Vladimir Putin answered questions from the Russian media to sum up his visit to Kyrgyzstan.
* * *
President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Good evening.
I think that I must begin by thanking the President of the Kyrgyz Republic and all his colleagues for their efforts to organise the SCO Summit. What a major endeavour. Those of you who have already been here have probably noticed that some of the buildings were constructed specifically for this event. It was all well organised at a proper international level. In fact, everything was impeccable from an organisational standpoint, and we also adopted important documents. I would like to congratulate the President of Kyrgyzstan and all his numerous team members for achieving this result. This is what I wanted to say at the outset.
Now I will be delighted to answer your questions. Go ahead, please.
Alyona Nefyodova: In your today’s remarks, you said that the SCO is the world’s biggest regional organisation. What potential does it have in terms of its future development, in your opinion? Can we expect new participants to become SCO members? Or does promoting deeper integration among the current membership dominate the agenda at this point?
Vladimir Putin: Let me remind you that the decision to establish the SCO did not come out of nowhere. As I have already said, in the wake of the Soviet Union’s dissolution, it was created with a mission to prevent and cut short any possible border conflicts, smooth out incidents and any shortcomings, while also serving as an effective platform for working together primarily on security matters. And all these aims were accomplished in a beneficial, timely manner and effectively.
However, it soon became clear that this platform can be used to go beyond this agenda by discussing not only security issues, but also economic development, fighting organised crime, drug addiction and trafficking, terrorism, and followed by environment-related matters and cultural cooperation. Overall, the SCO started gathering pace and gaining positive momentum. It is not a coincidence that other countries from this region were eager to join this organisation.
Today, it is one of the most powerful regional structures. As I have already said in my remarks – I do not remember whether this statement was open to the public or not, – the SCO accounts for more than half of the global population or something along these lines, and about a third of the global GDP. It has vast natural resources and incredible logistics opportunities. In fact, the SCO represents a half of the world. The fact that there were countries that wanted to join it and become full members within this organisation was not a coincidence. This is how the SCO expanded to include 10 member states, with another 15 countries contributing to its work in various capacities and statuses. All these countries now have observer status.
As for whether we need to expand the organisation and when it can happen, it all depends on what the SCO’s permanent members decide. We have a shared understanding that we cannot allow the SCO to grow into a loose structure by including countries or any participants in this process who do not share our common approaches or something else.
Therefore, we want this organisation to be inclusive. We want it to have more members. There was an agreement among us to do this on a step-by-step basis without any haste. Those who become observers must also understand where they are and what principles guide us in our action.
But what makes the SCO so appealing, in general? It is appealing because all matters are decided by consensus and based on specific agreements. No one imposes anything on anyone. This is a platform for working together as part of a collective decision-making process and the decisions we take must benefit the participating countries. In this sense, I believe that the SCO has a great future ahead of it.
Olga Knyazeva: Today, very much attention is given to our contacts with the United States. The CIA director has reportedly visited [Moscow] to offer trilateral Russia-US-Ukraine talks.
Do you think we need any negotiation tracks now or possibly new intermediaries, including American ones?
Vladimir Putin: First, communication between our intelligence services is maintained at all times. You may have noticed that we have recently handed over to the American side an American citizen who was serving a prison term in Russia. We did that for health and humanitarian reasons. He is a simple guy, a drinker and a brawler with health problems, so we sent him home to get medical assistance.
It was my first point. Communication is and was always maintained, even in the most difficult periods of the Cold War, and even more so now. Direct contacts are also maintained between the senior officials of our intelligence services.
As for expanding the number of negotiators, we believe that negotiations, any kind of negotiations, should be primarily filled with concrete content. If anyone is making or can make a practical contribution to this process, we are all for it.
The only thing we would like to avoid is to carry on a senseless process. If anyone can make a positive contribution to this negotiating process, which has been frozen to some extent, as we see this, we would not be against this. But this requires the involvement of specialists, the military and diplomats, of course.
On the other hand, we are quite comfortable with working with those who we know well and generally trust. These people are close to President Trump. In my opinion, they are sincere people who try to add practical content to our efforts. And President [Trump] trusts them, which is very important and without which no negotiations are possible. The thing is that everything is pointless if these people coordinate some issues with us but their top leader reviews the arrangements they make and divides them by a thousand or more. As far as we can see, he trusts them. That is why Mr Kushner and Mr Witkoff are always welcome here, and we enjoy working with them.
Pavel Zarubin: Good evening.
A few days ago, you drew a rather unexpected analogy involving orcas, polar bears and the special military operation. So, who is who there, and whom did you mean?
Vladimir Putin: You know, it was quite spontaneous – it occurred during a meeting, I believe, at the Pedagogical University, and it was indeed an impromptu remark. As for orcas and bears… If your suggestion is that the orcas symbolise, so to speak, the collective West, I would say that the orca is, without doubt, a formidable predator, yet it is also a highly intelligent creature, a cunning one. The collective West, for its part, was assigned a specific definition in the Soviet era, which remains current to this day – the sharks of imperialism.
Nonetheless, the essence, of course, is much as you have surmised. The thrust of my remarks was that if anyone attempts to drag us down the food chain and devour us, to consume us, they would be well advised to expect their teeth to be broken. And Russia stands ready to do precisely that, despite the insatiable appetites and ever-sharpening teeth of these sharks.
Viktor Sineok: The same applies to the special military operation.
Russian troops are currently advancing towards Kramatorsk and Slavyansk, and strikes on Ukrainian military facilities are ongoing.
Has the turning point in this conflict already been reached, and will the enemy, as the saying goes, begin to crumble? Or does that moment still lie ahead?
And what is the present situation at the front, and how do you assess it?
Vladimir Putin: I have no doubt whatsoever that the enemy will, indeed, crumble. Matters of precise timing are always exceedingly complex, and these are precisely the questions to which it is best not to attempt definitive answers – neither in respect of timing nor of any other specifics. For war is an enterprise that is harsh and difficult to predict.
Nevertheless, questions of the sort you have just raised invariably arise at every meeting with media representatives. That is why, before entering this hall, I proceeded to my office upstairs and have just spoken directly with the Chief of the General Staff. I would note, however, that the information I receive is sourced from a wide array of channels, from virtually all command bodies of the special services and our agencies which, in one manner or another, are engaged in the special military operation. Accordingly, the picture – at least as it appears to me – is fairly objective. I have just received the latest reports from him [Valery Gerasimov] and from other colleagues.
I would like to add, of course, that hostilities always involve casualties, which is sad and it is always a tragedy and faces us with new challenges, especially at this time of rapid scientific and technological development.
The biggest challenge is posed by unmanned vehicles, which operate in all spheres – underwater, on sea, land and in the air. This is a serious challenge to us, but we are coping with it. I am confident that all tasks in this sphere will be fulfilled. I have no doubt whatsoever about this. I can conclude this from the speed our defence enterprises have accumulated.
But there is more to it. You know, I was pleased with my meetings with representatives of small and medium-sized businesses and our nascent engineering schools. The average age of their engineering professionals is 35 years. I have recently held such a meeting and I was really pleased and impressed by this fact. We may be lagging behind or moving ahead of the enemy in some spheres, but we will certainly overcome all challenges and fulfil all our tasks.
But the main thing I would like to say in reply to your question is this. Despite all challenges, Russian forces are accelerating their offensive in the zone of the special military operation. They are not simply advancing but accelerating their movement.
The liberation of the Donetsk People’s Republic is proceeding as planned. I would like to note that in August alone we assumed control over 270 square kilometres of the republic’s territory and 15 localities. Here are the details.
The units of the South Group of Forces are confidently, I repeat, confidently advancing, overcoming the defence lines and engineering fortifications of the enemy, advancing… (Addressing Viktor Sineok) You have said “charging ahead.” Well, they may not exactly be charging ahead, but they do move unhurriedly in a high drone threat environment, advancing towards the eastern suburbs of Slavyansk and Kramatorsk and the southern suburbs of Druzhkovka, which are between 1.5 and 4 kilometres away in different sections of the frontline. Moreover, they are approaching Druzhkovka from several directions, bypassing it in the south and approaching it from the east.
Troops from the Centre group are advancing on several key axes simultaneously and are now engaged in street-by-street fighting to take the city of Dobropolye. This is a major, heavily fortified logistics hub, with both permanent and semi-permanent defensive structures in place. I will not tempt fate by predicting the outcome, but I am confident the result will come.
Forces from the West group – I am not sure whether this has been reported in the media – have encircled a large enemy contingent on the eastern bank of the Krasnooskol Reservoir, near the village of Peski-Radkovskiye, and have begun to neutralise it. Thirteen Ukrainian armed forces battalions, totalling around 5,000 troops, are trapped in the pocket. This happened recently, and I do not know whether the Ministry of Defence has issued any statement or has been able to confirm it. The figure is probably somewhere around 4,500 to 4,800 troops – roughly that number. Moreover, this encirclement has been physically sealed. That is to say, not just under fire control, but physically complete – we have them fully surrounded and are now tightening the ring.
The offensive in the Zaporozhye Region is also proceeding actively. Units and formations of the Vostok and Dnepr groups are pushing forward on a broad front towards Zaporozhye. They liberated nine communities in August, and fighting is now underway in the central districts of Orekhov. The troops there are operating calmly, but with great confidence.
The North group of forces continues to establish a buffer zone along the Russian-Ukrainian border in the border areas of the Sumy Region (there are now only 12 kilometres left to Sumy itself, before the ring road) and also in the Kharkov Region. Over the past month, 14 communities have come under Russian control, including the liberation of Kazachya Lopan and, as of yesterday, the town of Svyatogorsk.
In the north-eastern part of the Kharkov Region, another enemy grouping of up to 2,000 troops has been completely encircled. The pocket formed there is substantial – 460 square kilometres – and encompasses 27 communities. Its elimination will allow the line of contact in this sector to be pushed back by at least 20 kilometres from the border areas of the Belgorod Region.
I would like to remind you that our actions were taken in response to the Kiev authorities’ provocation, namely their incursion into the Kursk Region.
We continue to target Ukrainian military facilities, industrial enterprises, and the port and logistics infrastructure that operate in the interests of the Ukrainian armed forces. As you know, we are doing this in response to the Ukrainian regime’s continued attacks on Russia’s civilian infrastructure and its fuel and energy complex, including oil refineries. I have been told that last night a large number of drones tried to get past the air defence systems of Moscow and St Petersburg, targeting civilian facilities, including oil refineries. They attempted to hit three oil refineries. Taking all this into account – the attacks on Russia and these facilities – the Russian Armed Forces were instructed to prepare and deliver mass strikes on Ukrainian energy facilities. They are targeting our facilities; we strike back. This is roughly the situation.
Alexander Yunashev: May I ask an additional question about drones?
Vladimir Putin: Yes, you may.
Alexander Yunashev: Good afternoon, Mr President.
The German authorities have stated that Russia is behind the drone incident in Leipzig, claiming that it was a Russian drone armed with explosives. However, this is a murky story. They have denounced the lease for the Russian House and want to shut down our consulate general in Berlin. At the same time, Zelensky openly threatened our air force several hours ago, saying that civilian aircraft have no place in the sky used by Ukrainian drones.
What can you say about this?
Vladimir Putin: Let’s start with the first part, about the actions of the German authorities. I believe that it mostly has to do with the internal political situation. The Chancellor’s political standing is complicated. He is not trusted by his citizens, and it is clear why – because he does not uphold but sells out national interests, and because of apparent economic missteps: enterprises are being shut down, people are losing their jobs, and living standards are plummeting. It is not clear why they did what they did. They have only one explanation: they need to stand up against “aggressive Russia.” You want proof? Here you are; they have planted it.
I would like to remind everyone that some time ago – several months or even a year ago – the German authorities accused Russia of blowing up the Nord Stream pipeline. I was really surprised that they came up with such a strange idea because we were interested in selling gas to Europe. We would be ready to provide gas today too. They only need to press the button, to make the decision to do it. But they don’t have the stomach for this, because of the US sanctions and everything else.
Good, but now they need to explain the reasons behind their actions. Considering the falling ratings and the upcoming elections, including in Saxony, this puts the political future of the German ruling circles in question. I believe that this is the explanation. I think that this is yet another blunder, and that it runs contrary to the interests of the German people.
What was the other part of your question, about a statement?
Alexander Yunashev: Zelensky has said that the skies are unsafe for civilian airlines. Is this a threat?
Vladimir Putin: I have not heard such statements, but if he did say this publicly, this sounds like a claim to state terrorism. I would like to note that they are asking us to resume talks and hold personal meetings. We don’t negotiate with terrorists. This is the first point.
Now, about the second part of your question. If, God forbid, such tragedies happen, we will provide a reply, let no one be in any doubt about this.
Gleb Ivanov: Mr President, you have recently signed an executive order authorising the Government to place critical infrastructure facilities under temporary administration if their security is not ensured. Could you elaborate on this executive order? First, in what cases do you intend to implement this, and second, could this lead to the nationalisation of these assets, turning them into state property?
Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: Of course not. What are you talking about? This is not a matter of nationalising anything – do not even think about it. There was never any such intention behind this move. Nationalisation is not an option. What compelled us to do this was quite straightforward. There is a saying, you know, that a man will not lock the barn door until after the horse is stolen. The adversary has started targeting civilian sites, including oil refineries. Did the adversary succeed in inflicting damage? It did. But why? Among other factors, and primarily because they were not protected. Unfortunately, our companies – I have had many face-to-face and collective meetings with them – these companies have been saying: “This is a matter for the law enforcement agencies, the army, etc. to handle.” But once we discussed this, they understood that they also had to be part of this effort.
Let me assure you… I said that there were attempts to target three oil refineries this night alone. These attempts failed. Why? Because these facilities were already protected. This does not mean that no strikes will ever get through. It might happen every now and then, but this elevates the protection to a whole new level. We have yet to complete repairs at just 10 percent of our oil refineries, so there is no way we can afford to have those of them that were repaired suffer from any strikes.
Therefore, we must all work together. This executive order is designed to achieve just that: to enable public administrations on the ground, including in municipalities, cities, regions and republics of the Russian Federation, as well as law enforcement agencies, and the Defence Ministry to work together to defend critical sites. This is all there is to it in terms of the purpose of this executive order. And it works, you know.
Of course, everything is possible, and there is always a possibility that something penetrates these defences somewhere, since the defences are not always effective. That said, this is the purpose of this executive order. And we can see that it works.
Go ahead, please.
Anna Sedykh: You had a long series of bilateral meetings, including a very interesting one with Pashinyan. He has recently said that Moscow is no longer Yerevan’s strategic partner. In this context, does Russia have any plans to close its base in Gyumri? Overall, are you satisfied with your conversation with Pashinyan? Have you received answers to questions that matter to Russia? What do you think about Armenia’s statements that it would like the CSTO to expel the country?
Vladimir Putin: You know, I do not want to dwell too much on what has happened recently, but it all started – even if we agreed to try not to do this, but you are basically forcing me, but never mind, we can discuss this topic now and that will be it, – it all started with the Karabakh issue. The Armenian leadership and the Prime Minister himself signed a paper in Prague recognising that Karabakh was part of Azerbaijan. From this moment, we found ourselves in a very ambiguous situation on this matter. Can we or should we interfere in Azerbaijan’s internal affairs?
The West actively – very actively – conveyed to me personally (I will not reveal the names at this juncture) that all Western European states recognised Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan. They assured me: “We will guarantee the rights and interests of the Armenian population residing there.” I responded: “You will guarantee nothing; people will simply depart, and that will be the end of the matter.” Although President Ilham Aliyev would cause no harm to these people – he is a modern, astute statesman; he will, without question, endeavour to safeguard their interests one hundred percent – nevertheless, they would ultimately leave. This is precisely what transpired.
However, it is exceedingly difficult to assume responsibility for all these developments in hindsight. Russia, appeared to be very “conveniently” here, as it were. We have already provided our explanations in this regard.
I do not wish to blame anyone for anything. The course of events unfolded precisely as it did. However, there may well be certain advantages in this decision taken by the current Armenian leadership, for it lays bare the situation in its entirety; thus, one may close this chapter and move forward without further conflict, resettle the population in new places of residence, unblock infrastructure, embark upon a new chapter in economic life, open borders for investment, and so forth. In fact, there are a considerable number of advantages.
Turning to the European Union and the Eurasian Economic Union, I also stated today: if you have chosen to align with the European Union – by all means, proceed; that is the sovereign decision of any state. We are bound to the Armenian people by historical ties of friendship – indeed, by more than mere friendship. Our relations with Armenians, with the Armenian people as a whole, including in this part of the world, are deeply rooted. Yet it is fundamentally impossible to be a member of both organisations simultaneously. It is simply impossible. We have divergent phytosanitary regulations and divergent technical standards; indeed, we have a multitude of aspects that are, at present, incompatible.
When the Prime Minister noted that Armenia had neither withdrawn from nor filed any application to withdraw from the Eurasian Economic Union – I believe this was stated during the open session – I replied: if you have enacted legislation (they have adopted a law initiating the procedure for accession to the European Union), this signifies that you have indicated to us that you intend, at some point, to leave the Eurasian Economic Union.
Furthermore, I will speak frankly – there is nothing classified about this – within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union, Armenia undoubtedly receives highly significant preferences. I am not even speaking of energy prices – I do not recall the precise figure, whether it is 138 dollars or thereabouts – whereas in Europe, as we know, it stands at 800 euros per thousand cubic metres. But that is not the crux of the matter: their market is accessible to us, facilities are being constructed there, and there are numerous other preferences. While enjoying these preferences in its relations with us, the country is – to a degree taking advantage of the full benefits of cooperation with the Eurasian Economic Union and with Russia – seeking to withdraw. Let them now state frankly their desires and their objectives.
We agreed to keep the dialogue constructive and measured. Mr Pashinyan proposed a thorough review of our joint work in each area, and I agreed to it. I have invited him to Moscow so that we can sit down properly – just the two of us, with our respective government experts – and go through every item.
There are specific practical questions, too. Take the railway, for example. We lease it, more or less. The question is how to develop it. But investment in such infrastructure depends entirely on traffic volumes: if the freight is there, the investment will follow – from us or from others. If not, there will be no investment and no development. With any luck, once the fighting stopped and the situation returns to normal, things may finally change for the better. Maybe the border with Turkiye will reopen, and other routes too, and then cargo flows could pick up again. And if they do, anyone can make those investments, Russia included. At the end of the day, it comes down to whether the economic project is viable. But ultimately, that is a sovereign decision for each country to make.
That applies even more so to the military base. If Armenia decides it no longer wants a Russian base, we could leave as early as tomorrow. Is that what Armenia wants? Fine – we are not going to force anything on anyone. But if the Armenian people would prefer to have a Russian military presence nearby, we will stay, we will keep working, we will continue cooperating.
As for the CSTO, that, too, has its own backstory. Mr Pashinyan says, “There is no point in bringing that up.” But how can we not? He took the view that the CSTO should be responsible for securing certain sections of the border. Yet all the other CSTO members say: no, that is a different matter altogether. There has been no border delimitation, no border agreement – there never was, and there isn’t one now. Azerbaijan claims the border runs one way, Armenia claims it runs another. Where is the agreement? There isn’t any. So how do we move forward on that basis? There are a lot of issues that really need expert-level assessment. And I am expecting the Prime Minister in Moscow, as we agreed, so that we can discuss all of this properly.
Question: Allow me to go back to the threats issued by Vladimir Zelensky. You characterised this as tantamount to state terrorism, and it is well known how terrorists are dealt with.
Under what circumstances might strikes occur, and are such strikes even possible against Ukraine’s military and political leadership, as opposed to solely against energy facilities?
Does Ukraine’s leadership and military command currently enjoy immunity from our strikes?
Vladimir Putin: As you can see, we are not carrying out such strikes. We proceed from the premise that certain individuals are necessary for dialogue. Indeed, should they come to realise that they wish to resolve matters by peaceful means, rather than simply “destroying our economy within 40 days”, bringing Russia “to its knees”, or inflicting upon us “another strategic blow” or a “strategic defeat” – then we will require negotiators of some sort. This is indeed tantamount to terrorism, but not yet a transition into outright terrorism. Should it ever come to that, we will consider how to respond, and we will find the necessary means.
Nazigul Dzhusupova: How do you assess the current situation on the grain market? Was this subject discussed during your contacts in Bishkek, in particular with President Erdogan? In light of the concerns expressed by many countries regarding a grain shortage, is Russia prepared for a new grain deal? And what are the consequences of our strikes for Ukraine in this context?
Let me also seek clarification on the matter of cooperation on grain hubs. You stated earlier that Egypt is interested in this project; has there been any progress?
Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: Regarding the grain deal. I remember it very well – I participated in this process – and it arose for much the same reasons: the need to ensure food security for Third World countries suffering from hunger, as without Ukrainian grain there would be a genuine catastrophe and famine would claim thousands of lives. We agreed to it. I believe that approximately zero point two percent of Ukrainian grain reached developing markets in Africa. All the rest was sent to Europe, to quite prosperous countries, at a normal, favourable price. Consequently, Africa was left absolutely out in the cold. That is the first point.
Secondly, under this grain deal, within the framework of this agreement, it was decided to resolve certain issues of interest to Russia, specifically: sanctions were to be lifted from Rosselkhozbank – our bank – and it was to be permitted certain forms of operation; the ban on ships calling at Russian ports to export our products was to be lifted; issues with insurance companies were to be resolved; and so on – there was an entire package. Yet nothing was done – simply zero, absolutely nothing.
Then we said: “Nothing has been done, the deadlines have passed, and we are withdrawing from the deal.” However, we were asked to remain and promised that everything would be resolved shortly. Some time passed – again, nothing was done. We extended it a third time, and then said: “Well, enough is enough.” That was it; we withdrew.
But what has actually transpired now? In fact, we have not targeted any civilian vessels. Yes, we have conducted pinpoint strikes on certain vessels, but these were genuinely precise. We have never once made a mistake; we struck only those craft that were transporting weapons or ammunition to Ukraine. There was not a single error. Why? Because each strike was followed by secondary explosions and detonations, which meant we always hit the intended target. But, I repeat, this was highly selective work.
But when, back in June, the head of the regime announced he was launching an operation and would inflict irreparable damage on the Russian economy within 40 days, forcing us to do this and that, and then set about doing just that… Well, I think they did inflict real damage on us. In the first two weeks alone, they hit about 40 of our ships. Not destroyed, but damaged. Over those 40 days, they damaged around 100 vessels in total. People died – sailors, including foreign nationals, among them Azerbaijani and Turkish citizens.
The total damage, by our preliminary estimates, was fairly substantial – around 1 percent of GDP. That is not critical for us; they cannot deal us a knockout blow. But damage is damage. After that, we said, “Right, fair enough – but then we will respond in kind.”
I told Pavel Zarubin during an interview we were doing: “You have opened Pandora’s box – so here you go.” Now they are less than happy about it. They are feeling the heat because they are spending heavily on imports, and those imports are growing – around 8 billion euros or dollars a month, give or take. They earn about 3 billion from exports – mostly grain and other agricultural produce – and the other 5 billion comes as handouts from the West. That is how Ukraine keeps itself afloat these days.
Now, if there is a problem getting that grain and other agricultural goods out, they are losing roughly that 3 billion – a significant shortfall against the 8 billion they need just to cover imports. And of course, farmers are taking a hit too; they could go under, and the banks are feeling it as well. It is a serious challenge. I am not saying we are going to collapse their economy, but it is a serious challenge for them.
And there are at least three possible crises on the horizon.
First, a currency crisis. Why? Because they are selling less, earning less foreign currency, and yet they still need to spend more. Second, a budget crisis – revenues are falling, plain and simple, and the budget falls short. And third, a banking crisis. Because those producers who took out loans will not be able to repay them. What is more, not only will they default, but with the currency shortage, the state will start borrowing from the banks, effectively draining that currency away from them, which means economic actors will get less. And what money will the banks have to part with? Those held in citizens’ accounts, among other things. Citizens will see what is happening, I am sure of that, and they will start converting their bank balances into cash. And that will trigger another crisis.
That is precisely why they have gone running to all our friends – to the Arab states, not just one but several; to our Indian friends; and to a few others, including Turkiye – with the same plea: “Help us. Let’s make Russia, under one pretext or another, primarily on social and humanitarian grounds, to release our cargo.”
They can export it, of course – for example, through Poland, to neighbouring European countries. But the Poles will not let it through. Why? Because they are afraid that relatively cheap Ukrainian grain will end up staying on their domestic market, rather than just passing through in transit, and will undermine the financial stability of their own agricultural producers. And I suspect the other neighbouring countries are thinking along exactly the same lines.
So it is a complicated situation. As I mentioned, they have put forward some proposals. I will not go into them now – it does not feel appropriate to disclose that sort of thing. I have already said that their proposals are outlandish, truly outlandish. You know our famous joke: “First we eat yours – and then everyone will eat their own.” That is the kind of proposals they come up with.
Olga Matveyeva: Recently, there are more and more reports in Ukraine and in a number of Western media outlets claiming that a new wave of mobilisation will take place in Russia after the State Duma elections.
Vladimir Putin: This is complete nonsense. It is an information attack against Russia.
Question: You met with Mr Tokayev yesterday, as well as in Omsk in June. Back in June, he proposed freezing the conflict in Ukraine along the line of contact.
Vladimir Putin: We did not discuss this issue with him at all. He made that proposal publicly, but we have not returned to it since.
Question: What is your position on this?
Vladimir Putin: Of course, we want to do that, but we do not want to just freeze the conflict. We want to end the war and achieve lasting, comprehensive peace, both in Ukraine and in Europe. We are ready to engage in the negotiation process with anyone who is willing to do so.
Anton Vernitsky: At your meetings with your counterparts in Bishkek, did any of them – maybe Xi Jinping or Erdogan – put forward any new mediation proposals for resolving the Ukraine conflict?
Vladimir Putin: We know their position. No one is imposing anything on us, but all our friends hold a position in favour of ending this conflict as quickly as possible, preferably through peaceful means. We know this position, and we greatly respect it. It is sincere, as the people are thinking about how to improve the situation. No one is exerting any undue pressure on us, but this issue is, of course, always on the agenda, and we discuss it.
Lyudmila Aleksandrova: In Bishkek, you had meetings with Indian Prime Minister Modi and [President of Kazakhstan] Tokayev. Could you please tell us whether the issue of gasoline supplies was discussed and, if so, whether any agreements were reached during these talks, perhaps regarding the schedule or volumes of supplies?
Vladimir Putin: We discuss all topics of mutual interest, and everything is positive.
Lyudmila Aleksandrova: Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: I am not joking. This is not a joke or an excuse. I am telling it like it is.
Don Courter: Moscow has repeatedly warned that any British military facilities in Ukraine and beyond could be targeted in response to Ukrainian strikes using British weapons on Russian territory, so…
Vladimir Putin: Are there any British military facilities in Ukraine?
Don Courter: If there are any.
Vladimir Putin: If there are, then absolutely – I can confirm it again: any military facilities in Ukraine are legitimate targets for us, British or otherwise.
Don Courter: And if these weapons are used on Russian territory, is there a “red line”? Could British defence facilities located on British soil become military targets?
Vladimir Putin: That’s classified. Military secret.
Don Courter: Understood. Thank you.
Question: Mr President, you recently said that while visiting the Kuril Islands, you were impressed to see tuna and sharks. Were you impressed – or perhaps surprised – by the Japanese government’s reaction to your visit?
And more broadly, is the fact that you are visiting the Kuril Islands for the first time now connected to the Japanese government’s harsh anti-Russia rhetoric? They are planning to hold exercises off the coast of the Russian Federation in just a week.
Vladimir Putin: On the whole, I was not surprised by their reaction to my visit to the Kuril Islands. What does surprise me is their stance towards Russia in general. We have not taken a single step to worsen Russian-Japanese relations – we have handled them with the utmost care. Everything that is happening now, the deterioration in our relationship, is entirely down to the Japanese government.
What have we actually done against Japan? Absolutely nothing. As I have said before, we were ready to continue discussing the peace treaty and addressing other humanitarian issues – Japanese citizens visiting the islands, that sort of thing. We had responded positively to a lot of their concerns.
Signing a peace treaty is a complicated matter – it is a complex issue, and for us, it is a closed chapter. But we were nonetheless prepared to engage in some kind of dialogue with them. Then, out of nowhere, completely unprovoked on our side, they began to run down our relations step by step. What has that got to do with us? Well, if you are intent on undermining relations, then so be it. We regret it, but the blame lies squarely with them – entirely.