer exports, lower maritime insurance costs, and enhance access to ports and payment systems for such transactions. “ It said no more about the Ukrainian attacks on energy targets except that “the United States and Russia agreed to develop measures for implementing President Trump’s and President Putin’s agreement to ban strikes against energy facilities of Russia and Ukraine.” That was on March 25. In the interval of three weeks since then, the frequency of the Ukrainian drone attacks on Russian energy targets has increased.

The US and Russia then sent officials to Istanbul on April 10 for negotiations to implement the earlier Rubio-Lavrov agreement in Riyadh “to address irritants to our bilateral relationship with the objective of taking steps necessary to normalize the operation of our respective diplomatic missions.” Alexander Darchiev for the Russian Foreign Ministry (he is the new Russian Ambassador to Washington) and Sonata Coulter, a deputy assistant secretary of State, failed to agree on any of the issues on the agenda except for one: “the U.S. and Russian delegations exchanged notes to finalize an understanding to ensure the stability of diplomatic banking for Russian and U.S. bilateral missions.”

The return of Russian offices, residences and other property in the US, confiscated on White House order for several years, was the Russian priority. According to Darchiev, “the return of illegally seized diplomatic property to the Russian side… is of critical importance for the restoration of normalcy in the entire bilateral relationship.” Coulter refused, claiming the US priority is “the Russian Federation’s policy prohibiting the employment of local staff, which is the key impediment to maintaining for stable and sustainable staffing levels at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow.”

These serial failures, dictated by the Trump subordinates, has now led to an afternoon meeting in St Petersburg between Putin, his foreign policy advisor Yury Ushakov, Dmitriev and Witkoff. Lavrov was not present. The meeting appears to have been arranged hastily on the US initiative. “The situation on the negotiation track of the United States and Ukraine is developing rapidly,” Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov announced. “There are a lot of developments in one day.”


Source: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/76675

For the time being neither the Kremlin nor the White House has claimed any result. RIA Novosti, headlining that the meeting with Witkoff lasted for four hours, reported no detail at all.

Several hours after Witkoff had left meeting with Putin, Trump implied that he is blaming the Russians for the failure of the talks so far, and is planning a new ultimatum. “Russia has to get moving”, Trump tweeted.


Source: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrum ... 2702753512

A well-informed source in Moscow says that Trump and his subordinates have been surprised by the Russian terms for ending the war. “The Russians have told Americans they will have Odessa and a land corridor to Moldova. They have offered ports on Dnieper River for access to the sea for the Ukrainians. There has been no demand about Nord Stream. Money is being discussed on the sidelines but not in the main talks. In the main room [in Riyadh on February 18] Lavrov and Ushakov brought no papers and asked Americans [Rubio and Waltz] to dust off the December 2021 treaty draft. The Russian positions shocked the Americans. They were told the Ukraine will be demilitarized and its forces will be turned into paramilitary and police. The Americans were also surprised how little Russians cared about Zelensky or his British and Europeans backers. The Americans were told there will be no Ukrainian paramilitary force east of the Dnieper – only police. A new Russian demand was tabled for autonomy of eight Ukrainian oblasts, with Kiev army forces removed. In general, the Russians propose turning the Ukraine into a genuinely federal structure with provisions that Banderites can never take power in Kiev and that the central forces will be limited in their capabilities, supplementing the police if and when Banderites take to the streets. The main purpose of any such force will be de-nazification and keeping it that way. There are demands also about the Orthodox Church in Ukraine.”

https://johnhelmer.net/the-three-steps- ... more-91375

Sure hope that 'well-informed source' is right, if Putin stays with that program all will be well.

******



Historical Ironies on Ice
by Gordonhahn
April 10, 2025

History often springs ironic surprises on us that capture the spirit and tectonics of the times in which we live. Last week a Russian hockey player broke the record establishing the highest number for goals in a career recorded by any player in the history of the National Hockey League (NHL). Alekasandr Ovechkin’s 895th career goal, superseding the standing record held by Wayne Gretzky’s 894 goals, manifests some ironic meaning that has relevance beyond sports. That meaning extends to the great drama unfolding before us of Russia’s revival as a great power and the ‚new cold war‘ provoked by the West in an effort to deny Moscow great power status and any sphere of influence. Several elements in this seemingly historically peripheral event stand out.

First, that a Russian national now holds the record for the most goals recorded in any NHL career represents a standard of great personal skill, devotion, self-discipline, and success achieved in, even over a Western milieu, the NHL. A Russian has superceded all Canadians, Americans, Swedes, Finns, and other nationals who previously or presently play in the West’s, indeed the world‘s premier hockey league. This level of success goes against the Russian image most Americans, Canadians, and Westerners in general are presented in their respective cultures. Russians are typically presented in Western culture and discourse as lazy, drunken brutes, lacking in initiative and creativity, despite Russian culture’s perhaps unparalleled level of achievement in Western arts and nearly unparalleled achievements in science. The West‘s stereotypes of Russians are misleading and unfair to anyone familiar with Russia beyond the usual cursory acquaintance and have been rendered void once more by Ovechkin’s drive, tenacity, and inventiveness on the ice.

A further irony is contained in the fact that Ovechkin has established his remarkable record in a career playing for the Washington Capitals. The symbolism here is downright obvious. How long have Washington and the capitol of Ovechkin’s homeland been political antipodes? Today, Washington and Russia confront each other in a military conflict – the NATO-Russia Ukrainian War — that threatens both Russia and the West with a wider regional if not global conflict, given its and their interconnections with other conflicts in which they stand on opposing sides as well as both countries‘ set of allies that are directly or indirectly involved in the Ukrainian war and other conflicts. Added to this is that Ovechkin has been an open supporter and somewhat of a friend of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is surely the most hated man in Washington D.C., even in all America, bar none, with the possible exception of US President Donald Trump.

Another irony was contained in the symbolism of Ovechkin’s remarks after the game in which he set the new career goal was stopped. In recent years I have researching and writing what I call ‚Russian tselostnost‘‘ (wholeness, integrality, unity) and its five subtypes: monism (mostly the unity of spirit and matter), universalism (world unity), communalism/collectivism (primacy of communities over individuals), solidarism (national social, cultural, and political unity), and historicism or historical unity (the unity of history, time, generations). Russian tselostnost‘ is, in my interpretation, the Russian aspiration to wholeness, integrality, or unity as expressed through Russian culture and discourse, including Russian (and Soviet) literature, the other arts, philosophy, theology, politics, and the social, even physical sciences.

Ovechkin, in addition to making the not unusual nod to his present and former (a mark of historical tselostnost‘?) team mates and the Washington Capitals‘ entire organization and fan base – a rather standard communalism any player feels in such moments of collective celebration – seemed to invoke Russian solidarism, even universalism when he addressed all Russians around the world: „And the last thing, all of you fans, for all the world, Russia, we did it, boys, we did it. It’s a history!”. Translating from his slightly broken English, he was saying: ‚Thank you to fans from the world, and particularly Russia, we did it. We made history.‘

Thus, instead of focusing on himself or his personal achievement, the world’s and particularly Russian hockey fans, perhaps all Russia — given the linguistic unclarity — were credited with a national achievement. In this way, Ovechkin’s speech invokes Russian national solidarism or solidarist tselostnost‘. His focus on the world suggests Russian universalism or universalistic tselostnost‘ as well. Ovechkin‘s not quite consummate expression, but expression, nevertheless, of Russian solidarism was made ironically in the capital or, perhaps, former capital of Western individualism and, moreover, in a nation experiencing anything but national social, cultural, and political unity.Yes, the wheel of history churns with potent ironies, revealing how contending trends interact and reflect each other. Indeed, the more turbulent the times, all the more potent and perhaps prophetic the ironies are. Finally, Ironies usually offer lessons. The irony of Ovechkin’s triumph in North America is no exception. He has demonstrated that soft authoritarian, albeit, Russia remains a reservoir of talent, national identity, and power that must reckoned with seriousness, respect, realism, and historical knowledge.

https://gordonhahn.com/2025/04/10/histo ... es-on-ice/

******

Foreign agent Kozyrev
April 11, 18:25



Former Russian Foreign Minister Kozyrev has been officially recognized as a foreign agent.

From the inspiring quotes of the former first Minister of Foreign Affairs of "free Russia".

1. A change of regime in Russia is inevitable, and perhaps even imminent. The Russian people will rise from their knees. But the path to sustainable democracy and a stable economy will be difficult. The West must be ready to help.

2. NATO is a guarantee. It is a blessing that NATO forces are standing at Russia's western borders."

3. The only way for the West is to act from a position of strength, to give Ukraine weapons and the green light to use them.

In fact, even in this position he was effectively a foreign agent, handing over Russia's national interests wholesale and retail, becoming one of the symbols of the betrayal of the 90s, the consequences of which we are still dealing with.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9776371.html

Former Sevastopol Governor Imprisoned in Britain
April 11, 21:00



How ironic.
The former governor of Sevastopol was given 3 years and 4 months in Britain, where he moved from Cyprus after the start of the Second World War. Ovsyannikov became a British citizen (that is, he swore allegiance to the British crown).

He was jailed "for violating the anti-Russian sanctions regime," since Ovsyannikov tried to transfer money from Cyprus to Britain, where his accounts were frozen and he himself was arrested. Ovsyannikov's father and brothers, by a happy coincidence, are also British citizens. P.S. In Sevastopol, he was remembered for his political war with Alexei Chaly, which ultimately ended with his departure from Sevastopol, and Ovsyannikov delighted the rest of the country with his drunken brawl at the Izhevsk airport, when he was deputy minister of industry and trade. And Cyprus and Britain are the end of his political career. He turned out to be an unusually stupid character.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9776401.html

"Second World War"? Boris, are you in your cups?

Google Translator

******

Putin: Russia's Future Navy; Housing & City Master Plans; Strategic Initiatives Agency's Activities
Doings over the past three days
Karl Sanchez
Apr 11, 2025


Rostov on Don City Planning scheme

Today’s main item of focus was Putin’s meeting with Trump envoy Stephen Witkoff for which no information was released by the Kremlin prior to my writing at 1pm Pacific. Prior to that, Putin held a meeting discussing Russia’s Navy of the future out to 2050, the sort of strategic planning window few nations undertake. The day before, Putin met with the General Director of DOM.RF Vitaly Mutko to discuss the ongoing housing construction and financing campaign along with the status of master plans for selected cities. And on the 9th, the always vibrant Director General of the Agency for Strategic Initiatives Svetlana Chupsheva met to update the president on the Agency’s numerous activities. The article’s design is to begin with the ASI update, onto DOM.RF and to finish with what we’re allowed to know about the Navy program.

Svetlana Chupsheva: It is already becoming a good tradition, and I hope, Mr President, that I will present new tourist routes to you during our meeting.

Vladimir Putin: I'll look at it with interest.

S. Chupsheva: Last time I gave you a collection of our new Russian tourist routes, and this time I want to give you our joint project on industrial tourism "Two Countries, thousands of factories" with the Government of the Republic of Belarus. You are welcome.

Vladimir Putin: Is this industrial tourism?

S. Chupsheva: This is industrial tourism, our friends and colleagues from the Belarusian Institute for Strategic Initiatives saw our project here, as it was implemented in the Russian Federation, and were very interested. And we met several times, also went there, met with the heads of enterprises, and the Ministry of Industry of the Republic of Belarus supported us.

50 factories and enterprises of the Republic of Belarus and Russia with a common history are represented here, including cooperation ties and historical ties. I think it is an interesting tourist project for the residents of our countries and for further cooperation on expansion.

Vladimir Putin: Interesting. Thank you, I'll definitely check it out.

S. Chupsheva: Thank you.

Dmitry Nikolaevich Chernyshenko [Deputy Prime Minister of Russia for Tourism, Sport, Culture and Communications] also actively supports all our projects related to tourism, so everything works out.

Vladimir Vladimirovich, I would like to tell you today about two new programs that we are implementing this year.

The first is a program for the development of strong localities. Of course, it is implemented by the Government of the Russian Federation. But we have connected with our own public projects, with the projects of entrepreneurs and with our solutions, best practices to improve the quality of life in small towns.

We have compiled a large atlas of effective infrastructure and service solutions for localities with different populations, i.e. where they can be most effective. These are solutions in the field of transport, housing and communal services, urban improvement, education, and medicine. And many of them, surprisingly, are offered free of charge by Moscow. It would seem that Moscow is a huge metropolis, but many solutions, especially informational ones, are absolutely applicable for small cities and prove their effectiveness. For example, in medicine-–a system for supporting medical decisions, recognition of diagnostic images using artificial intelligence.

For example,in the Nizhny Novgorod region, this allows you to simply multiply the level of diagnosis and correct diagnosis in medical institutions. Or general purchases, which Moscow also offers to introduce together with either individual municipalities or regions.

This is also an example of the Novgorod region. On purchases of medical equipment together with Moscow, Novgorod saved 500 million rubles for the budget of the Novgorod region. This is a significant amount of money that the regional authorities have allocated to other investment projects.

And we think that these are very good decisions and practices that will be useful for our regions of the Russian Federation.

Vladimir Putin: We need to replicate it.

S. Chupsheva: Yes. And small towns. At the end of last year, we presented 80 effective solutions in the field of transport. There were also decisions made in Moscow and other regions of the Russian Federation. It is very important that the heads of municipalities are already taking them into service, looking at their effectiveness, starting from 5 thousand residents of the city, 100 thousand residents and more. We can already assess the impact and hope that this work will be expanded as much as possible this year.

On your instructions, Vladimir Vladimirovich, we support projects to involve architectural monuments and cultural heritage sites in economic turnover. For small towns, this is, of course, a serious potential in the field of tourism and history.

Together with the Government of the Russian Federation (Maxim Stanislavovich Oreshkin is personally involved in these projects), we are looking at the applicability of such projects, the financial model for attracting investment, so that it is also interesting for investors who implement such projects.

Last year and this year we are going to work very hard on measures to support and make such facilities more attractive for investment. The agency has prepared such model solutions. Today we are actively working with pilot regions.

One project is a program in the field of providing medical care for members of the SVO. Vladimir Vladimirovich, this year is the Year of Defender of the Fatherland.

Vladimir Putin: Military and civilian medicine?

S. Chupsheva: Yes. We have tried to gather all the resources and competencies that are currently collected in military hospitals, all the new technologies that are currently available in civilian medicine and in the military, and combine this in the center of competencies of military-civilian medicine.

This project is supported by the Ministry of Defense and the Defenders of the Fatherland Foundation. We are implementing this project together with the Burdenko Military Hospital; the Society of Russian Surgeons also actively supports it. This year we want such centers to appear in every federal district. The main profile is surgery, military field surgery. Because, of course, today's unique experience and competencies are also collected from military medics.

Vladimir Putin: Based on what?

S. Chupsheva: On the basis of existing regional and regional clinics. It is very important that our children who end up in military hospitals, after operations, after the necessary treatment, can receive high-level medical care and rehabilitation near home, so that in each region medicine has such competencies.

Vladimir Putin: It is very important, I fully agree. Very important. Okay, let's take a look. [My Emphasis]

Russia has a plethora of small towns/villages and slightly larger cities besides the larger cities and government at all levels is keen to keep them vibrant and alive, not to become hollowed-out shells like so many here in America. Industrial tourism may seem odd in our deindustrialized nations, but in Russia industry is king and many are like palaces. I didn’t know it, but it was no surprise to learn Belarus also has its own strategic initiatives agency and that it works in tandem with Russia’s. We have nothing like that here, and Musk’s DOGE isn’t anything like that at all; it appears to work in the opposite direction. Getting cities/regions to combine purchasing to gain a better bargain makes great sense. It’s taken time to get accustomed to Russian soldiers being called children instead of men and women, although the term is correct. If they fight for the Mother/Fatherland, then of course they must be its/their children. And of course, ASI is also involved with the planning of smart cities. So, let’s now see what DOM.RF CEO Vitaly Mutko had to say:

Vladimir Putin: Vitaly Leontyevich, how are you?

V. : In general, the company is developing. We are a key development institution in the housing sector. Of course, housing, as you know, is the main priority and need of every person and family, so first of all we are focused on implementing housing policy. We are engaged in implementing all the national goals that you have outlined. And of course, we and the financial investment institute attract resources to the industry.

Of course, the situation in the housing sector is not easy now, but in general it is controlled: Today, about 119 million square meters of housing are under construction.

I would like to say at once that this, Mr Putin, is due to the reform that we carried out in 2019 on your instructions, and I would even say with your participation. Then we transferred the industry to project financing using escrow accounts. Protected–-remember?—and there were no defrauded shareholders.

Vladimir Putin: But there were many doubts that it would be effective.

V. Mutko: The Finance Minister and I recently recalled that we reported to you three times and you corrected us, but we still made these reforms.

Now you know what is happening: the bank has opened credit lines for 20 trillion rubles. There are eight trillion in the market, and seven trillion in escrow accounts. This is the key to stability.

We see, of course, that now the main driver of home purchases is mortgages: 80 percent of housing is bought at the expense of mortgages. Naturally, in the structure of this mortgage 70 percent—with state participation.

Of course, after July 1, when we completed the massive family mortgage, focused our efforts on family mortgages, and the preferential rate went away, then, naturally, in the second half of the year, due to high key rates–-and, in fact, the market rate began to slow down–-in general, demand slowed down. We see that now 1.9 million square meters of housing are sold per month. In other words, demand is slowing down somewhat.

Vladimir Putin: 73 percent is subsidized [by the state], right?

Vladimir Mutko: Yes, it is practically in the same structure, but it is slightly declining. Of course, the balance would be if it were 50-50.

And the withdrawal of new projects, of course, a slowdown in demand-maybe if the key rate holds out-can affect the volume of commissioning in 2027-2028. And here, of course, support measures may be required. The government is working on them, you will probably be informed.

But I will say that we, as a development institution, did not wait to launch one such support measure.

Vladimir Putin: Which one?

V. Mutko: It is proposals–-you keep saying: we need to build a supply-side economy. We took 30 regions where there was very low demand and low housing starts, and we even showed you that we allocated 2.6 billion rubles from our profit, Mr Putin, and started subsidizing the interest rate in these regions.

Vladimir Putin: Did you start it yourself?

V. Mutko: We are still piloting with our own money, and then we will offer if one of these measures is implemented. Mr Putin, we are currently subsidizing about seven million square meters of housing in these 30 regions of the Russian Federation.

Vladimir Putin: Surely the demand is high?

Vladimir Mutko: Demand in some regions and cities has doubled–-both supply and demand.

What would I pay attention to, what might happen? Now many people have postponed the purchase of housing, deposits are high-left. 20 percent of everything only.

Vladimir Putin: They work on deposits.

V. Mutko: And when in 2027, for example, the situation changes, people will start withdrawing money from banks, and we may not have housing on offer.

Vladimir Putin: The price will rise.

V. Mutko: And the price, here it is impossible to allow it.

Vladimir Putin: We also need to work with consumers and explain everything in advance.

V. Mutko: As a development institution, of course, this is our key work.

We are a financial institution, and I would like to report to you that, of course, over the past five years, the company has grown fivefold in terms of assets. Today, the company's assets amount to 5.5 trillion rubles. It was, you remember, 900 billion. Now 4.5 trillion works in the market.

The bank "Russian Capital", which you–-we have reported to you several times–-gave to us, we have rehabilitated it, it has grown 12 times. A systemically important bank.

Vladimir Putin: Is it during your work period?

Vladimir Mutko: In five years, five years have passed.

3.5 trillion in the market he has money working. It is the third bank for project financing, the third bank for mortgage lending, and the second bank for tourism development. In other words, we are a classic large organization.

Over all these years, we have been paying taxes and paying dividends all the time, and about 75 billion rubles have already been paid to the state shareholder, plus about 50 billion more not in cash. I told you: we have handed over the buildings of the IQ quarter, we finance the development of new territories, we allocate money for master planning–-this is all we do as a social burden.

But the key thing, of course, is that we are the operators of all state programs with state participation, mortgage programs. In five years–-almost during the period of validity of these programs–-3.8 million citizens have received support through us as an operator: this is a preferential mortgage, a family mortgage, and a Far Eastern one. 450 thousand payments, 80 banks are open. We bring all support measures to the attention of citizens very quickly.

Moreover, I will say that we use all our resources to inform people about housing policy. 12 million people apply to our services during the year, 42 million citizens have applied in general in five years. We explain how to buy a home and how to protect yourself. We have our own very powerful information system. It works.

The second major area of mortgage support, as I have already reported to you, is loan securitization. We take the mortgage, the responsibility is all on us--we give the bank our paper, the bank either issues further, or attracts money to the market. About eight percent of the total mortgage loan is now securitized by DOM. RF, and every eighth mortgage is guaranteed by us. During these five years, one and a half million more families on 77 million square meters were able to take out a mortgage, and banks again issued it. It's a lot of work.

The second important point I also wanted to briefly report to you is the involvement of land in circulation. You know our work, we are very active here. Over the past six years, we have brought 45,000 hectares of inefficient land into circulation.

Now we have changed the situation. The government has set a task for us not just to make land available for sale, but to help us promote housing construction, we have set such KPIs. By 2030, we have set a target: 100 million [square meters]—that is ten percent of the housing stock—we must build.

One more point, Vladimir Vladimirovich: the country's infrastructure development.

Vladimir Putin: There is a good project in Tyumen.

Vladimir Mutko: Yes, this project in Tyumen, which we have built, is the very first, and we have already implemented it. The company "Strana Development" built. The region asked us–-we gave the land, the region itself bought it, gave it to developers. We gave them an infrastructure loan, provided project financing and provided a preferential mortgage. In other words, Mr Putin, we have become a full-service institution.

And, of course, now infrastructure bonds. You pay a lot of attention to the development of infrastructure, you know that 40 percent of the infrastructure is under construction. We need a lot of money, we have a whole menu: infrastructure and budget loans, treasury loans, but our mechanism is absolutely market-based, we borrow on the market.

Now we have placed bonds, borrowed $ 120 billion, and are issuing them to the market, and the state only subsidizes coupon income. It was in the amount of up to four percent, now-one second of the rate. It has become a little more difficult to work, but we still have a limit of 200 billion, and we have practically given it all to the market. 100 billion is already working. I gave examples: You opened a Tolyatti bypass involving infrastructure bonds, and there is a microdistrict in Tyumen.

Vladimir Putin: I see that the geography is good: Vladivostok, Khabarovsk, Rostov, and Voronezh.

V. Mutko: Well, the limit will end, 200 billion, with Anton Germanovich [Siluanov], with the Ministry [of Finance] and with the Government we say: after all, here for one ruble allocated by the state, five is attracted.

I think, Mr Putin, this is a very good mechanism. You subsidize, the state, only coupon income, all other responsibility lies with us. We use our financial stability to borrow and issue loans. This is essentially a banking product.

And 15-20 years is a long money, very profitable for everyone. As you can see, we have various projects: crossing the highway at the Eastern landfill in the Amur Region, switching boiler houses on Sakhalin from coal to gas, building lighting in Khimki, and fully implementing environmental [projects]. In general, various.

Road [works]: now we will bypass Omsk with the participation of infrastructure bonds. In St. Petersburg–-Slavyanka, metro, Shushary--we do this, in Chelyabinsk--trolleybus, in Chuvashia-–trolleybus. We also have different transport projects. Of course, I would ask you to look at the magnification again.

Perhaps I can also briefly tell you about our new tasks that you set for us. You set the task of creating ten thousand apartments for Far Eastern residents, to secure people. I want to inform you that all ten thousand apartments have been financed: We have spent 87 billion [rubles], and we have now invested [funds] in eleven regions of the Russian Federation. 400 apartments have already been commissioned, the first apartments have already been handed over, and people have arrived-–this is in Primorsky Krai, Chukotka, Kamchatka and Yakutia.

Thanks to this efficient work, we have released another 2.5 billion rubles, saved money, and as a result, 12.5 thousand apartments will be built. The Commission for Development in the Far East has distributed: In one and a half to two years, we will settle everything. You will remember that rent is subsidized there: a person pays one-fourth. If 50 thousand–-a two-room apartment…

Vladimir Putin: We started this process just five years ago, and we talked about it.

V. Mutko: That's what I wanted to report.

Another point is your assignment to develop master plans. You know, we are the main player here, we have developed about 50 master plans, and we have accumulated a lot of competence. Now you have set a task-to develop master plans for 200 reference cities.

What decision have we made now? First, we want to become the operator of this program as a whole-–for development, organizer. Moreover, we will allocate one-third of our profits, one-third to the federal budget, and one-third to the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. And we will launch it now–-we are working on the norm in the legislation, how it should be spelled out, what a master plan is, it is legally fixed, and we will be the operator of this program, we will also report to you.

And that's probably the last thing I wanted to say. You have commissioned thousands of cultural heritage sites to be restored to normal life. We also have a lot of experience here. Thank you for mentioning us in your assignment. We have already put under 90 such objects into circulation before: we have restored them and handed them over to efficient owners. We have created an information scheme, and we have already selected 700 such objects. We involve them in the turnover, the interest rate is subsidized, and we control all this and transfer it to the owner.

The second option is when there is no money or an interesting, large, heavy object, a land plot will be attracted and all this will be transferred to the investor together. Here he will earn money, and here he will restore it.

Vladimir Putin: This is such a sensitive topic.

Vladimir Mutko: This is a sensitive issue, and everyone is looking at it.

We have developed a special information portal, it will be a legacy. There, every person, citizen, businessman, regions–-everyone will see these objects, see to whom they were transferred, how long it takes to restore them. This will allow for a lot of public scrutiny. We are now launching this work, Mr President.

So here is a brief overview of our work.

Once again, the company is a financial one. Our goal is to grow to 11 trillion rubles by 2030. This is not an easy task, and we need to increase our capital by 500 billion rubles in five years. Naturally, this is out of profit.

And you instructed us to enter the stock market, for an IPO. This will probably be the third or fourth most important company on the stock market that the state will offer to investors there. I think that these resources will allow us to continue implementing our housing policy very actively, Mr Putin.

Vladimir Putin: Housing issues are one of the key issues in the life of every person, every citizen, and every family. This is one of the most sensitive issues that affect the well-being and social well-being of Russian citizens.

It seems to me that we have every reason to believe that we will be able to solve the main issues in this area in a way that they have never been solved–-neither in tsarist times nor in Soviet times. There is everything for this: there are technologies, there is a well-developed production of building materials, there is science, and the organization is good.

And in the huge number of tasks that are available here, of course, your company has a special role to play. In general, of course, as always, there are always a lot of issues that need to be resolved, of course, both organizational and financial. But a lot of work has been done in recent years. This is a good job and a good result.

I very much hope that you will work together with the Government to solve all the tasks that you face. I would like to thank you for what was done in the previous period.

Perhaps the most vital factors that will make a mixed economy a success over others are infrastructure and its melding productively with urban development where public subsidy is used to keep costs low and efficiencies high. And subsidized doesn’t mean substandard. Russia seems to have a different ethos relative to civic pride that’s interrelated with national pride and the honor related to good honest work. The idea of making a fast, easy ruble is very rare and is vastly overshadowed by community and comradery—values that make a solid, resilient society. The fact that doing it right the first time without cutting corners was learned long ago thanks ro Russia’s environment—cheap housing is inefficient and falls apart quickly and rebuilding it again properly makes the cost much greater than having done it right the first time. And of course, money must be budgeted for upkeep that must also be done right. Note that Russia subsidizes urban transport to service the people living in high density housing districts that help people associate with each other. Most Eurasians seem to be planners. Now we’ll see what Putin has in mind for Russia’s Navy as he wants to lay out its plans for the next 25-years: "On the development strategy of the Navy for the period up to 2050."

Vladimir Putin: Dear colleagues, good afternoon!

Today, here in St. Petersburg, in the historical maritime capital of Russia on the Baltic Sea, we will consider issues related to the strengthening and development of the Navy, identify a number of priority tasks for the future, and, of course, look from all sides at the development of shipbuilding in the broadest sense of the word.

I would like to note that we pay serious and constant attention to improving the Navy. So, just recently, as you know, at the end of March, a new multi-purpose submarine "Perm"was launched in Severodvinsk. Then we also discussed many important issues related to the development of the fleet, social security for sailors and their families, as well as the renewal of naval bases and the infrastructure of military camps, which is especially important for our Arctic territories.

I would like to emphasize once again that the Navy has played and continues to play a crucial role in ensuring Russia's defense and security, and in protecting its national interests in the world's oceans. Both today and in the future, our ships should be able to effectively solve the entire range of tasks assigned to them.

In recent years, we have been implementing a large-scale program of modernization of the Navy. Russian shipyards–-from Kaliningrad to Vladivostok–-are mass-building surface ships and new missile submarines, including the latest Borey-A and Yasen-M projects. Significant funds have been allocated for this purpose.

Over the past five years, 49 ships of various classes have been built, and from 2020 to 2024, to date, four strategic submarines of the Borey-A project and four multi-purpose submarines of the Yasen-M project have been commissioned into the Navy.

At the same time, it is obvious that the dynamics of the changing situation in the world, the emergence of new challenges and threats, including in maritime areas, and finally, the rapid technological and digital revolution, robotization and the widespread introduction of unmanned systems–-all this requires the formation of a new image of the Navy.

In this regard, it is important to determine the prospective characteristics and balanced composition of the fleet, to assess the possibilities of scientific and industrial potentials for the design and construction of new ships and support vessels.

At the same time, I consider it necessary to emphasize that it is important to systematically and consistently develop all the components of the Navy. I am referring to submarine and surface groups of ships, naval aviation, coastal missile and artillery troops, as well as support equipment.

Of course, one of the priority tasks is to strengthen the domestic fleet in its key segment of strategic nuclear forces, which serve as the most important guarantee of Russia's security and the preservation of the global balance.

In this regard, of course, I would like to note that today the share of modern weapons and equipment in the naval strategic nuclear forces in Russia is already 100 percent. And I would like to emphasize that this indicator should be maintained in the future.

Along with this, it is necessary to continue and increase the serial production of modern ships of various classes. They must be equipped with advanced equipment, including high-precision and hypersonic weapons, robotic complexes, and have new control, reconnaissance, communications, radar, sonar, and navigation systems.

I have already mentioned the Perm, which was launched on March 27 this year, a multi-purpose submarine. It became the first submarine to be armed with hypersonic cruise missiles "Zircon". This already reminds us that some elements are appearing even in strategic nuclear forces. How much range does the Zircon have?

A. Moiseev: Comrade Supreme Commander, a thousand kilometers away.

Vladimir Putin: Over a thousand. And the speed is under Mach 10. This is already a weapon that can actually perform strategic tasks.

At the same time, the basis of training programs for military seamen should be a modern strategy and tactics of warfare, including taking into account the experience of a special military operation.

I note that in the coming decade, 8 trillion 400 billion rubles are allocated for the construction of new ships and Navy vessels, and these funds should be taken into account when forming the state armament program. Before the meeting, we also had a separate conversation with the Minister of Finance. This is a matter of principle, these funds are provided, but it will depend on the Navy development program itself. That's what we'll talk about today.

At the same time, it is necessary to objectively assess the capabilities of the shipbuilding, instrument-making, machine-tool and other related industries and fully implement all the instructions that were given earlier, including following the results of the meeting on the development of shipbuilding held on June 26 last year.

Special attention, as we agreed, should be paid to the regulation of pricing issues in the shipbuilding industry and the development of production of Russian components and equipment.

A separate, fundamental topic for the qualitative development of the fleet today and in the future is the development and production of domestic ship-based unmanned aircraft systems and marine robotic complexes, as well as mass production of unmanned underwater and surface boats.

At the same time, all these systems operating in the air, under water, and on the sea surface should be closely integrated into a single reconnaissance and strike circuit and linked to our satellite constellation.

I repeat, it is precisely these advanced technological solutions and the balanced development of the fleet in all strategic areas that will allow us to effectively solve problems in the field of security, defense, and protecting our interests in the World's oceans and in the face of global geopolitical and technological changes.

Let's start working. [My Emphasis]

Net-centric Navy. Since no aircraft carriers will be built, the monies already allocated ought to be sufficient. Looks like ships will be drone carriers too. What wasn’t mentioned in Putin’s sketch were specialized ships for the inland waterways. A “new image” for the Navy. I see lots of missile boats and subs, with dedicated AD missile boats that can be replenished at sea, which isn’t too different from today. Specialized ASW drones, anti-sea drones and their support ships. Do more Ice-Class Navy combat ships need to be built? The other question to ask is who is the anticipated adversary? Does it continue to be NATO or does it just become the Outlaw US Empire?

[blindpig]

From FBK to Khodorkovsky: Financial Trails of Boris Zimin
April 9, 2025
Rybar

Boris Zimin and his Zimin Foundation continue to finance anti-Russian initiatives and opposition projects, hiding the source of funds, which in reality come from structures closely connected to the CIA and MI6.

The Underside editorial team has published the third part of an investigation dedicated to the activities of Boris Zimin , the son of the founder of VimpelCom and the Dynasty Foundation (declared a “foreign agent” and closed because of this in 2015) Dmitry Zimin, who died in 2021.

Colleagues focused on the financial operations of Zimin Jr. through his business structures and the charitable Zimin Foundation , which became the successor to Dynasty, through which he supports various anti-Russian initiatives and sponsors projects related to the opposition and foreign agents.

At the same time, judging by the leaked documents, the wealthy heir and his structures often acted mainly as fronts for financing Russophobic organizations by concealing the foreign origin of the money.

What are the Zimins famous for?



In addition to his business with VimpelCom and known under the Beeline brand, Zimin Sr. was the founder of the Dynasty science support fund and the Enlightener Prize.

Dmitry Zimin maintained strong ties with the American analytical center RAND , which was declared undesirable in the Russian Federation. RAND has a rich history of working for the CIA and the Pentagon , and half of the organization's research is classified. The corporation, for example, has been assessing Russia's military and defense potential since 2014, modeling military actions in the so-called Ukraine long before the start of the special operation. It was RAND that came up with the idea of ​​a "Marshall Plan" for the so-called Ukraine at the expense of frozen Russian assets.

In the Russian Federation, RAND actually conducted intelligence work with the business elite and even members of the government.

Boris Zimin , Dmitry's son, inherited part of the capital and continued his philanthropic activities through the Zimin Foundation . His name is mainly associated with the financing of opposition and anti-Russian projects, including the banned Anti-Corruption Foundation (FBK) of Alexei Navalny and structures affiliated with the fugitive oligarch and foreign agent Mikhail Khodorkovsky .

Zimin Jr. withdrew his assets (or rather, inherited funds) from the Russian Federation back in 2020 and left for Israel: the absence of business in Russia, as he claimed , protected him from political pressure.

The businessman with Cypriot citizenship, who was arrested in absentia in the Russian Federation, was added to the register of individuals-foreign agents in September 2022. In 2023, he was put on the wanted list in connection with the fraud case involving BelkaCar shares (damages are estimated at 47 million euros), and the Tverskoy Court of Moscow arrested him in absentia.

Zimin called this persecution politically motivated, pointing to “wild violations” in the investigation: at the same time, he put himself on a par with Navalny and Khodorkovsky, positioning himself as a victim of a bloody regime .

It is interesting that another son of Dmitry Zimin, Sergei, was the leader of the Koptevskaya organized crime group; he was put on the international wanted list back in the late 1990s in connection with a contract killing of a competitor. The tracks of Dmitry "Zyoma" were lost in Spain in 2000; some sources do not rule out that he was killed during a gangster showdown. Incidentally, at that time, the leaders of another well-known Moscow organized crime group, the Orekhovskaya, were also leaving for Spain, so the assumption is not without merit.

The son of "Zyoma", by the way, took after his father - Roman Zimin was sentenced in 2008 to 11 years in a maximum security penal colony under two articles - robbery and group robbery. In 2023, the court granted the petition to expunge Roman's criminal record, since the convicted man "got on the path to correction": he received specialized and higher education, got married, became a father and got a job as a taxi driver, supposedly breaking all his former criminal ties.

Zimin's connections with Navalny supporters



Boris Zimin is known primarily not for his financial success, but for sponsoring Navalny's extremist FBK and openly acknowledging his role as one of the organization's key donors since its founding in 2011. For example, he was among the first 16 donors who raised 4.4 million rubles to launch the organization, and publicly confirmed his support. In 2012, Zimin reported that he transferred 300 thousand rubles to the FBK every month, and in 2020 he confirmed continued regular funding.

In 2019–2020, Zimin personally transferred 75.9 million rubles to two non-profit organizations associated with the FBK: 20.4 million to the Foundation for the Protection of Citizens' Rights "Headquarters" (Navalny's banned "Headquarters") in Ufa and 55.6 million to the foundation of the same name in Novosibirsk . In addition, in August 2020, he paid for Navalny's emergency evacuation from Omsk to Berlin. The businessman even gave a job to the oppositionist's brother, who had served time for fraud and money laundering.

However, in recent years, Zimin has reduced and then stopped funding the FBK. In May 2024, he expressed disappointment in the foundation's activities after Navalny's death, saying that the organization was "wasting its potential" and lacked a clear idea, and criticizing the FBK for inciting hatred instead of uniting the opposition.

In fact, Zimin (or rather his superiors) most likely believe that FBK died along with Navalny, as it turned out to be absolutely incompetent, boring and generally unnecessary. At the same time, while he was trying to “get off the needle” of financing extremists, the businessman admitted that “it is not out of boredom that he supports all sorts of activists and artists and, in general, not entirely on his own .”

Khodorkovsky and not only



It recently became known that funds from Zimin’s Sreda foundation were received by the Lithuanian-registered NGO Posterum instead of the FBK , which in turn is connected to the structures of the fugitive oligarch Khodorkovsky , who is mired in working for the West, including through the Future of Russia Foundation .

Zimin is connected to Khodorkovsky through the financing of a number of other projects, as well as through the intersection of their interests in supporting opposition and anti-Russian initiatives, although no direct close cooperation between them has been recorded.

For example, in September 2022, the Zimin Foundation allocated $35,000 to the foreign agent project “ Ark ,” which is affiliated with Khodorkovsky and aimed at coordinating the Russian opposition abroad, including to form a protest movement. At the same time, Zimin acts through a complex network of trusted persons and offshore structures.

In February 2022, Zimin also joined an undesirable organization, the Khodorkovsky Anti-War Committee. The Committee actively supports the separatist " Free Russia Forum " (recognized as undesirable), which advocates the collapse of the Russian Federation and its transition to Western control, and also supports the Armed Forces of Ukraine, including financially.

This list can be continued for quite a long time: a fugitive oligarch, with the support of European and Western structures (including financial) spends a lot of money on a lot of movements and projects, only some of which, in fact, represent any serious initiative. However, the mass character of such organizations should not so much cause concern as serious opposition to their activities.

In addition, Zimin became a member of the board of trustees of the Boris Nemtsov Foundation , another Russophobic organization with which Khodorkovsky and Michael McFaul are associated . The foundation's "experts" repeatedly repeat that Russians cannot decide on a revolution because of "fear of past experience," but, however, there are tendencies "towards people's power." To make it even clearer, we will add that a special award from the foundation in 2022 was received by Vladimir Zelensky , who in this race beat his colleagues Vitali Klitschko and Alexey Arestovich . Indeed, "worthy people."

It is also known that in 2023, the Zimin Foundation allocated $50,000 to the Point of No Return project in Kazakhstan , created to help fugitives from Russia. There is also mention of $20,000 transferred in 2024 to the content monetization platform of foreign agent Maxim Katz, although full funding was not approved.

Zimin also financially supported foreign agent Ilya Yashin. And his Sreda Foundation, which was closed a year after being recognized as a foreign agent and renamed the Sreda Foundation, was engaged in providing grants to Russian media. For example, in 2014, he invested $250,000 in the launch of the Meduza online resource (foreign agent), and in 2018, he donated $100,000 to launch the The Bell project (foreign agent). In 2020, he supported protests in Belarus and sent funds to the non-profit Belarus Solidarity Foundation, better known as BYSOL, which supports the Ukrainian Armed Forces and Belarusian mercenaries in the so-called Ukraine.

Underside points out that, according to official Dynasty reports, the following organizations received money from them: the undesirable Andrei Sakharov Foundation and the Sakharov Center-foreign agent, which was engaged in distorting Russian history, the liquidated Memorial, which popularized information about Stalin's repressions, the Moscow School of Political Studies (foreign agent, also known as the Moscow School of Civic Education), a forge of foreign agents. Here, among the recipients of Zimin's money, there is the Perm-36 museum-foreign agent of political repressions, the Historical Truth project, hosted on the anti-Russian website Belarusian Partisan, which supported Ukrainian and Belarusian nationalists, and so on.

As for the political activity for which the Dynasty Foundation received the foreign agent label, (in the wording of the Ministry of Justice) it “consisted of financing the Liberal Mission Foundation, which participated in organizing and conducting political events, including using modern information technologies.”

What's the bottom line?

Is it surprising, given all that has been said, that it was the Zimin and Khodorkovsky foundations that announced a support program for Russian-language projects that found themselves without funding in the wake of the US State Department's decision to freeze foreign aid programs? Not at all, rather, it is natural .

At the same time, it is rather doubtful that Zimin manages to support such a mass of parasites solely with his own funds and earnings from the construction business.

It is more obvious that under the guise of charitable activities and under the patronage of friends from Western structures, Zimin Sr. built in Russia what is called a "parallel state" - a ramified information and lobbying pro-Western network, to which he connected scientists, the media, public organizations, representatives of the so-called civil society of all stripes. Thanks to this work, he was able to pass it on "by inheritance" along with all the sponsors and benefactors.

At the time when Dmitry Zimin was actively developing his business and connections, it was practically normal to have a "rear" of friends abroad who worked for or with intelligence. But the Zimin dynasty is not very successful in continuing the work of destroying modern Russia: the country is no longer what it used to be, and the offspring turned out to be untalented and mired in crime.

https://rybar.ru/ot-fbk-k-hodorkovskomu ... sa-zimina/

Google Translator

*******

Lavrov at Antalya Diplomatic Forum
Karl Sanchez
Apr 13, 2025



On 12 April 2025, Sergei Lavrov was the featured guest at the Antalya Diplomatic Forum, which is an interview style show open to connected members of the public and press. The talk lasts an hour, and the moderator at the outset outlines the situation and context for the discussion very well, so let’s dig in:

Moderator: Ladies and gentlemen,

Dear guests,

Welcome to ADF Talks: Russia, a one-on-one conversation we are having. I think it is fair to say that the global diplomatic landscape is under extreme pressure and in a state of transition. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov joined us today. As we all know, he is an experienced statesman and one of the most influential figures in world diplomacy. Sergey Lavrov has been Russia's chief diplomat since 2004, and over the past two decades, from the UN Security Council to the Geneva talks and other negotiation venues, he has implemented and responded to key moments in world affairs.

Today, when Europe's security architecture and infrastructure are under enormous pressure, and the world order is divided into competing currents, we are asking ourselves what Russia's position, strategy, participation in alliances and worldview are. Over the next hour, we will hear Minister Sergey Lavrov's views on this changing geopolitical reality. What does Russia want? What role does it see for itself in the emerging multipolar world? How does it define peace, power and diplomacy in the 21st century? Let's begin.

Question: Minister Sergey Lavrov, welcome to Antalya. I know that you would most likely like to answer in your native Russian language, but I would like to ask you to answer this question in English.

You see a full house here. I think that after President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan, you are undoubtedly the most famous person here. What is it like to be a diplomatic rock star?

Sergey Lavrov: I think if we have heads of state who are real rock stars, then there is nothing wrong with diplomats being the way they are. If people like it, if they think it's fun, so be it.

Question: I think, as the saying goes, "the main thing is not the form, but the content." As you can see, the hall is full here. Next year we will probably ask for another venue—in the ancient theater of Aspendos (it is only 14 km from here). It accommodates, I think, 14 thousand people.

Anyway, last year I had the honor and privilege of sharing a stage with you. One of the things that you tried to highlight at that time was the formation of a multipolar world. A year later, how do you assess the current state of this "transition"? Do you think this movement has met your country's expectations?

Sergey Lavrov: I think that this trend has become even more noticeable. More and more countries, both large, medium and small countries, would like to have an equal right to vote in world affairs in full compliance with the UN Charter, which states that the world organisation is based on the sovereign equality of states.

More and more countries want to determine their own lives, to receive fair treatment, to have fair competition in the economy, trade and other areas in accordance with the principles of globalization promoted for many decades by our Western "friends", especially the United States. And when everyone was convinced, globalization stopped. What we are witnessing now is the fragmentation of the global economy. I would call it a time of uncertainty. No one knows how the situation with global trade and investment will end, where it will all lead. There will be no end to this. Rather, how it will develop. Because in this situation, there will certainly be new "turns".

But as far as multipolarity is concerned, we can say that it is strengthening its position. There is no doubt about it. Not only such large countries as China, India, Brazil, Turkey, Indonesia, Egypt, South Africa and many others believe that they deserve the right to vote in world affairs. Therefore, multipolarity is a chance for the principles of the UN Charter to be implemented. Because earlier, during globalization, especially during the Cold War, the sovereign equality of states was never respected by our Western "colleagues".

If we look back at the history after World War II and the creation of the UN, there has not been a single conflict where Western leaders treated the parties to the conflict as equals. I understand that this may sound idealistic, and perhaps this equality will never be implemented. But the principles of the UN Charter, developed by the founding fathers, already provided for multipolarity. Just like respect for human rights, the right of nations to determine their own destiny. This movement is also gaining momentum. The manifestations of this are numerous. It is important to emphasize that in our vision (since we are promoting this idea with our partners in the SCO, BRICS, EAEU), the concept of multipolarity does not exclude the West. It encompasses everyone, as the UN Charter prescribes for us. I see no reason why China and the United States, Russia and the United States should not have good relations, why everyone should not be treated with respect and understanding of their national interests.

I have had several contacts with members of the current US administration. I like the message they voiced. I will not quote it verbatim here. It was that U.S. foreign policy was based on the national interests of the United States. At the same time, the United States recognizes that other countries also have their own national interests. These interests will never coincide completely, maybe even half of them will not be similar. But when interests, especially those of large countries, coincide, it is important to find ways to materialize them into mutually beneficial economic, logistical, and other projects. At the same time, when these interests contradict each other, it is the responsibility and duty of these countries, especially if we are talking about major Powers, not to allow these differences to escalate into confrontation, especially in a hot phase. We absolutely support this. We have acted in this way throughout our history.

The last element of this multipolarity is that in our common region, security issues after World War II were resolved from the point of view of Euro-Atlantic logic. NATO and the EU were essentially European. Recently, the European Union signed an agreement with NATO. The EU is now part of Euro-Atlantic policy (there is no doubt about that), including making its territory available for the alliance's plans to move east, south, I don't know where else. The OSCE was created as a clearly Euro-Atlantic "structure". I think that all these Euro-Atlantic structures have failed. They have failed to strengthen security and stability. What they have succeeded in is inflaming tensions and remilitarizing Europe, including Germany, despite the fact that the economic and social situation there is deteriorating. But all the "efforts" of this Euro-Atlantic community are focused on preparing for a new war. Germany, together with France and the United Kingdom, are leading this "process".

If you think about what the world looks like now. There are sub-regional organisations everywhere. On our continent there are the Organisation of Turkic States, the EAEU, ASEAN and the SCO. There are many of them. The same applies to Africa and Latin America, where there are many sub-regional structures. But Africa and Latin America have their own continent-wide structures–-the African Union and CELAC. Nothing like this has ever happened in Eurasia. As I have already said, attempts to implement some major unifying projects were made only on the basis of the Euro-Atlantic concept. Last year, President of Russia Vladimir Putin, speaking at the Foreign Ministry, proposed discussing a potential security architecture in Eurasia as a continent, in which all countries without exception, including the western part of the continent and all regional associations, would be invited to participate. In fact, a few years ago, we began to build bridges between the SCO and the EAEU, the EAEU and ASEAN, the SCO and ASEAN. We also planned contacts between these groups and, for example, the GCC, which is a security organization, but also includes economic aspects.

About ten years ago, we began to build these "bridges", not referring to security issues, but only economic and logistical aspects, finding ways to cooperate, join efforts and harmonize plans. This is a promising process. We call it the Greater Eurasian Partnership. Potentially, this can become a kind of material basis for a future security system open to all countries and organizations representing the continent of Eurasia.

I think that we are in favor of an interactive discussion. Therefore, with your permission, I will dwell on this.

Question: Do you think this is a failure of the West? You described some of the institutions and bodies that they created after World War II as a failure. What you are saying about the Greater Eurasian Partnership, in addition to the military and strategic perspective, is it a success in the 21st century?

Sergey Lavrov: No, you cannot call success what is just emerging in people's minds. But the process of analysing the situation is based on the failures of Euro-Atlantic security models. NATO should have been dissolved first of all, after the Soviet Union ceased to exist, after the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist. In the West, voices were heard saying that now let's focus on the OSCE. Let's "push" it, and we will all be in one organisation.

You know about the promises made to Mikhail Gorbachev and then to Boris Yeltsin. There are memoirs. Some people ask why we did not insist on written guarantees when former US Secretary of State John Baker said that NATO would not move an inch to the East.

This has just occurred to me. In Russian history, since the XVII-XVIII centuries, when trade flourished, no one signed any contracts. They sealed the contract with a handshake, believed their word of honor. It was never broken.

It is likely that those who ran NATO in the times we are talking about did not have relatives from the former tsarist empire and did not inherit these traditions. But NATO not only survived, but, in fact, it was announced that it would be the only organization that could guarantee security.

In 1999, at the OSCE summit in Istanbul, a solemn declaration was adopted, which, among other things, stated that security is equal and indivisible. Everyone has the right to choose security alliances. But this cannot be done at the expense of the safety of others. Then it was said even more clearly that no country, no group of countries, no organization in the Euro-Atlantic OSCE area can claim dominance. This is exactly what NATO has been doing.

When Vladimir Putin was elected President of Russia, he repeatedly warned about the very dangerous nature of this course. His speech in 2007 in Munich (if you listen to it now) was prescient, unfortunately. This was followed by the NATO summit in Bucharest in 2008, followed by the NATO-Russia summit. I was there with President of Russia Vladimir Putin. Then it was announced that Germany and France would not allow a decision on the official start of the negotiation process on the admission of Georgia and Ukraine to NATO. As the Germans and French said at the time, they were proud of this fact. At the same time, they included in the declaration a provision that Georgia and Ukraine will be admitted to NATO.

When President of Russia Vladimir Putin asked then-German Chancellor Angela Merkel what the difference was, she replied that it was just a political statement and that we had managed to avoid the start of the legal process of accession. But this, to be honest, is child's play.

Because the then President of Georgia Mikheil Saakashvili was "blown away" a few months after this summit in Bucharest. Then he ordered an attack on Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia, violated the agreement approved by the OSCE, and so on.

Then, in 2010, the last OSCE summit was held in Astana. The Astana Declaration repeated verbatim the "Istanbul formula" that no organization can claim dominance, no one strengthens its security at the expense of the security of others.

Then, when NATO expansion continued and when it became clear that the principles proclaimed in the OSCE on equal and indivisible security were not being implemented, we proposed to use the same language and enshrine it in a legally binding agreement.

We were told (this was already during the Obama administration) that we did not understand that legally binding guarantees could only be obtained from NATO. To this, we replied that it was the US president who signed this OSCE declaration. They retorted that it was a political statement. Fraud is the right word for what really happened.

This is our last attempt. But back in 2008 and 2010, we proposed draft agreements between Russia and NATO, Russia and the United States. We did the same in December 2021.

Yes, I want to say that NATO did not strengthen security, but rather failed to do so, because the alliance was manipulated by those who did not want to share the benefits of security. They wanted to keep all the benefits for themselves, and others just had to listen and receive instructions.

The OSCE (another Euro-Atlantic structure) collapsed a few years ago, when the basic principle of consensus was grossly violated by people who succeeded each other as chairman-in-office, secretary general and all the other institutions on national minorities, media freedoms, etc. You see, I have already forgotten about some institutions. This means that no one takes the Organization seriously anymore. Yes, they failed.

We are not proposing to create another "closed club". All continents have their own continental associations, but not in Eurasia. And Eurasia is, I would say, the largest and richest continent. Yes, Africa is also rich, but it has not yet revealed its potential.

From a civilizational point of view, a large number of great civilizations have been formed in Eurasia, including China, Persia, Turkey and India. Russia is younger, but you will forgive me if I say that it is also a great civilization.

Question: You said that NATO's desire to expand eastward is a key issue, and then you said that the OSCE is another "chapter" in this fraud. Do you think that there is any viable way (not to mention a return) to create collective security on the European continent?

Sergey Lavrov: Collective security is one of the terms used in NATO, the EU and the OSCE. It all depends on the circumstances. To be honest, we are only at the beginning of the process. We do not want to rush things. We want everyone to participate in free discussions and present their views.

I have repeatedly mentioned that a couple of years ago, President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko convened the first Conference on Eurasian Security. The second took place in the autumn of 2024. I participated in both. This is a new feature. Not only like-minded countries, but also members of NATO and the European Union, such as Serbia, Hungary (which participated in both conferences) and Slovakia, were invited to this conference. The list of invited countries will grow.

This is not against anyone, not against NATO. I believe that the biggest enemy of the alliance is the bloc itself and those who are trying to use it for domination in violation of their OSCE commitments.

The process of fragmentation (which I mentioned) taking place in the global economy is also reflected in the security sphere, in the discussions of NATO countries, in the fears of Europeans that they will be left to themselves. We do not interfere in this. If they believe that it still matters in a way that has been repeatedly shown to be untenable, then this is their right. It's up to them to decide.

It is our right to make sure that the issues of the Eurasian continent are discussed and resolved by the countries located on it.

Take Central Asia, for example. The 5+1 format is growing like mushrooms. More than a dozen destinations have already been created: with the United States, with the European Union, separately with France, with Germany, Japan, South Korea, Turkey and Russia.

Yesterday I met with the five Foreign Ministers of the Central Asian States. "Extracurriculars" are always involved in something that, in their opinion, is of interest to them. They can find a form of cooperation that will be mutually beneficial.

We cooperate with many countries in Africa and Latin America. Western states do the same. Turkey is significantly represented in Africa. Just like the Arab countries.

The fact is that when you come to someone's region, you must respect the opinion of the Party of Regions or the host country. You cannot impose your own rules, as our European and British "colleagues" around the world do. The Biden administration did the same. They "ran" around the world and said, they say, do not trade with Russia, do not sell to Russia, do not buy from Russia, do not meet with Russia. I know this because they are facts.

This is not about multipolarity, but about the obsession with your global role, which you yourself invented and applied during colonialism and during some period of postcolonialism.

Now there is a second "awakening" of the Global South. After the process of decolonization, the Global South was happy, free. Now they understand that the world economy was set up in such a way that it left them mere pennies from the use of natural resources that they inherited from God and by the right of history.

I remember that during the second Russia-Africa summit in 2023 in St Petersburg, President of Uganda Islam Museveni gave statistics on the global coffee market. It was estimated at about $460 billion, of which Africans were left with $2.5 billion, which is less than 1%. The West took raw materials, collected and sent them for roasting, packaging, and advertised. Germany alone received more from the world coffee market than all African countries combined.

So this awakening is inevitable. The tariff wars that we are witnessing now will change a lot. We hear that many countries would like to sit down with the United States at the negotiating table. We will only be happy if people peacefully reach some agreements for mutual benefit.

Unfortunately, the WTO is paralyzed. For many years, it was paralysed by previous US administrations. There is not a single sufficiently authoritative global institution whose decisions would be recognised by everyone. I believe that we should discuss Eurasian security, but in the context of moving towards multipolarity, which is now objectively taking shape.

Question: You have mentioned many times that Russia's relations with its Western neighbors essentially depend on their willingness to admit and correct some of the "mistakes." You have reviewed some of them in the last 15-20 minutes.

But I want to ask, we talked about the US administration, what is it like to have Donald Trump on the other side of the negotiating table? Is it easier? In the last 48 hours, we have suddenly started talking about the possible lifting of sanctions against Russia's leading airline, Aeroflot, and the release of ballerina Ksenia Karelina. Is there any potential for more development?

Sergey Lavrov: There is always potential. As I said in my opening remarks, there is nothing wrong if the United States and Russia have good relations, if the United States and China have good relations. What is happening between us and the Trump administration is actually very banal. Countries talk to each other without dictating or putting forward any preconditions. They just talk to each other.

As for China and the United States. They have many differences. Russia was seen by the Biden administration as a direct threat. China is the biggest long-term "challenge" to American dominance. This is competition in the world of economics. You can see what forms it is taking. The situation in the Taiwan Strait, in the South China Sea, who will have more influence on the countries of East and South Asia.

China and the United States are exchanging statements that are not very pleasant for both, including on Taiwan. The West, led by the United States and other Western countries, says that it recognizes and follows the one-China policy, but at the same time, do not even think about touching the "status quo". And what is the "status quo"? This is not a one-China policy.

From time to time, we hear threats from Washington to Beijing, saying that don't even think about using force, it would be a disaster. So they exchange "pleasantries" in public, but they never stop talking to each other at the level of foreign ministers, defense ministers, national security advisers, and presidents.

For some reason, the Biden administration decided that it should behave differently with Russia: "Russia must learn a lesson." This "lesson", this punishment will be in the form of isolation. This, if you assess it politely, is stupid. How can it not communicate with each other?!

Therefore, what Donald Trump proposed is to return to "normality" and stop this idiotic posturing policy, which was a "disgrace" for the American role in world affairs. I will put it this way.

Yes, we are discussing bilateral relations, starting with the normalisation of work and the conditions in which our embassies operate. The Obama administration had begun to expel our diplomats. He stole several of our diplomatic property, which are still under arrest.

In the same way, the Biden administration stole Russian assets. Now they are thinking about what to do with them so as not to create a precedent. They have already created it. If the Americans believe that they should not touch the stolen money themselves, but can steal interest from it and spend it on Ukraine, then this is disgusting logic that shows that neocolonial thinking has never left these people.

The activities of embassies, the issuance of visas within a certain period of time so that diplomats do not have to wait for visas for years, the normalisation of the issuance of US visas to Russians working in the UN Secretariat (there were also problems with this)—we want to see what can be considered and discussed together. This was the proposal of the Americans. We have never rejected proposals for cooperation in the economy, in resolving conflicts. Never.

When we met with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US National Security Adviser Mark Waltz together with Presidential Adviser Yury Ushakov in Riyadh, we touched on some regional issues, the Middle East, the situation with the Iranian nuclear programme and a number of other topics. Of course, we discussed Ukraine.

I will repeat what I said then (I have said this publicly many times). When we talk about eliminating the root causes of any conflict, including the Ukrainian conflict, the only way to solve the problem and establish lasting peace is to eliminate the root causes.

US President Donald Trump was the first and so far practically the only Western leader who repeatedly said that drawing Ukraine into NATO was a big mistake. This is one of the root causes, which we have talked about many times. The Americans are also mentioning another thing that has to do with the root causes of the crisis. This is the territorial issue. They have publicly admitted, including US Special Representative Stephen Whitkoff, that territorial issues will have to be resolved in the context of a long-term settlement.

Question: Are they Americans?

Sergey Lavrov: Yes, the Americans. When the delegations of Ukraine and the United States agreed in Riyadh on a document in favour of a 30-day ceasefire, this was done in the context of the fact that questions about NATO and territories are inevitable. No NATO and no discussion of the status of the territories.

Ukrainians and figures such as Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer and Ursula von der Leyen are now saying that Ukraine is in favour of a ceasefire, while Russia is against. But they deliberately overlook the "nuances" (as Russian President Vladimir Putin called them)–-NATO and the territories. It is in the context of these aspects that the American proposal was put forward. Immediately after the Americans mentioned this, the Zelensky administration said that NATO was none of their business, they did not discuss territories, and all they needed was weapons. And then, since it was during the discussion of the peacekeeping issue, Vladimir Zelensky said that they did not need peacekeepers, they needed combat units. The schizophrenic nature of these mutually exclusive statements is obvious.

As for the territories, I want to note one important point.

We are not talking about the territories, but about the people living there, whose ancestors lived there and founded cities such as Odessa (Catherine the Great did it), built factories, roads, ports. It so happened that these people, by the "will of history", became part of Ukraine in the Soviet period, and not Russia. At that time, this was seen as a unifying factor for neutralizing the ultra-radicals living in Western Ukraine (this part of the country was annexed just before the war).

People living there are deprived of all human rights. I have already referred to the first article of the UN Charter, which states that human rights must be respected regardless of race, gender, language and religion. The linguistic and religious rights of ethnic Russians living in the territory of the former Ukrainian SSR are being violated. The Russian language is banned at all stages of education, in culture and in the media. Books in Russian are thrown out of libraries. The Nazis in Germany burned them. Ukrainians are acting more "smartly". They dispose of them and get money for it. And everyone is happy. Recently, the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church was banned. They are literally destroying everything Russian.

In November 2021, long before the forced start of the special military operation, Vladimir Zelensky was asked in an interview what he thought of the people on the other side of the line of contact in Donbass. At that time, the Minsk Agreements were still in force, although later the Germans, French and Ukrainians admitted that they had never intended to implement them and needed more time to arm Ukraine. This, by the way, is about a 30-day ceasefire. The logic is the same.

So, going back to November 2021, Vladimir Zelensky, trying to seem smart, said: "You know, there are people and there are individuals." In another interview, he said: "My advice to those who live in Ukraine but feel connected to Russian culture, for the sake of your children and grandchildren, go to Russia." A couple of weeks ago, in another interview, when he was asked what motivates him, he said: "Hatred of Russia." The interviewer wanted to clarify whether he was talking about Vladimir Putin. He replied: "No, hatred of all Russians." And this is being said by a man who in his creative years defended the right of Ukrainians to speak Russian. He said: "Don't even think about touching the Russian language, this is our history." Just like that.

Hatred is not the best conduit. Israel has never banned the Arabic language, has it? No? I don't think so.

Ukraine is the only country on Earth that is multinational, and the language of one large ethnic group is banned. The West (NATO, especially the EU) constantly says that human rights are above all. When they discuss Venezuela, Russia, Serbia and Turkey, they never forget about human rights. Check what they say about the situation in Ukraine. They say that Vladimir Zelensky and his team are defending European values. So your value is the extermination of the language of those who founded the country, if your value is the glorification of the Nazis and their accomplices convicted by the Nuremberg Tribunal, to whom you erect monuments whose birthdays you celebrate as a national holiday, while destroying monuments to those who saved Europe from Nazism, demolishing the monument to Catherine the Great, who founded this city in Odessa. By the way, soon after this monument was demolished, UNESCO granted the central district of Odessa, where it was located, the status of a World Heritage Site. This is a shame for a lady who accidentally turned out to be French, and, apparently, "by default" became the general director of this respected organization.

Question: You spoke about eliminating the root causes, about territory. I heard your position. I have just been to a session where they talked about the European security structure. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine was there. He said that they would not accept anything less than the 1991 borders.

Sergey Lavrov: This is not about them "accepting." It's about making sure that the people who have lived there for centuries have not been deprived of their inalienable right.

If the Ukrainian Nazi regime (I cannot call it otherwise) uses the cover of the EU, which has never said a word about the human rights situation in Ukraine, then this is not our problem. We are listening to those people who voted in the referendum to join Russia in order to restore all their rights that belong to them under international law and history, according to justice.

Question: You have repeatedly stated that even the thought of foreign peacekeepers is a hostile act. Under what circumstances will the Russian Federation think about neutral peacekeepers in this territory?

Sergey Lavrov: The biggest supporters of some kind of "forces of stability" and "forces of stability" are Emmanuel Macron and Keir Starmer. They are not thinking about any neutral forces. They say that their countries will provide most of the troops, and sometimes they mention states outside the European Union, including Turkey (according to rumors). They said that they are talking to China (this is a lie), India and Indonesia.

US President Donald Trump understands much more about what is happening than any European leader, with the exception of Hungary and Slovakia. The leaders of these countries are quite conscious of this topic. But it was Donald Trump who was the first to say a lot of things about NATO and the territories. When he was asked about this idea of a contingent and peacekeeping forces, he said that both sides needed to discuss it. And President Emmanuel Macron said that there should be no discussions with the Russians, Ukraine is a sovereign country, it has the right to invite whomever it wants and invites us. I will repeat what Vladimir Zelensky said: we do not need peacekeepers, we need combat units. Draw your conclusions.

Yesterday, Keith Kellogg said that why don't we divide Ukraine, as we divided Berlin after World War II. Then he said that he had made a mistake, that he had been misunderstood.

Everyone is missing the key point. The leaders of the Brussels bureaucracy say that it is necessary to reach an agreement that should ultimately guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty. By the way, they did not mention territorial integrity. Only sovereignty. I have a question for them: do they really mean that they want to have peacekeepers in order to preserve the regime that Vladimir Zelensky is currently heading? Do they want to ask this regime whether it is interested in fulfilling international obligations, including the UN Charter, regarding the rights of ethnic minorities, language and religion? No one raises this issue. Therefore, my conclusion is as follows: ignoring the gross violation of all international human rights norms by the Zelensky regime and at the same time discussing the deployment of peacekeeping or stabilisation forces in the rest of Ukraine, they want to use them not to maintain peace, but to preserve and protect the Nazi regime. This is a key point. Everything else is a smokescreen.

Question: You mentioned the important talks that took place in Riyadh and some of the conversations you had with the American delegation. They also talked about safe navigation in the Black Sea. We know that the process of creating similar mechanisms with the Republic of Turkey is underway. What is your position on the development of this?

Sergey Lavrov: This was one of the proposals mentioned by US President Donald Trump in his last telephone conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Vladimir Putin said that it is necessary to think over the agreement in such a way as to prevent a repetition of the failure of the first one. The first was concluded in 2022, it was a "package deal". The first part was guarantees for Ukrainian exports, and the second part was a memorandum between the UN and Russia on guarantees of exports from Russia by ensuring normal freight rates, insurance rates, the rights of Russian carriers of fertilizers and grain to enter European Mediterranean ports, etc. The Ukrainian part of the deal was implemented. The Russian one was not even started.

We do not blame the UN, whose representatives have tried and continue to do this. Formally, the deal between Russia and the UN is valid until July this year. It was a three-year "deal", and for Ukraine, a one-year one. At the end of the first year, we said: thank you very much, we don't want to "play one-way" anymore. And then UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and UNCTAD Secretary-General Richard Greenspan tried, but the position of the UN Secretariat was cunning. In fact, they said that they could not violate sanctions, that is, in fact, they recognized unilateral sanctions as legal. They told us that they would try to find a way to circumvent the sanctions so that they would not violate them. They have been trying to do this for almost three years. Unsuccessfully.

This is not the first time that the topic of the Black Sea Initiative has been raised. Last year, President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan proposed to President Vladimir Putin to resume the deal. He said that Vladimir Zelensky was ready to cooperate. The proposal differed from the original "deal" because the original one called for inspections of Ukrainian cargo ships returning to Ukrainian ports to make sure they were not carrying any weapons. Last year, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan invited President Vladimir Putin to trust him. It is enough to announce that there are no weapons on board, and the ship will be allowed to sail further. It was not an easy situation, but President of Russia Vladimir Putin said that he would support this proposal on the condition that President Recep Tayyip Erdogan would make efforts to influence the Ukrainians so that they would not violate them. At the last moment, Vladimir Zelensky refused. Yes, President of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan called President of Russia Vladimir Putin and said that Vladimir Zelensky also wants to add a commitment not to attack nuclear power plants. Vladimir Putin said, okay, this has nothing to do with Black Sea transportation. Then, when the Russian president agreed to this addition, Vladimir Zelensky refused. So we are again in this situation "going around in circles". At the same time, I do not think that Ukrainians complain about the difficulties with the export of their grain. They send a lot of it at dumping prices to the European Union. The European Union is unhappy. Instead of doing something about this situation for the sake of its citizens, Brussels threatened to stop importing grain from Russia.

These are specific "leaders"—K. Kallas, A. Baerbock. When their people criticized and said that now they live worse than before, they replied that they understand everything, but their electorate should suffer for the sake of Ukraine. At the same time, thousands of Ukrainians live in the EU in luxury, buy expensive cars. This is what the European elite calls European values, which they defend in the person of the Zelensky regime.

This time, when US President Donald Trump proposed another Black Sea deal, Vladimir Putin said: "Yes, we are ready, but we need to learn lessons from the past. Let's make sure of this before we launch this. It is necessary to resolve issues with freight, insurance, port calls." The Americans wrote it down and took it to work. So far, they have not contacted us.

Another initiative of US President Donald Trump was a 30-day moratorium–-not a complete ceasefire, but a 30-day moratorium on attacks on energy infrastructure. During the telephone conversation, President of Russia Vladimir Putin agreed and ordered the Chief of the General Staff to stop attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure, including those related to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. At that moment, there were seven Russian drones in the air. Vladimir Putin gave the order to shoot them down, which was done. Since then, we have kept our word, and the Ukrainians attack us every day, with maybe two or three exceptions. I handed over to Turkish Foreign Minister Hassan Fidan what we are conveying to the Americans, to the UN and to the OSCE–-a list of facts confirming Ukraine's attacks on Russian energy infrastructure over the past three weeks.

We understand that Vladimir Zelensky hates all Russians, so he gives orders. Either he gives orders and they are not carried out, or he lies that he gives these orders. This is a tragedy.

Question: Were there any direct or indirect contacts with the Ukrainian side in Antalya?

Sergey Lavrov: As far as I know, no. I came here for work.

***

Question: Can you say that US President Donald Trump or his supporters want to push Russia away from China and reorient itself towards Russia after the war in Ukraine?

Sergey Lavrov: This issue has never been raised in any of our contacts with the Americans. There was not even a hint of it.

I think that US President Donald Trump and his team have sufficient life experience. When you understand life, it's much easier to get involved in politics. And since he understands life, he will not think about trying to quarrel Russia and China. [My Emphasis]

Much of what Lavrov spoke about is reiteration for most readers here, with the narrative changing because of the meeting’s context. Perhaps the explanation for the failures of NATO and OSCE were better, but still don’t match the explicitness I applied when I wrote OSCE NATO members violated all the treaties they signed regarding the indivisibility of security which was/is the core concept of all three OSCE treaties, the Helsinki Final Act, and the UN Charter. I agree with Lavrov that this second rise of multipolarity can breathe new life into the UN as the old colonial structures wither away and the new reality takes hold. The key is for the Collective Western Empire to admit the fact that it’s in decline and can no longer claim Primacy over all others. That it really needs to reinvent itself into nations that work to benefit their citizenry and not a small elite. Of course, what we see is the resistance to all that from that small elite. If Lavrov were asked the right question(s) about the cabal of elites wanting to retain power using any and all means, then we might get some insightful answers, but he’s never asked such questions.

IMO, one of the key impediments to establishing a Eurasian Security Structure is the continuing idea that Europe is its own separate continent when it clearly isn’t. And that of course goes along with Eurocentrism, which a form of exceptionalism. And then there’s the Zionists and their ism that’s also exposed what it is as it conducts Genocide. Their conduct has no place on the planet, and IMO the Zionists present the greatest impediment to the formation of a Eurasian Security Structure for Palestine and Levant are Eurasian regions. Note how both the Palestinian and Syrian issues were ignored in the Q&A. I imagine the time factor was an issue so not everything could be explored.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/lavrov-a ... atic-forum

[blindpig]

What does the restoration of U.S.-Russia relations really mean?

Lucas Leiroz

April 15, 2025

Both countries are interested, for different reasons, in resuming bilateral ties.

Recently, The National Interest published a call for a reconfiguration of U.S.-Russia relations, and the proposal to establish an economic partnership signals a subtle but significant shift in Washington’s strategy. After years of hybrid warfare, sanctions, and failed attempts to isolate Moscow, some sectors of the American establishment seem to finally acknowledge the obvious: the U.S. tends to gain much more from reconciliation than Russia does. And most importantly — unlike in the 1990s, Moscow is in no hurry.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, U.S.-Russia relations have been marked by a clear asymmetry. The 1990s and 2000s were defined by a weakened Russia attempting to integrate into the international system on Western terms. The result was a series of strategic humiliations, broken promises—such as NATO expansion—and ongoing efforts at containment. Today, that scenario is completely reversed. Moscow negotiates from a strengthened position, guided by long-term strategic interests and a clear vision of a multipolar world.

The American think tank calls for economic rapprochement do not occur in a vacuum. On the contrary, they reflect the ineffectiveness of sanctions as a tool for political change. Over the past decade, the U.S. has used sanctions as a primary foreign policy method, refining their use to target specific individuals, companies, and strategic sectors while attempting to minimize collateral damage. However, even this “surgical” approach has failed.

In Russia’s case, sanctions not only failed to alter Moscow’s stance but also reinforced its internal resilience and political cohesion. The Russian economy adapted, built alternative logistical, industrial, and financial systems, and deepened ties with powers such as China, India, and Iran. More than that, the sanctions regime stimulated the development of an independent foreign policy, consolidating Russia’s role as a pivotal power in the transition toward a multipolar order.

It is in this context that the U.S. now seeks to replace war and sanctions with other methods of deterrence and engagement—primarily economic in nature. The bet is simple: an economically integrated, cooperative, and stable Russia would better serve Washington’s strategic interests than a confrontational and self-sufficient power. On paper, Moscow could serve as a useful counterweight to China, help relieve economic and migratory pressures in Europe, and potentially shift its focus toward internal economic development instead of geopolitical challenges.

However, this vision ignores a fundamental element: Russia does not simply want to return to being part of a “rules-based international order”—a phrase now synonymous with American hegemony. Moscow wants to end that paradigm. Russia’s strategic interest lies in replacing this unilateral order with a new international structure governed by treaties, pragmatism, and mutual respect between sovereign powers. This is not about returning to the “reset” of the Obama era, but about negotiating new terms for global coexistence—terms that Russia now has the power to impose.

In this scenario, rapprochement with the U.S. only interests Russia if it is based on a realistic, long-term cooperation agenda. Moscow will not accept unilateral conditions or asymmetric concessions. Its goal is clear: to consolidate multipolarity, weaken unilateral structures of domination, and establish relations based on mutual benefits. The geopolitics of force gives way to the diplomacy of interest.

If Washington truly wants a “reset,” it must accept it on the terms of a new world—not as an uncontested leader, but as one among several poles of power. Russia is willing to engage in dialogue, but not in submission. And this time, it’s not Moscow that needs the conversation most—it’s Washington.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2025/ ... ally-mean/

******

Explaining Russia’s Restrained Response To Estonia Seizing One Of Its “Shadow Fleet” Vessels
Andrew Korybko
Apr 14, 2025



Russia wants to avoid falling into the UK’s trap for sabotaging its rapprochement with the US by credibly threatening military force against Estonia in response to this provocation, but Putin’s patience might run out if the US is unable or unwilling to prevent its partners from staging repeat incidents.

Estonia seized one of Russia’s “shadow fleet” vessels on Friday just two days after approving a new law that allows it to use force to sink such ships if they pose a national security threat. RT chief Margarita Simonyan condemned the first as state-sponsored piracy while Putin’s senior aide Nikolai Patrushev speculated that Britain might be behind the second. Russia has yet to significantly respond to this latest provocation at the time of writing. Here are some background briefings for contextualizing everything:

* 1 October 2024: “Don’t Forget About How NATO’s Northeastern Flank Can Stir Up A Lot Of Trouble For Russia”

* 11 February 2025: “The Baltic Front”

* 14 February 2025: “Will The EU Seize Russia’s ‘Shadow Fleet’ In The Baltic?”

* 11 March 2025: “Russian Spies Warn That The UK Is Trying To Sabotage Trump’s Envisaged ‘New Détente’”

* 24 March 2025: “Putin’s Senior Aide Patrushev Shared Some Updates About The Arctic & Baltic Fronts”

This seizure coincided with Trump envoy Steve Witkoff’s third meeting with Putin, which follows Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev helping to break their impasse on Ukraine during his trip to DC the week prior. The diplomatic trajectory of the Russian-US talks on normalizing ties and ending their proxy war in Ukraine is therefore back on a positive track, which upsets European warmongers like the UK. It can thus be concluded that Patrushev is probably right since London does indeed have an interest in sabotaging this.

To that end, it makes perfect sense for the UK to embolden its Estonian partner, in whose country it has a little less than 1,000 troops, to provoke Russia into a military reaction by seizing one of its alleged “shadow fleet” vessels, mischievously timed as it was during Witkoff’s latest trip to Russia. Precisely for that reason, however, Russia’s response will likely remain militarily restrained even if it soon goes all out in politically condemning Estonia and UK. That’s because Moscow doesn’t want to fall into London’s trap.

Putin might hope that Trump could pressure the UK and Estonia into not carrying out any more such provocations, perhaps by having the US convey (whether openly or discreetly) that it wouldn’t extend Article 5 defense guarantees to them if future seizures result in armed clashes of any sort with Russia. The precedent for this proposal rests in what Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth declared in early February about how the US won’t extend these same guarantees to NATO countries’ troops in Ukraine.

Whether in parallel with the above or in place thereof, the US could also convey that it will pull its troops from Estonia if this happens again, though that could backfire by prompting the UK to transform its rotational presence there into a permanent one. The consequence would be that no return to the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act would be possible like Putin wants without London’s agreement just like that’s no longer possible without Berlin’s after Germany just opened a permanent base in Lithuania.

If France does something similar with regard to its rotational presence in Romania, then Western Europe’s three traditional Great Powers would essentially be leapfrogging eastward to collectively prevent Trump from potentially reaching a deal with Putin for restoring the NATO-Russia Founding Act. It was already assessed here that the US is unlikely to withdraw its forces from Central & Eastern Europe so such developments might be part of these countries’ competition for leadership in post-conflict Europe.

Neither Russia nor the US might be able to stop this since the first won’t risk World War III by using force in response to such low-level intra-NATO deployments no matter how threatening it regards them as being while the second has lost control over its rebellious German, British, and French allies. In any case, the relevance of this scenario to British-backed Estonia seizing one of Russia’s alleged “shadow fleet” vessels is that a strong political reaction from Moscow could be exploited to justify the UK doing this.

The decision might have already been made in order to complicate the Russian-US rapprochement and compete with its traditional Western European Great Power peers even if this latest move doesn’t sabotage the positive trajectory of the Russian-US talks. A militarily restrained response from Russia (regardless of how strong its political one is), however, could expose the UK’s possible plan of establishing a permanent military presence in Estonia as provocative by removing the main pretext.

Although the end result would be the same, namely that this might happen no matter what, Russia could at least be able to more compellingly present it as a destabilizing move before the global public. That’s better than Moscow falling for London’s trap by issuing credible military threats against Tallinn that could risk reversing the recent progress in ties with Washington and even rallying NATO against Russia. If Putin won’t risk war over this, then it’s the best course of action for now, unless there are repeat incidents.

In that event, he might eventually overcome his innate reluctance to escalate just like he did in late November when authorizing the use of his country’s hitherto top-secret medium-range hypersonic Oreshnik missiles, in which case the US’ stance towards Article 5 in this context would be paramount. Repeat incidents would only happen if the US is unable or unwilling to control British-backed Estonia. It might respectively therefore withhold such defense guarantees or explicitly reaffirm them.

Trump’s decision will ultimately come down to whether he’d by then become impatient with Putin over the latter’s unwillingness up until this point to majorly compromise on his maximum goals. He already expressed such sentiments right before Dmitriev’s latest trip and once again posted about them during Witkoff’s visit on Friday so he could possibly support future seizures as a form of pressure upon Russia. That would be an extremely dangerous way to “escalate to de-escalate” on better terms for Ukraine.

What’s described above is one of the worst-case scenarios since Putin couldn’t back down without Russia losing the sizeable budgetary revenue that it reportedly derives from its “shadow fleet’s” Baltic activities, not to mention losing face across the whole world, so he might very well escalate then. As of now, however, everything remains manageable but that could suddenly change. Russia’s restrained response to Estonia’s provocative naval seizure is pragmatic but even Putin’s patience has its limits.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/explaini ... d-response

******

On the situation with the ship "Cosmonaut Viktor Patsayev"
April 14, 15:00



On the situation with the ship "Cosmonaut Viktor Patsayev"

I have already spoken and written a lot about the Patsaev, its fate and the people involved in its fate. And much of what was said and written is saved on the NIS KVP website - http://niskvp.ru I recommend that you familiarize yourself with all its sections.

1. About the fate of the Patsaev.

It is not simple and the happy ending in the history of the vessel has not yet arrived.
What happened before 2020, I briefly outlined on the Military Review website - http://niskvp.ru/index.php/spasti-patsa ... -obozrenie

After the Ministry of Defense backed down in 2020 (see the article), the future of the vessel hung in the unknown.
But in 2021, the matter was unexpectedly resolved in a happy way: the Governor of the Kaliningrad Region A.A. Alikhanov decided to accept the vessel from Roscosmos under the jurisdiction of the region, under the operational management of the Kaliningrad Regional Historical and Art Museum. At the same time, the Museum of the World Ocean was given the opportunity to restore its exhibits on board the Patsayev, dedicated to V.I. Patsayev, cosmonautics and our fleet, and most importantly - to open access for now to two of the many laboratories in which special radio equipment is installed for receiving and processing telemetry and for maintaining communication between the Mission Control Center and manned spacecraft.

2. About people.
On the path of the Patsayev, they were different. Both deceitful and truthful. Both selfless and vice versa.

There were many deceitful, selfish and simply indifferent people on the path of the Patsayev.
I can't say anything good about the Roscosmos management, which treated the vessel purely as a consumer: as long as it works, it is needed, if it stops working, it is of no concern. And it doesn't matter that "Patsayev" is the only surviving vessel of those that worked on space programs and is worthy of becoming the world's first (and this is really true!) museum of the space service fleet. Only the status of a Cultural Heritage Site of the Peoples of Russia of federal significance, which was won in 2016 by veterans with the assistance of the Museum of the World Ocean, Kaliningrad, saved "Patsayev" from being sold for scrap.
I can't say anything good about those high-ranking military officials (Kartaplov, Gerasimov, Shoigu, etc.), who promised a lot in the matter of preserving "Patsayev" as a museum vessel in the Kronstadt "Patriot" park. They praised us "for the patriotism we showed", fooled us for a long time, and eventually reneged on their promises. What does the Ministry of Defense have to do with it? But the entire fleet of the space service, although it wore the pennant of the USSR Academy of Sciences, was in fact military unit 26179, otherwise - the 9th Separate Marine Command and Measurement Complex (9 OMKIK) as part of the Command and Measurement Complex, subordinated to the Main Directorate of Space Resources of the USSR Ministry of Defense.
There were also those who, under the signboard of "Patrons of Russia", gathered, apparently,to set up a hotel business on "Patsaevo". (I remembered the drinking party on "Aurora")

I can name many people who selflessly and honestly sought to preserve the ship as a monument and museum.
First of all, Svetlana Gennadyevna Sivkova, the founder and General Director of the Museum of the World Ocean. These are veteran enthusiasts who, to the best of their ability, pestered the heads of Roscosmos, the Ministry of Defense, the Government and the President with their demands. This is Svetlana Viktorovna Patsayeva, the daughter of a hero-cosmonaut. We managed to establish close interaction and coordination of joint efforts. Many caring people helped us: our veteran friends from the ships of the measuring complex, State Duma deputies, journalists from the media and TV.

Veterans maintain constant contact with the Museum, with its management and employees. We visit "Patsayev" every year, participate in celebratory events, share information with tour guides. We understand that hard times have come now, that there is not enough funding for the most necessary things for "Patsayev" - for docking and repairs. But we do not give up and hope for the best.

Our goal: "Patsayev" should become the Museum of the Space Service Fleet. It is our memory of many years of work in the Ocean. We want to preserve this memory.

Vladimir Proshchenko
==============
With respect.
Kurochkin Anatoly Mikhailovich, (Klim_33)
Chairman of the Union of Veterans of the Ships of the Measuring Complex named after Admiral Yu. I. Maksyuta

. P.S. The vessel must certainly be preserved as a monument to an entire era of Russian space and Russian fleet.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9781534.html

Google Translator

[blindpig]

Lavrov Paints Fuller Picture in Interview with Kommersant
Karl Sanchez
Apr 15, 2025

Perhaps because he’s tired of telling the same story over and over again or because he feels he needs to be more explicit for the Russian public, IMO Lavrov’s gets more detailed in this long Q&A interview with Kommersant:

Question: Since the new administration came to the United States, several rounds of talks with the Americans have already taken place. How would you assess the results of these contacts? Have you managed to formulate the key parameters of a future comprehensive agreement on Ukraine? On what aspects of it are there already agreement in Washington and Moscow?

Sergey Lavrov: The answer to the last question is no. The key components of the settlement are easy to agree on. They are being discussed.

There are no secrets on our part. On June 14, 2024, President of Russia Vladimir Putin, speaking at the Russian Foreign Ministry, clearly outlined the principles on the basis of which he identified a long-term, reliable and fair settlement that takes into account, first of all, the interests of people and fully ensures human rights (especially the rights of ethnic minorities) in accordance with the UN Charter. All this was set out.

This is not some kind of requesting position. [I’d underline this too if I could.] I would like to emphasise once again that it is firmly based on the wording of the UN Charter, numerous conventions and the results of referendums and the will of the people in the territories, primarily Donbass and Novorossiya. These are four regions that, after a nationwide expression of will under international supervision, transparently decided to return to their great homeland–-in this case, the Russian Federation.

As for the American side. We have already noted that, unlike the Europeans (I can't even find any other word than frenzy), who are literally overwhelmed with frenzy (I am talking, first of all, about the leaders of France, Britain, the Baltic countries, and some other EU and NATO countries), the Trump administration is trying to delve into the problem and understand the root cause of the situation that has arisen as a result of the actions of Washington and Brussels, which brought the current regime to power by organising and paying for the unconstitutional coup d'état in February 2014.

Victoria Nuland, who was then responsible for Ukraine at the US State Department of the Obama administration, defended the effectiveness of the administration's policy at some hearings in the Senate, saying that they had spent $5 billion, and this had yielded results, and a friendly government had been established in Ukraine. The fact that this was the rule of the Nazis quickly became clear. In February 2014, the first instinct of that government was to violate the agreement concluded just the night before, guaranteed by the Germans and the French (we will have to talk about them more than once today if we consider ways to betray the agreements approved by the Security Council). They refused to create a government of national unity, which was supposed to prepare early elections, and announced to the entire square, to the entire Maidan, that they said, "Congratulations, we have created a "government of winners."

All these processes have already become irreversible (I mean that in the end, only military forces can expel these "evil spirits" from power). The first instinct of those "puchists" who seized the presidential palace and administrative buildings in February 2014 was to announce that they would abolish the status of the Russian language. Therefore, the generic signs are known in their entirety.

US President Donald Trump has said more than once that the Biden administration's decision to drag this country into NATO was a colossal mistake, including one that became a "trigger" or one of them, for what is happening in Ukraine now. Before that, there were some promises. At the time when Joe Biden came to power, they began to do this in earnest. US President Donald Trump has publicly recognised one of the main root causes more than once.

When we (Presidential Aide Yury Ushakov was also in our delegation) met with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Adviser Mike Waltz, we also talked about the second main primary reason that the Nazi authorities, represented by Vladimir Zelensky and his associates, have embarked on a course of exterminating everything Russian.

They physically killed many famous people, including journalists, public figures, who defended the need to preserve Russian culture in a country that was decisively created by the Russians and which for centuries the Russians not only helped, but equipped, built cities such as Odessa and many others, ports, roads, plants, factories. These people were physically exterminated.

Legislatively (if we take the current state of Ukrainian legislation) everything Russian has been exterminated. A series of laws that were adopted, and a dozen of them were adopted, long before we decided that there was no alternative to the start of a special military operation. The Trump administration also understands this.

In particular, US Special Envoy Stephen Whitkoff said in one of his interviews (to Tucker Carlson, I think) that these territories are inhabited by people who held referendums and spoke in favour of being part of the Russian Federation.

It is impossible not to take this into account: NATO, the destruction of people's rights. We are not talking about "land", but about the rights of people who live on these lands. That is why these lands are dear to us. We cannot give them away by expelling people from there. Now they are proposing to expel Palestinians from the Gaza Strip.

Do those led by Vladimir Zelensky continue to talk about the 1991 borders also want to expel people from there or want to return them to their Nazi rule, to a situation where everyone has forgotten the language, culture and history–-everything that Russia has done for these territories? They need land to bargain at a higher price. They have already sold something to British Prime Minister Keir Starmer at "speculative" prices. Now they have nothing left to offer the Americans. These are hucksters who have nothing sacred.

Recently, I was in Antalya at a diplomatic forum and quoted Vladimir Zelensky. The other day, in an interview, he said that he was motivated by hatred of Russians. When asked that he hates Russian President Vladimir Putin so much, he replied that he hates all Russians. Yesterday, Vladimir Zelensky confirmed this again in an interview with another media outlet.

We do not just feel that the Americans understand this. The Americans say that they understand that something needs to be done about these root causes. I do not even want to suspect that there is not a single normal person in Europe. Surely there are those who understand this. But they are also being silenced. With the rarest of exceptions, only Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Slovak Prime Minister Roman Fico and some political scientists and scientists who are not in power dare to tell the truth there.

The Americans and the Trump administration have this ability, which distinguishes them favorably from those who do not even want to think but only climb out on the screen (sorry for the not very elegant word) and begin to demand that Russia immediately cease hostilities for a month. And they, they say, will have time to quickly "patch up the holes", send some peacekeepers. Vladimir Zelensky has already explained everything to them with glowing eyes (he sometimes has glowing and sometimes "dimmed") when there was a discussion about peacekeepers (French President Emmanuel Macron did his best). He said that they did not need peacekeepers, but combat detachments. They say, let's quickly defend weapons, militants from your countries. I was forced to set out in detail our vision of who, what and how understands in relation to Ukraine.

Returning to other aspects of the Russian-US dialogue, it is certainly not easy to pull relations out of this hole after a three-year "failure". Moreover, the sincere desire (we see that it is sincere) of US President Donald Trump and his team to return to normalcy after the "stupefaction" that has gripped the Washington elites (not only the Democrats, but also partly the Republicans) is now beginning to cause resistance. They are secretly preparing some "moves" through lobbyists and the media. We are reading about it. Although no secret is being made of this. They want to prevent US President Donald Trump from establishing relations with Russia in an adult way, as befits two great powers and as it should be between any country.

The UN Charter (I never tire of quoting it) states that the United Nations is based on the sovereign equality of states. When the world Organization did not yet exist, Western colonialists never approached relations with others as their equals. Name me at least one conflict situation after the creation of the UN in 1945 where the West would have accepted as equals the parties to conflicts in which it actively intervened. Never. Therefore, it is not so easy to restore normality.

The PRC and the United States have no fewer [less] contradictions. Perhaps they are not so harshly "played" in the media space, but these are the two main, and perhaps the only rivals for primacy in the world economy and finance. As for the economy, look at the current life-and-death tariff struggle. They also have huge contradictions on geopolitical issues, including the territorial integrity of China: Taiwan, the South China and East China Seas, and territorial disputes. And in them, the United States unequivocally stands on the side of those who oppose Chinese rights presented in this or that situation. The position of the Westerners on Taiwan is the height of hypocrisy. In words, representatives of the US presidential administration and all European governments declare that they respect and are committed to the one-China principle, but immediately add that no one dares to change the "status quo". And what is the status quo? De facto, it is an independent Taiwan, which is being armed, independent treaties on economic issues are being concluded, without asking China anything. This is a "game" here. Not so long ago, Chinese representatives once again said that they are most firmly in favor of a political and diplomatic settlement of the issue of restoring China's unity, but if the West continues its provocations and incites Taiwan to abandon peaceful reunification, then the PRC does not rule out any methods.

I have cited examples that show that relations there are seriously burdened by a deep contradiction in principle. But neither under the Biden administration nor before it has the dialogue ever been interrupted. With all the high-profile and public invectives that are exchanged from time to time, it never occurred to anyone that the Americans could turn away and say that they were boycotting China, that it should be isolated. No one can ever imagine this. And with Russia, Joe Biden imagined himself to be a "teacher", a "mentor", someone who makes "court decisions", announces them and forces others to follow this "path".

The restoration of normal dialogue with US President Donald Trump is a natural thing. The fact that this has become a sensation for many is the "legacy" of Biden's mentality, which wanted to normalize the complete "isolation" of Russia. This is absurd. Of course, it has not materialized. Dialogue is difficult, but it is being restored. The main thing is that there is a desire on both sides, despite the problems and the mismatch of national interests on a number of issues on the international agenda (maybe even on the majority). It is necessary to meet as well-mannered and polite people and listen to each other. This is what is happening.

There is an understanding of how to move forward with the resumption of the normal work of our embassies, how to resolve problems with the timely issuance of visas to diplomats, including our diplomats working at the UN (this is a slightly different status).

The previous administration of Joe Biden, Barack Obama before him, and the first administration of Donald Trump abused the fact that the UN headquarters is located in the United States, although according to all the rules and according to the agreement signed by Washington with the UN, the Americans have no right to prevent the hiring of citizens of any country that is a member of the world organisation. There are still cases when employees approved by the UN Secretariat cannot go to their place of work because the Americans do not give visas. People wait for several years.

When, under Joe Biden, they began to create difficulties with the financing of our embassy, we responded in kind. Now reasonable people in the administration, who finally appeared there after Biden's protégés left or were sidelined, are working with us on basic issues of the life of diplomatic missions in our countries that have not severed diplomatic relations with each other. It is nonsense that this has to be done, but nevertheless.

The third area is the economy and trade. The Americans spoke about this at the first stage, when US President Donald Trump had his first telephone conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin, when US Special Presidential Envoy Stephen Witkoff was visiting, and when RDIF CEO Kirill Dmitriev was in the United States. They are business people. Material dividends are important to them. Donald Trump is making no secret of this. This is his philosophy and policy. The American people voted for this. It is clear that they are looking for profit.

If we take Europe, then the Americans there want to reduce the cost of maintaining NATO, primarily on the maintenance of American troops and their contribution to the defense of other members of the North Atlantic Alliance. See who has a surplus, who has a trade deficit, who taxes what investment projects. All this is happening, but it is happening chaotically. It happened. This is the policy pursued by the US president-elect.

The material issue has always been important to them. This was also evident during Donald Trump's first "cadence." Everything will depend on how they plan to resume economic cooperation. Compared to the record $34 billion a few years ago, it is 90% covered by illegal sanctions.

If you follow the discussion in our society, you know that we are not chasing anyone, we are not asking for the sanctions to be lifted. We have a powerful group of public opinion leaders who believe that the lifting of sanctions will be disastrous. Because liberal officials will immediately try to curtail all these achievements in import substitution, the sovereignisation of our economy, production, and security in those areas on which the development of the state depends: military, food, technological security. There is a fear that now these "cunning" Americans will suddenly lift the sanctions, and immediately flood our market with services and technologies on which we have been burned.

The story with civilian aircraft has not yet been normalized. Double registration, spare parts, engines, they say that they will not give us anything, they say, let our aviation industry die. Probably, none of the normal people wants this.

To reiterate, I am absolutely sure that President Vladimir Putin is right when he repeatedly drew attention to this, that we should no longer become dependent in areas that are critical for the survival of the state. As he said recently at the congress of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, if any of those who ran away from business in Russia after the "shouting" of their governments want to return, we will see if there is any vacant niche for this particular company. The niches that they created by fleeing from Russia do not belong to them. Many of them are already occupied by our businesses and businessmen from those countries who continued to work, to fulfil their obligations in terms of employing our citizens and in terms of fulfilling their plans to supply the markets with certain goods. The markets had already planned their work based on the fact that they exist. Then all this was trampled underfoot.

I believe that in this dispute between those who say that under no circumstances should sanctions be lifted and it will be worse, and those who say that we will then again fall into autarky from the global economy, I am still on the side of the former. It is difficult to talk about autarky.

There is no longer any globalisation of the global economy. It has been destroyed. And not by Donald Trump, but by Joe Biden, when he imposed sanctions and made them the only tool of his foreign policy. We were not alone. We have a record number of sanctions. More than half of the countries in the world are under sanctions, various kinds of restrictions – China, Iran and Venezuela. These are the largest recipients of this "benefit". But more than a hundred countries are under unilateral sanctions from the United States in one way or another.

The fragmentation of the world economy began long before today. Of course, the acceleration was betrayed by Joe Biden's use of the dollar as a weapon to punish the innocent. No negotiations were conducted with a country that was considered to be a violator of democratic norms. Service in dollars was stopped, barriers were built, they were bypassed, they tried to close workarounds. When there were trends towards the creation of alternative payment platforms and settlements in national currencies began to gain momentum, it was not for nothing that Donald Trump said before and after the elections that one of Joe Biden's crimes (worse than a crime) and mistakes was his use of the dollar as a weapon. Thus, he undermined confidence in this means of payment and laid a "time bomb" that will definitely "explode" someday.

Donald Trump also voiced his fear that the BRICS would create their own currency. If so, then he will impose absolutely cosmic tariffs on this association. This also shows that he understands the role of the dollar and the paper part of the world economy in general in the position of the United States in the world, in ensuring their leading role. After these tariffs, someone lost $50 billion just because the ledgers and computers where all this happens reacted to the change in reality in everyday life, where it was said that they would take money from us. And virtual globalization has proven to be unsustainable. Exchanges pump these futures, and then it all collapses and a tragedy is made out of it. This period passes.

Question: You say that the new US administration wants to discuss not only bilateral issues, but also a peaceful settlement in Ukraine.

At a recent UN meeting on Ukraine, convened in connection with the strike on Kryvyi Rih, the US representative warned that further Russian strikes on Ukrainian territories could lead to the disruption of peace talks.

After that, a few days later, there was a strike on Sumy, where, according to the statements of the Ukrainian side, the civilian population and children were again killed. Does this mean that Russia does not take the US warnings seriously?

Sergey Lavrov: Which representative said after Kryvyi Rih?

Question: Acting US Spokesperson to the UN.

Sergey Lavrov: The Americans have many official representatives. In particular, some representative recently said something in Greenland. She was asked to return to her homeland and look for another job.

I don't want to say that this woman (I don't remember the statement you mentioned) deserves the same fate, but we know very well that the position of the West, Europe and the Biden-era United States was dominated by outright lies.

Over the past couple of years, I have repeatedly drawn the attention of UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to the fact that he, as the main administrative person of the Organisation (as written in the Charter), should comply with the requirements of Article 100 of the Charter, not take sides, but pursue a balanced position and not receive instructions from any government.

I have known him for a long time, we are on a first-name basis, we have been working for decades in various overlapping positions. I told him that he may not be in this post, but he is following the instructions of Western countries in connection with the situation in Ukraine.

Now, again, after shouting that "dozens of children and civilians have died" in Sumy, he made a statement that he firmly advocates an end to such violations of international humanitarian law, a settlement of the Ukrainian crisis on the basis of the UN Charter and respect for the territorial integrity of Ukraine on the basis of relevant General Assembly resolutions.

First, international humanitarian law categorically prohibits the deployment of military facilities and weapons on the territory of civilian facilities. From the first days of the crisis, and even earlier, during the Minsk Agreements, during the "rosy" but dashed hopes that they would allow the problem to be resolved peacefully, leaving Ukraine in its territorial integrity minus Crimea (they did not want to do this), there were "million" facts of the deployment of artillery, air defence systems in urban areas near kindergartens. How many videos have been posted on the Internet when Ukrainian women shout for the military to get out of shops and playgrounds. But this practice continues.

We have facts about who was at the facility that was hit in Sumy. There was another "gathering" of Ukrainian military leaders with their Western colleagues, who are either under the guise of mercenaries, or I don't know under the guise of whom. There are military personnel of NATO countries there and directly lead. Everyone knows this. The New York Times recently explained how the Americans played a decisive role in attacks on Russia from the very beginning. Without this role of theirs, most long-range missiles would not have broken away from their bases at all.

The second point that I regularly remind Antonio Guterres of is when he says that it is necessary to comply with the UN Charter and ensure the territorial integrity of Ukraine. Why is it necessary to ensure the territorial integrity of Ukraine when there is a government that does not represent Crimea, Donbass, Novorossiya, or a number of other territories that remain under the control of the Kiev Nazi regime?

In the UN Charter, much earlier than territorial integrity is mentioned, it is written "to respect the equality and the right of nations to self-determination." It was this principle that became the basis for the process of decolonization, primarily in Africa. Yes, they waited a long time–-15 years after 1945—but then, at the initiative of our country, the "process began" (as one of our leaders said) and was completed, but not completely. 17 territories still remain in a subordinate position in gross violation of UN decisions. This is done primarily by the French and the British.

French President Emmanuel Macron is foaming at the mouth that the Russians are obliged to comply with the UN Charter and international law. But he never mentions the fact that, contrary to the UN General Assembly resolutions and the will of the residents of a number of African territories, they keep "pieces" of these territories. Probably, they like to go there on vacation. After all, it is beautiful there, palm trees grow. You will not find such a picture in Paris–-there is dirt and crime.

We remind our UN friends that if they say that it is necessary to decide in accordance with the UN Charter, then they should be kind and (as the main administrative person) approach it in the entirety and interconnection of its principles.

The principle of self-determination is linked to the principle of territorial integrity in a simple way. Back in 1970, the UN General Assembly resolution in the form of the Declaration on Principles of Relations among States proclaimed respect for the territorial integrity of all states whose governments do not violate the principle of self-determination and therefore represent the entire population living in a given territory.

Do Vladimir Zelensky and his "clique" represent the population of southeastern Ukraine? Never and for no reason. When the UN Secretary-General says today that it is necessary to resolve the Ukrainian crisis on the basis of relevant resolutions, he is referring to Russophobic, absolutely frenzied resolutions that over the past three years have been adopted by the vote and votes of those who were blackmailed by the West, whom it threatened and whom it forced.

The resolution I mentioned on the need for self-respecting states to represent all the people on their territory is a consensus that no one has canceled.

We talked about the legislative extermination of the Russian language, about the recent law banning the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, a sister of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Article 1 of the UN Charter: everyone is obliged to ensure the observance of the rights of every person, regardless of race, gender, language or religion. Language and religion are directly mentioned in the UN Charter, which our Western colleagues do not care about. It turns out that the West, since it is represented in the UN leadership, also does not care.

We will prove. The truth is on our side.

Question: Don't you think that these two points (on the right of nations to self-determination and on territorial integrity) are in irreconcilable contradiction?

I see your efforts to unite them and explain your actions by the fact that Russia is guided by one of these points. The opposite side will not agree with us anyway, and you will not come to an agreement in this way.

At one of the plenary sessions with the participation of President of Russia Vladimir Putin, President of Kazakhstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev spoke about the same and warned that if we are guided only by the idea and the clause on the right of nations to self-determination, then about 650 absolutely irreconcilable conflicts will immediately flare up in the world. Should something be done about this?

Sergey Lavrov: Everything must be done honestly.

I remember this speech by President of Kazakhstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev. I do not agree with him. Later, we explained our position to our Kazakh friends. For them, there is only the right to territorial integrity. I repeated to him that if Kazakhstan is a member of the UN, they must respect the UN Charter in its entirety. I gave the example of decolonisation. Exactly what was written in the Declaration on the Principles of Relations between States is exactly what happened there. Namely, territorial integrity is respected by those states whose governments represent the entire people living in this territory. Neither Paris, nor Lisbon, nor Madrid, nor London–-not a single colonial power represented the entire people living in the territory that these colonialists seized. This does not require proof. Therefore, the decolonisation process was carried out in full compliance with the UN Charter.

The fascists and Nazis in Kiev do not represent the relatives of those whom they burned in Odessa, those whose children they tortured and killed in Donbass (which is what the Alley of Angels in Donetsk is now dedicated to), the relatives of those who died in early June 2014 in the centre of Lugansk as a result of military bombing. International humanitarian law prohibits the use of one's armed forces against one's own people in internal conflicts. I can go on and on.

Look at how those who were under the Nazi "yoke" for more than ten long years (I can't call it otherwise), those who were robbed, whose houses were destroyed, whose herds were stolen, raped women, react to the liberation of more and more new villages.

Do you know why there will be chaos? Because, first of all, in Africa, the colonizers, when they left, drew maps on a ruler, cutting the places of residence of ethnic groups in half, into three or four parts. As we are now observing the situation with the Tuaregs who live on both sides of the border of Algeria and Mali. There are a huge number of such examples: Tutsis, Hutu, etc. Yes, they left such a legacy.

The African Union in its wisdom decided that now we just need to live within these borders, somehow negotiate, arrange good-neighborly schemes so that relatives go across the border. As we had with our neighbors.

Question: All these African tribes will claim their right to self-determination. And soon there will be endless wars.

Sergey Lavrov: I am telling you that the African Union, in its wisdom, decided not to touch this shameful legacy of the colonisers, knowing full well that in this case even more blood will be shed. And in the overwhelming majority of cases, no one disputes these borders.

Question: That is, they are guided by a different point?

Sergey Lavrov: I understand that you are close to the logic that you are advocating. They are guided by the fact that they exercised the right of nations to self-determination in the conditions that existed at that time.

And in their wisdom they do not want to question these boundaries. Although the natural course of things (tribes live there) is associated with the fact that sometimes there are various "skirmishes". If we talk about the fact that now the right of nations to self-determination means a call to chaos, then this is not the opinion of the powers that be, to whom everything is allowed and about whom, apparently, you are talking about.

Kosovo. They don't give a damn about the territorial integrity of Yugoslavia. At the same time, there was no military activity in the territory around this part of Serbia by the time of the unilateral declaration of independence of the province. There was no threat to the population of Kosovo, from which they allegedly need to be saved. And much more. Even before Kosovo declared independence, a resolution was signed. The UN Security Council decided that there should be Serbian policemen there, that Serbian border guards should be stationed on Kosovo's external borders. They did not care about this. They simply set a course for secession. Moreover, there was no referendum in Kosovo. A UN representative, former President of Finland Miguel Ahtisaari, stood up and said that Kosovo was now independent – no referendum, nothing. The Americans told him "I had to"–-he did.

How was the right to self-determination exercised in Crimea? They gave us the opportunity to hold a referendum freely. It was attended by several hundred observers. Yes, they did not represent Western governments, but they represented Western parliaments and the parliaments of countries on other continents. Then the West said, what is the right to self-determination? Like, no, we can't, we are Slavs, and they have Albanians.

Now they show many documentaries from the history of the Great Patriotic War. This racist essence is reminiscent of how the "superior race" treated the same Slavs. Now I am looking at the development of events. It has not gone anywhere, it has not disappeared anywhere. Listen to the same F. Merz.

Eight or ten years ago, when I talked with my German colleagues on various general geopolitical topics, they sent a "signal." Do you know what the meaning of their statements was? They said that they had settled accounts with us and everyone else a long time ago, as if they did not owe anything to anyone else and would behave as they wanted.

And a specific question from the same "opera". Survivors of the siege of Leningrad, Jews who survived the siege, received one-time payments from the German government several times. To our numerous questions (this story has been dragging on for fifteen years): what about those who, together with the Jews, froze in terrible conditions, carried their children on sleds on the ice, ate each other? They also survived, as did the Jews. Did they not deserve equal treatment?

At that time, the current President of Germany, Frank-Walter Steinmeier (he was Foreign Minister at the time), told me that the Germans had a separate law about the Jews (the Holocaust), and that the blockade survivors were ordinary participants in the war. There were no one-time payments for them. They said that the Germans had already paid the indemnity. I said, "Excuse me, but still, if this is part of the Holocaust, it means that it applies to all blockade survivors. They are part of the Holocaust not because they are just Jews, but because they were mocked in this way." Categorically – "no". Let's build some kind of "hospital" in St Petersburg and create a centre for meeting war veterans–-"make peace". We said: "Good. This is probably not bad, but this is not the main thing. The main thing is not to show a racist attitude towards the blockade survivors." Categorically "no".

We have already explained to them that if they want to build something there in St Petersburg, they are welcome. But the survivors of the siege live all over the world, not only in Russia, but also in many other cities. Categorically no. This is now manifested in Franz Merz's statements and in many other ways. This is sad.

For us, of course, the fate of people is of decisive importance, and to say that the territorial integrity of Ukraine must not be violated means to return Russians, Russian-speaking people who fled from the Nazi regime, to the clutches of these "monsters".

We started by saying that the Americans understand the root causes. One of them is an absolutely Russophobic approach, which is enshrined in law and at the same time, in the context of the fact that the Americans are beginning to "delve into" these root causes, there are already discussions about territories. Stephen Whitkoff said that there were referendums in four states. This must be admitted.

Keith Kellogg (also Donald Trump's special envoy) said that there is a lot of talk about peacekeepers. They should be brought into the part that is beyond the Dnieper, that is, implying that it is necessary to "put up with it" before the Dnieper and there will be no territorial integrity there. There will be, or rather, already was, the self-determination of the people. He proposes to create "zones of responsibility" on the right bank of the Dnieper, something like Berlin, as was the case after World War II. There was noise and shouting.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron are running around with this idea of peacekeepers and assembling a "coalition of those who wish." The Balts have already sworn to this idea. Of course, there is no way without them.

But most EU and NATO countries are "sour" to this "sour". They say that it is good that there will be some kind of line of contact. The main thing is to stop the conflict. But they still postpone a political settlement for later.

Our President's questions are coming into force: what will you do until this truce suddenly hypothetically "appears" without a lasting settlement? Are you going to arm, help forcibly mobilize poor Ukrainians, who are rushed after and "torn out" of toilet stalls in front of their mothers, stuffed into TCC cars?

Vladimir Zelensky said that they do not need peacekeepers but combat units. An "outspoken" person. But French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Christopher Starmer are playing with words. Now they have come up with "resilience forces". That is, in order to preserve the "resistance" of Ukraine, they will no longer put behind the barrier detachments to which the Ukrainian army is accustomed, but "civilized" military from Western countries. But what will they protect? Is it still the same regimen? No one even "stutters" about the elections.

Now, however, the Americans have said: it is necessary to hold elections. But Europe will do everything to ensure that the regime does not change in its essence. Maybe they will find some "new half-Führer" who will be less dependent on various "substances", but the essence of the regime will remain.

At various events I ask (I asked a few days ago in Antalya): When do you recognize the inevitability of preserving Ukraine within the already "truncated" borders, how do you see the regime of this "truncated" Ukraine? Will you force them to repeal the laws banning the Russian language everywhere? There is no such thing anywhere. Israel, even during the most brutal times of the occupation of the Palestinian territories, never banned the Arabic language, and this is still the case. But they have it, they can do it.

Instead of pointing at "this one" and this "creature" (remember how he calls the Russians), Ursula von der Leyen declares with pathos that it is necessary to give up "the last thread", "the last gun", "the last cartridge" (the last cartridge would not hurt Vladimir Zelensky), "everything to the end" – so that only he defeats the Russians, because Vladimir Zelensky and his army are defending "European values." This does not cause rejection from anyone in Europe.

Therefore, all these peacekeeping "schemes" drawn by the "Macrons" and "Starmers" proceed from the premise that this is required in order to preserve at least a piece of land on which the openly Nazi, Russophobic regime will remain, sharpened to prepare for another war against Russia (as was done with the Minsk Agreements). This is a big problem for the reputation of the West.

Question: In recent years, you and Vladimir Putin have emphasised in your public speeches the unreliability of our Western partners in negotiations of this kind. Moreover, they themselves emphasized, after all, their unreliability.

Sergey Lavrov: We emphasised and they proved.

Question: And they did, too, frankly speaking. How do the current negotiations differ from the previous ones? Why can they be trusted now? Do you think this can be explained in any way from the point of view of common sense?

Sergey Lavrov: There is only one common sense. And this, by the way, is Donald Trump's slogan. He always says that he is guided by common sense. This can be seen only in one thing: people came and told us: we have a lot of problems and contradictions, but this is idiocy inherited from the previous administration, that we do not talk to you. I believe (I have already said this) that this is normality, human normality, from which we will not "push away". On the contrary, we think it is important.

I can tell you that when we met with Presidential Aide Yury Ushakov in Riyadh with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US National Security Adviser Mike Waltz (because they invited us there), they began to "sing" and their "singing" was such that common sense is important for President Donald Trump.

Donald Trump's foreign policy is a policy of American national interests. At the same time, he acknowledges that other countries (especially major powers) also have their own national interests, which do not always, and honestly, in most cases do not coincide with the national interests of the United States, but (and then most importantly), Russia, the United States and any other significant country as responsible international players in those situations (and they are the majority) when the national interests of each of them do not coincide. We must do everything to prevent this discrepancy from degenerating into confrontation. In those cases (even if there are fewer of them), when these interests coincide, we must do everything not to miss the moment, to translate this coincidence into mutually beneficial material, economic, technological, transport, and logistics projects.

I believe that this is pragmatic and deserves a conversation. I do not know what will happen in four years, when a different administration comes. Now they are saying: let's buy Boeings again. So what? And who knows how the situation will develop in four years. Will they stand again, will we disassemble them for spare parts? Four years may even be too long.

In Europe and in our country, political scientists write that there is a year and a half left before the midterm elections to the US Congress, where the Democratic Party will "break into a cake" so that only there is no majority. But this is all fortune-telling on coffee grounds.

Now, when we are offered normal (as Donald Trump says) deals, we perceive it in a good sense. We are well aware of what a mutually beneficial deal looks like, which we have never rejected, and what a deal looks like that could drive us into another "trap."

The dominant opinion in our political class is that under no circumstances should we allow any restoration of relations in the economy and in other areas to lead to the fact that we will again become dependent on conditional "spare parts" in all areas, on the condition of which the well-being and general condition of our state depends. These are military, food and technological security. I am 100 percent convinced that this lesson will not be forgotten. It is not for nothing that President Vladimir Putin, speaking at the height of the special military operation, said that we have learned lessons and will never be the same as it was before February 2022.

This means that until the last moment we still tried to look for some compromises according to those rules. Despite the fact that our proposals to consolidate agreements on the security foundations that suit us (after the Munich speech, in 2008 we proposed a specific treaty), NATO and the United States "pushed back".

In December 2021, two more treaties were proposed to ensure the security of Russia, Europe and Ukraine without NATO expansion. We were ignored. In January 2022, then US Foreign Minister Antony Blinken told me not to "get involved" in the topic of NATO. They said that this was none of your business, and that they could think about agreeing to limit the number of medium-range missiles deployed on the territory of Ukraine (prohibited by the treaty), from which the United States withdrew. All. Here is a "concession" for you. But after the two draft treaties were submitted in December 2021 on the President's instructions (after another speech in November 2021 at the Russian Foreign Ministry), he hoped to the last moment that we would still convince them of the absolute catastrophic scenario that implied stupidly dragging Ukraine into NATO. We know that even before 2014, it was planned to create bases in Crimea. Then the issue of Crimea was already closed. But the British were going to build naval bases on the Sea of Azov and much more. President Putin's words that it will no longer be the way it was before February 2022 mean that he hoped for common sense until the last moment.

Now common sense has appeared in the White House. We will see.

Question: What will happen after the expiration of the New START Treaty in February 2026? Do you think you will probably not have time to work out anything to replace it? Will there be an arms race?

Sergey Lavrov: Why? President Vladimir Putin said that we will never get involved in an arms race again.

Question: Will there be some kind of unilateral "restraint"?

Sergey Lavrov: Why? We have our own policy, and we know how to ensure the defence capability of our state in case the strategic situation in the world does not change.

Despite the normalisation of relations with the Americans, no one stops declaring us an adversary in US and NATO doctrinal documents, and public officials also declare us an enemy. This does not stop.

You cannot tear it out of the START-3 Treaty (just like the UN Charter): we want to inspect your nuclear facility, this will be territorial integrity. It says otherwise. At the very beginning of the document, it says that we were able to conclude it because we respect each other, we are for equal security and recognise the relationship between strategic offensive and defensive systems. This relationship has long been "broken" by the US withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. And before that, they withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Since then, the Americans have begun to create missile defence systems, intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles, which are deployed all over the world: in Europe, in Southeast Asia, and along the perimeter of the borders of Russia and China.

The Trump administration has proposed that the three of us sit down with China on this issue. They are not offering us anything. We will not offer anything to anyone either. Because we were not the ones who destroyed the arms control instruments and the New START Treaty. The Biden administration has rejected the basic principles without which it could not have taken place. The Trump administration has not yet returned to these principles, although dialogue on many issues is ongoing.

We are self-sufficient. We have everything. We know how to ensure our defence capability. If they feel that their nuclear arsenals are very outdated and continue to become obsolete against the backdrop of our modernised weapons, then they are probably interested in somehow correcting this "discrepancy". We have not received any such proposals.

The last time then-President Joe Biden "asked" to check the nuclear facilities at which American-made Ukrainian drones were launched at that time. The Trump administration said that they were interested in discussing strategic relations between the United States, Russia and China. China is not interested in this. We have not received any bilateral proposals. If it does, of course, we will explain, as we see truly equal conversations, talks on how to ensure strategic stability. But this is a long way off. We are not rushing around with requests: let's sit here, talk, let's talk there. We have not interrupted the process in any of its components (economic, defence, missile defense, intermediate-range missiles, etc.).

President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said that we do not want to ask for it. If you do not like talking to us, we will behave accordingly and draw conclusions. If you want to come back, explain what you want to come to us with, and we will see if it suits us or not.

For example, the Americans have proposed a dialogue on the Ukrainian crisis–-we are talking, explaining our position. In the same way, they have proposed a dialogue on normalising the work of embassies–-we are in favour.

Question: When will the US Embassy in Moscow be open? When will it be possible to apply for an American visa in Moscow?

Sergey Lavrov: When will Kommersant's circulation increase? Do you want a five-year plan in three years again? There is no harm in wanting (I know this proverb).

The fact is that any process cannot be tied to any date.

Now they say there should be peace on Easter. Why? Because President of Finland Alexander Stubb thinks that this would be the right thing to do. He said all this after playing golf in Mar-a-Lago. And then he said, yes, this is our neighbour, the border is more than a thousand kilometres, so they will have to "recover." And three days before that, with a "brutal" expression on his face, he demanded that "Russia get out" and that they would not forget that it had taken away thousands of square kilometres of their territory. This is what worries Mr Stubb, and not the fact that they lived with us, gained independence from us, that they were explained why we needed to move the border away from Leningrad. As it turns out, they have "forgotten" all this. Including how at one time their leaders took a steam bath in the sauna with their Soviet, Russian colleagues, how someone even played hockey. And then once they said that "Russia violated everything in the world" by bringing in troops as part of a special military operation, and "the gloss flew off". Immediately—"give" us our territories.

Therefore, when people like French President Emmanuel Macron, who vilified us with his last words, suddenly said that one day we will have to talk and he will probably be the main "negotiator" from Europe, or President of Finland Alexander Stubb, who shouted that they were offended by taking away their territories and that Russia was the aggressor, said that we would "normalise" them someday. If these people think that they will behave this way now and then suddenly want to or realise that they are already impatient and need to "normalise" relations somehow, then we will think about whether the time has come or not, and under what conditions these relations will be "normalised". Truly, no one is forgotten. Nothing has been forgotten in every sense.

Question: From the previous words, it follows that Moscow believes in the ability of the American side to negotiate and in the role of the Americans as mediators in the Ukrainian conflict. There are already two agreements that have been signed with the mediation of the Americans: on safe navigation in the Black Sea and a moratorium on strikes on energy infrastructure facilities. As we can see, neither the first nor the second is fully operational. How would you comment on this?

Sergey Lavrov: There are no such agreements.

On March 18, during a telephone conversation, US President Donald Trump proposed to President Vladimir Putin for thirty days... Donald Trump said that he understood why it was not clear how to organise a truce.

Do you remember that at the news conference with President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko, President of Russia Vladimir Putin outlined our reaction to the idea of a 30-day general truce? What will it look like? Will it be used to pump up new weapons, to forcibly mobilise tens of thousands more people (I don't know how many they would scrape together there), and how to ensure that violators are immediately identified? Knowing how much Ukraine loves to lie. Therefore, Donald Trump proposed establishing a thirty-day moratorium on strikes on energy facilities.

President Vladimir Putin immediately agreed. During the conversation, he gave instructions to introduce such a ban for thirty days. It turned out that seven of our drones were already flying to attack Ukrainian energy facilities. We shot them down ourselves.

And the second thing that Donald Trump said. They say that let people gather on the Black Sea Initiative, and it is necessary to resume its activities. People met and agreed on five points that the Americans circulated. We circulated an addendum to these five points, in particular, to the paragraph that the Americans would help resume normal Russian grain and fertiliser exports in terms of insurance rates, port calls and refueling ships. In general, practical things.

These are exactly the ones that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres was supposed to do three years ago, when he signed the first Black Sea deal consisting of two parts: half of the "package"–-Ukrainian grain, half of the "package" – and grain and fertilisers of the Russian Federation. Antonio Guterres pledged to remove obstacles to the export of our agricultural products, fertilisers and grain. He did not do this. Therefore, knowing that he did nothing, we have been selling for three years, we have opportunities, we just use other routes. But there is still little grain and fertiliser on the market, which poor countries need in order for them to somehow establish their food production and receive humanitarian aid from us.

Therefore, we honestly said that it is great that the United States, just like Antonio Guterres three years ago, has volunteered to facilitate Russian exports by removing obstacles. The Americans have now formulated the same readiness. But, knowing that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres' "hopes" had been dashed, we honestly said that if the United States is ready to assist, then this is what needs to be done so that the situation when that deal was welcomed with such "fanfare blows" again, and then it turned out to be "zilch" in terms of Russian exports.

In principle, checking the integrity of our Ukrainian neighbours is what we insist on when discussing with the West any schemes that they are promoting, wishing to "facilitate a settlement". Two of the most "screaming" examples. He spoke about how on May 2, 2014, almost 50 people were burned in the House of Trade Unions. Ukraine said (Petr Poroshenko was president at the time) that they would investigate this. No one is investigating anything. And the Council of Europe, which a year after the tragedy, when we were still members there, volunteered to help the investigation, and made some modest decision. They say that they are ready to provide services to the Ukrainian government in the investigation of this terrible tragedy. And slowly (as we say in our people) he "faded". Everyone has forgotten about it and no one remembers. Although there is a lot of video footage with those who set fires, who shot people who jumped out of the windows. No one is interested in this.

But for me, the most striking example is Bucha. In which, two days after our units were withdrawn as a gesture of "goodwill" at the end of March 2022 before the Istanbul Agreements, which Boris Johnson eventually forbade the Ukrainians to sign.

For two days, there was no one in Bucha except for the local authorities. The mayor of the city ran in front of the BBC cameras and said that they had regained control over their small homeland. Two days later, the BBC suddenly sensationalized dozens of corpses laid out along the roadside, not in basements or nooks and crannies. It is immediately stated that this is a "Russian atrocity" and that we have taken revenge on the Ukrainian people in this way. The European Union, the Americans and employees of the Bailen administration are imposing sanctions. All this lasted for three or four days: "Russia is a beast"...

Since then, we and I personally have been trying to get the names of the people whose corpses were shown with such fanfare on the BBC, and then through all other channels. When I was twice in New York at the UN General Assembly and took part in meetings of the UN Security Council, I asked Antonio Guterres, who was sitting opposite at the round table, whether it was possible to help. Because no one is presenting them. We have been accused. All right, there is an investigation. Tell me the names. We no longer hope, just to see how "biased" you are. Antonio Guterres turned away and shouted. Then, one-on-one, he said that this was not his competence. I replied, "Wait, but there is a UN Human Rights Council, which has created an "independent" Human Rights Mission in Ukraine in violation of its procedures. For us, it is illegitimate, but it exists. We wrote an official paper to the Human Rights Council: can we understand what happened there? Three years have passed since Bucha, at least give us names. They do not answer us. This is already an official paper.

When I am in New York, I do not avoid giving news conferences there, I tell everyone who is accredited to the UN (BBC, CNN and others) that they are journalists, they have such a genre as "journalistic investigation". UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres is evading the answer, and the UN Human Rights Council is avoiding answering. Can journalists write a specific request to the UN? Nobody does anything.

Therefore, the situation is clear to me. I also understand how dangerous the self-determination of peoples is. Not at all dangerous.

The Nazis seize lands that have never belonged to anyone except the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union, and do absolutely disgusting things there, try to make some kind of "representation" to us.

"Suddenly" they recall some kind of Budapest Memorandum. It does not say anything about the need to "bow our heads" before the anti-constitutional coup d'état that brought racists, real Russophobes, to power. When they talk about the borders of 1991, they arose due to the Belovezhskaya Pushcha and then Almaty "divorce" between the republics of the former Soviet Union, based on the conditions that existed at that time. One of the key conditions for us, for the RSFSR, at that time was the Declaration of Independence of Ukraine, adopted a year earlier. It clearly stated that this state would be neutral forever, that they would not join any military blocs. Then this "migrated" to the Constitution of Ukraine. This was correct. Their Constitution stated that the state of Ukraine guarantees the observance of the rights of Russians (separately highlighted) and all other national minorities. Despite all these "wolf laws" that I have mentioned, this provision has been retained in the Constitution of Ukraine. It was only later that they began to insert "accession to NATO" into the Constitution. But we recognized the independence of Ukraine as a neutral, friendly, non-aligned state in which "the rights of Russians and other national minorities" are respected. [My Emphasis]

Initially, no video was provided with the transcript so we could see and hear Lavrov’s body language and the tone of his voice. One is now available for his 80-minute testimony. His tone in the transcript IMO is one of tired cynicism where his emotions aren’t as guarded as usual, thus the matter-of-factness seen. While Lavrov praised Trump for opening dialog, there were also several messages to Team Trump related to the reality of what Zelensky fronts and those that brought it into being. That those in charge of major European nations want to assist and prolong the Nazis in Kiev tells us much about those leaders and those behind them. The levels of animosity shown towards Biden and Guterres were greater than anything said in the past. Biden must be looked beyond to Obama/Clinton and their deep association with Neocons. Trump 1.0 also cannot be excused for its role, and Trump’s spin must be spit back into his face as we see the legacy of Pompeo living in Trump’s demands on Iran. Just because Team Trump say they recognize one of the root causes doesn’t mean they will do anything about it/them. The unwillingness to pull the support plug is a key indicator here. Lavrov also finally gave away what he sees as the only solution to the Nazis—they must be eradicated militarily as in WW2. Indeed, as many Russians and others have noted, there are many similarities with the two as Europe rallies around the prime tenet of Nazism—Intense hatred of all things Russian.

(Additional commentary at link.)

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/lavrov-p ... -interview

[blindpig]

STRIKE FOR STRIKE IN TRUMP’S SANCTIONS WAR – HOW AUSTRALIA’S ATTACK ON RUSAL’S ALUMINA IN QUEENSLAND HAS TRIGGERED RUSSIA’S ATTACK ON RIO TINTO’S COPPER IN MONGOLIA



by John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

At 10 on Monday morning this week, the official White House log shows that President Donald Trump was preparing himself to greet the President of Salvador who was arriving at the White House door in an hour’s time.

But in a tweet Trump composed beforehand, he announced: “The War between Russia and Ukraine is Biden’s war, not mine. I just got here, and for four years during my term, had no problem in preventing it from happening… President Zelenskyy and Crooked Joe Biden did an absolutely horrible job in allowing this travesty to begin. There were so many ways of preventing it from ever starting. But that is the past. Now we have to get it to STOP, AND FAST. SO SAD!”

Trump was falsifying what he had done himself to escalate the war against Russia from 2017 to 2021. He was also concealing the executive order he had signed four days before, on April 10 at 8:45 am. In that paper Trump agreed to the Biden Administration’s charge of “harmful foreign activities of the Government of the Russian Federation—in particular, efforts to undermine the conduct of free and fair democratic elections and democratic institutions in the United States.” For that reason, Trump agreed to extend Biden’s executive order to continue economic warfighting against Russia, including the threat of new tariffs.

Trump is now hiding what he has just agreed and signed. He has omitted to tweet a record of his agreement with Biden on the Russian enemy. There is also no White House announcement on April 10 of Trump’s order to continue the economic guns firing in the war.

“We did not have any high expectations here in this regard,” the Kremlin spokesman Dmitri Peskov responded, saying as little as possible to expose the Kremlin’s knowledge of Trump’s deceit.

In fact, in Trump’s first term the president added two new laws intended to widen the scope and multiply the number of Russian targets for sanction targets; at the same time, Trump made it more difficult for a successor president to ease or lift his Russia sanctions. Now that Trump is his own successor, he is continuing the Biden war which Obama and Trump had started.

Trump has refused to authorize his appointees at the State Department, Treasury, and National Security Council (NSC) to allow even limited easing of sanctions for the food and fertilizer trade that was under discussion last month in Saudi Arabia as part of the Black Sea “ceasefire” which Trump had discussed on the telephone with President Vladimir Putin.

But there is just one form of sanctions relief which Trump has introduced – this is an indirect benefit to the Russian oligarchs who are already under sanctions designations. It’s not an offer to lift the individual sanctions; it’s a scheme for not prosecuting violations when the Russians find ways to evade the sanctions (or pay bribes in the intermediation). This Trump move is being concealed.

According to the Baker McKenzie law firm of Chicago, “Task Force KleptoCapture, one of the Biden era enforcement initiatives, has been disbanded. This was announced in a memo issued by US Attorney General Pam Bondi on February 5. This was a task force within the US Department of Justice focused on enforcing the sanctions against Russian oligarchs. This was the task force behind many of the high-profile asset seizures that were widely reported in the press, such as luxury yachts.”

But the Russian oligarchs are impatient for direct, open sanctions relief from Trump. For this they are looking to Kirill Dmitriev to negotiate terms with Steven Witkoff; read more here.

So far, however, the yachts and mansions concession is all that Trump and Witkoff have agreed to. Even the YachtBuyer in its report on the superyacht market acknowledges that the asset brokers and oligarch intermediaries are cautious, warning that “any perceived softening on oligarch-linked assets could draw political and legal backlash from Ukraine’s allies, especially in Europe.”

How this is playing out in the courts on both sides of the war can be followed in the legal challenge Oleg Deripaska and his Rusal group of aluminium companies fought and lost late last year in Australia, and in the retaliation they have commenced in the Russian courts last week.

The complex legal argumentation and the Russia-hating government policy which motivates the continuing sanctions to stop worldwide movement of Russian minerals and metals, and the multi-billion dollar retaliation which the Deripaska and the Kremlin are now threatening if the sanctions aren’t lifted, are, as a Russian business source in Dubai puts it, “pushing the accelerator and brake pedal at the same time for Trump, for Witkoff, their business associates, and the government agencies they are trying to run.”

In a new court move in Kaliningrad, revealed by a Moscow newspaper yesterday, Oleg Deripaska, the Russian aluminium oligarch who has been under personal US sanctions since before 2014 – his Rusal companies since 2018 — has begun a retaliatory strike against the Anglo-Australian Rio Tinto Corporation, the world’s second largest metals and mining corporation. Deripaska’s method is to retaliate for the sanctions cutting off the alumina supplies he owns in Australia by cutting off the mining company’s raw materials and railway access at its Oyu Tolgoi mine in Mongolia, one of the largest and most profitable copper deposits in the world.


For enlarged view, click on source: https://www.castellum.ai/russia-sanctions-dashboard

In a Washington think tank’s history of the economic war against Russia, “sanctions on Russia increased substantially during the Obama administration compared to the prior rate of designations, primarily in response to Russia’s territorial aggression in Ukraine and illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014. The Trump administration continued imposing new sanctions on Russia, albeit at a much lower rate than the preceding Obama administration, which designated 458 entities and individuals with ties to Russia during Obama’s second term compared to 273 under Trump.”

According to the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), a military-industrial complex think tank in Washington, “during the Trump administration, the rate of new sanctions on Russia slowed but took on a broader focus, with new sanctions targeting malign cyber activity, election interference, and Russia’s support for countries like North Korea. For example, new cyber sanctions on Russia-linked entities accounted for 69 designations during the Trump administration. The Trump administration issued 273 designations from 2017 through 2020 on Russia-linked individuals and entities, of which 131, or just under 48 percent, were related to Ukraine.”

Following the start of the Special Military Operation in February 2022, the Biden Administration widened and intensified the sanctions war, multiplying the individual Russian designations to 1,522, dwarfing all other nationals, and adding a new executive order – No. 14114 of December 22, 2023. This authorized “sanctions on foreign financial institutions involved in helping Russia evade existing financial restrictions. The sanctions represent the first major effort to employ secondary sanctions against third-party persons assisting Russia since the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Although the United States’ use of secondary sanctions has previously caused tensions with allies due to their extraterritorial nature, the United States and its allies are increasingly aligned on the need to use such measures to stem sanctions evasion routes in third-party markets. The EO also allows for the United States to prohibit import of Russian-origin items that have been processed or substantially transformed in third countries, including Russian seafood and diamond products.”

For the US-Israel campaign to attack the Russian diamond industry, read this. https://johnhelmer.net/wp-content/webpc ... &nocache=1

Several hundred Russian individuals and entities were sanctioned on January 15, 2025, five days before Biden’s term expired.

Dated March 18, 2025, a summary of US sanctions against Russia noted the Trump Administration is continuing the economic war against Russia with the same intensity and targets as the Biden Administration. Trump’s executive orders have “not removed or relaxed any of the US sanctions or export controls against Russia…[and] allowed the energy sector sanctions imposed at the end of the Biden Administration on January 10 to go into effect. This included a prohibition on US Persons providing petroleum services to anyone in Russia, which had come with a delayed effective date of February 27. The January 10 measures also included a series of wind-down general licenses that expired on February 27 and March 12.”

In addition, Trump renewed the national emergency for the Ukraine war which has been the legal foundation for the start of the US economic war, and the implementation of sanctions against Russia since the Obama Administration in 2014. “As reported in the Federal Register on February 27, President Trump continued the national emergency with respect to Ukraine for another year, until March 6, 2026. This national emergency was first declared by President Obama in 2014 to address threats to the democracy and sovereignty of Ukraine. This national emergency underpins a large number of sanctions against individuals and entities in Russia under Executive Order 13662 following Russia’s annexation of Crimea. (Most of the post-2022 sanctions against Russia were based on a different national emergency declared by President Biden in 2021 in Executive Order 14024. However, in its final weeks, the outgoing Biden Administration imposed a number of sanctions under both EO 14024 and EO 13662 in an attempt to make the sanctions more difficult to remove later.”


Source: https://www.yachtbuyer.com/en/news/us-d ... ptocapture

According to the YachtBuyer, “Task Force KleptoCapture played a critical role in some of the most high-profile superyacht seizures in recent years. The unit was instrumental in: [1] seizing Amadea, a $325 million, 106-meter Lürssen superyacht linked to sanctioned Russian billionaire Suleiman Kerimov in Fiji in 2022. The yacht was later sailed to San Diego under U.S. control, where it remains. [2] Impounding Tango, a 77-meter Feadship yacht belonging to Viktor Vekselberg, at a marina in Palma de Mallorca, Spain in 2022. The U.S. accused Vekselberg of using shell companies to evade sanctions. [3] Blocking the movements of Crescent [owned by Igor Sechin] and Madame Gu [Andrei Skoch], two Lürssen-built mega-yachts associated with Russian elites, preventing them from leaving foreign ports…Although the DOJ has confirmed that ongoing cases will continue, critics argue that without a centralized task force, the process may slow down or lose momentum. The U.S. has yet to auction or repurpose any of the seized yachts, leading to legal disputes over ownership and asset disposal. Some industry insiders believe that sanctioned oligarchs may see an opportunity to reclaim their detained yachts through lengthy legal battles, particularly in European courts, where decisions on asset seizures have been mixed…The disbandment of Task Force KleptoCapture could signal a broader policy shift away from aggressive sanctions enforcement, potentially allowing Russian yacht owners more flexibility in moving and maintaining their assets…As ongoing cases unfold, the yachting world will be watching closely to see whether the seized superyachts remain under U.S. control or if legal challenges pave the way for their return to sanctioned owners.”

In the three-year long challenge to the legality of Australian government sanctions seizing control of Rusal-owned alumina and transferring it to its joint-venture partner, the Anglo-Australian Rio Tinto company, Rusal’s lawyers have argued that the shareholdings in Rusal of Deripaska and his oligarch partners fall below the 50% US threshold for sanctions targets.

Rusal has also said it was ready to ship its alumina to third parties not involved in the Ukraine war, avoiding the Russian aluminium refineries which had been their destination before the war. Rusal, the court was told, “is prepared to give a binding undertaking, which reflects these matters, if this would give comfort to QAL. In light of these matters, it is clear that any supply of alumina to ABC [Alumina and Bauxite Company Ltd., Rusal subsidiary] by QAL [Queensland Alumina Ltd., Rio Tinto-controlled joint venture] will not be a sanctioned supply because: (a) the alumina will not directly or indirectly as a result of that supply be transferred to Russia or for use in Russia; (b) as a direct or indirect result of that supply, the supply is not for the benefit of Russia.”

In March 2022, when officials in Canberra announced they were introducing sanctions on Rusal’s alumina, there were two vessels at berth in Gladstone, waiting to be loaded with alumina for shipment to Russia. To release the vessels and avoid the sanctions, Rusal arranged to divert the cargoes to Qingdao in China, where the alumina could be stored until negotiations for sale could be arranged with “customers in Europe, India and the Middle East.”

The Australian government ordered Rio Tinto officials in Gladstone to stop the loading.


Left: the QAL Ltd. alumina refinery in Gladstone, Queensland.

Right, Oleg Deripaska. For the history of Deripaska in Australian politics, start here. There is a parallel history of rivalry between Deripaska and Rio Tinto in Guinea, the west African bauxite and alumina source; see https://johnhelmer.net/.

At stake in the case was the Australian Autonomous Sanctions Act of 2011. Unnoticed when a Labor Party government passed it through parliament at the time, the statute effectively subordinates all Australia’s export industries to US government directives. The exports under US control include iron ore, coal, gas, gold, wheat, bauxite, alumina and aluminium.

Although the statute’s title is “Autonomous Sanctions Act”, in practice it means the Subordinate Sanctions Act. According to section 3, the Australian government may impose sanctions at American or other allied direction when there are “matters that are of international concern in relation to one or more particular foreign countries…[including] one or more of the following… threats to international peace and security…malicious cyber activity…serious violations or serious abuses of human rights…activities undermining good governance or the rule of law, including serious corruption.”

Section 6 of the Act removed parliament from having to review and decide when a foreign country posed any of these threats. Instead, an unspecified minister was empowered “by legislative instrument [to] specify a provision of a law of the Commonwealth as a sanction law” and “specify a provision in relation to particular circumstances.” This vagueness meant a secret process by local officials resulting in unilateral issuance of regulations, without the legal requirement of compensation, enforced by US agreement that the action “will facilitate the conduct of Australia’s relations with other countries or with entities or persons outside Australia.”

Section 7 of the Act allowed extra-territorial jurisdiction; this meant that the government in Canberra, acting on US order, could impose sanctions and penalties on Australian companies mining, refining and trading in other countries and according to their laws.

Last November a three-judge panel of the Australian Federal Court decided that the cutoff of alumina was lawful, no matter how small the Russian shareholding in the joint venture was, and no matter where in the world and to whom the Rusal share of the alumina was shipped and sold.


Source: https://www.austlii.edu.au/

On the Russian shareholding threshold for sanctions to apply, the appeal court claimed that Deripaska and his Russian oligarch partner Victor Vekselberg were “significant indirect shareholders of UC Rusal and thereby ABC.” Vekselberg’s stake was identified in the court ruling as 25.52% of Rusal, and since Rusal through the Alumina and Bauxite Company (ABC) held a 20% stake in QAL, his indirect stake in QAL amounted to 5.1%. No attempt was made by the court to calculate Deripaska’s shareholding; instead, it ruled that “given the bases upon which we have determined the appeal, it is not necessary to detail the nature and extent of Messrs Deripaska and Vekselberg’s indirect shareholdings.”

An expert interpretation of the Australian court decision is that it is tougher and has extended further than the originating US sanctions law. “While the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the EU and the U.K. enforce sanctions for 50% or 50%-plus designated ownership, Australian courts’ rulings in the United Co. Rusal cases set a far lower threshold for liability…Australia’s sanctions laws [are] much more burdensome on those who must comply, at least with respect to the designated entity provisions, than those of the U.K., the U.S. and Europe.”

The appeal court judges went on to accept the evidence of a single local expert who claimed that if Rusal’s alumina were shipped to China, it might end up as a Chinese export to Russia, and that this trade would be untraceable for the Australians. But even if the QAL alumina owned by Rusal didn’t end up in Russia, as the judges believed it would, they also ruled that the final destination didn’t matter. This, they judged, was because the sanction applied to any benefit, direct or indirect, to Russia.

“Even if it were to be accepted that, following the imposition of the Export Sanction, UC Rusal and/or ABC [Alumina and Bauxite Company] would have successfully taken steps to prevent alumina delivered to ABC from the Gladstone Plant being physically transferred to Russia, a direct or indirect result of the delivery to ABC would have been that the alumina would be transferred for the benefit of Russia. The benefit arises from the fact that UC Rusal would be able to direct the transfer of the Gladstone alumina to China which would increase the availability of other alumina in China to be purchased by UC Rusal.”

“ ‘Anything that is for the good of a person or thing’ or ‘advantage, profit, good’ — this construction,” the court decided, “ better gives effect to the purposes of the Regulations and legislation.”

In effect, the court was ruling that it is lawful for the Australian government to declare unrestricted economic war against Russia, on a ministerial decision without parliamentary review or vote to authorize. Rusal’s lawyers didn’t challenge the power of the Australian foreign minister to decide this; no evidence was called into court of the evidence which that official or his ministry had used in deciding to issue the sanction.

Russian retaliation has followed on April 11. In a report by the Moscow business newspaper Kommersant, published on April 13, Rusal’s lawyers have asked the Kaliningrad arbitration court to order Rio Tinto to pay damages of Rb104.75 billion ($1.3 billion) for Rio Tinto’s gains, Rusal’s losses resulting from the imposition of the Australian government sanctions on the alumina supplies from Queensland.

For the time being, according to the press report, “the case is being considered in a closed session. The texts explaining the essence of the requirements have not been published.”

However, the newspaper’s source believes that Rusal is targeting Rio Tinto’s stake in the Oyu Tolgoi cooper mine in Mongolia. According to the latest Rio Tinto annual report, the mine has already absorbed more than $7 billion in capital investment and “is expected to produce (from the open pit and underground) an average of about 500,000 tonnes of copper per year from 2028 to 2036.” At the current market price for copper, this represents about $5 billion in value.

During last year Rio Tinto has reported that in large part due to “ramp-up” of copper production at Oyu Tolgoi, “we generated significantly higher net cash from operating activities of $2.6 billion.”

Rio Tinto’s shareholding in the Mongolian project is 66%; the balance is owned by the Mongolian government.

The objective of the new Rusal litigation is to win a Russian court award of billion-dollar damages, and then apply for enforcement through the direct and indirect links between the Russian and Mongolian governments. According to Kommersant, there is the risk that the Russian-owned railways in Mongolia will cut raw material supplies and movement for Rio Tinto, just it had done to Rusal’s alumina in Australia.

For the time being, Rio Tinto has not reported or replied to the Russian counter-sanctions.

https://johnhelmer.net/strike-for-strik ... os-copper/

******

Kremlin reveals content of Putin’s talks with Trump envoy
April 15, 2025
RT, 4/11/25

The discussions between Russian President Vladimir Putin and White House special envoy Steve Witkoff on Friday involved “aspects of the settlement of the Ukraine conflict,” the Kremlin has announced, declining to provide further details.

Witkoff visited Russia on Friday and met with Putin in St. Petersburg. The meeting lasted over four hours and the content of the talks has been largely kept under wraps by Moscow and Washington.

However, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt addressed the issue during a press briefing earlier in the day when asked by a reporter about the purpose of Witkoff’s visit to Russia.

According to Leavitt, the visit was aimed at facilitating direct US communications with the Kremlin as part of a broader effort to negotiate a ceasefire and eventual peace agreement in the Ukraine conflict.

The Trump administration faced growing internal divisions this week after Witkoff allegedly proposed a ceasefire plan that would recognize Russian control over four eastern regions claimed by both Moscow and Kiev, Reuters reported on Friday citing anonymous sources.

During a White House meeting with President Donald Trump last week, Witkoff argued that recognizing Russian ownership of Lugansk, Donetsk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson was the swiftest path to halting the war, the outlet’s sources said. General Keith Kellogg, Trump’s Ukraine envoy, reportedly pushed back, stressing Ukraine would not accept full territorial concessions.

White House explains purpose of envoy’s Russia visitREAD MORE: White House explains purpose of envoy’s Russia visit

The meeting reportedly concluded without a decision from Trump, who has repeatedly said he wants to broker a ceasefire by May. Witkoff subsequently traveled to Russia on Friday for talks with Putin.

The episode has deepened rifts within the Trump administration, as officials debate how to resolve the Ukraine conflict, Reuters wrote. Witkoff’s approach, previously outlined in a March interview with Tucker Carlson, has reportedly alarmed both Republican lawmakers and US allies.

“They’re Russian-speaking,” Witkoff told Carlson of the eastern territories. “There have been referendums where the overwhelming majority of the people have indicated that they want to be under Russian rule.”

Several Republicans reportedly contacted National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and Secretary of State Marco Rubio to raise concerns about Witkoff’s stance, criticizing him for echoing Russian rhetoric.

A recent dinner with Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev, who until recently was under US sanctions, further stirred controversy. Originally planned at Witkoff’s home, it was moved to the White House after security concerns were raised.

Despite criticism, Witkoff retains strong backing from Trump and some administration officials. Waltz praised his efforts, citing his business background and recent diplomatic activity, including securing the release of US citizen Marc Fogel from Russia.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/04/kre ... ump-envoy/

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy: The 2025 60 Minutes Interview transcript
April 16,
CBS News 60 Minutes, 4/13/25

The Ukrainian president faces a critical moment in his alliance with the United States. In an interview this past Friday, Volodymyr Zelenskyy invited President Trump, here, to Ukraine, to see how Russia’s unprovoked invasion, three years ago, continues to threaten the peace of the Western world. Zelenskyy is navigating a sharp turnabout in Washington. The United States had been leading nato in arming Ukraine and isolating Russia. but since taking office, President Trump has praised the Russian dictator Vladimir Putin and criticized Zelenskyy. this past Friday, a Trump official met Putin in Russia about the same time we sat down with Zelenskyy in his hometown. It had been a week since Russia killed 9 children on a playground.

Scott Pelley: You seem to have a real hatred of Vladimir Putin.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Translated): Putin? 100% hatred. Not even 99.9%. Though this doesn’t mean we shouldn’t work to end the war as soon as possible and transition to diplomacy. But how else can you see a person who came here and murdered our people, murdered children? We’re inside a school bomb shelter right now. The bomb shelter of a school.

The bomb shelter classrooms beneath the city of Kryvyi Rih were silent. School 41 was mourning its students killed on April 4. Swing sets pierced by shrapnel stood where Zelenskyy laid his memorial to the nine children and 10 others cut down by a Russian missile. He asked us to look at their faces and told us that while the great powers endlessly debate war and peace, these children will never speak again.

Scott Pelley: Mr. President, what does an atrocity like this tell you about the progress of the war?

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy: It means that we can’t trust Russia. We can’t trust negotiations with Russia.

Russia strikes Ukrainian cities daily. 1,700 attacks on schools, 600 children dead. 780 hospitals and clinics attacked. 13,000 civilians killed. And up to 100,000 Ukrainian soldiers dead, all for Vladimir Putin’s vanity war to expand Russia to NATO’s doorstep.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Translated): Our people have paid the highest price possible. There is no higher price. We have given all our money–all we have in terms of finances. But most important, we gave [the lives of] our people.

Those were the points Zelenskyy struggled to make in February as President Trump opened negotiations with Russia and, initially, excluded Ukraine. Then, Trump rewrote history, saying, falsely, that Ukraine had started the war and calling the democratically elected Zelenskyy…

President Trump on February 19: A dictator without elections. Zelenskyy better move fast or he’s not going to have a country left. Gotta move, gotta move fast ’cause that war is going in the wrong direction.

Scott Pelley: When President Trump called you a dictator and said that Ukraine started this war, what did you think?

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Translated): I believe, sadly, Russian narratives are prevailing in the U.S. How is it possible to witness our losses and our suffering, to understand what the Russians are doing, and to still believe that they are not the aggressors, that they did not start this war? This speaks to the enormous influence of Russia’s information policy on America, on U.S. politics, and U.S. politicians.

And Zelenskyy told us he heard Russia’s narrative from Trump officials in that disastrous Oval Office meeting in February.

Trump in Oval Office meeting with Zelenskyy: You’re gambling with World War III.

Zelenskyy grew tense as President Trump said both sides were suffering, Ukraine’s people and the Russian invasion force.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Translated): It’s a shift in tone, a shift in reality, really yes, a shift in reality, and I don’t want to engage in the altered reality that is being presented to me. First and foremost, we did not launch an attack [to start the war]. It seems to me that the Vice President is somehow justifying Putin’s actions. I tried to explain, “You can’t look for something in the middle. There is an aggressor and there is a victim. The Russians are the aggressor, and we are the victim.”

Vice President Vance suggested that Putin could be trusted and it was Zelenskyy who was creating a false narrative.

Zelenskyy in Oval Office meeting: Have you ever been to Ukraine that you see what problems we have? Come once.

Vance in Oval Office meeting: I’ve actually, I’ve actually watched and seen the stories and I know what happens is you bring people, you bring them on a propaganda tour, Mr. President.

Scott Pelley: Would you invite President Trump to Ukraine?

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy: With pleasure. Please.

This, Zelenskyy apparently wanted President Trump to hear in English.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy: We want you to come, and I think to come and to see. You think you understand what’s going on here. Okay, we respect your position. You understand. But, please, before any kind of decisions, any kind of forms of negotiations, come to see people, civilians, warriors, hospitals, churches, children destroyed or dead. Come, look, and then let’s — let’s move with a plan how to finish the war. You will understand with whom you have a deal. You will understand what Putin did. And we will not prepare anything. It will not be theater, with preparing actors in the streets and the [city] center. We don’t do this. We don’t need it. You can go exactly where you want, in any city which been under attacks. What I said to them, just to come and to understand.

With his invitation on its way, he switched to Ukrainian.

Scott Pelley: Does the United States have your back?

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Translated): (PAUSE) Even in this pause of mine there’s a problem. Because I want to answer truthfully and quickly that the United States is our strategic, strong partner. But the pause is doubt. I don’t doubt that the people of America are with us. But in a long war, many details are forgotten. In Europe everyone fears that the United States may drift away from Europe.

Scott Pelley: Can you do without the United States?

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Translated): I think without the United States we will suffer great losses. Human and territorial. So, I wouldn’t like to consider that. But this is our destiny, our land, our life. One way or another, we will end this war.

The U.S. has donated about $175 billion in aid. Roughly 100 billion of that was military, most of which was spent in the U.S. on manufacturing American weapons.

Scott Pelley: What would you say that the American people have gotten for that money?

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Translated): We have always believed that this is our shared struggle, that Ukraine is defending our shared values, that we are defending Europe as a whole. I can only thank the people of the United States of America for their support, their strong support. But the people dying right now, with all due respect to the U.S. and Europe, the ones dying right now are Ukrainians. This is why I say that by giving us weapons, other countries are protecting their own people.

But in the Trump administration, U.S. aid has all but stopped. Last month the White House announced partial ceasefires, but they haven’t happened. And now, Trump says he is losing patience with Putin.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Translated): Putin can’t be trusted. I told that to President Trump many times. So when you ask why the ceasefire isn’t working – this is why. Putin never wanted an end to the war. Putin never wanted us to be independent. Putin wants to destroy us completely – our sovereignty and our people.

Putin’s troops occupy about 20% of Ukraine. The 600-mile front is largely frozen – World War I trench warfare plus drones. It’s estimated that as many as 200,000 Russian troops have been killed.

Scott Pelley: What does a just peace look like to you?

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Translated): To not lose our sovereignty or our independence. We, no matter what, will take back what is ours because we never lost it – the Russians took it from us, the temporarily occupied territories. We will not recognize [as Russia] those territories that the Russians temporarily occupy. We will bring them back. When or how, I cannot say. [But] what we can’t bring back are the human [lives]. There’s only one thing that can be done, justice. We cannot let go the issue of justice. Those who killed must pay for the murders.

Zelenskyy told us any true ceasefire must include a guarantee of Ukrainian security. He imagines an international peacekeeping force and would like the U.S. to be part of it.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Translated): This could mean a [force] protecting airspace and providing air defense, which may consist of airplanes rather than boots on the ground.

Trump in campaign speech: I will end the war in Ukraine immediately I will get it done while I’m president-elect.

During his presidential campaign, Trump boasted he would end the war before Inauguration Day. Instead, today, Palm Sunday, Russian missiles struck the Ukrainian city of Sumy — at least 32 civilians are dead, including another 2 children.

Scott Pelley: In your view, what is at stake in this moment?

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Translated): Security. The security of the world is at stake. If we do not stand firm, he will advance further. It is not just idle speculation; the threat is real. Putin’s ultimate goal is to revive the Russian Empire and reclaim territories currently under NATO protection. And the United States being part of NATO means it will be involved in any potential conflict. Considering all of this, I believe it could escalate into a world war.

Scott Pelley: A risk to the world.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (Translated): Yes, for the world. There won’t be a safe place [not a] safe place for [anyone].

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/04/ukr ... ranscript/

Zelensky couldn't fool a dog.

******

“Russia and Latin America: Lavrov Highlights Regional Sovereignty in the Emerging Multipolar Order”


Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.Apr 15,2025 Photo:RT

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov speaks at the ‘Year of Anniversaries: From Mexico to Argentina’ exhibition in Moscow.


April 15, 2025 Hour: 6:41 pm

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov emphasizes Russia’s respect for Latin America’s sovereignty and its pivotal role in shaping a multipolar world during a diplomatic exhibition in Moscow.

Russia and Latin America: A Strategic Alliance for a Multipolar World

At an event commemorating decades of diplomatic relations between Russia and various Latin American countries, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov underscored the region’s significance as a key player in the emerging multipolar world order. The exhibition, titled “Year of Anniversaries: From Mexico to Argentina,” celebrates the political, economic, and cultural cooperation that has strengthened ties between Moscow and Latin America.

Russia Reaffirms his Support for Latin American Countries Sovereignty

Lavrov highlighted Russia’s historical commitment to non-interference in Latin America’s affairs, recalling the Russian Empire’s stance during the region’s independence wars in the 19th century. “We have always respected the decision of Latin American peoples to solidify their true sovereignty,” he stated. This sentiment resonates strongly in a global context where traditional powers continue to exert influence over the region.

Latin America’s Strategic Role in Multipolarity

Lavrov described Latin America as “one of the powerful poles of the emerging multipolar world order.” According to him, the region plays a crucial role in democratizing international relations by promoting a fairer and more balanced global system. This perspective aligns with Latin America’s growing call for new alliances and reduced dependence on the United States.

The Foreign Minister emphasized the vast potential for expanding bilateral relations across sectors such as trade, investment, technology, science, and culture. “We are ready to work together to strengthen our ties in all areas,” Lavrov declared. This reflects Russia’s strategic interest in fostering economic partnerships with resource-rich and emerging markets in Latin America.


Shared Traditions as a Foundation for Diplomatic Success

Lavrov pointed out that longstanding traditions of friendship, trust, and mutual sympathy form the bedrock of successful future cooperation between Russia and Latin America. The exhibition showcases historical documents that trace these relationships’ evolution into strategic partnerships.

Challenging U.S. Dominance

From a progressive viewpoint, this alliance between Russia and Latin America can be seen as resistance against U.S. dominance in the region. Countries like Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua are central to Russia’s strategy of building an alternative bloc that promotes regional autonomy while countering Washington’s sanctions.

Opportunities for Equitable Integration

Russia’s increasing presence in Latin America offers new geopolitical and economic options for countries in the region. However, this relationship must be monitored to ensure it does not replicate extractive or asymmetric dynamics similar to those historically imposed by other foreign powers.

Lavrov’s remarks reflect a strategic vision aimed at strengthening ties between Russia and Latin America as part of a broader effort to construct a fairer multipolar world order. For progressive voices in Latin America, this partnership represents an opportunity to consolidate regional sovereignty amidst external pressures.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/russia-a ... lar-order/

******

Lieutenant General Shamarin gets 7 years in prison for corruption
April 17, 15:02



Shamarin was given 7 years in a maximum security penal colony.

The court sentenced the former head of the Main Communications Directorate, Deputy Chief of the General Staff, Vadim Shamarin to 7 years in a strict regime penal colony for accepting bribes on an especially large scale while fulfilling a state defense order. He was also stripped of the rank of lieutenant general and was prohibited from holding positions in government bodies for 7 years. The court seized Shamarin's property in order to ensure the sentence in terms of collecting a fine. It is worth noting that the prosecution asked for 12 years in prison for Shamarin. So his sentence was slightly mitigated. On the other hand, this is a kind of greeting to those who said that such high-ranking generals would not be imprisoned and would be whitewashed. Shamarin was not whitewashed.

The investigation established that in 2019-2023, the Perm Telephone Plant "Telta" concluded contracts with a state customer for the supply of communication devices for a total of more than 1.4 billion rubles. During the specified period, Shamarin received bribes from officials of the Telta plant totaling 36 million rubles for increasing the volume and cost of supplied products. It is worth noting that at the beginning of the war, the army experienced serious problems with communications, some of which have not yet been completely resolved.

Everyone is waiting with interest to see how the Timur Ivanov case will end.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9787627.html

1 billion rubles stolen during construction of fortifications in Kursk region
April 17, 11:13



On the case of the arrest of the former governor of the Kursk region.

1. The authorities were developing Smirnov for several months in parallel with the cases of contractors responsible for the construction of fortifications in the southern regions of the Kursk region.
2. The case was not limited to Smirnov alone. His deputy Dedov was arrested on the same charges. Criminal cases were opened for both under the article "Fraud". The former director of the "Kursk Region Development Corporation" Lukin is also involved in the case.
3. The court arrested Smirnov for 2 months. He will be kept in a pre-trial detention center. The court rejected Smirnov's requests to place him under house arrest or under a written undertaking not to leave.
4. The investigation into the theft of 1 billion rubles (initially they talked about 200 million) during the construction of fortifications continues, and new defendants may appear in the case.
5. Of course, the problems of organizing defense in the Kursk region in August 2024 are not limited to theft during the construction of fortifications.
I believe this is a long-term story.

For the heap. Official statement from the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

"Investigators from the Investigative Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia have brought charges against former deputy governors of the Kursk region, Alexey Smirnov and Alexey Dedov. Alexey Smirnov was the governor of the region for some time. They are defendants in a criminal case of fraud committed as part of an organized group using their official position. The
former officials were detained as part of the investigation of a criminal case on the theft of budget funds in the amount of more than 1 billion rubles. They were allocated to JSC "Kursk Region Development Corporation" for the construction of fortifications on the region's border with Ukraine.
Earlier, three heads of the Corporation, as well as heads of commercial organizations that received budget funds and failed to carry out the necessary construction work, were detained on suspicion of this crime. They were taken into custody.
During the investigation, it was preliminarily established that the two former deputy governors led members of an organized group and, together with the management of JSC "Kursk Region Development Corporation", organized the theft of budget funds.
On April 15 and 16, the defendants were detained by investigators of the Investigative Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia with the operational support of employees of the Main Directorate for Economic Security and Combating Corruption of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia and the FSB of Russia. The suspects were taken to Moscow and charged with a crime under Part 4 of Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Investigators plan to apply to the Meshchansky District Court of Moscow with a petition to choose a preventive measure for the accused in the form of detention,"

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9786890.html

Museum of Collaborator Krasnov Closed in Rostov Region
April 17, 8:58



In the Rostov region, the FSB has finally closed down the scandalous museum of the ataman-collaborator Krasnov, where since the 2000s there had been a no less scandalous monument to Krasnov, who served the Nazis.
Since Krasnov and Shukhevych served the same German masters, Banderites often pointed to this fact when they were reproached for monuments and museums to Bandera and Shukhevych.
Now, thanks to the FSB, this argument has been eliminated.
Museums, monuments, plaques and other "memorial signs" dedicated to those who served the Nazis have no place on Russian territory.
The very fact that such a "museum" exists is a disgrace.
There is an opinion that if it were not for the SVO, it would have continued to stand.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9786803.html

Google Translator

[blindpig]

Eugene Doyle: Disruption: historians challenge Russophobic propaganda
April 17, 2025
By Eugene Doyle, Solidarity, 3/29/25

The Germans have a word for it – as they always do. Putinversteher – one who “understands” Putin. It is meant as a slur and has recently gained traction in Western IR (international relations) circles but Professor Geoffrey Roberts, a British historian of Russia, embraces the term. “I think it’s a very good term,” he told me last week. “It’s my professional responsibility to try to understand Putin.”

He is one of a growing number of ‘free thinkers’ who are rejecting the standard Western propaganda model that frames Putin and Russia as merchants of evil, instead ascribing to them motives that are both pragmatic and commonplace. This leaves plenty of room to criticize Putin’s regime and its hardball geopolitics. These academics, however, have shouldered the intellectual’s role to challenge the dominant narrative and expose underlying untruths (“Russia’s totally unprovoked war”, “Russia wants to conquer all of Ukraine”, “If we don’t stop them in Ukraine, the Russians will keep going”, etc).

“That stuff is absolute nonsense,” Roberts says. “Yeah, Putin does have ambitions; he has ambitions to change the global polity in ways that will suit Russia and Russia’s interests.”

“Putinversteher” and Putin’s vision for a post-war world

Professor Roberts has sat in rooms with Putin, heard him speak at length, and unlike 99% of people in the West has taken the time to study his words unmediated by the various arms of the Western media. He seeks to disrupt the perceptions of a world misinformed by cartoonish good guy/bad guy narratives that make resolving crises all but impossible.

“Putin is a visionary whose overarching goal is to end American global hegemony”, Roberts says, “and usher in a new, post-Western system of international relations – a multipolar system of sovereign states based on diversity, equality and common security. It is not an empire that Putin is seeking to build, but a new world order that will safeguard the long-term security of Russia and its civilisational values.”

Back in October I wrote an article “US is spending $28 billion to colonise your brain” which outlined the staggering sums of money spent on US disinformation/perception management campaigns which involve owning journalists, editors and entire media outlets, and which seeks to dominate our mental landscape by purging alternative voices. Swimming in this ocean of Russophobic, Sinophobic propaganda makes it all but impossible to assess Russia, the Chinese or, until recently, the Palestinians, in anything approaching a balanced way.

Former head of the CIA Russia desk George Beebe spoke eloquently recently of the duty of analysts to “empathise” with the Russians, to walk in their shoes – which, he pointed out, is different to “sympathising” with the Russians (accepting their positions). Along with former US Ambassador to Moscow Jack Matlock, Quincy Institute scholar Anatol Lieven and people like Pascal Lottaz, Professor Glenn Diesen and others, Geoffrey Roberts enriches our thinking at a time when the Western media seems incapable of nuanced dialogue.

Fellow British historian Robert Skidelsky, a member of the House of Lords, spoke on Neutrality Studies last week about the danger of dragging out the war in Ukraine and having endless hostility with Russia.

“The whole European position is disingenuous. It’s misleading. It’s self-deluding. It’s as though people have had bits of their brains lobotomized so they can’t think about these things any longer. I find it terrifying.”

This is why, for all the madness, dangers and incoherence, the Trump Moment may at least be a circuit breaker, an opportunity for the West to rediscover the lost art of diplomacy.

Challenging Putin Myths
Geoffrey Roberts has 50 years of scholarship on Russia and the Soviet Union behind him. The author of many books, including Stalin’s General: The Life of Georgy Zhukov (who led the Soviet victory at the Battle of Stalingrad) and The Soviet Union in World Politics: Coexistence, Revolution and Cold War, 1945-1991 (The Making of the Contemporary World), he has also penned innumerable articles trying to build understanding.

“One of the things I’ve been trying to do all my life is counter this vilification of Russia and, more recently, the demonization of Putin – the complete distortion of Putin’s views.”

Historians like Geoff Roberts prefer the long view, looking at events from a distance, which helps them to be as dispassionate, as objective as possible. But sometimes history calls historians to comment when the smell of cordite is still in the air.

In terms of Russophobic propaganda, Roberts says, the last three years have been more toxic than anything he has seen. It has compelled him, he says, to eschew some of his scholarly habits – being an “archive rat” – and step into the ring.

Through articles, interviews, YouTube platforms and his own email database he seeks “to provide alternative perspectives and to cut through the propaganda blizzard in respect to Ukraine. I also do it to make sense of it myself.”

His 2022 article “Now or Never: The Immediate Origins of Putin’s Preventative War on Ukraine” appeared in various outlets, including the Journal of Military and Strategic Studies. It made a significant contribution to the discussion. In June last year Brave New Europe published his “Negotiate Now, or Capitulate Later: Ten Incentives for Ukraine to Make Peace with Russia” which spelt out in crisp and sober terms the stark realities that are increasingly obvious to everyone today: Ukraine faces a crushing defeat if they press on, the West is indifferent to the death of Ukrainians, the demographic crisis is real, and to save Odessa and access to the Black Sea, Ukraine should pursue a settlement now.

Most Ukrainians, Roberts says, now believe that even a bad peace will be better than the continuation of a disastrous losing war. Delaying and fighting on makes no sense. As some have argued for years: Ukraine would have a brighter future as a bridge between Russia and the rest of Europe, not as a fortified outpost for either side.

The courage to oppose a dominant discourse comes at a price. Powerful forces are pressing in on academics and others who dare to express alternative views. Staying silent or parroting the party line is the safer option. Geoff Roberts is made of sterner stuff.

“I had that option of keeping quiet, keeping my head down. But at a certain moment, I guess in 2014 when the crisis broke, I felt compelled to comment. It’s been easier for me to dissent because I’m retired. I’m loathe to criticise anyone in academia for not speaking out. But there are younger academics who dare to speak truth to the powerless. For me, they are the true heroes of the resistance to Russophobia.”

I admire independent thinkers like Geoffrey Roberts. They risk vilification in order to foster truth and the understanding that Ukraine is a thorny issue with faults on all the many sides of this disaster. Without this healthy perspectivism, making peace and moving forward is blocked. Does that make me a Putinversteher? So be it. Ich bin Putinversteher.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/04/eug ... ropaganda/

Reuters: Russia says it is not easy to agree Ukraine peace deal with US
April 17, 2025
Reuters, 4/15/25

Summary

-Russia says not easy to agree Ukrainian peace

-Russia will not give up lands in Ukraine

-Russia will never depend on the West again

-Globalisation of world economy is over, Lavrov says

MOSCOW, April 15 (Reuters) – Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that it was not easy to agree with the United States on the key parts of a possible peace deal to end the war in Ukraine and that Russia would never again allow itself to depend economically on the West.

U.S. President Donald Trump, who says he wants to be remembered as a peacemaker, has repeatedly said he wants to end the “bloodbath” of the three-year war in Ukraine, though a deal has yet to be agreed.

The Reuters Tariff Watch newsletter is your daily guide to the latest global trade and tariff news. Sign up here.

“It is not easy to agree the key components of a settlement. They are being discussed,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in an interview with the Kommersant newspaper when asked if Moscow and Washington had agreement on some aspects of a possible peace deal.

“We are well aware of what a mutually beneficial deal looks like, which we have never rejected, and what a deal looks like that could lead us into another trap,” Lavrov said in the interview published in Tuesday’s edition.

The Kremlin on Sunday said that it was too early to expect results from the restoration of more normal relations with Washington.

Lavrov said that Russia’s position had been set out clearly by President Vladimir Putin in June 2024, when Putin demanded Ukraine must officially drop its NATO ambitions and withdraw its troops from the entirety of the territory of four Ukrainian regions claimed by Russia.

“We’re talking about the rights of the people who live on these lands. That is why these lands are dear to us. And we cannot give them up, allowing people to be kicked out of there,” Lavrov said.

Russia currently controls a little under one fifth of Ukraine, including Crimea, which Russia annexed in 2014, and parts of four other regions Moscow now claims are part of Russia – a claim not recognised by most countries.

Lavrov praised Trump’s “common sense” and for saying that previous U.S. support of Ukraine’s bid to join the NATO military alliance was a major cause of the war in Ukraine.

But Russia’s political elite, he said, would not countenance any moves that led Russia back towards economic, military, technological or agricultural dependence on the West.

The globalisation of the world economy, Lavrov said, had been destroyed by sanctions imposed on Russia, China and Iran by the administration of former U.S. President Joe Biden.

Biden, Western European leaders and Ukraine describe Russia’s 2022 invasion as an imperial-style land grab, and repeatedly vowed to defeat Russian forces.

Putin casts the war in Ukraine as part of a battle with a declining West, which he says humiliated Russia after the Berlin Wall fell in 1989 by enlarging the NATO military alliance and encroaching on what he considers Moscow’s sphere of influence.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/04/reu ... l-with-us/

******

No longer terrorists
April 17, 18:59



The Supreme Court of Russia has officially suspended the ban on the Taliban movement in Russia.
The process of legalizing the Taliban continues. They have been recognized for several years now, but the legal procedures have been taking a little longer.

Accordingly, we can no longer attribute it to a "terrorist organization." In fact, the Taliban has not used terrorist practices since 2021, when the last terrorist attacks against units of the puppet regime of Ashraf Ghani took place. At the moment, the Taliban is mainly busy fighting ISIS, which regularly carries out bloody terrorist attacks.

(Video at link, marginally funny)

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9787936.html

Stalingrad and Leningrad are back on air
April 18, 12:56



Stalingrad and Leningrad are back on air

In radio communications between dispatchers and aircraft crews flying to the airports of St. Petersburg (Pulkovo) and Volgograd (Gumrak) from 00:00 on May 8 to 23:59 on May 10, the former names of these hero cities - Leningrad and Stalingrad - will be used. Rosaviatsia made this decision at the request of industry veterans. The necessary aeronautical information (NOTAM) was published by the State ATM Corporation, subordinate to the agency.

"Temporarily returning the historical names of our hero cities to the airwaves is one of the few things we can do in memory of the feat, courage and fortitude of the defenders and residents of these cities. We suggest that aircraft commanders inform passengers about the features of the festive flights so that everyone arriving or departing from St. Petersburg and Volgograd can once again feel the atmosphere of the Great Victory," said Dmitry Yadrov, head of Rosaviatsia, on this matter.

According to him, the idea of ​​​​temporarily using the names Leningrad and Stalingrad in radio communications was proposed by veterans at a meeting of the Public Council under the Federal Air Transport Agency. The federal agency treated this initiative with all due respect.

https://ukraina.ru/20250417/stalingrad- ... 83807.html - zinc

Actually, a number of Russian cities are officially renamed for several days to old Soviet names (Leningrad, Stalingrad, Stalino, Voroshilovgrad) on the occasion of memorable dates associated with the Great Patriotic War. Now pilots have joined this initiative.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9789305.html

Google Translator

******

(Un)peace treaty: New details of Armenian-Azerbaijani negotiations
April 17, 2025
Rybar

At the recent Anatolian Diplomatic Forum in Turkey, a meeting was held between the Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Azerbaijan, Ararat Mirzoyan and Jeyhun Bayramov. The talks once again confirmed that Baku is not going to soften its position on the conflict settlement.

What are Azerbaijan's main demands?
As before, the country does not intend to conclude peace without changing the Constitution of Armenia . Yerevan does not want to do this publicly yet and reassures the public with words that such things are exclusively an internal matter of the republic.

Baku also insists on the requirement to disband the OSCE Minsk Group for the settlement of the Karabakh conflict. The Armenian side is ready to take this step, but only on the day of signing the "peace" agreement.

In Yerevan, they are trying to smooth over the rough edges by declaring that the text of the peace treaty allegedly contains a clause on a commission to discuss the remaining issues, which will resolve the problems outlined. However, for some reason, the text of the agreement is not shown to the public.

Against this backdrop, the Armenian opposition is outraged that the talks do not raise the issues of prisoners of war held in Baku and the status of the territories where Armenians lived. This illustrates how Yerevan is prepared to make concessions in an effort to quickly conclude “peace.”

At the same time, the mention of the presence in the agreement of a clause on a certain commission to discuss the remaining issues seems to hint that its signing will not remove Azerbaijan’s claims .

After all, the remaining issues in Baku can easily include the Zangezur corridor, demilitarization and the settlement of the regions of Armenia by Azerbaijanis.

https://rybar.ru/nemirnyj-dogovor-novye ... regovorov/

New exercises of Russia and Egypt
April 18, 2025
Rybar



From April 6 to 10, regular exercises "Friendship Bridge-2025" took place in the eastern Mediterranean Sea . On the Russian side, the Northern Fleet forces were involved for the first time.

In the first part of the maneuvers, security forces worked out their inspection actions. In the second part, the armed forces demonstrated a joint repulse of an attack by aircraft of a simulated enemy, the role of which was played by Egyptian F-16s.

The regularity of the exercises underlines the friendly attitude of the Egyptian authorities and their readiness to demonstrate an independent policy. Also, Egypt joined BRICS last year.

For Russia, these exercises are useful in that they provide an opportunity to practice maneuvers against Western types of equipment used by the Egyptian armed forces.

https://rybar.ru/novye-ucheniya-rossii-i-egipta/

Google Translator

[blindpig]

Putin's Visit to Bauman Moscow State Technical University: Talks with Students & Space Activities
Several combined events
Karl Sanchez
Apr 18, 2025


The university complex

Visit to the Bauman Moscow State Technical University. With First Deputy Prime Minister Denis Manturov (right) and Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin. Explanations are given by the rector of MSTU Mikhail Gordin. Photo: Sergey Karpukhin, TASS
The university complex

Here’s how the Kremlin described the day’s activities:

The head of state began the visit with an inspection of the complex of dormitories and the leisure center "Spectrum". Vladimir Putin was shown the living rooms of students, a co-working area and a food court, the Novoselye information center. Then, at the University Congress Center, the President got acquainted with the developments of MSTU, including including in the field of space, quantum technologies, mechanical engineering. Vladimir Putin also presented a model of the Quantum Park building - an interdisciplinary cluster advanced technologies, which will bring together 25 unique laboratories.

At the end of the inspection, the head of state talked with Bauman students.

In addition, the President of the National Research Center "Kurchatov Institute" Mikhail Kovalchuk told Vladimir Putin about the development of nuclear power plants and their application in space.

MSTU is one of the oldest higher technical educational institutions Russia and was founded on July 13, 1830. The University Development Strategy until 2030 is aimed at transforming it into a full-cycle university and maximum integration into the scientific and technological agenda of the state.

As part of the implementation of the federal project "Creation of a network of modern Campuses" in 2021-2024, 14 buildings of MSTU were built and restored, including the complex of dormitories "Spectrum" and "Strela," the congress center, exhibition and educational media space "Palace of Technologies." Total designed capacity of the new campus is for 8.9 thousand students.

So, overall quite a lot of activity at what appears to be an excellent place to learn. We’ll begin with Putin’s meeting with students after his tour of the facilities that the video indicates lasted about 20 minutes:

M. Gordin: These are a few of our students. The most active of them participate in various organizations, engineering centers, and student design bureaus. And they would certainly like to ask some questions.

Vladimir Putin: But not very difficult ones. You are welcome.

My question is: Does anyone live on these new campuses?

Tatyana Gorshkova: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: Where are you from?"

Tatyana Gorshkova: I'm from Ivanov.

Vladimir Putin: And when did you check in here?

Tatyana Gorshkova: I moved to a new hostel in August.

Vladimir Putin: Do you like it?

Tatyana Gorshkova: Yes, of course.

Vladimir Putin: And who lives with you?

Tatyana Gorshkova: Students of my own department live with me. I'm in my third year, my roommate is in her fourth year, and two roommates are in their sixth year. We communicate, I gain experience from them.

Vladimir Putin: This is what the rector was talking about. Communication is very important. Different courses and areas of study?

Tatyana Gorshkova: No, it's the same direction, they're just a little older.

Vladimir Putin: That's great. Congratulations on this campus.

Tatyana Gorshkova: Thank you.

S. Vostrikova: Good afternoon!

My name is Sofia Vostrikova. I am a fifth-year student of the Department of Special Life Support Systems, Refrigeration and Cryogenic Engineering.

Until recently, Russia actively cooperated with European countries in the creation of space projects, which are currently suspended.

In this regard, I have a question: is it planned to resume these projects and how important is Russia's participation in international space programs?

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: You probably understand even better than I do how important cooperation is in such a complex, science-intensive field as space. Everything is packed with ideas and modern technologies.

Russia is active, and the Soviet Union at one time, then Russia actively began to interact with partners, and until recently we worked with Europeans. As you said, [cooperation] has been suspended, but you did not say on whose initiative–-not on our initiative, but on the initiative of the Europeans.

By the way, we continue to cooperate with the Americans in space. No matter what, everything continues. And the Europeans decided to suspend it. It's their choice. But how important is it for both us and our partners? It says that, despite the fact that our European partners have stopped cooperating with us, practically reduced it to zero, nevertheless, Russian equipment is still working at their stations, at their facilities, including, in my opinion, for the study of Mars, and so on. That is, what we did, whether or not we did it together, it is still working. So it's important to them, too. They also curtailed cooperation, but the devices were not seized, the devices are still working.

As for cooperation with other countries, with the United States, as I said, it continues, and Roscosmos is in contact with NASA. In what year, in 1975, did we have the first docking, Soyuz-19 – or what kind of Soyuz was there? "and the Apollo." And since then, cooperation began, which then resulted in the international space station. This work continues, and I repeat, we are in contact with NASA. By the way, when the Soyuz–Apollo spacecraft docked–-in my opinion, it was in 1975--there is a very interesting moment there. Maybe you know about it, and if you don't, I'll tell you. It was planned that the docking would take place over Moscow. In fact, it actually happened over the Elbe. Exactly 30 years earlier, Soviet and American troops met there, delivering the final blow to Nazi Germany. And exactly 30 years later, in 1975, Apollo and Soyuz docked just above the Elbe.

Since then, the International Space Station has been established and operating. Now there are all sorts of ideas about how it should finish the work, how, what we will have to do next. But I am sure that the work will certainly continue, including with new partners.

We have big plans with the People's Republic of China-–interesting, good and grandiose, with the BRICS countries in general: with India, with South Africa, with Brazil. This cooperation does not stop and cannot stop, because so many countries are interested in this cooperation. Moreover, we were and still are leaders in many areas. This means that we are of interest to our partners. I'm sure it will continue.

A. Eichler: I will ask a question to develop the topic of international cooperation.

Hello!

I am Artem Eichler, a second-year student of the Department of Spacecraft and Launch Vehicles, founded by Sergey Pavlovich Korolev.

I am an activist of the Youth Space Center and dream of working on a manned mission to Mars after graduating from university.

Do you think I will be able to do this? Do you plan to create such a project in Russia?

Vladimir Putin: You know, there is a man in the States where he lives, Musk, who, you can say, is delusional about Mars. Such people do not often appear in the human population–-charged with a certain idea. If it seems improbable even today, then after some time such ideas are often realized. Just as the ideas of the same Korolev, our pioneers, were implemented in their time. It seemed incredible–-some of the plans that they made, but everything came true.

The project to fly to Mars is very complex, and today it seems very difficult to implement. If you're interested, you probably know about it. The first thing that needs to be solved is the problem of a long and safe human stay in space, and not just in near space, but in deep space, because there are different amounts, degrees, and power of radiation.

Second, we need to address the issue of new ways of transmitting information. It is very important.

The third is to provide energy for future facilities, including those that humanity plans to implement in relation to Mars.

But in general, of course, this is a grandiose and interesting task. I am sure that it will attract more and more supporters.

We also have certain plans for exploring deep space–-both the Moon and Mars. Let me remind you that once we were the first to carry out an automatic landing on a planet where 400-500 degrees Celsius, but this was done. It seems incredible, but nevertheless many projects are being implemented. It seems to me that this one is finally being implemented.

In Soviet times, the song was very popular: "And on Mars there will be apple trees in bloom." I don't know about apple trees, but in general, of course, this is what humanity will strive for. It's great that you are now thinking about it and planning your participation.

Today, right now, we will talk directly about the plans for the development of Roscosmos, our space activities, and we will also talk about this, about deep space.

A. Eichler: Thank you.

Evgeny Vokhminov: I have just a question to continue the topic of Mars exploration.

I am a student of the department" Plasma power plants", I am extremely interested in this topic and, like many Baumans, I am inspired by the exploration of deep space. It seems to me that with the help of plasma propulsion systems, this will be much faster and more energy efficient.

Vladimir Vladimirovich, please tell us whether in the coming years support will be created for the development of projects on plasma engine building and [will there be] international cooperation on plasma science?

Vladimir Putin: We are certainly leaders in this area, although we could and should have done much more in practice than we have done so far. We could have done this if we had worked more purposefully on this topic.

If you are interested in this, you probably know that in principle, these ideas were born in the 60s, these are the three "K": Keldysh, Korolev and Kurchatov. They were engaged in this, and there are good developments.

Of course, when we talk about deep space, we are attractive to our potential partners, including because we have similar developments. The flow of this fuel is much, tens of times faster than that of thermal devices, any other power plants, electric motors. But this is very promising both from the point of view of movement, movement of objects, and from the point of view of energy sources for the implementation of those projects that are related to deep space. One of the most promising [directions]. Without this, deep space exploration is hardly possible, and this is our competitive advantage. We'll also talk about this today.

V. Kameneva: In continuation of the project, I would like to ask a question.

My name is Veronika, I am now a post-graduate student, head of the Space Technology department at the Bauman Moscow State Technical University. I've always wanted to do space exploration since I was a child, and I can finally do it here. At the same time, I am creating a project for a small-sized Zoryanka lander, which will promptly deliver various experiments both from orbital stations and from low-Earth orbits. A Russian orbital station is currently being developed, which is very interesting from the point of view of conducting experiments in circumpolar orbits.

In this regard, the question is: do you think it is possible to fully implement student initiative projects both in the Russian space station and in Russian cosmonautics in general?

Vladimir Putin: Not only is it possible, but it is necessary. But they should certainly be competitive, they should preferably be one step ahead. We have design bureaus, design bureaus, and design bureaus, which I think are now established in more than 70 regions of the Russian Federation, 76, I think, and in more than 200 universities. These design bureaus, I don't know, maybe the rector knows, are already somewhere over 600. And through these structures, it is quite possible to offer your own developments and solutions. But we must, of course, make sure that they are competitive.

A colleague and I were just talking about navigation elements. I asked him: "What's their accuracy?" "A few dozen meters." And it would be desirable-however, for different purposes you need different devices—up to a meter. This is a very important point. And other indicators. Maybe in this case we were talking about other tasks, but I'm just giving you an example: we need all this to be competitive. Taking into account the opportunities that Bauman has, I think it is possible to achieve this competitiveness. We will do our best to ensure that your ideas are implemented in the future, and even now. There is no need to postpone it for the period when the Russian station will start working.

A. Kameneva: Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: You're welcome. Thank you for the idea.

Igor Zaichkin: Vladimir Vladimirovich, to continue the topic of competitive developments.

My name is Zaichkin Ivan, I am a sixth-year student of the Department "Spacecraft and launch vehicles".

In 2017, at the Sirius Educational Center, when I was still a schoolboy, I presented you the first school satellite.

Vladimir Putin: As I remember now. (Laughter) In 2017, right?

Igor Zaichkin: Yes, 2017.

In 2018, it was sent into orbit, and the spacecraft was operating successfully.

Vladimir Putin: And he flew, didn't he? Great. I congratulate you

Igor Zaichkin: It has even burned up in the atmosphere, and it has fulfilled all its tasks. Actually, the case was not abandoned. After six years of studying at the university, I became…

Vladimir Putin: So you visited Sirius and then entered Bauman?

Igor Zaichkin: Yes, I was at Sirius twice, then I entered Bauman and continued to develop my specialty.

Vladimir Putin: Where did you study, at what school, when did you go to Sirius ?

I. Zaichkin: Lyceum "Second school".

Vladimir Putin: That's great.

I am particularly pleased that you have passed through Sirius, which I also have something to do with.

I. Zaichkin: This is a very significant place that has changed a lot in the lives of so many people. Many of us have stayed in the subject, continue to work in the industry and develop it, just like me.

I continue my development as a student. During my training, I became a developer of my own systems for eight Bauman spacecraft, which were launched by the Roscosmos State Corporation under the UniverSat program. Thanks to this, we were able not only to create something new, but also, as students, to get real practical experience in developing new hardware, which is very necessary for engineers.

Vladimir Putin: What functions do your devices perform?

Igor Zaichkin: You were told about our devices in the previous audience. Studying space weather…

Vladimir Putin: So this is exactly what you did?

Igor Zaichkin: Yes, I am a developer of communication systems for them.

Vladimir Putin: That's great.

Igor Zaichkin: But, unfortunately, the program for launching university apparatuses ends this year.

Vladimir Putin: We need to extend it.

Igor Zaichkin: Mr President, please do so.

Vladimir Putin: You were "understood," as they sometimes say in the countryside.

M. Gordin: They [student satellites] as a passing load are launched for free…

Vladimir Putin: Good. We need to extend it.

Igor Zaichkin: Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you.

Dmitry Voropanov: Mr President, good afternoon!

My name is Denis Voropanov. I am a student of the "Advanced Engineering School", studying under the network educational program "Project management of cryogenic power propulsion systems development".

In 2024, I managed to pass a competitive selection for an internship organized on the basis of TsENKI JSC at the Yuzhny Space Center at the Baikonur cosmodrome. This experience has taught me the main thing: even the most difficult and ambitious tasks can be achieved when specialists from different fields combine their knowledge and enthusiasm.

I have a question for you: do you think it is possible to introduce grant support for internships at key cosmodromes in the country, such as Baikonur and Vostochny, in order to increase the interest of young specialists in the rocket and space field?

Vladimir Putin: I do not know through what channels, but since you did an internship, [this] is supported–-both by Roscosmos and other institutions.

Of course, it is absolutely necessary to do this in order to maintain interest, so that people who have a future in the profession, of course, are determined more precisely with what they are going to do and would like to do. Of course, we need to do this.

I will now talk to the head of Roscosmos, who was born in Baikonur, by the way, he told me recently. Therefore, both on the East, and here, and I think that on some-why not? At the Ministry of Defense, too, it may well pass. Why not? Sure. Moreover, you have dual-use topics very often, and almost everywhere dual-use. So why not? Definitely need to do. I'll definitely talk to my colleagues right now, okay?

And the source of funding–-in this case, this is not a problem, because it is not some kind of project.… this isn't a trip to Mars.

N. Korshakov: My name is Nikita Korshakov.

I will move a little away from the subject of space. I am a post-graduate student at Bauman Moscow State Technical University, and I am also a junior researcher at the Dukhov VNIIA.

At our new campus, in the Quantum Park cluster, I develop superconducting quantum processors for next-generation supercomputers and data centers.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, I was told.

Nikolai Korshakov: Yes, we had an exhibition [at the exhibition presented].

Why do we need this at all? The use of quantum technologies will allow our country to develop faster and more efficiently in various fields of science and technology, as well as in space projects in principle. Thus, we will be able to strengthen our country's position on the world stage in the areas of high technologies and innovations.

What do you think are our prospects for the development and implementation of quantum technologies in the country? And also what is necessary, what steps should we take to achieve technological leadership in this matter?

Vladimir Putin:What steps need to be taken--you know better.

And how much it is necessary is obvious, just now the rector was talking about it, and you just said it yourself.

In principle, we have already started this research and development quite a long time ago, and we are applying it now – (addressing A. Fursenko) Yes, Andrey Aleksandrovich? – we are already applying them in many industries. Therefore, I think that the advantages that quantum technologies provide, without any doubt, as well as artificial intelligence, we should put much more broadly at the service of achieving the final results in technological development. We will definitely do it, there is no doubt about it.

Russian Railways is currently active here…

N. Korshakov: Russian Railways, Rosatom, Sber.

Vladimir Putin: These are still large enterprises with a good financial base. But the state will also support you. We will work, no doubt. Good luck to you.

Mikhail Gordin: Mr President, we have a tradition. Dmitry Andreevich Sulegin is the vice-rector for educational work, and he will tell you about it.

Dmitry Sulegin: Dear Vladimir Vladimirovich,

We, Baumans, love and honor values and traditions very much and always try to pass them on from generation to generation, because we believe that without them it is impossible to raise a real engineer.

Let me briefly tell you about one of our traditions. Students of our university, when defending their diploma, wear a white helmet to confirm their status, they are proud of being awarded the qualification of an engineer. And after that, they collect signatures from their close people, favorite teachers, mentors who accompanied them in the process of student life.

Our students and I have also prepared for you such a small gift from our university – our Bauman helmet with the signatures of the best students of our university. We'll give it to you as a gift.

Vladimir Vladimirovich, we have a request: could you leave us a hard hat as a keepsake? It will take its rightful place in memory of your visit.

Thank you very much.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you. [My Emphasis]


Vladimir Putin signed on the Bauman engineering helmet. Photo: Kristina Kormilitsyna, Rossiya Segodnya International Information Agency

If you recall, in the epic film 2001: A Space Odyssey, one of the main characters was named Dr. Dave Bowman. Bauman is very similar, yes. Of course, the real historical Bauman was no scientist but a Bolshevik activist with a florid history, and it was for the latter reason the university bears his name. I don’t know if Arthur C. Clarke knew of that connection or not, but I don’t think I’m the only one to have seen that possibility.

Now, we get to read about the meeting on the development of space activities Putin mentioned when talking to the Baumanites. Unfortunately, we don’t get to read the entire discussion as the transcript is confined to Putin’s opening remarks:

Vladimir Putin: Dear colleagues,

Our focus today is on the long–term development of the domestic space industry. Addressing this topic is always a special responsibility to the pioneers of space, to those people who set the highest bar for us.

Just recently, on April 12, we all celebrated Cosmonautics Day together, the day when the first person flew into space, and this person was our compatriot Yuri Alekseyevich Gagarin. The memory of his feat still unites all generations of our citizens.

I would like to once again congratulate industry veterans, cosmonauts, and military personnel of the Russian Aerospace Forces on this past holiday, and thank all employees of state–owned enterprises and private space companies–-and we also have such employees, thank God--as well as employees of scientific organizations and universities, and, of course, for their hard work., the team of the legendary Baumanka, where our meeting is taking place. Among its graduates are a whole galaxy of famous cosmonauts, outstanding scientists and designers.

The best traditions of personnel training are developing and multiplying these days, and, as we have seen, in the new campus as well. It creates modern conditions for obtaining the required competencies. Of course, we will implement such projects in other cities of Russia as well.

You may have noticed that a short conversation took place just now during our acquaintance with Baumanka and with students and postgraduates of the university.

I ask the Government and Roscosmos to carefully work out the proposals made during the conversation. The guys have a lot of good ideas, they understand the challenges facing the industry, and they believe that the contribution of young people to the implementation of the space program should increase--it's hard not to agree with this. I ask you to support these ideas once again.

In this regard, I would like to remind you… I have already mentioned cosmonauts, and a whole galaxy of cosmonauts came out of Baumanka there, and I think the whole crew was formed at one time from graduates and researchers–-let me remind you that Korolev was also a student of Baumanka. Here he not only studied but also designed a model of a light-engine aircraft as a thesis, and then, as you know, three decades later, together with a team of like-minded people, he ensured the primacy of our country in space. So the traditions here are serious and fundamental.

Today, our plans in this crucial area should correspond to the historical status of our country as an advanced space power. It is absolutely necessary to build up the potential of the national space program so that it is the flagship, one of the key driving forces of our entire national development, technological renewal of the economy and improvement of the quality of life of citizens.

It is precisely in this logic that in October 2023 we spoke about the need to develop a comprehensive, systematic national project in the field of space activities. It is designed to cover all the most important areas for Russia: from the creation of its own multi-satellite groups for various purposes and a national orbital station to deep space exploration programs.

In March, at a meeting with the head of Roscosmos, Dmitry Vladimirovich Bakanov–-who is also here and will speak--we agreed that the new national project will be approved in the very near future, so that as part of the preparation of the federal budget for 2026 and for subsequent years, until 2028, it will be financed in the nearest future in full. Today I would like to tell you about the progress of work on this key element of the national project.

Dear colleagues, what fundamental issues do I consider it necessary to pay special attention to? First of all, the national project should clearly and concretely formulate both the immediate and long-term goals of the Russian space program. This will make it possible to set subject tasks for science, the education and training system right now without delay–-and these are, I emphasize, key components of the implementation of all technology leadership projects.

Of course, you need to identify clear investment guidelines for technology companies. So, together with business, an entire industry of space communication services, navigation, and satellite data acquisition and analysis will have to be formed on the horizon of 2030. Of course, in order to guarantee the quality and availability of such products and services, we must have our own advanced competitive solutions.

In this regard, I believe that it is absolutely necessary to provide support to domestic universities, research organizations, design bureaus, and private companies, which I have already mentioned and which are working on platform solutions for multi-satellite groups, within the framework of a relevant national project. This includes the development of methods for mathematical modeling and data processing, instrument and component bases, optical equipment, as well as technologies aimed at significantly reducing the cost of space launches.

Another important topic is the domestic nuclear space power industry. As part of the national project, it is necessary to ensure a qualitative step forward in its implementation. I am referring to the creation of electric jet engines and other systems necessary for autonomous operation on various space objects.

At first glance, what I am talking about now seems to be the tasks of the future, but in fact, all the leading space powers are actively working on this topic in practice. I will add that the nuclear power plants created by Soviet scientists were already operated in orbit. And at the present stage, taking into account advanced materials and new technologies, qualitatively different, fundamentally new great opportunities are opening up for the implementation of such complex projects.

Russia's undisputed leadership in this area needs to be further developed. In this regard, I propose to discuss today the main parameters of work on the creation of a space system with a special power plant and the so–called space tug—a transport and energy module based on a nuclear power propulsion system. These are large-scale programs that are being implemented with the leading participation of Roscosmos, Rosatom and the Kurchatov Institute.

In this regard, I would like to add that the most important direction of the national project for the development of space activities should be fundamental research of deep space. Russia has serious groundwork here, and significant programs have been launched. First of all, it is the Spektr-RG orbital observatory: a real space laboratory that makes a detailed map of the universe.

Let me also remind you that Russia has unique scientific schools in the field of studying the Moon, Mars and other planets. So, for example, the domestic technology of landing autonomous spacecraft–-I mentioned today and at the meeting with the guys–-on the surface of Venus has not yet been able to recreate or copy anywhere in the world. How many there, I remembered, 500 degrees, in my opinion, yes?

Gennady Krasnikov: President of the Russian Academy Sciences: 450 [degrees] and 70 atmospheres.

Vladimir Putin: We round it up to 500. Anyway, no one has replicated it yet.

I also ask the President of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Gennady Yakovlevich Krasnikov, to explain in detail what research areas are planned to be included in the national project, what tasks we need to set for ourselves, and what additional solutions are needed for their successful implementation.

Dear colleagues, we are well aware that any space projects are always complex and require significant financial investments, but they are vital for Russia as a large and sovereign country if we want to remain so and continue to develop in this capacity.

I would like to emphasize that it is important to identify clear and stable sources of funding for the domestic space program, because what we do in the space sector in the coming years will determine our development for decades to come. At the same time, the scientific knowledge and technologies obtained must necessarily be converted into advanced developments to achieve national goals, to develop the Arctic, and to build up the country's defense capability.

In general, the national space project is designed to become one of the end-to-end, integral for all national projects of technological leadership, to accelerate the practical implementation of many fundamentally new technical solutions, including information transfer using quantum and photonic technologies, to promote the development of robotics, advanced materials, microelectronics, bio - and medical technologies in our country, to accelerate the creation and implementation of deployment of unmanned systems.

I would also like to add that Russia's technological achievements, especially in the field of deep space exploration, can become a very significant contribution to international programs, and we are open to such cooperation and are ready to implement joint projects. We will definitely discuss the formats of interaction with our partners from other space powers.

Let's move on to the discussion. Please give the floor to Roscosmos CEO Dmitry Vladimirovich Bakanov. [My Emphasis]

As many kids coming of age during the 1960s, I was a Spacenik, experimented with model rockets and closely followed NASA’s activities. Before I saw the movie. I read Clarke’s 2001. And of course, I was a Trekkie and immediate fan of Star Wars. I was fascinated by Isaac Asimov because he was such a prolific writer and only later became a fan of his SciFi works. When the ISS’s first components were launched into orbit, I wanted to build a model of the completed station but lacked the money. In the 1990s, I became involved with designing food support systems for long distance space flight that assumed the radiation issue would be resolved. I learned more about how vastly different closed versus open systems were in reality and the very real problems related to long-term life support. I only learned about the huge issue related to radiation protection in the early 2000s that still remains the main roadblock today—we can do the moon and near-Earth asteroids, but not the objects beyond. IMO, propulsion issues will be solved well before the radiation issues; however, even non-organic materials are subject to grave damage from radiation meaning that even humanoid robots will find space travel dangerous. Robotic Lunar mining operations would also need to pay close attention to Space Weather. It’s hoped materials science can eventually create a solution.

As Putin mentioned, Roscosmos and NASA still talk and most recently their discussions have been about how to deorbit the ISS so it causes negligible terrestrial damage. As those following the topic know, China is the most active nation with a manned space program, although its timeline for establishing the International Lunar Research Station continues to be rolled back from the initial goal of 2030 to 2035. This very current—published today—op/ed article in Space*News details some of the issues and domestic US politics in play, with the scientific issues being shared challenges, although both Russia and China are better positioned than the USA.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/putins-v ... scow-state

*******

Cleanse Russia of external and internal enemies
April 18, 19:00



The new governor of the Kursk region, Khinshtein, commented on the arrests of his "predecessors", calling them "internal enemies".
He also spoke about the fraudulent schemes that operated under the arrested ex-governor.

Cleanse Russia of external and internal enemies

The day before, following the former governor of the Kursk region Alexey Smirnov, the court also placed his long-time associate, the former chairman of the regional government Alexey Dedov (on the left in the photo) under arrest. Let me remind you ( https://t.me/mediamvd/38147) that both of them are accused of fraud in the construction of defensive structures, which was carried out by the infamous Kursk Region Development Corporation (KRKO). It is important to explain that initially this structure (a joint-stock company with 100% participation of the region) was created exclusively as a project office to support investors, but through the efforts of officials it turned into a real super-monopoly. Along with defensive structures (₽19.4 billion), KRKO built FAPs and aviation infrastructure in the region, received land for KRT (we have already stopped one such construction in Zheleznogorsk), ( https://t.me/Hinshtein/10127 ) bought up alcoholic beverage brands and even almost became the sole supplier of medicines ( https://t.me/Hinshtein/9021 ) for the needs of the region (the corresponding resolution of the regional government was prepared just before my appointment, but I, of course, blocked it). In total, tens of billions of budget rubles passed through KRKO. How much of it was stolen is an open question. Suffice it to say that the court of first instance has already satisfied ( https://t.me/Hinshtein/10363 ) the claim of the Prosecutor General's Office to recover ₽4.1 billion to the budget. The funds were allocated for the construction of fortifications, but were appropriated by the management of KRKO and their contractors (we fully supported ( https://t.me/Hinshtein/10363 ) this claim in court). Since the end of last year alone, more than ten (!) criminal cases related to KRKO have been opened in the Kursk region (some of them were subsequently combined). To date, along with the ex-governor and the ex-chairman of the government, the director of the Corporation ( https://t.me/Hinshtein/8787 ) Vladimir Lukin (pictured on the right), three (!) of his former deputies, as well as a number of heads of contractor companies have been arrested. But there are also criminal cases being investigated in parallel in Ivanovo, where the same people - the heads and contractors of KRKO - were caught embezzling during major repairs of apartment buildings. (Previously, Lukin worked as an adviser on housing and communal services to the governor of the Ivanovo region, but when he moved to Kursk in 2021, he took many of his accomplices and subordinates with him, where they have already deployed in full force. At least three defendants ( https://t.me/sudrfkursk/10244 ) in the multi-billion anti-corruption lawsuit of the Prosecutor General's Office, not counting Lukin himself, have an "Ivanovo trace". Among them are the former heads of the Department of Housing and Communal Services and the Capital Repairs Fund of the Ivanovo Region).

The previous leaders of the Kursk region - Smirnov, Dedov and others - simply could not help but see who was being trusted with billions of budget money. On the contrary, they deliberately turned a project mini-office into the largest state contractor, which had neither the necessary competence, nor experience, nor even a basic staff of specialists.

The prosecutor's office and other law enforcement agencies repeatedly pointed this out to the region's leaders, but there was no proper response. Why - is clearly visible from the photo I published, where the chairman of the government and the director of KRKO are sitting hugging in frivolous poses.

Alas, the enemy is not only on the other side of the front line. Bribe-takers and corrupt officials undermine the country from within, especially when it comes to theft in the defense sector.

I have no doubt that all persons involved in these multi-billion dollar criminal schemes, unprecedented in cynicism and scale, will be exposed and will be punished as they deserve, regardless of their positions.

For its part, the Kursk region government intends to continue to actively cooperate with law enforcement agencies in restoring order, which I spoke about ( https://t.me/Hinshtein/8601 ) from the very first days of my work in the region. A number of criminal cases of the KRKO have already been initiated based on our requests. ( https://t.me/Hinshtein/9715 )

I express my sincere gratitude to my colleagues from the prosecutor's office, the FSB, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and other law enforcement and supervisory bodies for their integrity and firmness in the matter of anti-corruption cleansing of the Kursk region.

I believe that our land will be liberated not only from external, but also from internal enemies.

https://t.me/Hinshtein - zinc

The headline is in the style of the Pravda newspaper from 1937.
But the message is correct - in a war situation, a thief is an internal enemy. Let's see how much the guilty parties will ultimately be given and how much of the stolen goods they will be able to recoup.

P.S. At the same time, it is worth remembering that it was not only the theft of budget money for field fortifications that was the cause of problems in defending the state border in the Kursk region.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9790033.html

Google Translator

******

Armenia is confused again: They laid flowers to the Leningrad blockade survivors and adopted an anti-Russian resolution on the same day.
April 18, 2025
Rybar

Two majors spotted the Chairman of the Armenian Parliament, Alen Simonyan, in St. Petersburg , where he arrived for the CIS summit. Simonyan is the main anti-Russian speaker in Yerevan. However, against the backdrop of the changing geopolitical situation, Armenia decided to show Moscow that it is afraid to break off relations.

Meanwhile, today, Armenian representatives supported the UN resolution containing accusations against Russia . The resolution speaks of "aggression against Ukraine and Georgia" and mentions "the creation of a special tribunal for the crime of aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine . "

It is significant that the US did not support the resolution, as it considers it useless for advancing peace. Azerbaijan and Israel did not participate in the vote.

All the latest statements and actions of the Armenian authorities indicate that support for such resolutions is an absolutely conscious anti-Russian position of Yerevan , as opposed to the imitation of work along the lines of the same CIS. After all, Simonyan in past years demonstratively ignored the sessions of the assembly, and his colleagues sabotaged conferences of the CSTO and other specialized agencies.

And the question arises: why do we accept the "prodigal sons" back when it is convenient for them ? And instead of repentance, Yerevan holds demonstrative actions that are supposed to demonstrate disagreement with Moscow.

I would like our parliamentarians to raise this issue at a meeting with Simonyan, as well as the problem of sabotage of the opening of the Russian Consulate General in the Syunik region.

https://rybar.ru/v-armenii-opyat-zaputa ... -odin-den/

Google Translator

******

Healthy Person Partnership: On V. Putin's Meeting with the Emir of Qatar
April 18, 2025
Rybar

Yesterday in Moscow , negotiations took place between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Emir of Qatar Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani , which became a rare reminder that diplomacy is not a show and statements in the media, but specific agreements.

The meeting between the two leaders covered a wide range of issues: from the Syrian settlement to investment agreements.

More details about the meeting results
First of all, the parties noted that economic cooperation between the two countries has long gone beyond common declarations. Thus, the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) and Qatar Investment Authority launched a $2 billion platform for projects in healthcare, infrastructure and mineral extraction.

The agreements will not only strengthen Qatar's presence in the Russian economy (13 billion dollars have already been invested), but will also open the way for Russian companies to the Middle East markets. V. Putin specifically noted the role of Qatar as a key partner of Rosneft and recalled mutual assistance in organizing the Sochi Olympics and the 2022 World Cup in Qatar .

Another important topic was the discussion of the situation in the Gaza Strip , which revealed the common concerns of the parties, in particular due to the new escalation of the conflict in mid-March. Qatar intends to continue mediation, and Russia is ready to support these efforts.

Notably, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi arrived in Moscow at the same time as the emir's visit . This coincidence suggests a possible attempt by Qatar and Russia to mediate between Tehran and Trump , especially ahead of the new round of talks in Oman .

An equally important issue in the negotiations was the fate of Russian bases in Syria . The Emir of Qatar confirmed that he had contacted Al-Julani , emphasizing in the conversation the advantages of a strategic partnership with Moscow . Some experts write that the leaders could also have discussed S. Lavrov's initiative to use Russian bases as humanitarian hubs.

While the West has long tried to isolate Russia with sanctions, Qatar, despite the pressure, has increased its investments in the Russian economy. And this is not charity, but cold calculation. Doha sees Moscow as a long-term partner capable of providing access to Eurasian markets, and Russia values ​​Qatari capital, free from political prejudices.

Even in the most painful issue – the Syrian conflict – Russia and Qatar eventually found a formula for “constructive interaction.” Now, Doha may indeed be interested in maintaining limited Russian influence in Syria , since this will allow the Turkish and Israeli presence to be somewhat diluted.

The Qatar case once again proves that Russia is ready to deal with those who do not make cooperation dependent on the market situation. Moscow clearly shows that it is possible to trade, put out crises and even argue - but without moralizing and breaking off relations. This is not "friendship of peoples", but business in the genre of "realpolitik", where instead of sanctions there are contracts and common investment funds.

https://rybar.ru/partnerstvo-zdorovogo- ... om-katara/

Google Translator