Last Thursday, another conference of the “Waldaj” Discuss Club was held. It is simply a key event, and in fact a key think-tank shaping reflections and narratives of Russian elites about Russia towards the outside planet and about global relations. Think-tank has the expression of the improvement and Support Foundation of the global Discussion Club "Waldaj", whose founders are the Russian Ministry of abroad Affairs, the Council of abroad Affairs and Defence, the Moscow State Institute of global Relations (MGIMO) and the National University of Research-High School of Economics (NIU-WSE). On a regular basis, think-tank publishes "Russia in Global Politics", and manager of the club's technological papers, Fiordor Łukianow has a regular publicist program "International View" on state tv Rossija-24. In addition, Łukianów is besides head of the Bureau of the abroad and Defence Affairs Council. In my opinion, this environment is the main environment reflecting the actual intellectual diplomacy of the Kremlin.
Traditionally, the conference held a discussion gathering with Putin. He was in good shape. He reacted calmly, but firmly. He dealt well with questions that were, however, not demanding, uncomfortable, almost not.
Putin expressed the belief that we were dealing with a breakthrough time of building a completely fresh global order, to the degree of the Westfalz or the Yalta. He emphasized the ideological rationale of Western politics, acknowledging that its leading liberal ideology had become an ideology of extremist “an intolerance to any alternative, any sovereign and independent thought.” He assessed that the West is inactive surviving a belief in its uniqueness, and that it is presently pursuing Russia's task of "strategic disaster". He spoke about the Western's " creeping intervention" against his state, as described by the geopolitical conflict in Ukraine.
He pointed to BRICS as a expression for managing global relations resistant to the influence of the West and governments of the "golden billion" – as he presented the financial position of the Western elite. In this context, he explicitly advertised the function of Russia as a partner of non-Western powers and the Global South.
Putin complimented Trump as a real man, a man who showed his virtues at the time of his assassination on his life, spoke of congratulations, though his administration had previously assured that there were no formal or informal congratulations, and expressed hope that Trump would carry out the announced moves, in terms of the war in Ukraine. These are words far more affirmative than those of the Russian elite. Suggesting openness to negotiations. He stressed the readiness to normalize relations with the US, but without any preconditions.
He spoke of relations with China as being unprecedentedly advanced – "the level of trust in relations is historically highest". He enjoyed the fast increase in the share of trade with China in Russia's overall abroad trade turnover. He was trying to trade technology. It stressed the importance of Russian energy natural materials and the atomic energy sector for the PRC. He praised the mixed economical strategy of the PRC as a combination of the free marketplace and the planned economy. He claimed that "the Chinese economy is more efficient than others". He stressed the community's force situation. In consequence to a nipponese journalist's question, he virtually referred to China as a “sooty”. India besides called it. economical cooperation with the second has besides given up many places. Nota bene questions from Chinese journalists were the most numerous. erstwhile a Saudi writer spoke of “three planet powers” (US, China and Russia) Putin immediately added that India belongs to this rank as well.
"The greater the crisis, the more the plan," he said about the economical situation. However, this anticipation was linked to real sovereignty, independency from external political and economical interests. This is forced by the realities of the shift in Putin's narrative, which for many years was a liberal monetarian.
Putin dropped work to the West for breaking the treaties on atomic arms control. He opposed China's engagement in them, stressing that they had no parity with the US and Russia so far, which was another clear motion towards Beijing. At the same time, he talked about the increase in the strategical possible of Britain and France, which he wrote into the collective account of the West. There was clearly a deficiency of readiness to talk on this level, which Russia will most likely have in connection with talks on another levels on which it wants to talk right now.
Putin proposed a "new investment platform", which he promoted already at the October BRCIS summit in Kazan. It would be a mechanics for investing measures leading the block economies in little developed countries. However, the platform would mean not only the transfer of financial capital, but besides staff, which suggests that any of the money would return to companies and institutions from China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, UAE.
The president stressed that two-thirds of Russian abroad trade and 88% of turnover with the BRICS states were done without the dollar. He stressed the request to establish an electronic payment strategy in place of SWIFT. Instead, he distanced himself to this minute from the thought of any understood BRICS currency.
He besides addressed cultural issues. The beginning ceremony of the Paris Games was called “an insult” to Christians. He powerfully criticized the inclusion of alleged "female" male women in women's sports competitions, referring, among others, to the Algerian "fist" at the last Olympics. He said that "self-worths must be defended by all available means".
He rejected the proposition of an “inverted Kissinger” maneuver that a Chinese writer asked about. He stated that relations with China were not only a community of many interests, but besides a community of values. He stressed that the situation in East Asia was becoming increasingly tense. However, he defended China, claimed that their policy was "temperate" and defensive, and attributed the US policy to "building blocks" and "formal NATO entry" into the region. He called on the nipponese writer to search a compromise, as he felt the improvement of Chinese-Indian relations was progressing. He claimed that the U.S. is doing its “provokation” policy in Taiwan, as it had previously done in Ukraine. In fact, the nipponese writer was rather harsh in asking why he was asking about Russia's cooperation with China in joint military exercises in the Far East, since Tokyo together with the West sanctioned Russia and has maintained American armed forces for decades. He spoke rather foreignly to this writer claiming that Japan had imposed sanctions on Russia "on the command of Washington".
He passed rapidly after the subject of this year's quasi-sojuszic agreement with the DPRK, relegating it rhetorically as a simple continuation of previously signed agreements, inactive in the times of the USSR, although he did not officially exclude joint military exercises.
He emphasized Russia's willingness to invest on the African continent (as an example – an atomic power plant in Egypt) and reiterated one more time that Moscow had never colonised and "exploited" Africa and "supported independency movements" (revocation to USSR policy). He translated military engagement on the continent with the initiative of the African states themselves. He admitted that Russia trains African military and safety officers in selected states.
Speaking on the mediate East, he took a critical position towards Israel as a organization to the UN safety Council and General Assembly resolutions. He stressed the importance of a two-state solution. He suggested in a veiled manner that Israel's consequence to the Hamas attack proved disproportionate. However, he spoke carefully, clearly not wanting to strain his relation with Tel Aviv.
The war with Ukraine was explained by Russia's designation of its borders on condition that the country was neutral. He besides stated that armed intervention was a way of supporting people defending their interests against a "state attack", as stated by the Majdan Revolution. He referred to the UN Statute and presented himself as a defender of the right to self-determine Crimea and Donbas. He referred to the case of Kosovo and the designation of its independency by the UN Court. The annexation of these areas was presented as the will of their residents, against “initiated by the Kiev government of armed actions”. "If there is no neutrality, it is hard to imagine good neighbourly relations between Russia and Ukraine, due to the fact that under specified conditions Ukraine will be a tool in another people's hands [...] The situation will make in unpredictable directions" – this is an crucial overall declaration on the conditions for peace talks. Russia will clearly not be satisfied with the annexation of already controlled Ukrainian territories, but it is determined to at least neutralise Ukraine, i.e. not joining NATO will be its fundamental condition. Putin expressed assurance in the possible of a further war to exhaustion.
A question from a German writer sparked a peana in Putin for Gerhard Schröder, as a man with a “speak of opinion”. He praised his opposition to the American invasion of Iraq. He considered his commitment to building Nord Stream as a merit for Europe and acting "in the interests of the German people". This is simply a clear signal to Berlin, in a veiled way indicating Russia's resources as a rescue from the crisis caused by the green governance policy.
He presented everything in the sauce "multipolar world" and "balanced", in which he saw the warrant of the peaceful nature of global relations.
There were fewer journalists from the West in the conference. Definitely the most, judging by the questions, were Chinese and Indian. Putin, as I have already written, was in good form (he did not appear to have been dying for at least 3 years) and surely manifested a retreat of Russia from Europe.
Krystian Kamiński
The author is simply a associate of the Main Board of the Confederation, was a associate of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland of the 9th term, text for fb
