Politics.be - Russische leiders in hun eigen woorden

Politics.be (https://forum.politics.be/index.php)

- Oekraïense oorlog (https://forum.politics.be/forumdisplay.php?f=228)

- - Russische leiders in hun eigen woorden (https://forum.politics.be/showthread.php?t=264130)

Russische leiders in hun eigen woorden

Lees, leer of negeer.

Lavrov 19 maart 2022

Citaat:

Dear friends,

I would like to greet you and express my gratitude for your continuing to invite me even though I chair the Supervisory Board. It is important for me to see you, listen to your questions and understand what worries you in this uneasy period.

This meeting takes place against the backdrop of events now occurring in Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly spoken at length about the origins of this crisis. I would like to briefly reiterate: this is not about Ukraine. This is the end-result of a policy that the West has carried out since the early 1990s. It was clear back then that Russia was not going to be docile and that it was going to have a say in international matters. This is not because Russia wants to be a bully. Russia has its history, its tradition, its own understanding of the history of its peoples and a vision on how it can ensure its security and interests in this world.

This became clear in the late 1990s-early 2000s. The West has repeatedly attempted to stall the independent and autonomous development of Russia. This is rather unfortunate. From the start of President Vladimir Putin’s “rule” in the early 2000s, we were open to the idea of working with the West in various ways, even in a form similar to that of an alliance, as the President has said. Sadly, we were unable to do this. We repeatedly suggested that we should conclude treaties and base our security on equal rights, rejecting the idea of strengthening one’s security at the expense of another.

Neither were we able to promote economic cooperation. The European Union, which back then showed some signs of independent decision-making, has now devolved toward being completely dependent on the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the US. The story of Nord Stream 2 was the highlight of this change. Even Germany, which defended its interests in the project to the very end, was persuaded that the “project was not in its interests.” Germany and its people were told what their interests were by people on the other side of the Atlantic. Many other international areas were blocked despite our commitment to close cooperation on an equal basis.

The West did not want equal cooperation and, as we can now see, has kept true to the “will and testament” of Zbigniew Brzezinski who said that Ukraine should not be allowed to side with Russia. With Ukraine, Russia is a great power, while without Ukraine, it is a regional player. We understand that this is a mere exaggeration. But it fits nevertheless the philosophy and the mentality of western leaders. No effort was spared to turn Ukraine into an instrument to contain Russia. Into an “anti-Russia,” as President Putin said. This is neither a metaphor nor an exaggeration.

What has been happening all these years is the significant accumulation of physical, military, ideological, and philosophical threats to the security of the Russian Federation. The militarisation of Ukraine, which was injected with weapons (including assault weapons) worth many billions of dollars over these years, was accompanied by the Nazification of all spheres of society and the eradication of the Russian language. You know the laws that were passed there concerning education, the state language, and the indigenous peoples of Ukraine that made no mention of Russians. It was not only the language that was being edited out, but simply everything Russian. They banned the mass media, which broadcast from Russia and transmitted in Ukraine. Three Ukrainian television channels that were considered disloyal to the current government were shut down. Neo-Nazi battalions with insignia of Hitler’s SS divisions held marches; torchlight processions took place with a presidential regiment assigned as an official escort; fighters were trained in camps by instructor programmes from the US and other Western countries. All this was done with the connivance of civilised Europe and with the support of the Ukrainian government.

To my great regret and shame, President Zelensky has been asking how he could be a Nazi if he has Jewish roots. He said this on the exact day when Ukraine demonstratively withdrew from the Agreement on Perpetuating the Memory of the Courage and Heroism of the Peoples of the CIS Countries During the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945. When he personally patronises the tendencies I have mentioned, it is difficult to take the policy of the Ukrainian leadership seriously. Just as in the early stages of his presidency, and even earlier, when he was a stage and soap opera star, he assured me in every possible way that it was unthinkable for him that the Russian language could be infringed upon. So here we are: life demonstrates what a person’s word is worth.

These accumulated tendencies took on a new form following the coup d’etat in February 2014. Despite the guarantees of the EU countries — France, Germany and Poland — that were part of the agreement between the opposition and the then-President of Ukraine, they tore up that agreement the morning after, disregarded the guarantees, humiliated the nations above, and the EU as a whole, before announcing their new regime. In our conversations with our western partners, including the Germans and the French, we have been asking them how they could allow this to happen. We kept reiterating, you provided guarantees to this agreement. They say this happened because Yanukovich left Kiev. Yes he did, but he left for Kharkov to take part in his party’s congress. Yes, he faced a number of issues and did not enjoy broad support, but he never fled. Still, this is not about Yanukovich.

The first point of the Agreement read that the Government of National Accord was to be established as an interim stage for early presidential elections. Most likely, the then president would not have won, and everyone knew this. All the opposition had to do was to wait and fulfil what it agreed to. Instead, they immediately ran back to “Maidan.” They seized the government building and said, “congratulate us, we have created a government of winners.” And this is how their instincts were immediately manifested. Winners. First of all, they demanded that the Verkhovna Rada abolish any privileges granted to the Russian language. This, despite the fact that the Russian language was and is still enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine, which declares that the state must guarantee the rights of Russians and other ethnic minorities. They demanded that Russians get out of Crimea because they would never think like Ukrainians, speak Ukrainian or honour Ukraine’s heroes Bandera and Shukhevich. They sent combat battalions and “friendship trains” to that peninsula to storm the Supreme Council building. At this point, Crimea rebelled, and Donbass refused to accept the coup d'état and instead asked to be left alone. But they were not left alone. Donbass didn’t attack anyone. But they were declared terrorists and an anti-terrorist operation was launched, with troops being sent in, with nearly all of the West applauding the move. That’s when it became evident exactly what plans were in store for the future role of Ukraine.

The massacre was stopped with enormous effort and through Russia’s active participation. The Minsk agreements were signed. You know what happened to them next. For seven long years, we tried to appeal to the conscience of those who signed the agreements, above all, to France and Germany. The end was tragic.

We held several summits and meetings at other levels, and Ukraine, either under Poroshenko or under Zelensky, just did not want to comply with the agreements. First of all, they refused to open a direct dialogue with Donetsk and Lugansk. We asked the Germans and the French why they would not make their proteges at least sit down at the negotiation table. The answer was that they did not think that the republics were independent, and that it was all Russia’s fault. End of conversation. Contrary to its commitments under the Minsk agreements, late last year and early this year, Kiev began to build up its forces along the line of contact up to 120,000 troops. Contrary to the ceasefire agreements that had been signed and violated many times prior, they dramatically increased their heavy shelling, always targeting residential areas. The same has been happening for all these eight years, with varying degrees of intensity, amid complete silence from all the international “human rights” organisatons and Western “civilised democracies.”

Shelling intensified at the start of this year. We received information that Ukraine wanted to implement their Plan B, which they had long threatened, to take the regions by force. This was made worse by the West’s stonewalling of Russia’s initiative to reach an agreement on an equal and indivisible security architecture in Europe. President Vladimir Putin put forward this initiative in November 2021, we drafted the necessary documents and relayed them to the US and NATO in December 2021. They responded that they were willing to negotiate certain issues, including where missiles could not be deployed, but that Ukraine and NATO was none of our business. Ukraine was said to have reserved its right to appeal to join NATO, which would then deliberate whether to admit it, and all this without asking anyone else (likely ending up granting Ukraine’s membership). This was the essence of what they told us.

This is why when Ukraine commenced its shelling, signifying a clear sign of preparations to launch a military offensive in Donbass, we had no other choice but to protect Russian people in Ukraine. We recognised the Donetsk and Lugansk people’s republics. President Vladimir Putin responded to their request by ordering the launch of a special military operation. I am certain that you are following the events and know that the operation has brought to light our worst fears about Ukraine’s military plans and has helped us derail them.

You know that facts have been uncovered of a dangerous bioweapons programme that the Pentagon has been carrying out in many cities of Ukraine. Now that Russia’s armed forces have acquired access to these documents, the US has been trying to cover its tracks. We will be fighting for the truth to come out. This bioweapons research is not limited to Ukraine and is being conducted in over 300 laboratories in various countries, most of them located in former Soviet Union nations along the borders of Russia and the People’s Republic of China.

This was not our choice. We saw how the West’s attitude was communicating one simple truth – if you were a Russophobe; if you were set on eradicating Katsaps and Moskals (a quote from statements made by Ukrainian politicians); if you were to say that anyone who considers themselves Russian and is a citizen of Ukraine should get out for the sake of their future and their children, (as President Vladimir Zelensky said in September 2021); if you obediently fulfill Western bidding so as to constantly irritate, unnerve and unbalance Russia, then you have the universal green light to do anything.

The unprecedentedly hysterical reaction in the West to our military operation, the way they are encouraging and indulging everything anti-Russia and anti-Russian is sad news indeed. I regularly read about the ill treatment that Russian people face in other countries, including citizens of those countries who are of Russian origin. It appears anyone can demand that these people be persecuted in the West now, even on social media. I cannot wrap my mind around this.

But this all proves one thing: the anti-Russia project has failed. President Vladimir Putin has listed the goals of the operation, and the first on the list is to ensure the safety of people in Donbass, and the second one, to eliminate the growing threats to the Russian Federation from the militarisation and Nazification of Ukraine. When they realised that our policy line had helped to thwart their plans, they literally went ballistic.

And yet, we have always supported diplomatic solutions to any problems. Over the course of hostilities, President Vladimir Zelensky proposed negotiations. President Vladimir Putin agreed. The talks are underway, although the Ukrainian delegation did start by, as we say, simply going through the motions. Then dialogue actually began. Even so, there is always the feeling that the Ukrainian delegation is manipulated by the West (most likely, the Americans), and is not allowed to agree to our demands, which are bare minimum, in my opinion. The process is underway.

We continue to be open to cooperation with any countries, including Western ones. However, given how the West has behaved, we are not going to propose any initiatives. Let’s see how they will get themselves out of this self-imposed impasse. They have got themselves into this impasse along with their “values,” “free market principles,” rights to private property and the presumption of innocence. They have trampled on all of this.

Many countries are already beginning to rack their brains in search of ways to slowly “creep away” from the dollar in international settlements. Look what has happened. What if they do not like something else tomorrow? The United States is sending its diplomats around the world, its ambassadors in every country have orders to demand that these countries end cooperation with Russia under the threat of sanctions. We would understand if they did this with small countries. But when such ultimatums and demands are given to China, India, Egypt, or Turkey, it looks like our American colleagues have totally lost touch with reality, or their superhuman complex has overwhelmed their sense of normalcy. We have seen such complexes in human history, and we do know about this.

I do not want to be the only speaker, though. I would like to hear from you. What questions do you have, what are you interested in?

Question: For those who do not know, Riga was part of the Russian Empire longer than Sevastopol was. How long will Russian people need a visa to travel to Russia? Is it possible to issue maybe a card or something for compatriots from the Baltics and European countries, so that they could travel or work in Russia? There is a residence permit, but if you leave for more than six months you lose your residency. In the current situation, when Russophobia is on the rise, this would be especially relevant.

The mistakes made by the public, the “soft power,” then have to be corrected by the army (as we see in Ukraine). Perhaps in countries where Russia faces direct opposition it would make sense to work not through Russian Community Councils (which quickly find themselves under the control of local authorities), but rather to decentralise work. For example, Americans have 20 different funds. You can be anything – green, blue, light blue, whatever, but if you are anti-Russia, this opens all the necessary doors.

Sergey Lavrov: I agree with you about visas. This is an old problem. We have a complicated bureaucracy. This discussion between liberals and conservatives has been going on since the late 1990s and early 2000s. The liberals believed we needed to remove as many barriers as possible so that people with Russian roots, who speak Russian and are involved in cultural and humanitarian events, enjoyed a preferential entry regime. The debate was quite lively when the law on compatriots was adopted, and they discussed the “compatriot card” option. This was one of the most important matters discussed. However, no agreement was reached, including for legal reasons – because it is not a passport or a half-passport. For example, Poland issues Pole’s Cards. These can essentially be used as passports. There are other instruments to liaise with their diasporas in Western countries (with ethnic Hungarians, Romanians, Bulgarians), and in the Middle East, too. Even in Syria, there is an entire ministry (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates). We are currently working on additional steps that we can take in this direction.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin has appointed me to head the Commission for International Cooperation and Support for Compatriots Abroad. The commission will meet at the end of March. This question will be one of the main ones on the agenda. We will discuss it in the context of a broader approach called repatriation. I believe that repatriation must be legally formalised with all the necessary formalities and the with all legal norms observed. This must be done in order to dramatically facilitate the procedure for those who identify as Russians to relocate or come to stay in Russia. We will try to consider your question as well as part of this approach.

As for the soft power, the Russian Community Councils and the American method – there must be some school of thought that prompts such action. As we promoted the movement of compatriots, we sought to make their actions transparent, so that they did not arouse any suspicion of being involved in underground activities. Unfortunately, that was all in vain. All this transparency backfired. What they are doing with the management of the Russian Community Council in the United States is pure McCarthyism. Its leaders had to return to Russia, otherwise the FBI threatened to imprison them for a long time because they promoted projects between compatriots who maintained cultural and humanitarian ties with Russia. Recall how the Americans treated Maria Butina. She worked openly and completely freely in the United States, promoting joint projects. In the US, all NGOs for the most part explicitly declare they are supported and funded by the Agency for International Development. Other Western countries have many projects that prefer to keep this information to themselves. I wouldn't want us to act like this. First, it would be dangerous for the people concerned. Secondly, these are the methods of the intelligence services, not soft power methods. On the other hand, American soft power relies heavily on the CIA and other special services.

We will think of ways to support our compatriots in situations where a true witch hunt has been unleashed against them. I think more flexible forms of support could be implemented, including the Foundation for Supporting and Protecting the Rights of Compatriots Living Abroad. The essence of this is the provision of legal assistance to those who find themselves in a difficult situation. There is also the Alexander Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund. We will think about some additional formats, naturally, fully legitimate ones.

Russia needs to toughen its policy with regard to shadow agencies engaged in things that do not coincide with their charter and other documents. Thank you for showing such an interest. We will certainly try to take this into account.

Question: What contribution do you think representatives of other states can make to the development of international relations with the Russian Federation?

Sergey Lavrov: We will support any public initiatives aimed at developing cooperation in the post-Soviet space. There are many forms for interaction in the CIS, in the CSTO, and in the EAEU, which are of interest to public movements and organisations and that can be used to organise events.

I sincerely would not want to give you any specific ideas here. You know better. You have a feel for what life is like in your country, and how it is affected by relations with Russia on the official, investment, and trade tracks.

As for the Russian Community Councils, in some countries our compatriots are beginning to create alternative councils. It is possible that people are just being competitive, which is only natural, but if you have an interest in doing something on the ground, we will only welcome this. If you need some advice, I am available to listen to your ideas and see how we can support them together with our Kazakhstani colleagues.

Question: I have a proposal, not a question. We have set up a pressure group on this track, and we have already drafted our own proposals. We are ready to help promote Russian culture and the Russian language in Germany, the Baltics and other countries. We would like to become independent analysts and experts and to develop culture, the Russian language and to support compatriots and foreigners who love the Russian language, and who aspire to culture. We would be happy to take part in this process.

Sergey Lavrov: That’s wonderful. Could you please leave your proposals and contacts with the organisers? The Foreign Ministry exercises various functions within the framework of the Government Commission for Compatriots Abroad, and I head this Commission. Our Ministry is also the main body responsible for the implementation of a new federal targeted programme to promote international cooperation. This is what soft power is all about. We also have a programme for supporting the Russian language abroad. In effect, opportunities still exist for the kind of projects you mentioned. I look forward to reading your letter.

Question: As of late, many Western activists, including Arnold Schwarzenegger, have addressed the people of Russia. If you were able to address all the peoples of the world in the West, the East and in Latin America, what would you tell them to make sure they hear you?

Sergey Lavrov: I would tell them that all peoples should be true to themselves, and that they should not abandon their traditions, history, aspirations and world outlook.

Getting back to Ukraine, the Americans are gloating over this situation and rubbing their hands with glee. In all, 140 countries voted against Russia at the UN General Assembly. We know how these countries reached this decision: US ambassadors have been shuttling from capital to capital and demanding that even the great powers comply with their demands, and they don’t shy away from speaking about it in public. They either want to offend others, or they have completely lost all sense of proportion, while comprehending their own superiority. However, out these 140 countries voting on US orders, not one imposed any sanctions except the West. An overwhelming majority of countries did not impose any sanctions on Russia. It appears that, by voting, some of them wanted to minimise damage, but they don’t want to shoot themselves in the foot, and they will continue to develop their economy. Many independent leaders are saying openly that they don’t want to fulfil US instructions to their own detriment.

So, people of the world, be true to yourselves.

Question: What should the West do now that events have dramatically escalated to move things back towards a realm of peace, tranquility, kindness and cooperation?

Sergey Lavrov: The West should start minding its own business and stop lecturing others. Because right now, all we hear is “Russia must..” Why must we do anything, and how have we so upset the West? I really do not understand. They’ve dragged out our security guarantees initiatives. They told us not to worry about NATO expansion because it does not threaten our security. Why do they get to decide what we need for our security? This is our business. They do not allow us anywhere near discussions of their own security. We are constantly reminded that NATO is a defensive organisation. First, this defensive alliance bombed Yugoslavia. We only recently recalled how in 1998 Joe Biden was so proud that he personally contributed to the decision to bomb Belgrade, and bridges over the Drina River. It was fascinating to hear this from someone who claims Russia is led by war criminals.

NATO also acted in Iraq without a UN Security Council resolution. In Libya, it did have a resolution, but it only covered establishing a no-fly zone, so that Muammar Gadaffi's aircraft could not take off from their airfields. They didn't. On the other hand, NATO bombed all the army positions from the air, which the UN Security Council did not warrant, and brutally killed Muammar Gadaffi without trial or investigation. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went live on air to celebrate the event.

Strategically speaking, there was indeed a collective defence alliance when the Berlin Wall and the Warsaw Pact existed. It was clear where the line of defence was then. When the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist, NATO foreswore not to expand to the East, but began to do just that. We have seen five waves of expansion by now, contrary to its assurances. And each time, the imaginary Berlin Wall was moved further east. The alliance assumed the right to determine the boundary of its line of defence. Now Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has declared that NATO must bear global responsibility and is obliged to ensure security in the Indo-Pacific region. It is their name for the Asia-Pacific region. So, NATO is ready to “defend itself” in the South China Sea now. They are building defence lines against China now, so China, too, needs to be on the alert for that. A really unusual type of defence.

As for the Indo-Pacific region, which we have always called the Asia-Pacific region, there is the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) there, as well as mechanisms created around the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). ASEAN has a dozen partners. We participate in holding the East Asia Summit, the ASEAN Security Forum, and the ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus, a platform for ASEAN and its twelve partners which include China, Russia, the West (including Australia) and India – all the key players. Those formats work on the basis of consensus. This does not suit the Americans though, because to pursue their policy to contain China, they need an anti-China mechanism. But no platform where China is a member can produce such a result. They proclaimed the Indo-Pacific strategies and created Quad – a group of four nations including the United States, Australia, Japan, and they also lured India into this group. Our Indian friends are well aware of what we are talking about. They said they would participate in this only in the context of economic and infrastructure projects, but not military ones. So, because they needed to build up the military component, they created a parallel format, AUKUS, which included Australia, the UK and the United States. Now they want to expand it by adding Japan and South Korea, and even some ASEAN countries. This will lead to the collapse of the ASEAN ten.

When the Indo-Pacific concept was announced, we asked what was wrong with the Asia-Pacific label. We were told it mixed two different things because Asia did not refer to an ocean, but the Pacific did. Hence the Indian Ocean and Asia. We asked, if this includes the Indian Ocean, does this mean the whole of East Africa will be involved in this cooperation? They said no. That region had too many problems they did not want to deal with as they had enough on their plate. Is the Persian Gulf also part of the Indian Ocean? They said no to that too, disowning it. This makes it clear that the Indo part has been included with the sole purpose of cozying up to India and trying even harder to turn it into an anti-China player.

Russian President Vladimir Putin visited India in early February 2022. I spoke frankly with them. Our Indian friends understand everything perfectly and will never be open to such “cooperation” or play someone else’s games. India is a great country. Making such provocations against great powers is simply disrespectful.

Back to our discussion – we tried to negotiate with the West up to the last minute. But relations with the EU were destroyed back in 2014. All mechanisms, and there were plenty of them: biannual summits, annual meetings of the Russian Government and the European Commission, four common spaces being developed under four roadmaps, 20 industry-based dialogues – all that was derailed simply because the people in Crimea, faced with a radical neo-Nazi threat, voted for reunification with Russia.

Our Western colleagues do have this curious approach towards politics – when considering any problem in international politics, they cut off periods of time that are not favourable to them. When we discussed Ukraine with them, they said that we “annexed” Crimea. Wait, but what happened before that? They failed to make the opposition do what they themselves had signed on to. The opposition violated all guarantees and, contrary to the agreements, carried out a coup d'état and proclaimed an openly anti-Russia policy line. They began trying to suppress everything Russian. But Westerners called it “the price one has to pay for democratic processes.” They could not even say the word coup.

Last autumn, I asked the Germans and the French, how is this so? It is the Minsk Agreements we are talking about. Why are you so stubborn about this annexation part? It all started then. “This is the price one has to pay for democratic processes.” You see, this is their approach – they ignore what is unfavourable to them. They just single out one of the symptoms and begin to build their entire policy on it.

Question: Politics is about forestalling. I would like to take a look into the future. How do you, as an absolute professional in this area, see the future of the Slavic peoples’ coexistence in this space? I am sure that everything will be well. However, the forms of such coexistence may differ. What is your opinion of its stability and preferred forms?

Sergey Lavrov: We should follow the lines dictated by life itself. We have reached an extremely important milestone. I am referring to the 28 union programmes. They are described as roadmaps. These programmes are being actively and efficiently transformed into normative acts. We need to have many of them. The majority have already been drafted, and the rest are at the advanced stage of preparation. They will ensure not just our rapprochement but the creation of a common economic foundation, which is necessary to level out rights in absolutely all spheres, including trade, investment, the implementation of economic projects, access to state orders and more.

As for the political superstructure, we have the union parliament, the union cabinet of ministers, and the Supreme State Council chaired by our presidents. These bodies will deal with economic business development to see if our political bodies should be additionally adjusted to our superstructure. I am sure that we will rely on the opinion of our peoples, who regard each other as fraternal and truly close peoples.

Question: I have a question about soft power. School education concerns not only the external but also the internal contours. For the past seven years, I have been closely monitoring developments in children’s culture, which can be described as extremely pro-liberal. Today we need to overhaul the cultural space here and to quickly launch the introduction of our cultural codes abroad. Here is a simple example: the animated television series Masha and the Bear has done more in the external contour to improve Russia’s image abroad than many official programmes. Are there any programmes, or plans to launch programmes to change the cultural code both in the internal and the external contours? I have a proposal, which I would like to formulate and to submit through this event’s organisers tomorrow, if I may.

Sergey Lavrov: Yes, of course. I would like to urge everyone, including those who don’t have formulated proposals, to share their ideas with us. We will discuss all of them.

You have touched upon a very important issue. I am not directly involved in these efforts, but we have always been speaking about the need to start promoting our culture from the cradle, primarily in Russia. There is too much external influence now, and internal influence is not always effective in shaping the right worldview in our children. I am not talking about brainwashing people. But we need to prevent the brainwashing of our children by other forces. This is the issue. Children’s access to information must not be limited to one source. Do please submit your ideas. We will look at them together with the Culture Ministry.

Question: A colleague has mentioned the issue of visas. The lady from Kazakhstan has said what we should do abroad and how we should do it. Can you say what Russia’s priority is: to collect as many compatriots as possible in Russia, or to form a cordon or a barrier of compatriots outside the country?

Sergey Lavrov: I know that some political analysts are pondering this idea. I believe that people have a free choice. We must create the right conditions for those who want to return. I have already mentioned repatriation today. We will certainly deal with this matter at the United Russia’s Commission [on International Cooperation and Support for Compatriots Living Abroad]. I will do my best to help draft a law on this matter.

As for the interests of those who want to live where they are living, we must work with the authorities of their countries of residence to prevent discrimination against Russians, Russian education, [Russian] media outlets, etc. It will be more difficult to do this now, because our Western colleagues are encouraging Russophobia in all areas. Regrettably, they are trying to set the Georgian people on this track. When they recklessly adopted these horrible, inhuman sanctions, leaving 200,000 people outside the national territory, preventing them from using national airlinesand prohibiting Western air carriers from bringing these people home, the Prime Minister of Georgia announced that they were ready, in view of that humanitarian situation, to allow Georgian airlines to bring Russians from Europe and the EU closer to their home country. You remember how fiercely he was attacked for this. It was an elementary human desire to help people in difficult circumstances. If you have any complaints about your authorities, please write to us.

Question: There are no complaints. We will submit the proposals regarding possible support for our compatriots in foreign countries.

Sergey Lavrov: We have a channel for communication. We are interested in normal relations with our Georgian colleagues.

Question: All states are playing the same game: the author has trump cards and a support team in case there are dissenters. I am referring to the UK and the United States. This will go on until one of the parties ceases to exist. Is it not high time Russia started its own game within the framework of the Eurasian continent and friendly countries to promote peace, justice and security? Given its nuclear arsenal, Russia could guarantee the security of states (where it has been confirmed – Syria, Ukraine) for countries that currently depend to some or other extent on big, major players so that they can feel they are also involved.

Sergey Lavrov: I wouldn’t call it a game in the sense implied by Zbigniew Brzezinski’s terms “great Game” and “grand chessboard”. We proceed from the premise that our friends are people, states, and political parties which are our equals. Unlike the Western organisations, where there is little democracy. They invented consensus, but in NATO and the EU this consensus is a sham.

They adopted sanctions in instalments even before the current stage in the development of our geopolitical space (there has been a series of sanctions for no reason at all since 2014). Everything seems to have happened – Crimea, Donbass, the Minsk agreements… But every six months, they imposed new sanctions. Many of my European counterparts tell me confidentially: we understand that this is stupidity and a dead end, but we have consensus. I told one of them: a consensus means that a decision is not taken if there is even one “nay” vote. If you object, say so! This is a case of collective responsibility. Everyone says: I am against it, but all of them want a consensus. This consensus is shaped by an aggressive, Russophobic minority, primarily by the Baltic states (to my great regret), Poland, and recently Denmark.

Today, it is a sign of good manners for them to demonstrate that you are more of a Russophobe than your neighbours. In NATO, it is the United States that rules the roost. The EU is being dominated by the alliance. The neutral countries, which are not NATO members – Sweden, Finland, and Austria – are being drawn into cooperation under the cloak of “collective mobility.” This means that the neutral countries will allow NATO to use their roads and territories when it needs to move its military infrastructure east. This is being palmed off as NATO-EU partnership. I have mentioned Nord Stream 2 as an example. There is no longer any independence in Europe. They were just told: Stop taking care of your energy security on the terms that are beneficial to you; we will guarantee your security at a much higher price, but we will be in chips. President of France Emmanuel Macron is the only politician who continues to focus on strategic autonomy. Germany has resigned itself to the fact that they will have no such autonomy. There is no diktat of this sort in our country.

The difficulties arising in the work of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) are contingent on and explained by the democratic nature of these organisations rather than their weakness. They decide all matters by consensus and nothing can be imposed on them from outside. We have allied relations with Syria and good relations with Iran. I don’t think it will be a good idea to “knock together” a bloc. This will tie everyone’s hands, if we look at the situation pragmatically. It is better to have allied relations or an unprecedentedly close relationship of the kind we have with China. Our leaders said in one of the [bilateral] documents: relations have reached an unprecedentedly high level that in some respects even exceeds the traditional allied relations. That is absolutely true and hence we have multivariance.

The Russian Empire was created as follows. There was no melting-pot like in the United States. They have melted everyone into Americans. Generally, all Americans favour human rights. Practically all the states have an equal balance of rights. In the Russian Empire, as ethnic groups joined, Moscow and St Petersburg always sought to have regard for their unique identities and made efforts to preserve their cultures and religions. Multivariance in relations with foreign partners seems more effective and enables greater freedom of action in cases where such actions will be necessary.

Question: I am a citizen of the People’s Republic of China. I was born and grew up there. For many years, I have been involved in humanitarian cooperation (education) between China and Russia. I believe that Russia and China are two great powers that enjoy historical and cultural affinity. What areas of cooperation between China and Russia have best prospects?

Sergey Lavrov: It would be impossible to list the promising areas of cooperation between Russia and China. It would need an entire session of its own. Through Moscow and Beijing, we disseminate detailed information on what our two countries are working on together. Currently, this cooperation will be growing stronger. At a time when the West is most flagrantly eroding the entire bedrock that the international system stands on, we as two great powers have to think about our future in this world.

For the first time in many years, China has been declared the main target, previously it was Russia. Now we are targets on rotation. At this stage, their proclaimed goal is to deal with Russia and then go after China. When we communicated with the Western countries during less turbulent times, we asked them why they were allowing the American course against China to be built up and why was everyone being dragged into it? What did China do? “China is a threat.” What makes China a threat? “They are starting to defeat everybody economically.”

If you look at the beginning of China’s economic elevation, China started by simply accepting the rules of the game, which had been essentially created by the West, led by Americans. These rules included the international monetary system, the international trade system, the Bretton Woods System and the World Trade Organisation (WTO). China started playing by their rules and is now outplaying them on their home field by their rules. Is it a reason for changing the rules? It appears so. Who is proposing to reform the WTO? The West. Because the World Trade Organisation in its current form is providing rules that are fair. Therefore, if we just forget about the situation in Ukraine and the sanctions for a minute, the actions of the West confirm it is not reliable, either as a part of the world that generated the major reserve currencies, or as economic partners or as countries to store gold and currency reserves. We have things to work on. Our leaders and other members of the Government, foreign affairs agencies are working on this extensively as part of our traditionally regular dialogue.

Question: Russia is conducting an operation in Ukraine. It is not a secret that Russia is building a Greater Eurasia. Can you clue us in a little: is Sergey Shoigu going to stop at the border with Poland? Or are we going into Transnistria and Moldova? What is the plan? Are we going to unite further?

Sergey Lavrov: We declared our goals. They are fully legitimate and clear: to protect the people of Donbass (with which we are now allies) that are subject to blatant aggression. For these purposes and based on our treaties, we applied Article 51 of the UN Charter on collective self-defence. Another goal is to eliminate any threats to Russian security posed by the militarisation of Ukraine that is carried out by the West. There must be no strike weapons in the country or threats in the form of Ukraine’s nazification, for obvious reasons. The aggressive spirit of the Ukrainian elite has been consciously created to be like this by Western instructors throughout these decades. They trained neo-Nazi battalions, showing them how to conduct aggressive combat operations, etc. We have no other goals beyond these.

Alternatively, the other side may come up with some curious goals. For example, Prime Minister of Poland Mateusz Morawiecki has proposed an idea that will be discussed soon, which is to send NATO peacekeeping forces to Ukraine. It is possible that, should this decision be made all of a sudden, it will entail that Polish personnel will make up the core of these peacekeeping forces and they will take control over Western Ukraine, including the major city of Lvov, to remain there for a prolonged period of time. It appears to me that this is the plan.

I believe this initiative is doublespeak. NATO will realise they should be reasonable and realistic.

Question: It is now clear to everyone that the world will never be the same again. There is much talk these days about the new global architecture and the fact that its foundations are now being laid. I do agree with the notion that we have no need of a world without Russia. But what kind of a world do we want to build? What place will Russia and the Union State have in the new international order?

Sergey Lavrov: What we want is an equitable world, free from war, aggressive projects or attempts to pitch one country against another. Equitable is also the way we see Russia’s place in the world. Similarly, the Union State must enjoy all the benefits of this ideal world as you have described it.

What we want is to discuss how to live on this planet in the future. Too many problems have been piling up, and the existing institutions have been unable to resolve them. This is the gist of the initiative President of Russia Vladimir Putin put forward two years ago to convene a summit of UN Security Council permanent members. Almost everyone supported it but the West will now drag its feet. There is a preliminary agenda. We have coordinated it with our Chinese friends, while the others are reviewing it. But now everything will be put on hold. This is not about the P5 reimagining a “new Yalta,” as some claim. Under the UN Charter, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council have primary responsibility for maintaining international peace.

When we express the need for more democracy in international relations, this does not mean cancelling the UN Charter. It means stopping violations of the UN Charter. The sovereign equality of states and the requirement to respect territorial integrity and the right of nations to self-determination – it is all in the Charter. Had all its provisions been respected, this would have ensured peace and cooperation in good faith among all countries. However, the West manipulates them for its own benefit.

For example, we stand accused of violating Ukraine’s territorial integrity, starting with Crimea and Donbass. Crimea held a referendum. Everyone knew that this was an open, honest process when people expressed their will. The Americans know this too. Let me share a secret with you (I hope that no one will get cross at me). In April 2014, after the Crimea referendum then US Secretary of State John Kerry told me that they understood that this was an honest vote. However, he noted that we fast-tracked it by announcing the referendum and holding the vote in a matter of just one week. I explained to him that the Ukrainian radicals posed a direct threat at the time. All the formalities had to be completed in order to protect this territory. He suggested that we hold another referendum in the summer or autumn, announce it about two months in advance and invite foreign observers. The result would be all the same but they would be there to “bless” and verify it. This was not a matter of substance, since everyone understood where it was all heading, but about creating a favourable image for the outside world in order to be able to report that the people of Crimea cast their ballots in a referendum, while the Western “comrades” verified the results.

As for sovereignty and territorial integrity, ever since the founding of the UN in 1945, it has been debating whether sovereignty takes priority over the right to self-determination or vice-versa. A negotiating process was put into motion, paving the way for the adoption by consensus in 1970 of a Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States under the UN Charter. This is a lengthy document with an entire section on the relationship between sovereignty, territorial integrity and the right to self-determination. It says that everyone must respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states whose governments ensure the right to self-determination and represent the people living in their territory. Has the Ukrainian leadership ensured Crimea’s right to self-determination? All they did was curtail Crimea’s rights within Ukraine. Did the Petr Poroshenko regime or the current leadership represent all the people of Ukraine, including Crimea, as they pretend? No. They did not represent Donbass either. They have been ignoring all these principles.

According to the principle of indivisible security, everyone is free to choose alliances but no one can reinforce their security at the expense of others. They say that only alliances matter and nothing else. However, when it suits their interests, the principle of self-determination comes to the fore, relegating Yugoslavia’s territorial integrity into the background, as happened with Kosovo. Its self-determination took place without a referendum. They engineered the creation of a parliamentary structure of sorts, and it voted on the matter. Serbia took the case to the International Court, which issued a curious ruling, saying that consent from the central government was not required for a declaration of independence. President of Russia Vladimir Putin has quoted this landmark ruling by the International Court on multiple occasions.

Question: The West is planning to replace Russian oil and gas in the coming years. What is Russia's interest in participating in the Iran-US nuclear deal? Iran will have an opportunity to increase oil production and replace the Russian market in Europe. How ready are our Venezuelan partners for a deal with the Americans to replace Russian oil?

Sergey Lavrov: We never betray our friends in politics. Venezuela is our friend. Iran is a close state. Unlike the Americans, we do not act only out of selfish interests. If they need to "teach the Russians a lesson," then it's okay to agree with the regime in Caracas (as they called it). The United States would rather restore the programme with Iran, just to punish Russia. This reflects problems not so much with international institutions as with "liberal democracy.” As it turns out, it is not "liberal" at all, and it is not "democracy" at all.

When the leading country of the world (which the United States is) solves the problem of global, planetary importance, primarily on the basis of its own domestic interests, which are determined by two-year electoral cycles, then the biggest problems are sacrificed to these electoral cycles. What we can see now in US actions is a desire to prove that a Democratic president and administration are doing well and feel strong enough ahead of the November congressional elections. China does not understand this. What is two years? Nothing. Although the Chinese say that "a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step," they see the horizon of that great journey. Here, in addition to the US desire to command everything, there are no more horizons. They will act the way they need to today.

It has been noted that the Americans are running around with the issue of oil and gas, turning to Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar. All these countries, like Venezuela and Iran, have made it clear that when they consider new entrants to the oil market, they are committed to the OPEC+ format, where quotas for each participant are discussed and agreed upon by consensus. So far, I see no reason to believe that this mechanism will be broken in any way. No one is interested in that.

Question: What formats do you see for post-crisis settlement and intra-Ukrainian dialogue? What role might the DPR and LPR play? Ukraine’s governance and education system are permeated with Ukrainian nationalism. Several generations have grown up with this discourse. War criminals will be held accountable under criminal law. What about cultural aspects?

Sergey Lavrov: We have announced the goals we are working to achieve. As for the intra-Ukrainian dialogue, this will be up to the Ukrainians after the special operation ends – I hope, with the signing of comprehensive documents on security issues, Ukraine’s neutral status with guarantees of its security.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, commenting on our initiatives on the non-expansion of NATO, said: we understand that every country needs security guarantees. We are ready to negotiate and work them out for ourselves, for Ukrainians and Europeans outside the framework of NATO expansion. Therefore, a neutral status, security guarantees and bringing the legal framework to a civilised level with regard to the Russian language, education, the media, and laws that encourage the country’s nazification, as well as the adoption of a law prohibiting this. Most European countries have such laws, including Germany.

As for the DPR and LPR’s involvement in the all-Ukrainian dialogue, it should be a sovereign decision of the people's republics.

Question: Why was the military operation launched now and not eight years ago? At that time, a pro-Russian “anti-Maidan” movement emerged in Odessa and Kharkov, which installed the Russian flag on top of the Kharkov regional administration without firing a shot. The city supported Russia. Now these people are hiding from shelling.

Sergey Lavrov: A lot of factors influence developments at each specific historical moment. Back then, it was a shock, primarily because the West turned out to be an absolutely unreliable guarantor of the things that we supported. US President Barack Obama, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and the French leaders called Russian President Vladimir Putin and asked him not to interfere with the agreement between Viktor Yanukovych and the opposition. Vladimir Putin said that if the incumbent president was signing something, it was his right, and he had the authority to negotiate with the opposition. But the West dumped us and immediately began to support the new government because they announced an anti-Russian policy line.

People got burned alive in the House of Trade Unions in Odessa; combat aircraft fired at the centre of Lugansk. You must remember the Novorossiya movement better than anyone else. We also had a public movement for support.

We certainly relied too much on what remained of our Western colleagues’ conscience. France initiated the Normandy format; we were asked not to state categorically that we refused to recognise Petr Poroshenko’s election at the end of May 2014. The West assured us they would do everything to normalise the situation, so that Russians could live normally.

We must have trusted them because of some naivety and kindness of heart, which is something Russians are known for.

I have no doubt that lessons will be learned.

https://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/1805180/

Deze tekst is van Lavrov, minister BuZ van de Russische Federatie.

Welke is de minister BuZ van Oekraïne?

Ongekend hier. Het is de acteur die al het werk doet.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Nr.10 (Bericht 9925101)

Deze tekst is van Lavrov, minister BuZ van de Russische Federatie.

Welke is de minister BuZ van Oekraïne?

Ongekend hier. Het is de acteur die al het werk doet.

Dmytro Kuleba, gekend en gerespecteerd door wie iets weet van Oekraiene.
https://twitter.com/DmytroKuleba

Meer gerespecteerd dan het menselijk afval dat zich Sergey Lavrov noemt in elk geval en voor wie een plaatsje wordt vrijgehouden op het tribunaal naast Poetin. ;-)

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Nr.10 (Bericht 9925101)

Deze tekst is van Lavrov, minister BuZ van de Russische Federatie.

Welke is de minister BuZ van Oekraïne?

Ongekend hier. Het is de acteur die al het werk doet.

Andrei Kozyrev, russisch minister van BuZa en dus de vroegere baas van Lavrov in 1991-96 zegt hier dat hij moet kotsen van de hypocrisie van zijn vroegere nummer 2.
Zeer zeldzaam, dat een geschoolde diplomaat zich zo expliciet uitspreekt.

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/world...ine-nr-vpx.cnn

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Nr.10 (Bericht 9925101)

Deze tekst is van Lavrov, minister BuZ van de Russische Federatie. Welke is de minister BuZ van Oekraïne? Ongekend hier.
Het is de acteur die al het werk doet.

Die gast laat wel de boertige Russische Vlad een poepje ruiken, amaai nogni.
Ne vous déplaise, nummerke 10.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Pandareus (Bericht 9925113)

Andrei Kozyrev, russisch minister van BuZa en dus de vroegere baas van Lavrov in 1991-96 zegt hier dat hij moet kotsen van de hypocrisie van zijn vroegere nummer 2.
Zeer zeldzaam, dat een geschoolde diplomaat zich zo expliciet uitspreekt.

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/world...ine-nr-vpx.cnn

Niet echt he.
Ik schreef het al, maar ge moet dat gemist hebben: de Russische boertigheid is alom vertegenwoordigd.

Een icoon op minder dan een maand.

Putin, 6 maart 2022

Antwoord op vraag tijdens flight attendants meeting

Citaat:

“I will be brief but still will have to start, as they say, from “the center of the field”. I said about this at the start of the operation and also spoke about this before this decision has been made, a hard decision, without a doubt.

What is this about? The fact of the matter is that after the anti-constitutional coup in Ukraine, which, unfortunately, was strongly supported by the Western countries – let us face it. They do not even hide the fact that they have spent $5 billion on it, not to mention cookies given away on Maidan, and so on. And after that, instead of bringing the situation back on track, even if it had spiraled out of control, even if it had been the act of the overzealous locals – there is such legal term, i.e. planned one thing, but the result turned out to be something else – they still could have, and should have, returned the situation back onto the political track.

Furthermore, shortly before the coup, the foreign ministers of the three countries came to Kiev in 2014 and signed an agreement with the Ukrainian government acting as guarantors of this agreement to ensure that the situation would be developing in the political sphere. But nothing like that occurred. They organized a coup d’état and supported the perpetrators. What followed were the well-known events related to the Crimea and the southeast of Ukraine, Donbass, where people refused to support the coup. As we know, the Crimea made a decision; people came to vote in a referendum to return to the Russian Federation. Naturally, yes, naturally, we cannot but support that decision, al the more so, since they felt they were in danger from the nationalists and neo-Nazis. There is strong evidence that they were absolutely right in that.

Later, or, rather, in parallel, the events in Donbass were taking place. What have these events led to? People resisting the results of the coup were persecuted. Eventually, the new Kiev authorities initiated a military operation on that territory. They have conducted two large-scale punitive operations using of heavy weapons and combat aviation. They directly attacked Donetsk destroying the city squares with aviation, using tanks and artillery. Both these military campaigns failed. The Ukrainian army suffered defeat. After that, so-called Minsk agreements, or the Package of Measures, to use the official term, have been concluded. The agreements offered a path for a peaceful settlement of the conflict.

We did everything we could to direct the events along this path, to restore the territorial integrity of Ukraine as well as to protects the interests of the people living in these territories. What did these people demand? Nothing but the basic things: the right to speak their mother tongue, i.e. the Russian, and maintain their traditions and culture. These were by no means extraordinary demands. But no. These territories were put under economic blockade; disconnected from the banking system; the supplies of food were stopped; the payments of the pensions and social assistance were suspended. Sometimes, some handouts were given, but in order to get those pensions and benefits a person had to cross the separation line.

Now listen. I will now say something that may sound rough but the situation compels me to say it. You know that occasionally in some regions packs of stray dogs attack people, injure or even kill them (this is a separate problem, and it is for the local authorities to deal with). But then these animals are poisoned or shot dead. But people of Donbass are not stray dogs. Approximately 13,000-14,000 people have been killed during these years. Over 500 children have been killed or injured. But what is particularly intolerable is that the so-called “civilized” West has preferred all these years to look the other way. All these years – 8 years! Eight years!

Moreover, lately the Kiev authorities started to say openly and publicly that they are not going to fulfill the Minsk agreements. They are saying this from the TV screens and online. They are saying this everywhere on the record: We don’t like them; we will not do it. And all this time, Russia has been accused of not fulfilling the agreements. This is simply nonsense; the theater of the absurd; white is called black and black is called white. Lately, things got even worse. Actually, the talk has started long ago, but intensified of late. More and more often we hear that Ukraine would be admitted into NATO. Do you understand what this could lead to? Or can lead to still?

If Ukraine is a NATO member, then according to the North Atlantic Treaty, all other members must support the country in case of a military conflict. No one besides us has recognized Crimea as a Russian territory. The yare conducting military operations in Donbas but also could move onto Crimea, and in such case we would have to fight with the whole of NATO. What is that? Do you understand the consequences? I think everyone understands.

Now they (Ukraine) are talking about acquiring the nuclear status, i.e. developing nuclear weapons. We cannot possibly ignore such things, particularly considering that we know how the so-called West behaves with regard to Russia. First, Ukraine has some nuclear competence left from the Soviet time. As far as enrichment and nuclear material are concerned, they would be able to organize that work. They have missile abilities: suffice is to mention Yuzhmush. This company used to build intercontinental ballistic missile equipment for the Soviet Union. They could recover that ability and do it. And those from across the ocean would even help them do it. And after that would say: “Well, we do not recognize the nuclear status; they have done everything themselves”. And then they would put these complexes under control, and from that moment on, from that very second, the fate of Russia will be completely different. Because in that case, our strategic adversaries would not even need intercontinental ballistic missiles. They would keep us right here at the nuclear gunpoint, that is all. How could we disregard such a thing? These are absolutely real threats, not some far-fetched silly fantasy.

Our boys who are now fighting and risking their lives, they are fighting and giving their lives for our future, for the future of our children. This is something perfectly obvious. And the people who do not want to understand that, particularly those among today’s leaders (of Ukraine), have to understand that if they keep doing what the have been doing – I have spoken about this before – they put at risk the very future of the Ukrainian statehood. If this happens, that will be entirely their fault.

What is going on now? I have already mentioned our objectives in this operation. First, of course, is to protect the people living in Donbass. How? By demilitarizing and denazifying Ukraine as well as establishing its neutral status. Why? Because the neutral status means Ukraine will not be joining NATO. They have it written in the Constitution that the country will be joining NATO. You understand – they have included that into the Constitution!

Denazification – what does this mean? I have spoken with my Western colleagues about this. They say:” What is the problem? You also have the radical nationalists”. Yes, we do. But we do not have them in the government, but everybody agrees that they (the Ukrainians) do. Perhaps, we have some idiots running around with swastika, but do we support that at the government level? Do thousands of people march with torches and swastikas on the streets of our capital or other cities in Russia, like it happened in 1930s in Nazi Germany? Is something like that happening in Russia? But it happens in Ukraine, and it is supported. Do we support those who killed the Russians, Jews, or the Poles during the war? Do we hail them as heroes? But in Ukraine, they do.

The current events are also very important. Look, the foreign citizens have been taken hostages in Sumy and Kharkov – over 6,000 young people, students. They have been driven together into a railway station and kept there for 3 days. Listen, they have been held there for the third day. We have told everybody about this and informed the current Ukrainian authorities. They said: “Yes, yes, of course, we will deal this this right now”. We have informed the leaders of the major European countries, I personally talked to them. “Yes, yes, we will put pressure on Ukraine right now”. We informed the UN Secretary-General: “Yes, yes, we will solve the problem right away”. Nobody is doing anything.

People who are considered the citizens of Ukraine are treated even worse. They are simply used as a human shield. Right now, in this very moment, this is happening in Mariupol. The Kiev government called our military: ”Provide humanitarian corridors so people could leave”. Naturally, our people instantly responded, even suspended the military activities, and were observing what was happening. But no one was allowed to leave. You understand, no one was allowed out. They do not anybody leave but instead use the people as a human shield. Who are they? The neo-Nazis, of course.

We already observe the presence of the militants from the Middle East and some European countries. We know about them; we can hear them speak on the radio. They are using so-called jihad-mobiles, i.e. cars stuffed with explosives, which they drive towards the Russian troops. But they do not achieve anything, and they will fail in the end. Who are they, then, if not neo-Nazis? By such actions, they are destroying their own country and their own statehood.

That is why one of our key demands is demilitarization. In other words, we are helping people of Donbass by working towards the neutral status of Ukraine and the demilitarization of the country. We have to know with certainty what weapons are there, where they are deployed, and who controls them. A number of options are on the table. We are discussing them now, including with the Kiev government representatives in our talks in Belarus. We are grateful to the President Lukashenko for organizing the meetings and helping us to conduct these negotiations. Our proposals are on the table for the groups of the negotiators from Kiev to study. We hope that Kiev will respond positively to our proposals. This is pretty much all I wanted to say.”

Het gaat om deze meeting, waarvan hier slechts kort fragment gegeven wordt.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FMd16AYcOa8

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door parcifal (Bericht 9925117)

Een icoon op minder dan een maand.

Tussen (): Zelensky werd tot president verkozen met 72 % v.d. stemmen.

27 maart 2022 A.V. Bortnikov Director of the FSB of the Russian Federation.

Citaat:

Appeal to the citizens of Russia and Ukraine!

Dear compatriots, fellow citizens, friends!

Many of you do not understand what is happening and how to perceive the ongoing military actions on the territory of Ukraine.

Contradictory information is coming from all sides, mostly "fake", We will try to explain the very essence of what is happening

1. The Russian troops were banned from taking photos and videos in order not to outrage the population of Ukraine and Russia with videos and photos of the destruction caused and killed soldiers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

Therefore, everything that is on the net now is mostly filmed by the APU, who cling to every small victory, for every hit truck. Taking into account the scale of the offensive and the number of hot spots, they have nothing much to boast about, the same is evidenced by the number of their fakes.

Although, as you understand, it will not do without losses on our part either, you need to understand and accept this.

These are military actions and they involve not only professional military personnel, but also civilians who may suffer mutually.

2. No matter how you feel about Putin, now our political and military leadership needs your understanding and moral support!

War is a great tragedy, but a lost war is a disaster!

At this difficult time, wishing for the defeat of our army, agitating against Putin and the military operation, breeding defeatist sentiments, whining about sanctions and panicking is tantamount to betrayal, for which you will soon have to answer.

The decision on a military operation was not made easily, but believe me, our leadership of the country and the Army, all actions are precisely planned, calculated and weighed down to the smallest details.

And this military operation has been launched for only one purpose - the protection of Russia and the fraternal people of Ukraine!

The decision has been made!

There is nothing to stop, the die is cast, now we are all in the same boat.

We will "clean up" all the consequences later, but now we need a VICTORY!. Even if for this it will be necessary to use heavier weapons than are used by the Russian army now.

3. Understand, this is not a war "for palaces, banks, and the privileges of individuals", this is a war for historical justice and one's own security! Russia has always been friendly to Ukraine. Since the collapse of the USSR, Russia has always helped Ukraine: she sold benefits, preferences, resources cheaper than other countries, gave profitable loans. Russia treated Ukraine as a fraternal country. And how did Ukraine (its leadership) repay? The fact that she wanted to join NATO, a military organization whose whole point of existence is aimed at confrontation with Russia. Which in its last documents declared Russia an enemy. This is a real betrayal, this is a stab in the back. Why did Ukraine want to deploy American military bases and weapons, first in Crimea, then on the border with Russia?

Why was it necessary to indulge the Ukrainian nationalists?

There are no more than 20% of the population there (and they are concentrated mainly in the western regions, the former Galicia), who do not want to have anything to do with either "Muscovites" or, by the way, Ukrainians themselves. The remaining 80% of the population of Ukraine has always advocated friendship and partnership with Russia.

4. Separately, I would like to clarify the situation with sanctions. A country as rich in resources as Russia should strive for AUTARKY (independence), we should not depend on anyone, especially from our potential enemy. Therefore, all sanctions and prohibitions in the future are even useful for the development of their own economy and contribute to self-sufficiency.

Dear fellow citizens, if your Homeland (Russia and Ukraine) is dear to you, if you associate your future with it, are going to live here and raise your children and grandchildren, show patience and proper patriotism, support our army and the leadership of Russia!

We wish the Russian soldiers and officers participating in the military operation courage and bravery!

Remember, we support you, worry about you, pray for the successful completion of your Great Mission and look forward to your return with Victory to your family and friends! Glory to the Russian Army!

Distribute it to as many people as possible.

A.V. Bortnikov

Director of the FSB of the Russian Federation.

https://kremll.info/direktor-fsb-aleksan…

UNESCO speech, Russisch vertegenwoordiger, 18 maart 2022

speech by Tatyana Dovgalenko, Deputy Permanent Representative of Russia to UNESCO.

Citaat:

The previous speaker emotionally and eloquently described the suffering of the Ukrainian people. I want to say yes, it is, yes, these sufferings are terrible and yes, some of the Ukrainian people have been living in basements, in bombings for 8 years, and yes, they have been living like this in some countries for many many years too. But you've always turned a blind eye to it. And are they, in your opinion, not people? And the children of Donbass, whose monument is installed on the alley of angels in Donetsk, are their lives worthless?

Among those who shout the loudest are the EU countries that, in violation of their international obligations and directives, supply weapons and combatants to Ukraine. They are talking about freedom of speech here, because these countries have closed all sources of alternative information with their arbitration decision – all Russian media. And it was these countries that kept silent all these years about the existence of the Peacemaker website— a Ukrainian Nazi resource on which journalists were persecuted, and on which the word executed was posted after their death.

Most of the speakers were juggling facts and unsubstantiated accusations. They did not provide a single reliable fact – however, as you know, this is the first victim of any conflict. For those who mentioned Babi Yar, I recommend watching the video of the Israeli journalist Ron Ben-Isha, who shot that everything is intact and intact. To those who mentioned the murdered New York Times journalist Brent Reno, I want to say that he died in Irpen at the hands of AFU soldiers and his surviving colleague confirms this, as well as the New York Times said that he was not their journalist.

I can list the facts for a long time, tell who Hitler's henchmen Bandera and Shukhevych are elevated to the rank of national heroes of Ukraine. I urge you to compare the stripes of the Azov battalion and the Nazi Das Reich divisions. To find a few differences in the slogan "Ukraine is a mustache" and "Deutschland über alles" and so on. But you won't listen to all this, because, as one American president said, "Somoza may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch"

Russian Russian literature lovers who have not found a single word today in support of Russian culture and Russian artists who are persecuted in Europe, I want to read one quote:

"It has long been possible to predict that this rabid hatred, which has been kindled more and more every year in the West against Russia, will break loose someday. This moment has come. It is the whole West that has come to express its denial of Russia and block its path to the future. Russia is simply offered suicide, renunciation of the very basis of its existence, a solemn recognition that it is nothing else in the world, as a wild and ugly phenomenon, as an evil that requires correction"
Fyodor Ivanovich Tyutchev, April 21, 1854.

Thanks.

https://inforuss.info/moshhnaya-rech-pre…

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Bach (Bericht 9929842)

speech by Tatyana Dovgalenko, Deputy Permanent Representative of Russia to UNESCO.

https://inforuss.info/moshhnaya-rech-pre…

"Jullie handen zitten in bloed tot over jullie ellebogen" (Tatyana Dovgalenko)

Inderdaad.

Video met de auteur aan woord (RT):

'YOUR HANDS ARE COVERED IN BLOOD' | RUSSIAN UNESCO OFFICIAL ON WESTERN HYPOCRISY
_{RT via bitchute.com

17 mrt 2022}

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Nr.10 (Bericht 9929898)

"Jullie handen zitten in bloed tot over jullie ellebogen" (Tatyana Dovgalenko)

Inderdaad.

Dit gedrag zie ik zo vaak op onze speelplaats als iemand betrapt wordt. Jantje wordt op steentjes gooien betrapt en zegt: "Meester, dat is niet eerlijk, Sven was ook steentjes aan het gooien en ik krijg straf".

Jantje gooide stenen. Fout.

De Russen gooien bommen. Fout. Heel fout. Zoek geen excuses voor je eigen fouten, maar besef en pas je gedrag aan.

Interview met Sergey Glazyev, 28 maart 2022

Integratie en macro economie minister van de Euraziatische economische commissie die aan de ontwikkeling van een nieuw economisch systeem werkt.

https://www.business-gazeta.ru/article/544773
Translated via Yandex

“Events like this happen once a century”: Sergey Glazyev on the breakdown of epochs and changing ways of life
Is it possible to stabilize the ruble in three days and why don’t the Ukrainian”zombies” give up?

“After failing to weaken China head-on through a trade war, the Americans shifted the main blow to Russia, which they see as a weak link in the global geopolitics and economy. The Anglo-Saxons are trying to implement their eternal Russophobic ideas to destroy our country, and at the same time to weaken China, because the strategic alliance of the Russian Federation and the PRC is too tough for the United States. They don’t have the economic or military power to destroy us together, not separately,” says Sergey Glazyev, an academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences and former adviser to the Russian President. Glazyev spoke in an interview with BUSINESS Online about what opportunities are now opening up for the Russian economy, whether the Central Bank is pandering to the enemy and whether a new world currency will replace the dollar.

“The new world economic order is ideologically socialist”
– Sergey Yuryevich, commenting on today’s tragic events, you wrote in your telegram channel that it was necessary to read your book about the” last world war”, written about 6 years ago. How did you manage to predict everything so accurately?

— The fact is that there are long-term patterns of economic development, the analysis and understanding of which allows us to predict events that are currently taking place. We are now experiencing a simultaneous change in technological and world economic structures, while the technological basis of the economy is changing, the transition to fundamentally new technologies is taking place, and the management system is also being transformed. This kind of event occurs about once a century. However, technological patterns change about once every 50 years, and their change is usually accompanied by a technological revolution, depression, and an arms race. And world economic patterns change once every 100 years, and their change is accompanied by world wars and social revolutions. This is due to the fact that the ruling elite of the core countries of the old world economic structure prevents changes, does not take into account the emergence of more effective management systems, tries to block the development of new world leaders using them, and tries to maintain its hegemony and monopoly position by any means, including military and revolutionary ones.

Say, 100 years ago, the British Empire was trying to maintain its hegemony in the world. When it was already losing economically to the combined resources of the Russian Empire and Germany, the First World War provoked by British intelligence was unleashed, during which all three European empires self-destructed. I am talking about the collapse of tsarist Russia, the German and Austro-Hungarian empires, but this also includes the fourth-Ottoman Porto. As for Britain, it held global dominance for a while and even became the largest empire on the planet. But due to the inexorable laws of socio-economic development, the colonial world economic system, based in fact on slave labor, could no longer provide economic growth. Introduced two completely new political models of Soviet and American — has demonstrated a much greater production efficiency, because they were organized on different principles: not for private family capitalism, and the power of large transnational corporations with centralized structures of economic regulation and limitless monetary emission using Fiat currency (paper or electronic means — approx. ed.). They enabled mass production of products much more efficiently than the control systems of the colonial empires of the nineteenth century.

The emergence of social states in the USSR and the United States with centralized management systems made it possible to make a sharp leap in their economic development; In Europe, the corporate governance system was formed, unfortunately, according to the Nazi model in Germany, and also not without the help of British intelligence. Hitler, backed by British intelligence agencies and American capital, quickly deployed a centralized corporate governance system in Germany, which allowed the Third Reich to quickly take over all of Europe. With God’s help, we defeated this German (or rather, European — taking into account today’s realities) fascism. After that, two models remained in the world, which I refer to as the imperial world economic order: the Soviet and the Western (with the center in the United States). After the collapse of the Soviet Union, which failed to withstand global competition due to the fact that the directive management system was not flexible enough to meet the needs of technological progress, the United States for a while seized global dominance.

— But now this period of “American unipolar loneliness” is already passing, and probably not only thanks to Russia, but first of all to China and the Asian regions as such. Isn’t that right?

— Indeed, the hierarchical vertical structures characteristic of the imperial world economic system turned out to be too rigid to ensure continuous innovation processes and lost their comparative effectiveness in ensuring the growth of the world economy. On its periphery, a new world economic order has been formed, based on flexible management models, a network organization of production, where the state works as an integrator, combining the interests of various social groups around achieving one goal — raising public welfare. The most impressive example of such an integrated world economy today is China, which has been three times faster than the growth rate of the American economy for more than 30 years. At the moment, China already surpasses the United States in terms of output, exports of high-tech goods, and growth rates.

Another example of the model of the new world economic order, which we called integral (due to the fact that the state in it unites all social groups that differ in their interests), is India. It has a different political system, but it also has the primacy of public interests over private interests, and the State seeks to maximize growth rates in order to combat poverty. In this sense, the new world economic order is ideologically socialist. At the same time, it uses market mechanisms of competition, which makes it possible to ensure the highest concentration of resources for the technological revolution in order to ensure economic leaps based on a new advanced technological order. If we look at the growth rate since 1995, the Chinese economy has grown 10-fold, while the American economy has grown only 15 percent. Thus, it is already obvious to everyone that the pace of global economic development is currently shifting to Asia: China, India and Indochina countries already produce more products than the United States and the European Union. If we add Japan or Korea, where the management system is similar in its principles of integrating society around the goal of improving public welfare, we can say that today this new world economic order already dominates the world, and the center of reproduction of the world economy has moved to Southeast Asia. Of course, the American ruling elite cannot agree with this.

“Put up with it, I’d say…

– yes. They, like the British Empire once did, seek to maintain their hegemony in the world. The events taking place today are a manifestation of how the financial and power oligarchic elite of the United States is trying to maintain world domination. It can be said that for the past 15 years, it has been waging a global hybrid war, seeking to chaotize countries beyond its control and restrain the development of the PRC. But due to the already archaic management system, they cannot do this. The financial crisis of 2008 was such a transitional moment when the life cycle of the outgoing technological order actually ended and the process of mass redistribution of capital to a new technological order began, the core of which is a complex of nanobioengineering and information communication technologies. All countries started pumping money into their economies. The simplest thing a modern state can do is to give all businesses access to cheap long-term money so that they can adopt new technologies. But if in America and Europe such funds were spent mainly in financial bubbles and provided budget deficits, then in China this huge monetary issue was completely directed to the growth of production and the development of new technologies. There were no financial bubbles, while the ultra-high monetization of the Chinese economy did not lead to inflation, the growth of the money supply was accompanied by an increase in the output of goods, the introduction of new advanced technologies and an increase in public welfare.

Today, economic competition has already led to the fact that the United States has lost its leadership. If you remember, Donald Trump tried to contain China’s development through a trade war, but nothing came of it.

“The Americans opened a biological war front by launching the coronavirus in China”
— Why not?” Did Trump, who is used to taking risks and going all-in, not have enough determination?

— And even Trump couldn’t do it, because China has a more efficient management system, which allows us to concentrate the available production resources as fully as possible. At the same time, effective money management keeps the money issue in the contour of expanded reproduction of the real sector of the economy, focusing on financing development investments. China has reached the highest savings rate of any country: about 45 percent of GDP is invested, compared to 20 percent in the United States or Russia. This, in fact, ensures the ultra-high growth rate of the Chinese economy.

In general, the United States was doomed to defeat in this trade war, because the Middle Kingdom can produce products more efficiently and finance development cheaper. The entire banking system in China is state — owned, it operates as a single development institution, directing cash flows to expand output and develop new technologies. In the United States, the money supply is used to finance the budget deficit and is reallocated to financial bubbles. As a result, the efficiency of the US financial and economic system is 20 percent-there only one in five dollars reaches the real sector, and in China almost 90 percent (that is, almost all the yuan created by the Central Bank of the PRC) feed the contours of expanding production and ensure ultra — high economic growth.

Trump’s attempts to limit China’s development through trade war methods have failed. At the same time, they boomeranged on the United States itself. Then the Americans opened a biological war front, launching the coronavirus into China, hoping that the Chinese leadership would not cope with this epidemic and chaos would arise in China. However, the epidemic has shown poor health care effectiveness and has created chaos in the United States itself. The Chinese management system has also shown much greater efficiency here. In China, the death rate is significantly lower, and they coped with the pandemic much faster. Already in 2020, they even reached economic growth of 2 percent, while in the United States there was a decline of 10 percent of GDP (analysts noted the largest drop since World War II–ed. ). Now the Chinese have regained growth rates of about 7 percent per year, and there is no doubt that China will continue to develop confidently, expanding the production of a new technological mode.

In parallel with the trade war against China, the US special services were preparing a war against Russia, since the Anglo-Saxon geopolitical tradition considers our country to be the main obstacle to the establishment of world domination by the power and financial elite of the United States and Great Britain. I must say that the war against the Russian Federation unfolded immediately after the annexation of Crimea and after the American special services organized a coup in Ukraine. They can be said to have tricked Russia into agreeing to the American occupation of Ukraine, considering it as a temporary phenomenon. However, the Americans took root in the Square, created not only strong points, raising Nazis under their wing, but also trained the Nazi armed forces, gave the Nazis the opportunity to get a military education, trained them in their academies, and “flashed” all the Armed Forces of Ukraine with them. And for 8 years, they prepared the Armed Forces of Ukraine to fight the only enemy-Russia. While the mass media, which is also completely controlled by the Americans in Ukraine, formed an image of the enemy in the public consciousness.

In addition, the United States used the currency and financial front of a hybrid war against the Russian Federation. Already in 2014, they imposed the first financial sanctions and knocked out a significant part of Western loans from the Russian economy. Now we are seeing the next phase, when they have effectively disconnected Russia from the global monetary and financial system, where they dominate. However, all this was predicted by me 10 years ago, based on the theory of changing world economic patterns and the specific logic of the US ruling elite, focused on world domination. Anglo-Saxon geopolitics is traditionally oriented against the Russian Empire and its successors, the USSR and the Russian Federation, because, since the time of the British Empire, Russia has been seen as the main opponent of the Anlo-Saxons. All the so-called geopolitical science that was written in London was reduced, in fact, to a set of recommendations on how to destroy Russia as the dominant force in Eurasia. I mean all sorts of speculative constructions like “countries of the sea against countries of the land” and so on.

— Why did Russia interfere with the “countries of the sea” so much? After all, geographically we have never bordered on the UK.

— In this regard, a formula was invented: whoever controls Eurasia controls the whole world. Actually, applied development has already gone further. Zbigniew Brzezinski’s famous theorem says that in order to defeat Russia as a superpower, you need to tear Ukraine away from it. All this political dogma, which, it would seem, has long gone down in history, is nevertheless reproduced today in the thinking of the American political elite. I must say that there are still courses in 19th-century geopolitics at Harvard and Yale University, sharpening the brains of future American politicians against Russia. So they, in fact, jumped on this old and time-tested Russophobic stream, which has always been characteristic of Anglo-Saxon geopolitics. And, considering Russia as the main opponent of its domination in the world, they used Ukraine as an outpost, or rather, as a tool for undermining Russia, weakening it, and in the future for destroying it as a sovereign state, in accordance with Brzezinski’s proposal.

So, what is happening today was easily predicted, based on a combination of long-term patterns of economic development, which actually condemned the world to a hybrid war, and the traditional Russophobia of the Anglo-Saxon political elite. After the weakening of the PRC did not turn out head-on through a trade war, the Americans transferred the main blow of their military and political power to Russia, which they see as a weak link in the global geopolitics and economy. In addition, the Anglo-Saxons seek to establish dominance over Russia in order to implement their eternal Russophobic ideas to destroy our country, and at the same time to weaken China, because the strategic alliance of the Russian Federation and the PRC is too tough for the United States. They have neither the economic nor military power to destroy us together, not separately, so the US initially sought to put us at odds with China. They didn’t succeed. But they, taking advantage of our, I would say, complacency, seized control of Ukraine, and today they are using our fraternal republic as a weapon of war to destroy Russia, and then-to seize control of our resources in order, I repeat, to strengthen their position and weaken the position of China. In general, all this is obvious, as twice two makes four.

“The Americans will not be able to win, just as the British did not succeed in their time”
— It’s probably obvious, but not for everyone. There are many opponents of an alliance with China among the Russian elite. At least before the special operation in Ukraine, it seemed to these people that American and Western culture were clearer and closer to us than Chinese hieroglyphic wisdom, and that we would always find a common language with our “Western partners”.

— You know, back in 2015 I wrote the book ” The Last World War. The United States starts and loses, ” which you mentioned at the beginning of the conversation — everything was thought out and justified there. The United States launched a global hybrid war-starting with the Orange revolutions – to disrupt those regions of the world that it did not control — in order to strengthen its position and weaken the position of its geopolitical competitors. After the famous Munich speech of President Putin (February 2007–ed. they realized that they had lost control of Yeltsin’s Russia, and they were seriously concerned. In 2008, the financial crisis broke out and it became clear that the transition to a new technological order was beginning, and the old world economic order and the old management system no longer provide for progressive economic development. China takes the lead. Well, then the logic of the world war unfolds, only not in the forms that existed 100 years ago, but on three conditional fronts — monetary and financial (where the United States still dominates the world), trade and economic (where they have already lost the primacy to China) and information and cognitive (where the Americans also have superior technologies). They are using all three fronts to try to hold the initiative and maintain the hegemony of their corporations.

And finally, the fourth front — the biological one, which opened with the appearance of the coronavirus from the US-China laboratory in Wuhan. Today we see that a whole network of biological laboratories existed in Ukraine. So the United States has long been preparing to open a biological front for world War II.

The fifth, and most obvious, front is, in fact, the front of military operations-as the last tool for forcing the states they control to obey them implicitly. Today, the situation on this front is also getting worse. In other words, active operations are underway on all five fronts of the global hybrid war and it is possible to predict the result. The Americans will not be able to win, just as the British did not succeed in their time. Although Britain formally won the Second World War, they lost politically and economically. The British lost their entire empire, more than 90 percent of their territory, and 95 percent of their population. Two years after the Second World War, where they were the victors, their empire collapsed like a house of cards, because the other two winners — the USSR and the United States — did not need this empire and considered it an anachronism. Similarly, the world will not need American multinational corporations, the US dollar, US currency and financial technologies and financial pyramids. All this will soon be a thing of the past. Southeast Asia will become an obvious leader in global economic development, and a new world economic order will be formed before our eyes.

— To paraphrase Remarque, we can say that changes have finally come to the western front. But what signs do you see of this powerful global system’s imminent demise?

— After the Americans first seized the Venezuelan foreign exchange reserves and handed them over to the opposition, then-the Afghan foreign exchange reserves, before that — the Iranian ones, and now — the Russian ones, it became absolutely clear that the dollar ceased to be the world currency. Following the Americans, this stupidity was also committed by Europeans — the euro and the pound ceased to be world currencies. Therefore, the old monetary and financial system is living out its last days. After the US dollars that no one needs are sent back to America from Asian countries, the collapse of the global monetary and financial system based on dollars and euros is inevitable. Leading countries are switching to national currencies, and the euro and dollar are no longer foreign exchange reserves.

— How do you see the world after the disappearance of the dollar monopoly?

— We are currently working on a draft international agreement on the introduction of a new world settlement currency, pegged to the national currencies of the participating countries and to exchange-traded goods that determine real values. We won’t need American and European banks. A new payment system based on modern digital technologies with a blockchain is developing in the world, where banks are losing their importance. Classical capitalism based on private banks is a thing of the past. International law is being restored. All key international relations, including the issue of world currency circulation, are beginning to be formed on the basis of contracts. At the same time, the importance of national sovereignty is being restored, because sovereign countries are coming to an agreement. Global economic cooperation is based on joint investments aimed at improving the well-being of peoples. Trade liberalization ceases to be a priority, national priorities are respected, and each state builds a system for protecting the internal market and its economic space that it considers necessary. In other words, the era of liberal globalization is over. Before our eyes, a new world economic order is being formed — an integral one, in which some states and private banks lose their private monopoly on the issue of money, on the use of military force, and so on.

“The third scenario is catastrophic. Destruction of humanity”
— And why did you name your book “The Last World War?” What makes you hope that this global war is really the last?

— I called this world war the last, because we see that there are several scenarios of movement out of today’s crisis. The first scenario, which I have already described, is a calm and prosperous one. It consists in overcoming the US monopoly. In order to do this in the financial sector, you need to abandon the dollar. In order to overcome the monopoly in the information and cognitive sphere, we need to isolate our information space from the American one and switch to our own information technologies. Creating their own contours of economic reproduction, but without the US dollar and euro, and relying on their information technologies for managing money, the countries of the new world economic order ensure high rates of economic development, while the Western world collapses. There is a situation of collapsing financial pyramids, disorganization and a growing economic crisis, aggravated by rising inflation due to uncontrolled money issuance over the past 12 years.

The second scenario of possible development of events is similar to the one that Hitler wanted to implement during the change of previous world economic structures. This is an attempt to create a world government with a superhuman ideology. If Hitler thought of the German nation as superhumans, then the current ideologists of world domination impose a transition to a post-humanoid state on humanity. In contrast to the posthumanism of the West, the core countries of the new world economic order are characterized by a socialist ideology, albeit with respect for private interests, protection of private property and the use of market mechanisms. In China, India, Japan, and Korea, socialist ideology — or rather, a mixture of socialist ideology, national interests, and market competition-dominates. It is this mixture that forms a fundamentally new power and political elite, focused on economic development and the growth of the welfare of nations.

Western politicians, intellectuals, and businessmen have a different approach. What we are seeing today is an attempt to create a certain image of a new world order with a world government at the head, where people are driven into an electronic concentration camp. You can see from the example of restrictions during the pandemic, how it happened: all people are given tags, access to public goods is regulated by QR codes, and everyone is forced to walk in formation. By the way, in the Rockefeller Foundation scenario back in 2009, the pandemic and, in fact, everything that happened in connection with it was laid out in a stunning way — they actually predicted the future. This scenario was called Lock Step, that is, “Walk in formation”, and the Western world followed it. By sacrificing their own democratic values, people are being forced to obey commands. International organizations, including the World Health Organization, are used as a kind of base for assembling a world government that would be subordinate to private capital.

But, I must say, Donald Trump strongly hindered these plans, because he stopped the signing of the transatlantic and trans-Pacific partnership agreements, where all countries participating in the treaties sacrificed national sovereignty in all disputes with big business. And you need to understand that today any multinational corporation can act as a foreign investor, including in the United States. According to these agreements, if foreign capital is present in a business, then in a dispute with the national government, an international arbitration court is formed, it is not clear how and by whom it was drawn up. And these unelected judges, appointed, in fact, by large international businesses, resolve these disputes. In fact, the point was that the state was losing all sovereignty in regulating relations with big business. However, Trump stopped the agreement — the United States did not sign it. Thus, the process of forming a world government was stopped. This is the second alternative, and it is currently experiencing a crisis due to the collapse of the idea of globalization and the gradual abandonment of “pandemic” restrictions.

We must understand that the world government option is incompatible with a sovereign Russia, with our independence and role in the world. In the globalist scenario, the Russian Federation is considered as a territory that is intended for exploitation by Western multinational corporations. At the same time, the” indigenous population ” should serve their interests. Under this scenario, Russia disappears as an independent entity, as does China. The Western world government may incorporate some of our oligarchs into its own version of the future, but only on the second and third roles.

The third scenario is catastrophic. The destruction of humanity…

— The apocalypse everyone’s talking about?”

— Well, not all of them… But everyone is definitely afraid. By the way, about American biolabs that synthesize dangerous viruses, it was said in another book of mine, published a little later: “The Plague of the XXI century: how to avoid disaster and overcome the crisis?”.

I remember that back in 1996, when I had to work in the UN Security Council, I proposed to develop a national biosecurity concept. Because even then, almost 30 years ago, genetics was a sufficiently advanced science to synthesize viruses directed against people of a certain race or a certain gender, a certain age. This has long been possible. You can create a virus that will work only against whites or, conversely, only against blacks, only against men or only against women. Now the Americans are going further — you can see that, according to the data of our Ministry of Defense, announced the day before, American biolabs were developing viruses aimed against the Slavs. Apparently, it is now possible to make a virus against some ethnic group that has its own genetic code.

What is happening in Ukraine today is an echo of the agony of the US ruling elite, which cannot accept that it will no longer be a world leader. This is becoming clear to everyone — at least to those who are not connected with Americans by their interests and are not subject to their cognitive influence.

Here is an example. When the United States imposed anti-Russian sanctions in 2014, I asked my Chinese colleagues: “Do you think the Americans can impose sanctions on China?” They were sure not. It was said that this was impossible, because the United States depends on China as much as China depends on the United States. That is, it will be more expensive for America. Two years later, Trump launched a trade war against China. And Beijing now understands that America is an enemy that will sink the Chinese economic miracle in any way possible. Before that, my Chinese colleagues were not very convinced by my arguments, just as my book mentioned by you did not greatly influence our political and economic elite. My arguments were dismissed. Although we have said for many, many years that the dollar should be abandoned. Foreign exchange reserves should have been removed from dollar-denominated instruments, from euro-denominated instruments to gold, they should have switched to their own currency and financial system, and developed their own settlements in national currencies with partners. We have been proposing all this since the noughties, when it was already clear what the global economic development was leading to. And only now, finally, everyone has seen the light.

“The Americans brainwashed the Ukrainians and turned 150-200 thousand people into a fighting machine that works without thinking”
— Judging by the heart-rending howl that comes from the camp of liberals, as well as the events in Ukraine, not everyone has seen the light yet.

— Yes, we are faced with the fact that the Americans have managed to fool the Ukrainian people so much in 8 years that the people who resist the Russian army, the so-called Armed Forces of Ukraine, look simply zombified. They are controlled like puppets. Not Zelensky commands the Ukrainian army, not even the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine and the General Staff, but the Pentagon. He commands very effectively from the point of view of fighting “to the last Ukrainian soldier”, because these zombie guys do not give up. But they are in an absolutely hopeless situation. All experts have already recognized that Russia won the military special operation, that Ukraine has no chance of resistance, that the entire military infrastructure has been destroyed… the APU can only surrender in order to minimize human losses. However, Ukrainian officers (and especially, of course, nationalists) act like externally controlled zombies-they follow instructions from the Pentagon, which are received on their personal computers and special tablets.

Moreover, the Americans command their puppets from the APU, breaking them into the appropriate units. Each unit is assigned a number, and each number is assigned tasks by artificial military intelligence every day. They really turned 150-200 thousand people into a fighting machine that works without thinking, only stupidly follows all their orders. For 8 years, they have managed to force a significant part of the youth of Ukraine not just to join the ranks against Russia, but by brainwashing them into their own weak-willed tools. Not just cannon fodder, but controlled cannon fodder.

Being in an absolutely hopeless situation, surrounded, deprived of any supplies at all, they still continue a senseless war, condemning themselves to death, and dragging the surrounding civilians with them to the grave. This is a good example of how American modern technologies work. We must understand that we are facing a very powerful force. You know, we have previously heard from Russian experts and politicians that the Ukrainians themselves will suffocate economically and then crawl to us and in general where Ukraine will go without us. After all, it will not be able to ensure the reproduction of the economy without our resources and cooperation with us. Indeed, Ukraine has entered a state of economic catastrophe, as we expected, as we explained to our Ukrainian colleagues. The Ukrainian Republic has become the poorest state in Europe, along with Moldova. Due to the fact that Ukraine has severed ties with Russia, its losses amount to more than $ 100 billion. Nevertheless, this did not prevent American and British political strategists and instructors from forming a 200-thousandth army of thugs and murderers who completely inadequately represent reality and are an obedient tool of American interests.

— Aren’t there equally obedient American puppets in Russia? Was it only Ukrainians who were zombified?

— Yes, and here it should be noted that almost the same thing is happening with the Central Bank, but only on other issues.

— Before we move on to the Central Bank, let me clarify. You said that you are working on introducing a new currency. And in what format and with what team?

— We have been doing this for quite a long time, as a group of scientists. 10 years ago, at the Astana Economic Forum, we presented the report “Towards Sustainable Growth through a Fair world economic order” with a draft transition to a new global financial and monetary system, where we proposed to reform the IMF system based on the so — called special drawing rights, and on the basis of the modified IMF system-to create a world settlement currency. This idea, by the way, aroused great interest at that time: our project was recognized as the best international economic project. But in a practical sense, none of the states represented by the official monetary authorities were interested in this project, although the publications of Nursultan Nazarbayev, who proposed a new currency, followed. I think he offered altyn.

– Altyn? It is interesting.

— Yes, his article on this topic was published even in Izvestia. But negotiations and political decisions were not reached, and to this day it is more of an expert proposal. But I am sure that the current situation forces us to create new payment and settlement instruments very quickly, because the dollar will be practically impossible to use, and the ruble cannot find stability due to the incompetent policy of the Central Bank, which, in fact, acts in the interests of international speculators.

Objectively, the ruble could become a reserve currency along with the yuan and the rupee. It would be possible to switch to a multi-currency system based on national currencies. But you still need some equivalent for pricing… We are currently working on the concept of the exchange space of the Eurasian Economic Union, where one of the tasks is to form new pricing criteria. That is, if we want metal prices to be formed not in London, but in Russia, just like oil prices, then this implies the emergence of some other currency, especially if we want to act not only within the Eurasian Economic Union, but in Eurasia in a broad sense, in the center of a new world economic order, to which I refer China, India, Indochina, Japan, Korea and Iran. These are big countries that all have their own strong national interests. After the current history of confiscation of dollar reserves, I don’t think any country will want to use another country’s currency as a reserve currency. So we need some new tool. And such a tool, from my point of view, can first become a certain synthetic settlement currency, which would be built as such an aggregated index.

– Can I get some examples? What is it?

— Well, let’s say the ecu-there was such an experience in the European Union. It was built as a basket of currencies. All countries that participate in the creation of a new settlement currency must be granted the right to have their national currency in this basket. And the common currency is formed as an index, as a weighted average component of these national currencies. Well, to this we must add, from my point of view, exchange-traded commodities: not only gold, but also oil, metal, grain, and water. A sort of commodity bundle, which, according to our estimates, should include about 20 products. They, in fact, form global price proportions and therefore must participate in the basket to form a new settlement currency. And we need an international treaty that will define the rules for the circulation of this currency and create an organization like the International Monetary fund. By the way, we proposed reforming the IMF 15 years ago, but now it is already obvious that the new monetary financial system will have to be built without the West. Perhaps one day Europe will join it and the United States will also be forced to recognize it. But it is still clear that we will have to build without them, for example, on the basis of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. However, these are just expert developments that we will submit to the official bodies for consideration in the coming month.

— And at the level of the government or at the level of the president?

— We will first send it to the departments that are responsible for these issues. We will hold discussions, develop some common understanding, and then reach the political level.

“The central Bank continues its policy of pandering to the enemy”
— In your telegram channel, you write that all that remains is to nationalize the Bank of Russia. Why hasn’t it been completed yet? Here, for example, there is a point of view that Elvira Nabiullina remains in her post as a screen, but she will no longer manage anything serious. Can you refute or confirm this?

— You know, I don’t want to do conspiracy theory.

“Is this a conspiracy theory?”

— Yes, we can talk about the American deep state in conspiracy terms. In this case, conspiracy theory is a very appropriate line of thought, because in America, behind the screen of presidents and congressmen, there are some deep forces — special services. But in our Country, everything is simple. We have a president, a head of state, who has built a vertical of power. We absolutely understand how the parliament and the judicial system are formed. Here, in general, no conspiracy theory can be applied. The same goes for the Central Bank. Let me remind you that, according to the law on the Central Bank, all its property is federal property. Therefore, the Central Bank is a state structure, there is no doubt about it.

— And they always said that he was separated, as if on the sidelines.

— The Board of Directors of the Central Bank is appointed by the State Duma on the recommendation of the President. I have worked for many years as its representative in the National Banking Council, which oversees the activities of the Central Bank. I can say that there is no doubt that the Central Bank is the state body regulating monetary circulation, and it is also the main financial regulator in the country.

But there are nuances. The Constitution stipulates that the Central Bank conducts its policy independently, that is, it is independent of the government. But this does not mean that it is independent of the state. This is a government agency. Our judicial system is also officially independent of the government. Therefore, being an independent body, the Central Bank is nevertheless formed as a state regulatory body and must fulfill the tasks that are necessary for the development of our economy. To do this, it is necessary to involve the Central Bank in strategic planning. The classic theory of monetary circulation stipulates that the main goal of the monetary authorities, i.e. the Central Bank, should be to create conditions for maximizing investment. This is exactly what the banking system should do — maximize investment. Because the more investment, the more production, the higher the technical level, the lower the costs and lower the inflation, the more stable the economy. Macroeconomic stabilization in the modern economy can be achieved only on the basis of accelerated scientific and technological progress. Attempts to target inflation (such a buzzword), which the Central Bank has been practically imitating for the past 10 years, by manipulating the key interest rate against the background of the freely floating ruble exchange rate, are short — sighted, primitive and counterproductive. These measures are usually recommended by the IMF for underdeveloped countries that do not know how to think themselves.

What is inflation targeting in practice? This is an extremely primitive and internally contradictory set of measures, the application of which drives the economy into a stagflationary trap. The Central Bank threw the ruble into free floating, which is absurd from the point of view of targeting inflation in an open economy, where the exchange rate directly affects prices. And we see how the devaluation of the ruble periodically accelerates prices. In addition, they have reduced monetary policy to only one absolutely primitive tool — manipulation of the key interest rate. But the key rate is the percentage at which the Central Bank issues money to the economy and withdraws money from the economy. Its attempts to suppress inflation by raising the interest rate cannot succeed in the modern economy, because the higher the interest rate, the less credit, the less investment, the lower the technical level and competitiveness. A decline in the latter leads to a devaluation of the ruble in 3-4 years, after they raise the interest rate ostensibly to fight inflation. By letting the ruble exchange rate float freely, they essentially left it at the mercy of currency speculators.

Americans really like this policy, so they strongly praise the leadership of our Central Bank and the Ministry of Finance. After all, what is important to them? So that everything is pegged to the dollar, so that the ruble is a “junk” currency that is unstable. And this is a paradox, because the number of foreign exchange reserves of the Russian Federation has recently been 3 times more than the money supply in rubles! This means that the Central Bank could stabilize the exchange rate at any level. But he didn’t.

And who are the speculators to whom the Central Bank actually threw the ruble to the mercy? The main speculators are American hedge funds, which actually form the ruble exchange rate by manipulating the market. And the Central Bank does not notice this, or rather, it does not seem to notice. To keep them in the foreign exchange market by raising the interest rate, the Central Bank kills credit and makes our economy dependent on foreign sources of credit, and the foreign exchange financial system-dependent on the interests of speculators. It is in whose interests the Central Bank is working, hiding behind buzzwords like “inflation targeting”, which has shamefully failed in recent years in terms of real price dynamics. So we have the weakest point of the entire national security system in general — this is the Central Bank. His leadership is overwhelmed by the enemy’s cognitive weapons, in other words, zombified by them. In fact, our monetary authorities are doing what the enemy needs.

By the way, I proved mathematically and chronologically that the first wave of sanctions was imposed against Russia only after the Central Bank prepared the ground for this, namely, it let the ruble exchange rate float freely and announced that it would raise the interest rate if inflation started in the country. As soon as the Central Bank adopted this strange policy, the Americans immediately imposed sanctions. Their speculators ensured the collapse of the ruble exchange rate, which caused an inflationary wave, and the Central Bank, on the instructions of the IMF, raised the interest rate, which completely paralyzed our economy. The total damage caused by this policy has already reached 50 trillion rubles of unproduced products and approximately 20 trillion rubles of undeveloped investments. Now we need to add to this the $ 300 billion invested in foreign assets that are currently frozen — that’s the damage.

Therefore, when we talk about nationalizing the Central Bank, we are not talking about formally nationalizing it (it is already nationalized), but about bringing it into a policy that is consistent with national interests. Now his policy is contrary to the national interests. And there is no conspiracy theory here. We can see in whose interests such a policy is being implemented. The central bank raised the interest rate to 20 percent, giving bankers a dominant position in the economy. Having the most expensive and scarce resource, money, they determine which enterprise will survive, and which enterprise will die, go bankrupt, and so on. Rising interest rates make the entire Russian economy a hostage to a handful of bankers. This is the first one. Second, the Central Bank’s management allowed another collapse of the ruble exchange rate and closed the currency exchange. As a result, today banks have become the main currency speculators: they buy foreign currency for about 90 rubles per dollar, and sell it for 125 rubles. The difference settles for them as a super-profit.

— But why does the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, in your opinion, pursue a policy in the interests of the enemy?

— As I said, he does this on the recommendation of the International Monetary Fund. But his interests are also shared by our large banks, which objectively like this policy, as well as our currency and financial structures, which are also involved in manipulating the ruble exchange rate. Therefore, an influential lobby is formed around this policy, which supports this policy based on its private interests. These interests run counter to the interests of the country, they are directly opposite to them. And if you look at what the Central Bank is doing today, I have no doubt that it is continuing its policy of pandering to the enemy. It undermines macroeconomic stability by allowing international speculators to manipulate the ruble exchange rate and does not control the currency position of banks that have become currency speculators, although the Central Bank could easily withdraw banks from the foreign exchange market by fixing their currency position, prohibiting banks from buying currency. And secondly, by raising the interest rate, the Central Bank actually killed investments in the development of the Russian economy, which are very much needed right now, primarily for import substitution and for restoring economic sovereignty, while our leadership says that we should not be afraid of sanctions, because they create conditions for economic growth, for import substitution…

Look, about a third of the EU’s imports have left our market. These are huge opportunities for import substitution. If we assume that our enterprises will start developing these markets, then we will develop at a rate of 15 percent per year. But this requires loans. Import substitution cannot occur without credits. We need loans to set up production facilities, develop new technologies, and load idle production facilities. We have long developed such a strategy of advanced development at the Academy of Sciences, and we are promoting it. But, unfortunately, the Central Bank’s crazy policy, from our point of view, has quite specific influential structures that like it and they support it. That is why this policy is so stable.

“You can stabilize the ruble in three days”
– Sergey Yuryevich, if this is not a conspiracy theory, then why does the Central Bank continue to pursue such a policy? Only based on the interests of lobbyists?

– To whom the war, and to whom the mother is native. Commercial banks make a 40% profit on currency speculation. Bought for 90 rubles per dollar-sold for 125. 35 rubles — nothing easy! As a result, we are experiencing inflation, imports are becoming more expensive, and everyone sees this crazy exchange rate. Prices for all goods are rising, but banks are making super-profits.

Once again, a very influential lobby has formed around this policy, and for many people to admit the failure of such a strategy means, in fact, admitting their incompetence and even sabotage. And speculators with large banks are quite influential structures in our country that influence decision-making.

— Well, what if the first person does not get this information, it is blocked?

— When I was an adviser, I brought this information to you.

— Did they listen to you?

— Yes, there were discussions, discussed at the economic council, then it was closed so as not to annoy the officials. I don’t want to comment on it now. We see today that if we do not change monetary policy, it will be impossible for us to survive in this hybrid war. We need to counter economic sanctions now with a serious increase in domestic production. There are production facilities for this, people, raw materials, brains — too, but there is no money. Right now, the simplest thing that the state can give people is money.

— What’s your feeling?” Is there any understanding at the top?

— I think that you need to address this question directly to them.

— But many people call you almost the No. 1 person in the current situation — a public figure who can save Russia.

– Thank you for this review. I try my best.

— I just want to understand: if there was no prophet in our Homeland before, is there one now? Is this a temporary situation with the Central Bank?

— It is so prolonged, I would say, for 30 years. If we carried out a competent monetary policy in accordance with the requirements of the new world economic order, the integrated system, we would develop like China — by 10 percent a year. There were such opportunities. And we have been practically marking time for these 30 years. So it’s not even a question of whether they are listening or not, you just need to look objectively and see how China and India are developing and how we are developing. What prevented us from developing in the same way?

Moreover, the management system of the new world economic order, which I describe in my books, is universal. It worked successfully in Japan until the Americans disrupted Japanese economic growth. And even in Ethiopia, where they also began to form this management model (and achieved growth several times). In other words, this universal management model of the modern economy, focused on the growth of public welfare through investment in a new technological order, needs to be implemented. At the same time, of course, the targeted use of money implies high responsibility. Throwing money from a helicopter is not our thing.

“Not our way.

— We are talking about a targeted credit issue based on modern digital tools with a strict control system focused on investment in new technologies. We know how to do this, how to minimize the human factor by introducing digital technologies, including the digital ruble. But this is not profitable for those who still adhere to the previous strategies. They made a cash cow out of Russia, and they sucked $ 100 billion out of it to offshore companies. But now the Americans have closed offshorization for us. There is a real chance, we must use it.

— What would you advise people to do? Now the main query in Internet search engines is where to invest money in the era of turbulence. What should people do?

— First of all, do not make any sudden movements, I would say so. In any case, what exactly is not necessary — to run for dollars or euros. Because we don’t know what will happen to these currencies next. If our system is disconnected from the western one, then our banks cannot effectively invest dollars and euros anywhere, except in currency speculation. But I hope that our authorities will still curb the foreign exchange market.

In this context, what the banks did, raising the interest rate on foreign currency deposits sharply, turned out to be a clear overkill, which spurred panic. I think the ruble will stabilize if, of course, speculators are removed from the foreign exchange market and the currency is sold only to importers and people who transfer money abroad within reasonable limits to relatives or are going on a business trip according to the regulations. Otherwise, block the channels of currency leakage. Then the currency inflow will return to normal.

You know, we have a very positive trade balance. Mandatory sale of 80% of foreign currency earnings has been introduced. If you sell this revenue on the stock exchange, the volume of currency will be more than importers need. We will have a surplus of currency. This means that the ruble exchange rate will strengthen, that is, it will return to the old indicators-80 or even 70 rubles per dollar. But until the Central Bank removes speculators from the market and allows commercial banks to become such, the ruble exchange rate will not stabilize. So, unfortunately, the monetary authorities have not yet come to their senses and have not begun to implement the correct policy of macroeconomic stabilization, and I can’t give any advice other than how to invest in gold if possible (especially since the government has removed VAT from gold). There are no other real assets and safe havens.

“So you want to buy gold?”

– Buy basic necessities. Or invest in real estate, in something reliable. As for investing in dollars and euros… They have already ceased to be a currency for us. This is no longer a currency, but some obligations of other countries that may or may not be fulfilled. So we need to look for other opportunities. But I would like to emphasize once again that with the right policy, we can very quickly stabilize the ruble and even restore its purchasing power.

— And in what perspective, after all?

— It can be done tomorrow, you know? The Primakov and Gerashchenko governments did it in one week.

— Can the government do that?”

“Of course it can. To do this, in general, you need to make two decisions: fix the currency position of commercial banks and introduce currency sale standards for non-trading operations, and keep the freely convertible foreign exchange market only for trading operations. That’s all. You can write this in 15 minutes and announce it within a day, or enter it within three days, and the ruble will stabilize.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Bach (Bericht 9929921)

Wat wil je met dit geraaskal bereiken ?
Het resultaat is in feite het tegengestelde van wat ik vermoed wat het doel was.
Dit bevestig alles wat ik tot nu toe heb vernomen van de perfide gedachtenwereld van de huidige Russische Putin aanhangers.

Hier ter illustratie een uittreksel uit een interview uit National Interest met de hierboven geciteerde minister Glazyev:

Citaat:

De hele crisis in Oekraïne werd georkestreerd, uitgelokt en gefinancierd door Amerikaanse instellingen in samenwerking met hun Europese partners.
Ze financierden neonazi's. Vijftien jaar lang financierden de VS en Europeanen de opleiding van neonazi's, hun kampen en hun voorbereiding. Door de erkenning van de Amerikaanse onderminister van Buitenlandse Zaken Victoria Nuland, heeft het ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken $ 5 miljard uitgegeven aan de oprichting van een anti-Russische politieke en paramilitaire elite.
Dit werk leidde tot de trieste situatie dat nu in Oekraïne neonazi- en neofascistische ideeën de overhand hebben, evenals bewondering voor, meer dan wat dan ook, de medewerkers van Stepan Bandera die in hun tijd Joden, Oekraïners, Russen, Polen en wie ze maar wilden vermoordden , verbranden of anderszins doden onder nazi-leiderschap.

In augustus 2013 zei Glazyev dat de bewering dat alle Oekraïners de voorkeur geven aan Oekraïne om te integreren in de Europese Unie "een soort ziekelijk zelfbedrog is" en, daarbij verwijzend naar een peiling van december 2012, zei "onderzoeken door Oekraïense sociologische diensten zeggen iets anders: 35% van de mensen geeft de voorkeur aan de Europese Unie en 40% aan de douane-unie".

Citaat:

Uit opiniepeilingen, zoals een opiniepeiling van de Duitse staatszender Deutsche Welle, blijkt echter dat de meerderheid van de Oekraïners liever lid wordt van de Europese Unie dan van de douane-unie.

Hij beschuldigde "talloze politicologen en experts, die zich 20 jaar lang hebben gevoed met Europese en Amerikaanse subsidies, en een hele generatie diplomaten en bureaucraten die zijn verschenen na de jaren van de 'oranje' hysterie, die een anti-Russische agenda" en "die te ver van de economie en het echte leven staan, de geschiedenis van hun land niet echt kennen en zijn gescheiden van zijn spirituele tradities" voor het creëren van "een effect dat Oekraïne niet wil".

In juni 2014 noemde hij in een interview met de BBC de nieuwe president van Oekraïne, Petro Poroshenko, onwettig gekozen vanwege het gebrek aan stemmen in de meest oostelijke provincies van Oekraïne; de ondertekening op 27 juni 2014 van de associatieovereenkomst tussen Oekraïne en de Europese Unie eveneens onwettig.
Glazyev noemde Poroshenko ook een nazi: "Europa probeert Oekraïne ertoe te bewegen deze overeenkomst met geweld te ondertekenen ... Ze organiseerden een militaire staatsgreep in Oekraïne, ze hielpen nazi's aan de macht te komen.
Deze nazi-regering bombardeert de grootste regio in Oekraïne."
Op de vraag of hij geloofde dat Poroshenko een nazi was, antwoordde hij: "Natuurlijk."

Op 2 juli 2014 waarschuwde Glazyev voor de economische gevolgen van de associatie van Oekraïne met de Europese Unie: "Wees objectief: de met geweld aan Oekraïne opgelegde associatie met de EU leidt tot de scherpe verslechtering van de toch al slechte staat van de Oekraïense economie, de vermindering van zijn concurrentievermogen, het uit de markt drukken van Oekraïense goederen en een daling van de productie, verhoogde werkloosheid en een lagere levensstandaard."

In augustus 2017 beweerde Glazyev dat "Vandaag de dag is Oekraïne een bezet gebied.
Er is geen legitieme macht, er is niemand om mee te praten, er zijn geen mensen die verantwoordelijkheid kunnen nemen voor de uitvoering van politieke overeenkomsten.
Er zijn alleen militairen van Amerikaanse agressors die instructies krijgen van de Amerikaanse ambassade, van daaruit financiering ontvangen en in feite Amerikaanse belangen in Oekraïne dienen."

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door edwinp (Bericht 9930533)

opknopen..alle schandknaapjes van Putin(myassplease)

Verblind door haat? Geen haar beter dan al die Oost-Europese oermensen?

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Anselmo (Bericht 9929987)

Wat wil je met dit geraaskal bereiken ?

Dat staat in de titel van de draad. Niets verplicht u de gegeven informatie te lezen. Het zou ook verkeerd zijn te concluderen dat het hier noodzakelijkerwijze over mijn opinie gaat. Het gaat om het toegankelijk maken van informatie in tijden van censuur.

Het interview met Glazyev is interessant onder andere vanwege de wat hij zegt over de centrale bank van Rusland. Het geeft de indruk dat er een interne strijd bezig is.

Citaat:

Het resultaat is in feite het tegengestelde van wat ik vermoed wat het doel was.
Dit bevestig alles wat ik tot nu toe heb vernomen van de perfide gedachtenwereld van de huidige Russische Putin aanhangers.

Ik denk vooral dat u het 'geraaskal' niet gelezen heeft.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door edwinp (Bericht 9930533)

opknopen..alle schandknaapjes van Putin(myassplease)

Blijkbaar beschouwt u mij als een "schandknaapje van Putin".

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Infowarrior (Bericht 9930544)

Verblind door haat? Geen haar beter dan al die Oost-Europese oermensen?

Ik ben tenminste direct, geen hypocriete massamoordenaar die stijf staat van de leugens.

En bovendien komt hier geen zinnig argument voorbij van de 'andere' zijde enkel copy/paste propaganda van debiele websites & figuren

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door edwinp (Bericht 9930578)

Tja, dan leest ge enkel zeer selectief. Enkel hln, vrt news, hbvl en gva zijn geen propaganda? Zoals ik al schreef, verblind door de haat.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Bach (Bericht 9930569)

Blijkbaar beschouwt u mij als een "schandknaapje van Putin".

Nee, wel als een "nuttige idioot".

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Gipsy (Bericht 9930631)

Nee, wel als een "nuttige idioot".

Dat kan van u ook gezegd worden.

Voor wie graag eens een stukje uit het Russich vertaalt, deze dienst is uitstekend:

https://translate.yandex.com

En de jammeraars proberen weer een eerlijke oprechte mening te bannen, ik lees geen posts meer van poetintrollen dus hoe kan ik ze dan bedreigen ?

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Bach (Bericht 9929921)

Vertaling kan ook naar uitstekend nederlands 8-)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sergey Glazyev: "dergelijke gebeurtenissen gebeuren ongeveer een keer per eeuw", over de afbraak van tijdperken en de verandering van wegen
27 maart 2022

Is het mogelijk om de roebel in drie dagen te stabiliseren en waarom de Oekraïense "zombies" niet opgeven
"Na het falen om China frontaal te verzwakken door middel van een handelsoorlog, de Amerikanen verschoven de belangrijkste klap naar Rusland, die zij zien als een zwakke schakel in de mondiale geopolitiek en de economie. De Angelsaksen streven naar het realiseren van hun eeuwige russofobe ideeën voor de vernietiging van ons land, en tegelijkertijd voor de verzwakking van China, omdat de strategische alliantie van de Russische Federatie en de Volksrepubliek China te hard is voor de Verenigde Staten. Ze hebben noch economische noch militaire macht om ons samen te vernietigen, niet afzonderlijk, " zegt academicus van de Russische Academie van Wetenschappen, ex-adviseur van de President van de Russische Federatie Sergey Glazyev. Glazyev sprak in een interview met BUSINESS Online over welke kansen zich nu openen voor de Russische economie, of de Centrale Bank toegeeft aan de vijand en of een nieuwe wereldvaluta de dollar zal vervangen.

"Het nieuwe wereld economisch systeem is socialistisch in ideologie"
- Sergey Yuryevich, commentaar op de tragische gebeurtenissen van vandaag, schreef u in uw telegram kanaal dat het noodzakelijk was om uw boek te lezen over de "laatste Wereldoorlog", ongeveer 6 jaar geleden geschreven. Hoe heb je alles zo nauwkeurig kunnen voorspellen?

- Het feit is dat er lange-termijn patronen van economische ontwikkeling zijn, waarvan de analyse en het begrip ons in staat stellen om de gebeurtenissen die zich op dit moment voordoen te voorspellen. We ervaren een gelijktijdige verandering van technologische en mondiale economische patronen, terwijl de technologische basis van de economie verandert, een overgang naar fundamenteel nieuwe technologieën plaatsvindt en ook het managementsysteem wordt getransformeerd. Dit soort gebeurtenissen gebeurt ongeveer eens per eeuw. Echter, technologische patronen veranderen ongeveer eens in de 50 jaar, en hun verandering gaat meestal gepaard met een technologische revolutie, depressie en een wapenwedloop. En mondiale economische patronen veranderen eens in de 100 jaar, en hun verandering gaat gepaard met wereldoorlogen en sociale revoluties. Dit is te wijten aan het feit dat de heersende elite van de kernlanden van het oude economische systeem veranderingen voorkomt, geen rekening houdt met de opkomst van effectievere managementsystemen, probeert de ontwikkeling van nieuwe wereldleiders te blokkeren door ze te gebruiken en probeert hun hegemonie en hun monopoliepositie op alle mogelijke manieren te handhaven, inclusief militair en revolutionair.

Laten we zeggen, 100 jaar geleden, probeerde het Britse Rijk zijn hegemonie in de wereld te handhaven. Toen het al economisch verloor aan de gecombineerde middelen van het Russische Rijk en Duitsland, werd de Eerste Wereldoorlog, uitgelokt door de Britse inlichtingendienst, losgelaten, waarbij alle drie de Europese rijken zichzelf vernietigden. Ik heb het over de ineenstorting van het tsaristische Rusland, de Duitse en Oostenrijks-Hongaarse rijken, maar de vierde kan hier ook worden toegeschreven — de Ottomaanse poort. Wat betreft Groot-Brittannië, het hield wereldwijde dominantie voor een tijdje en werd zelfs het grootste rijk op de planeet. Maar door de onverbiddelijke wetten van sociaal-economische ontwikkeling kon het koloniale wereld economisch systeem, dat in feite gebaseerd was op slavenarbeid, niet langer voor economische groei zorgen. De twee fundamenteel nieuwe politieke modellen die naar voren kwamen — de Sovjet en de Amerikaan — toonden een veel grotere productie — efficiëntie, omdat ze al op verschillende principes waren georganiseerd: niet op het privé-familiekapitalisme, maar op de kracht van grote multinationale ondernemingen met gecentraliseerde economische reguleringsstructuren en met onbeperkte monetaire kredietuitgifte met fiat-geld (papier of elektronische middelen-ca. ed.). Zij verschaften de mogelijkheid van massaproductie van producten veel efficiënter dan de beheerssystemen van de koloniale rijken van de XIX eeuw.

De opkomst van sociale Staten in de USSR en de VS met gecentraliseerde managementsystemen maakte het mogelijk om een scherpe sprong in hun economische ontwikkeling te maken, in Europa werd het corporate governance-systeem gevormd, helaas, volgens het Nazi-model in Duitsland, en ook niet zonder de hulp van de Britse inlichtingendienst. Hitler, afhankelijk van de steun van de Britse inlichtingendiensten en het Amerikaanse kapitaal, zette snel een gecentraliseerd bedrijfsmanagementsysteem in Duitsland in, waardoor het Derde Rijk heel Europa zeer snel kon veroveren. Met Gods hulp hebben we dit Duitse (of beter gezegd, Europese — rekening houdend met de realiteit van vandaag) fascisme verslagen. Daarna waren er nog twee modellen in de wereld die ik toeschrijf aan het imperial world economic system: de Sovjet en de Western (gecentreerd in de VS). Na de ineenstorting van de Sovjet-Unie, die de wereldwijde concurrentie niet kon weerstaan omdat het systeem voor het beheer van de richtlijn niet flexibel genoeg was om aan de behoeften van de technologische vooruitgang te voldoen, greep de Verenigde Staten een tijdje de wereldwijde dominantie aan.

- Maar nu is deze periode van "Amerikaanse unipolaire eenzaamheid" al aan het verdwijnen, en waarschijnlijk niet alleen dankzij Rusland, maar vooral aan China en de Aziatische regio's als zodanig. Is dat niet zo?

- Inderdaad, de hiërarchische verticale structuren die kenmerkend zijn voor de imperiale wereldeconomie bleken te star om continue innovatieprocessen te waarborgen en verloren hun comparatieve effectiviteit in het waarborgen van de groei van de wereldeconomie. Aan de periferie is een nieuwe economische wereldorde gevormd, gebaseerd op flexibele managementmodellen, een netwerkorganisatie van productie, waarbij de staat als integrator werkt en de belangen van verschillende sociale groepen verenigt rond het bereiken van één doel — het verhogen van het algemeen welzijn. Het meest indrukwekkende voorbeeld van zo'n integrale mondiale economische structuur is China, dat al meer dan 30 jaar drie keer sneller is dan het groeitempo van de Amerikaanse economie. Op dit moment overtreft China de Verenigde Staten al in termen van productie, export van hightechgoederen en groeicijfers.

Een ander voorbeeld van het model van het nieuwe economische wereldsysteem, dat we integraal noemden (vanwege het feit dat de staat alle sociale groepen verenigt die verschillen in hun belangen), is India. Het heeft een ander politiek systeem, maar het heeft ook het primaat van openbare belangen boven particuliere belangen, en de staat streeft ernaar om de groeipercentages te maximaliseren om armoede te bestrijden. In die zin is het nieuwe economische wereldsysteem ideologisch socialistisch. Tegelijkertijd maakt zij gebruik van marktmechanismen van concurrentie, die het mogelijk maken om de hoogste concentratie van middelen voor de technologische revolutie te waarborgen om economische sprongen te maken die gebaseerd zijn op een nieuwe geavanceerde technologische orde. Als we kijken naar de groeicijfers na 1995, zullen we zien dat de Chinese economie 10 keer is gegroeid, terwijl de Amerikaanse economie met slechts 15 procent is gegroeid. Het is dus al voor iedereen duidelijk dat op dit moment het tempo van de mondiale economische ontwikkeling verschuift naar Azië: China, India en de landen van Indochina produceren nu al meer producten dan de Verenigde Staten en de Europese Unie. Als we daaraan Japan of Korea toevoegen, waarin het managementsysteem vergelijkbaar is in zijn principes van integratie van de samenleving rond het doel van het verbeteren van het openbaar welzijn, dan kunnen we zeggen dat vandaag de dag dit nieuwe mondiale economische systeem al de wereld domineert, en het centrum van reproductie van de wereldeconomie is verplaatst naar Zuidoost-Azië. Natuurlijk kan de Amerikaanse heersende elite het hier niet mee eens zijn.

- Om te accepteren, zou ik zeggen…

- bevestigend. Zij, zoals het Britse Rijk ooit, streven ernaar om hun hegemonie in de wereld te behouden. De gebeurtenissen die vandaag plaatsvinden zijn een manifestatie van hoe de financiële en macht oligarchische elite van de Verenigde Staten probeert de wereldheerschappij te handhaven. Het kan gezegd worden dat het de afgelopen 15 jaar een wereldwijde hybride oorlog heeft gevoerd, met als doel landen buiten zijn controle te chaotiseren en de ontwikkeling van de Volksrepubliek China te beperken. Maar door het al archaïsche managementsysteem kunnen ze dit niet doen. De financiële crisis van 2008 was zo'n overgangsmoment toen de levenscyclus van de uitgaande technologische orde daadwerkelijk eindigde en het proces van massale herverdeling van kapitaal in een nieuwe technologische orde begon, waarvan de kern een complex van nanobioengineering en informatie-communicatietechnologieën is. Alle landen zijn begonnen geld in de economie te pompen. Het eenvoudigste wat een moderne staat kan doen is alle ondernemingen toegang bieden tot goedkoop langetermijngeld, zodat ze nieuwe technologieën kunnen introduceren. Maar als in Amerika en Europa dergelijke fondsen vooral in financiële zeepbellen gingen en dekking van begrotingstekorten boden, dan was in China deze kolossale geldkwestie volledig gericht op de groei van de productie en de ontwikkeling van nieuwe technologieën. Er waren geen financiële zeepbellen, terwijl de ultra-hoge monetisatie van de Chinese economie niet resulteerde in inflatie, de groei van de geldhoeveelheid ging gepaard met een toename van de productie van goederen, de invoering van nieuwe geavanceerde technologieën en een toename van het openbaar welzijn.

De economische concurrentie heeft er nu al toe geleid dat de Verenigde Staten hun leiderschap hebben verloren. Als je je herinnert, Donald Trump probeerde de ontwikkeling van China te beperken door middel van een handelsoorlog, maar er kwam niets uit.

"Vandaag de dag heeft de economische concurrentie al geleid tot het feit dat de Verenigde Staten zijn leiderschap heeft verloren. Als je je herinnert, Donald Trump probeerde de ontwikkeling van China te beperken door middel van een handelsoorlog, maar er kwam niets van"

"De Amerikanen hebben een biologisch front van oorlog geopend door een coronavirus in China te lanceren"
- waarom? Had Trump, die gewend is om risico's te nemen en all-in te gaan, niet genoeg vastberadenheid?

- En zelfs Trump kon niet naar buiten komen, omdat China een efficiënter managementsysteem heeft waarmee u de beschikbare productiemiddelen zo volledig mogelijk kunt concentreren. Tegelijkertijd houdt effectief geldbeheer de geldkwestie in de lus van uitgebreide reproductie van de reële sector van de economie, gericht op het financieren van investeringen in ontwikkeling. China heeft de maximale accumulatie van alle landen bereikt: ongeveer 45 procent van het BBP wordt geïnvesteerd in investeringen in vergelijking met 20 procent van de Verenigde Staten of Rusland. Dit zorgt in feite voor de ultrahoge groeicijfers van de Chinese economie.

In het algemeen waren de Verenigde Staten gedoemd te verslaan in deze handelsoorlog, omdat China efficiënter producten kan produceren en ontwikkeling goedkoper kan financieren. Het hele bancaire systeem in China is staatseigendom, het werkt als een enkele ontwikkelingsinstelling, het sturen van kasstromen in het uitbreiden van de productie en het beheersen van nieuwe technologieën. In de VS gaat het geldprobleem naar de financiering van het begrotingstekort en wordt het herverdeeld in financiële zeepbellen. Als gevolg daarvan is de efficiëntie van het Amerikaanse financiële en economische systeem 20 procent - slechts elke vijfde dollar bereikt de echte sector daar, en in China bijna 90 procent (dat wil zeggen, bijna alle yuan gemaakt door de Centrale Bank van de Volksrepubliek China) voeden de contouren van de uitbreiding van de productie en zorgen voor ultra—hoge economische groei.

Trump 's pogingen om China' s ontwikkeling te beperken door middel van handelsoorlog methoden zijn mislukt. Tegelijkertijd boemeranged ze tegen de Verenigde Staten zelf. Toen openden de Amerikanen een biologisch front van oorlog door een coronavirus in China te lanceren, in de hoop dat het Chinese leiderschap deze epidemie niet zou aankunnen en chaos in China zou ontstaan. De epidemie heeft echter een slechte gezondheidsefficiëntie aangetoond en chaos in de Verenigde Staten zelf gecreëerd. Ook het Chinese managementsysteem is hier veel efficiënter gebleken. In het Middenrijk is de mortaliteit aanzienlijk lager en de pandemie werd daar veel sneller aangepakt. Al in 2020 bereikten ze zelfs een economische groei van 2 procent, terwijl in de Verenigde Staten was er een daling van 10 procent van het BBP (analisten merkte de grootste daling sinds de Tweede Wereldoorlog — ed.). Nu de Chinezen hebben herwonnen groeipercentages van ongeveer 7 procent per jaar, en er is geen twijfel dat China zal blijven ontwikkelen met vertrouwen, het uitbreiden van de productie van een nieuwe technologische manier.

Parallel aan de handelsoorlog tegen China, waren de Amerikaanse inlichtingendiensten een oorlog tegen Rusland aan het voorbereiden, omdat het ons land is dat de Angelsaksische geopolitieke traditie beschouwt als het belangrijkste obstakel voor het vestigen van wereldheerschappij door de macht en de financiële elite van de Verenigde Staten en Groot-Brittannië. Ik moet zeggen dat de oorlog tegen de Russische Federatie zich ontvouwde onmiddellijk na de annexatie van de Krim en nadat de Amerikaanse speciale diensten een coup organiseerden in Oekraïne. Men kan zeggen dat ze er op frauduleuze wijze voor hebben gezorgd dat Rusland instemde met de Amerikaanse bezetting van Oekraïne, gezien als een tijdelijk fenomeen. Echter, de Amerikanen wortel geschoten op het plein, creëerde niet alleen bolwerken, groeiende nazi 's onder hun vleugels, maar ook getraind de Nazi-strijdkrachten, gaf de nazi' s de kans om een militaire opleiding te krijgen, trainde hen in hun academies, "genaaid" alle strijdkrachten van Oekraïne met hen. En al 8 jaar bereiden ze de strijdkrachten van Oekraïne voor om de enige vijand — Rusland-te bestrijden. Terwijl de massamedia, die in Oekraïne ook volledig gecontroleerd worden door de Amerikanen, een beeld vormden van de vijand in het publieke bewustzijn.

Daarnaast gebruikten de Verenigde Staten het monetaire en financiële front van een hybride oorlog tegen de Russische Federatie. Al in 2014 hebben ze de eerste financiële sancties opgelegd en een aanzienlijk deel van de westerse leningen van de Russische economie uitgeschakeld. Nu zijn we getuige van de volgende fase, waarin ze Rusland daadwerkelijk hebben losgekoppeld van het mondiale monetaire en financiële systeem, waar ze domineren. Echter, dit alles werd door mij voorspeld 10 jaar geleden, gebaseerd op de theorie van het veranderen van de wereld economische patronen en de specifieke logica van de heersende elite van de Verenigde Staten, gericht op wereldheerschappij. Angelsaksische geopolitiek is traditioneel gericht tegen het Russische Rijk en zijn opvolgers, de USSR en de Russische Federatie, omdat Rusland sinds de tijd van het Britse Rijk wordt beschouwd als de belangrijkste tegenstander van de Anlo-Saksen. De hele zogenaamde geopolitieke wetenschap, die werd samengesteld in Londen, werd in feite gereduceerd tot een reeks aanbevelingen over hoe Rusland te vernietigen als de dominante kracht van Eurazië. Ik bedoel allerlei speculatieve constructies zoals "de landen van de zee tegen de landen van het land" enzovoort.

- Waarom bemoeide Rusland zich zo met de "landen van de zee"? Geografisch gezien hebben wij immers nooit aan Groot-Brittannië grenzen gesteld.

- In dit opzicht werd een formule bedacht: wie Eurazië controleert, controleert de hele wereld. In feite zijn de toegepaste ontwikkelingen al verder gegaan. De stelling van Zbigniew Brzezinski is bekend dat om Rusland als supermacht te verslaan, Oekraïne ervan moet worden verwijderd. Al dit politieke dogma, dat naar het schijnt al lang in de geschiedenis is opgenomen, wordt vandaag de dag echter gereproduceerd in het denken van de Amerikaanse politieke elite. Ik moet zeggen dat er nog steeds cursussen in geopolitiek van de XIX eeuw aan Harvard en Yale University, scherpen de hersenen van toekomstige Amerikaanse politici tegen Rusland. Dus sprongen ze op deze oude en beproefde russofobe stroom, die altijd kenmerkend is geweest voor Angelsaksische geopolitiek. En omdat ze Rusland beschouwden als de belangrijkste tegenstander van hun overheersing in de wereld, gebruikten ze Oekraïne als een voorpost, om precies te zijn, als een instrument om Rusland te ondermijnen, te verzwakken en, in de toekomst, voor vernietiging als soevereine staat, in overeenstemming met het voorstel van Brzezinski.

Dus, wat er vandaag gebeurt is gemakkelijk te voorspellen op basis van een combinatie van lange termijn patronen van economische ontwikkeling, die in feite de wereld gedoemd tot een hybride oorlog, en de traditionele Russofobie van de Angelsaksische politieke elite. Na de verzwakking van de Volksrepubliek China faalde frontaal door een handelsoorlog, de Amerikanen overgedragen de belangrijkste klap van hun militaire en politieke macht aan Rusland, die zij beschouwen als een zwakke schakel in de wereld geopolitiek en de economie. Bovendien proberen de Angelsaksen de dominantie over Rusland te vestigen om hun eeuwige russofobe ideeën voor de vernietiging van ons land te realiseren, en tegelijkertijd om China te verzwakken, omdat de strategische alliantie van de Russische Federatie en de Volksrepubliek China te hard is voor de Verenigde Staten. Ze hebben noch de economische, noch de militaire macht om ons samen te vernietigen, niet afzonderlijk, en daarom probeerden de Verenigde Staten aanvankelijk ruzie te maken met China. Dit werkte niet voor hen. Maar met behulp van onze zelfgenoegzaamheid hebben zij de controle over Oekraïne veroverd, en vandaag gebruiken zij onze broederlijke Republiek als oorlogswapen om Rusland te vernietigen, en vervolgens om de controle over onze hulpbronnen te grijpen om, ik herhaal, hun positie te versterken en de positie van China te verzwakken. In het algemeen is dit alles duidelijk, want twee keer twee is vier.

"De Amerikanen zullen niet in staat zijn om te winnen, omdat de Britten in hun tijd niet slaagden"
- Dit is waarschijnlijk duidelijk, maar niet voor iedereen. Er zijn veel tegenstanders van de alliantie met China onder de Russische elite. Tenminste, voor de speciale operatie in Oekraïne, leek het deze mensen dat de Amerikaanse en westerse cultuur waren duidelijker en dichter bij ons dan hiëroglief Chinese wijsheid, en dat we altijd een gemeenschappelijke taal met onze "westerse partners"zou vinden.

- Weet je, in 2015 schreef ik het boek "de laatste wereldoorlog. De Verenigde Staten begint en verliest, " die u aan het begin van het gesprek noemde — alles was daar doordacht en gerechtvaardigd. De Verenigde Staten ondernamen een wereldwijde hybride oorlog-het begon met de Oranje revoluties om die regio ' s van de wereld te desorganiseren die het niet onder controle had — om zijn positie te versterken en de positie van geopolitieke concurrenten te verzwakken. Na de beroemde toespraak van president Poetin in München (februari 2007 — noot van de redactie), realiseerden ze zich dat ze de controle over het rusland van Jeltsin hadden verloren en maakten ze zich er ernstig zorgen over. In 2008 brak de financiële crisis uit en werd duidelijk dat de overgang naar een nieuwe technologische orde begon en dat de oude economische wereldorde en het vorige managementsysteem niet langer zorgden voor een progressieve economische ontwikkeling. China stijgt naar voren. Nou, dan is de logica van de inzet van de wereldoorlog werkt, alleen niet in de vormen die 100 jaar geleden bestond, maar op drie voorwaardelijke fronten — monetaire en financiële (waar de Verenigde Staten nog steeds dominantie in de wereld), handel en economische (waar ze al het primaat hebben verloren aan China) en informatie en cognitieve (waar de Amerikanen hebben ze ook technologieën superieur aan ons). Ze gebruiken al deze drie fronten en proberen het initiatief te behouden en de hegemonie van hun bedrijven te handhaven.

En tot slot, het vierde front is het biologische front, dat opende met het verschijnen van het coronavirus van het Amerikaans-Chinese laboratorium in Wuhan. Vandaag zien we dat er een heel netwerk van biologische laboratoria bestond in Oekraïne. De Verenigde Staten bereiden zich al lang voor om het biologische front van de wereldoorlog te openen.

Het vijfde, meest voor de hand liggende front is in feite het front van vijandelijkheden — als laatste middel om de staten die zij controleren te dwingen ze impliciet te gehoorzamen. Vandaag de dag escaleert ook de situatie op dit front. Dat wil zeggen, actieve acties vinden plaats op alle vijf fronten van de wereldwijde hybride oorlog en het is mogelijk om het resultaat te voorspellen. De Amerikanen zullen niet kunnen winnen, omdat de Britten destijds faalden. Hoewel formeel Groot-Brittannië won de Tweede Wereldoorlog, maar politiek en economisch verloren ze. De Britten verloren hun hele rijk, verloren meer dan 90 procent van het grondgebied en 95 procent van de bevolking. Twee jaar na de Tweede Wereldoorlog, waar zij de winnaars waren, stortte hun rijk in als een kaartenhuis, omdat de andere twee winnaars — de USSR en de VS — dit rijk niet nodig hadden en het als een anachronisme beschouwden. Op dezelfde manier zal de wereld geen behoefte hebben aan Amerikaanse multinationals, De Amerikaanse dollar, Amerikaanse monetaire en financiële technologieën en financiële piramides. Dit alles zal binnenkort tot het verleden behoren. Zuidoost-Azië zal een voor de hand liggende leider worden in de wereldwijde economische ontwikkeling voor iedereen, en een nieuwe mondiale economische orde zal voor onze ogen worden gevormd.

- Om een opmerking te parafraseren, we kunnen zeggen dat er eindelijk veranderingen zijn gekomen aan het westelijk front. Maar welke tekenen van het op handen zijnde vertrek van dit krachtige mondiale systeem zie je?

- Nadat de Amerikanen eerst Venezolaanse valutareserves arresteerden en ze aan de oppositie overhandigden, toen-Afghaanse valutareserves, daarvoor-Iraanse, en nu-en Russische, werd het duidelijk dat de dollar geen wereldvaluta meer is. Na de Amerikanen hebben ook de Europeanen deze domheid begaan — de euro en Het Pond zijn niet langer wereldvaluta ' s. Daarom leeft het oude monetaire en financiële systeem zijn laatste dagen uit. Nadat de Amerikaanse dollars die niemand nodig heeft vanuit Aziatische landen terug naar Amerika zijn gestuurd, is de ineenstorting van het mondiale monetaire en financiële systeem gebaseerd op dollars en euro ' s onvermijdelijk. De belangrijkste landen schakelen over op nationale valuta ' s en de euro en de dollar zijn niet langer deviezenreserves.

Hoe zie je de wereld na het verdwijnen van het dollarmonopolie?

— Wij werken momenteel aan een ontwerp voor een internationale overeenkomst over de invoering van een nieuwe wereldomspannende valuta die gekoppeld is aan de nationale valuta ' s van de deelnemende landen en aan op de beurs verhandelde goederen die de reële waarden bepalen. We hebben geen Amerikaanse en Europese banken nodig. Een nieuw betalingssysteem gebaseerd op moderne digitale technologieën met blockchain ontwikkelt zich in de wereld, waar banken hun belang verliezen. Klassiek kapitalisme gebaseerd op particuliere banken behoort tot het verleden. Het internationale recht wordt hersteld. Alle belangrijke internationale betrekkingen, met inbegrip van de kwestie van de circulatie van de wereldvaluta, beginnen te worden gevormd op basis van contracten. Tegelijkertijd wordt het belang van de nationale soevereiniteit hersteld, omdat soevereine landen het daarmee eens zijn. De mondiale economische samenwerking is gebaseerd op gezamenlijke investeringen om het welzijn van de volkeren te verbeteren. Liberalisering van de handel is niet langer een prioriteit, nationale prioriteiten worden gerespecteerd, elke staat bouwt een systeem van bescherming van de interne markt en zijn Economische Ruimte als het nodig acht. Dat wil zeggen, het tijdperk van liberale globalisering is voorbij. Voor onze ogen wordt een nieuwe economische wereldorde gevormd, een integrale, waarin sommige staten en particuliere banken hun privémonopolie op de geldkwestie, op het gebruik van militair geweld, enzovoort verliezen.

"Het derde scenario is catastrofaal. De vernietiging van de mensheid"
- En waarom noemde je je boek 'de laatste wereldoorlog'?"Wat voedt je hoop dat deze wereldwijde oorlog echt de laatste is?

- Ik noemde deze Wereldoorlog de laatste, omdat we zien dat er verschillende scenario ' s zijn van beweging uit de huidige crisis. Het eerste scenario, dat ik al heb beschreven, is kalm en welvarend. Het houdt in het overwinnen van het Amerikaanse monopolie. Om dit in de financiële sfeer te doen, moet je de dollar opgeven. Om het monopolie op de informatie-en cognitieve sfeer te overwinnen, moeten we onze informatieruimte isoleren van de Amerikaanse en overschakelen op onze eigen informatietechnologieën. Door het creëren van hun eigen contouren van economische reproductie, maar zonder de Amerikaanse dollar en euro en vertrouwen op hun informatietechnologie voor geldbeheer, zorgen de landen van de nieuwe mondiale economische structuur voor een hoge mate van economische ontwikkeling, terwijl de westerse wereld instort. Er is een situatie van ineenstortende financiële piramides, desorganisatie en een groeiende economische crisis, verergerd door stijgende inflatie als gevolg van ongecontroleerde gelduitgifte in de afgelopen 12 jaar.

Het tweede scenario van een mogelijke ontwikkeling van gebeurtenissen is vergelijkbaar met het scenario dat Hitler wilde implementeren tijdens de verandering van de vorige wereld economische patronen. Dit is een poging om een wereldregering te creëren met een bovenmenselijke ideologie. Als Hitler de Duitse natie als bovenmenselijke beschouwden, dan leggen de huidige ideologen van de wereldheerschappij de mensheid een overgang naar een post-humanoïde staat op. In tegenstelling tot het postumanisme van het Westen worden de kernlanden van de nieuwe wereldeconomie gekenmerkt door een socialistische ideologie, zij het met respect voor particuliere belangen, bescherming van particuliere eigendom en het gebruik van marktmechanismen. In China, India, Japan en Korea overheerst de socialistische ideologie — of beter gezegd, een bepaalde mix van socialistische ideologie, nationale belangen en marktconcurrentie. Het is deze mix die een fundamenteel nieuwe macht en politieke elite vormt die gericht is op economische ontwikkeling en de groei van het welzijn van Naties.

Anders westerse politici, intellectuelen en zakenlieden. Wat we vandaag zien is een poging om een beeld te vormen van een nieuwe wereldorde met een wereldregering aan het hoofd, waar mensen in een elektronisch concentratiekamp worden gedreven. Je kunt zien aan het voorbeeld van beperkingen tijdens de pandemie, hoe het gebeurde: alle mensen krijgen tags, toegang tot publieke goederen wordt gereguleerd door QR-codes, iedereen wordt gedwongen in formatie te lopen. Trouwens, in het scenario van de Rockefeller Foundation in 2009, werd de pandemie en in feite alles wat er in verband daarmee gebeurde op een verbazingwekkende manier op de planken gelegd — ze voorspelden de toekomst. Dit scenario werd Lock Step genoemd, dat wil zeggen "wandelen in formatie", en de westerse wereld volgde het. Ze offeren hun eigen democratische waarden op en proberen mensen te dwingen bevelen op te volgen. Internationale organisaties, waaronder de Wereldgezondheidsorganisatie, worden in dit geval gebruikt als een soort referentiepunt voor het samenstellen van een wereldregering die ondergeschikt zou zijn aan particulier kapitaal.

Maar, ik moet zeggen, Donald Trump belemmerde deze plannen enorm, omdat hij stopte met het ondertekenen van de trans-Atlantische en trans-Pacific partnerschapsovereenkomsten, waar alle landen die deelnemen aan de Verdragen hun nationale soevereiniteit opofferden in alle geschillen met het grootkapitaal. En we moeten begrijpen dat vandaag de dag elke multinationale onderneming kan optreden als een buitenlandse investeerder, ook in de Verenigde Staten. Volgens deze overeenkomsten, als er buitenlands kapitaal in het bedrijf, dan in een geschil met de nationale overheid, een internationaal arbitragehof wordt gevormd, is het onduidelijk hoe en door wie. En deze niet-gekozen rechters, benoemd, in feite, door grote internationale zaken, lossen deze geschillen op. In feite ging het om het feit dat de staat alle soevereiniteit aan het verliezen was bij het reguleren van de betrekkingen met het grootkapitaal. Echter, Trump stopte de overeenkomst - de Verenigde Staten nooit ondertekend. Zo werd het proces van het vormen van een wereldregering gestopt. Dit is het tweede alternatief, en het ervaart momenteel een crisis als gevolg van de ineenstorting van het idee van globalisering en de geleidelijke afschaffing van "pandemische" beperkingen.

We moeten begrijpen dat de optie van een wereldregering onverenigbaar is met een soeverein Rusland, met onze onafhankelijkheid en rol in de wereld. In het kader van het globalistische scenario wordt de Russische Federatie beschouwd als een gebied dat bedoeld is voor uitbuiting door westerse multinationals. Tegelijkertijd moet de "inheemse bevolking" hun belangen dienen. Onder een dergelijk scenario verdwijnt Rusland als een onafhankelijke entiteit, net als China. De westerse wereldregering kan sommige van onze oligarchen opnemen in haar eigen versie van de toekomst, maar alleen in de tweede en derde rol.

Het derde scenario is catastrofaal. De vernietiging van de mensheid…

De apocalyps waar iedereen het over heeft?

- Nou, niet allemaal ... maar iedereen is zeker Bang. Trouwens, er werd gezegd over Amerikaanse biologische laboratoria die gevaarlijke virussen synthetiseren in mijn andere boek, iets later gepubliceerd: "de pest van de XXI eeuw: hoe een catastrofe te vermijden en de crisis te overwinnen?".

Ik herinner me dat ik in 1996, toen ik in de VN-Veiligheidsraad moest werken, heb voorgesteld een concept van nationale biologische veiligheid te ontwikkelen. Want zelfs toen, bijna 30 jaar geleden, was genetica een voldoende geavanceerde wetenschap om virussen te synthetiseren die gericht waren tegen mensen van een bepaald ras of een bepaald geslacht, een bepaalde leeftijd. Dit is al lang mogelijk. Je kunt een virus maken dat alleen werkt tegen blanken of, omgekeerd, alleen tegen zwarten, alleen tegen mannen of alleen tegen vrouwen. Nu gaan de Amerikanen verder - je kunt zien dat, volgens de gegevens van ons Ministerie van Defensie, de dag ervoor aangekondigd, Amerikaanse biolabs virussen ontwikkelden die zich richtten op de Slaven. Blijkbaar is het vandaag de dag mogelijk om een virus te maken tegen een etnische groep die zijn eigen genetische code heeft.
Wat er vandaag in Oekraïne gebeurt is een echo van de lijdensweg van de heersende elite van de Verenigde Staten, die niet kunnen accepteren dat ze niet langer een wereldleider zullen zijn. Dit wordt voor iedereen duidelijk — althans voor degenen die niet verbonden zijn met de Amerikanen door hun belangen en niet onderworpen zijn aan hun cognitieve invloed.

Hier is een voorbeeld. Toen de Verenigde Staten in 2014 anti-Russische sancties oplegden, vroeg ik mijn Chinese collega ' s: "denk je dat de Amerikanen sancties kunnen opleggen aan China? Er werd gezegd dat dit onmogelijk was, omdat de Verenigde Staten net zo afhankelijk zijn van China als China van de Verenigde Staten. Dat wil zeggen, het zal duurder zijn voor Amerika. Twee jaar zijn verstreken en Trump heeft een handelsoorlog tegen China gelanceerd. En Beijing begrijpt nu dat Amerika een vijand is die het Chinese economische wonder in alle opzichten zal verdrinken. Daarvoor overtuigden mijn argumenten van Chinese collega ' s niet veel, net zoals Mijn door u genoemde boek echter geen grote invloed had op onze politieke economische elite. Mijn argumenten werden afgewezen. Hoewel we al vele, vele jaren zeggen dat de dollar moet worden opgegeven. Valutareserves hadden moeten worden verwijderd uit dollarinstrumenten, van euro 's naar goud, het was nodig om over te schakelen naar zijn eigen monetaire en financiële systeem, het ontwikkelen van zijn eigen nederzettingen in nationale valuta' s met partners. We bieden dit alles al aan sinds de jaren ' 30, toen al duidelijk was waar de wereldwijde economische ontwikkeling toe leidde. En pas nu, eindelijk, heeft iedereen het licht gezien.

"De Amerikanen zombified Oekraïners en veranderde 150-200 duizend mensen in een vechtmachine die werkt zonder na te denken"
- Te oordelen naar het hartverscheurende gehuil uit het liberale kamp, evenals naar de gebeurtenissen in Oekraïne, heeft nog niet iedereen het licht gezien.

- Ja, we worden geconfronteerd met het feit dat de Amerikanen erin zijn geslaagd om het Oekraïense volk in acht jaar zoveel voor de gek te houden dat de mensen die zich verzetten tegen het Russische leger, de zogenaamde strijdkrachten van Oekraïne, er gewoon zombified uitzien. Ze worden gecontroleerd als marionetten. Zelensky voert niet het bevel over het Oekraïense leger, zelfs niet over het Ministerie van Defensie van Oekraïne en de generale staf, maar over het Pentagon. Hij commandeert zeer effectief vanuit het oogpunt van het vechten "tot de laatste Oekraïense soldaat", omdat deze zombie jongens niet opgeven. Maar ze bevinden zich in een absoluut hopeloze situatie. Alle deskundigen hebben al erkend dat Rusland de militaire speciale operatie heeft gewonnen, dat Oekraïne geen kans op verzet heeft, dat de gehele militaire infrastructuur is vernietigd... de APU kan zich alleen overgeven om menselijke verliezen te minimaliseren. Echter, Oekraïense officieren (en vooral, natuurlijk, nationalisten) handelen als extern gecontroleerde zombies — ze volgen instructies van het Pentagon, die aankomen op hun personal computers en speciale tablets.

Bovendien hebben de Amerikanen het bevel over hun marionetten vanuit de AFU, waardoor ze in de juiste eenheden worden verdeeld. Elke eenheid krijgt een nummer toegewezen, en kunstmatige militaire intelligentie geeft elk nummer elke dag taken. Ze hebben echt 150-200 duizend mensen veranderd in een vechtmachine die werkt zonder na te denken, alleen dom al hun orders uitvoert. 8 jaar lang hebben ze bereikt dat ze een aanzienlijk deel van de jeugd van Oekraïne hebben gedwongen niet alleen om zich aan te sluiten bij de rangen tegen Rusland, maar door hen te hersenspoelen hun zwakke wil Gereedschap. Niet alleen kanonnenvoer, maar geleid kanonnenvoer.

Ze bevinden zich in een absoluut hopeloze situatie, zijn omsingeld, zijn verstoken van alle voorraden, en gaan nog steeds door met een zinloze oorlog, veroordelen zichzelf tot de dood en slepen de omringende burgers met zich mee het graf in. Dit is een duidelijk voorbeeld van hoe Amerikaanse moderne technologieën werken. We moeten begrijpen dat we een zeer krachtige kracht voor ons hebben. Weet u, we hebben eerder van Russische deskundigen en politici gehoord dat de Oekraïners zelf economisch zullen stikken en dan naar ons zullen kruipen en in het algemeen waar Oekraïne zonder ons heen zal gaan. Het zal immers niet in staat zijn de reproductie van de economie te waarborgen zonder onze middelen en samenwerking met ons. Oekraïne is inderdaad in een economische catastrofe terechtgekomen, zoals we aannamen, zoals we aan onze Oekraïense collega ' s hebben uitgelegd. De Oekraïense Republiek is samen met Moldavië de armste staat van Europa geworden. Vanwege het feit dat Oekraïne de banden met Rusland heeft beëindigd, bedragen de verliezen meer dan $ 100 miljard. Toch weerhield dit Amerikaanse en Britse politieke strategen en instructeurs er niet van een 200.000 man sterk leger van misdadigers en moordenaars te vormen die zich volstrekt onvoldoende de realiteit voorstellen en een gehoorzaam instrument van Amerikaanse belangen zijn.

Zijn er geen even gehoorzame Amerikaanse poppen in Rusland? Werden alleen Oekraïners zombified?

- Ja, en hier moet worden opgemerkt dat vrijwel hetzelfde gebeurt met de Centrale Bank, maar alleen op andere kwesties.

- Voordat we verder gaan met de Centrale Bank, laat me het verduidelijken. Je zei dat je werkte aan de invoering van een nieuwe munt. En in welk formaat en met welk team?

- We doen dit al heel lang, als een groep wetenschappers. 10 jaar geleden, op het Astana Economic Forum, presenteerden we een rapport "Towards sustainable growth through a fair world Economic Order" met een ontwerp overgang naar een nieuw mondiaal financieel en monetair systeem, waar we voorgesteld om het IMF-systeem te hervormen op basis van de zogenaamde speciale trekkingsrechten, en op basis van het gewijzigde IMF — systeem-om een wereld settlement valuta te creëren. Dit idee, door de manier, wekte grote belangstelling op dat moment: ons project werd erkend als het beste internationale economische project. Maar in praktische zin was geen van de Staten vertegenwoordigd door de officiële monetaire autoriteiten geïnteresseerd in dit project, hoewel de publicaties van Nursultan Nazarbajev, die een nieuwe munt voorstelde, volgden. Naar mijn mening bood hij altyn aan.

Altyn? Het is interessant.

- Ja, de publicatie van zijn artikel over dit onderwerp vond zelfs in Izvestia plaats. Maar het kwam niet tot onderhandelingen en politieke besluiten, en tot op de dag van vandaag is het eerder een deskundig voorstel. Maar ik ben er zeker van dat de huidige situatie ons dwingt om nu heel snel nieuwe betaal-en afwikkelingsinstrumenten te creëren, omdat het praktisch onmogelijk zal zijn om de dollar te gebruiken, en de roebel, als gevolg van het incompetente beleid van de Centrale Bank, die in feite handelt in het belang van internationale speculanten, kan op geen enkele manier stabiliteit bereiken.

Objectief gezien zou de roebel een reservevaluta kunnen worden, samen met de yuan en de Roepie. Het zou mogelijk zijn om over te schakelen op een systeem met meerdere valuta 's, gebaseerd op nationale valuta' s. Maar je hebt nog steeds een soort equivalent nodig voor de prijs... we werken momenteel aan het concept van de uitwisselingsruimte van de Euraziatische Economische Unie, waar een van de taken het opstellen van nieuwe prijscriteria is. Dat wil zeggen, als we willen metaalprijzen worden gevormd niet in Londen, maar in Rusland, evenals olieprijzen, dan impliceert dit de opkomst van een andere valuta, vooral als we willen handelen niet alleen binnen de Euraziatische Economische Unie, maar in Eurazië in brede zin, in het centrum van de nieuwe wereld economische orde, waarnaar ik verwijs China, India, Indochina, Japan, Korea en Iran. Dit zijn grote landen die allemaal hun eigen fundamentele nationale belangen hebben. Na de huidige verhalen over de confiscatie van dollarreserves, denk ik dat geen van de landen de valuta van een ander land als reserve zal willen gebruiken. Daarom is een aantal nieuwe tool nodig. En zo ' n instrument, vanuit mijn oogpunt, kan om te beginnen een soort synthetische afwikkelingsvaluta zijn, die zou worden gebouwd als een dergelijke geaggregeerde index.

Mag ik wat voorbeelden? Wat is er?

- Nou, laten we zeggen ecu — er was zo ' n ervaring in de Europese Unie. Het werd gebouwd als een mand van valuta ' s. Alle landen die deelnemen aan de creatie van een nieuwe afwikkelingsvaluta moeten recht hebben op de aanwezigheid van hun nationale valuta in deze mand. En de gemeenschappelijke munt wordt gevormd als index, als gewogen gemiddelde component van deze nationale valuta ' s. Welnu, daar moeten we vanuit mijn standpunt grondstoffen aan toevoegen: niet alleen goud, maar ook olie, metaal, graan en water. Een soort goederenbundel, die volgens onze schattingen ongeveer 20 goederen zou moeten bevatten. Zij vormen in feite de verhouding van de wereldmarktprijzen en moeten daarom deelnemen aan de mand voor de vorming van een nieuwe afwikkelingsvaluta. En er is een internationale overeenkomst nodig waarin de regels voor de circulatie van deze munt worden vastgelegd en een organisatie als het Internationaal Monetair Fonds wordt opgericht. Trouwens, vijftien jaar geleden hebben we voorgesteld om het IMF te hervormen, maar nu is het al duidelijk dat het nieuwe monetaire financiële systeem zonder het Westen moet worden opgebouwd. Misschien zal Europa zich ooit bij het Verdrag aansluiten en zullen ook de Verenigde Staten gedwongen worden het te erkennen. Maar het is nog steeds duidelijk dat we zonder hen moeten bouwen, bijvoorbeeld op basis van de Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Dit zijn echter slechts deskundige ontwikkelingen die we de komende maand ter overweging zullen voorleggen aan de officiële instanties.

- En op het niveau van de regering of op het niveau van de president?

- We sturen het eerst naar de afdelingen die verantwoordelijk zijn voor deze kwesties. We zullen besprekingen voeren, een soort gemeenschappelijk begrip ontwikkelen en dan naar het politieke niveau gaan.

"De Centrale Bank zet het beleid van toegeven aan de vijand voort"
- In uw telegram schrijft u dat het alleen blijft om de Bank van Rusland te nationaliseren. Waarom is het nog niet uitgevoerd? Er is bijvoorbeeld het standpunt dat Elvira Nabiullina in haar post als scherm blijft, maar dat ze niets serieus meer zal doen. Kunt u dit weerleggen of bevestigen?

- Ik wil geen samenzweringstheorie doen.

Is dit complottheorie?

- Ja, we kunnen praten over de Amerikaanse deep state in samenzwerings termen. In dit geval is complottheorie een zeer geschikte gedachtegang, omdat in Amerika, achter het scherm van presidenten en congresleden, sommige diepe krachten zich verbergen — speciale diensten. En in ons vaderland is alles eenvoudig. We hebben een president, een staatshoofd die een verticale macht heeft opgebouwd. Wij begrijpen volkomen hoe het Parlement en het rechtsstelsel worden gevormd. In het algemeen is het onmogelijk om hier een samenzweringstheorie toe te passen. Hetzelfde geldt voor de Centrale Bank. Ik wil u eraan herinneren dat volgens de Wet op de Centrale Bank al haar eigendom federaal eigendom is. Daarom is de Centrale Bank een staatsstructuur, daar bestaat geen enkele twijfel over.

En ze zeiden altijd dat hij gescheiden was, alsof hij aan de zijlijn stond.

— De Raad van bewind van de Centrale Bank wordt op voorstel van de President door de Doema benoemd. Ik heb vele jaren gewerkt als zijn vertegenwoordiger in de nationale Bankraad, die toezicht houdt op de activiteiten van de Centrale Bank. Ik kan zeggen dat er geen twijfel over bestaat dat de Centrale Bank de nationale regulator van de geldcirculatie is, en het is ook de belangrijkste financiële regulator in het land.

Maar er zijn nuances. De Grondwet bepaalt dat de Centrale Bank haar beleid onafhankelijk voert, dat wil zeggen onafhankelijk is van de regering. Maar dit betekent niet dat het onafhankelijk is van de staat. Dit is een overheidsinstantie. Ons rechtssysteem is immers ook officieel onafhankelijk van de overheid. Daarom is de Centrale Bank, als onafhankelijk orgaan, toch een staatsregulerend orgaan en moet zij taken uitvoeren die noodzakelijk zijn voor de ontwikkeling van onze economie. Daartoe is het noodzakelijk de Centrale Bank te betrekken bij de strategische planning. De klassiekers van de monetaire circulatie bepalen dat het belangrijkste doel van de monetaire autoriteiten, dat wil zeggen de Centrale Bank, moet zijn om voorwaarden te creëren voor het maximaliseren van investeringen. Dit is wat het banksysteem zou moeten doen-maximaliseren van investeringen. Want hoe meer investeringen, hoe meer productie, hoe hoger het technische niveau, hoe lager de kosten en lager de inflatie, hoe stabieler de economie. De macro-economische stabilisatie in de moderne economie kan alleen worden bereikt op basis van versnelde wetenschappelijke en technologische vooruitgang. Pogingen om de inflatie (zo ' n modewoord), die de Centrale Bank de afgelopen 10 jaar praktisch imiteert, aan te pakken door de belangrijkste rente te manipuleren tegen de achtergrond van een vrij zwevende roebelkoers, zijn kortzichtig, primitief en contraproductief. Meestal worden deze maatregelen door het IMF aanbevolen voor onderontwikkelde landen die niet weten hoe ze zelf moeten denken.

Wat is het doel van inflatie in de praktijk? Dit is een uiterst primitieve en intern tegenstrijdige reeks maatregelen, waarvan het gebruik de economie in een stagflatieval drijft. De Centrale Bank heeft de roebel in het vrije verkeer gebracht, wat absurd is vanuit het oogpunt van inflatiebestrijding in een open economie, waar de wisselkoers rechtstreeks van invloed is op de prijzen. En we zien hoe de devaluatie van de roebel periodiek de prijzen versnelt. Bovendien reduceerden ze het monetaire beleid tot slechts één absoluut primitief instrument — manipulatie van de belangrijkste rente. Maar de belangrijkste rente is het percentage waartegen de Centrale Bank geld uitgeeft aan de economie en geld opneemt uit de economie. Zijn pogingen om de inflatie te onderdrukken door de rente te verhogen kunnen in de moderne economie niet slagen, want hoe hoger de rente, hoe minder leningen, hoe minder investeringen, hoe lager het technische niveau en het concurrentievermogen. De vermindering van de laatste houdt de devaluatie van de roebel in 3-4 jaar in, nadat ze de rente zogenaamd opblazen om de inflatie te bestrijden. Door de roebel Wisselkoers vrij te laten zweven, gaven ze hem in feite aan valutaspeculanten.

Amerikanen houden echt van dit beleid, dus ze prijzen het leiderschap van onze Centrale Bank en het Ministerie van Financiën op alle mogelijke manieren. Immers, wat is belangrijk voor hen? Zodat alles gebonden is aan de dollar, zodat de roebel een "junk" valuta is die onstabiel is. En dit is een paradox, want het aantal deviezenreserves van de Russische Federatie is de laatste tijd 3 keer meer dan de roebel geldhoeveelheid! Dit betekent dat de Centrale Bank de wisselkoers op elk niveau kan stabiliseren. Maar hij heeft het niet gedaan.

En wie zijn de speculanten aan wie de Centrale Bank eigenlijk de roebel naar de genade gooide? De belangrijkste speculanten zijn Amerikaanse hedgefondsen, die eigenlijk de roebel Wisselkoers vormen door het manipuleren van de markt. En de Centrale Bank merkt dit niet op, of liever gezegd, alsof ze het niet merkt. Om ze op de valutamarkt te houden door de rente te verhogen, doodt de centrale Bank krediet en maakt onze economie afhankelijk van buitenlandse kredietbronnen, en het monetaire financiële systeem afhankelijk van de belangen van speculanten. Dat is in wiens belang de Centrale Bank werkt, zich verschuilen achter modewoorden als "inflatie targeting", die de afgelopen jaren op schandelijke wijze heeft gefaald vanuit het oogpunt van de reële prijsdynamiek. Dus we hebben het zwakste punt van het hele nationale veiligheidssysteem in het algemeen — Dit is de Centrale Bank. Zijn leiderschap wordt getroffen door de cognitieve wapens van de vijand, met andere woorden, zombified door hen. In feite doen onze monetaire autoriteiten wat de vijand nodig heeft.

Trouwens, ik heb wiskundig en chronologisch bewezen dat de eerste golf van sancties tegen Rusland pas werd opgelegd nadat de Centrale Bank de grond hiervoor had voorbereid, namelijk dat ze de roebel vrij liet zweven en aankondigde dat ze de rente zou verhogen als de inflatie in het land begon. Zodra de Centrale Bank overging tot dit vreemde beleid, legden de Amerikanen onmiddellijk sancties op. Hun speculanten zorgden voor de ineenstorting van de roebel Wisselkoers, dit veroorzaakte een inflatoire golf, en de Centrale Bank, in opdracht van het IMF, verhoogde de rente, die onze economie volledig verlamd. De cumulatieve schade van dit beleid heeft al 50 biljoen roebel aan niet-geproduceerde producten en ongeveer 20 biljoen roebel aan onontwikkelde Investeringen bereikt. Nu moeten we toevoegen aan deze $ 300 miljard geïnvesteerd in buitenlandse activa die vandaag bevroren zijn-dat is de schade voor jou.

Daarom, wanneer we het hebben over de nationalisatie van de Centrale Bank, hebben we het niet over formeel nationaliseren (het is al genationaliseerd), maar over het in overeenstemming brengen met nationale belangen. Nu is zijn beleid in strijd met de nationale belangen. En er is hier geen samenzwering. We zien in wiens belang een dergelijk beleid wordt gevoerd. De centrale bank verhoogde de rente tot 20 procent, waardoor bankiers een dominante positie in de economie kregen. Met de duurste en schaarse hulpbron, geld, bepalen ze welke onderneming zal overleven, en welke onderneming zal sterven, failliet gaan, enzovoort. Een verhoging van de rente maakt de hele Russische economie gegijzeld door een stel bankiers. Dit is de eerste. Ten tweede liet het management van de Centrale Bank een nieuwe ineenstorting van de roebel Wisselkoers toe en sloot de valutawissel. Als gevolg hiervan zijn banken vandaag de belangrijkste valutaspeculanten geworden: ze kopen valuta voor ongeveer 90 roebel per dollar en verkopen het voor 125. Het verschil is daarmee een meevaller.

- Maar waarom voert de Centrale Bank van de Russische Federatie, naar uw mening, een beleid in het belang van de vijand?

- Zoals ik al zei, hij doet het op aanbeveling van het Internationaal Monetair Fonds. Maar zijn belangen worden ook gedeeld door onze grote banken, die objectief van dit beleid houden, evenals onze monetaire en financiële structuren, die ook betrokken zijn bij het manipuleren van de roebel Wisselkoers. Daarom wordt er een invloedrijke lobby gevormd rond dit beleid, die dit beleid steunt op basis van zijn privébelangen. Deze belangen druisen in tegen de belangen van het land, ze zijn er rechtstreeks tegenin. En als je kijkt naar wat de Centrale Bank vandaag doet, twijfel ik er niet aan dat zij haar beleid van eigenlijk toegeven aan de vijand voortzet. Het ondermijnt de macro-economische stabiliteit door internationale speculanten in staat te stellen de roebel Wisselkoers te manipuleren en heeft geen controle over de valutapositie van banken die valutaspeculanten zijn geworden, hoewel de Centrale Bank gemakkelijk banken van de valutamarkt kan terugtrekken door hun valutapositie vast te stellen en banken te verbieden valuta te kopen. Ten tweede heeft de Centrale Bank, door de rente te verhogen, investeringen in de ontwikkeling van de Russische economie, die op dit moment heel hard nodig zijn, in de eerste plaats voor importvervanging en voor het herstel van de economische soevereiniteit, gedood, terwijl ons leiderschap zegt dat we niet bang moeten zijn voor sancties, omdat ze voorwaarden scheppen voor economische groei, voor importvervanging.…

Kijk, ongeveer een derde van de invoer van de EU heeft onze markt verlaten. Dit zijn enorme mogelijkheden voor importvervanging. Als we ervan uitgaan dat onze ondernemingen deze markten gaan verkennen, zullen we ons met 15 procent per jaar ontwikkelen. Maar dit vereist leningen. Importvervanging kan niet plaatsvinden zonder leningen. We hebben leningen nodig voor het creëren van productiefaciliteiten, voor de ontwikkeling van nieuwe technologieën en voor het laden van lege productiefaciliteiten. We hebben een dergelijke strategie van geavanceerde ontwikkeling al lang ontwikkeld aan de Academie van Wetenschappen, en we bevorderen het. Maar, helaas, vanuit ons oogpunt, heeft het krankzinnige beleid van de Centrale Bank heel specifieke invloedrijke structuren die het leuk vinden en die het ondersteunen. Daarom is dit beleid zo stabiel.

"Commerciële banken maken 40 procent winst op valutaspeculatie. Ik kocht het voor 90 roebel per dollar, verkocht het voor 125. 35 roebel-niets is eenvoudig"
"Commerciële banken ontvangen 40 procent winst op valutaspeculatie. Gekocht voor 90 roebel voor een dollar — verkocht voor 125. 35 roebel-niets is eenvoudig"
Foto:"BUSINESS Online"
"Je kunt de roebel in drie dagen stabiliseren"
- Sergej Joerjevitsj, als dit geen samenzwering is, waarom blijft de Centrale Bank dan zo ' n beleid voeren? Alleen gebaseerd op de belangen van lobbyisten?

- Aan wie de oorlog, en aan wie de moeder is inheems. Commerciële banken maken 40 procent winst op valutaspeculatie. Gekocht voor 90 roebel voor een dollar — verkocht voor 125. 35 roebel-niets is gemakkelijk! Als gevolg daarvan hebben we inflatie, import wordt duurder, iedereen ziet dit gekke tarief. De prijzen voor alle goederen stijgen, maar banken maken superwinsten.

Eens te meer heeft zich een zeer invloedrijke lobby rond dit beleid ontwikkeld, en het falen van een dergelijke strategie voor veel mensen toegeven betekent in feite hun incompetentie en zelfs sabotage toegeven. Speculanten met grote banken zijn zeer invloedrijke structuren in ons land die de besluitvorming beïnvloeden.

- Nou, bereikt deze informatie niet de eerste persoon, is het Geblokkeerd?

Toen ik adviseur was, bracht ik deze informatie mee.

Hebben ze naar je geluisterd?

- Ja, Er waren discussies, ze bespraken het in de Economische Raad, daarna werd het gesloten om ambtenaren niet te ergeren. Ik wil er nu geen commentaar op geven. We zien vandaag dat als we het monetaire beleid niet veranderen, het voor ons gewoon onmogelijk zal zijn om in deze hybride oorlog te overleven. We moeten economische sancties nu afweren met een ernstige toename van de binnenlandse productie. Er zijn productiefaciliteiten hiervoor, mensen, grondstoffen, hersenen, maar er is geen geld. Op dit moment is het eenvoudigste wat de staat mensen kan geven geld.

En wat voelt u? Is er enig begrip aan de top?

- Ik denk dat je deze vraag rechtstreeks aan hen moet richten.

- Maar veel mensen noemen je bijna de nummer 1 persoon in de huidige situatie - een publiek figuur die Rusland kan redden.

- Bedankt voor deze beoordeling. Ik doe mijn best.

- Ik wil alleen maar begrijpen: als er eerder geen profeet in zijn thuisland was, is hij dan nu verschenen? En is dit zo ' n tijdelijke situatie met de Centrale Bank?

- Het is zo lang geleden, ik zou zeggen, voor 30 jaar. Als we een gezond monetair beleid hadden gevoerd in overeenstemming met de vereisten van het nieuwe mondiale economische systeem, het integrale systeem, zouden we ons net als China hebben ontwikkeld - met 10 procent per jaar. Er waren zulke mogelijkheden. En deze 30 jaar zijn we eigenlijk tijd aan het markeren. Dus het is niet eens een kwestie van luisteren of niet, we moeten gewoon objectief kijken en zien hoe China, India en hoe we ons ontwikkelen. Wat weerhield ons ervan om ons op dezelfde manier te ontwikkelen?

Bovendien is het beheerssysteem van de nieuwe economische wereldorde, dat ik in mijn boeken beschrijf, universeel. Ze werkte succesvol in Japan totdat de Amerikanen de Japanse economische groei braken. En zelfs in Ethiopië, waar ze ook dit managementmodel begonnen te vormen (en meerdere malen groei bereikten). Dat wil zeggen, dit universele beheersmodel van de moderne economie, gericht op de groei van het welzijn van de bevolking door middel van investeringen op een nieuwe technologische manier, moet worden geïmplementeerd. Tegelijkertijd betekent een doelgericht gebruik van geld natuurlijk een grote verantwoordelijkheid. Geld uit een helikopter gooien is niet ons ding.

- Niet op onze manier.

- We hebben het over een gerichte kredietkwestie gebaseerd op moderne digitale tools met een streng controlesysteem gericht op investeringen in nieuwe technologieën. We weten hoe we dit moeten doen, hoe we de menselijke factor kunnen minimaliseren door de introductie van digitale technologieën, waaronder de digitale roebel. Maar het is niet winstgevend voor degenen die zich nog steeds houden aan de vorige strategieën. Een geldkoe werd gemaakt uit Rusland, $ 100 miljard werd gezogen uit het buitenland naar offshore bedrijven. Maar nu hebben de Amerikanen offshoring voor ons gesloten. Er is echt een kans, die moeten we gebruiken.

Wat zou je mensen adviseren? Nu is de belangrijkste vraag in Internet zoekmachines is waar om geld te investeren in het tijdperk van turbulentie. Wat moeten mensen doen?

- Ten eerste, maak geen plotselinge bewegingen, zou ik zeggen. In ieder geval, dat is zeker niet nodig-om te lopen voor dollars of euro ' s. Omdat we niet weten wat er met deze valuta ' s gaat gebeuren. Als ons systeem is losgekoppeld van het westerse systeem, dan kunnen onze banken nergens effectief dollars en euro ' s investeren, behalve in valutaspeculatie. Maar ik hoop dat onze autoriteiten de valutamarkt nog steeds zullen beteugelen.

In deze context bleek wat de banken deden door de rente op deposito ' s in vreemde valuta sterk te verhogen een duidelijke overkill te zijn, die paniek aanwakkerde. Ik denk dat de roebel zal stabiliseren als, natuurlijk, speculanten worden verwijderd van de valutamarkt en de munt wordt alleen verkocht aan importeurs en mensen die geld overmaken naar het buitenland binnen redelijke grenzen aan familieleden of gaan op zakenreis volgens de regelgeving. De rest is om de kanalen van valuta lekkage te blokkeren. Dan zal de instroom van valuta weer normaliseren.

Weet je, we hebben een zeer positieve handelsbalans. Een verplichte verkoop van 80 procent van de buitenlandse valuta inkomsten is ingevoerd. Als u deze inkomsten op de beurs verkoopt, zal het volume van de valuta meer zijn dan importeurs nodig hebben. We zullen een overschot aan valuta hebben. Dit betekent dat de roebel Wisselkoers zal versterken, dat wil zeggen dat het zal terugkeren naar de oude indicatoren — 80 of zelfs 70 roebel per dollar. Maar totdat de Centrale Bank speculanten van de markt verwijdert en commerciële banken toestaat om zo te worden, zal de roebel Wisselkoers niet stabiliseren. Dus, helaas, de monetaire autoriteiten zijn nog niet bij zinnen gekomen en zijn nog niet begonnen met het juiste beleid van macro-economische stabilisatie te implementeren, ik kan geen advies geven, behalve hoe te investeren in goud indien mogelijk (vooral omdat de regering BTW van goud heeft verwijderd). Er zijn geen andere echte activa en geen veilige haven.

Dus, om goud te kopen?

- Koop de meest noodzakelijke dingen. Of investeren in onroerend goed, in iets betrouwbaars. Wat betreft de investeringen in dollars en euro ' s... die zijn al niet meer een valuta voor ons. Dit is niet langer een munt, maar een aantal verplichtingen van andere landen die al dan niet kunnen worden nagekomen. We moeten dus naar andere mogelijkheden zoeken. Maar Ik wil nogmaals benadrukken dat we met een goed beleid de roebel heel snel kunnen stabiliseren en zelfs zijn koopkracht kunnen teruggeven.

En in welk perspectief?

- Het kan zelfs morgen, Weet je? De regering van Primakov en Gerasjtsjenko deed het in een week.

Is de regering daartoe in staat?

- Natuurlijk kan dat. Om dit te doen, in het algemeen, is het noodzakelijk om twee beslissingen te nemen: de valutapositie van commerciële banken vast te stellen en normen voor de verkoop van valuta voor niet-handelstransacties in te voeren, om de vrij converteerbare valutamarkt alleen voor handelstransacties te behouden. Dat is alles. U kunt het in 15 minuten schrijven en binnen een dag aankondigen, binnen drie dagen invoeren — en de roebel zal stabiliseren.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sergej Joerjevitsj Glazyev is een Russische econoom en politicus. Doctor in de economie, Professor, academicus van de Russische Academie van Wetenschappen (sinds 2008), waarnemend lid van de Raad (Minister) op de belangrijkste gebieden van integratie en macro-economie van de Euraziatische Economische Commissie.

Adviseur van de President van de Russische Federatie (30 juli 2012 – 9 oktober 2019) inzake de coördinatie van de activiteiten van de federale uitvoerende autoriteiten gericht op de ontwikkeling van Euraziatische integratie binnen de douane-unie en de gemeenschappelijke economische ruimte van de Russische Federatie, De Republiek Belarus en de Republiek Kazachstan. Lid van de Nationale Academie van Wetenschappen van Oekraïne (2009-2016).

Lid van de nationale financiële Raad van de Bank of Russia. Voormalig Minister van Buitenlandse Economische Betrekkingen van Rusland, afgevaardigde van de Doema van de I, III, IV convocaties. Een van de leiders van het electorale blok van de Rodina partij (2003-2004). Kandidaat voor het presidentschap van de Russische Federatie (2004). Voormalig plaatsvervangend secretaris-generaal EurAsEC.

Hij werd geboren op 1 januari 1961 in Zaporozhye, waar hij studeerde aan de middelbare school nr. 31 in 1978.

Volgens Glazyev is zijn vader Russisch, zijn moeder Oekraïens. Jongere zus-Yulia Sinelina (1972-2013) — socioloog van religie, Doctor in de sociologische Wetenschappen, senior onderzoeker, hoofd van de sociologie van religie Sector van het Instituut voor Socio-politieke Studies van de Russische Academie van Wetenschappen.

Hij studeerde in dezelfde klasse bij de toekomstige Oekraïense politicus en volksvertegenwoordiger van de I–II, IV, VI–IX convocaties Sergej Sobolev.

In 1978 ging hij naar de Lomonosov Moscow State University aan de faculteit scheikunde. Een jaar later stapte hij over naar de Faculteit Economie, waar zijn klasgenoot het toekomstige hoofd werd van het secretariaat van de voorzitters van de regering van de Russische Federatie Michail Kasjanov en Michail Fradkov Michail Sinelin (echtgenoot van Glazyev ' s zus. In 1983 studeerde hij af aan de Staatsuniversiteit van Moskou, met een diploma met onderscheiding in de specialiteit "economische cybernetica").

In 1987-1991 was hij lid van een informele groep van voornamelijk jonge economen (Egor Gaidar, Alexei Kudrin, Sergei Ignatiev, Anatoly Chubais, enz.) die seminaries organiseerde waarin maatregelen ter hervorming van de Sovjeteconomie werden besproken. Samen met de deelnemers aan de seminars bezocht hij Chili in 1991, waar hij een cursus volgde aan het Instituut voor vrijheid en ontwikkeling over de ervaringen met Chileense economische hervormingen.

In November 1991, op voorstel van de seminardeelnemer Peter Avena, benoemd tot voorzitter van de Commissie voor Buitenlandse Economische Betrekkingen bij het Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken van de RSFSR, hij nam de post van zijn eerste plaatsvervanger.

1991-1992 - eerste vicevoorzitter van het Comité voor Buitenlandse Economische Betrekkingen van de Russische Federatie, eerste onderminister van Buitenlandse Economische Betrekkingen van de Russische Federatie.

1992-1993-Minister van Buitenlandse Economische Betrekkingen van de Russische Federatie.

1994-1995-afgevaardigde van de Doema van de eerste oproeping, verkozen op de lijst van de Democratische Partij van Rusland, voorzitter van de Commissie voor Economische Politiek van de Doema. In de eerste helft van 1995 was hij voorzitter van de DPR-fractie in de Doema.

In 1995 ging hij naar de Doema verkiezingen van de tweede oproeping op de kieslijst van het Congres van de Russische Gemeenschappen (hij nam de derde plaats op de federale lijst), maar deze organisatie wist de vijf procent barrière niet te overwinnen.

Op 14 augustus 1996 werd Alexander Lebed, secretaris van de Veiligheidsraad van de Russische Federatie, benoemd tot hoofd van de afdeling Economische veiligheid van het personeel van de Veiligheidsraad. Na de vrijlating van Lebed als secretaris van de Veiligheidsraad nam Glazyev ontslag.

1996-1999-hoofd van de afdeling Informatie en analyse van het personeel van de Federatieraad van de Russische Federatie.

2000-2003-afgevaardigde van de Doema van de III-oproeping op de lijst van de Communistische Partij, hoewel hij geen lid was van de partij zelf; voorzitter van de Commissie economisch beleid en ondernemerschap. Van November 2002 tot het einde van het werk van de Doema van de III oproeping werkte hij in het Comité voor kredietorganisaties en financiële markten van de Doema.

In 2002 stelde hij zich verkiesbaar als gouverneur van het gebied van Krasnojarsk, ontving 21,44% van de stemmen van de deelnemende kiezers en werd de derde in de uitslag.

Bij de verkiezingen voor de Doema van de IV convocatie organiseerde en leidde hij het electorale blok "People' s Patriotic Union "Rodina", die volgens officiële gegevens de steun kreeg van 9,1% van de kiezers, en vormde een factie met dezelfde naam in de Doema. Tegelijkertijd werd hij verkozen tot afgevaardigde van de Doema in het Podolsk district nr. 113, waar hij een overtuigende overwinning behaalde.

2004-2007-afgevaardigde van de Doema van de IV-oproeping, lid van het Comité gezondheidsbescherming, lid van het Comité begroting en belastingen.

In 2004 nam hij als onafhankelijke kandidaat deel aan de presidentsverkiezingen van Rusland. Begin 2004 ontstonden meningsverschillen in de leiding van de Rodina factie. Glazyev moest de post van het hoofd van de factie verlaten. Bij de presidentsverkiezingen van maart 2004 stemde 4,1% van de deelnemende kiezers Voor Glazyev, wat het derde resultaat was.

In November 2008 werd hij benoemd tot plaatsvervangend secretaris-generaal van de Euraziatische Economische Gemeenschap (EurAsEC) en op 4 februari 2009 werd hij benoemd tot uitvoerend secretaris van de Commissie van de douane-unie van de Republiek Belarus, De Republiek Kazachstan en de Russische Federatie. Onder zijn leiding werd sinds 1 juli 2011 de overdracht van douane -, sanitaire, veterinaire, fytosanitaire quarantainecontroles en transportcontrole door de staat van de Russisch-Wit-Russische en Russisch-Kazachse grenzen naar de buitengrens van de douane-unie uitgevoerd. De uitvoering van deze en andere taken maakte het mogelijk om vanaf 1 januari 2012 over te stappen op de agenda van verdieping van de integratie — de vorming van één Economische Ruimte.

Op 30 juli 2012 werd hij benoemd tot adviseur van de President van de Russische Federatie. Hij is de vertegenwoordiger van de President van de Russische Federatie in de nationale financiële Raad.

Op 9 februari 2012 werd hij officieel geregistreerd als een volmacht van de presidentskandidaat van de Russische Federatie, Eerste Minister van de Russische Federatie Vladimir Poetin.

Op 9 oktober 2019 werd hij ontheven van de functie van adviseur van de President.

Op 17 maart 2014, de dag na het referendum over de status van de Krim, werden Amerikaanse sancties opgelegd aan Glazyev. Al snel werd hij opgenomen in de sanctielijst van de Europese Unie, Canada, Australië en Zwitserland, en in September 2015 werd hij opgenomen in de sanctielijst van Oekraïne. Volgens de Volksgouverneur van Donbass Pavel Gubarev belde Glazyev hem op 5 maart 2014 op zijn mobiele telefoon (nadat Gubarev en zijn aanhangers het gebouw van het staatsbestuur van Donetsk voor de tweede keer hadden bezet) en betuigde hij zijn steun aan hem.

In 2000 werd hij verkozen tot corresponderend lid van de Russische Academie van Wetenschappen, in 2008 - academicus van de Russische Academie van Wetenschappen. Voorzitter van de Wetenschappelijke Raad van de Russische Academie van Wetenschappen over complexe problemen van Euraziatische Economische Integratie, modernisering, concurrentievermogen en duurzame ontwikkeling.

Hij is een expert op het Economisch Forum van Moskou.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Putin, 31 maart 2022, mbt roebels voor gas

(machine vertaling moon of Alabama)

Citaat:

Today I have signed an Executive Order that establishes the rules for trade in Russian natural gas with so-called unfriendly states. We offer counterparties from such countries a clear and transparent scheme. To purchase Russian natural gas, they must open ruble accounts in Russian banks. It is from these accounts that payment will be made for gas delivered starting tomorrow, from April 1 of this year.If such payments are not made, we will consider it a failure to fulfill obligations on the part of buyers – with all the ensuing consequences. No one sells anything to us for free, and we’re not going to do charity either. That is, existing contracts will be stopped.

I would like to stress once again that in a situation where the financial system of Western countries is used as a weapon, when companies from these states refuse to fulfill contracts with Russian banks, enterprises, individuals, when assets in dollars and euros are frozen, it makes no sense to use the currencies of these countries.

In fact, what’s going on, what’s already happened? We supplied European consumers with our resources, in this case gas, and they received it, paid us in euros, which they then froze themselves. In this regard, there is every reason to believe that we have supplied part of the gas supplied to Europe virtually free of charge.

This, of course, cannot continue. Moreover, in the case of further gas supplies and their payment under the traditional scheme, new financial revenues in euros or dollars can also be blocked. Such a development of the situation is quite expected, especially since some politicians in the West talk about it, speak publicly. Moreover, it is in this vein that the heads of government of the EU countries speak. The risks of the current state of affairs are, of course, unacceptable for us.

And if you look at the issue as a whole, the transfer of payments for the supply of Russian gas to Russian rubles is an important step towards strengthening our financial and economic sovereignty. We will continue to consistently and systematically move in this direction within the framework of the long-term plan, to increase the share of settlements in foreign trade in the national currency and the currencies of those countries that act as reliable partners.

By the way, you have probably heard that many traditional suppliers of energy resources to the world market are also talking about diversifying settlement currencies.

Let me repeat once again: Russia values its business reputation. We comply with and will continue to comply with our obligations under all contracts, including gas contracts, and we will continue to supply gas in the established volumes, I want to emphasise this, and at the prices specified in the existing long-term contracts.

I emphasize that these prices are several times lower than the current quotes on the spot market. What does that mean? Simply put, Russian gas is cheaper energy, heat, light in the homes of Europeans, an affordable cost of fertilizers for European farmers, and therefore, food in the end. Finally, this is the competitiveness of European enterprises, and hence the salaries of Europeans, citizens of European countries.

However, judging by the statements of some politicians, they are ready to neglect the interests of their citizens, if only to please their overseas master, the suzerain. Some kind of populism inside out: people are encouraged to eat less, dress warmer to save on heating, refuse to travel – and all this supposedly for the benefit of those people from whom these voluntary deprivations are demanded for the sake of abstract North Atlantic solidarity.

Such dubious approaches and actions in economic, energy, food policy on the part of Western countries have been observed for more than a year.

By the way, the food crisis will be followed by another inevitable, another wave of migration, including primarily to European countries.

Nevertheless, step by step, decisions are being made that push the world economy to a crisis, lead to the severance of production and logistics ties, lead to an increase in global inflation and increased inequality, to a decrease in the well-being of millions of people, and in the poorest countries – I have already said this – to the tragedy of mass starvation.

Naturally, the question arises: who is responsible for this? Who will be responsible for this?

It is clear that the United States will again try to solve its problems – namely its own problems – at someone else’s expense, including launching a new wave of emissions and budget deficits. It has already grown exorbitantly, and in the leading European economies the record is broken by inflation, and in the United States. And at the same time, they are trying to blame their mistakes in economic policy on us, they are always looking for someone to blame. It’s pretty obvious, we’re seeing it.

I would like to add that the United States will try to capitalize on the current global instability, as it did during the First and Second World Wars, during its aggressions against Yugoslavia, Iraq, Syria and so on. Global markets are falling, and the value of shares of companies of the American military-industrial complex is only growing. Capital is flowing into the U.S., depriving other regions of the world of development resources.

As a result, Europeans are not only forced to fork out, but also, in fact, with their own hands to undermine the competitiveness of European companies, to remove them from the global market. For Europe, this means large-scale de-industrialization and the loss of millions of jobs, and against the background of rising prices for food, gasoline, electricity, housing and communal services, there is also a radical decline in the standard of living of citizens.

This is the price that the ruling Western elites offer to pay to people, as I have already said, for their ambitions and short-sighted actions both in politics and in the economy, including for the economic war that they are trying to unleash against Russia, or, one might say, have already unleashed.

It didn’t start now, it didn’t start in the last month. Illegitimate sanctions and restrictions have been imposed against our country constantly, for many years. Their goal is to restrain Russia’s development, undermine our sovereignty, and weaken our potential in production, in finance, in technology.

Let me repeat that all these sanctions were prepared in advance, they would have been introduced in any case, I want to emphasise this. In fact, these are sanctions for our right to freedom, for the right to be independent, for the right to be Russia. For the fact that we do not want to dance to someone else’s tune, to sacrifice our national interests and traditional values.

The collective West is not going to abandon the policy of economic pressure on Russia. Moreover, of course, he will look for new reasons for sanctions, namely pretexts. Therefore, it is not worth counting on changing these approaches, at least in the near future.

In this regard, I would like to ask the Government, the Bank of Russia and the regions to ensure that the sanctions pressure on our country, as it was in previous decades, will continue when organising systematic work to develop the economy and its individual sectors. That is the objective reality.

What do I consider important to note here and I ask you to draw the attention of all colleagues to this? Considering the situation in each specific industry, sphere, it is necessary to focus not only on overcoming the challenges of the current year, but also to build long-term development plans based on the internal capabilities of our economy, Russian science and education system. We must rely primarily on private business initiative and healthy competition, strive to maximize the load of our enterprises, create new competencies and increase Russia’s global competitiveness as a whole.

At the same time, the key indicators of the effectiveness of economic policy for us should be the preservation and creation of jobs, the reduction of poverty and inequality, improving the quality of people’s lives, the availability of goods and services. It is with these requirements in mind that we discussed the situation in the construction and housing sector last week.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Infowarrior (Bericht 9930597)

Tja, dan leest ge enkel zeer selectief. Enkel hln, vrt news, hbvl en gva zijn geen propaganda? Zoals ik al schreef, verblind door de haat.

vrt
vtm
nos
hbvl
hln
de morgen
de tijd
de telegraaf
AD
CNN
BBC
Msnbc
Fox news
Tass
Reuters
rt.com
sky news
Al Jazeera
New York Times
Washington post
Bloomberg media
UN news
Red cross international
Amnesty International

Citaat:

VALLETTA, Malta (AP) — Pope Francis said Saturday he was considering a possible visit to the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv and blasted the leader who launched a “savage” war, delivering his most pointed denunciation yet of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

In his remarks in Malta, Francis didn’t cite President Vladimir Putin by name, but the reference was clear when he said “some potentate” had unleashed the threat of nuclear war on the world in an “infantile and destructive aggression.”

insinuaties dat bovenstaande bronnen zuivere gestuurde propagandakanalen zijn zijn zo ridicuul en kinderlijk gemekker dat ik er geen tijd meer in steek in deze AD HOMINEM truken

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Bach (Bericht 9932599)

(machine vertaling moon of Alabama)

Dit is de machinevertaling naar het nederlands:

Vandaag heb ik een uitvoerend besluit ondertekend dat de regels vaststelt voor de handel in Russisch aardgas met zogenaamde onvriendelijke Staten. Wij bieden tegenpartijen uit dergelijke landen een duidelijk en transparant schema. Om Russisch aardgas te kopen, moeten ze roebelrekeningen openen bij Russische banken. Het is vanuit deze rekeningen dat de betaling zal worden gedaan voor gas geleverd vanaf morgen, vanaf 1 April van dit jaar. Als dergelijke betalingen niet worden gedaan, beschouwen wij het als een niet–nakoming van verplichtingen van de kant van de kopers, met alle gevolgen van dien. Niemand verkoopt ons iets gratis, en we gaan ook geen liefdadigheid doen. Dat wil zeggen, bestaande contracten zullen worden stopgezet. Ik wil nogmaals benadrukken dat in een situatie waarin het financiële systeem van westerse landen als wapen wordt gebruikt, wanneer bedrijven uit deze landen weigeren contracten met Russische banken, ondernemingen, particulieren na te komen, wanneer activa in dollars en euro's worden bevroren, het geen zin heeft om de valuta's van deze landen te gebruiken. In feite, wat is er aan de hand, wat is er al gebeurd? Wij hebben de Europese consumenten van onze middelen voorzien, in dit geval gas, en zij hebben het ontvangen, ons betaald in EURO's, die zij vervolgens zelf hebben ingevroren. In dit verband is er alle reden om aan te nemen dat wij een deel van het gas dat aan Europa wordt geleverd vrijwel gratis hebben geleverd. Dit kan natuurlijk niet zo doorgaan. Bovendien kunnen in het geval van verdere gasleveringen en de betaling daarvan in het kader van de traditionele regeling ook nieuwe financiële inkomsten in EURO's of dollars worden geblokkeerd. Een dergelijke ontwikkeling van de situatie wordt verwacht, vooral omdat sommige politici in het Westen erover praten, in het openbaar spreken. Bovendien spreken de regeringsleiders van de EU-landen in deze geest. De risico's van de huidige stand van zaken zijn voor ons natuurlijk onaanvaardbaar. En als je naar de kwestie als geheel kijkt, is de overdracht van betalingen voor de levering van Russisch gas aan Russische roebels een belangrijke stap in de richting van versterking van onze financiële en economische soevereiniteit. We zullen in het kader van het langetermijnplan consequent en systematisch in deze richting blijven werken om het aandeel van nederzettingen in de buitenlandse handel te vergroten in de nationale munt en de valuta's van de landen die als betrouwbare partners optreden. Trouwens, je hebt waarschijnlijk gehoord dat veel traditionele leveranciers van energiebronnen aan de wereldmarkt ook praten over diversificatie van nederzettingvaluta's. Ik herhaal nogmaals: Rusland hecht waarde aan zijn zakelijke reputatie. Wij houden ons aan onze verplichtingen uit hoofde van alle contracten, met inbegrip van gascontracten, en wij zullen doorgaan met het leveren van gas in de vastgestelde hoeveelheden, Ik wil dit benadrukken, en tegen de prijzen die in de bestaande langetermijncontracten zijn vastgelegd. Ik benadruk dat deze prijzen meerdere malen lager zijn dan de huidige koersen op de spotmarkt. Wat betekent dat? Simpel gezegd, Russisch gas is goedkopere energie, warmte, licht in de huizen van de Europeanen, een betaalbare kosten van meststoffen voor de Europese boeren, en dus, voedsel op het einde. Tot slot gaat het om het concurrentievermogen van Europese ondernemingen, en dus om de salarissen van Europeanen, burgers van Europese landen. Echter, afgaande op de verklaringen van sommige politici, zijn ze bereid om de belangen van hun burgers te verwaarlozen, al was het maar om hun overzeese meester, de suzerain, te behagen. Een soort populisme binnenstebuiten: mensen worden aangemoedigd om minder te eten, warmer te kleden om te besparen op verwarming, weigeren te reizen – en dit alles zogenaamd ten behoeve van die mensen van wie deze vrijwillige ontberingen worden geëist omwille van abstracte Noord-Atlantische solidariteit. Dergelijke dubieuze benaderingen en acties in het economisch, energie-en voedselbeleid van de westerse landen worden al meer dan een jaar waargenomen. De voedselcrisis zal trouwens worden gevolgd door een andere onvermijdelijke migratiegolf, vooral naar Europese landen. Toch worden stap voor stap beslissingen genomen die de wereldeconomie in een crisis brengen, leiden tot het verbreken van productie-en logistieke banden, leiden tot een toename van de wereldwijde inflatie en toenemende ongelijkheid, tot een afname van het welzijn van miljoenen mensen, en in de armste landen – Ik heb dit al gezegd – tot de tragedie van de massale hongerdood. Natuurlijk rijst de vraag: Wie is hiervoor verantwoordelijk? Wie zal hiervoor verantwoordelijk zijn? Het is duidelijk dat de Verenigde Staten opnieuw zullen proberen hun eigen problemen op te lossen ten koste van iemand anders, met inbegrip van het lanceren van een nieuwe golf van emissies en begrotingstekorten. Het is al exorbitant gegroeid, en in de toonaangevende Europese economieën wordt het record verbroken door de inflatie, en in de Verenigde Staten. En tegelijkertijd proberen ze ons de schuld te geven van hun fouten in het economisch beleid, ze zijn altijd op zoek naar iemand om de schuld te geven. Het is vrij duidelijk, we zien het. Ik zou hieraan willen toevoegen dat de Verenigde Staten zullen proberen te profiteren van de huidige wereldwijde instabiliteit, zoals zij dat hebben gedaan tijdens de eerste en Tweede Wereldoorlog, tijdens hun agressie tegen Joegoslavië, Irak, Syrië, enzovoort. De mondiale markten dalen en de waarde van de aandelen van bedrijven van het Amerikaanse militair-industriële complex groeit alleen maar. Kapitaal stroomt naar de VS, waardoor andere regio's van de wereld van ontwikkelingsbronnen worden beroofd. Als gevolg daarvan worden de Europeanen niet alleen gedwongen om de handen uit de mouwen te steken, maar in feite ook met hun eigen handen om het concurrentievermogen van de Europese bedrijven te ondermijnen en hen van de wereldmarkt te verwijderen. Voor Europa betekent dit grootschalige de-ïndustrialisatie en het verlies van miljoenen banen, en tegen de achtergrond van stijgende prijzen voor voedsel, benzine, elektriciteit, huisvesting en gemeentelijke diensten, is er ook een radicale daling van de levensstandaard van de burgers. Dit is de prijs die de heersende westerse elites aan de mensen willen betalen, zoals ik al heb gezegd, voor hun ambities en kortzichtige acties, zowel in de politiek als in de economie, inclusief voor de economische oorlog die ze proberen te ontketenen tegen Rusland, of, zou je kunnen zeggen, al hebben ontketend. Het begon niet NU, Het begon niet in de afgelopen maand. Al vele jaren worden er onwettige sancties en beperkingen opgelegd aan ons land. Hun doel is de ontwikkeling van Rusland in te dammen, onze soevereiniteit te ondermijnen en ons potentieel op het gebied van productie, financiën en technologie te verzwakken. Ik herhaal dat al deze sancties van tevoren waren voorbereid, ze zouden hoe dan ook zijn ingevoerd, dat wil ik benadrukken. In feite zijn dit sancties voor ons recht op vrijheid, voor het recht om onafhankelijk te zijn, voor het recht om Rusland te zijn. Voor het feit dat we niet willen dansen op de melodie van iemand anders, om onze nationale belangen en traditionele waarden op te offeren. Het collectieve Westen zal het beleid van economische druk op Rusland niet opgeven. Bovendien zal zij natuurlijk op zoek gaan naar nieuwe redenen voor sancties, namelijk voorwendsels. Daarom is het niet de moeite waard erop te rekenen dat deze benaderingen, althans in de nabije toekomst, worden gewijzigd. In dit verband zou ik de regering, de Russische Bank en de regio's willen vragen ervoor te zorgen dat de sanctiedruk op ons land, zoals in de afgelopen decennia, zal worden voortgezet bij het organiseren van systematische activiteiten om de economie en de afzonderlijke sectoren te ontwikkelen. Dat is de objectieve realiteit. Wat vind ik belangrijk om hier op te merken en ik verzoek u de aandacht van alle collega's hierop te vestigen? Gezien de situatie in elke specifieke industrie, sfeer, is het noodzakelijk om zich niet alleen te concentreren op het overwinnen van de uitdagingen van het huidige jaar, maar ook om ontwikkelingsplannen op lange termijn op te bouwen op basis van de interne capaciteiten van onze economie, Russische wetenschap en onderwijs systeem. We moeten in de eerste plaats vertrouwen op het initiatief van het particuliere bedrijfsleven en gezonde concurrentie, ernaar streven de belasting van onze ondernemingen te maximaliseren, nieuwe competenties te creëren en het mondiale concurrentievermogen van Rusland als geheel te vergroten. Tegelijkertijd moeten de belangrijkste indicatoren voor de doeltreffendheid van het economisch beleid voor ons het behoud en het scheppen van banen zijn, de vermindering van armoede en ongelijkheid, de verbetering van de kwaliteit van het leven van mensen, de beschikbaarheid van goederen en diensten. Met deze eisen voor ogen hebben wij de situatie in de bouw-en woningbouwsector vorige week besproken.

Mededeling Min BuZ Russ. Fed.:

https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/1808143/
_{5 apr 2022}

Foreign Ministry statement regarding Twitter’s act of censorship

On April 5, the American social media company Twitter resorted to a blatant
act of censorship by concealing a post on the Russian Foreign Ministry’s
official account in English behind a warning that it violates the platform’s
rules. The post covered the main points of the Russian Defence Ministry’s
statement about the provocation in the Ukrainian town of Bucha and a link to
the full text of the statement. The material was marked as “offensive” and
the ability of Twitter users to share it has been drastically curtailed.

This is the first time such a restriction has been placed on the Foreign
Ministry’s verified account since it was created in 2011.

We regard this step as clear confirmation that Twitter as well as other US
tech companies are direct participants in an unprecedented act of information
aggression launched by Washington and its satellites, which is designed to
shape international public opinion, creating a vastly distorted picture of
events in Ukraine. Large-scale measures are being taken to conceal the
horrendous crimes committed by the Kiev regime that is steeped in Nazi
ideology. The fabrication of pretexts for ramping up political and sanctions
pressure on Russia and flooding Ukraine with an endless supply of weapons
continues unabated.

Before it was censored, the post was seen by over two million users, mainly
outside of Russia. Obviously, the widespread interest prompted Twitter
executives to resort to these unscrupulous methods.

We demand that Twitter immediately restore access to this post. There can
be no place for bias in the company’s content moderation in the future.
Otherwise, it may acquire a reputation as an accomplice to the Kiev regime’s
atrocities.

Interview met Lavrov, 11 april 2022

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation MFA Russia

Citaat:

Question: I would like to ask you about “strange” statements by European diplomats on the course of Russia’s military operation in Ukraine. EU diplomacy chief Josep Borrell said it must be won on the battlefield. This doesn’t really jibe with the EU’s status as a primarily political and economic organisation. German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier expressed regret over his earlier stance on the possibility of normal dialogue with Russia. So now he doesn’t think it’s possible. How is one supposed to talk with these people? How is one supposed to come to terms with them?

Sergey Lavrov: This is a major shift in the policy of the EU and the entire West under the leadership of the US (there is no doubt about that) that occurred after the start of our special military operation. Their current policy is rooted in bitterness and derangement (excuse the non-diplomatic word choice), though it’s not all about Ukraine but rather turning that country into a bridgehead from which Russia can finally be subjugated and subordinated to the global system built by the West even though the Cold War ended and the USSR and Warsaw Treaty disappeared. The West was moving closer to our borders all the time despite its promises not to expand NATO, statements to the effect that we were no longer adversaries and many other things. Our special military operation is designed to put an end to NATO’s unlimited expansion and to keep the US and other NATO countries from achieving total domination in the world arena. They are building this system based on “rules” which they just now started going on about, despite violating international law in the crudest manner in the process. They devise these rules on a case-by-case basis. It is fine to recognise independence in Kosovo without a referendum but not in Crimea even after a referendum that was monitored by hundreds of unbiased foreigners.

A threat to US security was detected in Iraq (10,000 km away from the US). They bombed it but didn’t locate the threat and didn’t even apologise. They are cultivating neo-Nazis and ultra-radicals on our borders. The Pentagon is setting up dozens of laboratories conducting experiments to develop biological weapons. The documents found there leave no doubt about this. But we are not allowed to respond to a threat on our borders, as opposed to across the ocean. That’s the message.

President Vladimir Putin explained in detail the reasons for the decision on the special military operation. These include eight years of sabotage of the Minsk agreements accompanied by the daily bombing of Donbass; the flooding of Ukraine with Western weapons; and the sending of instructors that trained the most extremist units that were later sent to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. They formed the backbone of the groups that are now resisting our operation to demilitarise and denazify Ukraine. Western propaganda immediately used all this to portray Russia as pure evil and themselves, consequently, as purely good. The current Ukrainian regime is described as a model of democracy, justice, freedom and European aspirations in all things, including the values that Europe has supposedly always preached. The response that followed shows that they understand very well that Ukraine isn’t really the point. The point is their own dominance, which far from all countries are willing to accept. Russia, with its history and traditions, is one of those countries that will never accept a subordinate status. We can be members of the international community only on equal terms, on conditions of indivisible security. We wanted to reach some accommodation but were ignored by our Western colleagues.

But what Mr Borrell said – even by the standards of the unprecedented, aggressive level things have reached – marks a serious change in the rules of the game. Until now the EU has never acted as a military organisation. Yes, now they are discussing their “strategic compass.” For the first time in history, Germany allocated an additional 100 billion euros to exercise its military muscles, which represents a qualitative change. This “strategic compass” includes a tangible increase in military spending and the formation of a certain collective structure for defence against potential aggressors. But the upshot of all this independence is zero because the United States is controlling everything that is being done. The EU has not been given any independent role, even internally. Its efforts are being skillfully controlled by the Baltic states, Denmark and Poland, which will not allow any kind of separation between the EU and NATO. Quite the contrary, they will be pushing it back into NATO’s web.

Question: A NATO branch?

Sergey Lavrov: So it seems. Whenever the chief diplomat of a country or an organisation (in this case, head of EU diplomacy Josep Borrell) says that a particular conflict can be resolved exclusively by military means, that is how such a statement is construed. This means that either he has a personal grudge, or it was a slip of the tongue, or he got ahead of his orders. This statement is out of line. We will cover this in more detail in our official documents. I hope we will be able to analyse all this within the next couple of days.

You also mentioned Frank-Walter Steinmeier, whom I know well back from his days as Federal Minister of Foreign Affairs. He is now the President of Germany. In an interview that he gave several days ago, he was asked whether an international tribunal was needed to try representatives of the Russian leadership, starting with President Vladimir Putin and the Foreign Minister, as war criminals. He agreed, saying that everyone who is responsible for the military operation and the political decisions should be held accountable. I leave this to his conscience. I think that the facts will become known in Germany, and the perpetrators of war crimes will become known. This will be determined not on the basis of fakes (such as Bucha or Kramatorsk), but on the basis of the deadly evidence that we present, and that our military discover during the special military operation and on the basis of the testimony of the people who have lived in the divided Donbass under the yoke of these neo-Nazis for many years, cut off from their sons who stayed on the eastern side of the line of contact. As these people are being liberated now, it is impossible to fake the feelings that they have or to make up the hardships they went through living under the control of neo-Nazi and other “territorial” battalions.

Steinmeier said another interesting thing about Ukraine. He said that, as a diplomat, he had never dedicated as much time to any other country as he did to Ukraine. He recalled that when Germany chaired the EU in 2007, he was the one to initiate the talks on preparing an Association Agreement with the EU. In 2013, when the riot began on the Maidan, he brokered the talks between Viktor Yanukovych and the opposition. That’s how it was, indeed. Importantly, a half-truth is worse than a lie. In fact, Mr Steinmeier left out some important episodes and turning points in the events that he mentioned. First, the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the EU provided for the transition to zero tariffs for the vast majority of goods. By the time this Agreement had already been in the works in 2013, we reminded our Ukrainian colleagues that we also have a free trade area with them as part of the CIS. We introduced significant protections against European goods when we joined the WTO. So, if they have zero tariffs with Europe, and we have long had zero tariffs for most goods with Ukraine, then goods from the EU will pour into our country freely contrary to the agreements that we reached when joining the WTO. We told them we need to sit down and decide on this issue so that we are not impacted by their relations with the EU. However, the EU, which (as Steinmeier says) started the talks on the Association Agreement on his initiative, told us that this was not our business and that they would reach an agreement with Ukraine as they see fit. After that, Yanukovych realised that this would be a problem and Russia would be forced to build a barrier on the border with Ukraine against Ukrainian-made goods. The President of Ukraine asked to postpone the signing for several months so that we could resolve these problems taking into account the interests of Ukraine, Russia and the EU.

It was after this that Europe, which Mr Steinmeier was so proud of when he said that Ukraine aspired to European values, provoked the Maidan. They rallied the people under the banner of fighting Yanukovych who allegedly wasn’t letting Ukraine join the EU.

Mr Steinmeier did not mention that he did not just broker the talks between Yanukovych and the opposition, but also took part in concluding them by signing a settlement agreement. On behalf of Germany and the EU, Steinmeier signed this agreement as a guarantor alongside the foreign ministers of Poland and France. The next morning, they spat on his signature. The opposition tore up the agreement and, from day one, advocated the abolition of the special status of the Russian language (contrary to the Constitution of Ukraine), called for Russians to “get out” of Crimea, sent “friendship trains” there with armed thugs who wanted to storm the Supreme Soviet. After that there was a referendum. Eastern Ukraine completely refused to recognise the coup. They did not attack anyone, but they were declared terrorists and an anti-terrorist operation was announced.

Mr Steinmeier forgot to say that Germany, France, Poland and the entire European Union showed total helplessness and lack of self-respect. Their signatures were trampled on. Tacitly, they even began to encourage this whole thing when they realised that the thugs who came to power would help the West in every possible way and manipulate it. They remained silent when these people burned dozens of innocent people in Odessa’s House of Trade Unions and when, on June 2, 2014, Ukrainian Air Force bombed central Lugansk. They just remained silent. Later, during the attempts to resolve the situation months and years later, we asked them how they allowed a coup to happen. They told us it was “not quite a coup.” Then what? “The costs of the democratic process.” How can you say that with a straight face?

Frank-Walter Steinmeier forgot to mention February 2015, when, alongside the Normandy format leaders, he co-authored the Minsk agreements. Soon after the signing, actually the next day, Petr Poroshenko and his team, speaking in the Verkhovna Rada, refused to act on them. They called the Minsk agreements a “political declaration” which allegedly was not binding. Then we unanimously approved the Package of Measures at the UN Security Council. It has become part of international law and thus binding. They ignored it and in every possible way encouraged the Ukrainian regime as it continued to sabotage its obligations.

We continued our efforts to find compromises, and were ready to make additional concessions and encourage the republics with which Kiev refused to talk to directly to do so as well. At some point during the talks we supported what was called the “Steinmeier formula” as a sign of our flexible approach. When we had to decide what should be done first - granting a special status or holding elections - he came up with a solution that suited everyone and became known as the “Steinmeier formula.” A couple of weeks after the “formula” had been approved and everyone welcomed it, it was consigned to oblivion as well. Petr Poroshenko and Vladimir Zelensky after him were vehemently opposed to following it.

Frank-Walter Steinmeier has to live down a diplomatic disgrace for the second time in several years if he considers himself the initiator (as he proudly stated in that interview) of many things related to the state of Ukrainian society.

Question: Is it possible to speak about a change in the positions of the sides at the Russia-Ukraine talks after the provocations in Bucha and Kramatorsk and considering the collective West, primarily the US, is doing all it can to prolong hostilities?

Sergey Lavrov: President of Russia Vladimir Putin emphasised more than once that we prefer talks. During the very first round of talks when Ukraine suggested contacts and we agreed to arrange them, President Vladimir Putin ordered a pause in the special military operation. When we realised that the Ukrainians were not going to reciprocate, we decided not to make any pauses for subsequent rounds of talks until the final agreement was reached and signed.

The provocations are outrageous. Our military personnel provided chronological arguments and videos made in Bucha (excuse me for going into details but they depicted the positions of corpses and how they looked). They presented all the evidence they could. I don’t understand how adults who consider themselves politicians and diplomats can try to say otherwise without any support.

It is revealing that they tried to keep Bucha going as a story for several weeks but quickly stopped talking about Kramatorsk. Evidence was presented on the same day, including ballistic trajectories, the absence of Tochka-U systems in our forces and the like. More provocations will follow.

Recently, the Defence Ministry and the National Defence Management Centre of Russia submitted intelligence data revealing the plans of the Ukrainian regime to stage new provocations with direct support of Western intelligence services, for instance, involving the use of toxic chemicals, mass executions and burials. There will be more provocations. We must respond to them with facts. Our main argument is what is taking place on the ground.

I don’t see reasons that could prevent us from continuing the talks even though Ukrainians keep making an about face and rejecting what they have just suggested.

We are patient and persistent.

Question: What are conditions like for our diplomats working now in unfriendly countries and the UN Headquarters? We are seeing a worrying surge in Russophobic attitudes. Families with children abroad are receiving threats. Did you have to harden security for the employees? How can the interests of our compatriots be protected against the backdrop of mounting Russophobia?

Sergey Lavrov: Diplomats live and work in difficult conditions. There are attacks, actually terrorist acts against our offices and their physical security but our diplomats are more or less protected by their status. We often do not advise people to go out alone.

We are most of all concerned over the situation of our compatriots, citizens, simply Russians living abroad. They are subjected to regular physical attacks. I know that Western capitals and Western embassies in Moscow are discussing this issue. EU ambassadors hold meetings from time to time for this purpose. Some of our good acquaintances said that EU ambassadors in Moscow are expressing serious concern over examples of Russophobia in Europe. They think this is wrong because it spoils the EU’s image. I wouldn’t say spoil but rather further reveals it for what it is now.

The speed with which the Russophobic wave was set in motion shows (as a US scholar put it) that “latent racism” is alive and well in Europe. At one time, Adolf Hitler mobilised his own society and other European countries against the Jews (and Slavs, for that matter). Now the command to attack is against Russians. The gloves have come off, the pretense and political correctness are gone. Nothing remains.

Ukrainian politicians say “a good Russian is a dead Russian." All other Russians are bad. Ministers are saying that Europe must discriminate against all Russians without distinction. They want them ostracised whether or not they support Putin because there is no time to determine that. They are openly saying this.

These are serious things. We will use all legal channels at our disposal to protect our citizens. There is the Foundation for Supporting and Protecting the Rights of Compatriots Living Abroad. For the most part, it helps hire attorneys for people abroad. We are substantially increasing its financing.

This is a huge problem. We will discuss it.

Lavrov interview Al Arabiya (29 april 2022)

Volledig interview van de Russische minister van buitenlandse zaken Lavrov met Al Arabiya

Ik ben nog geen transcriptie van het volledige interview tegen gekomen, enkel wat opvallende citaten.

Dit is de video:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_DwOZOaJfY4

Het fundament van het conflict volgens Lavrov zoals gezegd in een interview met Xinhua nieuwsagentschap

Citaat:

“Today we are not talking about a new ‘cold war’, but, as I have already noted, about the persistent desire of Washington and its satellites, who imagine themselves to be ‘arbiters of the fate of mankind’, to impose an American-centric model of the world order. It has gotten to the point that the Western minority is trying to replace the UN-centric architecture and international law formed after the Second World War with their own ‘rule-based order’. These rules are written by Washington and its allies themselves and then imposed on the international community as binding.

“It must be understood that the United States has been pursuing this destructive line for more than a decade. Suffice it to mention the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia, the attack on Iraq, Libya, the attempt to destroy Syria, the ‘color revolutions’ orchestrated in Western capitals in a number of countries, including Ukraine. All this cost hundreds of thousands of lives, led to chaos in various regions of the planet.

“Those who pursue an independent course in domestic and foreign policy, the Westerners are trying to suppress by the most brutal methods. And not only Russia. We see how ‘bloc thinking’ is being imposed in the Asia-Pacific region. What is the so-called Indo-Pacific strategy promoted by the United States, which has a pronounced anti-Chinese orientation. In the spirit of the archaic Monroe Doctrine, the US seeks to dictate how and by what standards Latin America should live. This explains Cuba's many years of illegal trade embargo, sanctions against Venezuela, attempts to ‘rock’ stability in Nicaragua and some other countries. In this vein, and the ongoing pressure on Belarus. This list can be continued.

“Obviously, the attempts of the ‘collective West’ to impede the natural course of history, to solve their problems at the expense of others, are doomed.Today's world has several decision-making centers, it is multipolar. We see how the states of Asia, Africa and Latin America are developing dynamically. Everyone has a real freedom of choice, including ways of development and participation in integration projects. Our special military operation in Ukraine also contributes to the process of freeing the world from the neo-colonial oppression of the West, heavily mixed with racism and an exclusiveness complex.

“The sooner the West comes to terms with the new geopolitical realities, the better it will be for itself and for the entire international community.”

Overgenomen van Tomas Polin
http://www.news.cn/world/2022-04/30/c_1128610657.htm

Lavrov framed hier het conflict in Oekraïne in een wereldwijde context.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Jay-P. (Bericht 9925116)

Niet echt he.
Ik schreef het al, maar ge moet dat gemist hebben: de Russische boertigheid is alom vertegenwoordigd.

Wij zijn drie jaar geleden uit ons hotel in Kemer (Turkije) gaan lopen vanwege de baldadige boertige stomdronken Russen en gaan nu enkel nog in gegarandeerd Russenvrije hotels.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Bach (Bericht 9952074)

Het fundament van het conflict volgens Lavrov
Lavrov framed hier het conflict in Oekraïne in een wereldwijde context.

Het meest fascineredne zinnetje

Citaat:

Everyone has a real freedom of choice

Geldt overduidelijk voor oekraine,

Ik vind ze allemaal erg interessant leesvoer.
Hun geheel maakt quasi het volledige verhaal.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door TREBRON (Bericht 9952095)

Wij zijn drie jaar geleden uit ons hotel in Kemer (Turkije) gaan lopen vanwege de baldadige boertige stomdronken Russen en gaan nu enkel nog in gegarandeerd Russenvrije hotels.

Hetzelfde meegemaakt in een hotel in Parijs. Mijn nacht naar de kloten maar moest de dag nadien wel op een beurs staan om klanten te ontvangen met een zware kop.
Ook in China met hun onbeschoftheid tegenover het hotelpersoneel dat ze voor slaven pakten. Tijdens het ontbijt blaften ze tegen het personeel dat ik beschaamd in hun plaats was.

Ik heb uitzonderingen gekend maar dat maakt de massa boertige Russen niet goed. Achterlijke brutale primaten. Met stip het laatste land ter wereld waar ik zou willen wonen.

Citaat:

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Gipsy (Bericht 9954158)

Hetzelfde meegemaakt in een hotel in Parijs. Mijn nacht naar de kloten maar moest de dag nadien wel op een beurs staan om klanten te ontvangen met een zware kop.
Ook in China met hun onbeschoftheid tegenover het hotelpersoneel dat ze voor slaven pakten. Tijdens het ontbijt blaften ze tegen het personeel dat ik beschaamd in hun plaats was.

Ik heb uitzonderingen gekend maar dat maakt de massa boertige Russen niet goed. Achterlijke brutale primaten. Met stip het laatste land ter wereld waar ik zou willen wonen.

:cheer: Tiens, een kenner :cheer:

Iedereen weet dat USA media erg gekleurd zijn, net zoals de Russische, daar niet van. Maar het is niet omdat dit op NBC te zien was dat het ongemak van Lukashenko niet wordt opgemerkt, hier.

.... Plus dat ook het Frustraat genaamd Putin er vliegensvlug bij was om Israël excuses aan te bieden. Zo ne rappe hadden ze ook nog nooit gehad.
Voor het overige gaat alles blijkbaar volgens plan.