Russia today

[blindpig]

After Victory Day Celebration Putin's Message
Karl Sanchez
May 11, 2025



Late this evening, Russian President Putin met with media to summarize the celebration’s events. A great deal of writing and speaking was done over the last three days with Putin’s oration capping it all:

Vladimir Putin: Good evening, or maybe good night already. I want to welcome everyone. Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, Dear colleagues!

I would like to once again congratulate all of you on the Great Victory Day! We would like to thank our friends and foreign partners who were in Moscow with us during the anniversary celebrations to pay homage to the generation of winners.

We honor all those who contributed to the common victory over Nazism, including our allies in the anti-Hitler coalition, soldiers of China, members of the anti-fascist resistance in Europe, fighters of the people's liberation movements in Africa, in the Asia-Pacific region, and volunteers from Latin America.

Together with our friends and like-minded people, we share a common memory and respect for history, for the feats of true heroes who fought for freedom, and of course, our responsibility for the future, for building a more just and secure world. The issues that directly affect the stable and sustainable development of the entire world community – Eurasia and other regions of the world – were at the heart of the bilateral and multilateral meetings held in Moscow.

Of course, they were held in a special, solemn, festive atmosphere, but at the same time they were extremely rich and informative, filled with topics on the political, economic and humanitarian agenda.

Summing up, and I would like to do so now, I will say that in four days – from 7 to 10 May – we have hosted events of official visits by the leaders of three foreign countries: the People's Republic of China, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

In addition, 20 bilateral meetings were held with the heads of the CIS countries, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, Europe and Latin America. In total, 27 heads of state from the CIS, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, Europe, Latin America, as well as about 10 heads of international organizations took part in the celebrations. Six other countries were represented at a high level.

We see such a broad participation of delegations from foreign countries and international organizations as inspiring evidence of genuine consolidation around the enduring ideas and values of our common Great Victory.

We are grateful to the leaders of 13 countries who sent units of the national armed forces to participate in the parade on Red Square. Their march shoulder to shoulder with our parade crews filled the general holiday with a special energy, the spirit of military brotherhood, hardened during the Second World War.

I was glad to personally thank the military leaders of the Korean People's Army and convey my warmest words to the soldiers and commanders of the special forces units of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, who, together with our soldiers, professionally, I want to emphasize this, conscientiously performed tasks during the liberation of the border areas of the Kursk region from the formations of the Kiev regime. I would like to emphasize that they showed courage and heroism, acted – I want to say it again-in the highest degree professionally, showed good training and preparation.

And of course, it was a special honor for all the leaders of the two countries to welcome the main heroes of the Victory Anniversary – World War II veterans from Russia, Israel, Armenia, and Mongolia-to the stands.

I would like to note that, despite threats, blackmail and obstacles, including the closure of air space, the leaders of some European countries also came to Moscow: Serbia, Slovakia, Bosnia and Herzegovina. I repeat: we understand what massive pressure they faced, and therefore we sincerely appreciate their political courage, firm moral position, and decision to share the holiday with us, to pay tribute to the memory of the heroes of the Great Patriotic War and World War II, who fought both for their father's home and for getting rid of the brown plague of the whole world, of all mankind without any exaggeration.

It is important for us that millions of Europeans, the leaders of countries that pursue sovereign policies, remember this. This gives us optimism and hope that sooner or later, based on the lessons of history and the opinions of our own peoples, we will start moving towards restoring constructive relations with European states. Including those who today still do not abandon anti-Russian rhetoric and clearly aggressive actions against us. They are still trying, as we can see right now – to talk to us, in fact, in a boorish manner and with the help of ultimatums.

Our comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation with the People's Republic of China can serve as a true example of modern equal relations in the twenty-first century. Chinese President Xi Jinping was the main guest of the celebrations dedicated to the 80th anniversary of the Great Victory.

We have had extremely fruitful negotiations, adopted two joint statements at the level of heads of state, and signed a number of intergovernmental and interdepartmental agreements covering such areas as energy, trade, finance, science, culture and much more. As I have already said, it has been agreed that in September I will pay an official return visit to China to celebrate the 80th anniversary of the Victory over militaristic Japan.

It is deeply symbolic and natural that the main, in fact the main commemorative events related to the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II in Europe and Asia will be held in Moscow and Beijing—in the capitals of states whose peoples went through the most difficult trials and paid the highest price in the name of a common Victory.

Dear colleagues, I think it is obvious to everyone that during the talks and meetings held in Moscow, the issue of resolving the conflict in Ukraine was also raised. We are grateful to all our guests and friends for the attention they pay to this conflict and for the efforts they make to bring this conflict to an end. In this regard, I consider it necessary to focus on this topic separately.

In this regard, I want to say: as you know, Russia has repeatedly made initiatives for a cease-fire, but they–-these initiatives--were repeatedly sabotaged by the Ukrainian side. Thus, the Kiev regime defiantly violated the 30-day–-I want to emphasize this–-30-day moratorium on strikes on energy facilities from March 18 to April 17, about 130 times, which was announced in accordance with our agreement with the President of the United States of America, Donald Trump.

The Easter truce initiated by Russia was also not observed: the ceasefire was violated by Ukrainian formations almost five thousand times. Nevertheless, for the celebration of Victory Day–-and we also consider it a holy holiday for us, you can only imagine how much we lost 27 million--we declared a truce for the third time on this holy holiday for us.

At the same time, we also conveyed to our Western colleagues, who, in my opinion, are sincerely looking for ways to resolve the conflict, our position on this issue, on the ceasefire on Victory Day, that in the future we do not rule out the possibility of extending the terms of this truce–-but, of course, after analyzing what will happen in these few days, based on the results of how the Kiev regime will respond to our proposal.

And what do we see? What are these results? The Kiev authorities–-as you can clearly see for yourself--did not respond at all to our proposal for a cease-fire. Moreover, after the announcement of our proposal–-and this happened, as you may recall, on May 5 of this year-–the Kiev authorities launched large-scale attacks from May 6-7. The strike involved 524 unmanned aerial vehicles and a number of Western-made missiles, while 45 beks–-unmanned boats–-were simultaneously used in the Black Sea. In fact, during the three days of the ceasefire we announced–on the 8th, 9th and 10th—what you also saw from the mass media, in fact, from your reports, it was clear: during this time, five targeted attempts were made to attack the state border of the Russian Federation in eastern Ukraine. in the area of the Kursk region and at the junction with the Belgorod region, exactly during the days of the ceasefire we announced. In addition, 36 more attacks were launched in other directions. All these attacks, including attempts to enter the territory of the Russian Federation in the area of the Kursk region and the Belgorod region, were repulsed. Moreover, our military experts believe that they had no military significance, were conducted solely for political reasons, and the enemy suffered very heavy losses.

As I have already said, the Kiev authorities not only rejected our proposal for a ceasefire, but also, as we have all seen, tried to intimidate the leaders of states gathered for the celebrations in Moscow. You know, dear colleagues, when I met with colleagues here in Moscow, I had this idea. I will share with you: who was tried to intimidate from those who came to Moscow to celebrate the Victory over Nazi Germany? Who were you trying to intimidate? After all, those who came to us are leaders not by their official position, not by their position, but by their character, by their beliefs and by their willingness to defend their beliefs. And who tried to intimidate them? Those who stand to attention in front of and salute and applaud former SS soldiers? And elevates to the rank of national heroes those who collaborated with Hitler during the Second World War? It seems to me that this is an attempt with obviously unsuitable means, and those who are trying to do this do not correspond to the swing that they themselves expect.

I will repeat once again: we have repeatedly proposed steps towards a ceasefire. We have never refused to engage in a dialogue with the Ukrainian side. Let me remind you once again: we did not interrupt the negotiations in 2022, but the Ukrainian side did. In this regard, despite everything, we suggest that the Kiev authorities resume the negotiations that they interrupted at the end of 2022 and resume direct negotiations. And, I emphasize, without any preconditions.

We propose to start without delay next Thursday, May 15, in Istanbul, where they were held earlier and where they were interrupted. As you know, our Turkish colleagues have repeatedly offered their services in organizing such negotiations, and President Erdogan has done a lot to organize them. Let me remind you that as a result of these negotiations, a joint draft document was prepared, and it was initialed by the head of the Kiev negotiating group, but at the insistence of the West, it was simply thrown into the trash.

Tomorrow we are scheduled to have a conversation with the President of Turkey, Mr. Erdogan. I want to ask him to provide such an opportunity for holding negotiations in Turkey. I hope that he will confirm his desire to contribute to the search for peace in Ukraine.

We are committed to serious negotiations with Ukraine. Their purpose is to eliminate the root causes of the conflict, to reach the establishment of a long-term lasting peace in the historical perspective. We do not rule out that during these negotiations we will be able to agree on some new truces, on a new cease-fire. Moreover, a real truce, which would be observed not only by Russia, but also by the Ukrainian side, would be the first step, I repeat, towards a long-term, sustainable peace, and not a prologue to the continuation of the armed conflict after the rearmament, resupply of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the feverish digging of trenches and new strongholds. Who needs such a world?

Our offer is, as they say, on the table. The decision is now up to the Ukrainian authorities and their curators, who, guided, it seems, by their personal political ambitions, and not by the interests of their peoples, want to continue the war with Russia at the hands of Ukrainian nationalists.

I repeat: Russia is ready for negotiations without any preconditions. Now there are military operations, a war, and we offer to resume negotiations that were not interrupted by us. Well, what's wrong with that?

Those who really want peace cannot but support it. At the same time, I would like to once again express my gratitude for the mediation services and efforts made by our foreign partners, including China, Brazil, the countries of Africa, the Middle East, and recently the new Administration of the United States of America, aimed at a peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian crisis.

In conclusion, I would like to once again thank all those who shared with us the festive celebrations dedicated to the 80th anniversary of the Victory over Nazism. I am confident that the spirit of solidarity and harmony that united us in Moscow these days will continue to help us build fruitful cooperation and partnership in the name of progress, security and peace.

Taking this opportunity, I would also like to note the huge role of journalists, representatives of world news agencies, TV channels, and the press who covered the anniversary events, as well as the many-hour program of current negotiations and working meetings. We have done a lot to make people around the world feel the unique atmosphere of the current holidays in Moscow. Of course, I would like to thank you for this meeting, because it is rather late and, of course, everyone is already tired.

Thank you very much for your attention, because it's almost half past one in the morning or even more than half past one in the morning in Moscow, I'm letting you go with God.

Thank you very much for your attention. Goodbye. [My Emphasis]

A very deft move by President Putin, well framed and articulated. An excellent reply to the 30-Day Ceasefire Immediately demanded by Zelensky and crew. The first words from Zelensky’s mouth when he’s finally told he must negotiate must be I rescind my no negotiation decree—anything else is non-credible. It’s rather simple. Russia will continue its SMO until the other side finally capitulates to talks. The point is to force the Nazis and their EU/NATO backers to commit one way or the other as Summer begins. IMO, we’ll find out just how Nazi the EU/EC has become.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/after-vi ... ion-putins

******

North Korea Will Send Troops to Russia If Necessary
May 10, 19:11



Comrade Kim Jong-un said that he will not hesitate to send troops to Russia again to help the Russian army if Western countries dare to attack Russia.

The DPRK has the right to do so under the defensive treaty between the DPRK and Russia, which gives the parties the right to send troops to each other's territory to help in defensive wars against external aggressors. So Russia can also send its contingents to the DPRK to protect Pyongyang from the US, South Korea and Japan. This treaty clearly shows what a direct military alliance is, unlike, say, our complex of relations with China and Iran, which is not so mandatory in military terms. The DPRK is certainly our direct military ally. Of course

, Comrade Kim Jong-un's statements concern not only the war with the US and NATO. This warning also concerns Ukraine - if Ukraine tries to invade the territory of the Russian Federation in the old regions, the DPRK will again participate in these operations, as a result of which the Russian Armed Forces have the option of using 10-20 thousand North Koreans in border battles. There is no talk yet about using North Korean troops in the Donbass or in the southern direction. But in the Belgorod, Bryansk and Kursk regions, their participation in battles on the border is more than possible.

The go-ahead has already been given to perpetuate the memory of the fallen DPRK soldiers in the Kursk region. Monuments and memorials will be created, plus several streets in the Kursk region will be named in honor of the North Koreans who helped us beat the enemy. Of course, North Korea has already received various bonuses for its assistance, in addition to the most valuable combat experience in the war against the NATO proxy army. We can expect serious progress from the DPRK army in the field of drones, electronic warfare, and air defense systems.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9831399.html

Google Translator

*****

Ben Aris: Kremlin sets the conditions for foreign companies to return to Russian market
May 10, 2025 natyliesb
By Ben Aris, Intellinews, 4/10/25

Thanks to the tangible thaw in US-Russian relations, Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered the government to work out the conditions for firms to return. The list is ready, The Bell reported on April 10.

A special government commission will assess all applications for market re-entry, with approval contingent on fulfilment of a range of industrial and political criteria. Without this authorisation, companies will not be permitted to resume operations in Russia. No one has applied to return so far, but a few firms have expressed an interest.

Putin opened the door for the return of Western companies towards the end of February, but made it clear that they could only return on the Kremlin’s terms and in a way that was beneficial to the Russian economy.

On the downside, any firm that took sides against Russia in the Ukraine conflict would be barred from operating.

On the upside, the Kremlin is going to force companies to localise production of inputs – something that the Kremlin was trying to get companies to do for years, especially in the automotive sector – without much luck. The goal is to accelerate the modernisation of Russia and promote import substitution, something the Kremlin has not made much progress with.

Specifically, the conditions, reported by Russian business daily RBC, include:

-Obtain approval from a special government commission (without which re-entry is not possible);

-Guarantee localisation of production within Russia;

-Commit to technology transfer and creation of research centres;

-Establish performance indicators for investment in development (KPIs);

-Comply with requirements for the level of robotisation in production;

-Form joint ventures with:

-Existing Russian shareholders of the former business, or

-Systemically important Russian enterprises;

-Prioritise inclusion of products in the Ministry of Industry and Trade’s list of 329 items for import substitution;

-Allow Russian businesses to pre-assess risks and vote on the advisability of a foreign firm’s return;

-Demonstrate previous compliance when exiting the Russian market:

-Fulfilled financial obligations (e.g. paid salaries, no outstanding debts)

-Did not support foreign agents, the Armed Forces of Ukraine or other hostile entities.

Many companies left Russia, selling their businesses to their local management in widespread MBOs, and many of these deals included a buy-back option should relations improve. However, the Kremlin has indicated these options will not be respected.

In the case of the Renault carmaker that was in a joint venture with Russian automotive titan AvtoVaz, the French firm sold its stake for a reported RUB2, but with an option to buy it back for the same price. However, a few days after Putin’s comments, AvtoVAZ president Maxim Sokolov said that Renault would have to pay $1.3bn if it wants its shares back, the amount of “extra” investment the Russian car company had to invest as a result of Renault’s departure.

In other sectors, especially retail, requests by foreign companies to retake control of their franchises will simply be ignored. McDonald’s, for example, spent three decades building up its chain, which was taken over by Vkusna i Tochka (Tasty. Period), including its flagship outlet on Pushkin’s Square in central Moscow. Since then the new owner has continued to invest, rolling out new stores in Russia’s regions and reported that the chain had become more profitable than the original after the first year of operations.

Most of the new owners have little incentive to sell them back to their original owners. During the exodus Russia saw one of the biggest transfers of wealth and property in its history, where entrepreneurs and managers picked up mature and profitable businesses with hundreds of thousands of dollars of turnover at very deep discounts. Franchises such as McDonald’s, if it returns at all, will be forced to start from scratch.

Encouraging foreign direct investment (FDI) is a classic goal of any government, as it brings not only the transfer of technology, but also management skills. But the Kremlin has been frustrated by the reluctance of international companies to set up full production lines in Russia. In the automotive sector just under two thirds of car parts continue to be imported from the European Original Equipment Manufacturers’ (OEMs) Western European parts plants as a way to prevent the authorities usurping their industry. In other businesses, like the French DIY retailer Leroy Merlin, the international companies have been more proactive, making investments in light manufacturing production after Chinese wages, a major source of product cost, overtook Russian labour wages. One of the most active foreign investors was Swedish furniture retailer IKEA – it refused to leave Russia after the invasion of Ukraine – which set up a credit scheme to finance the construction of Russia-based factories to make their products. However, the bulk of Russian FDI is the reinvestment of profits earned by multinationals operating in the market – a quirk of Russian national accounting is this reinvestment is counted as FDI, which is not the case in most markets – and not true FDI, which remains small by most emerging markets’ standards.

Now the Kremlin intends to force international firms that want to return to make these commitments by fiat rather than market forces.

In addition to the localisation of production, a key requirement includes the establishment of research centres, and the setting of specific investment performance indicators. Authorities will specifically evaluate technological contributions, such as the level of automation: Russia currently operates just 19 robots per 10,000 employees, compared with the global average of 162 and will set KPIs relating to the number of robots used in a new factory.

Foreign firms must also form joint ventures with Russian partners – either existing shareholders from their previous Russian operations or state-designated “systemically important” companies, but this will be done in terms of delivering as yet undefined “benefits” for the domestic economy.

The Ministry of Industry and Trade will prioritise applications from companies making products on the list of 329 items crucial for import substitution, but their domestic partners will also have a say in the process.

Applicants will also have to demonstrate their neutrality on sanctions and the Ukraine conflict. Moreover, they will need to prove they settled outstanding wages and cleared debts during their exit.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/05/ben ... an-market/

******

WATCH: Ray McGovern on Trust Between Russia & the US
May 10, 2025

Former C.I.A. analyst Ray McGovern addressed the Znanie Youth Forum in Moscow on April 29 ahead of the celebration of the 80th Anniversary of Victory in Europe over the Nazis.



https://consortiumnews.com/2025/05/10/w ... ia-the-us/

[blindpig]

Press statement by the President of Russia

In conclusion to festive events dedicated to the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War, Vladimir Putin made a statement for the media where he summarised the results of work on May 7–10.

(Video at link.)

May 11, 202502:00The Kremlin, Moscow
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good evening, or maybe good night already. I want to greet everyone. Ladies and gentlemen. Colleagues.

Allow me to once again congratulate all of you on the Great Victory Day! Thank our friends and foreign partners who have been with us in Moscow these days at the anniversary celebrations to bow to the generation of winners.

We honour all those who contributed to the common victory over Nazism, including our allies in the anti-Hitler coalition, Chinese soldiers, participants in the anti-Fascist resistance in Europe, fighters of the people's liberation movements in Africa, the Asia-Pacific region, and volunteers from Latin American countries.

Together with our friends and like-minded people, we share a common memory and respect for history, heroic deed of true heroes who fought for freedom, and of course, our responsibility for the future, for building a more just and safer world. The issues that directly affect the stable, sustainable development of the entire world community – Eurasia and other world regions – were at the center of the bilateral and the multilateral meetings held in Moscow.

Of course, they were held in a special, solemn, festive atmosphere, but at the same time they were extremely rich and informative, filled with topics of the political, economic and humanitarian agenda.

Summing up, and this is exactly what I would like to do now, I would say that in four days, from May 7 to May 10, we hosted official visits by the leaders of three foreign states: the People's Republic of China, the Venezuelan Bolivarian Republic and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.

Additionally, 20 bilateral meetings were held with the heads of the CIS countries, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, Europe and Latin America. In total, 27 heads of state from the CIS, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, Europe, Latin America, as well as about 10 heads of international organizations took part in the celebrations. Another six countries were represented at a high level.

We see inspiring evidence of genuine consolidation around the enduring ideas and values of our common Great Victory in such a wide participation of delegations from foreign countries and international organisations.

We are grateful to the leaders of the 13 states who sent units of the national armed forces to participate in the parade on Red Square. Their shoulder-to-shoulder march with our ceremonial units filled the common holiday with special energy and the spirit of military brotherhood, tempered during the Second World War.

I was pleased to personally thank the military leaders of the Korean People's Army and convey my warmest words to soldiers and commanders of special forces units of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, who, jointly with our servicemen, professionally, and I want to emphasise this, faithfully performed their assignments during the liberation of the Kursk Region border areas from the Kiev regime forces. I would like to emphasise: they showed courage and heroism, acted – I want to say this again – professionally, to the highest degree, showed good training and preparation.

And of course, it was a special honour for all state leaders to salute the main heroes of the Victory anniversary on the stands – WWII veterans from Russia, Israel, Armenia and Mongolia.

I would like to highlight that, despite threats, blackmail and obstacles caused, including the closure of airspace, the leaders of several European countries – Serbia, Slovakia, Bosnia and Herzegovina – came to Moscow. I would like to reiterate: we understand the massive pressure they faced, and therefore we sincerely appreciate their political courage, firm moral position, decision to share the holiday with us, to pay tribute to the memory of the heroes of the Great Patriotic War, World War II, who fought for their Fatherland and for deliverance from the brown plague of the whole world, of the entire mankind without any exaggeration.

It is important for us that millions of Europeans, state leaders that pursue sovereign policies, remember this. This gives us optimism and hope that sooner or later, based on the lessons of history and the opinion of our peoples, we will begin to move towards restoring constructive relations with European states. Including those who today still do not give up the anti-Russian rhetoric and clearly aggressive actions against us. They are still trying – we can see it right these days – to talk to us, in fact, in a boorish manner and through ultimatums.

Our comprehensive partnership and strategic interaction with the People's Republic of China can serve as a genuine example of modern equal relations in the 21st century. Chinese President Xi Jinping was the chief guest at the celebrations marking the 80th anniversary of the Great Victory.

We have had exceptionally fruitful negotiations, we have adopted two joint statements at the level of heads of state, and we have signed a number of intergovernmental and interdepartmental agreements covering such areas as energy, trade, finance, science, culture and much more. As I have already said, it has been agreed that in September I will pay an official return visit to China for the celebrations marking the 80th anniversary of victory over militaristic Japan.

It is deeply symbolic and natural that the principal, in fact the main commemorative events related to the 80th anniversary of the end of WWII in Europe and Asia will be held in Moscow and Beijing – in the capital cities of the states whose peoples passed through the hardest trials and paid the highest price for the common Victory.

Colleagues, I think it is obvious to everyone that the talks and meetings held in Moscow also touched on the issue of resolving the conflict in Ukraine. We are grateful to all our guests, our friends, for the attention they are paying to this conflict and for the efforts they are making to bring this conflict to an end. In this connection, I believe it is necessary to dwell on this topic separately.

So, I want to say that, as it is known, Russia has proposed ceasefire initiatives on several occasions, but they, these initiatives, have been repeatedly sabotaged by Ukraine. For example, the Kiev regime defiantly violated about 130 times the 30-day – I want to make it a point – 30-day moratorium, from March 18 to April 17, on strikes against energy facilities, which was declared in accordance with our agreement with US President Donald Trump.

The Easter truce initiated by Russia was not observed either: the ceasefire regime was violated by Ukrainian forces almost 5,000 times. Nevertheless, for the celebration of Victory Day – and we consider this to be a sacred holiday for us as well, just imagine that we lost 27 million people – we declared a ceasefire for the third time on this holiday, which is sacred to us.

Incidentally we conveyed to those of our colleagues in the West who, in my opinion, are sincerely looking for ways to settlement, our position on this issue, on a ceasefire on Victory Day, and that in the future we do not exclude the possibility of extending the terms of this truce – but, of course, after analysing what will happen in these several days, based on the results of how the Kiev regime will react to our proposal.

And what do we see? What are these results? The Kiev authorities, as you can see for yourself, did not respond at all to our ceasefire proposal. Moreover, after the announcement of our proposal – and this happened, as you remember, on May 5 – the Kiev authorities launched large-scale attacks in the early hours of May 7. As many as 524 unmanned aerial vehicles and a number of Western–made missiles participated in the strike, and 45 unmanned boats were used simultaneously in the Black Sea.

Actually, during these three days of the ceasefire that we announced – on May 8, 9 and 10 – happened what you also saw from the media, in fact, from your reports, it was clear: during this time, five targeted attempts were made to attack the state border of the Russian Federation in the area of the Kursk Region and at the junction with the Belgorod Region, precisely during the days of the ceasefire we announced. Additionally, another 36 attacks were made in other areas. All these attacks, including attempts to enter the territory of the Russian Federation in the Kursk Region and the Belgorod Region, were repulsed. Moreover, our military experts believe that they had no military significance, were conducted solely for political reasons and the enemy suffered very heavy losses.

As I have already said, the Kiev authorities not only declined our ceasefire proposal, but also, as we all saw, tried to intimidate the leaders of the states who gathered for the celebrations in Moscow. You know, when I met with colleagues here in Moscow, a thought occurred to me. I'll share it with you: who were they trying to intimidate among those who came to Moscow to celebrate the Victory over Nazi Germany? Who were they trying to frighten? Those who have come to us are leaders not by position or a post, they are leaders by character, by their beliefs and willingness to stand for their beliefs. And who was trying to intimidate them? Those who stand at attention and salute, applaud former SS soldiers? And elevates those who collaborated with Hitler during WWII to the rank of national heroes? It seems to me that this is an attempt with obviously unsuitable means and those who are trying to do this do not correspond to the scale they expect themselves.

I will repeat: we have proposed steps towards a ceasefire on many occasions. We have never refused to engage in dialogue with the Ukrainian side. Let me remind you again: it was not us who interrupted the negotiations in 2022; it was the Ukrainian side. In this connection, despite everything, we propose that the authorities in Kiev should resume the negotiations that they interrupted at the end of 2022 and resume direct talks. And, I stress, without any preconditions.

We suggest starting without delay next Thursday, May 15, in Istanbul, where they were held earlier and where they were interrupted. As you know, Turkish colleagues have repeatedly offered their services to organise such talks, and President Erdogan has done a lot to organise them. I recall that as a result of these talks a joint draft document was prepared and initialed by the head of the Kiev negotiating group, but at the insistence of the West it was simply thrown into the basket.

Tomorrow we are going to have a conversation with the President of Turkiye, Mr Erdogan. I would like to ask him to provide such an opportunity to hold talks in Turkiye. I hope that he will confirm his desire to contribute to the search for peace in Ukraine.

We are set on serious negotiations with Ukraine. Their aim is to eliminate the root causes of the conflict and to achieve a long-term lasting peace for a historical perspective. We do not rule out that in the course of these negotiations it will become possible to agree on some kind of new truce and a new ceasefire. And a real ceasefire that would be observed not only by Russia but also by the Ukrainian side and would be the first step, I repeat, towards a long-term, sustainable peace, rather than a prelude to continuing armed conflict after the Ukrainian armed forces have been rearmed, re-equipped and frantically digged trenches and new strongholds. Who needs such peace?

Our proposal is, as they say, on the table. The decision is now up to Ukrainian authorities and their supervisors, who are seemingly guided by their personal political ambitions, rather than the interests of their peoples, want to continue the war against Russia at the hands of Ukrainian nationalists.

Let me reiterate myself: Russia is ready for talks without any preliminary conditions. There are combat actions and war going on now, and we propose to resume negotiations that were not interrupted by us. Well, what's wrong about it?

Those who really want peace cannot but support this. At the same time, I would like to express my gratitude once again for the mediation services and efforts aimed at a peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian crisis undertaken by our foreign partners, including China, Brazil, African countries, the Middle East, and recently the new Administration of the United States of America.

In conclusion, I would like to once again thank everyone who shared with us the festive celebrations dedicated to the 80th anniversary of the Victory over Nazism. I am sure that the spirit of solidarity and harmony that united us in Moscow these days will continue to help us build fruitful cooperation and partnership in the name of progress, security and peace.

I would also like to take this opportunity to note the tremendous role of journalists, representatives of international information agencies, TV channels, and the press who covered the anniversary events and the many-hour programme of current negotiations and working meetings. Much has been done to ensure that people in different countries of the world experience the unique atmosphere of the current holidays in Moscow. Of course, I thank you for this meeting as well, as it is held quite late and, of course, everyone is already tired.

Thank you very much for your attention, as it's almost half past one in the morning, or even later than half past one in Moscow, God be with you.

Thank you very much for your attention. Goodbye.

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/76899

[blindpig]

Putin, Delovaya Rossiya (Business Russia) & Russian Governments Converse

The main topic of the discussion is ensuring balanced economic development in the context of structural transformation. A very long, important read.
Karl Sanchez
May 13, 2025


Meeting with members of the All-Russian Public Organization

A very important distinction is made at the outset of this meeting that involves not just these key business representatives, but national and regional government members linked by video. Here within the Outlaw US Empire and the West generally the Class War is being escalated via various manifestations whereas the exact opposite is happening within Russia. The following is an excerpt from Putin’s opening words:

It is very important that you, the vast majority of your colleagues, and all of us understand that professional labor collectives stand behind you. It is all together, together with them—with employees, with labor collectives–-as I have already said, and I want to emphasize this again—as one team, that you–-I want to say here—write both the success story of your business and the success story of the Russian economy. [My Emphasis]

Mr. Putin’s words were further emphasized by the Chairman of Delovaya Rossiya Alexey Repik:

Alexey Repik: Yes, Mr President, I know how important this is for our teams, how much we support each of our guys, and we expect them to come back to work, because our teams are waiting for them.

But the most important thing is that, despite the fact that some of our guys are now engaged in the defense of our Homeland, we still have everything in order with the rear. [My Emphasis]

Who are those “50-60 thousand” who come every month voluntarily to enlist in Russia’s military? Many “come by themselves, including from your labor collectives:” It’s the Russian working man who is doing the fighting and dying to preserve Russia. The labor collectives are what really make Russian business and agriculture work. An extremely small number of nations honor their workers and soldiers as Russia does, and most certainly not anywhere in the Western world where they exist to be exploited and feed the rich. One might say such recognition is a Soviet Era leftover. However, I would say that’s the only right and proper way to run a nation that’s supposed to be a collective of peoples, not a jumbled mass of Classes ruled by oligarchs. The inclusion of labor into Russia’s societal formula is the significant point needing to be made over and over because it’s so different and the aim of Russophobic Media is to erase that very significant difference and model to others. The Meeting:

Vladimir Putin: Good afternoon!

The head of Delovaya Rossiya [Alexey Repik] and I discussed how your work is going. Delovaya Rossiya is one of our leading public organizations that unites both owners and managers of manufacturing, industrial, service, and high-tech businesses in the country.

Your companies are actively strengthening their positions in the domestic market, building cooperative ties with Russian and foreign partners, and, of course, developing promising export destinations.

I would like to note that it is largely thanks to the efforts of business and the energy of entrepreneurial labor that the Russian economy is showing stability and developing. So, despite all the difficulties, despite the so-called external pressure, we still achieved significant growth in the year before last–-in general, significant growth both for our country and for the world economy: in the year before last, GDP grew by 4.1 percent, and last year–-4.3. We thought it was 4.1 percent, but after an additional calculation, it turned out to be [4.3 percent]. Those two-tenths of a percent also matter.

This is, indeed, the result of joint, partnership work of the state, business and labor collectives. A kind of fusion of entrepreneurial freedom, initiative, and skills of workers, engineers, and specialists in various fields. I hope that both the Government and our regional teams have made a certain contribution here. All together, this is the result of a common work.

It is very important that you, the vast majority of your colleagues, and all of us understand that professional labor collectives stand behind you. It is all together, together with them—with employees, with labor collectives–-as I have already said, and I want to emphasize this again—as one team, that you–-I want to say here—write both the success story of your business and the success story of the Russian economy.

A significant mission of Delovaya Rossiya is to identify barriers that hinder the dynamic growth of the domestic economy, and therefore the entire country in all areas that are important for the state. And at the same time, it is not only necessary to talk about problems, but it is also necessary to offer concrete solutions based on the daily practical experience of companies, on deep expert and legal analysis.

As a matter of fact, this is what always happens when Alexey Yevgenyevich [Repik] was there, he already touched on certain things, certain problems. Of course, you are here to discuss all this, to bring it to the attention of government agencies. Now we have many of my colleagues from various ministries, departments, and government officials in touch online–-and I hope that I will turn the arrow to them when I have any questions.

As a matter of fact, this is true-–you work out solutions together with them. If something is missing–-this is what we are going to do, in order to clarify what is missing and what needs and can be done in order to move more efficiently further.

We are hosting a plenary session of the forum. The regions in the online system are also in touch with us. So there is an opportunity to socialize and talk. I would like to hear, of course, as I have already said, questions and suggestions, which is the most important thing.

Finally, in a month's time, in June, the St. Petersburg Economic Forum will be held. I hope that the proposals that we will discuss today, and you will formulate them, will also be in demand as part of the preparations for this large-scale event.

Please, let's get started.

A word to Alexey Yevgenyevich Repik. I ask you to.

Alexey: Thank you very much, Vladimir Vladimirovich!

We have just a few days ago died down fireworks. Everyone celebrated the 80th anniversary of the Great Victory with bated breath. We honored veterans, thanked home front workers–-those who were able to mobilize during the most difficult time for the country, provided unprecedented support to the front, the work of factories, factories, transport infrastructure, schools, hospitals.

And now, when the neo-Nazis who raised their heads with the support, and often under the dictation of their curators, have crossed the boundaries of what is permissible, moved the hybrid war from the economic board to the battlefield, it seems to me that right now it is important to once again thank and express great gratitude on behalf of all Russian entrepreneurs to our defenders of the Fatherland, participants of the special military operation for their military work, heroism. This is very important for us.

Mr President, you can be absolutely sure: just like 80 years ago, the rear is secured.

Vladimir Putin: I'm sorry. You just spoke about defenders, about those who are engaged in military work. I must say, I want to point this out too, sorry, for God's sake, I won't interrupt any more, but this is very important–-after all, these are also people from your labor collectives.

I want to draw your attention to this: if the Kiev authorities are engaged in forced mobilization--people are caught on the street like dogs, then our guys go voluntarily, they go themselves. We have a set, you know: they are currently catching 30 thousand people there, and we have 50-60 thousand people a month who come by themselves, including from your labor collectives. So thank you for remembering this.

Alexey Repik: Yes, Mr President, I know how important this is for our teams, how much we support each of our guys, and we expect them to come back to work, because our teams are waiting for them.

But the most important thing is that, despite the fact that some of our guys are now engaged in the defense of our Homeland, we still have everything in order with the rear. We also managed to mobilize, set up production, put everything we needed on the front line, while maintaining the possibility of a normal daily life. In other words, the teams got used to these endless sanctions "bombardments", of course, they missed strikes somewhere, stalled, but they learned to correct mistakes and adapt quickly. And now, in general, I am confident that the economic security circuit is reliably protected.

Mr President, our meeting is taking place at a very special time. Around the upcoming possible negotiations, well-known comrades will again plot their machinations, intimidate us with the introduction of hundredth or five-hundredth packages of sanctions and frighten us with apocalypses. You can immediately say: it won't work. We did it in 2022, and we will do it now.

It is always very important at the key points of the story, but it is also easy to determine who is really who. Vysotsky had it like this:"If you idly watched down and did not fight with the scoundrel, with the executioner, then you had nothing to do with life." Here is what is important: "Delovaya Rossiya", the entrepreneurs of "Delovaya Rossiya" at the most critical moment did not get scared, did not vibrate, balancing both yours and ours, did not try to escape somewhere. We calmly and confidently stood up, as they say, to our full height and did our job, defending our right to sovereign development, our right to live as we see fit, and do what we do right on the labor front. I would like to confirm once again, Mr President, that you can rest assured that whatever the pressure, we have secured the economic security circuit.

You mentioned that a number of topics for discussion were discussed during the preparations for the congress. More specific industry and regional issues and suggestions will be made today from our speakers, but there are two blocks that concern almost every one of us.

The first is monetary policy and maintaining investment activity. Here, of course, it is very important to remind everyone how critical it is not to miss the moment when efforts to combat inflation will start to give a sharp return and the economy will "fall" into hypothermia from overheating. We're just seeing the first signs of it. These are not only our unexpected May frosts, but also a number of serious indicators.

See: the producer price index, and in processing, including, not only in the energy sector, is falling, that is, prices are falling. Further, the corporate loan portfolio decreased by 40 billion rubles in the first four months. I want to remind you that last year it grew every month, adding a total of more than 14 trillion rubles. And inflation, by the way, almost stopped last week.

I will focus on the second priority block–-these are the formats for returning foreign companies to our market.

In general, foreigners initially felt privileged in the new Russia. The largest multinational corporations since the early 1990s, entering the Russian market, felt at ease: they received the most convenient sites for construction, the best places in shopping centers, conducted massive advertising campaigns, when we heard the names of brands from every iron. Thus, in fact, loyalty to these brands was formed.

We agree: Of course, foreign investments brought a lot of benefits, but our growing domestic market returned these investments a hundredfold, these investments. And so, when in 2022 many foreign investors were forced to withdraw from the Russian market or sharply reduce their presence, the domestic business found a solution, and many of these solutions turned out to be no worse, and sometimes even better than the original ones.

Vladimir Vladimirovich, no economy can develop normally and be self-sufficient. But the need to ensure technological sovereignty and readiness in a critical situation to close the most acute, significant elements of domestic consumption on their own—they are for Russia from a theoretical construction, the probability of which many were extremely skeptical--have become a reality. We really did everything in our power to deal with this situation. So now, when we hear more and more signals from our historical partners, who are also competitors, about working out a plan to return to the Russian market, fear of losing it forever, readiness to take a step forward–-this is a step back, in fact–-it is necessary to form an objective and balanced position in relation to this process.

The economy should not be shut down. Of course, we welcome companies from any country to enter our market, as well as any healthy competition. As well as, of course, we welcome foreign investment in Russian companies that have regained their home market. But as for foreign companies, it seems to us that it is inappropriate to row everyone under one comb. There are those who, despite the difficulties, pressure from their politicians, continued to work and invest with us, and they should be treated with reverence and care, as if they were our own. Others reduced their presence and left, but they did it with respect, without compromising consumers. Someone transferred the business to Russian investors, while retaining the opportunity to return. Here, the most correct format seems to us to be a return through the creation of joint ventures with Russian partners, while maintaining a certain shareholder control over the latter: either majority or through a "golden share". I believe that this format should become mandatory for enterprises in strategic industries.

Those companies that" hung the lock on the door", let down Russian contractors, did not fulfill their contractual and warranty obligations, must first compensate for the losses incurred by us, and if the damage was caused to consumers, citizens, then pay the corresponding compensation to the budget of the Russian Federation.

If we talk about companies that allowed themselves to express anti-Russian rhetoric, supported the Armed Forces of Ukraine, publicly accused Russia, refused to deal with it, no one is waiting for them in our market. The Russian consumer remembers such things very well. In general, to start a dialogue about the return of such companies, it seems to me that they will first have to make a public apology.

The time when we gave the" green light " to everything foreign to the detriment of ourselves has irrevocably passed. The internal investor should be an absolute priority for us. Where this is not the case, the situation needs to be corrected. For example, I still wonder why and whether it is fair that employees of our companies who went to work abroad for various reasons, regardless of their tax residence, were equalized at the personal income tax rate with employees in Russia in 2024. Let me remind you that earlier the "fork" was 17%.

In general, I believe that those who work, live at home, in Russia, make a much more significant contribution to our economy, spend money here, so they should be a priority. As in the case of investors, those who have fled should pay the price for their shortsightedness, and not receive preferences.

You mentioned that today, along with the speakers here in the Kremlin, we have more than 300 delegates of the congress on Delegatskaya Street in touch, as well as regional offices in all regions of the Russian Federation. Entrepreneurs of Delovaya Rossiya have a lot to say about the achievements and successes in recent years, as well as suggestions for implementing the tasks you set for structural transformation of the economy and increasing factor productivity. So, if you'll excuse me, I suggest we move on to the speeches.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, good.

If you'll excuse me, I'll also say a few words in order to comment on your speech.

You have raised an important issue. We encountered this somewhere at the turn of 2018-2019, when the agricultural sector in principle gained enough momentum for its development, and began, in fact, to cover all the basic needs of the Russian food market. And then the agricultural producers told me directly at the meetings: "Just don't let anyone back in." Because they will come with their huge subsidies: they all cheat in reality, all sign documents in the framework of the World Trade Organization (WTO), that this cannot be subsidized, this, and hidden subsidies go in huge quantities and create huge preferences, including in our market. First.

Second: places and shelves in stores. Our manufacturers will not be able to get through to the shelves from which the goods are sold out. What nonsense! How long have we talked about this? Even though the stake is on Teshi's head, nothing happens. Now, when Alexey [Repik] said that our entrepreneurs have managed to achieve a lot: and brands appear in hundreds and thousands of names, and so on and so on. And indeed, some things are better in quality than foreign manufacturers previously imagined in our market. But you know that better than anyone else. I went to the market, staked out everything, and then I couldn't kick you out. Do anything you want–-you can't break through in any way. Now they have foolishly banned their companies from working with us. But we see that people are coming to me, and big businesses are coming out, and they want to come back. For God's sake, please. But here it is very important, as Alexey [Repik] correctly said, first of all, we need to see who behaved like this. Furniture Manufacturers… In Belarus, they used to make good furniture. Well, God grant you good health. And we began to do it no worse, and maybe even better. And technologies appeared, and even the corresponding means of production appeared, and they began to make themselves.

Yes, this is a complex process. It is more complex, of course, and more diverse than in the field of agriculture, although even there everything is not so simple. By the way, the quality of our products and the requirements for agricultural products have always been higher than in the European Union, for example. But also in the field of industrial production.

Of course, you need to see who behaved like that. Someone was rude, saddened us, well, let them sit somewhere, God be with them.

What do I want to pay attention to? Alexey [Repik] said: "We need them--someone transferred money to the APU--we need them to apologize." Uh, no! This is definitely not enough. They're about to be charged. Listen, I've been in contact with many people for decades, and I've met many business representatives in Europe and the United States… I respect them very much, they are very serious people, competent, pragmatic, they can count everything, they can achieve their goals. They are really powerful competitors.

If you say, "You'll apologize," they'll apologize tomorrow. If they need to go back to our market, whatever-–they'll come and kiss you on the mouth. This is not enough. We need to look at all these issues from a pragmatic point of view. Listen to me: is it profitable for us to have this or that company come? So we should let her in. You know, I'll put it simply, in the popular way: it's not profitable-–you need to find a thousand reasons why it should not be here, this or that company. And among these thousands of reasons, 999 will exactly meet the WTO requirements, I assure you. And we will argue in the courts for one for at least 15 years.

I didn't come up with anything. You know, when someone left our market, violated our laws, violated WTO laws, we told them: "We will go to court." "Good riddance, for God's sake. We will sue you for 10, 15, 20 years." We were told this three years ago. That's what we should do with them. Nothing personal, just business.

I asked the Government to work on this issue, to work out certain conditions of return. Of course, we must take into account the behavior of our partners in the previous three years. Of course, without this, too, it is impossible, it is necessary to treat as a human being. There were companies that didn't want to, but left with tears, honestly, but with tears: "The pressure is such that they will destroy our business overseas, they will not allow us to make payments, and they will cause damage in Europe." We all know them. I asked the Government to keep this in mind.

I would now like to ask Maxim G. Reshetnikov (this is still their diocese first of all) to comment on this issue: what the Government has prepared, and if something needs to be taken into account in terms of the interests of our business, first of all, we will focus on your interests, on the interests of our business. We will have to proceed from this.

Of course, we need to see how all this will be reflected in the market. If we really need something on the market, but there is still no way (or 20 years are still ahead) for us to reach certain parameters for the production of certain product groups, we need to orient ourselves accordingly, create joint ventures, as Alexey [Repik] suggested. We must be flexible and proceed solely from our national interests.

Maxim Gennadievich, please.

Mikhail : Mr President, thank you very much for giving me the floor.

In general, we agree with Delovaya Rossiya and Alexey Yevgenyevich on our approaches, and indeed we have discussed this many times. Of course, when they return, we will be interested not only in how the companies behaved–-we agree with the approaches--but also in how our business invested. Because if our business has occupied this niche, invested, then, of course, we must give it a period for these investments to pay off.

Therefore, we will analyze the situation here, as they say, in each specific case, based on this balance of interests–-so that people who believe, and businesses who believe in the prospects, start investing in the domestic market, so that they get the necessary return on their invested capital, as they say.

However, there is a second point. We don't always have foreign companies… Let's just say that a number of companies have left and stopped supplying the products that we need here. This is especially the case with our pharmacists: a number of Western companies have left and simply those key medicines that we need on the market, stopped supplying.

But we are also not sitting here waiting for the situation to normalize. We have introduced a special mechanism, and on your instructions, we have created the necessary government commission, which, in fact, forcibly issues licenses to our companies that are ready to produce the relevant products.

At the same time, we do not violate the rights of those companies in any way. Our companies will pay the necessary deductions at a very reasonable level to Western copyright holders. These deductions go to special accounts, where, accordingly, they accumulate, and then, when the situation is, let's say, comprehensively resolved, this money can be available to Western companies. But it is very important that now our companies are already producing the necessary medicines.

We are ready to apply the same approach to other types of products. My point is that we will not sit here and wait for Western companies to deign to provide our market with some key technologies, but we are ready to work actively here.

In general, we work very closely with Delovaya Rossiya and Alexey Yevgenyevich in all these areas, and we really have common approaches.

Thank you.

(To A. Repik.)Vladimir Putin: I have a couple more thoughts on your speech. You said that no economy in the world can be self-sufficient. This is true, but we still need to understand what self-sufficiency of the economy is in the modern world. We need to understand this.

Second point. "We will not be intimidated by these new possible sanctions"–-we should not be intimidated. Anyone who starts to get scared will immediately lose everything. But it is absolutely necessary to understand what can happen, and we must be prepared for any actions of our possible future detractors.

They do many things to their own detriment. It seems that so-and-so will not be done exactly, because it harms them. But they do, you assholes—I'm sorry, please. And how? The world's leading economies are falling into recession just to hurt us. I'll buy tickets, but I won't go, as they say, to spite the conductor. What is it? So, of course, we should keep this in mind, because they can do what they say publicly.

And, of course, we must at least minimize the negative consequences for us. This is also the answer to the question of what a self–sufficient economy can be or cannot be. Everything is interconnected in the modern world, this is an obvious thing. But still, there are key points that make up one of the parameters of our economic independence and sovereignty. We must be prepared, of course, for anything.

Now, perhaps, we will move on further.

Alexey Repik: Mr President, you know, you are always very inspired when you realize that your ideas are not only yours, but they are shared by your head of state, your leader. So, to be honest, it's easier for us now.

Vladimir Putin: What I just said, you share, right?

A. Repik: Yes.

Vladimir Putin: It's nice.

Alexey Repik: We talked about investment activity today. I would like to ask Pavel Borisovich Titov, our distinguished winemaker and president of Delovaya Rossiya, to tell us what measures we need to support investment activity. We already have them, much has been done here by the Government, and the work is going well. But it seems to me that there are elements that require additional adjustment.

Pavel Borisovich.

Pavel Titov: Thank you very much.

Dear Vladimir Vladimirovich,

In the context of tight monetary policy, high inflation, and an obvious shortage of equity capital, it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain the dynamics of investment. We strive to create conditions for its sustainable growth, especially in industries with high added value.

We propose to adjust priorities in the application of existing state support tools. We are not talking about new volumes, but rather about a finer calibration with an emphasis on enterprises that implement investment projects using their own funds or market financing.

Today, a significant part of state support comes from loans with a subsidized interest rate. But we all understand that with the growth of lending, inflationary pressures are also increasing. Concessional loans often motivate investors to keep their own capital on high-yield deposits and keep it out of business.

We believe that it is necessary to shift the focus towards non-credit support tools: these are tax mechanisms, including federal and regional investment deductions, grants, direct compensation for actual costs incurred under industry programs.

Separately, we would like to draw your attention to the federal investment tax deduction introduced earlier this year. It aims to encourage businesses to invest in expansion and modernization through income tax adjustments. However, the mechanism needs to be adjusted further.

What do we mean by that? First of all, we consider it important to consider the possibility of simultaneous application of federal and regional investment deductions. At the moment, the Tax Code does not provide for this. Lifting the current restriction is especially important for regions with active investment policies. Federal support should not exclude regional support; on the contrary, their combination can become a serious link for new projects.

It is also necessary to expand the industry coverage of the deduction, taking into account technological priorities and tasks of national projects. Now the deduction is not available for such industries as food production, medical services, transport and warehouse logistics and not only, and this is especially important for remote regions.

Based on the results of the first half of 2025, we propose to assess the relevance and effectiveness of applying the FINV [Federal Investment Tax Deduction] and, if necessary, adjust its parameters. We believe that increasing the share of non-banking and tax mechanisms will reduce the pro-inflationary effect and motivate entrepreneurs to make optimal use of their own capital.

If I may, from the general to the particular. I still represent Russian winemaking. You gave instructions for a pilot project for remote sales of Russian wine with the participation of Russian Post in 2021.

Vladimir Putin: So that the post office can still sell wine?

P. Titov: There was such an initiative. We would like to resume work on it, because it would help a lot.

Vladimir Putin: To whom?

Pavel Titov: First of all, for Russian winemakers, of course.

Thank you so much for your attention. And of course, we are waiting for you in Abrau-Durso, we have a lot of new things.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Thank you. You would have rolled us something in honor of Victory Day.

P. Titov: With pleasure.

Vladimir Putin: Pavel Borisovich, you have raised the most pressing issue today, and this is understandable. This applies not only to winemaking, but also to agriculture in general. But it was clear, as we have said many times before, that we would very much like the economy to develop at the pace we need and in compliance with macroeconomic indicators. This is understandable.

And one of the main problems of today's Russian economy is high inflation. And this is a difficult task: we need to push down inflation and not create conditions–-as Alexey [Repik] just said in his speech—so as not to freeze the economy itself. It is necessary to implement a soft, small landing, which would allow for a situation in which the Central Bank would lower the key rate.

Today's main instruments are working, as you also mentioned: loans are subsidized. This means that the higher the interest rate and, accordingly, the higher the interest rate of not only the key one, but also of credit institutions, the higher the budget expenditures for this subsidy. This is understandable. And then the question arises: where is this border and what loans to subsidize? Naturally, in this case, the state should make a choice in favor of such projects that are vital for the country and for the economy. This is obvious.

Of course, first of all, these are large companies that depend on the stability of the entire economy–-we will not name them, so as not to relax them, because they will now hear: "Only to us". The other way, as you have just mentioned, is through grants or direct subsidies for the project. Not for these loans as a whole, but for the project. But in this case, the volume of these grants and loans will also be limited. This is an obvious thing.

We talked about this additional adjustment. Now I have asked Maxim Gennadyevich to speak out, as this is also his diocese in general. But in our Government, Alexander Valentinovich Novak deals with these issues through the Government leadership.

Alexander Valentinovich, I would like to ask you to comment on this issue as well.

Alexander : Mr Putin, good afternoon! Dear participants of the congress,

Indeed, today the most urgent task in the context of a tight monetary policy is to create conditions so that the volume of investment that we have achieved and its growth rates do not decrease but also fulfill your instructions in accordance with the Decree and Message: investment growth in 2030 by 60 percent.

Therefore, of course, the Government has developed measures, we have adopted a national project in accordance with your instructions "Efficient and competitive economy", a federal project specifically on investment and support measures, in which our colleagues actively participated in the development of the national project. We discussed all support measures together with Delovaya Rossiya.

We have reported to you about the subsidy mechanisms in cooperation with the Central Bank. In order to implement a joint policy aimed at reducing inflation, we also proposed to change the approaches and part of the subsidies that we used for lending to the provision of concessional loans.

Today, it is proposed to redirect them, among other things, to grants with the condition of providing and participating in capital, in investments of companies at the expense of their own funds, with incentives, including entering into an IPO. These are the tools that should make it possible to raise additional funds, including at the expense of companies ' own funds.

We understand that even this is quite difficult to do today, given the reduction in profitability at high interest rates and the reduction in profitability. However, since such tools were used less often in the past, we will encourage them and use them to a greater extent in order to ensure the achievement of the set indicators and create incentives.

It was mentioned about the investment tax deduction. Indeed, this is a new tool, the federal investment tax deduction, which was adopted starting from January 1, 2025. Previously, we had and still have an existing instrument related to investment support within the framework of regional investment tax deductions. And there is a new one, an additional one, which is still valid for several months.

We will receive the first results of its implementation sometime in June. Together with our colleagues from Delovaya Rossiya and our business partners, we will definitely analyze the results of how this tool works.

When we discussed it, Mr President, we chose exactly those seven areas of the main types of economic activity, which are primarily aimed at modernizing and developing high-tech industries, modernizing machinery and equipment. In accordance with this instrument, three percent of the total investment can be used to reduce the payment of income tax in terms of the federal component.

Taking into account the fact that there is also a regional investment tax deduction, this tool works together. We will see how these two tools can be combined in accordance with the proposals of Delovaya Rossiya in order to get the greatest effect for its implementation.

In general, we support these proposals. We will also look at the possible expansion of directions, if our individual activities are less effectively used based on the results of analysis and monitoring of this tool. Therefore, we will work closely together to make adjustments to improve the efficiency and create investment attractiveness of not only this instrument, but also in other areas as a whole.

We have a Capital Investment Rights Protection Agreement, a Project Finance Factory, concession agreements, and various other tools that have proven effective and that we are constantly improving with our business colleagues.

Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: The SPICs [special investment contracts] are the same, as well as zones with special tax regimes, administrative support, and so on, of course.

Thank you.

Alexey Repik: Mr President, three or four years ago, at our congress, Mikhail Goncharov told you about his pancakes and about issues related to public catering in the Russian Federation. Do you remember "Teremok", when Macron was still sitting, waiting, and Mikhail Petrovich still could not stop in his great enthusiasm?

They really make 35 million pancakes a year, and during this time they have already baked more than 100 million. As far as I know, we conducted an experiment with the Ministry of Finance and the Government to adjust taxation in the industry. If you don't mind?"

Vladimir Putin: Please. In my opinion, we are currently undergoing an experiment.

Mikhail Goncharov: It is almost over.

Dear Vladimir Vladimirovich, in the early 1990s, when I saw how McDonalds works, I was shocked (I was a young student then) by how this business machine works. It really set me on fire, and I wanted to create our Russian project. And in 1998, I had such a chance, just after the crisis, I once again went bankrupt and realized that I now need to realize my dream.

Vladimir Putin: I feel that all this is good for you, you look very good.

Mikhail Goncharov: Yes, the soul of the project is Russian cuisine and pancakes. Moreover, I was so eager and eager to restore what we had lost that even we address our customers as "sir" and " madam".

In 26 years of such steady, steady development, we have opened 350 restaurants, and overall business is going well. But in 2022, as you said, an experiment was conducted for medium-sized companies with a turnover of up to two billion. They were exempted from VAT and social taxes were reduced.

Vladimir Putin: Social payments.

M. Goncharov: Social insurance.

Vladimir Putin: To what level?

M. Goncharov: From 30 to 15. Yes, for three years the experiment, in general, was a success. The Ministry of Finance even officially published the results in the newspapers that tax growth, business growth, turnover growth and overall the result was positive.

But you said "denote a barrier"... There was still one barrier left. And at that moment, the decision was made for companies up to two billion. We're going out now…

Vladimir Putin: Increase it?

Mikhail Goncharov: No, I can't increase it.

Vladimir Putin: The government wants to increase it to three.

Mikhail Goncharov: It wants to increase this micro-solution. This, as far as I know, has already been agreed upon. Those companies that have now reached barrier two or three are not important, they continue to have this barrier. In other words, social taxes increase from 15 to 30 and VAT immediately appears.

We have been working on the option and ask you to agree on a three percent VAT deductible. And, most interestingly, we propose to divide it into two parts: two percent to the federal budget, and one percent to the municipal budget.

In the government of the Moscow region, we held a meeting on the results of covid, and they say: "You know, we kind of need you, but you're not very interesting, we don't get anything from you." This one percent of the municipality may also encourage the interest of local authorities and help companies consolidate and develop on a large business scale. Because American fast food companies, of course, captured the whole world and felt great in Russia. We need our own national champions.

Why am I performing? Because we have five of them today, and there should be dozens. And, unfortunately, this barrier often forces companies to split up, does not allow them to open in the regions, increase or scale their business.

The proposal to introduce a three percent VAT and continue to work out the issue of some kind of smoothing the growth of these social taxes, because this industry is also quite man-intensive, and the growth is strong. 3 percent is our main offer.

Vladimir Putin: And now?

Mikhail Goncharov: Now we have a 20% VAT rate, but it is deductible, and it is difficult to administer. People have huge problems there, and there are constant disputes: both the tax and law enforcement agencies constantly catch this VAT. This revolving tax is a very good idea. Now, in general, companies pay from 3 to 4 percent. That is, in principle, this is not a very serious decline, but it will allow the company to consolidate and develop.

Vladimir Putin: You know, Mikhail Petrovich, it seems to me that you are right, we are constantly discussing in the Government: we need to keep VAT or just change everything completely, switch to the turnover tax as a whole, and so on, that individual exceptions are ineffective. But it seems to me that just such a delicate work is being done by industry, while in Moscow this experiment is mainly carried out, right?

Mikhail Goncharov: No, it was all over the country.

Vladimir Putin: It started in Moscow, and I think it worked effectively.

Mikhail Goncharov: We started, yes. In Moscow, the main companies are Russian.

Vladimir Putin: Yes, of course. And in general, I think that what you say is appropriate. This will give us a big return, even at all levels of the budget system. You said that the Ministry of Finance conducted an analysis and generally believes that it is appropriate. And now we will see if this is the case. Let's ask Anton Germanovich whether the Ministry of Finance will support Mikhail Petrovich's proposal.

(Much, much more...)

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/putin-de ... ess-russia

*******

The level of corruption in the Kursk region has reached the highest official level
May 12, 14:42



The level of corruption in the Kursk region has reached the highest official level

Previously convicted persons should not work in government, the level of corruption in the Kursk region has reached the highest official level, said the acting governor of the region Alexander Khinshtein.
During a meeting of the regional government, Khinshtein said that a list of more than 70 employees of local authorities who had previously been convicted or released from it "for non-rehabilitating reasons" had been prepared.

"People who have already been caught red-handed once should not work in government. Especially in a region where the level of corruption has reached the highest official level,"

https://russian.rt.com/russia/news/1476 ... aya-oblast - zinc

1. When the amount of direct damage to the state exceeded 4 billion (the amount is not final), and the former governor and a number of characters were accepted, the level of corruption became quite obvious to the entire country. It is also interesting here - will there be questions about the previous governor, under whom some of the contracts for the construction of defensive structures were concluded. He knew or did not know what was happening with the contractors receiving money for the construction of field fortifications on the border.

2. It would be interesting to look at the audits of the expenditure of funds for the construction of defensive structures in the Bryansk region. I would not be surprised if something similar is revealed there, with the participation of officials and contractors. There are questions about the quality of defensive structures and the provision of local BARS.

3. I would like to see a tightening of legislation for those responsible for theft and corruption in wartime, even taking into account the moratorium on the use of the death penalty in the country.

4. It is still difficult to judge what kind of manager Khinshtein himself is (it is interesting to listen to the opinions of residents of the region, especially the southern regions that suffered from the invasion). In principle, he is working well on the topic of fighting corruption in the region. I fully support the proposal to ban thieves from holding any positions in government. And this, of course, should apply not only to the Kursk region. and all regions and the entire state apparatus as a whole. If a person in power steals hundreds of millions or even billions, how can anyone trust him after he has served time?

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9834456.html

Law on the seizure of property of relocates
May 14, 8:42



The State Duma approved in the first reading a bill on the seizure of property of relocators.

Law enforcement officers will be able to hold citizens who have left Russia administratively liable if they commit offenses abroad against the interests of Russia. And so that they cannot evade the execution of a court decision, their property and accounts in the Russian Federation can be seized.

The law is, of course, very late. Some of these relocators have already gotten rid of real estate and assets in Russia, selling them at a reduced price and withdrawing the money. If the law had been passed in 2022 and they had immediately started to massively block the assets and accounts of enemies of the people who had fled abroad, then the budget could have received much more confiscated funds.

As it is, they will only take what the most stupid of them did not have time to take out. That is also good, but of course it is a pity that they came to this so late.
In any case, better late than never.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9836835.html

Google Translator

[blindpig]

THE US HAS PUSHED THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION (ICAO) TO DECLARE WAR ON RUSSIA



By John Helmer @bears_with

On Monday, May 12, the United States pushed the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the aircraft safety watchdog, to vote behind closed doors to adopt a secret resolution convicting Russia of shooting-down Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 on July 17, 2014.

Unlike the Dutch show trial which in November 2022 convicted two Russians and a Ukrainian of the same crime, the ICAO reached its verdict without the appearance of an open proceeding or of openly tested evidence. It’s a put-up job.

William Raillant-Clark, the ICAO communications chief at the Montreal headquarters, was asked to provide a text of the resolution and identification of the countries voting for, against, abstaining, and absent. Raillant-Clark replied: “In accordance with the Council’s Rules of Procedure, the vote was taken by secret ballot.” He refused to disclose the resolution itself; the numbers of votes without the names of the countries; or the reason for keeping everything but the conviction of Russia secret. He answered: “The Council’s considerations based on reason of law and fact, will be issued in the coming weeks.”

The spokesman was then asked for a copy of ICAO’s Rules of Procedure. He refuses to answer.

The decision of ICAO to go to war with Russia, using its aviation safety mandate to cover up the evidence of what really happened to MH17, destroys the organization for the future. It follows the destruction of the global organization for the safety of nuclear power generation, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW); the International Committee of the Red Cross; and the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres.

The downing of MH17 on July 17, 2014, with the deaths of all 298 passengers and crew, was a Ukrainian government operation, backed by the Obama Administration led by then-Vice President Joseph Biden, to start the economic sanctions war against Russia; US and NATO military preparations for the Ukrainian attack on the Donbass; it almost led to a NATO military intervention.

Read the full story of what happened, and the subsequent faking of evidence in the Dutch trial, in the book.


Left to right: authors of the MH17 lie – Dutch judge Hendrick Steenhuis and ICAO spokesman William Raillant-Clark; the truth .

This new ICAO fatality, weaponizing aviation safety into war against Russia, was inflicted by the US, the dominant member state on the 36-member Council of the ICAO. Collaborating with the State Department’s delegate at the Council, Anthony Clare, the Dutch and Australian governments promoted the resolution and pushed for adoption by the allied states.

The list of permanent and elected member states on the ICAO Council can be viewed here.

The ICAO session on May 12 does not appear in the advance schedule of meetings for the ICAO this month. The Council vote which took place on May 12 is not listed in the Council proceedings for the month.

An internal notice of the Council for the May 12 meeting shows the text of the resolution is “restricted”. Raillant-Clark has refused to explain.

As soon as the vote was taken, the Dutch Government and Foreign Ministry issued a press release. The Australian Foreign Ministry followed. The Netherlands and Australia, whose nationals comprised the majority of the 298 victims on board MH17, sponsored the ICAO resolution. Both governments are fighting Russia on the Ukrainian battlefield. The Dutch may now attempt to divert Russian state funds frozen in The Netherlands to pay compensation to the families of the victims.

Only after the two government releases had appeared, and Raillant-Clark was questioned personally, did ICAO reveal its press release.




The Russian government issued its response on May 13. “Russia,” the Foreign Ministry said, “is not part of the ICAO Council. In its press release, this body alleges that the responsibility for downing this flight rests with the Russian Federation. However, the text of the ruling, including its reasoning part, is not available. Therefore, this amounted to a blind vote – it is quite obvious that this decision does not hold water. Once again, the ICAO Council demonstrated its political bias. It takes its decision while guided by momentary considerations. This is not the way it must operate.”



“Russia withdrew from these proceedings last year, on June 17, 2024, in view of the multiple procedural violations by the Council and the ICAO Secretariat, which made an impartial fact-finding effort all but impossible. That said, Moscow’s principled position remains relevant to this day – Russia was not involved in the MH17 crash, while all the claims to the contrary coming from Australia and the Netherlands are at odds with reality.”

“The ICAO Council is not an independent body. It includes 36 ICAO member states out of 193. They get their voting instructions from their respective capitals. Most of the countries represent the West and their immediate satellites. This makes the way the Council operates a matter of arithmetic. There was simply nobody to tackle this matter in a professional manner and on its merits.”

“There is nothing new about using the ICAO Council against countries which are viewed as being undesirable by the West. This can hardly come as a surprise to anyone these days. Suffice to recall the investigation of the landing of a Ryanair flight at the Minsk airport on May 23, 2021. At the time, the interested Western countries were not satisfied with the preliminary report by the Investigative Team. They used their majority within the Council to force the team to re-write the report to ensure that it condemns Belarus. Moreover, the ICAO Council ruled that it was competent to review the Great Britain, Sweden, Ukraine, Canada v. Iran case regarding the crash of a Boeing aircraft near Tehran after a vote held behind the curtain. There was also a recent example when the Council refused to take up Venezuela’s claims in its dispute with Argentina regarding unilateral restrictions in civil aviation.”

https://johnhelmer.net/the-us-has-pushe ... more-91597

******

Xi's Letter to Russians & Speech to CELAC
Karl Sanchez
May 14, 2025



Hard to keep pace with events that need broader distribution. Xi’s letter to Russians went under the radar and discovered when I went to read his speech to the CELAC gathering in China earlier this week. There’s more to be written about China’s policies in relation to what’s happening globally that will soon be forthcoming. Much of Xi’s letter is in reference to the Victory Day Celebration, although it as some key policy points. The CELAC effort is briming with policy proposals. And yes, there’re links between the two. First is Xi’s letter to Russians:

Learning from History to Build Together a Brighter Future

H.E. Xi Jinping

President of the People's Republic of China

This year marks the 80th anniversary of the victory of the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, the Soviet Union's Great Patriotic War, and the World Anti-Fascist War. It also marks the 80th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations (UN). In this season when "apple and pear trees are blossoming," I will soon pay a state visit to Russia and attend the celebrations marking the 80th anniversary of the victory of the Soviet Union's Great Patriotic War, joining the heroic Russian people in honoring the history and the fallen heroes.

Ten years ago around this time, I came to Russia to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the victory. During that visit, I made a special arrangement to meet with 18 representatives of Russian veterans who endured the blood and fire of battlefields during the Soviet Union's Great Patriotic War and the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression. Their unyielding resolve and indomitable bearing left an indelible impression on me. In the past few years, General M. Gareyev, Major General T. Shchudlo and other veterans passed away. I pay my deepest tribute to them and to all veterans—from generals to the rank and file--for their extraordinary service and heroic feats in securing the victory over fascists around the world. We will never forget them. Heroes never perish; their noble spirit lives forever.

During the World Anti-Fascist War, the Chinese and Russian peoples fought shoulder to shoulder and supported each other. In the darkest hours of the Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, the Soviet Volunteer Group, which was part of the Soviet Air Force, came to Nanjing, Wuhan and Chongqing to fight alongside the Chinese people, bravely engaging Japanese invaders in aerial combat--many sacrificing their precious lives. At the critical juncture of the Soviet Union's Great Patriotic War, Yan Baohang, a legendary intelligence agent of the Communist Party of China (CPC) who was hailed as the "Richard Sorge of the East," provided the Soviet Union with primary-source intelligence. In the crucible of the war-torn years, the Soviet Union provided China with large quantities of weapons and equipment. China, for its part, shipped much-needed strategic supplies to the Soviet Union. The two countries jointly established a supply line spanning the treacherous Gobi Desert. It was an international lifeline, vital for our mutual support in fighting fascists. The strong camaraderie between our two nations, forged in blood and sacrifice, surges onward unceasingly, mighty as the Yellow River and the Volga. It is an eternal wellspring nourishing our everlasting friendship.

Eighty years ago, the forces of justice around the world, including China and the Soviet Union, united in courageous battles against their common foes and defeated the overbearing fascist powers. Eighty years later today, however, unilateralism, hegemonism, bullying, and coercive practices are severely undermining our world. Again humankind has come to a crossroads of unity or division, dialogue or confrontation, win-win cooperation or zero-sum games. In War and Peace, the great writer Leo Tolstoy observed, "History is the life of nations and of humanity." Indeed, historical memory and truth will not fade with the passage of time. They serve as inspirations that mirror the present and illuminate the future. We must learn from history, especially the hard lessons of the Second World War. We must draw wisdom and strength from the great victory of the World Anti-Fascist War and resolutely resist all forms of hegemonism and power politics. We must work together to build a brighter future for humanity.

We must uphold a correct historical perspective on WWII. China and the Soviet Union were the principal theaters of that war in Asia and Europe respectively. The two countries served as the mainstay of resistance against Japanese militarism and German Nazism, making pivotal contribution to the victory of the World Anti-Fascist War. The Chinese People's War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression began the earliest and lasted the longest. United as one under the banner of the Chinese united front against Japanese aggression, which was advocated and established by the CPC, the Chinese people launched a relentless struggle against and defeated the brutal Japanese militarists. With immense sacrifice, they carved out an immortal epic of heroic resistance and ultimate victory against Japanese aggression. In the European theater, the Soviet Red Army advanced like an iron tide with unwavering fortitude and valor, crushed Nazi Germany's ambitions and liberated millions from its brutal occupation, writing an epic of victory in the Soviet Union's Great Patriotic War.

History teaches us that light will always overcome darkness, and that justice will ultimately prevail over evil. The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg and the International Military Tribunal for the Far East condemned the convicted war criminals to perpetual infamy. The justice and integrity of the two landmark trials, their historic significance, and their contemporary relevance stand beyond challenge. Any attempt to distort the historical truth of WWII, deny its victorious outcome, or defame the historic contribution of China and the Soviet Union is doomed to fail. Neither of our two nations will tolerate any act to reverse the course of history--nor will the people of the whole world.

We must resolutely uphold the postwar international order. The most significant decision by the international community around the end of WWII was to establish the UN. China and the Soviet Union were among the first to sign the UN Charter. Our permanent membership in the UN Security Council is a product of history, earned through blood and sacrifice. The more turbulent and complex the international situation becomes, the more we must uphold and defend the authority of the UN, firmly uphold the UN-centered international system, the international order underpinned by international law, and the basic norms of international relations based on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, and steadily promote an equal and orderly multipolar world and a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization.

This year also marks the 80th anniversary of the restoration of Taiwan. Taiwan's restoration to China is a victorious outcome of WWII and an integral part of the postwar international order. A series of instruments with legal effect under international law, including the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, have all affirmed China's sovereignty over Taiwan. The historical and legal fact therein brooks no challenge. And the authority of UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 brooks no challenge. No matter how the situation on the Taiwan island evolves or what troubles external forces may make, the historical trend toward China's ultimate and inevitable reunification is unstoppable.

China and Russia have all along firmly supported each other on issues bearing on our respective core interests or major concerns. Russia has reiterated on many occasions that it strictly adheres to the one-China principle, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China's territory, it opposes any form of "Taiwan independence," and it firmly supports all measures of the Chinese government and the Chinese people to achieve national reunification. China highly commends Russia's consistent position.

We must firmly defend international fairness and justice. Now, the global deficits in peace, development, security and governance continue to widen unabated. To address these deficits, I have proposed to build a community with a shared future for mankind and put forward the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative, and the Global Civilization Initiative as a way forward to steer the reform of the global governance system toward greater fairness and justice.

The world needs justice, not hegemonism. History and reality have proven that to meet global challenges, it is important to uphold the vision of global governance featuring extensive consultation and joint contribution for shared benefit. It is also important to choose dialogue over confrontation, build partnerships over alliances, and pursue win-win cooperation over zero-sum games. It is equally important to practice true multilateralism, accommodate the legitimate concerns of all parties, and safeguard international norms and order. We firmly believe that people around the world will choose to stand on the right side of history and the side of fairness and justice.

China and Russia are both major countries with significant influence in the world. The two nations are constructive forces for maintaining global strategic stability and for improving global governance. Our bilateral relationship is founded upon a clear historical logic, sustained by strong internal drive, and rooted in profound cultural heritage. Our relationship is neither directed against nor swayed by any third party. Together we must foil all schemes to disrupt or undermine our bonds of amity and trust, and we must not be baffled by transient matters or unsettled by formidable challenges. We must leverage the certainty and resilience of our partnership of strategic coordination to jointly accelerate the shift toward a multipolar world and build a community with a shared future for mankind.

China and Russia are both great nations with splendid civilizations. The Chinese and Russian peoples are both great peoples defined by heroic legacies. Eighty years ago, our peoples won the anti-fascist war through heroic struggles. Eight decades later today, we must take all necessary measures to resolutely safeguard our sovereignty, security, and development interests. We should be guardians of historical memory, partners in national development and rejuvenation, and champions of global fairness and justice, and work together to forge a brighter future for humanity. [My Emphasis]

I can think of only two US Presidents whose rhetoric is in the same class as Xi Jinping’s: FDR in his Four Freedoms and One-Third of the Nation speeches and JFK’s 1963 American University Speech, “A Strategy of Peace.” It should be noted that only the second of the three has come close to fulfillment, while the main inhibitor to attaining the Four Freedoms and global peace is the Outlaw US Empire. Ironically, these two sentences also have a different meaning to a disturbing segment of humanity whose current aspirations were saved by the Anglo-Americans at WW2’s end:

Indeed, historical memory and truth will not fade with the passage of time. They serve as inspirations that mirror the present and illuminate the future.

That would be the Nazis and Nazism that are very much alive and prospering thanks to the Collective West. Many have said another Yalta is needed, yet Yalta allowed for the perversion of the UN Charter via the Spheres of Influence concept which was used to deny people self-determination by both sides during the Cold War. The task to preserve historical memory is correct, but ALL of it must be preserved—the good and the bad, justice and injustices. It’s far easier for nations to stand up, confess their crimes, and announce how they’ll atone for them. Unfortunately, most nations have proven to be cowards in that regard which contributes to continuing enmity between nations and peoples. Xi failed to mention the period of strife between the USSR and China over the correct socialist path to follow. IMO, that situation can be used today as a learning experience for both China and Russia. We see that Russia and China have learned and are trying to set an example for the Global Majority.

And now his keynote speech at the opening ceremony of the fourth ministerial meeting of the China-CELAC Forum where Xi makes proposals to animate its example:

Writing a New Chapter in Building A China-LAC Community with a Shared Future

Keynote Address by H.E. Xi Jinping

President of the People's Republic of China

At the Opening Ceremony

Of the Fourth Ministerial Meeting of the China-CELAC Forum

Beijing, May 13, 2025

Your Excellency President Gustavo Petro,
Your Excellency President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva,
Your Excellency President Gabriel Boric,
Your Excellency President Dilma Rousseff,
Delegates of CELAC Member States,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Friends,

It gives me great pleasure to meet so many old and new friends from Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries in Beijing. On behalf of the Chinese government and people, I extend a warm welcome to you all.

In 2015, LAC delegates and I attended the opening ceremony of the First Ministerial Meeting of the China-CELAC Forum in Beijing, which marked the launch of the China-CELAC Forum. Ten years on, with dedicated nurturing of both sides, the Forum has grown from a tender sapling into a towering tree. This fills me with deep pride and satisfaction.

Although China and the LAC region are geographically distant, the bonds of our friendship stretch back through centuries. As early as in the 16th century, Nao de China, or "Ships of China," laden with friendship, shuttled across the Pacific, marking the dawn of interactions and exchanges between China and the LAC region. From the 1960s onward, as New China established diplomatic ties with some LAC countries, exchanges and cooperation between the two sides became closer and closer. Since the turn of the century and in particular in recent years, China and LAC countries have ushered in a historic era of building a shared future.

We stand shoulder to shoulder and support each other. China appreciates the long-standing commitment of LAC countries that have diplomatic ties with China to the one-China principle. China firmly supports LAC countries in pursuing development paths suited to their national conditions, safeguarding sovereignty and independence, and opposing external interference. In the 1960s, mass rallies and demonstrations took place across China in support of the Panamanian people's rightful claim to sovereignty over the Panama Canal. In the 1970s, during the Latin American campaign for 200-nautical-mile maritime rights, China voiced its resolute and unequivocal support for the legitimate demands of developing countries. For 32 consecutive times since 1992, China has consistently voted for the United Nations (U.N.) General Assembly resolutions calling for an end to the U.S. embargo against Cuba.

We ride the tide of progress together to pursue win-win cooperation. Embracing the trend of economic globalization, China and LAC countries have deepened cooperation in trade, investment, finance, science and technology, infrastructure, and many other fields. Under the framework of high-quality Belt and Road cooperation, the two sides have implemented more than 200 infrastructure projects, creating over a million jobs. The China-LAC satellite cooperation program has set a model for high-tech South-South cooperation. The inauguration of Chancay Port in Peru has established a new land-and-sea connectivity link between Asia and Latin America. China has signed free trade agreements with Chile, Peru, Costa Rica, Ecuador, and Nicaragua. Last year, trade between China and LAC countries exceeded US$500 billion for the first time, an increase of over 40 times from the beginning of this century.

We unite in tough times to conquer challenges through mutual support. China and LAC countries have collaborated on disaster prevention, mitigation and relief and on joint response to hurricanes, earthquakes and other natural disasters. Since 1993, China has dispatched 38 medical teams to the Caribbean. When the pandemic of the century struck, China was among the first to offer assistance to LAC countries, providing over 300 million doses of vaccines and nearly 40 million units of medical supplies and equipment, and sending multiple teams of medical experts. All this helped protect the lives of hundreds of millions across the region.

We uphold solidarity and coordination and rise to global challenges with resolve. Together, China and LAC countries champion true multilateralism, uphold international fairness and justice, advance global governance reform, and promote multipolarization of the world and greater democracy in international relations. We have worked together to address global challenges like climate change, and advance progress in global biodiversity governance. China and Brazil jointly issued a six-point common understanding on the political settlement of the Ukraine crisis, which has been endorsed by more than 110 countries, contributing our wisdom and strength to resolving international hotspot issues.

Facts have shown that China and LAC countries are advancing hand in hand as a community with a shared future. This community of ours is founded upon equality, powered by mutual benefit and win-win, invigorated by openness and inclusiveness, and dedicated to the people's well-being. It exhibits enduring vitality and holds immense promise.

Distinguished Delegates,
Friends,

The century-defining transformation is accelerating across the globe, with multiple risks compounding one another. Such developments make unity and cooperation among nations indispensable for safeguarding global peace and stability and for promoting global development and prosperity. There are no winners in tariff wars or trade wars. Bullying or hegemonism only leads to self-isolation. China and LAC countries are important members of the Global South. Independence and autonomy are our glorious tradition. Development and revitalization are our inherent right. And fairness and justice are our common pursuit. In the face of seething undercurrents of geopolitical and bloc confrontation and the surging tide of unilateralism and protectionism, China stands ready to join hands with our LAC partners to launch five programs that advance our shared development and revitalization and contribute to a China-LAC community with a shared future.

The first is Solidarity Program. China will work with LAC countries to support each other on issues bearing on our respective core interests and major concerns. We must enhance exchanges in all fields, and strengthen communication and coordination on major international and regional issues. In the next three years, to facilitate our exchanges on national governance best practices, China will invite 300 members from political parties of CELAC member states every year to visit China. China supports the efforts by LAC countries in increasing their influence on the multilateral stage. We will work with LAC countries to firmly safeguard the international system with the U.N. at its core and the international order underpinned by international law, and to speak with one voice in international and regional affairs.

The second is Development Program. China will work with LAC countries to implement the Global Development Initiative. We will resolutely uphold the multilateral trading system, ensure stable, unimpeded global industrial and supply chains, and promote an international environment of openness and cooperation. We should foster greater synergy between our development strategies, expand high-quality Belt and Road cooperation, and bolster cooperation in traditional areas such as infrastructure, agriculture and food, and energy and minerals. We should expand cooperation in emerging areas such as clean energy, 5G telecommunications, the digital economy and artificial intelligence, and carry out the China-LAC Science and Technology Partnership. China will increase imports of quality products from LAC countries, and encourage its enterprises to expand investment in the LAC region. We will provide a RMB66 billion yuan credit line to support LAC countries' development.

The third is Civilization Program. China will work with LAC countries to implement the Global Civilization Initiative. We should uphold the vision of equality, mutual learning, dialogue, and inclusiveness between civilizations, and champion humanity's common values of peace, development, fairness, justice, democracy, and freedom. We should enhance China-LAC civilizational exchanges and mutual learning, including through a conference on China-LAC inter-civilizational dialogue. We should deepen cultural and artistic exchanges and cooperation, and hold the Latin American and Caribbean Arts Season. We should strengthen exchanges and cooperation in cultural heritage fields such as joint archaeological projects, conservation and restoration of ancient and historic sites, and museum exhibitions. We should also carry out collaborative studies of ancient civilizations and enhance cooperation to combat illicit trafficking of cultural property.

The fourth is Peace Program. China will work with LAC countries to implement the Global Security Initiative. China supports the Proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace and the Declaration of Member States of the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean. The two sides should cooperate more closely in disaster governance, cybersecurity, counterterrorism, anti-corruption, narcotics control and combating transnational organized crime so as to safeguard security and stability in the region. China will organize law enforcement training programs tailored to the needs of CELAC member states, and do our best to provide equipment assistance.

The fifth is People-to-People Connectivity Program. In the next three years, China will provide CELAC member states with 3,500 government scholarships, 10,000 training opportunities in China, 500 International Chinese Language Teachers Scholarships, 300 training opportunities for poverty reduction professionals, and 1,000 funded placements through the Chinese Bridge program. We will initiate 300 "small and beautiful" livelihood projects, actively promote vocational education cooperation programs such as Luban Workshop, and support CELAC member states in developing Chinese language education. We will also launch an exhibition of Chinese films and TV programs under The Bond, and work with LAC countries to translate and introduce 10 premium TV dramas and audiovisual programs annually to each other. China will host the China-LAC tourism dialogue with LAC countries. To facilitate friendly exchanges, China has decided to implement a visa exemption for five LAC countries as the first step, and will expand this policy coverage at proper times.

Distinguished Delegates,
Friends,

As an 11th-century Chinese poet wrote, "Life's greatest joy comes from finding kindred spirits." Latin America has a similar proverb which goes, "The one who has a friend has a treasure." No matter how the world changes, China will always stand by LAC countries as a good friend and a good partner. Let us march forward together on our paths toward modernization, working together to write a new chapter in building a China-LAC community with a shared future. [My Emphasis]

As Xi proposed to Africa last year, China is highly motivated to implement its several Global Initiatives all aimed at improving the world and moving it toward the goal of attaining Harmony. Yes, China’s goal is to provide LAC with a better alternative than subjugation to the Outlaw US Empire’s Monroe Doctrine which has caused so much harm to LAC nations and peoples since the 1840s. Xi’s referencing the Panamanian struggle to gain control over the canal that began in the 1960s and took many decades to finalize is a reminder that the LAC community needs a powerful friend to offset the hegemon to the North. There’s a tie-in between the LAC and African initiatives that’s logical since many LAC peoples have ties to Africa. One of China’s aims is to get the African Union to make common cause with the LAC by increasing commerce and people-to-people exchanges. It appears China will mimic Russia’s project of Parliamentary exchanges at national and regional levels to generate closer ties.

The response to Xi’s proposals and the China-CELAC Beijing Declaration was led by Brazil’s Lula who gushed enthusiasm:

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva praised the declaration as a source of encouragement for developing countries in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Lula said it brings hope and shows that economically strong countries like China are considering how to contribute to the development of the world's poorest nations. Renowned Brazilian journalist Leonardo Attuch remarked that the declaration opens a historic window for Latin America to reshape its future. It symbolizes a new world emerging from the collapse of the imperialist order - one that rebuilds international relations on the foundations of fairness, respect and national self-determination, according to him.

Another document was agreed upon that will facilitate the Declaration, The Joint Action Plan for Cooperation in Key Areas between China and CELAC Member States (2025-2027). The Gym’s next article will look into the Beijing Declaration and published discussion about it. While the CELAC-China Forum didn’t see 100% attendance from the region’s nations, China remains optimistic the Forum will grow as its benefits become apparent to non-members.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/xis-lett ... and-speech

******

And again Abramovich
May 14, 3:09 PM



Abramovich, who had been virtually invisible after the failure of a number of negotiations with Ukraine, showed up at Putin's meeting with the board of trustees of the Bolshoi and Mariinsky Theaters.
Of course, rumors immediately intensified that Abramovich could once again be pulled out of the closet for negotiations in Istanbul.
Abramovich had previously been involved in prisoner exchanges and contacts with the Nazi regime in Kiev. In addition, some contacts with the West were also carried out through him.

In general, we will see if Abramovich will also surface during the negotiations in Turkey. Especially since in 2025, Kirill Dmitriev, who conducted direct negotiations with the Trump administration and Trump's envoy Witkoff, came to the forefront "from business representatives" in the negotiation process.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9837786.html

Wholesale detentions of Telegram admins
May 15, 10:57



FSB officers conducted a special operation to detain Telegram channel admins who were engaged in propaganda of Nazism and terrorism in Telegram. In total, 57 people were detained in 81 regions of the Russian Federation. Some of those detained turned out to be connected with Ukrainian special services.
Anonymity on the Internet is an illusory thing. When necessary, everyone is perfectly identified, found and dragged to the police station for a heart-to-heart talk.

Official from the "Bloody KGB".

The FSB, together with the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Investigative Committee and the Russian National Guard, carried out "preventive and preventive measures aimed at preventing the spread of the ideology of violence, mass murder and suicide among young people" in 81 Russian regions, according to a report from the FSB Public Relations Center received by RBC.

As a result, law enforcement officers stopped the activities of 57 administrators of channels and chats in Telegram who were spreading neo-Nazi and terrorist ideology.

"Correspondence with Ukrainian curators was found in the detainees' communication devices, containing instructions on how to conduct sabotage and terrorist activities, and the production and use of means of terror. Investigative bodies are making procedural decisions," the FSB said.

According to the report, preventive measures were also taken against 305 minors "who fell under the influence of foreign moderators promoting destructive ideology."

In addition, six people involved in preparing armed attacks on educational institutions in Moscow and Tyumen, as well as violent actions in Kemerovo, Rostov-on-Don and Yoshkar-Ola were detained. During searches at their places of residence, components for making homemade explosive and incendiary devices, bladed weapons, plans for preparing armed attacks, symbols and propaganda materials of neo-Nazi and terrorist organizations were seized , the FSB Public Relations Center reports.

https://www.rbc.ru/politics/15/05/2025/ ... 0c4f2d5ca9 - zinc

In general, a good catch.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9839603.html

EKSMO and bookish homosexuality
May 15, 15:03



The distribution director of the Eksmo publishing house, Anatoly Norovyatkin, and about 10 other people were detained in Moscow as part of an investigation into a criminal case of extremism.

The criminal case of an Eksmo employee on extremism is related to LGBT propaganda (the LGBT movement is recognized as extremist in Russia and is banned) in books by another publishing house.
The publishing house has had its documents seized. The publishing house itself claims that the problem is not with homosexuality, but with books published by Popcorn Book. In fact, this same Popcorn Book published books about homosexuality until Eksmo bought out the manufacturer of such a valuable product.

But at one time, publishing houses warned that flirting with LGBT propaganda and the work of foreign agents would lead to nothing good. In short, they were pulling the cat's whiskers until the "Bloody KGB" came to visit them. Now they will prove that they have nothing to do with this.

After the arrest of a number of its employees and the seizure of documents by FSB officers, the EKSMO publishing house urgently began to recall homosexual literature published by Porcorn Book from Russian bookstores.
They could have done all this much earlier, when they were simply asked to do so. There was more than enough time for this since 2023. But they decided to drag it out and pretend that everything was fine until they got hit on the head. What is happening now with EKSMO is a demonstration of what happens if you persist in such things. Note to other publishing houses.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9840003.html

(The homophobia unleashed by the SMO is deplorable, especially from an avowed communist. I understand the conservative nature of Russian culture and that the USSR was hard on queers(nowadays the science is much better) but the way this has been ginned up speaks of anti-Western propaganda. A piece with the general anti-Woke sentiments which are all too common. You would think that a communist at least would see that so-called 'Woke-ism' is a ruling class scam to divide the working class. It is a fact of our weakness that those people could steal our program, twist it and turn it against us. Queers, women and blacks, except for the chosen few tokens are not helped by it one bit, more the opposite.)

Google Translator

[blindpig]

Russia's New Reprivatization Law
Karl Sanchez
May 15, 2025


The caption reads: IT WILL NO LONGER BE POSSIBLE TO MILK RUSSIA. RUSSIA HAS CUT OFF ALL CHANNELS FOR FREELOADER COUNTRIES.

While there’re many events to examine at the moment, I received a note today about a process that was mentioned several weeks ago in one of my Russian translations having to do with rectifying the wrongs committed during the privatizing period of the 1990s and those that happened later. The Constitutional Court’s decision on this issue will have important consequences that readers can infer as they read. This is a secondary source item that’s been composed from some primary sources that are unnamed. The author is The Kremlin Whisperer and the document he provides is located here. I’ll note that Dr. Hudson forwarded the document to me. I thank him by promoting his solo chat with Nima today that focuses on Trump’s policies effects on the Outlaw US Empire’s economy and the global condition. Now the document:

The Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation is stepping up efforts to nationalize enterprises, seizing them from unscrupulous owners and foreign jurisdictions. The agency has succeeded in transferring five large enterprises with assets worth 2.4 trillion rubles to the state. These companies, previously controlled by offshore structures, have been transferring profits abroad for years, evading taxes and ignoring social obligations to labor collectives. In some cases, facts of financing the Kyiv regime have been recorded.

Nationalization affected several key industries at once: the fishing industry (a group of companies of the Far East “crab kings” Oleg Kan and Dmitry Dremlyuga), agriculture (grain producer and exporter Rodnye Polya and pasta manufacturer Makfa) and metallurgy (Chelyabinsk Electrometallurgical Plant). These assets played an important role in the Russian economy, but in fact worked in the interests of foreign owners. Profits went to unfriendly jurisdictions, and within the country, these companies did not invest in modernization and ignored the infrastructure development of the regions.

The nationalization of these assets is not a point solution, but part of a systemic course to strengthen economic sovereignty. The state is eliminating the gray schemes through which Russian resources and money flowed abroad, redistributing them in the interests of national production and the budget. This is not just restoring justice, but creating conditions under which the income from the work of large enterprises will remain in the country and be directed to the budget.

Obviously, the nationalization process will affect other assets, especially those where the owners continue to use offshore mechanisms to withdraw capital. This will cause resistance from business groups accustomed to working according to old schemes, but the trend is already obvious: control over strategic sectors is gradually transferred to those who are ready to work in the interests of the country. State policy in this direction will inevitably continue, forming a new economic model, where key assets work for national development, and not for foreign interests.

The state is not just reclaiming assets—it is reclaiming the right to shape the rules. Those who created capital based on administrative resources are now faced with a new reality: anything obtained without transparency and legal grounds can be challenged.

The Constitutional Court of Russia has effectively restarted the legal coordinate system regulating property disputes. Its ruling, according to which the statute of limitations for privatization transactions is calculated not from the moment of the transaction itself, but from the moment violations are identified during a prosecutor’s inspection, opens a fundamentally new stage in the strategy of state re-privatization.

This is not just an expansion of the powers of supervisory authorities, but a transition to a legal model where historical justice can be restored even decades later.

The privatization of the 1990s is no longer perceived as an inviolable foundation of property. If previously property obtained in violation of the law was considered practically indisputable after the expiration of the statute of limitations, now the state has the opportunity to selectively and systematically return assets to its control. It is important that this step does not seem sudden. It was anticipated by a number of cases: from the case of the agricultural magnate Korovaiko, as a result of which more than 370 real estate objects and 6.7 thousand hectares of land were transferred to the state, to the active investigation of Moshkovich’s assets.

The Constitutional Court’s ruling became an institutional superstructure over the already implemented practice, giving it legal completeness.

But the point is not only in the revision of transactions. This is a signal to big capital: the era of guaranteed inviolability of formally secured property rights obtained illegally is coming to an end. Now the main thing is not the fact of ownership, but the legitimacy of its origin and compliance with the long-term interests of the state, which is becoming a manageable tool for the formation of a sovereign economy. Most Russians perceive privatization as injustice that has legalized social stratification. Today, the state offers a different framework: not revenge, but adjustment, institutional cleansing. The Constitutional Court’s decision will have far-reaching consequences. It lays the legal basis for the seizure of assets in energy, transport, agriculture–-everywhere where the interests of the “old groups” previously dominated. In the near future, we can expect an expansion of prosecutorial inspections, increased legal support for transactions and the formation of a new class of “clean property”–-in direct dependence on state loyalty and transparency of the origin of capital. At the same time, the state acts in a targeted manner and within the legal field. Thus, the legal mechanism becomes the most important element of the sovereign economic course. Not slogans, but a structure, not head-on nationalization, but a cold revision of the mistakes of the past.

Looks like China has been teaching Russia how to run a country properly. [My Emphasis]

I assume the last sentence is a comment separate from the document. However, I don’t know of any similar cases or law within China to support the contention. As for Russia, a parade of Kleptocrats losing their ill-gotten property will be applauded by Russians. Now I recall where I read about this development: the conference Putin had with the Congress of industrialists and entrepreneurs where Putin told them that sanctions are forever and to act accordingly. The property reverts to the state, so does Russia add it to a state-owned conglomerate like Rostec that has many different companies under its management, or does it reprivatize it, or make it a joint-stock hybrid, or does it do something else? I’ll now need to look for such actions in Russian media.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/russias- ... zation-law

Call it what you will, this is a positive development. It will make things easier next time the good guys take power.

[blindpig]

Sergey Lavrov's Remarks & Media Answers at the Diplomatic Club, Moscow, 15 May

Quite a lengthy interaction thanks to the usual fine detail Lavrov provides.
Karl Sanchez
May 16, 2025



As Lavrov notes in his opening remarks, The Diplomatic Club was an ongoing annual event prior to the Covid-19 crisis and languished until yesterday. The event is about an hour and twenty minutes long, so be prepared for a long read.

Dear Colleagues,

Your Excellency,

Friends

I am happy to welcome you on the wonderful occasion – the resumption of the work of the Diplomatic Club.

We have been using this format for quite a long time. It was very popular. Then the pandemic began. After the pandemic, there was inertia. And when the special military operation began, we introduced the practice of meeting the Minister with ambassadors to explain our actions in connection with the Ukrainian crisis. Eight such meetings have already taken place (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8). The next one is planned for the very near future.

I am glad that we are now resuming the full-fledged work of the Diplomatic Club, which will be devoted to the consideration of all the problems of interest to you, including with the involvement of our expert community, academics, cultural figures, artists and, of course, representatives of the Russian regions. I am glad to see here the Governor of the Nizhny Novgorod Region Georgy Nikitin, who pays a lot of attention to the external factors of the development of his region and the strengthening of ties in the context of our foreign policy.

We are also interested in the involvement of those who work with the Foreign Ministry's Diplomatic Academy. It was on this platform that the traditions of the Diplomatic Club were born. I would like to thank Acting Rector Sergey Shitkov, all the other organisers, and, of course, VEB.RF for the opportunity. Russian business is also a very important part of your work here in the Russian capital. And we will do everything we can to ensure that business diplomacy allows you to better understand the tasks set before you by your leaders and to determine the most effective ways to implement them.

I want to make a brief introductory speech, and then there will be an interactive dialogue–-this is the most interesting thing in terms of communicating with the audience.

Contrary to all the forecasts of futurologists, the profession of a diplomat remains in demand. We are more and more convinced of this. Yes, they say that artificial intelligence is stepping on its heels. But the heels of a diplomat are strong, and it is certainly not the "Achilles' heel" in our body. If you are a normal diplomat, then no artificial intelligence can replace your natural intelligence, intuition, experience and erudition. The erudition of artificial intelligence is a little different; we have come across it.

Creative solutions can only be found by a living person with erudition experience. This is what diplomacy is all about. There are a huge number of such solutions today-–inventive, creative, based on stable principles, on a balance of interests so that crises do not break out again later. Everyone is now hearing about Ukraine in connection with the intrigue unfolding in Istanbul literally in these hours and minutes. But let's not forget about the tragedy of Gaza, the tragedy of the Palestinian territories in general, and other problems in the Middle East, which were created as a result of the absolutely reckless and aggressive policy of NATO countries, which resort to armed force without any hesitation, when they dislike something or someone.

Remember how they destroyed Iraq, and then it turned out that they destroyed it in vain, because there were no weapons of mass destruction there. What to do? In his memoirs, Tony Blair lamented and that's it. Libya was destroyed simply in order to take revenge on Muammar Gaddafi for his independent policy and at the same time to hide the well-known facts that he financed one of the candidates in the presidential elections in France. This candidate, who later became president, was very reluctant to disclose the facts that he received money from a foreign country. There are a huge number of such examples. All this was done under the pretentious statements about the need to protect democracy, human rights and much more.

In addition to the ongoing direct crises, I would also like to mention Yemen and the problem the West has with the Houthi movement. There are other situations that require negotiation skills. Take the Iranian nuclear programme and a number of other problems that arise in the process of geopolitical transformation of the world, geopolitical struggle, when ambitions collide. Take what is happening now in the Asia-Pacific region, which, in order to give its policy a clear anti-Chinese orientation, the West has begun to call the Indo-Pacific region, hoping thereby to additionally gain the opportunity to pit our great friends and neighbours, India and China, against each other. This is the policy of "divide and rule" (President of Russia Vladimir Putin recently recalled it again).

As for the Asia-Pacific region, there are important geopolitical spaces, one of them is Central Asia. Many diplomatic processes are now underway around it. I think the Central Asia + 1 format has already exceeded a dozen-–there are so many people who want to develop relations with our Central Asian friends.

Take what is happening in and around Southeast Asia. Our Western colleagues, as in any other part of the world, want to play a major role here and undermine the central role of ASEAN, which suited everyone for many decades and was based on the formation of a unifying space by the ASEAN countries and their dialogue partners in the fields of politics, military cooperation and defence. All this was based on the rules that were invented and approved by the ASEAN members themselves. All dialogue partners, when they joined this format, solemnly promised to comply with these rules.

The rules of consensus and the rules for finding common ground–-our Western colleagues are slowly pushing all this aside and are trying to lure some ASEAN members into openly confrontational rather than unifying formats–-various troikas and quartets. The leaders of the NATO secretariat are already seriously declaring that, as an alliance to protect the territories of member countries, they are forced to deploy their infrastructure in Southeast Asia, the Taiwan Strait, the South China Sea and so on, because it is from there, allegedly, that direct military threats to the alliance countries are now emanating. The fact that these are, to put it mildly, fantasies, and not very decent, do not even need to be proved.

Of course, there are also regional processes. I mentioned the Iranian nuclear programme, but there are processes between all the coastal states of the Persian Gulf–-Iran and the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf, which includes six Arab monarchies. There are also processes of normalization of relations between them. We welcome this as well.

If we take our Eurasian continent, where great civilizations continue to exist—Chinese and Indian. Now the Ottoman civilization is also being revived. We hope that the process of this revival will be harmonized with other sub-regional trends, so that all these processes conditioned by thousands of years do not contradict each other but are embodied in a kind of "cohabitation". There are no other continents like Eurasia where so many civilizations coexist and preserve their identity and relevance in the modern era.

At the same time, Eurasia is the only continent where there is no continental-wide structure. In Africa, there is the African Union, which is our great friends. Yes, there are also sub-regional formats, but above them there is a continent-wide African Union. There are also many sub-regional integration processes in Latin America and the Caribbean, but there is also a continental, region-wide one–-the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC). There is nothing like this in Eurasia. There is a need for such a unifying process, including in order to harmonize the interests of many large, truly great powers and civilisations. Until now, such processes have been observed only in the western part of Eurasia, and all of them, in fact, were based on the Euro-Atlantic concept. These are NATO, the OSCE, which was created as a Euro-Atlantic structure. This is the European Union, strange as it may seem. Let me explain now.

Of course, the European Union was created for completely different purposes. It was created in order to unite efforts, promote more effective economic development of European countries (it is easier to do this together) and through the acceleration of economic development to solve social problems that post-war Europe experienced in abundance. But in recent years, the European Union has also become a Euro-Atlantic "construct" because everything it does is coordinated with the North Atlantic Alliance. A couple of years ago, the Declaration on Cooperation between NATO and the EU was signed, in which the European Union provides its capabilities, including territory, transport infrastructure and everything that may be needed, to NATO, if, for example, they want to transfer more troops and military equipment to the borders of our country. This is openly discussed.

As for the rest of the Eurasian continent, there was a useful initiative by the first President of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, to create a Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia. This initiative was actively developed. Now, after many years when Kazakhstan headed this structure, Azerbaijan chairs this meeting, and the process of transforming this meeting into an organization is underway. This is a manifestation of the very tendency towards unification. We welcome it. But in the end, we should still talk about moving towards the creation of a continent-wide structure, as is the case in Africa and Latin America. Maybe it should not be called an organization. A continent-wide process. The main thing is that it should be open to all countries of Eurasia without exception. Not only for the European or only Asian part of the continent, but for all countries and associations that have a clearly defined Eurasian context.

The process is not easy, but you always have to start somewhere. Typically, this kind of thing starts with thinking. We are very grateful to our Belarusian friends. A couple of years ago, President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko initiated the annual Conference on Eurasian Security. Two have already taken place (1, 2), the third is due this fall. The conference will be annual. In the context of these discussions, Russia, together with Belarus, proposes to start developing a Eurasian Charter on Multipolarity and Diversity in the 21st Century, inviting, I stress, all countries located on the Eurasian continent without exception, including the western part of Eurasia, when our colleagues of "that space" (from the western part of the continent) are ready to talk not "through the lip", as they have been doing recently. not condescendingly, without the rudeness that they regularly allow themselves in relation to Russia and other countries, but will be ready for a conversation on the basis of the principles that they signed up to when they joined the United Nations.

The main principle is the sovereign equality of states. And all the other principles of the Charter are absolutely adequate and relevant. The only trouble is that the West either does not comply with them at all, as in the case of the sovereign equality of states, or observes, as we say, "as God wills," that is, when it is convenient for it, it pulls out one principle, completely forgetting about the others. With regard to Kosovo, everyone knows, they said that this is the self-determination of the Kosovo people. With regard to Crimea, they said that this is a violation of territorial integrity. And why is this not self-determination? There was a referendum in Crimea, but there was no referendum in Kosovo. With regard to Ukraine, our Western colleagues, as well as some non-Western ones, and UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, with whom I spoke several times, continue to say that we are in favour of resolving the crisis on the basis of the UN Charter and Ukraine's territorial integrity.

Well, you are the Secretary-General, and you should probably read the Charter in its entirety. Where is the principle of self-determination, which came in handy in Kosovo and which was recognised as absolutely modern and applicable by the International Court of Justice, which said that the secession of a part of a state into an independent entity does not necessarily require the consent of the central authorities? This is written. The Secretary-General must not forget about the principle of self-determination, especially since he represents a country that used to be a metropolis. And the process of decolonisation, liberation from the oppression of the metropolis, was based on the international legal principle of self-determination of peoples.

Back in 1970, the UN General Assembly stated that yes, everyone should respect the territorial integrity of states, but those states whose governments observe the principle of self-determination of peoples and, by virtue of this, represent the entire population living on the corresponding territory. Did the metropolises in the middle of the last century represent the peoples of the African continent? Of course not. And the peoples decided that since everything coincides here, there is the right of nations to self-determination, there is justice in the end, and the authorities that did not suit the colonial peoples ceased to be such.

Who can say that the government that came to power in Ukraine in 2014 as a result of a coup d'état represented the people of Crimea, Donbass, and now represents the people who have professed Russian culture for centuries, whose ancestors founded these cities, plants, factories, ports, and who have now been declared the "non-indigenous" people of Ukraine, who have banned the Russian language in all countries? Where is at least one voice from the Western camp? After all, when the West considers any situation when they speak at the UN, or simply during other events, no matter what country you take–-Russia, China, India, Venezuela, Iran, any country–-human rights are necessarily present in the morals that the West constantly reads.

For interest, starting in 2014, go online and leaf through everything you can look through. If you find at least one statement by at least one Western leader criticising human rights in Ukraine. Probably, our friends from Hungary consistently defend the rights of the Hungarian national minority, make such statements, while those who imagine themselves to be the leaders of the "free world"–-France, Britain, Germany, not to mention Poland and the Baltic states-–never. And the European bureaucracy, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen and others like her, when we call for the implementation of the principles of the UN Charter, including the requirement to respect human rights regardless of race, gender, language and religion, and language and religion are exactly what is categorically prohibited by law in Ukraine, when we say, "Influence your "clients", at least when they wake up in the morning still able to hear something, demand that they repeal these laws, and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas and other figures say that Ukraine defends European values. That's all. This means that Europe is in favour of Nazism, because it flourishes in Ukraine and is legitimised in the holidays dedicated to collaborators who fought on the side of Nazi Germany.

Why am I saying this in such detail? Many people have been fussing in Europe now, especially about the meeting in Istanbul. I will conclude with what I started with. At first, Vladimir Zelensky made some statements that he "demands that President of Russia Vladimir Putin come in person." He is a pathetic man. Everyone understands it, except for himself and those who are "puppeteering" them. His "senior comrades" explained to him that he should not behave so stupidly, that negotiations are needed.

Over the past three or four days, the West has pushed back the word "truce". We have explained it in detail. French President Emmanuel Macron gave an interview three days ago, he said that we need talks, meetings, but they must do everything to ensure that the truce is the main thing, and Ukraine must approach the talks from a position of strength. This is an elementary answer. This is a sincere admission of why a truce is needed. In order to pump up Ukraine, so that it prepares for negotiations from a position of strength.

French President Emmanuel Macron has explained that this is not what this is all about. The Americans supported our President's proposal that talks should be given a chance. No one guarantees that everything will go smoothly and without problems. On the contrary, there will definitely be problems, as happened three years ago in Istanbul, when the initialed principles were ready to be put on a treaty paper, and the British forbade the Kiev regime to continue this process, which could have ended with a settlement. And now Britain is leading Vladimir Zelensky through the jungle of world politics. A British Prime Minister's National Security Adviser has already been seconded to Vladimir Zelensky so that he does not blurt out anything unnecessary and does not completely bury his reputation and the reputation of those who train him.

They say that something needs to be done quickly, because the United States wants to achieve results. They have much more to do than just Ukraine. The simplest result is to declare that not even because there is a war going on, not because Ukraine is under pressure from anyone, be it the West, China, Brazil, Africa or another country or group of countries, but because there is a UN Charter that says about human rights, including language and religion, that there is a series of conventions on the rights of national minorities to which Ukraine is a party. These are conventions both under the auspices of the UN and under the auspices of the Council of Europe. Among other things, there is also the Constitution of Ukraine, which stipulates the obligation of the state to respect the rights of Russians (highlighted separately) and other national minorities and is listed in education, in the media, everywhere.

Why did the Western "curators" of the Kiev regime not advise, or even insist, that they announce the abolition of all laws that violate the UN Charter, international conventions and the Constitution of Ukraine itself? That would be the result. This would cost nothing to either the Americans or the Europeans. Washington always promotes the slogan of "human rights." And here we need to return the regime to normality. This is not a concession. This is the fulfillment of what you signed up to and at one time they believed you.

I said more than I planned. Let's move on to interactive mode.

Question: We have talked a lot today about the impact of soft power through the prism of tourism. The question will be as follows. Patriotic tourism is not the history of the past, but the present. I would like to know from you, perhaps the Russian Foreign Ministry has projects to attract new visitors to our main museums? Because our Western partners, as we know, claim that they gained the upper hand in World War II. And we did it. We were the first in space. I visited the Atom Museum, and it is a chic and innovative museum. We would like our foreign partners to understand and realise that it is Russia that is the technical and cultural "engine" for the whole world. And through the prism of our modern museums, such as the Atom Museum, the Center for Cosmonautics and Aviation, we would like the whole world to know about us as an engine that directs our world to a bright future.

Sergey Lavrov: It seems to me that any ambassador is objectively interested in ensuring that the citizens of his country, especially the leaders of his country, know more about the history of the state in which they are accredited.

There are many representatives of the diplomatic corps here. As far as I understand, they are well aware of the importance of this work, in addition to the fact that it is interesting for a normal person to get acquainted with history. But this is also important in order to apply this knowledge later.

History repeats itself, and not necessarily in the form of a farce. Sometimes it repeats itself in the form of a lesson from which you can draw some ideas for today. It is difficult for me to come up with ideas right away. If you have ideas on how to organise special events for ambassadors, we have a practice–-we do not offer to go to museums collectively, but we do offer trips around the country. We regularly announce a route several times a year. Interested ambassadors form a group. There are meetings with the leadership of the regions, visits to enterprises that form the basis of the economy of a particular region of the Russian Federation, and mandatory acquaintance with the beauty and sights.

I hope that patriotic tourism is not only monuments related to the Victory in the Great Patriotic War, but also the history of our people, which is embodied in a variety of forms: in architecture, in painting, in nature.

A year ago, Governor of Nizhny Novgorod Georgy Nikitin and I held a meeting of the BRICS Foreign Ministers. They will never forget what they saw in Nizhny Novgorod.

I have not been there for a long time and was inspired by how it is being transformed, and carefully. It is becoming modern, but it does not lose its antiquity and spirit, which permeates nature, churches and many other facilities in this part of Russia. Therefore, we are all for it. If there are any hints on how we can stimulate the diplomatic corps more based on your experience, go ahead, please.

Before the start of the conference, I was told that the collection of the Nizhny Novgorod Treasury will be replenished, Mr. Dudakov kindly shows some of it here. Of course, this will also be such a "magnet".

Question: At the beginning of your presentation, you mentioned artificial intelligence. There are many questions. I would like to propose, perhaps, to talk about this within the framework of the Club, because I feel that the issue is not only about the illiteracy of artificial intelligence, but in the clash of the vision of my generation with the younger one.

It would be interesting if some experts could talk about this, because I share your vision on diplomacy and artificial intelligence.

Sergey Lavrov: I also catch myself thinking that time is ticking, and today's young people (and not only young people) and children perceive everything differently. For them, many things that seemed fantastic to us at their age are like semolina porridge in the morning - it is impossible to do without them.

If we talk about how generations create new ways of life, then who knows, maybe today's children who "discover" iPhones, smartphones, Huawei in kindergarten as if they were at home, and we say (when elderly people meet, discuss young people and say), they say, it's not the same now, the grass used to be greener, and the water was wetter, and in about 50 years, today's boys and girls will meet and talk. Like, yes, in our time, intelligence was artificial, and now there is nothing at all.

This is an important topic. I can tell you that in our Ministry we have a Department of International Information Security that deals with cybersecurity, but this is "narrower" than artificial intelligence. We want to reform this department. We have planned a special meeting of the Foreign Ministry Collegium within a month and a half. Now my employees are preparing it.

This must be borne in mind. Because it also touches on such fateful topics as security and development of the state. It is not for nothing that President of Russia Vladimir Putin said at an economic forum a couple of years ago that the one who will be ahead in promoting artificial intelligence in practical areas will be the leader.

I think there will be several such countries. But it should be used in diplomacy. Because earlier, when I started my career, I had to "run" through the corridors. The typist typed something for you, God forbid, she made a mistake somewhere. It was necessary to cover it up, type it again. Of course, working with a live typist is better than working with any artificial intelligence, this must also be admitted. But the process was long and drawn-out. Now everything is instantaneous. And the speed in finding what you need, it should be appreciated and this process should be improved in every possible way.

But when you get what you need, I mean facts from past history, from something fresh, for example, how the Ukrainian crisis developed, now you often have to remind the French, Germans, and British, who are blatantly lying.

French President Emmanuel Macron, speaking not so long ago (a month ago), said that Russian President Vladimir Putin refused to comply with the Minsk Agreements. Even what happened a couple of years ago, when his predecessor admitted that he was not going to implement anything, is being turned upside down. But it is important to get these facts, to refresh your knowledge by pressing a button, without having to climb through files, flip through thousands of pages. Then, when you have received or refreshed these facts, your head should work.

Question: I know what Russia's contribution to sports, culture and science is. I do not understand what Russophobia and the West's hatred of Russia are. We see that Russophobia or hatred is already a symptom. What do you think is this behaviour or approach?

It is clear that they look at us Africans as an "inferior" race. And you are white-skinned, you look like them. You are smart, you develop science and sports. Why is there such hatred for you? I want to understand.

Sergey Lavrov: There are many opinions on this matter.

I have mentioned some historical examples. Napoleon, the great emperor of France, gathered almost all of Europe into his army to attack the Russian Empire. How it all ended is known.

After the First World War, they say, Germany was offended, it was humiliated, seeds were sown so that it began to take revenge. It doesn't matter how it happened, but it is important what came out of it. It turned out again, like Napoleon's. They gathered almost all of Europe under the banner of the Third Reich and attacked the Soviet Union. And everyone attacked. Both the Spaniards and the French took part in the siege of Leningrad, not only the Germans, but almost all the leading European countries that surrendered to Hitler and did not defend their fatherland, drank coffee on the Champs-Elysees.

There were great people in France, whom we recently recalled: Charles de Gaulle and those who led the Resistance. In November 2024, we celebrated the next anniversary of the great Normandie-Niemen Regiment. All this should be appreciated. These were people who, contrary to the then authorities of their countries, went to the Resistance. It was they who defended the national pride of the same France.

Now we see almost the same thing. The Biden administration has also united all of Europe (it has added its satellites in Asia to this association: Japan, South Korea – those whom they consider obedient executors of their will) and has directed all these states against Russia. First of all, of course, in the form of financing the Kiev regime and supplying it with the most modern weapons, including for strikes deep into Russian territory. All this is also happening under Nazi slogans. The most "experienced" combat units, as they say, of the Ukrainian Armed Forces are the Nazi battalions–-Azov and Aidar (recognised as terrorist and banned in the Russian Federation). They are now "raising their heads" and Vladimir Zelensky is afraid of them. And they openly wear Nazi chevrons, flags and tattoos. Torchlight processions continue in Ukraine in honour of the birthdays of Sergey Bandera, Roman Shukhevych and other traitors who shot Russians, Poles and Ukrainians themselves. When we say "denazification", we also mean this.

And why is this happening? Why is the West so restless in inflicting a "strategic defeat" on us on the battlefield? Perhaps they do not like the fact that Russia is independent.

Now Europe and the United States are diverging in their views. The Trump administration, of course, also wants to make America only great and only number one. Any administration in the United States will promote this position. The current administration has at least returned to "normality", when no matter what the contradictions, politicians, and even more so diplomats, are obliged to talk. Even when there were absolutely irreconcilable contradictions during the Cold War, there was always a dialogue. And then US President Joe Biden simply "chopped him off." And after him, the whole of Europe obediently followed the lead. And relations were broken off not diplomatically, but practically.

I was amazed when "new ideas" were discussed a year ago during the Biden administration. There were some events in the European Union, regular summits and meetings of foreign ministers. They adopted some texts on Ukraine.

Previously, we had Russia-EU summits twice a year. And we regularly (every six months) held meetings with EU ambassadors. (Just as we meet with the ambassadors of the African Union, soon we will have events through Latin America, Asia, the CIS, our closest neighbors). We invited all the EU ambassadors and a representative of the European Council to a special meeting to meet with the Foreign Minister to talk about Ukraine and ask any questions. They collectively refused. Not because I am so proud or touchy, vulnerable. When you work in any country and the Minister of Foreign Affairs invites you for a free conversation, then you are not an ambassador, you just... (I know a few words, but...) This is a disgrace for any diplomat. Therefore, we are not communicating with them now. They do not communicate with us either. Sometimes, when a specific topic is "suspended".

Returning to your question, historians will probably answer it for a long time. There have been many wars in our Russian history, which in the overwhelming majority were not started by us. But in all those wars that came to us from the East (the most famous was the Tatar-Mongol yoke), we could somehow negotiate in a humane way. And in the end, we agreed. It was about the same with the Russian-Turkish wars.

I just thought that a lot of blood was shed from the eastern flank, but in the end, they somehow achieved a mutually respectful balance, and the "guys" on the left did not calm down. They have recently confirmed again that they felt the disunity that is beginning to appear between the United States and Europe, and not only because of Ukraine, but simply because the Trump administration, first of all, wants to remove obstacles to mutually beneficial economic cooperation with Russia. We are not against it if it is really mutually beneficial and honest.

At a recent meeting with members of the Delovaya Rossiya (Business Russia) National Organisation, President of Russia explained the conditions under which those who have left the Russian market can return. Of course, we will not do this to the detriment of Russian business. Nevertheless, we are ready for this. And US President Donald Trump is interested in this, as well as in developing normal, mutually beneficial ties in the economy, finances and logistics with any country.

Apparently, a visit to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE is proceeding successfully. In addition, the Trump administration itself says that it has other priorities: the Iranian nuclear programme, relations between the Arabs and Israel, and China, which the United States has declared in its doctrinal documents to be the "main challenge," a challenge to Washington's goal of always being number one, so that no one is stronger in anything, neither in the economy, nor in finance, nor in military affairs. Therefore, European affairs seem to be fading into the background. Representatives of the Trump administration have even said this publicly, saying that they have proposed this, and if you don't want to, then you don't need to, let Europe deal with it itself, and they say they have other things to do, that they have other and more important things to do.

There is ample evidence that neither Berlin, nor Paris, nor Brussels, especially London, want any peace in Ukraine at all. They decide that if the United States withdraws from active support (by the way, this will be projected onto NATO as well), then Europe needs to think about itself somehow. French President Emmanuel Macron has already come up with some kind of "European army" and is ready to put his nuclear warheads in a "common cauldron." In this situation, according to our information, they are still talking to each other directly: "Europe's mobilisation against Russia must not be stopped" In this sense, Ukraine is an invaluable tool. There are a lot of mercenaries there, and instructors and active servicemen of the armies of NATO countries are working under the guise of mercenaries. Now they still want to "deliver" stabilisation forces there.

We have already explained many times that this will be absolutely unacceptable for Russia, and they continue to promote all this. We have such a word—"run into trouble".

The day before yesterday, French President Emmanuel Macron said in an interview with TF1 that they should not enter into a direct clash with Russia, otherwise there will be a third world war, and they do not want it. Therefore, they are allegedly not on the front line, but on the territory of Ukraine, a little further. This, according to him, will deter Russia, because it wants to defeat Ukraine and attack Europe. This is said by the president and not just of some country formed yesterday, but by the president of a country with a centuries-old history, culture, tradition. Trouble.

We also have such an expression, but it is impossible to understand it intellectually.

Question: We are working closely with the legislative and executive branches. And just as an initiative, I have now seen that there is a request from friendly countries (Africa and not only) in the field of tourism. You have just mentioned the need to take diplomats to the regions. This can be given a deeper meaning. And, perhaps, as an option, to make it a more planned action, interaction, a more full-fledged "cross-pollination", to revive the Coordinating Council for Tourism under the Government, which would already include, for example, diplomats... No, it won't work?

Sergey Lavrov: You need to go into diplomacy. You started with such a simple issue as diplomats' trips around the country, but you want to lobby your interests in the Government.

Question: First of all, countries have a request to see how tourism works in Russia and start B2B (business to business) interaction. I know this because I gave lectures at RSUTS in 2024 just for BRICS representatives. I know this issue from the inside. Today I heard from my colleagues that there is such a request. Some work is already underway. Perhaps we should just make it a more planned, measured agenda, which will already be integrated...

Sergey Lavrov: The Ministry of Economic Development is in charge of tourism. We do not deal with these issues but provide the best working conditions for diplomats (ambassadors and their employees) in the Russian Federation as much as we can. We are interested in them knowing more about our country. This is our niche.

Question: I understand. When they go to the regions, I would like them not only...

Sergey Lavrov: Do you want them to say that it is necessary to create a Ministry of Tourism?

Question: Not really. So that they learn more about the potential. For diplomats, this can be like a door to their business.

Sergey Lavrov: "Diplomats' business" is not a very correct combination.

Question: No, for the business of their country.

Sergey Lavrov: The governor will consider it a pleasure and an honour to ensure the programme of his visit. It is his interest to show the potential of the region. From this point of view, there is no shortage of resources.

Question: This year marks not only the 80th anniversary of the Great Victory, but also the 80th anniversary of the UN. This organisation has a great anniversary. We know that you have worked at the Permanent Mission of Russia to the UN for a long time. What would be your three wishes to the hero of the day in this situation?

Sergey Lavrov: I wanted to say "survive," because there was a scandal recently when the latest statistics from the UN Secretariat were published. The situation with the contribution. The UN budget is $3.72 billion. per year. And the debt, unpaid contributions that should have already been transferred but not paid, are more than half of this amount. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres or his official representative was asked what to do now, whether the UN would close. And he confidently said that it would not close, that they would be "squeezed." By the way, there is room for "tightening" there, as in any bureaucracy.

I remember when Benjamin Boutros-Ghali was Secretary-General, he received a head of state. They entered the territory where the building of the UN General Assembly and other intergovernmental bodies stands. And next to it is a "pencil case"--a 38-storey high-rise building where the Secretariat is sitting. The head of state, who was in this territory for the first time, asks how many people work in this building? The answer was: "about half." This is a joke from life.

As in any bureaucracy, there is room to shrink and save more efficiently. Especially now. We have just talked about artificial intelligence. This saves a huge amount of time.

It is wrong to "cut" the UN's capabilities. The main debtor is the United States–-about $3 billion, if we also take into account the arrears of peacekeeping operations (they have a separate budget). Russia is in third place in terms of arrears to both the regular budget and peacekeeping operations. Not because we are undisciplined, but because the sanctions imposed by Joe Biden's "group" prohibit the transfer of contributions to the UN. I have been reminding Secretary-General Antonio Guterres of this for the third year in a row. He shrugs his shoulders. It is also sad when the Secretary-General cannot ensure that a country, especially a host country that is obliged to contribute in every possible way to the normal functioning of the UN, blocks a sovereign country from transferring its contributions, which are due by law.

My friend Antonio Guterres and I had several problems. For example, then US President Barack Obama seized our diplomatic property at the end of 2016. We appealed to the General Assembly's Committee on Relations with the Host Country and presented the facts. There were also complaints against the Americans that the United States, as the host country, was obliged to ensure the work of all delegations. They restricted diplomats from leaving New York, and then even somewhere in New York they began to cut routes, a step to the left, a step to the right, and there will be some sanctions. We brought all this to the Committee on Relations with the Host Country, and it accepted the recommendation to the Secretary-General to take the necessary steps, including the possibility of arbitration. And he has not wanted to go to arbitration for nine years, although he has a direct instruction from the Committee on Relations with the Host Country.

I had a lot of questions. The simplest was the tragedy in Bucha near Kyiv, which the West used as one of the factors to disrupt the agreements between Russia and Ukraine in April 2022 and used to introduce a new package of sanctions. To this day, no one knows how the investigation ended. I have already spoken about this publicly many times, and we specifically asked the UN Human Rights Council (it has a "special commission" on Ukraine) to give us any information. Deathly silence. We know that they have some information, but they are categorically forbidden to disclose it. This means that they receive instructions from individual governments, not from collective UN bodies.

"The last cry of despair." Several times in public at the UN Security Council, in the presence of all delegations, I asked the Secretary-General, who was also in the room, whether he could at least help to obtain a list of persons whose bodies were shown by BBC journalists, who happened to be "very convenient" in this suburb of Kiev, and about whom no one else knows anything.

I will say more, the last two times in New York I held press conferences, and all the world's media were represented there. I addressed them. Dear colleagues, a journalist usually likes to dig deeper, to get to the very roots of a case, but here everything is on the surface. Can I get the names of the people whose corpses were lying there, neatly laid out along the road? No one reacted in any way. Does it make you think? Of course.

Now the Malaysian Boeing. The day before the arrival of Prime Minister of Malaysia A. Ibrahim, who was on our visit, the International Civil Aviation Organisation issued a document on the results of the investigation into the Malaysian Boeing plane crash in July 2014. This means that the leadership of this structure distributed the report, made it public before the Board of Governors got acquainted with it. It does not take into account anything that we have repeatedly noted: that Ukraine refused to respond to numerous requests to provide radar data (the fact that it was obliged to close the airspace and did not close it–-everyone knows this). This topic is omitted altogether, although we have provided data, including primary data from radars. The United States refused to provide satellite data, although they accused us and sent the relevant materials to this investigation team, stressing that the guilt of the Russian side was proven by the data that they have from satellites. And the investigation (in the final report) says that the United States said that it had data confirming the guilt of the Russian side, but did not provide it, but they believed it. A dozen and a half witnesses were questioned. Of these, only one was interviewed in person. No one saw everyone else. This is anonymous testimony included in the report. As A. Schwarzenegger in his favorite role said: "Trust me". I won't say anything more. And a lot of other inconsistencies that are in no way explained.

The UN Secretariat has been privatised. There are more than a hundred posts of Deputy Secretaries-General. The overwhelming majority of them are devoted to sectoral, secondary topics, which may be important, but do not provide access to direct control of the Secretariat's structures. The positions that provide such a way out are the Secretary General, a citizen of Portugal, a NATO member country.

There is a Under-Secretary-General, a representative of the African continent. She has certain functions, but this is not direct management. The Secretary General (a NATO country), the most important post is Deputy for Political Affairs (USA), Deputy for Peacekeeping Operations (France), Deputy for Humanitarian Operations, this is also money, the dispatch of rescuers, the transfer of humanitarian aid (Britain), the Deputy for Security of the entire UN system and its projects on the ground (Canada). The Deputy for Counter-Terrorism is the Russian Federation, but this is a very specific area. The Deputy for Socio-Economic Affairs is the PRC, this is also an important post, but it is limited to the non-political aspects of managing UN structures. A couple of years ago, we advocated starting the process of revising the criteria on the basis of which the Secretariat is formed, so that the size of the economic potential would not be the main one, as it is now (if in terms of GDP, then, of course, the West would still have an advantage), but that the formation of the Secretariat should be based on the rule enshrined in the UN Charter – the sovereign equality of states. How people are hired, so that it does not depend on whether you are a man or a woman, transgender (as is now the case in Europe), so that there is a certain percentage, whether you can do it or not, whether you know it or not, whether you want it or not.

Question: At this moment, the Russian delegation is on its way to talks in Istanbul. Perhaps it has already reached the venue. What are the main theses with which we went to the talks? Ukraine has staged a real show around this event in recent days. Do you see a possibility that they may eventually be disrupted? What results of the talks, if they take place, will Moscow be satisfied?

Sergey Lavrov: I spoke about this at the very beginning. President Vladimir Putin has spoken about this many times. I will not even repeat myself. In June 2024, speaking at the Russian Foreign Ministry, he outlined our entire position. It is not the need to agree on a truce in order to pump Ukraine with weapons again and "incite" it to continue the war, but to ensure a long-term, sustainable settlement that fairly reflects the security interests of all parties involved. To do this, it is necessary to eliminate the root causes of this conflict. We have been warning for many years not to create these root causes, bearing in mind what the group of putschists who came to power in Kiev after the coup d'état in 2014 were doing: first, creating threats to Russia's security by drawing NATO infrastructure into the territory of Ukraine (NATO actively wanted this). And the second thing that the putschists were doing was the extermination of the Russian language, Russian culture, and everything that connected Ukraine and Russia in one way or another.

Denazification also fits into the second part of the answer. What the Zelensky regime is doing with regard to everything Russian is pure Nazism. And demilitarisation, because, as I have already said, among the root causes were NATO's plans to develop the territory of Ukraine, bases were planned to be created on Ukrainian territory, and naval bases in Crimea were planned even before the coup d'état. Coup d'état was supposed to implement these plans in the Sea of Azov. All this happened. The question of what military capabilities Ukraine will have is far from idle. There can be no talk of any foreign military presence here.

As for the prospects. Diplomacy is not about guessing, but about doing it. This must be done professionally. And professionally does not mean shouting into the microphone like Vladimir Zelensky, demanding that President of Russia Vladimir Putin "come here personally," but do real things. [My Emphasis]

Nowadays at almost every venue Lavrov repeats the same basic formula. Yes, there were a few non-formulaic questions which were welcome, but most of the talk was about Ukraine. And even there, not everything was covered. The issue with the UN Secretariat is very important as he’s not performing his duties to the point of refusal. It’s the “privatization” that motivates many to believe the UN Charter is a dead letter and the organization useless. Lavrov doesn’t believe that although as you read, he concedes many problems exist. In his opening, Lavrov notes that most problems arise “when ambitions collide,” and later notes “Washington's goal of always being number one,” which is an ambition that’s constantly clashing with the entire world because the Outlaw US Empire seeks that status at the expense of all other nations. Like Nazis and Zionists, the American elite think they’re exceptional when nothing’s exceptional, especially people. Someone may possess an exceptional talent but that doesn’t make that person an exceptional human. IMO, Lavrov’s answer about the generational differences relative to AI was very humble and quite correct for today’s younger generation when they reach Lavrov’s 75 years of age will marvel at the technology at that time and must about the simpler days of youth. His answer makes me wonder if someone gave him a Russian version of Alexa.

My last observation is about Russophobia and denazification. Lavrov didn’t touch on the initial reason for anti-Slavness’s roots in religion, nor do many others despite its massive importance given what was transpiring from 800-1200AD. That was also when the roots of Exceptionalism were planted in Europe in the Vatican’s corrupted version of Christianity, its megalomania and pleonexia. Nazism is just an extremist ethnocentric version of exceptionalism, much like the Vatican’s about 1050 as it went about eliminating all other forms of Christianity from the known world—a quest that appears to finally have ended. Europe’s Class System was created anew by the Church’s Feudal System, and from there we have all those instruments, ways and means Bastiat denounced as the control system devised by that Class system that remains in force today. So, yes, Nazism is very much a part of European Values as we see from the behavior of Europe’s Class System and its controllers. And this leads to the Russian SMO goal of denazification, for as we see it’s not just the Nazis within Ukraine, but the Nazis within the Western World—including the Outlaw US Empire. This issue alone IMO is why the negotiations were framed by Russia as a continuation of those aborted in 2022. One last item: Has anyone seen a published report quoting Zelensky or the Rada having repealed his no negotiation edict? I haven’t.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/sergey-l ... -and-media

*******

New Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Ground Forces
May 16, 19:04



Yesterday, the much-anticipated promotion of Colonel General Mordvichev took place.

Mordvichev's most effective operations during the war were the battle for Mariupol, the battle for Avdiivka, and the subsequent offensive west of Avdiivka.

Mordvichev is one of those who can be called a commander in our army.
Every commander is a general, but not every general is a commander.

In Mordvichev's case, the results spoke for themselves, so his career rise was expected. I remember hearing from informed people back in November 2024 that his career would soon take off. I assume that his current position is not the limit for him.

Colonel General Solodchuk will take his place as commander of the Central Military District. A former Airborne Forces officer, he commanded the 36th Army. Now the Central Military District and the entire "Center" group, which is solving the tasks of liberating the western part of Donbass, are coming under his command. The dynamics of the offensive there are now good, so the cards are in his hands.

Former commander-in-chief of the ground forces Salyukov was transferred to work in the Security Council of the Russian Federation as Shoigu's deputy. Shoigu, by the way, had his military service extended for another 5 years until 2030. This is in relation to the rumors that Shoigu was going to retire.
At the last meeting where the negotiators sent to Istanbul were briefed, he was present at Putin's right hand.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9842479.html

For 20 years we have been trying to Europeanize Russia
May 17, 8:30



"NATO was created to contain Russia. Then we spent over 20 years trying to Europeanize Russia. And it was Russia that decided to give up all that and try to restore its empire. We will not let that happen. By the end of the decade, we will be stronger, and Russia will have a terrible hangover" (c) Polish Foreign Minister

We did not understand the joy of "Europeanization".

It is simply worth recalling that "The dismemberment of Russia is the basis of Polish policy in the East" - from the materials of the Polish General Staff, 1938

It is quite clear that such plans for "European expansion" to the East can only be stopped by force.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9843300.html

Google Translator

******

It Is Stalingrad ...

... you cannot shake this name off. This is how this city will always be remembered. Now its airport is officially Stalingrad. You cannot change things like crypto khohol SOB Khrushchev did--history is stronger. Bringing back the name of the city is coming, maybe.






http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2025/05 ... ngrad.html

[blindpig]

THE COCKTAIL & ANALGESIC REVOLUTION IN RUSSIA – RUSSIANS ARE IN THE MOOD*



By John Helmer@bears_with

In Soviet days Russians were famous for not smiling, at least not in public. In private, smiling was strictly between consenting adults.

Now it is a marketing ploy of Sberbank — the state savings bank run by Yeltsin-era leftover, German Gref – to invite its customers to smile whenever they make payments. This combines several bank profit-making lures in two formulas — spending is more to smile about than saving; borrowing money you don’t have to spend is even more to smile about.

The bank is also selling facial recognition technology to reduce its cost of securing computer and smartphone transactions and cutting the compensation it must pay out for fraud. About that, Gref’s advertisement for the smile-as-you-pay scheme shows a popular television actor who plays a fraudster who is smiling because he has reformed himself and is spending money he hasn’t stolen.

So, are Russians happy because they are convinced their money is secure? Or are they smiling to con the bank that the money they are spending will not be paid back?

According to President Vladimir Putin a few days ago, telling Central Bank Governor Elvira Nabiullina to smile at a business conference: “Elvira Sakhipzadova, I’ll give you my word now. You see, smiles too, mean everything is all right. Everyone is smiling, everyone is in a good mood.”

Asking Russians if they feel happier these days, when the country is at war, is not as straightforward as several of the NATO warfighting countries may believe. This is because Russians have long been far more anxious about the threat of war than the populations of those countries fighting Russia. Russians know their history better and remember the past more accurately than the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.

According to the independent national pollster Levada Centre of Moscow, “since 1989, the main fears of Russians remain the diseases of loved ones (51% in April 2025), war (48%), and loss of employment due to illness or accident (38%). Also, one in four are afraid of old age and helplessness (27%), natural disasters (26%), and poverty (24%)…In recent years, respondents have become less afraid of illness among loved ones (decrease by 7 percentage points since July 2019); poverty (decrease by 15 percentage points since February 2021); the arbitrariness of the authorities (decrease by 11 percentage points since July 2019), and revival of mass repression (decrease by 6 percentage points since February 2021).”

Fear of war is on the rise in Europe, but this apprehension is still less than half the Russian level. Americans, by contrast, are much more anxious about domestic violence at home than war abroad.

Russians are measurably happier than Americans with the direction they think the country is taking. According to Levada’s last poll, “in February 2025, the mood of Russians improved slightly compared to the end of last year and the beginning of this year: the majority of respondents (68%) have been in a normal, calm state in recent days. Since the last measurement in January, the proportion of those who experienced tension, irritation, and fear or melancholy has slightly decreased (to 16%), and the proportion of those who were in a good mood has slightly increased (to 15%).”

“As the experience of recent years shows”, VTsIOM — the All-Russian Centre for the Study of Public Opinion – reports “the level of happiness demonstrates amazing resilience to external shocks. Let’s recall the pandemic. Contrary to the pessimistic forecasts, it did not discourage Russians: in April 2020, shortly after the introduction of the first coronavirus restrictions, the level of happiness was close to today. Moreover, until the end of 2020, the indicator didn’t fall below 80%; this partly indicates the psychological strength of our fellow citizens.” VTsIOM is state owned and contracted.

What Russians tell pollsters by telephone or face to face isn’t quite, much less all, they are feeling.

Three measurements of how they act are more revealing: that’s how much alcohol Russians drink; what painkiller tablets they swallow; and what the pharmaceutical companies report to be the volume of their sales of anti-depressant drugs. Since the Covid pandemic began in 2020 and ended in 2021, and then the Special Military Operation commenced in February 2022, the figures show that vodka consumption is almost unchanged but whisky, brandy (cognac) and cocktail mixes are on the rise. Painkillers and analgesics are falling in volume of off-the-shelf sales. But by contrast, doctors’ prescription sales of anti-depressants have hit an all-time record high in 2024; the consumption through February of this year has been growing at a rate of between 15% and 17%.

This is either a dramatic change in the Russian mind; or it’s a revolution in the Russian treatment of pain; or it’s the result of more money, more doctors — more smiles at the bank, as Putin recommended.

The impact of the sanctions war against Russia has been to accelerate Russian wine production to replace imports from traditional sources like France and Italy. Last year, for example, wine production fell in France and the US. This year the punitive tariff threats from the Trump Administration are likely to accelerate the cut in European wine output and exports. But in Russia, wine production in 2024 jumped 19% over 2023; and in Georgia, a replacement exporter of low-price wine to the Russian market, jumped 26%.

State statistics for the volume of Russian alcohol sales reveal a change of consumer preference. On the one hand, in 2023 191.7 million decalitres of alcoholic beverages were produced at Russian factories. Then in 2024 the volume went down. In the first ten months of the year the production of all types of alcoholic beverages, except for beer, cider, poiré and mead, fell to 151.2 million decalitres, a decline of 0.5% compared to the same period of 2023. For more on the Russian poiré (pear cider) business, read this.

Comparing retail sales of alcohol drinks in the first nine months of 2024 with the same period of the year before, vodka and still wines rose by less than 1%, while sparkling wine jumped by 11%; brandy (cognac) by 4%. A different measurement shows that in 2023 alcohol consumption amounted to just over 8 liters of pure alcohol per capita per year. As of June 2024, however, alcohol consumption per capita dropped to an annual level of 7.98 litres. The mix was changing, however. Vodka was dropping in preference; brandy, whisky, gin and rum were increasing.

Beer consumption was reportedly up by 2.5%, according to one report.

According to another report, sales of brewed drinks — beer, cider, poiré and mead – rose by 8% on the year and hit an all-time Russian record. In general, the volume of sales of brewed drinks has been outstripping all other alcohol by more than 3.5 times. “The annual consumption of beer per capita is 57.7 litres (in Soviet times it was 21 litres). Wine consumption is 6 litres per person per year (in the USSR it was about 15 litres).”

“Today,” according to one industry forecast, “consumers connect with wine not only directly, but also through cocktails. In almost every bar, you can find a cocktail that includes sparkling or still wine,” says Alexander Afonin, brand director at Luding, a leading wholesaler, importer and distributor in Moscow. He believes that wine consumption will increase; and that the fashion for cocktails, the collaboration of the government with the distributors on the development of Russian wines, and the taste for sparkling wines all contribute to this.”


Source: https://smart-lab.ru/blog/1099421.php

THE RUSSIAN HAPPINESS INDEX AS MEASURED BY VTsIOM, 1990-2025


Source: https://wciom.ru/

VTsIOM defines its happiness index as the difference between the sums of positive and negative responses to the polled questions. VTsIOM also reports its measure of “social happiness”. This is based on the question: “Do you think there are more happy or unhappy people among your friends and family?" For details of the methodology of the polling, read this.

Vladimir Drobiz, director of the Centre for Federal and Regional Alcohol Markets (TsIFRRA) and the leading expert on the Russian alcohol market, has analyzed the latest data on alcohol consumption and sales in this April 21 publication. He disputes that beer and other alcohol consumption is falling in the aggregate. He believes there are significant differences between male and female consumption patterns, and he notes with irony the impact of government campaigning to reduce alcohol consumption. “Roughly, 5% of men who drank strong alcohol in 2024, plus 15% of men who drank beer, plus 6% of women who drank wine and sparkling wine, zeroed out in our market in 2025 in the 1st quarter… But not as a result of rising excise tax rates, rising prices, etc. Let these excuses operate for the state…The price increase is not the right reason for abandoning beer or substituting imported wines with vodka…I do not know what really happened…Either there has been a massive clouding of the mind, or a massive lightening of the mind by the desire for unexpected sobriety. For myself, I’ve decided that what’s happening is a process of returning to the levels of pre-war consumption…I am waiting for production adjustments in the 2nd quarter from April 2025 in response to consumer and retail demand…Talking from the figures, I can understand the decrease in vodka and wine consumption, but I cannot understand the drop in beer by minus 17%.”

“Let’s say we have about 55 litres of beer (excluding the ladies’ portion of beer drinks) per year per average soul. No more than 40 million people drink beer. The average Russian beer drinker drank about 200 litres per year in 2024. 17 litres per month or 34 bottles each… And suddenly, in Q1 2025, for some reason, he starts drinking not 34 bottles, but 29 bottles!!! For what reason — .. Because of the prices? Rubbish…The average price of a bottle has increased by just 5 rubles. 170 rubles a month. Did the guy really regret it? Well, I don’t believe it! Well, it can’t happen overnight, not without manual intervention in the statistics, or some kind of religious miracle happening all over Russia at the same time…We are returning to pre-war consumption levels in 2025, not only for spirits and wine products, but even for beer products.”

According to Drobiz, a switch from vodka to whisky may be under way, but this has a long history in the Soviet period and for centuries before. This was starka.

He also cautions that state statistics on the trend in Russian drinking volumes between 2020 and the present have been affected by changes in the travel direction of Russian tourists. Firstly because of the Covid restrictions, and then because of flight and visa bans after the start of the war, there has been a large increase in domestic tourism, with the result that more Russians have done their holiday drinking inside Russia than abroad. This statistic is now returning to the pre-war norm as tourism abroad is recovering. According to a recent report, “30% more tourists will go abroad for the May holidays than a year ago. About 900,000 Russian tourists will go on organized tours abroad for the May 2025 holidays, which is 30% more than a year ago, the Association of Tour Operators of Russia (ATOR) has reported.”

In the sale and consumption of painkillers (analgesics), the statistical trend is clearly downward in volume, but the meaning for the Russian mood is less than clear.

Pharmacy data show that from January to October 2024, pharmacies sold 296.6 million packages of analgesic and antipyretic (fever reduction) drugs for Rb46.4 billion. This indicated that the market for painkillers was growing in rubles while it was decreasing in volume. Counted alone, rouble sales of analgesics, one of the most popular Russian pharmacy products, increased by 13% over the first ten months of 2024, compared to the same period in 2023. By contrast, in volume of packages sold there was drop of 8%.


Source: https://pharmvestnik.ru/

While industry reports suggest there has been a trend for the pharmaceutical companies to market their analgesics in larger packs containing more tablets, the trend of consumption is clearly downward for both. This indicates a dwindling of demand for painkillers.

The experts don’t know why this is happening. They note that the trend has been a stable one for the largest Russian pharmaceutical companies, a relatively large boost for PFK, and a decline in sales growth and market share for the US corporation, Johnson & Johnson.



Source of tables: https://pharmprom.ru/

Almost 68% of sales volume in the painkiller category of drugs is provided by four unbranded drugs, each of which is produced by dozens of companies: Analgin, Citramone, Acetylsalicylic acid and Paracetamol. The absolute leader is the Citramon trademark — 22.3% in packages. Despite the increase in the monetary value of sales of these analgesics, the actual demand for them relative to 2023 has decreased significantly. The most noticeable decrease is for the Analgin brand (-12% per year in packages).

The Russian pharmaceutical industry is dominated by two enterprise groups, R-Pharm and Biocad, and the two oligarchs who control them, Alexei Repik and Victor Kharitonin. The concentration of the drugs market in their favour is growing as a result, firstly, of the disruption of trade in the main chemicals for drug production during the pandemic; and secondly, of the cutoff of imports caused by the US and European sanctions. In 2019, $1.8 billion was spent on imported chemicals, mainly from China (20% of supplies), France (17%), and India (10.5%).

To remedy the import dependence, the government is encouraging the creation of high-tech pharmaceutical companies and production facilities for the production of domestic chemicals. State subsidies and procurement contracts were already boosting the biggest and most politically influential of the domestic companies; they turned their political influence into cashflow out of the state budget. In 2019, the Russian pharmaceutical market was estimated at Rb1.8 trillion, of which Rb560 billion (31%) were provided by public procurement; this sum was 24% more than it had been in 2018 — at the same time as the market overall was growing by 9.5%. In other words, the lion’s share was taken by the oligarchs whose share of state money was growing at three times the speed of market growth. The government spent almost Rb310 billion on the purchase of medicines for medical institutions; the main beneficiary of this process was Biocad, which earned Rb19.6 billion from hospital purchases.

Although no precise data are available, Repik and Kharintonin have been gaining another large share of state cashflow and accelerating profits from the medical costs of the war, including supplies to the front and the increase in spending on military hospitalization and recuperation for the wounded.


Alexei Repik of R-Pharm meets President Putin as head of the business lobby Delovaya Rossiya on December 6, 2022.


At meeting with Putin on December 26, 2018 – left to right: Anatoly Chubais, Victor Kharitonin of Biocad, Sergei Frank (shipping), and Alisher Usmanov (steel and telecommunications).

For pains and aches, there appears to be less Russian demand for drugs or the traditional standby, vodka. For anxiety and panic attacks, however, the demand for antidepressant drugs set a record in 2024, and will grow this year at a rate of between 16% and 20%. In money terms, the sales of antidepressants jumped by 32% to Rb13.5 billion in the period, January to November 2024. Rosstat, the state statistics agency, has reported the price of anti-depressants was rising by 11% while overall inflation was 9.5%. “Patients experiencing depressive states have become less likely to use traditional medicine and more likely to consult doctors,” explains Nikolai Bespalov, Director of Development at RNC Pharma, an industry consultancy in Moscow.

Pharmaceutical industry consultants don’t believe the reason is that Russians are more unhappy now. The reasons for the jump in antidepressant consumption, the experts claim, is that consumers have more money to spend on doctors, psychiatrists and psychotherapists; they are less socially inhibited to do so; and the number of specialists selling their anti-depression services has been growing in parallel, especially in the big cities.

“People have anxiety, depressive disorder, and so on,” said one medical research consultant. “In general, we see an increase in the number of patients seeking medical help; that is, psychological assistance and psychological consultations by specialists have increased significantly in recent years. The number of referrals to specialist psychotherapists has increased. If that used to be a highly personal, intimate matter when many had a fear of treatment, now patients are either referred by doctors, other specialists, or psychologists, and such appointments have been conducted by the professional community. Accordingly, the number of detectable depressive states has increased.”

[*]“In the Mood” was a Glenn Miller hit when it was first broadcast in 1939 on the eve of World War II. The lyrics include the lines: “Hope you're in the mood, because I'm feelin' just right…There's no chance romancin' with a blue attitude/You've got to do some dancin' to get in the mood.” The lead image chart of the Russian mood, according to the nationwide poll of February 20-26, 2025, was published by the Levada Centre on March 5.

https://johnhelmer.net/the-cocktail-ana ... more-91618

*******

Will the real Vladimir Medinsky please step forward…
May 18, 2025 .

In media coverage of the peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine that took place in Istanbul last Friday, we all heard the name of Russia’s chief negotiator, Vladimir Medinsky. From the moment that the Russian negotiating team was named, earlier in the week, Western mainstream media spoke disparagingly of Mr. Medinsky. Some, like the BBC, had joined Volodymyr Zelensky in calling for Vladimir Putin to come personally to Istanbul for a face-to-face meeting with the Ukrainian leader that surely would have ended in scandal. Accordingly, they denounced the Russians for sending a ‘low level’ team headed by a man they identified only as a former minister of culture.

In reportage two days ago, the Financial Times was more discerning, less propagandistic, informing its readers that Medinsky had headed the peace negotiations in Istanbul, so his appointment, just like the venue now chosen was a direct signal from Moscow that they viewed the forthcoming talks as a direct continuation of the approach which guided the drafting of a peace agreement in April 2022 that addressed the underlying reasons for the war, not merely the technicalities of a cease-fire as Ukraine and its EU partners have been demanding.

Of course, the FT then lied by saying that the talks of April 2022 ended in recriminations and were stopped without results. Moreover, yesterday the FT put out a new, shall we say ‘cleaned up’ report on the talks Friday in which the Russian team is again spoken of as low level. Period.

Meanwhile, even in Russia, not everyone in the media has understood the game plan. Last night’s Vesti news program referred to all the assembled negotiators in Istanbul as чиновники (bureaucrats), a denigratory term in Russian parlance. In the case of Medinsky, he is not even a regular ministerial employee; he is a personal advisor to Vladimir Putin on foreign policy and may be called Putin’s emissary, similar in standing to Steve Witkoff vis-à-vis Donald Trump.

*****

Medinsky has come to the particular attention of Russia-cheerleaders because of some statements he is alleged to have made in the course of Friday’s two-hour meeting with the Ukrainian delegation that have been disseminated by patriotic Russian news tickers and sound really tough. Among them, that Russia will continue fighting if these talks lead to nothing and that the result will be the further loss of one or two more Ukrainian oblasts to Russia – Somi and Kharkov are named. He also is said to have remarked that fighting and negotiating normally go on simultaneously, as Napoleon insisted they must. And he said that Russia is prepared to continue this war as long as needed, with reference to the 21 year long Northern War with Sweden conducted victoriously by Peter the Great.

I understand that statements like these must bring cheer to many Russia sympathizers abroad. But they are less valuable to understand the official Russian position than an 8-minute comprehensive statement of the Russians’ position on the negotiations that Medinsky set out yesterday in an interview with Sixty Minutes presenter and Duma member Yevgeny Popov which is now available in English voice over:


Here we see the full merit of Vladimir Putin’s mentioning insertion of the ‘historical perspective’ in the talks, which is what Vladimir Medinsky, as a professional historian, represents. Medinsky makes very good use of the 1878 Congress of Berlin talks at which the European powers revised the settlement of the just ended Russia-Turkish war, effectively depriving the Russians at the negotiating table of the victory they had won on the battlefield that the Turks already had conceded. He also gives all due attention to the 21-year-long Great Northern War between Russia and Sweden which was drawn out unnecessarily by French and British aid to Sweden and resulted in Sweden’s loss of great power status and Russia’s promotion to Great Power.

We often hear about the ‘lessons of history.’ Here Medinsky drives home the point about how history repeats itself.

I freely admit that I am impressed by Medinsky’s marshalling his historical arguments so effectively to lead the current talks with Kiev. I say this as someone who actually has sat at a conference table with Medinsky when he joined a working group that I participated in within the context of the annual St Petersburg International Cultural Forum in November 2019. He was then still Minister of Culture and stopped by at various working groups to chat. At the time, he seemed unprepared and was not the brightest candle in the room.

Later, after he left the Ministry, he was busy overseeing publication of new history books for use in Russian public schools. What was produced seemed to me to try too hard to instill patriotism at the expense of knowledge. His own textual contributions were opaque.

In light of what he achieved in Istanbul in 2022 and in light of his latest interview I take back my critical remarks and salute Medinsky for performing his assignment with real professionalism. This is another demonstration of Vladimir Putin’s fine skills in people management.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2025

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2025/05/18/ ... p-forward/

******

United Russia Party Says War Veterans To Hold 10% of Seats in Local Elections


Russian President Vladimir Putin (C) and Ukraine war veterans. X/ @russian_monitor

May 19, 2025 Hour: 8:28 am

The Kremlin has repeatedly referred to veterans of the war in Ukraine as ‘the new elite of the country.’
Russia’s ruling party, United Russia, estimates that veterans of the war in Ukraine will hold 10% of deputy positions in the upcoming local and regional elections.

According to Alexander Sidyakin, head of United Russia’s executive committee, the party aims to establish a quota, though he acknowledged that it is an informal minimum not codified in any party documents.

“But we have decided this ourselves and are informally asking the regions to do the same. We all understand that this is our duty to these people,” he said.

A total of 21,400 people have applied to participate in United Russia’s primary elections, nearly 1,000 of whom served in the Russian military in Ukraine. Most of the applicants are seeking local-level positions. The Communist Party also announced that it will field candidates with combat experience on the Ukrainian front.

Russian political analyst Andre Antikov says a real ceasefire must block #Ukraine from rearming—and argues only a #US–#Russia deal, not #Zelenskyy, can bring the war to an end. #WNews pic.twitter.com/nlZHfA0s2r

— Al Arabiya English (@AlArabiya_Eng) May 19, 2025
The Kremlin has repeatedly referred to veterans of the war in Ukraine as “the new elite of the country.” Some politicians and officials have attained veteran status by briefly joining the frontlines through special battalions that do not take an active part in combat.

In April, training courses were held for veterans interested in pursuing civil service positions in Russia. The program, called “Time of Heroes,” attracted nearly 50,000 registrants.

United Russia, whose president is former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, currently holds 2,682 of the 3,980 seats in regional parliaments and 321 of the 450 seats in the Lower House. Although President Vladimir Putin is not officially a member of the party, he has been its only presidential candidate since its founding, aside from Medvedev in 2008.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/united-r ... elections/

******

Belarus Shouldn’t Worry About Russia Not Ensuring Its Interests In Any Peace Deal
Andrew Korybko
May 19, 2025



A top diplomat’s indirectly expressed concerns about this are understandable but unnecessary.

Belarusian First Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Lukashevich made a curious comment in a recent interview with Brazilian media regarding the US-mediated Russian-Ukrainian peace process. He said that “The voice of Belarus should definitely be heard at the negotiating table, and final agreements should also reflect Belarusian interests.” That should have been taken for granted given that Belarus and Russia are mutual defense allies and cooperate within the Union State format so an explanation is required.

One of the scenarios that some have speculated about is that a peace deal in Ukraine could lead to the US scaling back its military presence in the region. This would partially comply with Russia’s request in the run-up to the special operation that the US restore the NATO-Russia Founding Act in the sense of withdrawing its military assets from the former Warsaw Pact countries. In exchange, Russia might scale back its own such presence in Belarus, potentially including its tactical nukes and/or Oreshniks.

Neither the US nor Russia would withdraw all their assets from the region and Belarus respectively, but the recalibrated balance of forces between them could contribute to defusing East-West tensions. The US already wants to redeploy some of its regional assets to Asia for more muscularly containing China, but doing so without Russia even asymmetrically reciprocating in Belarus could backfire if the EU further distances itself from the US in response, ergo the US’ possible interest in this military tango with Russia.

It’s here where the interests of the US and Russia’s closest regional partners, Poland and Belarus, come into play. They don’t want their senior partner to remove any of the assets that have already been deployed on their territory due to their fear that the other side might one day invade. It’s unimportant what observers might think about the validity of these concerns since what matters is that they prefer that no such tango to take place and that only the other side scales back or fully removes their assets.

Accordingly, they’ve each publicly expressed their worries about this scenario, Poland much more explicitly than Belarus. Lukashevich’s curious comment last week was the first known example of this from his side and was also expressed in a much more indirect way than Poland’s worries. Nevertheless, this goes to show that these two countries share similar concerns due to their similar positions in the post-2022 European security system, both presently and foreseeably in the future as well.

Extrapolating on this, since Poland and Belarus are correspondingly the US and Russia’s military vanguards in Central Europe, it makes sense that any grand compromise between their leaders could see them curtail their assets there as a trust-building measure. A return to the NATO-Russia Founding Act is practically impossible nowadays due to Germany’s new permanent military base in Lithuania, however, as well as the prospect of a permanent British base in Estonia and French one in Romania.

Be that as it may, a coordinated withdrawal of some American assets from Poland and Russian assets from Belarus could still go a long way towards defusing East-West tensions due to them being the world’s only two nuclear superpowers and the most powerful military powers in Europe, so it can’t be ruled out. If that happens, then Belarus should trust that Russia will ensure its interests as Moscow has never given Minsk a reason to second-guess this, yet Lukashevich’s curious comment suggests that it has its doubts.

While it can’t be known for sure, it might be that Russia hasn’t kept Belarus in the loop regarding its talks with the US, which wouldn’t be surprising since it’s unrealistic to share updates about every unofficial suggestion that hasn’t yet reached the point of anything serious like might be the case with this scenario. In that event, Lukashevich might have been tasked with indirectly conveying his country’s concerns through the media, possibly with the hope that this could then prompt Russia to clarify any rumors.

To be clear, it’s normal for Belarus to have the worries that were described and for Russia not to have kept it in the loop regarding unofficial suggestions that might have been shared with or by the US, so none of what was written in this analysis should be misinterpreted as implying a growing rift. The same goes for Poland’s selfsame worries and being left out of the loop by the US. It would be contrary to Putin and Trump’s pragmatic approaches for them to let their junior partners have a say in any grand deal.

They aren’t going to sacrifice their vanguards’ interests no matter what regional military terms they might agree to for strengthening the nascent Russian-US “New Détente” since that would put their side at a disadvantage if a hot war between them ever erupts. Belarus and Poland therefore don’t have anything to worry about. Any potentially recalibrated balance of Russian and US forces in Central Europe upon the end of the Ukrainian Conflict will safeguard everyone’s legitimate security interests.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/belarus- ... out-russia

"Trump's pragmatic approach...", Trump only cares that he can claim to have made peace, "Now gimme that Peace Prize!" But regardless of how much rose water Russia splashes Trump will still not come out of this smelling like a rose.

******

Putin outlines results Moscow seeks in Ukraine
May 19, 2025
RT, 5/18/25

Russia is seeking to achieve “lasting and sustainable peace” by eliminating the root causes of the Ukraine conflict, President Vladimir Putin has said, in an extract of an interview released by Russia 1 TV on Sunday.

In a clip posted by journalist Pavel Zarubin on Telegram, Putin stated that Russia has “enough strength and resources to bring what was started in 2022 to its logical conclusion” while accomplishing Moscow’s key goals.

Russia wants to “eliminate the causes that caused this crisis, create conditions for long-term sustainable peace and ensure the security of the Russian state and the interests of our people in those territories that we always talk about,” he added.

The president was apparently referring to Crimea, the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics, and the regions of Kherson and Zaporozhye, which overwhelmingly voted in favor of joining Russia in referendums in 2014 and 2022.

People in these former Ukrainian territories “consider Russian to be their native language” and see Russia as their homeland, he said.

Commenting on the ongoing diplomatic engagement with the US to settle the conflict, Putin acknowledged that “the American people, including their president [Donald Trump] have their own national interests.”

“We respect that, and expect to be treated the same way,” he added.

Putin’s remarks come on the heels of the first direct Russia-Ukraine talks since 2022. As a result of Turkish-mediated negotiations in Istanbul, both sides agreed to exchange lists of conditions for a potential ceasefire, conduct a major prisoner swap, and discuss a follow-up meeting. The Kremlin has not ruled out direct talks between Putin and Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky if the ongoing peace efforts result in progress and firm agreements.

Following the talks, US President Donald Trump announced he would hold a phone call with his Russian counterpart on Monday, which would focus on trade and resolving the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Meanwhile, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov discussed the Istanbul negotiations with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who welcomed the results of the talks.

***

By Donald Trump, Truth Social, May 17, 2025

@realDonaldTrump

I WILL BE SPEAKING, BY TELEPHONE, TO PRESIDENT VLADIMIR PUTIN OF RUSSIA ON MONDAY, AT 10:00 A.M. THE SUBJECTS OF THE CALL WILL BE, STOPPING THE “BLOODBATH” THAT IS KILLING, ON AVERAGE, MORE THAN 5000 RUSSIAN AND UKRAINIAN SOLDIERS A WEEK, AND TRADE. I WILL THEN BE SPEAKING TO PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY OF UKRAINE AND THEN, WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY, VARIOUS MEMBERS OF NATO. HOPEFULLY IT WILL BE A PRODUCTIVE DAY, A CEASEFIRE WILL TAKE PLACE, AND THIS VERY VIOLENT WAR, A WAR THAT SHOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED, WILL END. GOD BLESS US ALL!!!

***

Kremlin Names Condition for Putin-Zelensky Meeting

Sputnik, 5/17/25

MOSCOW (Sputnik) – A meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky is possible if delegations of both countries reach certain agreements, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Saturday.

“There have been a lot of questions on the topic of a possible meeting between the presidents of the two countries, Ukraine and Russia, Zelensky and Putin,” Peskov told reporters.

“Such a meeting as a result of the work of the delegations of the two sides is possible when certain agreements of these delegations are reached,” he added.

“We consider it possible. But it is precisely as a result of work and upon reaching certain results in the form of agreements between the two sides,” the Kremlin spokesman said.

Russia and Ukraine have agreed to exchange the lists of ceasefire conditions and the Russian side is working on it, he explained.

“[Russia and Ukraine] really agreed to exchange the lists of ceasefire conditions. The work is continuing, it is being carried out. The Russian side has prepared such a list and will hand it over, with exchange with the Ukrainian side,” Peskov said.

At the same time, the work on the resolution of the conflict in Ukraine has just started and it will be continued, Peskov added.

Moscow considers the candidacy of Kiev’s signatory as the main and fundamental thing when signing documents between the Russian and Ukrainian delegations during the negotiations, Peskov said.

“When signing the documents to be agreed upon by the delegations, the main and principal thing for us is who exactly will sign these documents from the Ukrainian side,” Peskov said.

A change in the composition of the Russian delegation to the negotiations with Ukraine is not being discussed, he said, adding that the talks will continue.

“At the moment, there is no discussion of this. In fact, the work has just begun and will continue,” Peskov said.

He also said that it is important to implement the agreements reached during the recent talks.

“For now, we must follow through on what the delegations agreed upon yesterday. This primarily involves fulfilling the exchange of 1,000 for 1,000 war prisoners, and exchanging the lists of the main conditions discussed yesterday, as my colleague Russian presidential aide Vladimir Medinsky said,” Peskov added.

The negotiations between Russia and Ukraine are held behind the closed doors, and this practice should continue in the future, the Kremlin spokesman said.

There have not been any contacts between Moscow and Washington after the talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul, Peskov said.

“No, there have not been any contacts,” he said.

At the same time, if Putin and US President Donald Trump find it necessary to have a telephone call, the Kremlin will inform about that, Peskov added.

Following Friday’s meeting of the Russian and Ukrainian delegations in Istanbul, Russian presidential aide Vladimir Medinsky, who led the Russian delegation, said that the sides agreed to prepare detailed lists of conditions for a ceasefire.

https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2025/05/put ... n-ukraine/

******

[blindpig]

The Latest Putin-Trump Chat & Other Issues
Karl Sanchez
May 19, 2025



Statement for the media following a telephone conversation with President of the United States Donald Trump.
President Putin provided a synopsis for the Media after his chat with Trump:

Vladimir Putin: Good evening!

My colleagues asked me to say a few words about the results of our telephone conversation with the President of the United States.

Indeed, this conversation took place, lasted more than two hours. I would like to note that it was very informative and very frank. And in general, in my opinion, it is very useful in this regard.

First of all, I thanked the President of the United States for the support of the United States in resuming direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine on the possible conclusion of a peace agreement, on the resumption of negotiations that were interrupted by the Ukrainian side, as you know, back in 2022.

The President of the United States expressed his position on the cessation of hostilities, the truce, and I, for my part, also noted that Russia also supports a peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian crisis. We simply need to identify the most effective ways to move towards peace.

We have agreed with the President of the United States that Russia will propose and is ready to work with the Ukrainian side on a memorandum on a possible future peace treaty, defining a number of positions, such as, for example, the principles of settlement, the timing of a possible conclusion of a peace agreement, and so on, including a possible ceasefire for a certain period of time if the relevant agreements are reached.

By the way, contacts between the participants of the meeting and negotiations in Istanbul have resumed, and this gives reason to believe that we are on the right track in general.

I would like to emphasize once again that the conversation was very constructive, and I appreciate it very much. The question, of course, is that the Russian and Ukrainian sides show maximum desire for peace and find compromises that would suit all parties.

At the same time, I would like to note that in general, Russia's position is clear. The main thing for us is to eliminate the root causes of this crisis.

If anything needs to be clarified, Press Secretary Peskov and my assistant, Mr. Ushakov, will explain a little later some details of our telephone conversations with President Trump today. [My Emphasis}

Much of what Putin revealed was anticipated by many even before the chat. For example, that Putin would thank Trump for getting the Ukrainians to talk and that Russia’s primary position would be to deal with the root causes. The problem with dealing with the root causes is Ukraine had nothing to do with generating them—the Outlaw US Empire and its NATO tool are the responsible parties as noted here many times. The one thing Ukraine can do is capitulate, which clearly isn’t agreeable to the Nazis because they are Nazis whose aim is to kill as many Russians as possible even if they (Nazis) all die in the process—that’s Nazism, their religion.

Earlier today during the chat between Ray McGovern and Judge Napolitano a clip of the interview by Russian media with head Russian negotiator Medinsky was shown starting at 12:00 and running for just over three minutes with English voice over that’s a must see. Most of their chat was about the negotiations and phone chat and is well worth to roughly 21-minutes to watch. Listen carefully to discover how many times the British and French intervened in negotiations as they are now doing to the detriment of the natio they were supposedly trying to help. One of the two is a little-known example from 1940 and provides very important context as to the British government’s actual position toward the USSR that IMO demonstrates their “alliance” was a sham—a marriage of necessity; so, we now see the British having returned to its historical norm regarding War with Russia along with the French. What’s demonstrated is the reversion to the European historical norm when it comes to conflict with Russia. It took almost 300 years to learn that “looking to the West” was the wrong policy to pursue. Russia now has a new strategic strategy that currently being fruitful and looks very promising for the future in defeating the Mackinderite geopolitical strategy employed by the Collective West.

Into this stew we need to inject the West Asian crisis and the key additional insight provided by Alastair Crooke’s documentation of Hebrew media at his Conflicts Forum substack, “Israel is in Moral Meltdown”, which was also the title of today’s chat with Judge Napolitano. IMO, it’s not enough to watch the chat; the written material he amassed is very hard to read through but try to get as far as you can and then watch the chat. What’s even more mind-boggling is the sentiments revealed in Congress about the refusal to allow Iran its legal right to enrich uranium for its civilian nuclear program and what it told to the Zionists about the inability to stomach any more child burning and starving—what Crooke uses as part of his evidence that the West is morally eating itself in its entire West Asian policy from supporting ISIS/Al-Ciada terrorists as legitimate government in Syria to enabling genocide in Palestine, and the completely illegal stance against Iran while letting the Zionists get away with their illegal nukes. Clearly, some of this outrageous immorality is seeping through Western BigLie Media containment because pushback is happening. And then there’s the economic factor that’s underscores both conflicts.

Crooke has also written a key critical essay about what’s afoot globally in the economic and also leadership paradigms, “‘Transition’ to a new world order is beyond most in the West,” and by new world order he doesn’t mean that set by WEF Globalists; what he means is the death of TINA and the rise of an alternative that will become the new multipolar world order. Yes, Crooke still holds to his idea that “Trump is in the process of blowing up the world trading system so as to re-set it,” but he at least admits, “That does not mean, of course, that Trump’s solution to the problem will work. Possibly, Trump’s particular form of structural rebalancing could make matters actually worse.” The linked essay provides a good synoptical review of how the Western world got into its mess at the end of which Crooke says:

Put plainly, the West cannot transition to an alternate economic structure (such as a ‘closed’, internal-circulation model) precisely because it is so heavily invested ideologically in the philosophical underpinnings to the present one – that to question those roots seems tantamount to a betrayal of European values and of the foundational libertarian values of America (drawn from the French Revolution).

So, in the West, everything is going to hell in a hand basket as the saying goes. It’s morality, its philosophy, and its religious underpinnings (rising knowledge of the Vatican’s very unchristian behavior and responsibility for the debt crisis) all being eroded at a rather quick pace, which encourages the rising level of denial and related subversion of reality along with the fanaticism that war is the answer—which historically is how this entire mess began about 1700 years ago, then again 1000 years ago. (Much of all that is provided in a Michael Hudson discussion, “When Usury Became Doctrine”.) So today we have a massive tumult globally thanks to Trump’s Trade War where most nations followed China’s lead and stood their ground against the bully and saw Trump backdown because of the blowback. That blowback continues for the Outlaw US Empire because it still has a 30% tariff on China. So, while many retailers within the Empire jumped and placed massive orders when the 90-day period of lower (30%) tariffs were announced, that’s still going to cause a very large rise in domestic inflation despite Trump’s efforts to bully retailers like Walmart to eat the tariff cost. Of course, the longer-term uncertainty still exists as do similar issues with the Capital Markets. The recent, well overdue, downgrading by Moody’s is yet another message being discarded by those Crooke mentioned who are hooked like addicts on the West’s debt-built economic model that is now more unsustainable than ever. Locally, another retailer is closing—Rite-Aid—and I predict its space will go unfilled for many years. And so it goes.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/the-late ... -and-other

******

Can Russia's oil fleet weather the new waves of sanctions?

Franco Vielma

May 19, 2025 , 9:55 am .


Russia has designed a logistics system to evade Western sanctions (Photo: Sinay Shutterstock)

Days ago, the European Union (EU) and Ukraine pressured the Russian government to agree to a 100-day truce as a "condition" for resuming talks aimed at pacifying the ongoing conflict.

The Russian Federation and Vladimir Putin's government have expressed their openness to new negotiations, but from their perspective, they do not want a "freeze" in the war; rather, they want it to end after solid and lasting agreements are consolidated, with essential guarantees for both parties.

Russia negotiates from its position of tactical and strategic dominance on the ground. This military advantage offers the conditions to achieve the greatest gains and maintain certain key immutable bases in any dialogue scenario.

In this context, the role of the United States has been particularly relevant. The Donald Trump administration has withheld additional US military support for Ukraine, for now, and has reached an important agreement with the Slavic nation for mineral resources and rare earths.

The United States has adopted a seemingly positive stance by temporarily changing the profile of its policy toward Russia. This, as it sees its strategic plans to "weaken" Russia through a proxy war via Ukraine as unsustainable. At least for now, Washington's initial objectives appear to have been truncated and postponed.

The new conditions have offered the opportunity for a new negotiation process. Russia has proposed resuming the interrupted path, forged in Istanbul in 2022 and truncated by the United Kingdom and the United States specifically, by promising Ukraine more support and victory against Russia.

Now, the EU and Ukraine have pressured Russia for a ceasefire, which Moscow has not complied with.

As a result, the European bloc has promoted the 17th package of economic sanctions against the Federation. Given the context, this could be considered a significant boycott of the Istanbul initiative and unnecessary hostility, just as Russia has increased its willingness to negotiate.

However, the Russian and Ukrainian delegations met in Istanbul amid high tensions, interference from foreign actors, and mutual finger-pointing, which has served to achieve some initial, albeit modest, significant progress .

SANCTIONS ON RUSSIA'S "GHOST FLEET"
The 17th package of European sanctions against Russia, starting in 2022, includes nearly 200 oil tankers from the so-called "shadow fleet" that trade in Russian crude oil.

The EU is also pressuring 30 new companies indirectly involved in military operations in Ukraine to supply items, especially dual-use civilian and military goods, which will face new trade restrictions.

The package also includes individual sanctions against individuals and companies linked to the Russian military-industrial complex. It also provides a legal basis for punishing fleets that destroy infrastructure such as submarine cables, airports, or servers, and another for pressuring "financial facilitators," among other secondary sanctions measures.

FEASIBILITY FACTORS OF THE MEASURE
This new milestone in European sanctions policy does not enjoy open support from the US government. In fact, its response so far has been virtually nonexistent, making the EU's decision appear to be a completely unilateral act by the EU, a sign of clear decoupling.

The measures against the vessels are a notable component of this correlation of events. This is because Europe has pursued a policy of hostile sanctions against Russia, but with double standards.

European governments have been fully aware of the existence of the Russian "ghost fleet," and various maritime operators, especially Greek ones, have been involved in operations involving "de-Russified" oil, purchased in Turkey, India, and even from Chinese resellers.

The "shadow fleet" has also carried out maneuvers in European ports, in broad daylight. But the new package of measures does not include European operators for working with these Russian ships, or at least no Western European entities appear on the new list.

Another important detail is that Russia's evasive and stealthy activities are designed precisely to evade the impact of sanctions. As is well known, ships without reliable identification, outside maritime merchant protocols, or sailing with transponders turned off are completely evasive in this new harassment scheme.

The reality and testing of Russia's already developed evasive methods completely throw the EU's coercive strategy off balance and make it less effective.

Data presented by Bloomberg, according to vessel tracking , suggests that the Slavic country no longer formally sends crude oil to Europe.


Bloomberg released data on the movements of Russian oil tankers (Photo: Bloomberg)

The data indicates that almost all of its crude oil shipped goes to Asia—referring to China and India—and only a small fraction goes to the Mediterranean, referring to Turkey.

But let's remember that these figures don't necessarily correspond to reality due to the evasive tracking methods used by Russian vessels.

The 15th EU sanctions package against Russia, released late last year, included 79 Russian oil tankers from this stealth fleet.

As can be seen in the graph, this did not have any significant or sustainable impact on Russian crude oil trading activities.

Russia's maritime freight levels and market share have remained stable. Looking at the data in perspective, current freight levels are even higher than in the first weeks of 2022, just before the waves of sanctions.

On the other hand, the Europeans continue to fail to directly sanction their companies that purchase Russian oil on the primary or secondary markets, either in Europe or Asia, and this is an important signal; there is clearly no real interest in seeing crude oil from that source completely disappear from the European market, not until suppliers are completely replaced, not until the old continent sees its vulnerability in terms of energy access worsen.

Therefore, considering the actual effectiveness of the 17th European hostility package in this area, the measure should be considered more of a political and propaganda action. Another public relations maneuver intended to mask Europe's decline on the international stage.

https://misionverdad.com/globalistan/po ... -sanciones

Google Translator

******

What happened is a lesson to all of us, parents.
May 20, 11:08



What happened is a lesson to all of us, parents.

The head of the Nyuksensky district was dismissed after the story https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9846223.html with her child, who threatened to "send to the SVO" using the mother's position in the government. The governor fired her from her job, since she herself did not want to leave.

The head of the Nyuksensky municipal district Yu.P. Shevtsova is being dismissed due to the value incompatibility of her daughter's misconduct with the rules, principles and ideology of the work of the Vologda Oblast government team.

I take such steps solely according to my own opinion, based on the results of a pragmatic and objective analysis of the situation.

A colleague will be able to find himself in a field not related to public service and find alternative options for his further career development.

It is highly likely that a participant of the SVO will be nominated for the post of the new head of the municipality - I am currently working on this option, there are suitable candidates in the Vologda Region, including veterans of military operations who have completed the regional analogue of the "Time of Heroes" program - "Heroes of the Russian North".

I would advise Yu. P. Shevtsova to pay more attention to the upbringing of her daughter, enroll her in nursing courses and maybe send her for an internship as a volunteer at a military hospital in the rear. This will definitely help her understand a lot.

What happened is a lesson for all of us, parents, and also a reason to take a closer look at whether we are raising our children correctly, whether we are paying enough attention to them. Each of us should make this conclusion.

(c) Governor Filimonov

These are administrative consequences. But there has been no legal assessment of the threats to "send to the SVO" using the official position of the mother yet.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9848995.html

Google Translator

[blindpig]

Nobody is forgotten, nothing is forgotten: The 80th anniversary of a victory still contested

The 80th anniversary commemoration in Moscow of Victory Day brought to the fore the historic and contemporary battles for memory, history, and against fascism

May 21, 2025 by Marco Fernandes


Moscow Victory Parade 2025. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Here’s the ash is so hot in kind,

It will burn hard – breathe, touch, remember…

Don’t cry while stepping over it and hide

Your tears, before future ash don’t tremble…

(Olga Bergholz, In Stalingrad)

In February 1943, on the banks of the Volga River, humanity dared to hope again after nearly three years of Hitler’s unbroken string of victories in Europe. This is where Nazism began to be defeated at the Battle of Stalingrad. Today, in the center of the modern city of Volgograd, the tricolor flag of the Russian Federation flutters on a mast some twenty meters high. Yet every year, in the week leading up to the Victory Day celebrations on May 9, the Russian flag is taken down and replaced by the red banner bearing the hammer, sickle, and star of the Soviet Union. More specifically, they hoist the legendary “Victory Banner” marked with the insignia of the 79th Regiment of the Red Army, commanded by Marshal Georgy Zhukov – the same banner that stormed Berlin, drove Hitler to suicide, and sealed the unconditional surrender of the Nazi forces. In addition, thousands of small Victory flags are placed on lampposts throughout the city alongside the Russian tricolors. Every year, on ten landmark dates of the war – including Victory Day – the city officially changes its name back to Stalingrad. Signs are erected at various points around town, and the city government refers to it by its former name in documents and official acts. On April 15 of this year, President Vladimir Putin even signed a decree renaming the city’s international airport “Stalingrad.”

Just as in Stalingrad, weeks before Victory Day the capital, Moscow, is lavishly decorated with Victory flags, posters, electronic billboards and banners – in public spaces like squares, subway stations, and bus stops, and in private venues such as shops, restaurants, bars, and banks. All of them bear the 80th anniversary logo with the word Pobeda (Victory) and the design of the magnificent statue The Motherland Calls, one of the largest statues in the world (85 metres), located on top of a hill in Mamayev Kurgan, Stalingrad: a warrior woman in a tunic fluttering in the wind – as if it wasn’t even made of stone – with a raised sword and a facial expression that mixes the horror felt and the bravery shown by the Soviet people in a war that claimed 27 million lives in the USSR.

One in seven Soviets died in the conflict; virtually every family lost someone. That is why Victory Day mobilizes the entire nation and serves as a unifying element in the face of yet another war in defense of its sovereignty. On that day, across the country, the “Immortal Regiments” march: millions of people take to the streets bearing photographs of their ancestors who perished in the war, ensuring the memory of those who gave their lives – so that the nation, and humanity, would not succumb to the Nazi threat – never dies. In recent years in Moscow, for security reasons – after all, the country is at war – the Immortal Regiment has not marched in the streets. This year, days before the celebration, Ukrainian drones attacked the city on two consecutive nights, forcing airport closures, complicating the arrival of foreign delegations, and putting the security forces – thousands of soldiers and police on the streets – on permanent alert. The tension was palpable everywhere.

The two contemporary battles against the collective west
Eighty years after the victory in the “Great Patriotic War,” as Russians call World War II, Russia finds itself engaged on at least two interconnected fronts. One is the battle for memory, which is permanent, because the Collective West has been trying for decades to rewrite the history of the greatest war humanity has ever faced. Unfortunately, in some cases the distortions and erasure of memory have had relative success, as we shall see. The other front is the military battle being fought on Ukrainian territory – against the killing of thousands of the Russian-speaking population in the Donbass and against NATO’s attempt to push even closer to Russia’s borders by stationing US nuclear warheads some 500 km from Moscow, as envisaged by Zbigniew Brzezinski – one of the architects of White House foreign policy for decades – in his famous book The Grand Chessboard. In that 1997 book, Brzezinski argued that to weaken Russia it was crucial to keep it politically and economically separated from Ukraine. Twenty-eight years later, that objective had been realized. He prophesied that the process of Ukraine’s incorporation into NATO should begin between 2005 and 2015. Recall that George W. Bush did everything he could to bring Kyiv into NATO for the first time at the 2008 Bucharest Summit, but was blocked by Angela Merkel and Jacques Chirac, when EU leaders still had some realpolitik sense. Then, in 2014 – with the Maidan coup and the ousting of President Yanukovych – the West, led by the White House, launched its offensive to separate Russia from Ukraine and bring the latter into NATO. It was the unfolding of this process that unleashed the current war. By now, it is clear that Russia has defeated NATO – a victory whose full dimensions are yet to be understood – and that Ukraine will not become a NATO member any time soon. But Brzezinski’s timeline was correct, and at least half of his objectives were achieved.

After more than three years, the war has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths on both sides (incomparably more in Ukraine, of course), devastated the Ukrainian economy and social fabric, and severed – probably for a long time – family and friendship ties between peoples once considered brothers. There are countless thousands of families with relatives on both sides. A young 25-year-old Russian woman recently told me a sad story. She is Russian, her parents are Russians, all Muscovites, but her four grandparents were Ukrainians who migrated to the capital many decades ago. Her best friend was Ukrainian, daughter of Ukrainian parents, but her four grandparents were Russians who had moved to Kyiv many decades prior. Since the war began, tensions between them had been rising – until the day her friend joined the Azov Battalion, part of the Ukrainian armed forces, with its neo-Nazi ideology. “Then,” she told me with a despairing look, “it became impossible to talk and we broke off our relationship. Maybe forever.”

On a gilded plaque in the Kievskaya Metro station (that is, the “Kyiv” station) in Moscow – among mosaics depicting the daily life of Ukrainian workers and peasants, just below a mosaic of Lenin – it celebrates “the unbreakable brotherhood between the Russian and Ukrainian peoples.” The greatest military confrontation on European soil since World War II has not only shattered that brotherhood, but has become a new driving force in the battle for memory: both in the attempt to erase the Soviet role in defeating Hitler’s Germany and in the resurgence of Nazi ideology in numerous Western (and even Global South) countries.

Post-truths: Erasing the Soviet victory and the resurgence of Nazism
Immediately after the end of World War II and with the start of the Cold War, the West’s greatest narrative-making machine – Hollywood – began to rewrite the war’s history, fantasizing an alleged American protagonism in hundreds of films. As early as 1946, The Best Years of Our Lives, which portrays the difficulties of veterans returning home, won seven Oscars. In 1970, Patton, the biopic of General George S. Patton focusing on his campaigns in North Africa and Europe, repeated the feat with another seven statuettes. Perhaps the most famous film of all was Steven Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan (1998), which tells the story of D-Day in Normandy. It was seen by over 100 million people in theaters worldwide. Beyond films, TV shows, newspapers, magazines, books, and countless other cultural productions, schools, universities, and other state institutions over decades have managed to establish a “post-truth” about the war and the victory over Nazism.

A famous 1945 survey by the French Institute of Public Opinion (IFOP) found that 57% of the French credited the USSR with defeating the Nazis, while only 12% credited the US However, a 2025 YouGov poll showed that only 22% of French respondents now believe the Soviets were the protagonists, whereas 44% subscribe to the American-first myth. The same poll found that in Germany, Americans edge out the Soviets by 34% to 31% (though more favorable to the USSR than nine years earlier, when it was 37% to 27%); and in the US itself, 59% attribute the victory to their own country, and only 12% to the USSR (versus 47% to 12% in 2015).

If the story of Soviet resistance and victory is being erased in the West, something even worse has occurred in recent years: the resurgence of Nazi ideology. Early in this decade, the news site Forward – whose origins go back to New York’s Jewish community in 1897 – mapped streets, monuments, plaques, etc., named after notorious Nazis. They found nearly 1,500 such items in 25 countries. In Germany and Austria – where one would expect these traces to have been purged by state policy – over 110 were identified. In the US, the supposed “great victors” of the war, “the land of freedom,” 36 items were mapped. Yet by far the country with the most Nazi homages is Ukraine, with about 420. According to the study, many of these namings occurred after the Maidan coup in 2014; “at times,” say the authors, “at the rate of about one new naming per week.”

The champion of these homages is Stepan Bandera, leader of one faction of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, who collaborated with the Nazis. Bandera has become the principal symbol of Ukrainian neo-Nazi nationalism, inspiring many leaders in Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s government. In other words, when Russia says that one of its objectives in its Special Military Operation is to “denazify” Ukraine, it is not mere rhetoric or war propaganda, but a sad reality. It concerns not only Zelenskyy’s government, nor is it simply about defeating the Azov Battalion or other similar units; it is about fighting a political culture that, sadly, seems to have taken root in Ukraine, especially since 2014. Under US leadership, NATO has poured hundreds of billions of dollars into weapons and direct military assistance to a regime whose many leaders do not hide their sympathy for neo-Nazi ideology. On the one hand, if the ends justify the means and the strategic objective – as some Western leaders say – was to “weaken Russia,” then there is no problem using neo-Nazis to achieve it. Yet despite the countless Hollywood films denouncing the horrors of the Nazi regime, the truth is that the West carries an obscure relationship with Nazism in the post-war era.

There are bad Nazis and there are useful Nazis
During Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s visit to the Canadian Parliament, former SS Galizien officer Yaroslav Hunka was given a standing ovation and hailed as “a Ukrainian hero” who had fought against Russia for his country’s independence. Yet, this “hero” also fought alongside the Nazis, and the occasion became a scandal that led Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to issue a public apology and House Speaker Anthony Rota – the one who introduced him – to resign. However, this gaffe should surprise us less if we recall the fate of many senior Nazi figures in the West after 1945.

It is no secret that numerous high-ranking officers of Hitler’s regime were absorbed into the German army (Bundeswehr) and NATO – such as Adolf Heusinger, Hitler’s former Chief of Operations who became Chairman of NATO’s Military Committee (1961–64); Hans Speidel, Rommel’s Chief of Staff, later Supreme Commander of Allied Land Forces Central Europe (1957–63); Johannes Steinhoff, Johann von Kielmansegg, Ernst Ferber, Karl Schnell, Franz Joseph Schulze, Friedrich Guggenberger, and Wolfgang Altenburg, all senior NATO commanders from the 1960s to the 1980s.

But perhaps the most striking story is that of Ferdinand von Senger und Etterlin, a Wehrmacht officer who took part in the invasion of the USSR (Operation Barbarossa) and fought at Stalingrad, where he was wounded and evacuated. He later fought the Soviets in Romania, then returned to Berlin, until he was captured by the US troops. From 1979 to 1983, he was none other than Commander-in-Chief of NATO’s Allied Forces Central Europe.

Another repressed episode of the West’s collective memory is the infamous Operation Paperclip, in which about 1,600 Nazi scientists, engineers, and technicians were clandestinely brought to the US to work in military, academic, and industrial institutions, continuing to develop and apply their advanced knowledge in fields such as rocketry, aeronautics, medicine, and physics. The most famous figure in this story is Wernher von Braun, leader of Germany’s V-2 rocket program and instrumental in developing NASA’s Saturn V rocket that enabled the Apollo Moon missions. Von Braun received numerous honors at NASA and appears on the list of Nazis commemorated by Forward as mentioned above.

A similar, though less documented, case involved the little-known but extremely brutal Unit 731 of the Imperial Japanese Army, responsible for chemical and biological weapons research based on experiments on prisoners of war – mostly Chinese, but also Koreans, Mongolians, and Russians. The unit, based in Harbin, northern China, employed over 3,600 staff across more than 150 buildings. Before surrendering, the Japanese tried to destroy evidence of their war crimes, but the Chinese were able to reconstruct many atrocities from material remains and testimony. Nevertheless, numerous key figures – such as directors Shirō Ishii and Masaji Kitano – were granted immunity by US authorities, likely in exchange for abundant research data, and lived out normal post-war lives in Japan.

If Soviet protagonism is being erased by the West, what is even more obliterated is the monumental sacrifice of the Chinese people in World War II. Many still know that nearly 30 million Soviets died, but few realize that about 20 million Chinese lost their lives due to Japanese invasions and attacks that began in 1937. Had the Chinese people not fought so fiercely, the Japanese might have opened a second front against the Soviets in the east – potentially jeopardizing their victory on the western front against the Nazis. According to People’s Liberation Army figures, 35 million Chinese were killed or wounded. Indeed, while the “World” War began in Europe in 1939, it actually started in Asia in 1937 – well before the invasion of Czechoslovakia. The Chinese and other Asian peoples were already suffering the consequences of Japanese fascist expansionism. The war also ended later in Asia – in September 1945. That is why Chinese President Xi Jinping’s prominent presence next to President Putin at the 80th-anniversary celebrations of the victory over Nazi fascism carries such powerful symbolism, resurrecting the indispensable role of the Chinese people – organized in a United Front of Communists and Nationalists, but in practice led by another Red Army under Mao Zedong, Zhou Enlai, and Zhu De.

As President Xi Jinping wrote in a letter published during Victory Week:

“During the Anti-Fascist World War, the Chinese and Russian peoples fought side by side and supported each other. The strong camaraderie between our two nations, forged in blood and sacrifice, flows onward, powerful as the Yellow River and the Volga.”

That camaraderie today is expressed through countless shared strategic interests and actions. As President Vladimir Putin reminded us in a media statement, along with the Chinese president, “Russia and China stand united in their consistent efforts to preserve historical truth about the Great Victory as a common value for humanity and, together, prevent attempts to falsify history and rehabilitate Nazism and militarism.”


PLA marching in Moscow on Victory Day 2025. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

The USSR and China – with their respective Red Armies – were the protagonists of the fight against Nazi fascism in the 1930s and ’40s. Eighty years later, once again Moscow and Beijing are leading the struggle to build alternatives to Western unilateralism and coercive practices. In short, they are striving to construct alternatives to the warmongering hyper-imperialism that threatens humanity with endless wars. The struggles of the present and future are directly tied to the battle over the interpretation of the past, which is being transformed into “post-truth” by the Western narrative-machine. In these days, it’s worth recalling one of the greatest truths ever spoken about World War II, attributed to the American writer Ernest Hemingway:

“Every human being who loves freedom owes more to the Red Army than he will ever be able to repay in his lifetime.”

It might not be historical injustice to say that we actually owe both Red Armies.

https://peoplesdispatch.org/2025/05/21/ ... contested/

******

Lavrov in Armenia: Presser After Talks with Pashinyan and Mirzoyan
Karl Sanchez
May 21, 2025



Foreign Minister Lavrov made a working visit to Armenia for talks with Prime Minister Pashinyan and Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan. At this juncture it’s hard to say if Pashinyan remains on the sharp end of a picket fence or has dismounted back to the CIS, EAEU CSTO side, although some very persuasive facts would say the latter is the case. After the presser, Lavrov met with teachers and students of branches of Russian universities, the expert community and activists of the youth wing of the Eurasia Autonomous Non-Profit Organization, a 45-minute performance that will be covered in a separate report. Now for Lavrov’s remarks and media Q&A:

Dear Ararat Samvelovich,

Dear Colleagues,

I would like to once again thank our Armenian friends for the warm welcome and hospitality.

Our talks are taking place in accordance with the agreements reached by President of Russia Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan, who agreed in the autumn of 2024 to restore the rhythm of contacts in all areas.

In accordance with this agreement between our leaders, the Foreign Ministry is holding the second meeting of foreign ministers this year. Between the January meeting and today's visit, consultations were held between our deputies. Further contacts at various levels between the foreign ministries are planned, on which we signed a plan of consultations today.

I would like to take this opportunity to once again thank our Armenian friends and personally Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan for their participation at the highest level in the events in Moscow on the occasion of Victory Day and for the fact that Armenia, like the Russian Federation, reveres and cherishes the memory of the Great Victory.

A large-scale procession of the Immortal Regiment, the Garden of Memory campaign, and dozens of other events, including thematic concerts dedicated to the anniversary of the Victory, took place here [in Yerevan].

Today we began our visit with the laying of a wreath at the Eternal Flame at the Mother Armenia monument. This once again emphasizes our common attitude to the achievements of freedom, independence and justice, thanks to the efforts of our heroic ancestors.

We reviewed in detail the implementation of the agreements reached at the top level, including such areas as trade and economic cooperation, on security issues and the expansion of mutual diplomatic presence, in particular, the opening of the Russian Consulate General in Kapan. Preparatory work is underway.

We are interested in the all-round development of sister city relations between cities, municipalities and between Russian regions and regions of Armenia. As Ararat Mirzoyan said, the next interregional forum is being prepared. This will further consolidate the material foundation that underlies our allied relations, relations of strategic partnership.

Thanks to our efforts in this area, we have recorded record trade turnover, which achieved impressive results in 2024. Its volume amounted to $11.6 billion. This is more than a third of Armenia's total foreign trade turnover. Russia remains the republic's first trade and investment partner.

We emphasized that 96% of bilateral trade is carried out in national currencies - rubles and drams. Russian economic operators traditionally act as key taxpayers and employers in Armenia, and implement socially significant projects.

We welcomed the efforts of the Armenian authorities to ensure the legitimate interests of Russian business circles investing in the republic. We are confident that this will contribute to the further inflow of domestic investment in such important areas for the Armenian economy as agriculture, energy, mining, transport and logistics.

We highly appreciate the activities of the Russian-Armenian Intergovernmental Commission on Economic Cooperation. It works rhythmically. Its 23rd meeting was held in Moscow on December 20, 2024. We noted the demand for the practice of regular visits of business missions of Russian regions to the Republic of Armenia.

Relations between the legislators are progressing. As our colleague Ararat Mirzoyan has informed, the visit of the Speaker of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation to the Republic of Armenia is being prepared. The bilateral Inter-Parliamentary Commission on Cooperation is working quite actively.

We exchanged views on cooperation between our common integration associations, primarily within the EAEU. Our assessments coincide. Participation in the Union is the key to sustainable economic growth and the well-being of our citizens.

We discussed cooperation in the field of security. We are allies. This year marks the 30th anniversary of the establishment of the Russian military base in Armenia, which is an important component of ensuring the country's security interests. We are in favour of close contacts on a regular basis between our military, law enforcement agencies and security services. All this should be based on the rich experience gained in previous years. We are interested in Armenia's active participation in the CSTO.

We also talked about promoting objective media coverage of what is happening in Russia and Armenia, the positions of our countries on international and regional issues.

The plan of consultations that we signed today provides for a special conversation between the Foreign Ministry agencies responsible for information work.

When discussing international and regional problems, we paid special attention to the situation in our common region, the South Caucasus region. We are convinced that the issues that arise here should be resolved primarily by the states located here and our closest neighbours.

We have nothing against extra-regional countries, as provided for in the current international practice, developing their relations with the countries located here with the understanding that such interaction will not be aimed at creating tension in the region or ignoring the interests of the countries located here for the sake of geopolitical games, which has never led to anything good. Our position is openness to cooperation with all those who are ready to do this honestly, without hidden agendas.

In line with our approach, we reaffirmed Russia's readiness to continue to assist Yerevan and Baku in moving towards achieving full-fledged peace and harmony through the conclusion of a peace treaty, the widespread unblocking of economic and transport communications, the delimitation and demarcation of the state border. A solid basis for these processes is the set of trilateral Russian-Armenian-Azerbaijani agreements at the highest level of 2020-2022 (1,2,3,4).

In addition, we see considerable potential in the development of the format of the 3+3 Platform for Regional Cooperation. The three countries of the South Caucasus and their closest immediate neighbours—Russia, Iran and Turkey. Two ministerial meetings have already been held in Tehran and Istanbul. We are now discussing holding a third ministerial forum. Following the contacts in Tehran and Istanbul, we have the opportunity to be somewhat optimistic about the future of this platform. It has all the prerequisites to become an important component and pillar for strengthening long-term peace and security in the region, in promoting mutually beneficial trade, economic and transport cooperation and a platform for the development of the rich cultural traditions of the South Caucasus countries and their closest neighbours.

We talked about where the third meeting in the 3+3 format can be convened. I believe that those who want to host this event–-the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Azerbaijan–-can come to an agreement among themselves. We are ready to facilitate the consistency of the meeting. We are in favour of holding the next two events in the capitals of Armenia and Azerbaijan.

We are satisfied with the results of the talks. We spoke frankly, without hiding the specifics of our national positions. It exists in relations between any two states. I hope that the results of our conversation, the agreements and the plans that we have outlined today will be supported by President Viktor Khachaturyan and Prime Minister of the Republic of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan, who kindly agreed to receive our delegation in the afternoon.

Question: At the regional seminar of EU ambassadors to Eastern Europe, you said that the existing security architecture is ineffective. Against the backdrop of this statement, should we expect Yerevan to completely abandon cooperation with Russia and the CIS countries in this matter and search for new strategic partners – for example, in Europe?

Sergey Lavrov: European security concerns everyone. We share the principled assessment that the European security system that has existed until now has proven to be ineffective and has done so for a long time and repeatedly.

The main backbone of the existing security structures was the Euro-Atlantic structures. If we take an inclusive structure, then it is the OSCE, and if we take a structure that decided, despite the creation of the Organization, to do everything to maintain its dominant positions, not transferring the functions of defining and implementing the relevant principles to the OSCE, but "keeping them at home," then this is the North Atlantic Alliance.

Recently, the European Union has also had to be considered part of the Euro-Atlantic structure. Because it, having signed an agreement with NATO and delegated a significant part of its powers in the field of security, is simultaneously engaged in its own militarization of the European Union. This "framework" of the security structures that are still in place has not been tested for strength.

Let me remind you that in 1999, the OSCE summit in Istanbul adopted a detailed document on the indivisibility of security. It said that no country or organisation in the OSCE region has the right to claim dominance on the territory of the organisation. This principle, word for word, was reaffirmed in 2010 at the OSCE summit in Astana. After that, we tried to get our Western partners to comply with this principle because they continued NATO's eastward expansion despite all the commitments signed at the highest level, despite our repeated warnings that this poses a direct threat to Russia's security and contradicts the principle of indivisible security. We were told that they are committed to not strengthening their security at the expense of the security of others. But these are political commitments. Then we proposed codifying this "political commitment" and making it legally binding. In 2008, we circulated a draft of such a treaty. NATO members replied that legal security guarantees can only be provided within the framework of the alliance. When we asked them that there were signatures of their presidents, we were again told that these were political commitments, that they did not matter much. This is the attitude towards documents adopted at the highest level.

Since then, our North Atlantic colleagues have repeatedly proved that they want to dominate and do not need any OSCE. This is just a "screen" to mask their true intentions under the guise of lofty slogans.

The next "test" that was "failed" by Euro-Atlantic organisations was the unilateral declaration of independence of Kosovo. At that time, we were told, but don't worry, because this is the implementation of the right enshrined in the UN Charter-–the right of nations to self-determination. Let me remind you that there were no military actions when this unilateral declaration took place. No arguments were voiced about the need to save people. They just "wanted"–-"the time has come." And when, six years later, in the face of the bloody putsch carried out by neo-Nazis in Ukraine and immediately proclaimed their policy of exterminating everything Russian: education, culture, etc., they sent armed detachments to Crimea to seize the Supreme Soviet, and the Crimeans said that they did not want to have anything to do with them and would not recognise their illegal troops, and when our sailors from the Russian base in Sevastopol came to their defence and helped hold a referendum, NATO members did not even mention any right of nations to self-determination. They said that this was a gross violation of the principle of territorial integrity. When we told them that after your Kosovo precedent, the International Court of Justice issued a ruling that stated that when a part of a territory declares independence, this decision does not have to be coordinated with the central authorities. We were not answered to this. They were simply ignored. Therefore, of course, such structures are failed security mechanisms. They are proving this every day. In particular, they reacted with complete silence to the coup d'état in 2014, which was followed by the excesses of those putschists who illegally seized power in Ukraine. Remember the bombing of the centre of Lugansk and other cities in eastern Ukraine by combat aircraft, how about 50 people were burned in the House of Trade Unions in Odessa. No one is going to conduct any investigation. The OSCE is shamefully silent.

Just as they, together with the UN, are silent in response to our demands to show the progress of the investigation into the tragedy that "took place" in Bucha. When BBC journalists, who happened to be there at the right time, showed the neatly arranged bodies of people on the main street of this settlement. We still cannot get a list of the names of those whose bodies were shown to the whole world with such pathos and anguish. This episode was used for another wave of sanctions against Russia. What kind of security system is this? What kind of justice is this?

Euro-Atlantic structures have discredited themselves. Now, apparently, the United States is also disappointed in them. At least, the statements of the Trump administration indicate that there is a need for Europe to be more responsible for its own affairs. The United States has priorities in other regions of the world.

In this regard, the question arises: which security system will be fairer? We believe that a more equitable security system will be one that is not imposed from above by any one structure, but comes from life. For example, there are a number of integration associations on the Eurasian continent: the EAEU (already mentioned today), the CIS, the CSTO, ASEAN, and the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf. There are also sub-regional associations in South Asia. Many of these organisations have already signed memorandums of cooperation. And thus, naturally, a kind of Greater Eurasian Partnership is being formed from below, as described by President of Russia Vladimir Putin. I would add here the Chinese Belt and Road project, which is being implemented together with the EAEU and ASEAN. All this forms the material foundation for the future security architecture. When the economy connects nations, it always helps to agree on how to neutralize challenges and threats.

Therefore, the Eurasian security architecture is very promising. And the doors to participation in discussions on how to create it are open. For a couple of years now, Minsk has been holding conferences with the participation of foreign ministers, their deputies and the political science community to draft a Charter on Diversity and Multipolarity in the 21st Century. Everyone is invited to the dialogue, including EU members and European NATO members. This is an honest approach that involves universal coordination of possible future structures. But when journalists asked our colleagues from the alliance about their interest in the eastern part of the Eurasian continent, in particular, former Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, about plans to move NATO infrastructure to the Far East, to Southeast Asia, despite positioning itself as a "territorial defence union" to protect the territories of member states. He said without blinking, yes, yes, it is. But in the current conditions, threats to the territories of NATO countries come from the South China Sea, from the Taiwan Strait, from Southeast Asia, etc. But the alliance wants to do this exclusively under its control, transferring military infrastructure there, creating "mini-blocs", "threes", "fours", etc.

Our approach is different. Let's all get together and come to an agreement without imposing anything on anyone. The European Union does not yet have such military capabilities. Although it is actively building them, militarizing them. Suffice it to mention Germany's statement about the need to become the main militaristic power in Europe again. But the European Union is also active and is trying to spread its mechanisms in the South Caucasus and the Central Asian region. No one can forbid anyone to develop relations with any country in the world. But this should not be a "zero-sum game." You cannot come and say, let us offer you a project that interests you, but stop communicating with someone else in return. This is not our principle. This is a principle that has been described as "divide and rule" since ancient times. And it is clear that there is nothing democratic or free in this principle.

Question: In 2022, Azerbaijan attacked the sovereign territory of Armenia, in particular the city of Jermukh. Why was there no appropriate reaction from the Russian Federation to this?

Sergey Lavrov: I don't know what you call an "appropriate reaction." In particular, there was a reaction that met our obligations to Armenia within the CSTO. Immediately, an advance group/mission to familiarize themselves with the CSTO situation, headed by the Secretary General, went to the site and promptly submitted a report with specific, practical proposals to send a CSTO observer mission to stabilise the situation. The number of observers and the weapons they should have were scheduled.

This report was considered in October 2022 in Yerevan as part of the CSTO summit. On the eve of the meeting of the heads of state and government, the foreign and defence ministers worked for a long time, editing the proposals that were made by the CSTO Secretariat under the chairmanship of Ararat Mirzoyan. As a result, we reached a consensus on the entire text. In the morning, it was submitted to the heads of state and government for consideration. But in that situation, the Armenian side proposed postponing the agreed text for various reasons-–"there is no consensus." We agreed, and after some time, in November 2022, the EU mission was announced. In Prague, it was stated that the position regarding the affiliation of Nagorno-Karabakh will now be resolved on a reciprocal basis–-it was confirmed by both Baku and Yerevan-–on the basis of the 1991 Alma-Ata Declaration, according to which the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region is part of Azerbaijan.

This was quite unexpected. Because in November 2020, at the height of hostilities between Azerbaijan and Armenia, President of Russia Vladimir Putin, together with Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan and President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, drafted the ceasefire agreement themselves at night. In that document, the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh's ownership was deliberately left out of the equation. It was a gentleman's agreement that the status of Karabakh should be further agreed upon between the parties.

But what happened happened. Therefore, I do not dispute the ability of our Armenian friends to criticize the position that someone took at that time. I replied that we did.

For a deeper understanding of the situation, I will recall more than one decade of negotiations that were held with the participation of previous administrations in Yerevan. Several times it seemed that an agreement had already been reached, but then they "fell apart". So you can criticize. They do not criticize someone who does nothing. We were just trying.

Question (retranslated from Armenian): You have arrived in a country against which, as well as against Nagorno-Karabakh, Azerbaijan has used Russian weapons in large quantities. As a result, Nagorno-Karabakh was seized, as well as part of the territory of the Republic of Armenia. In addition, Russia did not fulfill its obligations under the 1997 agreement, it did not provide weapons to Armenia, despite the fact that payment was made. Do you think that in these conditions, Armenia should start cooperation in the military sphere with other countries, for example, with France? Although you, for your part, said at a news conference on January 14 of this year that EU membership is the decision of the country itself, there are warnings about the "Ukrainisation of Armenia". What does it mean? That Russia is going to put pressure on Armenia by economic means or military forces, as happened with Kiev, or do you really respect the decision of sovereign Armenia?

Sergey Lavrov: It is even embarrassing to answer your question, because you do not need my answer.

First of all, I don't remember everything you said here. Your position is clear. I will try to respond.

As for the fact that Azerbaijan used Russian weapons. Let me remind you that Armenia has also used Russian weapons almost all the years after gaining independence, including to seize seven regions that it never officially claimed.

None of the first leaders of Armenia ever proposed recognizing Nagorno-Karabakh as an independent entity. But Russian weapons were used to seize seven uncontested Azerbaijani regions and to build fortifications and battle lines there, which showed that the calculation was to hold these territories for a very long time. Some analysts said the nature of these fortifications suggests that there were no plans to transfer them back to Azerbaijan at all.

Russian weapons are also in Africa. The flag of Mozambique depicts a Kalashnikov assault rifle. Many countries have our weapons. This does not mean that everywhere it is used for the purposes that would meet the principles that would suit everyone.

We discussed the episodes you mentioned, with payment for supplies and with failed deliveries, today. We have settled them. These payments are offset for other purposes. There are no contradictions regarding new supplies.

We are now in a situation where we are forced, as many times in history, to fight against the whole of Europe, which is once again fighting against Russia under Nazi slogans, putting the regime of Vladimir Zelensky in the lead. Almost all European countries. As you understand, in this situation, there are a lot of weapons coming to Ukraine. It is modern, it requires our response.

I am convinced that our Armenian friends understand that in these situations we cannot fulfill all our obligations on time. But even in this situation, a number of systems contracted by Armenian friends are being transferred. We will continue this practice.

As for the purchase of weapons from other countries. There is no problem. This is the choice of our Armenian friends. If they want to have a French "base" for additional supplies, they are welcome. If they want to have them in some other country, they are welcome. We will not impose anything. Of course, it is strange when an ally relies on weapons from a country like France, which leads the enemy camp. Personally, President Emmanuel Macron and all his ministers are simply hating Russia, calling it "the only problem that makes a Ukrainian settlement impossible." And by "settlement" they mean only a ceasefire without any conditions for at least a month, or even longer, so that they can re-arm Ukraine in a calm atmosphere so that it can strengthen its defensive positions. Moreover, these calls for an unconditional ceasefire are heard after several years of a completely different position, which was stated by the European Union and NATO members, namely: no negotiations until Ukraine gets stronger positions than Russia, and no negotiations at all until Russia is inflicted a "strategic defeat". Then they turned 180 degrees, and now there is a "truce". No longer about a "strategic defeat", but about a truce so that Ukraine gets a "respite".

In a political sense, France acts as a hostile country. Therefore, it is up to our allies to decide where it is better to buy weapons. Even with all that I have said.

You said something about January 14 and the right to choose. We recognise the right to choose. We still have very good relations with our Armenian friends, despite a number of problems that have arisen in our relations due to a misunderstanding of each other's positions.

As for Nagorno-Karabakh, I will say it again. No one can reproach us. Over the past 20 years, President Vladimir Putin, President Dmitry Medvedev and President Vladimir Putin have been promoting solutions that ensured a fair approach through peace talks.

Let me remind you what was discussed. Of the seven Azerbaijani districts, five districts should be returned, as a first step. As an intermediate stage, to preserve the Kelbajar and Lachin regions (this is a huge territory connecting Armenia with Nagorno-Karabakh) in the status in which they are now, postponing the decision on the final status of Nagorno-Karabakh for many years. In fact, there was talk of postponing it to future generations. Perhaps this is better than what has happened now, due to the fact that the compromise proposals that have been promoted by the Russian leadership for many years have been rejected. The right to choose was exercised. In this case, the rejection of the formula that I have just recalled.

Your phrase about our policy of allegedly "Ukrainising Armenia" in order to then, as you put it, "do to Armenia what we did to Ukraine." There is even nothing to comment on. This means that you support the Nazi regime, those who burned people in the House of Trade Unions in Odessa, who sent combat detachments to storm the Supreme Soviet of Crimea only because it and the people refused to support the unconstitutional state parliament.

I do not remember the Armenian leadership commenting on the coup d'état in Ukraine in February 2014. I do not remember any Western countries commenting negatively on this event. This means that even then (in 2014) Armenia exercised its right to choose a position. And our European colleagues, who on the eve of the coup d'état acted as guarantors of the agreement between the then president and the opposition, when asked why they did not call these putschists to order, because it was guaranteed that a settlement had been reached, shamefully let go of their eyes, told us that sometimes democracy acquires unexpected "twists". The same is true of the United States. They went somewhere "aside," although the day before, then-US President Barack Obama called President Vladimir Putin and asked him not to object to the signing of a settlement agreement under EU guarantees.

Speaking of the United States, in 2014 (a little later than February) there was an attempted coup d'état in the Gambia. You are an interested person. Look on the Internet. There is a statement from the US State Department regarding the attempted coup in the Gambia. It says that the United States will never support the transfer of power by unconstitutional means. You have American colleagues at a news conference. Ask them why it is "impossible" in the Gambia, and "it is allowed" in Ukraine. They will probably tell you something about "subjective circumstances". In fact, the Gambia had a government that the Americans supported, and Ukraine had a president that they wanted to overthrow and install their people. That's all.

I do not see any reason for the "Ukrainization of Armenia". Armenia is our ally, our friend. Armenia does not outlaw the Russian language, Russian culture, does not deprive ethnic Russians and those who simply want to speak Russian of their legal rights. Armenia has not adopted laws prohibiting all this, as happened in Ukraine. We have passed on the list of these laws to our friends today. Nowhere, in any country, there is no ban on any non-state language (or any other) if this language is spoken by the inhabitants of this country.

We found out that the Azerbaijani language is not banned in Armenia. In Azerbaijan, including Nagorno-Karabakh, the Armenian language is not banned by the country's Constitution, but in Ukraine Russian is prohibited. In Israel, the Arabic language is not prohibited, and Hebrew is not prohibited in Arab countries.

Ukraine is a unique country. We heard the statement of the European Commissioner for Enlargement M. Kos that Ukraine has fulfilled all the preconditions, and it is possible to start negotiations on joining the EU. Against the backdrop of the fact that President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas and others say that Ukraine must be helped until it wins, because this country defends "European values." This means that Europe considers Nazism to be its values, the extermination of the language spoken by the majority of citizens of the corresponding state, in this case Ukraine. What kind of "Ukrainization of Armenia" are we talking about? Armenia is a civilized country. [My Emphasis]

After upbraiding that media person, Lavrov was applauded by the audience. If you’re going to be confrontational with Lavrov, you better have all your facts polished and readily available. It’s unfortunate the cameras only portray the two ministers and there’s no image of the woman who asked that series of questions.

Since the Soviet Era, Russia has been Armenia’s steadfast friend and helped it many times. Armenia’s own tragic history IMO is behind the entire Nagorno-Karabakh affair, which is very complex and reported in books not short comments. My analysis says Armenia will become far worse if it joins EU/NATO and thus becomes a colony of the Outlaw US Empire. Its nations currency would self-destruct as would its very dynamic trade with Russia and the EAEU. I had my doubts that Pashinyan would attend the 9 May celebrations, but he did and from what I saw he was pleased to be there. Armenia isn’t a resource rich nation; what it is rich in is its people and their heritage. Armenia can become what I call a High-Minded nation by employing its human capital in intellectual/high-science pursuits and related technology areas.

Pashinyan has a very “colorful” political history and has survived seven stormy years as Armenian PM where he’s clearly learned on the job. As the next report will show, Russia is popular within Armenia. Lavrov’s report provides grounds for confidence moving forward. Putin chats with Pashinyan at least once monthly. We still await the formal signing of the Peace Treaty that will mark the formal end to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/lavrov-i ... fter-talks

******

Putin Visits Kursk for the First Time Since the Expulsion of Ukrainian Troops


President Vladimir Putin in Kursk, Russia, May 20, 2025. X/ @TmcMazima

May 21, 2025 Hour: 7:33 am

The visited the Kursk-2 nuclear power plant, which is currently under construction.

On Tuesday afternoon, Russian President Vladimir Putin visited the border region of Kursk for the first time since the expulsion of Ukrainian troops that had occupied the area since August 2024.

Putin met with the region’s acting governor, Alexandr Khinshtein, as well as with volunteers from other Russian regions working in Kursk. The Russian leader also visited the Kursk-2 nuclear power plant, which is currently under construction in the region.

During his meetings in Kursk, Putin said that the Ukrainian Armed Forces continue to “attempt to advance toward the Russian border.”

Khinshtein proposed opening a museum dedicated to the “events that took place in the Kursk region between 2024 and 2025” — a proposal Putin accepted.


“We’ll do it, it’s a good proposal,” the Russian president said about the initiative, which includes building a museum in the city of Kursk with a satellite branch in the town of Sudzha, the epicenter of the Ukrainian military operation in the region.

Putin’s previous visit to Kursk took place in March, when Russia had already regained control of more than 80% of the territory. At that time, he ordered troops to fully liberate the region from enemy forces.

At the end of April, Russian authorities officially declared they had regained control of the region, although they later acknowledged that isolated groups of Ukrainian troops still remained in wooded areas.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/putin-vi ... an-troops/

******

Incorrect Rosstandart
May 21, 17:09



Five defendants have been identified in a case of fraud involving state defense orders, the damages of which exceeded 1,000,000,000 rubles.

This was reported by the UFSB for the Rostov Region.
Searches were conducted at the directors and owners of bearing factories in Rostov, Sergiev Posad and Tver.

(Video at link.)

Among the defendants is the former deputy head of Rosstandart Kuleshov.
His mother, also connected to this case, is wanted.

Oh, how many wonderful discoveries we have...

Good luck to the bloody KGB in unraveling this case. There will certainly be more defendants.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9851792.html

Google Translator

******

Will Russia Inevitably Reconcile With The EU & Ukraine Like Putin Predicts?
Andrew Korybko
May 22, 2025



He’s known for being a realist, not a wishful thinker, which is why his prediction was so surprising to many observers.

Putin predicted a few weeks back that Russia will inevitably reconcile with the EU and Ukraine. Regarding the first, he said that “I have no doubt whatsoever that we will, in due time, rebuild our relations with Europe. It’s only a matter of patience and effort.” As for the second, he said several days later that “It seems to me that this is inevitable despite the tragedy we are currently experiencing.” He’s known for being a realist, not a wishful thinker, which is why his prediction was so surprising to many observers.

While he might have timed them to convince Trump that he isn’t the obstacle to peace that Zelensky might have misled him to think that he is, the perception of which is responsible for complicating the peace process as of late, he probably does indeed believe what he said. Putin has always considered Russia to be a European country, albeit with a unique civilizational identity, while he explained in his magnum opus from June 2021 why he considers Russians and Ukrainians to be kindred people.

These views account for why he remained committed to the Minsk Accords despite neither France, Germany, nor Ukraine complying with them. Putin subconsciously projected his interests-driven (realist/rational) worldview onto them by assuming that they shared his vision of turning Ukraine into an (imperfect) economic bridge for facilitating the EU’s overland trade with Russia and China upon Kiev’s implementation of the Minsk Accords. He therefore struggled to understand their lack of compliance.

He couldn’t countenance that they were duping him this whole time till it was too late and he felt that he had no choice but to commence the special operation to defend Russia’s national security interests. Far from having an interests-driven (realist/rational) worldview, they all have an ideologically driven (utopian/irrational) one that prioritizes Russia’s containment over their own material interests. The EU’s is liberal-globalist while Ukraine’s is ultra-nationalist, so some differences exist, but they share this goal.

For them to meaningfully reconcile with Russia, their policymakers must first replace their ideologically driven worldview with an interests-driven one, which hasn’t yet happened. While there are signs of dissent within their societies, which takes the form of rising populist-nationalist sentiment in the EU and increasing opposition to Zelensky’s rule in Ukraine, electoral fraud and the secret police combine to prevent reformists from coming to power in both. This is the objectively existing state of affairs today.

While critics of the EU and Ukraine want to believe that positive change is “inevitable”, that can’t be taken for granted, and it would be irresponsible for Russia to prematurely formulate policy with this expectation in mind when they’re still in a state of hybrid and hot war with it respectively. To be clear, Putin didn’t signal that Russia should soften its policy towards either since he himself probably knows that his prediction might not come to pass within his lifetime, but he still hopes that it one day will.

Considering all of this, Putin’s prediction was probably only an attempt to influence Trump into not abandoning the peace process instead of him hinting at upcoming policy changes towards the EU and Ukraine. Even in the best-case scenario that Russia achieves most of its goals in the special operation, whether via diplomatic or military means, too much has happened for a reconciliation to occur anytime soon after. It’ll likely take a generation or more, if ever, but no one should get their hopes up.

https://korybko.substack.com/p/will-rus ... -reconcile

[blindpig]

Media Duel Update
Further press interview of Lavrov and MFA statement as promised
Karl Sanchez
May 23, 2025



After his talk at the conference, which will be reported on in a separate article, Lavrov was asked a Q by UK media then it was decided to hold a short press conference centered around the MFA’s Press Release about the massive multiday/night drone attacks by Ukraine. Having my usual Friday duties to perform, I left the link to the Sputnik article about it all since it was a good synopsis in English:

From May 20 to 8 a.m. on May 23, Ukraine launched a record 788 combat drones targeting civilian areas and peaceful citizens in Russia. All attacks were intercepted, but sadly, there were casualties. The Russian Foreign Ministry has issued a statement on this, widely shared with other countries and international organizations.

Now I can provide the MFA PR statement:

The Kiev regime does not stop terror against the civilian population and civilian objects in many Russian regions, including Moscow.

According to the Russian Ministry of Defense, for the period from May 20 to 08.00 on May 23, a multiple increase was recorded: 788 raids of aircraft-type UAVs and Western-made missiles on the territory of the Russian Federation, and outside the zone of the Special Military Operation. Our air defense forces destroyed 776 drones and missiles, 12 UAVs, unfortunately, reached the target.

There are dead and wounded. On May 22, as a result of an attack on the village of Panteleymonovka in the DPR, 8 people were injured. On the same day, in the Vasilyevsky municipal district of the Zaporozhye region, a girl born in 1990 was killed as a result of drone strikes, four children were injured—10, 9, 8 years old and a one-year-old child. On the night of May 23, as a result of the fall of a downed UAV, which caused a fire in the industrial zone of the city of Yelets, Lipetsk region, 8 people were injured. In addition, the Armed Forces of Ukraine launched two strikes with Himars missiles on civilian targets in the city of Lgov, Kursk region, where people, including two children, were also injured.

It should also be noted that after the Kursk region was cleared of Ukrainian servicemen, the Armed Forces of Ukraine continue to try to wedge into our territory and strike with UAVs, as well as long-range artillery and missiles.

Under these conditions, the President of the Russian Federation was forced to make a decision to create a security zone in the adjacent territory in order to minimize the possibility of infiltration by the Armed Forces of Ukraine and strikes on our border areas using various means of destruction.

Another barbaric terrorist act by the Kiev regime was undertaken in an attempt to disrupt the process of direct Russian-Ukrainian talks aimed at a final settlement of the conflict, which was resumed with the assistance of the US administration, and to prevent the implementation of the first agreements agreed in Istanbul on May 16, including a large-scale exchange of prisoners of war.

The course taken by the Ukrainian "party of war" also includes violations of the so-called "energy" and Easter truces, which Russia strictly observed, as well as the ceasefire we announced during the celebration of the 80th anniversary of the Great Victory.

Of course, Russia will give an adequate response to massive terrorist attacks by the Kiev regime. Unlike the Ukrainian side, only military facilities and enterprises of the military-industrial complex will be chosen as targets.

But, we emphasize, our principled commitment to a constructive search for ways of peaceful settlement through dialogue remains unchanged. [My Emphasis]

Some will challenge the MFA’s interpretation of the rationale for the attacks, although it’s clear to realists that there’s clearly a “[party of war” pursuing Nazi-like goals of trying to kill as many Russians as possible as with Plan Ost which their forebearers played a significant role murdering tens of thousands.

We now move on to the short presser, Lavrov speaking:

Starting from May 20 and until 8 a.m. today, May 23, the Ukrainian side launched a record number of combat drones (788) against civilian targets and civilians of the Russian Federation. All attacks were repelled, although, unfortunately, there are dead and wounded. We have issued a special statement by the Foreign Ministry on this matter. It is widely distributed among states and international organisations.

We believe that this behaviour is a direct consequence of the support of the Ukrainian Nazis, primarily by some European countries led by Britain, France, Germany and the leadership of the European Union. We are convinced that they bear their share of responsibility for these crimes. We will firmly strive to put an end to this policy.

There is an obvious attempt to disrupt the peace talks and undermine the process that was launched in Istanbul following the agreement between President of Russia Vladimir Putin and President of the United States Donald Trump. It provided for a thousand-for-thousand exchange of prisoners of war and the continuation of work on documents that will formulate specific conditions and requirements that must be met for the conclusion of agreements. We will continue this work despite any provocations.

Question: Will Russia continue to strive for a peaceful settlement?

Sergey Lavrov: We remain committed to a peaceful settlement. We are always open to talks. President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly confirmed this publicly and in his talks with foreign figures.

I would like to draw your attention to the fact that we have complied with all the goodwill gestures that we have made, including the truce on the occasion of Orthodox Easter and Victory Day, as well as the truce in the form of a month-long moratorium on attacks on energy infrastructure, which was announced after the conversation between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. All of them were thwarted by Ukraine, which continued its aggressive and criminal actions during the pauses in hostilities that we announced.

I would like to emphasise once again that we are also committed to the agreements that were reached recently in Istanbul between the delegations of Russia and Ukraine. We are completing our preparatory work to draw up a list for the exchange of prisoners of war on the principle of "one thousand for a thousand".

We are actively working on the second part of the agreements, which provides for the preparation by each of the parties of a draft document setting out the conditions for achieving a stable, long-term and comprehensive settlement agreement. As soon as the exchange of prisoners of war is completed, by this time we will be ready to hand over to the Ukrainian side a draft of such a document, which the Russian side is now finalizing.

Question: You said that international organisations will be informed of the Foreign Ministry's statement. What reaction do you expect from them?

Sergey Lavrov: I proceed from the premise that the response should be based on the fundamental documents that underpin the activities of the United Nations, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe and other multilateral organisations, and which require the unconditional exclusion of any attacks on civilian targets during hostilities. This is also required by numerous conventions that define the principles of international humanitarian law.

All these years, they have been trampled on by the Kiev regime, which violates the rules of engagement that are generally accepted throughout the world, ignores and generally questions its ability to be a responsible member of the international community.

We are waiting for the UN's response. Moreover, the comments that we hear from Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and his official representatives during the special military operation show an unwillingness or inability to be guided by their direct duties, primarily compliance with the principles of the UN Charter.

Question: In recent weeks, a whole "landing force" of EU and European bureaucrats has landed in Kiev: Emmanuel Macron, Keir Starmer, Merz, Kaja Kallas and others. After that, as if on cue, the terrorist attacks of the Kiev regime literally multiplied. Do you see this direct connection? Are Vladimir Zelensky's curators responsible for the killing of civilians?

Sergey Lavrov: I think that it is impossible not to see this direct connection.

Those who patronise the Kiev regime, including the characters you mentioned, do not hide this. It is no coincidence that when they hysterically try to oppose our policy of resolving the root causes of the conflict with their idea of declaring an immediate truce without any preconditions, they mean, among other things, that this wording makes it possible to continue pumping weapons into the Kiev regime.

From their public statements, it is clear that this is a position that they do not want to give up. And by doing so, they are fuelling the conflict, Vladimir Zelensky and his team so that they continue their criminal actions.

Of course, there is a European responsibility here. I think that when we consider the consequences of this conflict (I hope that this will happen after the settlement), it will be difficult to evade responsibility.

Question: Don't you think that the above-mentioned Western European leaders are simply trying to undermine US President Donald Trump's efforts to peacefully mediate a settlement of the crisis in Ukraine? Maybe they are jealous?

Sergey Lavrov: I don't think this is about envy. They are simply used to living with the previous administration, which led anti-Russian actions and encouraged European capitals to do so in every possible way.

But now, when the administration has changed in Washington, it has become obvious that it was just convenient for them under the Biden administration. But they wanted the entire Western community to remain united in the fight against the Russian Federation (as they declared) in order to inflict a "strategic defeat" on Russia on the battlefield.

If we now analyse the statements and other information about the policy pursued by London, Paris, Berlin, Brussels, the capitals of the Baltic countries and Warsaw, it becomes obvious that they cannot give up this declared goal. They have staked their entire reputation on dragging Europe into a war against Russia, in order to carry out the militarisation of Europe under this "sauce" (by 2030, as you know), huge funds are being allocated. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz proclaimed that his goal was to make Germany again the main, the most powerful military power in Europe, with the largest conventional army. These are alarming signals. I think that reminiscences about historical precedents create a very disturbing picture here.

Another explanation for these actions. They have not lost hope of using certain circles in the United States to return President Donald Trump and his administration to their anti-Russia camp and share responsibility with the United States. They like to relieve themselves of responsibility. But I am sure that this time it will not work. [My Emphasis]

Yogi Berra: “It’s deja vu all over again.” Of course, the Outlaw US Empire is the entity primarily responsible for starting the Aggressive War against Ukraine and its Russian speaking population, the #1 War Crime, which although the EU was told to “Fuck-off” still participated via NATO from the outset. Trump’s main goal, as noted many times by myself and others, is to try and avoid being held culpable for the Empire’s criminality that he actively engaged and continues to engage in—who aided the Himars attacks? What entity continues to supply vital ISR data? Money, weapons, drugs, etc. A great deal of WW2 history was recently reviewed so many people ought to see the parallels between what was gestating in the 1930s and what’s occurring now within the defeated NATO/EU structure, although it must be noted participation isn’t 100% as some members are dissenting.

In the comment thread to the initial article, a portion of The Guardian’s propaganda was provided and implied that the conference Lavrov was speaking at was something akin to hard-right Russian nationalism; it was entitled, Historical Russian Lands. National Identity and Self-Determination of Peoples. This was one of the Ambassadorial Conferences Lavrov had mentioned would be reconvening a few days ago in which all accredited ambassadorial people are invited to attend. Their aim is to be informational so those people can do a better job in building relations between their nations and Russia. Briefly looking over the transcript, I can see several opportunities for propaganda. Readers will have a chance soon enough to read what those are. I will suggest despite the quality of the chat being poor the exchange between Nima and Dmirty Orlov that happened earlier today.

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/media-duel-update

Lavrov at the Ambassadorial Conference: Historical Russian Lands: National Identity and Self-Determination of Peoples
A long production.
Karl Sanchez
May 23, 2025



The title for this Conference is Historical Russian Lands: National Identity and Self-Determination of Peoples. A few days ago during one of his media encounters, Lavrov noted the resumption of the series of Ambassadorial Conferences that are aimed at educating and acclimating diplomatic personnel to Russia so they can better perform their duties by having a better—realistic—idea of who Russians are and what Russia is. A very pragmatic effort by Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The hiatus has lasted several years as it was discontinued during the Covid event and further delayed by the SMO. Lavrov doesn’t always conduct these conferences, but he chose to be the one to reinaugurate them. It would be nice to have a photo of the audience within the auditorium to see what sort of attendance was generated. The video does show close to a full house, and I would think Lavrov would appreciate a slightly wider chair to better accomodate his frame when he appears again. And now the dialog:

Question: Today, all key world players are talking about peace in Ukraine. Friendly countries, China, India, Brazil and, of course, our opponents have voiced their initiatives. In your opinion, what is the essential difference between Russia's approaches and the entire variety of proposals? Why is a truce and a ceasefire not enough today?

Sergey Lavrov: I will say a few words. I understand that I can repeat what was said here before me. I know that many of our experts and political scientists took part in the preparations for this event and have already spoken today.

But the falsification of history did not appear today. For many years, our ill-wishers have been doing this in order to quarrel with the Russian peoples, achieve their selfish interests, and hinder cooperation in the post-Soviet space. These attempts to "drive wedges" became especially active after the Soviet Union ceased to exist.

It is this period that is associated with a new rapid surge of nationalist sentiments in Ukraine, which existed there for a long time, but latently remained inactive. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, after a short period of time, then President Leonid Kuchma wrote a book "Ukraine is not Russia". It was published in 2003 and is openly pseudo-scientific. The author himself said that the purpose of this work was "to create Ukrainians".

In fact, it is this concept laid down in this work ("Ukraine is not Russia") that has become a kind of intellectual foundation for the modern nationalist Ukrainian elites.

In 2014, when an unconstitutional coup d'état took place with the open support of the United States and with the connivance of the European Union, Ukraine finally turned into a military and political bridgehead of the West near our borders. They cherished this dream for a long time and began to be called "anti-Russia."

Monuments were demolished in Odessa. This phenomenon of demolition of monuments, of course, is very indicative not only for modern Ukrainian leaders, but also for the Poles and the Baltic states. But when the monument to the founder of Odessa, Empress Catherine the Great, was demolished, and a week later UNESCO decided that the historical centre of Odessa is a world cultural heritage, it would have been impossible to disgrace this once respected organisation, which is now headed by an openly biased Director-General, Ms Audrey Azoulay, even if we really wanted to. I have already mentioned other monuments, such as those to Alexander Suvorov, Alexander Pushkin, Ivan Babel, and figures of literature, culture and art, whose name is associated with the Russian language. All these monuments are being liquidated, as well as monuments to those who liberated Ukraine from the Nazi invaders, and to those who were collaborators, on the contrary, such monuments are erected.

It is difficult to replace the historical truth, so the ideologists of this very "Ukraine is not Russia" hit such research, publish supposedly scientific works, that the last hairs "stand on end". I am not telling some jokes now. "In fact" the Black Sea was dug by Ukrainians. Buddha is from Zaporozhye. Mona Lisa is of Ukrainian origin, her great-grandparents were from Odessa and Kyiv. Can you imagine what nonsense this is? It is spread not just through word of mouth, it is from textbooks about the history of Ukraine.

Russophobia is deeply rooted in Ukraine and is actively supported by Westerners, also in a historical context. From the middle of the 19th century, the authorities of the Austro-Hungarian Empire cultivated anti-Russian sentiments in Galicia (in western Ukraine), and quite actively began persecution of the inhabitants of this territory–-Rusyns. But despite these persecutions, a significant part of the Galician-Russian intelligentsia and the overwhelming majority of the people remained committed to spiritual kinship with our country. Despite all attempts to break these ties.

During the First World War, the Austro-Hungarian authorities unleashed large-scale repressions against Rusyns–-tens of thousands were killed in the Talerhof and Terezín death camps–-the first mass death camps. This is an Austro-Hungarian invention. Now the airport of the Austrian city of Graz is located on the site of Talerhof. We have not forgotten these crimes. Work is underway to recognise the extermination of the Russian population of Galician Rus and other Russian regions of Austria-Hungary as the first genocide in the modern history of Europe. This work will certainly continue.

In 1929, the very sad Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists was created in Vienna, which became the matrix for most Ukrainian nationalist parties and organizations of the 1990s-2000s.

Through this organization and those who glorified it as an ideal association of Ukrainians, the theory of ethnic "purity" was promoted, copying the experience of both Western colonialists and German Nazis. Peoples were divided into "friendly" (neutral)—and they had to be evicted from the territory of Ukraine. And "unfriendly" on the other hand. The latter (there were Russians, Poles, Jews, Hungarians) should have been destroyed in the understanding of these Ukrainian nationalists. This is exactly what they did during the Second World War.

Those who were ideologists and who put these misanthropic principles into practice are now being put on a pedestal and idolised by their new nationalist movements (or revived nationalist movements). Stepan Bandera and Roman Shukhevych have been declared almost the founders of the modern Ukrainian nation. The Kiev authorities consider themselves the heirs of these criminals. It is not surprising that over the past 10-11 years, long before the start of the special military operation, the Kiev junta has begun to exterminate everything that is in one way or another connected with Russia, to exterminate everything Russian.

Education (at first, primary classes in Russian were banned, then secondary education, and then they reached higher education), culture, and the media. The media outlets owned by Russian publishers were simply closed, they were expelled from Ukraine. Ukrainian media outlets that broadcast in Russian were also closed.

In Ukraine, a filtering body has now been secretly introduced, through which it is necessary to coordinate any information for publication or for broadcasting through any mass media.

President Vladimir Putin has long drawn attention to these trends. In December 2019, he spoke at a meeting of the Russian organizing committee "Victory" on preparations for the next date of Victory in the Great Patriotic War. He touched on these things and uttered the following phrase: "Our answer to lies is the truth." The truth must be defended. It lies in the fact that the southern Russian lands and the entire territory of modern Ukraine have always been among the most developed, prosperous regions of the Russian Empire and the USSR. Natives of these lands—both in pre-Soviet and Soviet times—invariably held high government posts. Including the leader of the Soviet Union, Leonid Brezhnev, who is from what is now the Dnipropetrovsk region. He worked for a long time in senior positions in Ukraine itself, and then in Moscow.

At the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Ukrainian SSR had a powerful industrial potential and developed agriculture. You can judge for yourself what the "elites" who came to power after the collapse of the USSR brought it to and unleashed a fratricidal war in Donbass in 2014. The statistics are known, and so is the economy and social sphere of modern Ukraine. What kind of order exists there, including the forcible "catching" of young guys on the streets in order to first forcibly stuff them into a car, and then send them to the front. Russia has nothing to do with it.

When the coup d'état took place, the new authorities that came to power in Kiev as a result of this coup d'état divided their portfolios and announced their programme. The US State Department welcomed these events, and the notorious former US State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland even proudly admitted that it was not for nothing that the United States invested $5 billion in the past few years before the coup. In the creation, development and strengthening of Ukrainian democracy.

Today, there is a lot of talk about national identity and self-determination. The right of peoples to self-determination is enshrined in the UN Charter. I have spoken publicly at the Security Council and the UN General Assembly several times. In my conversations with Antonio Guterres, I urge him not to forget that the UN Charter is not limited to a single line about territorial integrity. Antonio Guterres' spokesman Stephen Dujarric has repeatedly avoided answering the question of what the UN's position on the Ukrainian settlement is. He repeats by heart that "we are in favour of resolving the crisis on the basis of international law, the principle of Ukraine's territorial integrity and General Assembly resolutions."

As for General Assembly resolutions, he simply does not know that there are many of them. One of the most important resolutions in this case, which we are talking about, was adopted in 1970 – the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in Accordance with the UN Charter. This is a large document. It was a consensus resolution, unlike the resolutions that the current Kiev regime, with the support of the West, is pushing through with a vote, and which Antonio Guterres refers to, justifying his position, which fully supports the Ukrainian regime. The declaration, which was adopted by consensus, says that everyone must "respect the territorial integrity of those states whose governments respect the principle of self-determination of peoples and therefore represent the entire population living in the relevant territory."

But neither Vladimir Zelensky nor those who came to power in 2014 represent the population of Crimea, Donbass or Novorossiya. The first intense signal that the putschists sent when they came to power in 2014 through a coup d'état was the announcement that they would abolish the status of the Russian language in Ukraine. After that, everything became crystal clear.

Those who blindly and stubbornly repeat the slogan of territorial integrity forget a simple thing. It was the principle of self-determination of peoples that underpinned the decolonisation process when, in accordance with the 1970 Declaration, the African peoples did not want to live under colonial oppression. And the colonizers in Lisbon, Paris, London and in all the capitals of the metropolitan countries these governments did not represent the African peoples. If this is so, then the decolonisation process was carried out in full compliance with the UN Charter and the principles that the General Assembly has developed in terms of the relationship between the principles of the Charter.

Just as I said, the current Ukrainian authorities do not represent the peoples of Crimea, Novorossiya and Donbass in any way. Moreover, we have distributed documents that quote the statements of the Ukrainian authorities regarding Russians and Russian-speaking citizens of their country, at least for the period long before the start of the special military operation. Vladimir Zelensky said that if you feel involved in Russian culture and live in Ukraine, his advice is to go to Russia for the sake of the peace of mind of your children and grandchildren.

All the other figures in his cabinet spoke even more frankly, including calls to "kill Russians." The notorious Ukrainian ambassador to Kazakhstan, Pavel Vrublevsky (who has now been recalled from there), gave an interview in 2022. Answering a question about the tasks facing the Ukrainian authorities, he said on the air that they should kill as many Russians as possible, because we want them to not exist at all, so we need to kill as many as possible so that our children have less work to do. This is the ambassador. There were no complaints from any Western power that supports this regime.

You can cite many examples from the modern history of Ukraine, which remain, they are "swept under the carpet". And no one is going to investigate crimes.

Odessa, May 2, 2014 – Fifty living people were burned to death in the House of Trade Unions only because they spoke out against what the putschists were doing and illegally seized Europe. Now the Council of Europe has actively taken up the preparation of claims against the Russian Federation in connection with the ongoing events, which they call aggression, occupation and annexation. At that time, it timidly offered its "services" to assist in the investigation of a savage crime, as a result of which fifty people were burned alive, and even adopted a resolution that it was ready to "assist." No one remembers this anymore, because the Kiev authorities ignored the Council of Europe and pointed out its place in their understanding. Since then, the Council of Europe has been subordinated to the task of "whitewashing" the Kiev criminals and "denigrating" the activities of the Russian Federation. Although there is nothing to investigate there: the people who set fire to and then shot at those who tried to escape by jumping out of the windows, everything is on the video footage. There is absolutely no need to do any work, just publish this data and that's it.

Another episode of lies and cover-ups is Bucha, April 2022, when the Russian Armed Forces, at the request of the West, in anticipation of the signing of a peace agreement on a settlement based on the principles proposed by the Ukrainians themselves, as a gesture of goodwill, withdrew their troops from Kyiv. And this was done. Including leaving the suburbs of Kyiv called Bucha. And two days after the mayor returned there, not somewhere in the basement, but on the main street of this settlement, BBC correspondents, who were lucky to be "at hand", showed dozens of bodies of people, neatly laid out along the main street on both sides of it.

There was an outburst of anger. The West again used the BBC report to impose a new portion of sanctions against Russia. Since then, we have been wondering if anyone has investigated this crime. We have written a letter to UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Friedrich Türk. He has been silent for many months, maybe years.

According to our information, they know everything very well, but they are afraid to tell the truth, which they partially know. The most obvious example of hypocrisy and cover-up of criminals is the refusal to provide the names of people whose bodies were shown and caused a surge of indignation.

There is no information. If someone says after this that Ukrainians are suffering, and Russia must be forced to do so somehow. We cannot leave people under the rule of the regime that is now there. If the "government", by and large, Vladimir Zelensky's junta, hopes that an agreement on the cessation of hostilities will somehow be reached, and what remains of Ukraine will live according to the laws that they adopted, this is an illusion. This must not be allowed under any circumstances.

On the territory of Ukraine, which is outside the constitutional borders of the Russian Federation, millions of people speak Russian. It is their native language. And to leave them under the rule of a junta that has banned them from speaking it (only they have not yet forbidden them to think) will be a great crime.

I hope and I am sure that we will definitely not allow this, the international community will not allow this to mock the UN Charter, where the first article says that "everyone is obliged to respect human rights, regardless of race, gender, language and religion." The Russian language and the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church are banned in Ukraine.

Therefore, at this stage of the settlement efforts, the simplest and most infallible thing for our Western colleagues, who are fussing, is to demand the repeal of laws that directly violate the UN Charter, not to mention the numerous conventions on the rights of national minorities. This would be a test of what the position of the Europeans, not all, but the majority of Europeans under the "leadership" of London, Paris, Berlin, Brussels and Warsaw, really is, who have never uttered the word "human rights" in relation to what is happening in Ukraine.

But when they discuss China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and almost any country and build relations with it, there will definitely be lectures about the need to respect human rights. There is no other country. Madam Ambassador of Israel and I recalled that the Arabic language is not banned in Israel, nor Hebrew is banned in Arab countries. This is not the case anywhere else.

But everything is possible for Ukraine. Moreover, they do not just close their eyes, but speak with pride. And Ursula von der Leyen, and before his resignation, Mr Charles Michel, and all the functionaries in Brussels, defending their position on Ukraine, convincing their voters that they need to tighten their belts and wait for better times, because now we need to help Ukraine, not to medicine, not to heating. They say that we have to wait, because Ukraine defends European values. Draw conclusions about what Europe sees its "values" in.

Real Nazism is being revived. There are many examples, including the speech of the new German Chancellor Frank Merz that the time has come for Germany to lead Europe again. To pronounce such words is to be a great cynic. The militarization of Europe has been proclaimed as one of the main tasks for the second half of the decade. This is a dangerous trend.

I will not go further, I can talk about this topic for a long time. It worries me, but let's move on to the questions.

Question: Every day we read about the mass of proposals that come in. All these proposals from our opponents and friends, including India, China and Brazil, are arguments on how to reach a solution to the settlement of the Ukrainian crisis.

I would like to ask you what is the fundamental difference between these proposals and our proposals? You have partially answered this question and described the Kiev regime and its current state. It is difficult to negotiate with it, if it is possible to negotiate at all. But nevertheless, negotiations have begun.

Sergey Lavrov: How difficult? We talked at the end of February 2022, when the Ukrainians asked for negotiations, we immediately agreed. There were several rounds in Belarus and then moved to Istanbul. It was already late March and early April 2022, and President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly spoken about this and shown the papers. It was the Ukrainians who proposed to resolve the situation on the basis of the principles they themselves wrote: refusal to join NATO and other military blocs, refusal to deploy military bases on their territory. And the British hatched plans to create bases both in Ochakov and on the Sea of Azov. This is all documented. They have been looking at Crimea for a long time, even before 2014.

No military bases, no military exercises on the territory of Ukraine and security guarantees that they themselves asked to be provided by the five permanent members of the Security Council, as well as Germany and Turkey. The list of those wishing to join was open. The guarantees were formulated in almost the same vein as Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty and it was emphasized that these guarantees would not apply to Crimea and the territory of Donbass. These principles were written by them, and that the dialogue would continue in other areas of settlement. We agreed. This was important in order to ensure the main goal at that time--the inadmissibility of NATO penetration into the territory of Ukraine.

Other guarantees were provided, including for national minorities. It was all brought down. President of Russia Vladimir Putin has returned to this topic more than once. But in the years that have followed and until today, we have always stressed at the highest and other levels that we are ready for peace talks that will focus on understanding and addressing the root causes of this crisis.

We did not shirk contacts. They said that Vladimir Zelensky said that he would never sit next to him. He signed an executive order prohibiting negotiations with Vladimir Putin and his government. Now they are trying to "outplay" him, that in fact this is not the case, that it is impossible to meet with Vladimir Putin personally. If it is impossible to meet with President of Russia Vladimir Putin, why did you shout that I went to Istanbul and Vladimir Putin did not want to come?

If you compare all the arguments that are heard from Ukraine, it is obvious that this is an inadequate leader. It is difficult to understand when and what he will do when he flies to South Africa, when he goes with someone to "hug" in Europe. But the President of Russia clearly set out our assessment of the legitimacy of Vladimir Zelensky and his regime.

He stressed that we do not refuse to contact him and his administration in order to agree on the principles of settlement that suit everyone. Another thing is that when it comes to signing, the issue of legitimacy will be crucial. Because if those whose legitimacy no longer convinces anyone signs, then the replacements may question the agreement reached.

Look at how the position of the Ukrainians themselves, the Ukrainian leadership and the West has changed. Until recently, they said that there were no negotiations, no truce, that only a "strategic defeat" of Russia would save the situation on the battlefield. When they began to understand that the change in the situation on the line of contact was far from being in favor of the Kiev regime, new notes began to sound: against the cessation of hostilities and against the start of negotiations, because they all said that in order to start negotiations, Ukraine must ensure a position of strength and talk to Russia from a position of strength.

We are talking about history. Which of these people does it teach? Let them remember how their ancestors and ancestors tried to talk to Russia from a position of strength. Uselessly.

Now they are the ones who are asking for a respite just to pump it up with weapons. They have said so publicly. My former colleague, now President of Finland Alexander Stubb, says that Vladimir Putin must immediately agree to a truce, but the truce will not impose any restrictions on relations between the West and the Ukrainian regime.

What does this mean? That they want to continue to militarize this state.

Here are the members of the delegation who recently went to Istanbul for the first round of talks. The Ukrainians sat with them, talked, discussed the agreements, which eventually began to take shape, on the exchange of prisoners of war and that both sides would prepare a memorandum outlining the issues that should make up the content of the settlement. They need to be given priority. That's settled. And nothing special happened. They agreed because they hoped that the support of the West, including the United States, would be eternal, and they would forever be allowed everything.

But US President Donald Trump has shown a different understanding of the situation. He repeatedly emphasises that this is not his war, but Joe Biden's. It is. His position that the United States is guided by national interests also applies to the Ukrainian situation. What national interest does the United States have in Ukraine, other than the very task promoted by Democratic administrations, namely to "contain," "encircle," and "constantly keep Russia in suspense"? No. Economic, for God's sake, please. No one forbids this to anyone.

We are in favour of talks. There will be a second round of talks. They have confirmed this. This is already a positive development.

Question: Is the memorandum being drafted today?

Sergey Lavrov: Yes, it is. I don't know about the other side, but our work is already at an advanced stage. In any case, we will hand over the memorandum to the Ukrainians, as agreed. We will hope that they will do the same.

Question: Is anything clear about the dates of the next meetings? There is a lot of talk about this now.

Sergey Lavrov: No, the timing has not yet been determined. Many people are fantasizing about when and where it will take place. We have no ideas now.

Do we have a papal nuncio here? I would like to say that they should not waste their own abilities on working out options that are not very realistic. Imagine the Vatican as a venue for negotiations. I would say that it is a bit inelegant when Orthodox countries discuss issues related to the establishment of the root causes on the Catholic platform. One of them is the policy of destroying the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Instead, Petr Poroshenko, when he was president, asked the Patriarch of Constantinople in Istanbul for a tomos to create an alternative church, which is famous primarily for the fact that its "thugs" forcibly seize churches of the canonical church and kill or beat priests. There is still a Greek Uniate Church in Ukraine, which is also very actively working to support the regime established in Ukraine after the coup d'état.

I think it will not be very comfortable for the Vatican itself to receive delegations from the two Orthodox countries in these conditions.

Question: If we still think about the future. This year we will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Helsinki Accords. It is clear that important decisions were made in Helsinki that ensured peace and stability in Europe for quite a long time. But then events took place that seriously undermined these agreements. I am referring to the events in the Balkans, Transnistria, the South Caucasus, and so on.

At various stages, President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly spoken about the need to create a new European security architecture that would meet the realities of today and ensure peace and stability in Europe for a fairly long period (at least one generation, but preferably several generations). Do you think we can talk about efforts in this area today? Is Europe ready to deal with these issues? Or does the current situation make it possible to postpone this prospect for a fairly distant period?

Sergey Lavrov: There is a deep security crisis in Europe. It thinks, as I said, about militarization. I would like to emphasise once again that it is very worrying that Germany, specifically Chancellor Friedrich Merz, is leading these discussions. He recently spoke in the Bundestag: "Strengthening the Bundeswehr is in the first place for us. In the future, the German government will provide all the financial resources necessary for the Bundeswehr to become the strongest conventional army in Europe." Does it remind you of anything? The strongest conventional army in Europe in his time was possessed by A. Hitler.

There is another interesting point from Friedrich Merz's statements. Recently, justifying his policy of militarisation and the creation of the strongest army, he said that Russia would not stop in Ukraine and would go to seize Europe. According to Freud, he would have done so, because he did not need to protect his compatriots and fellow tribesmen, but to seize land and start exploiting it. These Nazi instincts turned out to be very tenacious.

As for our position, it is based on the obvious that Euro-Atlantic security models have not justified themselves. This is primarily the OSCE. We are also witnessing a deep crisis in NATO as the main North Atlantic structure of the West. The European Union, having signed an agreement with the alliance two years ago, has practically become an appendage in the military-political sense. The agreement gives NATO the right to use the territories of all member states of the bloc when it is necessary to transfer weapons and forces to the east.

Eurasia is the largest, richest and most numerous continent, the birthplace of many great civilizations. It is a continent with many integration structures, but there is no continental, "umbrella" structure, and there never has been. There are also many integration associations in Africa, as well as in Latin America. But there is the African Union, there is CELAC. And in Eurasia, there is no such all-encompassing organization or even association, movement (it is not necessary to create an organization). Which is unnatural. Proceeding from reality, we see prospects (including from the point of view of increasing the competitiveness of the countries of the Eurasian continent) in establishing working ties between existing integration associations.

The EAEU has relations with the SCO and ASEAN. There is an initiative of Kazakhstan, which we support, the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia. There are now discussions about transforming it into an organization. The GCC is also a promising association. Given the process of normalization of relations between the Arab monarchies and Iran, this seriously increases the economic, transit and logistics potential. There is the Central Asian "five", with which many countries of the continent and not only are establishing ties.

Each of these associations has its own plans for the development of transport routes, routes for the delivery of energy resources. It is much more profitable and effective to harmonize these plans, and not to do the same things in their own area.

At the first Russia-ASEAN summit in 2005, President Vladimir Putin formulated his vision of establishing ties between all these existing structures and suggested that the result of this process would be the formation of the Greater Eurasian Partnership. And the process is underway. For example, the North-South International Transport Corridor, which makes it possible to provide a direct link between, say, the Baltic and the Indian Ocean. And there are other ideas.

I have been to Armenia. The Armenian side is working on the Crossroads of the World initiative, seeking to integrate its territory and its logistics capabilities into continent-wide processes. Speaking of this, we are in favour of developing all infrastructure projects so that, as our Chinese friends say, "thousands and millions of flowers bloom." But in order to put the Crossroads of the World into practice, it is necessary to sign a peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan. We sincerely wish success in this. Just yesterday we discussed this with Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan and President of Armenia Viktor Khachaturyan. It is clear that the agreement was made possible thanks to the trilateral summits of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia (1, 2, 3, 4). We are ready to continue to provide assistance if both sides are interested in this.

Of course, normalization between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Turkey is needed. Overcoming conflicts and unblocking the bans on transport and economic ties imposed as a result of these conflicts will significantly increase the competitiveness of this region and our entire continent.

The Greater Eurasian Partnership, as we see it, would become a serious material foundation for efforts, for work on the formation of a Eurasian security architecture.

I proceed from the premise that this should be done by the countries of the continent and that there should be a structure in the logic of Eurasian security, not Euro-Atlantic security. Not because we want to fence ourselves off. There is NATO. Countries that are interested in being institutionally intertwined with North America have such opportunities, please. But there is no need to create obstacles to the creation of a structure that all Eurasian countries, including the western part of our continent, can and will have the right to join.

I see no reason here to see some kind of conspiracy in this. But there are attempts to engage in unilateral initiatives on the other side, precisely on the part of NATO. There was NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. Many have already forgotten him. He headed the Secretariat of the North Atlantic Alliance for a long time. In the last year of his tenure, when NATO was already actively promoting "Indo-Pacific strategies," journalists asked Jens Stoltenberg if you were moving to the Indo-Pacific region, as if NATO had always said that it was a defensive alliance and its task was to protect the territories of its member states from external threats. He did not even blink, did not blush and said that yes, this is true, but now threats to the territories of NATO member states come from Southeast Asia, Northeast Asia, the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea. He said so directly.

NATO is now moving its infrastructure to the eastern part of the Eurasian continent, actively trying to weaken (to put it mildly) the unity of ASEAN, trying to invite individual ASEAN members into closed bloc structures (sometimes "threes", then "fours") and declaring that this is a region of vital importance for NATO.

Why is the Euro-Atlantic structure hatching plans to subjugate and extend its influence to almost the entire Eurasian continent up to the Far East? If the Eurasian countries themselves do not deal with the issues of security architecture, then we can only watch how they will do this from across the ocean.

Another aspect of this problem is that US President Donald Trump, as I have already said, insists that his foreign policy is based on national interests. He believes that European problems should be dealt with more by the Europeans themselves, and not by the United States. This is also a tendency for the discussion on how to ensure security to be "Eurasian" in some way in the future. This is contradicted by the absolutely aggressive and revanchist rhetoric of Brussels and Berlin on the militarisation of Europe and the cultivation of their own population to prepare for war with Russia. This must be countered by peaceful efforts.

From the very beginning, we actively supported the initiative of Belarus, which a couple of years ago held the International Conference on Eurasian Security for the first time in Minsk. The second conference was held last year. A third one is planned for this autumn. After the second conference (I participated in both of them, and I will definitely participate in the upcoming one), my colleague, Foreign Minister of Belarus Mikhail Ryzhenkov, and I circulated our vision of the project, the documents that we conditionally call the Eurasian Charter for Multipolarity and Diversity in the 21st Century. Some ministers from the European Union, other European countries, and Serbia in particular took part in the conference. Because we emphasise that Eurasian discussions on Eurasian security should be open to all countries of the Eurasian continent. So far, all this is in progress. We are not trying to artificially draw and say anything schematically. This distinguishes us from the authors and promoters of the "Indo-Pacific strategies" conceived in NATO offices.

We are trying to catch practical trends in real life. They lie in the fact that numerous structures created on the Eurasian continent are interested in building bridges. Many have already been built and used to implement mutually beneficial practical projects.

(Much more and well worth the time.)

https://karlof1.substack.com/p/lavrov-a ... conference

******

Art school instead of "Yeltsin Center"
May 24, 16:57



Art school instead of "Yeltsin Center

State Duma deputy from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation Denis Parfenov initiated ( https://t.me/uralinfozavod/2089 ) an investigation into the activities of the Yeltsin Center. Parfenov will send a request to the "competent authorities" to clarify the whereabouts of the first deputy director of the center, Lyudmila Telen, who is presumably in Israel.

This was stated by a member of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, Mikhail Tsarikhin:

We asked Denis Parfenov to send a request. They will look into it and take action. The issue is not only about her, but also about the distorted information that the center broadcasts to schoolchildren.
Since 2015, the Communists have been fighting for the closure of the Yeltsin Center. In their opinion, the building should be transferred to the School of Arts, as proposed by former Governor Yevgeny Kuyvashev.

Earlier, Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Economic Policy Mikhail Delyagin contacted the Investigative Committee, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Ministry of Justice and the Prosecutor's Office with a request to investigate the activities of the Yeltsin Center. The reason was the events organized under the leadership of Telen, which the deputy called "anti-Russian".

Comrade deputies, let's put pressure on this with joint efforts.
Earlier, Putin's plenipotentiary representative in the Urals Vladimir Zhoga spoke on the same topic. Everyone understands that in its current form, the Yeltsin Center is essentially an anti-Russian bedbug nest.

P.S. They used to say that Memorial, Ekho Moskvy (by the way, it was also financed by the state through Gazprom), Novaya Gazeta, etc. cannot be closed down, because "the earth will fly into the celestial axis". But these bedbug nests were closed down and the world did not collapse and the country lives perfectly well without them. The time for the Yeltsin Center will come. Water wears away stone.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/9857317.html

Google Translator