January 11, 2016
Question: Mr President, will you take any steps
to re-establish the G7 format as the G8?
And another question: what did you think when
the US President said that Russia is a regional power?
Vladimir Putin: I did not think anything
in particular. Every individual, all the more so the President
of the United States, is entitled to his or her own opinion
on anything, on partners and on other countries. That is
his own opinion, as I also know his opinion that the American
nation, the United States is unique. I cannot agree with either
of those opinions.
Let me clarify a few things about Russia. First,
we do not claim the role of a superpower. This role is very
costly and it is meaningless. Our economy is fifth or sixth
in the world in terms of volume. It may have moved down
to a lower place at present taking into account
the economic difficulties I have mentioned but we are confident that
we have very good development prospects and potential. We occupy, roughly,
the sixth place in the world in terms of purchasing
power parity.
If we say that Russia is a regional power, we
should first determine what region we are referring to. Look
at the map and ask: “What is it, is it part of Europe?
Or is it part of the eastern region, bordering on Japan
and the United States, if we mean Alaska and China? Or is
it part of Asia? Or perhaps the southern region?” Or look
at the north. Essentially, in the north we border
on Canada across the Arctic Ocean. Or in the south?
Where is it? What region are we speaking about? I think that speculations
about other countries, an attempt to speak disrespectfully about
other countries is an attempt to prove one’s exceptionalism
by contrast. In my view, that is a misguided position.
Question: And what about the G8?
Vladimir Putin: We planned to host
the G8 summit in 2014. I think Russia never became
a full-fledged G8 member, since there were always separate negotiations
between foreign ministers of the other seven countries. I would
not say that this mechanism is useless. Meetings, discussions, seeking
solutions together are always beneficial.
I believe that Russia’s presence was useful,
since it provided an alternative view on some issues under
discussion. We examine pretty much the same issues within the G20,
APEC in the East and within BRICS. We were ready to host
the G8 summit in 2014. It was not us who did not go somewhere; other
countries did not come to Russia. If our counterparts decide to come
for a visit, they will be most welcome, but we have not booked any
tickets yet.
Question: What do you think about
the possibility of re-establishing cooperation, if not within
the G8, then, perhaps, with NATO? There was the Russia-NATO Council
after all, and you conducted joint military exercises. Is there
a chance to re-establish such cooperation or should we forego
the prospect altogether?
Vladimir Putin: At the outset,
the idea of creating the Council was actively supported, if not
initiated, by Mr Berlusconi, the former Prime Minister of Italy,
and I believe it was in Italy that we signed the document
on establishing the Russia-NATO Council. It was not Russia that cut
off cooperation through the G8 or the Russia-NATO Council. We
are willing to interact with everyone, once there is a matter
for common discussion. We think that there is one, but a relationship
can be happy only when the feeling is mutual. If we are not welcome
as partners, that is fine with us then.
Question: Regrettably, at the moment
the Russia-NATO relations are at the stage
of confrontation, rather than cooperation. Turkish military forces have
downed a Russian aircraft, and Russian and Turkish warships are
reported to come dangerously close to one another all the more
often. Do you think that such developments may at a certain point
cause an escalation from a cold war to actual hostilities?
Vladimir Putin: Turkey is a NATO member.
However, the problems that have emerged have nothing to do with
Turkey’s NATO membership; nobody has attacked Turkey. Instead of trying
to provide us with an explanation for the war crime they
committed, that is, for downing our fighter jet that was targeting
terrorists, the Turkish government rushed to NATO headquarters
seeking protection, which looks quite odd and, in my view,
humiliating for Turkey.
I repeat, NATO has to protect its members
from attack, but nobody has attacked Turkey. If Turkey has vested interests
elsewhere in the world, in the adjacent countries, does it
mean that NATO must protect and secure these interests? Does it mean that
Germany, as a NATO member, must help Turkey to expand into
neighbouring territories?
I hope that such incidents will not cause
large-scale hostilities. Of course, we all realise that Russia, once under
threat, would defend its security interests by all available means
at its disposal, should such threats against Russia arise.
Question: Now let’s turn to Syria, if you do
not mind.
We say that we are tackling common challenges there.
This is the joint fight against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. However,
some people in the West say that Russian military forces
in Syria are fighting the anti-Assad rebels, rather than ISIS. What
would be your response to the allegations that Russia is hitting
the wrong targets?
Vladimir Putin: They are telling lies. Look,
the videos that support this version appeared before our pilots even
started to carry out strikes against terrorists. This can be corroborated.
However, those who criticise us prefer to ignore it.
American pilots hit the Doctors Without Borders
hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, by mistake, I am sure. There
were casualties and fatalities among civilians and doctors. Western
media outlets have attempted to hush this up, to drop
the subject and have a very short memory span when it comes
to such things. They mentioned it a couple of times and put
it on ice. And those few mentions were only due to foreign
citizens from the Doctors Without Borders present there.
Who now remembers the wiped out wedding parties?
Over 100 people were killed with a single strike.
Yet this phony evidence about our pilots reportedly
striking civilian targets keeps circulating. If we tag the “live
pipelines” that consist of thousands of petrol and oil tankers
as civilian targets, than, indeed, one might believe that our pilots are
bombing these targets, but everyone is bombing them, including the Americans,
the French and everyone else.
Question: However, it is clear that Syrian
President Bashar al-Assad is carrying out strikes against his own population.
Can we say that al-Assad is your ally?
Vladimir Putin: You know, this is a rather
subtle issue. I think that President al-Assad has made many mistakes
in the course of the Syrian conflict. However, don’t we all
realise full well that this conflict would never have escalated to such
a degree if it had not been supported from abroad through supplying money,
weapons and fighters? Tragically, it is civilians who suffer in such
conflicts.
But who is responsible for that? Is it
the government, which seeks to secure its sovereignty and fights
these anti-constitutional actions, or those who have masterminded
the anti-government insurgency?
Regarding your question if al-Assad is an ally
or not and our goals in Syria. I can tell you precisely
what we do not want to happen: we do not want the Libyan
or Iraqi scenario to be repeated in Syria. I have
to give due credit to Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi,
and I told him this myself, because had he not taken
on the responsibility, demonstrated fortitude and brought
the country under control, then we might have witnessed the Libyan
scenario in Egypt. In my view, no effort should be spared
in strengthening legitimate governments in the region’s
countries. That also applies to Syria. Emerging state institutions
in Iraq and in Libya must be revived and strengthened.
Situations in Somalia and other countries must be stabilised. State
authority in Afghanistan must be reinforced. However, it does not mean
that everything should be left as is. Indeed, this new stability would
underpin political reforms.
As far as Syria is concerned, I think
that we should work towards a constitutional reform. It is
a complicated process. Then, early presidential and parliamentary
elections should be held, based on the new Constitution. It is
the Syrian people themselves who must decide who and how should run
their country. This is the only way to achieve stability
and security, to create conditions for economic growth
and prosperity, so that people can live in their own homes,
in their homeland, rather than flee to Europe.
Question: But do you believe al-Assad is
a legitimate leader if he allows the destruction of his
country’s population?
Vladimir Putin: It is not his goal
to destroy his country’s population. He is fighting those who rose up
against him with deadly force. And if the civilians suffer,
I think that the primary responsibility for this is with those who
fight against him with deadly force as well as those who assist armed
groups.
As I have already said, though, this does
not mean that everything is all right out there and that everyone is
right. This is exactly why I believe political reforms are needed so much
there. The first step in that direction should be to develop
and adopt a new Constitution.
Question: If, contrary to expectations,
al-Assad loses the elections, will you grant him the possibility
of asylum in your country?
Vladimir Putin: I think it is quite
premature to discuss this. We granted asylum to Mr Snowden, which was
far more difficult than to do the same for Mr al-Assad.
First, the Syrian people should be given
the opportunity to have their say. I assure you, if this process
is conducted democratically, then al-Assad will probably not need to leave
the country at all. And it is not important whether he remains
President or not.
You have been talking about our targets
and means, and now you are talking about al-Assad being our ally. Do
you know that we support military operations of the armed opposition
that combats ISIS? Armed opposition against al-Assad that is fighting ISIS. We
coordinate our joint operations with them and support their offensives
by airstrikes in various sections of the frontline. This is
hundreds, thousands of armed people fighting ISIS. We support both
the al-Assad’s army and the armed opposition. Some of them
have publicly declared this, others prefer to remain silent, but the work
is on-going.
Question: Finally, I would like
to touch upon a topic that has never come up before, that is
the rift between Saudi Arabia and Iran, as if Syria was not
enough. Does it mean that this rift can lead us to a very grave
conflict?
Vladimir Putin: It hampers the efforts
to settle the Syrian crisis and the fight against
terrorism, as well as the process of halting
the inflow if refugees to Europe, that much is certain.
As for whether this will lead
to a major regional clash, I do not know. I would rather
not talk or even think in these terms. We have very good relations
with Iran and our partnership with Saudi Arabia is stable.
Of course, we regret that these things happened
there. But you have no death penalty in your country. Despite a very
hard period in the 1990s–early 2000s, when we were fighting terrorism
in Russia, we abolished the death penalty. And there is no death
penalty in Russia at present. There are certain countries that use
the death penalty – Saudi Arabia, the United States
and some others.
We regret this has happened, especially given that
the cleric had not been fighting against Saudi Arabia with lethal force. Yet
it is true that an embassy attack is a totally unacceptable
occurrence in the modern world. As far as I know,
the Iranian authorities have arrested several perpetrators
of the assault. If our participation in any form is needed, we
are ready to do everything possible to resolve the conflict
as soon as possible.
Question: One last question, Mr President.
During the preparations for the Winter
Olympics in Sochi, there was heavy criticism in the West
of democratic development and human rights situation in Russia.
Do you expect similar criticism to arise again during
the preparations for the 2018 FIFA World Cup?
I think the Russian language is more
extensive than German. (Noting the long translation
of the question from German into Russian.)
Vladimir Putin: I would say the German
language is more precise.
The Russian language is more diverse, more
elegant. However, such genius minds as, say, Goethe make the German
language sound very elegant and beautiful. One can feel its beauty only
in German, and to be able to feel it one needs
to understand it.
As far as democracy is concerned,
the ruling classes usually talk about freedom to pull the wool
over the eyes of those whom they govern. There is nothing new about
democracy in Russia. As we have already identified, democracy is
the rule of the people and the influence
of the people over the authorities. We have learned very well
the lesson of one-party rule – that of the Communist
Party (CPSU). Therefore, we made our choice long ago and we will continue
developing democratic institutions in our country. At present, 77
political parties can take part in parliamentary elections in Russia.
We have come back to direct *gubernatorial elections.
We are advancing the instruments of direct
democracy, meaning various public organisations, and will continue
to do so. There can be no identical clichés in democracy – be it
American, European (German), Russian or Indian. Do you know that twice
in American history the President was elected by the majority
of delegates representing the minority of voters? Does it mean
the absence of democracy? Of course not. But it is not
the only or the most important problem. One
of the European leaders once told me: “In the United States
it is impossible to run for presidency without a few billion
dollars in your pocket.”
Now, regarding the parliamentary system
of democracy.
I am repeatedly asked: “How long have you been
President?” But in a parliamentary democracy, the person number
one is the Prime Minister, who can Head the Government
an unlimited number of times.
We have returned to direct elections
of regional heads. In some countries, however, heads of regions
are appointed by the central government. I am not sure,
I may be wrong, it is probably better to leave it out
or to double-check it, but, as far as I know, that is
the case in India.
We still have a number of problems
to solve before people feel confident that they have real influence over
the authorities and that the authorities respond to their
demands. We are going to work towards improving our instruments.
As for the attempts to use sport
in political rifts and political competition, I believe that is
a huge mistake. That is what stupid people do. If problems arise,
particularly at the interstate level, sport, art, music, ballet
and opera are the very means that should bring people closer together
rather than divide them. It is vital to foster this role of art
and sport rather than belittle and suppress it.
Question: Thank you, Mr President,
for a wonderful and very detailed conversation.
GUBERNATORIAL = of or relating to the governor of a U.S. state or to the position of governor
No comments:
Post a Comment