Most people in
the English-speaking parts of the world missed Putin’s speech at the Valdai
conference in Sochi a few days ago, and, chances are, those of you who have
heard of the speech didn’t get a chance to read it, and missed its importance.
(For your convenience,
I am pasting in the full transcript of his speech below.) Western media did
their best to ignore it or to twist its meaning. Regardless of what you think
or don’t think of Putin (like the sun and the moon, he does not exist for you
to cultivate an opinion) this is probably the most important political speech
since Churchill’s “Iron Curtain” speech of March 5, 1946.
In this speech,
Putin abruptly changed the rules of the game. Previously, the game of
international politics was played as follows: politicians made public
pronouncements, for the sake of maintaining a pleasant fiction of national
sovereignty, but they were strictly for show and had nothing to do with the
substance of international politics; in the meantime, they engaged in secret back-room
negotiations, in which the actual deals were hammered out. Previously, Putin
tried to play this game, expecting only that Russia be treated as an equal. But
these hopes have been dashed, and at this conference he declared the game to be
over, explicitly violating Western taboo by speaking directly to the people
over the heads of elite clans and political leaders.
The Russian
blogger chipstone
summarized the most salient points from Putin speech as follows:
1. Russia will no longer play games and engage in back-room negotiations over
trifles. But Russia is prepared for serious conversations and agreements, if
these are conducive to collective security, are based on fairness and take into
account the interests of each side.
2. All systems of global collective security now lie in ruins. There
are no longer any international security guarantees at all. And the entity that
destroyed them has a name: The United States of America.
3. The builders
of the New World Order have failed, having built a sand castle. Whether or not
a new world order of any sort is to be built is not just Russia’s decision, but
it is a decision that will not be made without Russia.
4. Russia
favors a conservative approach to introducing innovations into the social
order, but is not opposed to investigating and discussing such innovations, to
see if introducing any of them might be justified.
5. Russia has
no intention of going fishing in the murky waters created by America’s
ever-expanding “empire of chaos,” and has no interest in building a new empire
of her own (this is unnecessary; Russia’s challenges lie in developing her
already vast territory). Neither is Russia willing to act as a savior of the
world, as she had in the past.
6. Russia will
not attempt to reformat the world in her own image, but neither will she allow
anyone to reformat her in their image. Russia will not close herself off from
the world, but anyone who tries to close her off from the world will be sure to
reap a whirlwind.
7. Russia does
not wish for the chaos to spread, does not want war, and has no intention of
starting one. However, today Russia sees the outbreak of global war as almost
inevitable, is prepared for it, and is continuing to prepare for it. Russia
does not war—nor does she fear it.
8. Russia does
not intend to take an active role in thwarting those who are still attempting
to construct their New World Order—until their efforts start to impinge on
Russia’s key interests. Russia would prefer to stand by and watch them give
themselves as many lumps as their poor heads can take. But those who manage to
drag Russia into this process, through disregard for her interests, will be
taught the true meaning of pain.
9. In her
external, and, even more so, internal politics, Russia’s power will rely not on
the elites and their back-room dealing, but onthe will of the people.
To these nine
points I would like to add a tenth:
10. There is
still a chance to construct a new world order that will avoid a world war. This
new world order must of necessity include the United States—but can only do so
on the same terms as everyone else: subject to international law and
international agreements; refraining from all unilateral action; in full
respect of the sovereignty of other nations.
To sum it all
up: play-time is over. Children, put away your toys. Now is the time for the
adults to make decisions. Russia is ready for this; is the world?
Text of
Vladimir Putin’s speech and a question and answer session at the final plenary
meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club’s XI session in Sochi on 24
October 2014.
It was
mentioned already that the club has new co-organizers this year. They include
Russian non-governmental organizations, expert groups and leading universities.
The idea was also raised of broadening the discussions to include not just
issues related to Russia itself but also global politics and the economy.
An organization
and content will bolster the club’s influence as a leading discussion and
expert forum. At the same time, I hope the ‘Valdai spirit’ will remain – this
free and open atmosphere and chance to express all manner of very different and
frank opinions.
Let me say in
this respect that I will also not let you down and will speak directly and
frankly. Some of what I say might seem a bit too harsh, but if we do not speak
directly and honestly about what we really think, then there is little point in
even meeting in this way. It would be better in that case just to keep to
diplomatic get-togethers, where no one says anything of real sense and,
recalling the words of one famous diplomat, you realize that diplomats have
tongues so as not to speak the truth.
We get together
for other reasons. We get together so as to talk frankly with each other. We
need to be direct and blunt today not so as to trade barbs, but so as to
attempt to get to the bottom of what is actually happening in the world, try to
understand why the world is becoming less safe and more unpredictable, and why
the risks are increasing everywhere around us.
Today’s
discussion took place under the theme: New Rules or a Game without Rules. I
think that this formula accurately describes the historic turning point we have
reached today and the choice we all face. There is nothing new of course in the
idea that the world is changing very fast. I know this is something you have
spoken about at the discussions today. It is certainly hard not to notice the dramatic
transformations in global politics and the economy, public life, and in
industry, information and social technologies.
Let me ask you
right now to forgive me if I end up repeating what some of the discussion’s
participants have already said. It’s practically impossible to avoid. You have
already held detailed discussions, but I will set out my point of view. It will
coincide with other participants’ views on some points and differ on others.
As we analyze
today’s situation, let us not forget history’s lessons. First of all, changes
in the world order – and what we are seeing today are events on this scale –
have usually been accompanied by if not global war and conflict, then by chains
of intensive local-level conflicts. Second, global politics is above all about
economic leadership, issues of war and peace, and the humanitarian dimension,
including human rights.
The world is
full of contradictions today. We need to be frank in asking each other if we
have a reliable safety net in place. Sadly, there is no guarantee and no
certainty that the current system of global and regional security is able to
protect us from upheavals. This system has become seriously weakened,
fragmented and deformed. The international and regional political, economic,
and cultural cooperation organizations are also going through difficult times.
Yes, many of
the mechanisms we have for ensuring the world order were created quite a long
time ago now, including and above all in the period immediately following World
War II. Let me stress that the solidity of the system created back then rested
not only on the balance of power and the rights of the victor countries, but on
the fact that this system’s ‘founding fathers’ had respect for each other, did
not try to put the squeeze on others, but attempted to reach agreements.
The main thing
is that this system needs to develop, and despite its various shortcomings,
needs to at least be capable of keeping the world’s current problems within
certain limits and regulating the intensity of the natural competition between
countries.
It is my
conviction that we could not take this mechanism of checks and balances that we
built over the last decades, sometimes with such effort and difficulty, and
simply tear it apart without building anything in its place. Otherwise we would
be left with no instruments other than brute force.
What we needed
to do was to carry out a rational reconstruction and adapt it the new realities
in the system of international relations.
But the United
States, having declared itself the winner of the Cold War, saw no need for
this. Instead of establishing a new balance of power, essential for maintaining
order and stability, they took steps that threw the system into sharp and deep
imbalance.
The Cold War
ended, but it did not end with the signing of a peace treaty with clear and
transparent agreements on respecting existing rules or creating new rules and
standards. This created the impression that the so-called ‘victors’ in the Cold
War had decided to pressure events and reshape the world to suit their own
needs and interests. If the existing system of international relations,
international law and the checks and balances in place got in the way of these
aims, this system was declared worthless, outdated and in need of immediate
demolition.
Pardon the analogy, but this is the way nouveaux riches behave when they
suddenly end up with a great fortune, in this case, in the shape of world
leadership and domination. Instead of managing their wealth wisely, for their
own benefit too of course, I think they have committed many follies.
We have entered
a period of differing interpretations and deliberate silences in world
politics. International law has been forced to retreat over and over by the
onslaught of legal nihilism. Objectivity and justice have been sacrificed on
the altar of political expediency. Arbitrary interpretations and biased
assessments have replaced legal norms. At the same time, total control of the
global mass media has made it possible when desired to portray white as black
and black as white.
In a situation
where you had domination by one country and its allies, or its satellites
rather, the search for global solutions often turned into an attempt to impose
their own universal recipes. This group’s ambitions grew so big that they
started presenting the policies they put together in their corridors of power
as the view of the entire international community. But this is not the case.
The very notion
of ‘national sovereignty’ became a relative value for most countries. In
essence, what was being proposed was the formula: the greater the loyalty
towards the world’s sole power centre, the greater this or that ruling regime’s
legitimacy.
We will have a
free discussion afterwards and I will be happy to answer your questions and
would also like to use my right to ask you questions. Let someone try to
disprove the arguments that I just set out during the upcoming discussion.
The measures
taken against those who refuse to submit are well-known and have been tried and
tested many times. They include use of force, economic and propaganda pressure,
meddling in domestic affairs, and appeals to a kind of ‘supra-legal’ legitimacy
when they need to justify illegal intervention in this or that conflict or
toppling inconvenient regimes. Of late, we have increasing evidence too that
outright blackmail has been used with regard to a number of leaders. It is not
for nothing that ‘big brother’ is spending billions of dollars on keeping the
whole world, including its own closest allies, under surveillance.
Let’s ask
ourselves, how comfortable are we with this, how safe are we, how happy living
in this world, and how fair and rational has it become? Maybe, we have no real
reasons to worry, argue and ask awkward questions? Maybe the United States’
exceptional position and the way they are carrying out their leadership really
is a blessing for us all, and their meddling in events all around the world is
bringing peace, prosperity, progress, growth and democracy, and we should maybe
just relax and enjoy it all?
Let me say that
this is not the case, absolutely not the case.
A unilateral
diktat and imposing one’s own models produces the opposite result. Instead of
settling conflicts it leads to their escalation, instead of sovereign and
stable states we see the growing spread of chaos, and instead of democracy
there is support for a very dubious public ranging from open neo-fascists to
Islamic radicals.
Why do they
support such people? They do this because they decide to use them as
instruments along the way in achieving their goals but then burn their fingers
and recoil. I never cease to be amazed by the way that our partners just keep
stepping on the same rake, as we say here in Russia, that is to say, make the
same mistake over and over.
They once sponsored
Islamic extremist movements to fight the Soviet Union. Those groups got their
battle experience in Afghanistan and later gave birth to the Taliban and
Al-Qaeda. The West if not supported, at least closed its eyes, and, I would
say, gave information, political and financial support to international
terrorists’ invasion of Russia (we have not forgotten this) and the Central
Asian region’s countries. Only after horrific terrorist attacks were committed
on US soil itself did the United States wake up to the common threat of
terrorism. Let me remind you that we were the first country to support the
American people back then, the first to react as friends and partners to the
terrible tragedy of September 11.
During my
conversations with American and European leaders, I always spoke of the need to
fight terrorism together, as a challenge on a global scale. We cannot resign
ourselves to and accept this threat, cannot cut it into separate pieces using
double standards. Our partners expressed agreement, but a little time passed
and we ended up back where we started. First there was the military operation
in Iraq, then in Libya, which got pushed to the brink of falling apart. Why was
Libya pushed into this situation? Today it is a country in danger of breaking apart
and has become a training ground for terrorists.
Only the
current Egyptian leadership’s determination and wisdom saved this key Arab
country from chaos and having extremists run rampant. In Syria, as in the past,
the United States and its allies started directly financing and arming rebels
and allowing them to fill their ranks with mercenaries from various countries.
Let me ask where do these rebels get their money, arms and military
specialists? Where does all this come from? How did the notorious ISIL manage
to become such a powerful group, essentially a real armed force?
As for
financing sources, today, the money is coming not just from drugs, production
of which has increased not just by a few percentage points but many-fold, since
the international coalition forces have been present in Afghanistan. You are
aware of this. The terrorists are getting money from selling oil too. Oil is
produced in territory controlled by the terrorists, who sell it at dumping
prices, produce it and transport it. But someone buys this oil, resells it, and
makes a profit from it, not thinking about the fact that they are thus
financing terrorists who could come sooner or later to their own soil and sow
destruction in their own countries.
Where do they
get new recruits? In Iraq, after Saddam Hussein was toppled, the state’s
institutions, including the army, were left in ruins. We said back then, be
very, very careful. You are driving people out into the street, and what will
they do there? Don’t forget (rightfully or not) that they were in the
leadership of a large regional power, and what are you now turning them into?
What was the
result? Tens of thousands of soldiers, officers and former Baath Party
activists were turned out into the streets and today have joined the rebels’
ranks. Perhaps this is what explains why the Islamic State group has turned out
so effective? In military terms, it is acting very effectively and has some
very professional people. Russia warned repeatedly about the dangers of
unilateral military actions, intervening in sovereign states’ affairs, and
flirting with extremists and radicals. We insisted on having the groups
fighting the central Syrian government, above all the Islamic State, included
on the lists of terrorist organizations. But did we see any results? We
appealed in vain.
We sometimes
get the impression that our colleagues and friends are constantly fighting the
consequences of their own policies, throw all their effort into addressing the
risks they themselves have created, and pay an ever-greater price.
Colleagues,
this period of unipolar domination has convincingly demonstrated that having
only one power centre does not make global processes more manageable. On the
contrary, this kind of unstable construction has shown its inability to fight
the real threats such as regional conflicts, terrorism, drug trafficking,
religious fanaticism, chauvinism and neo-Nazism. At the same time, it has
opened the road wide for inflated national pride, manipulating public opinion
and letting the strong bully and suppress the weak.
Essentially,
the unipolar world is simply a means of justifying dictatorship over people and
countries. The unipolar world turned out too uncomfortable, heavy and
unmanageable a burden even for the self-proclaimed leader. Comments along this
line were made here just before and I fully agree with this. This is why we see
attempts at this new historic stage to recreate a semblance of a quasi-bipolar
world as a convenient model for perpetuating American leadership. It does not
matter who takes the place of the centre of evil in American propaganda, the
USSR’s old place as the main adversary. It could be Iran, as a country seeking
to acquire nuclear technology, China, as the world’s biggest economy, or
Russia, as a nuclear superpower.
Today, we are
seeing new efforts to fragment the world, draw new dividing lines, put together
coalitions not built for something but directed against someone, anyone, create
the image of an enemy as was the case during the Cold War years, and obtain the
right to this leadership, or diktat if you wish. The situation was presented
this way during the Cold War. We all understand this and know this. The United
States always told its allies: “We have a common enemy, a terrible foe, the
centre of evil, and we are defending you, our allies, from this foe, and so we
have the right to order you around, force you to sacrifice your political and
economic interests and pay your share of the costs for this collective defense,
but we will be the ones in charge of it all of course.” In short, we see today
attempts in a new and changing world to reproduce the familiar models of global
management, and all this so as to guarantee their [the US’] exceptional
position and reap political and economic dividends.
But these
attempts are increasingly divorced from reality and are in contradiction with
the world’s diversity. Steps of this kind inevitably create confrontation and
countermeasures and have the opposite effect to the hoped-for goals. We see
what happens when politics rashly starts meddling in the economy and the logic
of rational decisions gives way to the logic of confrontation that only hurt
one’s own economic positions and interests, including national business
interests.
Joint economic
projects and mutual investment objectively bring countries closer together and
help to smooth out current problems in relations between states. But today, the
global business community faces unprecedented pressure from Western
governments. What business, economic expediency and pragmatism can we speak of
when we hear slogans such as “the homeland is in danger”, “the free world is
under threat”, and “democracy is in jeopardy”? And so everyone needs to
mobilize. That is what a real mobilization policy looks like.
Sanctions are
already undermining the foundations of world trade, the WTO rules and the
principle of inviolability of private property. They are dealing a blow to
liberal model of globalization based on markets, freedom and competition,
which, let me note, is a model that has primarily benefited precisely the Western
countries. And now they risk losing trust as the leaders of globalization. We
have to ask ourselves, why was this necessary? After all, the United States’
prosperity rests in large part on the trust of investors and foreign holders of
dollars and US securities. This trust is clearly being undermined and signs of
disappointment in the fruits of globalization are visible now in many
countries. The well-known
Cyprus precedent and the politically motivated sanctions have only strengthened
the trend towards seeking to bolster economic and financial sovereignty and
countries’ or their regional groups’ desire to find ways of protecting
themselves from the risks of outside pressure. We already see that more and
more countries are looking for ways to become less dependent on the dollar and
are setting up alternative financial and payments systems and reserve
currencies. I think that our American friends are quite simply cutting the
branch they are sitting on. You cannot mix politics and the economy, but this is
what is happening now. I have always thought and still think today that
politically motivated sanctions were a mistake that will harm everyone, but I
am sure that we will come back to this subject later.
We know how
these decisions were taken and who was applying the pressure. But let me stress
that Russia is not going to get all worked up, get offended or come begging at
anyone’s door. Russia is a self-sufficient country. We will work within the
foreign economic environment that has taken shape, develop domestic production
and technology and act more decisively to carry out transformation. Pressure
from outside, as has been the case on past occasions, will only consolidate our
society, keep us alert and make us concentrate on our main development goals.
Of course the
sanctions are a hindrance. They are trying to hurt us through these sanctions,
block our development and push us into political, economic and cultural
isolation, force us into backwardness in other words. But let me say yet again
that the world is a very different place today. We have no intention of
shutting ourselves off from anyone and choosing some kind of closed development
road, trying to live in autarky. We are always open to dialogue, including on
normalizing our economic and political relations. We are counting here on the
pragmatic approach and position of business communities in the leading
countries.
Some are saying
today that Russia is supposedly turning its back on Europe – such words were
probably spoken already here too during the discussions – and is looking for
new business partners, above all in Asia. Let me say that this is absolutely
not the case. Our active policy in the Asian-Pacific region began not just
yesterday and not in response to sanctions, but is a policy that we have been
following for a good many years now. Like many other countries, including
Western countries, we saw that Asia is playing an ever greater role in the
world, in the economy and in politics, and there is simply no way we can afford
to overlook these developments.
Let me say
again that everyone is doing this, and we will do so to, all the more so as a
large part of our country is geographically in Asia. Why should we not make use
of our competitive advantages in this area? It would be extremely shortsighted
not to do so.
Developing
economic ties with these countries and carrying out joint integration projects
also creates big incentives for our domestic development. Today’s demographic,
economic and cultural trends all suggest that dependence on a sole superpower
will objectively decrease. This is something that European and American experts
have been talking and writing about too.
Perhaps
developments in global politics will mirror the developments we are seeing in
the global economy, namely, intensive competition for specific niches and
frequent change of leaders in specific areas. This is entirely possible.
There is no
doubt that humanitarian factors such as education, science, healthcare and
culture are playing a greater role in global competition. This also has a big
impact on international relations, including because this ‘soft power’ resource
will depend to a great extent on real achievements in developing human capital
rather than on sophisticated propaganda tricks.
At the same
time, the formation of a so-called polycentric world (I would also like to draw
attention to this, colleagues) in and of itself does not improve stability; in
fact, it is more likely to be the opposite. The goal of reaching global
equilibrium is turning into a fairly difficult puzzle, an equation with many
unknowns.
So, what is in store for us if we choose not to live by the rules – even if
they may be strict and inconvenient – but rather live without any rules at all?
And that scenario is entirely possible; we cannot rule it out, given the
tensions in the global situation. Many predictions can already be made, taking
into account current trends, and unfortunately, they are not optimistic. If we
do not create a clear system of mutual commitments and agreements, if we do not
build the mechanisms for managing and resolving crisis situations, the symptoms
of global anarchy will inevitably grow.
Today, we
already see a sharp increase in the likelihood of a whole set of violent
conflicts with either direct or indirect participation by the world’s major
powers. And the risk factors include not just traditional multinational
conflicts, but also the internal instability in separate states, especially
when we talk about nations located at the intersections of major states’
geopolitical interests, or on the border of cultural, historical, and economic
civilizational continents.
Ukraine, which
I’m sure was discussed at length and which we will discuss some more, is one of
the example of such sorts of conflicts that affect international power balance,
and I think it will certainly not be the last. From here emanates the next real
threat of destroying the current system of arms control agreements. And this
dangerous process was launched by the United States of America when it
unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002, and then
set about and continues today to actively pursue the creation of its global
missile defense system.
Colleagues,
friends, I want to point out that we did not start this. Once again, we are
sliding into the times when, instead of the balance of interests and mutual
guarantees, it is fear and the balance of mutual destruction that prevent
nations from engaging in direct conflict. In absence of legal and political
instruments, arms are once again becoming the focal point of the global agenda;
they are used wherever and however, without any UN Security Council sanctions.
And if the Security Council refuses to produce such decisions, then it is
immediately declared to be an outdated and ineffective instrument.
Many states do
not see any other ways of ensuring their sovereignty but to obtain their own
bombs. This is extremely dangerous. We insist on continuing talks; we are not
only in favor of talks, but insist on continuing talks to reduce nuclear arsenals.
The less nuclear weapons we have in the world, the better. And we are ready for
the most serious, concrete discussions on nuclear disarmament – but only
serious discussions without any double standards.
What do I mean?
Today, many types of high-precision weaponry are already close to
mass-destruction weapons in terms of their capabilities, and in the event of
full renunciation of nuclear weapons or radical reduction of nuclear potential,
nations that are leaders in creating and producing high-precision systems will
have a clear military advantage. Strategic parity will be disrupted, and this
is likely to bring destabilization. The use of a so-called first global
pre-emptive strike may become tempting. In short, the risks do not decrease,
but intensify.
The next
obvious threat is the further escalation of ethnic, religious, and social
conflicts. Such conflicts are dangerous not only as such, but also because they
create zones of anarchy, lawlessness, and chaos around them, places that are
comfortable for terrorists and criminals, where piracy, human trafficking, and
drug trafficking flourish.
Incidentally,
at the time, our colleagues tried to somehow manage these processes, use
regional conflicts and design ‘color revolutions’ to suit their interests, but
the genie escaped the bottle. It looks like the controlled chaos theory fathers
themselves do not know what to do with it; there is disarray in their ranks.
We closely
follow the discussions by both the ruling elite and the expert community. It is
enough to look at the headlines of the Western press over the last year. The
same people are called fighters for democracy, and then Islamists; first they
write about revolutions and then call them riots and upheavals. The result is
obvious: the further expansion of global chaos.
Colleagues,
given the global situation, it is time to start agreeing on fundamental things.
This is incredibly important and necessary; this is much better than going back
to our own corners. The more we all face common problems, the more we find
ourselves in the same boat, so to speak. And the logical way out is in
cooperation between nations, societies, in finding collective answers to
increasing challenges, and in joint risk management. Granted, some of our
partners, for some reason, remember this only when it suits their interests.
Practical
experience shows that joint answers to challenges are not always a panacea; and
we need to understand this. Moreover, in most cases, they are hard to reach; it
is not easy to overcome the differences in national interests, the subjectivity
of different approaches, particularly when it comes to nations with different
cultural and historical traditions. But nevertheless, we have examples when,
having common goals and acting based on the same criteria, together we achieved
real success.
Let me remind
you about solving the problem of chemical weapons in Syria, and the substantive
dialogue on the Iranian nuclear program, as well as our work on North Korean
issues, which also has some positive results. Why can’t we use this experience
in the future to solve local and global challenges?
What could be the legal, political, and economic basis for a new world order
that would allow for stability and security, while encouraging healthy
competition, not allowing the formation of new monopolies that hinder
development? It is unlikely that someone could provide absolutely exhaustive,
ready-made solutions right now. We will need extensive work with participation
by a wide range of governments, global businesses, civil society, and such
expert platforms as ours.
However, it is
obvious that success and real results are only possible if key participants in
international affairs can agree on harmonizing basic interests, on reasonable
self-restraint, and set the example of positive and responsible leadership. We
must clearly identify where unilateral actions end and we need to apply
multilateral mechanisms, and as part of improving the effectiveness of
international law, we must resolve the dilemma between the actions by international
community to ensure security and human rights and the principle of national
sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of any state.
Those very
collisions increasingly lead to arbitrary external interference in complex
internal processes, and time and again, they provoke dangerous conflicts
between leading global players. The issue of maintaining sovereignty becomes
almost paramount in maintaining and strengthening global stability.
Clearly,
discussing the criteria for the use of external force is extremely difficult;
it is practically impossible to separate it from the interests of particular
nations. However, it is far more dangerous when there are no agreements that
are clear to everyone, when no clear conditions are set for necessary and legal
interference.
I will add that
international relations must be based on international law, which itself should
rest on moral principles such as justice, equality and truth. Perhaps most
important is respect for one’s partners and their interests. This is an obvious
formula, but simply following it could radically change the global situation.
I am certain
that if there is a will, we can restore the effectiveness of the international
and regional institutions system. We do not even need to build anything anew,
from the scratch; this is not a “greenfield,” especially since the institutions
created after World War II are quite universal and can be given modern
substance, adequate to manage the current situation.
This is true of
improving the work of the UN, whose central role is irreplaceable, as well as
the OSCE, which, over the course of 40 years, has proven to be a necessary
mechanism for ensuring security and cooperation in the Euro-Atlantic region. I
must say that even now, in trying to resolve the crisis in southeast Ukraine,
the OSCE is playing a very positive role.
In light of the
fundamental changes in the international environment, the increase in
uncontrollability and various threats, we need a new global consensus of
responsible forces. It’s not about some local deals or a division of spheres of
influence in the spirit of classic diplomacy, or somebody’s complete global
domination. I think that we need a new version of interdependence. We should
not be afraid of it. On the contrary, this is a good instrument for harmonizing
positions.
This is
particularly relevant given the strengthening and growth of certain regions on
the planet, which process objectively requires institutionalization of such new
poles, creating powerful regional organizations and developing rules for their
interaction. Cooperation between these centers would seriously add to the
stability of global security, policy and economy. But in order to establish
such a dialogue, we need to proceed from the assumption that all regional
centers and integration projects forming around them need to have equal rights
to development, so that they can complement each other and nobody can force
them into conflict or opposition artificially. Such destructive actions would
break down ties between states, and the states themselves would be subjected to
extreme hardship, or perhaps even total destruction.
I would like to
remind you of the last year’s events. We have told our American and European
partners that hasty backstage decisions, for example, on Ukraine’s association
with the EU, are fraught with serious risks to the economy. We didn’t even say
anything about politics; we spoke only about the economy, saying that such
steps, made without any prior arrangements, touch on the interests of many
other nations, including Russia as Ukraine’s main trade partner, and that a
wide discussion of the issues is necessary. Incidentally, in this regard, I
will remind you that, for example, the talks on Russia’s accession to the WTO
lasted 19 years. This was very difficult work, and a certain consensus was
reached.
Why am I
bringing this up? Because in implementing Ukraine’s association project, our
partners would come to us with their goods and services through the back gate,
so to speak, and we did not agree to this, nobody asked us about this. We had
discussions on all topics related to Ukraine’s association with the EU,
persistent discussions, but I want to stress that this was done in an entirely
civilized manner, indicating possible problems, showing the obvious reasoning
and arguments. Nobody wanted to listen to us and nobody wanted to talk. They
simply told us: this is none of your business, point, end of discussion.
Instead of a comprehensive but – I stress – civilized dialogue, it all came
down to a government overthrow; they plunged the country into chaos, into
economic and social collapse, into a civil war with enormous casualties.
Why? When I ask
my colleagues why, they no longer have an answer; nobody says anything. That’s
it. Everyone’s at a loss, saying it just turned out that way. Those actions
should not have been encouraged – it wouldn’t have worked. After all (I already
spoke about this), former Ukrainian President Yanukovych signed everything,
agreed with everything. Why do it? What was the point? What is this, a
civilized way of solving problems? Apparently, those who constantly throw
together new ‘color revolutions’ consider themselves ‘brilliant artists’ and
simply cannot stop.
I am certain
that the work of integrated associations, the cooperation of regional
structures, should be built on a transparent, clear basis; the Eurasian
Economic Union’s formation process is a good example of such transparency. The
states that are parties to this project informed their partners of their plans
in advance, specifying the parameters of our association, the principles of its
work, which fully correspond with the World Trade Organization rules.
I will add that
we would also have welcomed the start of a concrete dialogue between the
Eurasian and European Union. Incidentally, they have almost completely refused
us this as well, and it is also unclear why – what is so scary about it?
And, of course,
with such joint work, we would think that we need to engage in dialogue (I
spoke about this many times and heard agreement from many of our western
partners, at least in Europe) on the need to create a common space for economic
and humanitarian cooperation stretching all the way from the Atlantic to the
Pacific Ocean.
Colleagues,
Russia made its choice. Our priorities are further improving our democratic and
open economy institutions, accelerated internal development, taking into
account all the positive modern trends in the world, and consolidating society
based on traditional values and patriotism.
We have an
integration-oriented, positive, peaceful agenda; we are working actively with
our colleagues in the Eurasian Economic Union, the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization, BRICS and other partners. This agenda is aimed at developing ties
between governments, not dissociating. We are not planning to cobble together
any blocs or get involved in an exchange of blows.
The allegations
and statements that Russia is trying to establish some sort of empire,
encroaching on the sovereignty of its neighbors, are groundless. Russia does
not need any kind of special, exclusive place in the world – I want to
emphasize this. While respecting the interests of others, we simply want for
our own interests to be taken into account and for our position to be
respected.
We are well
aware that the world has entered an era of changes and global transformations,
when we all need a particular degree of caution, the ability to avoid
thoughtless steps. In the years after the Cold War, participants in global politics
lost these qualities somewhat. Now, we need to remember them. Otherwise, hopes
for a peaceful, stable development will be a dangerous illusion, while today’s
turmoil will simply serve as a prelude to the collapse of world order.
Yes, of course,
I have already said that building a more stable world order is a difficult
task. We are talking about long and hard work. We were able to develop rules
for interaction after World War II, and we were able to reach an agreement in
Helsinki in the 1970s. Our common duty is to resolve this fundamental challenge
at this new stage of development.
Today we are witnessing the continuation of a soft coup against not only President Trump, but of our Republic. The Democrats must be highly compromised, i.e. lots of skeletons in their closets. This was the most blatantly biased investigation of Democrats looking for a crime. Yet not that some Republicans are not compromised. Donald Trump did not erase 33,000 e-mail, did not accept 145,000,000 from a Russian Bank, did not hammer his Blackberries, did not bleach bit his computers, did not threaten Ukraine with withholding $1 Billion dollars from Ukraine unless they stopped the investigation of his drug addicted son Hunter, did not sell out the United States of America like Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Schiff, Nadler, and the compromised Democrats have. If the impeachment does not work this time they will try again, and again any means necessary to end the Presidency of Donald Trump, for they do not want their swamp drained.
Gun Safety, ala Governor Murphy
The NWO puppet that is the currently selected Governor of New Jersey constantly calls for "common sense gun control" should step back, and look at what "common sense gun control did for a group of Mormons in Mexico. In Mexico it is illegal to own a gun. Hey Murphy, what criminal obeys the law? He is in reality working for the disarmament of the American people and their subsequent enslavement.
Coup d'etat
Halloween a day when the demons come back to haunt us. It is the day of the devil. Nancy Pelosi, and Adam Schiff are perfect examples of the personification of evil. Nancy is an extremely devious person, and Adam continues to bite the apple over and over again. He tries to cover his loins just a Adam did as described in the Book of Genesis. The Star Chamber events that only the corrupt and compromised Democrats can call witnesses, and the accused has no right to confront his detractors. Only what lying little Adam Schiff see what will help his narrative gets out.
So now they will bring the charade out in the open, but with Nancy and liddle Schiff's caveats. Republican can only call witnesses if liddle Schiff approves them.
This is a Deep State operation in high gear. If the treasonous Democrats succeed in this impeachment it will be the END OF AMERICA as we know it.
Damn the Democrats, and I am a registered Democrat. I will vote in 2020 for President Trump!
Bought and Paid For
Jerry Nadler claims that there is NO evidence that Google censors conservatives. Either he is a liar, a fool or both. Well he pocketed $26, 000 from Google. It does not take much to buy this clown. My own blog went from 3000 hits-per day to between 50 to 100. It happened from one day to the next. It is called shadow banning. When I googled a story that was a rare story my blog DID NOT appear.
What else does the Deep State have on Nadler? Could it be pedophilia?
Death of Bush a Distraction
Hey did they pull the plug on daddy Bush to delay the Trump's release of classified information? This was to be the week of revelation about Hillary, Bill and the Deep State. Monday the Whistle blower on the Uranium One deal was to speak, but instead we have receive lies about a very evil man. The FBI raided the home of the whistle blower instead. Folks if you cannot see the current war that is going on inside our borders they you are either blind of dumber than a box of rocks. WTFU!!!
With the consummate liar, Netanyahu, claiming that there is a secret nuclear program in Iran is beyond hypocrisy. This criminal lives in a glass house, and should not throw stones. If Israel has the right to nuclear weapons so does Iran. What I would be looking for is Israel pulling a false flag on the US Navy.
Stein Hillary's Shill 120216
On Wednesday I listened to "Democracy Now", and later the Tucker Carlson Show. Each host was interviewing Jill Sellout Stein, but neither asked the key question. The key question for me would have been the following: "Jill, a hand recount of the votes in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania would probably not be completed by the December 19th deadline for the electoral votes. That would deny Trump the necessary votes to be elected President. That seems to be the Hillary strategy to steal the election, so why would the Green Party candidate shill for Hillary's election. Has Hillary, Bill, the Clinton Campaign, the DNC or others that are connected to the Clinton's approached you, and what were you offered?"
That would have been my question, but then again that is why I only operate in the "Fake News" section of journalism.
Egg Timer 06/14/16
The shooting at the Pulse night club in Orlando, which is just another false flag to promote a not so hidden agenda if failing to convince America that the gun did it. At the gym last night no body believed the government's story.
Just think of the 2.5 to 3 million UNCOUNTED votes in California. Had to get that off the front page. Just think that yesterday Trump was going to give a speech on the crimes of the Clintons. Well that had to be postponed. Cui bono? Hillary of course, and the Indonesian male prostitute that resides in the White House, and vacations around the world. He is determined to disarm law abiding Americans before he leaves the White House.
Iowa Caucus
How about Hillary's luck with her winning 6 coin tosses? Maybe she should play the horses, blackjack, etc. as they all can be fixed too. In six coin tosses you would have a 1 in 64 chance of winning all six. What that tells me is that the Iowa democrats have more allegiance to The Wicked Witch of the West than they do to their own country.
How about Sen. Cruz? He was not natural born, and there is doubt that his mother was born in the US. He is ineligible to run for President, but hey Obama did it why not him?
As for Rubio he was born in the US, but not of US citizens, so he too is not eligible to run for President. He has quite a few skeletons in his closet, and that is why they like him.
So much for representative government. It is a joke, but it is not funny.
Pearl Harbor
Today one should remember a day of "infamay". Yes today December 7th, 1941 the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, as Roosevelt hoped that they would. He made sure that the aircraft carriers were out to sea, and the dinosaur battleships were in port.
He needed an attack, where the US would lose military personnel, so that he could take the side of Churchill against Hitler. You see there were many like the Bush family that backed Hitler. So this necessitated the sacrifice of Americans to further Roosevelt's agenda.
And the beat goes on. We are still expendable to further hidden agendas.
December 7th, 2015
Halloween brings people in strange costumes, and strange people without costumes. So to does it sometimes bring strange events, in costumes. A Russian jet crashes in the Sinai. Well who was, and still is looking for their candy? Who would be willing and able to inflict such damage to the Russians? Looks to me that it would be Israel, the US, with the most means to do it. With ISIS a distant third.
Who does the security at the airport that the plane took off from?
Listening to the House Hearings on Benghazi was maddening.
The question not asked of the Wicked Witch of the West was "Why were we in Libya, and under what Congressional authorization justified it?"
What Hillary said at one point was that "We had to stop Quadafi from oppressing his people." Well he could ride standing up in an open top car without armed protection, and hear the "oppressed" cheer him. Quadafi had turned his country around, and he ran it for the benefit of the people.
The "oppressed" that the Witch referred to were the hired mercenaries out of Benghazi that Quadafi was fighting, and fighting successfully.
The Democrats were not interested in a thorough investigation of what happened, and why, but only in "Lets cover Hillary's ass mode." They accused the Republicans of turning it into a political circus. Well Hillary and Barry (aka Barack) immediately turned in into a political fairy tale while the dead Americans bodies were still warm. Obama thinking of 2012 election and Hillary thinking about 2016.
What Stevens was in on was the knowledge that Hillary and Obama were shipping weapons such as Stinger Missiles to the enemy. The enemy was fighting a US, Israeli, Saudi proxy war to overthrow Assad. My fellow Americans that is TREASON.
Was Hillary using here State Department Office to enhance the Clinton Foundation with money from people and countries that made generous "contributions" to it? In essence these were bribes to pay for her 2016 Presidential run
Hello all,
The technical support that I signed up for in 5 minutes has resolved the problem. So we will be back up and flying soon.
Obama will hate that fact.
October 3, 2015
The problem is back.
October 2, 2015
Finally, the problem has been fixed. Will be posting again soon, but first I have to take care of personal business.
October 2, 2015
Campus was a gun free zone, and vet with concealed carry was prevented to stop the carnage.
Also the World's most notorious killer, Barack Obama, referred to himself 28 times in his feigned attempt to turn the still warm victims as sacrificial lambs in his desire to disarm all Americans. This is a sick man that the rest of the World suffers from him NPD. Did you notice his pursed lips during his reading of his "sympathy" speech? That is a true sign of NPD. He knows NO empathy whatsoever.
Every Tuesday this asshole sits down with a kill list, and picks out who to execute with drones. Many men, women and children dies as collateral damage with the actions of this beast.
October 1, 2015
Still cannot post.
Will keep trying to right the situation.
September 30, 2015
Could not get into the blog today, and now that that has been addressed, we now cannot post.
Bear with us as we try and right the situation.
I guess that we must have annoyed someone.
Stock Trading 07/08/15
Stock trading has been suspended!!!
Christie Waddles for the Presidency
Just this past week the big fat bully governor of New Jersey announced that he was running for the Republican nomination for the Presidency. We here in New Jersey knew that he was waddling for the job ever since he was elected governor.
He has been a disaster for New Jersey, and he would be worse for the US.
JUST A COINCIDENCE
This past Friday I received a survey from "Everytown for Gun Safety", and of course it was about gun control. Or should I say the disarming of the citizens of America before their total enslavement and death.
It was also just a coincidence that the DHS ran an "active shooter" drill at the time of the Charleston shooting.
DISTRACTION
April 30, 2015
They have been trying to divide and conquer for quite some time, and Baltimore is just another attempt. Do not fall for it. Yes the murder of Freddie Gray was terrible, but it does not justify violence. Beware of agent provocateurs.
Yes there were peaceful protests, but looking at MSM you would not know it. What are they hiding while the Baltimore Riots takes front page, while a Treaty disguised as an agreement is being thrust upon our Nation. Discussed in secret, and with transnational corporate input. No Congressional input. They cannot even discuss what they have been told with their constituents.
Fast Track began with the Nixon administration for tariff rate, and only tariff rates. Treaties required 2/3 of the Senate to pass. Along comes The Great Communicator, the straight man for a chimp, and he declares treaties nothing more than agreements. So Ronnie only needed a simple majority of both houses.
Then came coke snorting, womanizing, money laundering Bill Clinton to get Fast Track on NAFTA, GATT, etc.
The TPP will grant sovereignty to corporations, and subject the citizens to their greedy whims and fancies. The poverty in this country and in others will explode, and violence will begin. That is why you are being subjected to another drill for Martial Law in Baltimore.
Just wait for Jade Helm, and again a psyops to get the masses used to Martial Law.
My friends any one who pushes the TPP is a TRAITOR.
FORCLOSURES
April 17, 2015
In the local paper every Friday has what appears in the classified section is a listing of Sherrif's Sales. Every Friday the list was 3, 4 or 5 pages. Today while we are in "recovery" the pages number 7, and the Republican Congress is pushing the TPP, which will destroy not only the soveringty of the US and any other signatories, but it will further bring down the middle class (what is left of it). Do not worry though, the vultures will peck at the bones of the national, state, county, and local government's assets, and they will get them for pennies on the dollar. The bastards of banking will devour the houses, and turn them into rentals.
WTFU America.
January 20, 2015
Just listenedd to Obama's Chief of Staff say that Obama with his State of the Union will continue his struggle for the middle class. "Continue his struggle for the middle class...", is that sarcasm. Obama, if that is his real name, has been attacking the middle class, and in so doing is destroying the United States of America.
His speech will be nothing more than rhetoric. He is going to demand increased taxes on the rich. Well how will that happen with a GOP House and Senate? It cannot happen and he knows it. It is all for show, and he continues his life in lies.
January 12, 2015
There is outrage on the outcome of the Dallas Cowboys versus the Green Bay Packers. Why is their outrage on this total distraction? Fans here belong to one of two tribes that support the circus of the "bread and circus".
It has become a game of less and less interest as commercials, reviews, more reviews, pregame shows of several well paid ex-jocks to tell us what must be done by each team to win. Then after the game the same go over and over the game and why one team won and one lost. The media has more covering a meaningless event than the do covering all of Africa.
It is done to take you mind off the reality of the day. It is the blue pill to keep you from seeing that you are accepting a police state as you are groped and searched when you enter the stadium.
Then there is more money to be made in the betting on the game than in the TV and commercials. So would it be any surprise to you that the games might be fixed? It isn't to me. Have you ever seen the pro football game where one team plays and the other merely shows up? Maybe the team that only showed up knew who the winner would be.
There is also a globalist plan to destroy national sports such as US football, and replace it with soccer. Could this be a step in that direction?
I remember the day well. A Customer Service Representative was promoted to Outside Sales, and he left just before lunch. His new job was to begin on the following Monday. He came back in at about an hour or two later. His face was white as a ghosts. He took a deep breath and said "President Kennedy has been killed."
It was a quiet at the bus stop in Newark that night, and the bus was dead silent. Just like today people are silent on the coup d'etat that happened that day in Dallas. It angers me that people can forget that at that day and time on the 11th month and the 22nd day our country was changed forever, and not for the better.
Many still believe that it is us versus them, and Democrat versus Republican when there is not a dime's worth of difference. The US and the world are run by a SSG (Secret Shadow Government).
Here is the audio of President Kennedy speaking about the danger to American in Secret Societies.
When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn? It takes more than flying a flag and closing your eyes to the senseless slaughterr of men, women, and children to be patriotic. The "Great Satan" has struck again, and killed children in Ahrar Ash-Sham, Syria. It is to stop our own creation ISIS, or so they say. It is really to wage war against the Syrian government, and his majesty want Congress to expand his war making powers. So get off of your patriotic ass and call your Congressman and Senator and say, "I am mad as hell and I am not going to take it anymore. End the wars, stop the bombing."
November 5, 2014
Today is the day after, and many of us know what a day after can be like. We promise never to do it again when we recover, but we forget about it and do it again. Well we did it again. We traded one bunch of traitors for another. It is like getting drunk on a different beverage. What will change? Nothing much will change. It will be the continued destruction of the United States, and the impoverishment of millions more. When will we ever learn, when will we ever learn?
May 28, 2008. MEDICARE PREMIUMS HAVE DOUBLED SINCE 2000? I did not know that. Can you help get the ad on the air? May 26, 2008: Vet Burials Nonstop At National Cemeteries Average Of 1,800 Veterans Die Each Day
RITTMAN, Ohio -- The cracking of rifle fire silenced the twittering blue jays, blackbirds and killdeer. (read entire article)
May 8, 2008: Hey, at least the OIL surge is working! This is happening on such a regular basis, it's not even shocking anymore, but that (to me) is the outrage! May 5, 2008: Another Taser incident. Just the facts: Number of Google hits for "Taser 20007" = 3,650,000. Number of hits for "Taser 2008" = 4,260,000. And it's only the beginning of May. May 1, 2008: CBS-2 HDTV reports that House members are leasing expensive cars on taxpayers' money. LINK April 30, 2008: Don't let anyone tell you that the U.S. "liberated' the women of Afghanistan. Shine the light on stories like this. April 29, 2008:I know, technically this qualifies as an "Outrage of the Last 7 Years," but it could also be an ACTION ITEM (read to the end of the column). Thank you, Ted Rall. April 28, 2008: Preventing Voter Fraud by Burdening the Poor and Elderly? Only in Bush World April 27, 2008: Doctors to kill transplant patient for using medical pot
0 comments:
Post a Comment