President Putin met with journalists following the Direct Line April14th 2016

President Putin answers to journalists’ questions following the Direct Line on April14th 2016

Vladimir Putin met with journalists and answered their questions following the Direct Line.

April 14th, 2016

Question: Was it not daunting to face so many serious problems and pressing questions?

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: No.

Question: Why do you say that?

Vladimir Putin: This is my work, what my colleagues and I are expected to do. You can’t hide from serious questions, because if you try to put a gloss on reality, how will you understand what is really going on? And it is extremely important to understand where we are, how we are working, and how people view our work.

Question: Mr President, when you were asked about [Alexei] Kudrin, you started talking about the future, about some plans for 2018. Does this mean that you have already made the decision to run for president in 2018?

Vladimir Putin: No, it doesn’t mean that I have made such a decision. It means that we need to adjust our medium and long-term plans. No country can survive without making such adjustments, and Russia is no exception. We had development plans in place through to 2020, and now it is already 2016. We have come to the point where we need to reflect on the medium-term prospects.

This was Mr Kudrin’s own initiative too, really. He and some other colleagues said that we should be working on this regardless of who will be in the Government and who will be the President. The country has to know which road it is taking, at what pace, and what is needed to reach the goals it has set.

Question: Do you regret Obama’s imminent departure?

Vladimir Putin: We will all go one day – there is no point in having regrets, we have to work. I must say that the President of the United States – assessments can vary of course, but in any case his work should be assessed by the citizens of the US – but he is working, and very actively. He and I keep in touch, I maintain contact with his Administration, and I am confident that this will continue until the end of his tenure. He is a very responsible man. But once America elects a new President, we’ll start working with the new one.

Question: New government in Canada and new Prime Minister. How do you see the relations with Canada going forward?

Vladimir Putin: We are positive about them. We have known each other personally since we met in Antalya, by the way, at the G20 meeting. He has expressed his views about how he is going to build relations with Russia. We are quite satisfied.

As I understand it, the new Prime Minister of Canada wants to build relations with Russia on a positive basis, as we did in previous years. We are fine with that. We are neighbours across the Arctic Circle, across the North Pole. We have a lot of mutual interests, oddly enough, even being as far apart geographically as we are. We look forward to working together.

Question: How do you see the role of the Kurds against ISIS?

Vladimir Putin: The role of the Kurds? What can I say? I will just say it as it is. How do I see it? The Kurds are very courageous people, if not heroic. I know what I am saying. The Kurds fight selflessly, without sparing themselves, and very effectively. They are a very serious force in the fight against terrorism in the Middle East, particularly in Syria.

As you know, the United States is working with them actively, but our troops are also in contact with armed Kurdish units, including in Aleppo, where the terrorists of Jabhat al-Nusra and ISIS are now trying to oust them from their present positions. We are following the events and we will support them.

Question: You have mentioned the economy. What do you see as a way out of this grave economic crisis: implementing Kudrin’s programme or, for example, agreeing with Saudi Arabia to freeze oil output?

I also have a question on privatisation. Why did you agree to the privatisation of important stakes in companies like Rosneft while the market is so low? How can you guarantee that it would not become a replica of the loans-for-shares auctions and selling off state assets at a low bargain price?

Vladimir Putin: Regarding ways out of the current situation, I do not intend to use either what Alexei Kudrin is proposing, or any agreements with Saudi Arabia as a foundation. In this respect, we should be guided by the anti-crisis plan of the Russian Government and make sure that it is implemented.

When it comes to dealing with the situation in which Russia has found itself, which is by the way also true for many other countries, especially the developing economies, two or three areas should always be prioritised.

What are these areas? Attracting investment, raising the purchasing power, which means increasing demand, and enhancing economic and governance efficiency.

For that, we need to support specific industries that are facing hardships. This goes for the automobile industry, processing, agriculture should be on this list anyway, which is due to sanctions and retaliatory measures, as well as a number of other industries. They are all mentioned in the Government plan.

There is no doubt whatsoever that we need to ensure and increase the demand. How? We need to assist people in difficult straits. We also need to boost industrial demand through targeted support measures that I have mentioned, including, by the way, the construction industry, despite the fact that 85 million square metres of real estate were built last year, as I have mentioned.

We need to continue to balance macroeconomic and budget policies, keeping the budget deficit within 3 percent and giving more political and economic freedoms to businesses, as well as improve the business climate.

These are the five key areas that we must and will work on. It is on these areas that we should base our efforts to foster economic development. We need to put the country back on the track of steady economic growth. We can and will do it based on the Government’s anti-crisis plan.

As for privatisation, there is nothing unusual in this respect. If you look at the articles I published in the run-up to the 2012 presidential election, I wrote that privatisation could be supported, including in the oil and gas sector, which refers to major state-owned companies. So there is nothing unusual.

Why are we doing it on a falling market? First, we need money. Second and most importantly, we will be looking for a strategic partner who understands that skimping is not an option when it comes to buying a 19 percent stake in Rosneft. There is no need to pay attention to the current stock prices. We should be forward-looking. If we find a partner of this kind, and I think that it is possible, we will be ready to move ahead with privatisation despite a falling market, as you have said.

Thank you.

Question: You will meet with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in May. You will probably discuss the northern territories and peace treaty issues. What kind of compromises would Russia be willing to consider, in your view?

Vladimir Putin: In order for compromises to be considered, we first need to have an on-going and uninterrupted dialogue, but Japan took the decision to limit contacts with us at one point.

I do not think this is at all in the interests of Japan and its people. At the same time though, we see that despite the pressure from their partners, in particular from the USA, our Japanese friends do seek to maintain relations with us.

We therefore welcome the Japanese Prime Minister’s visit to Russia. We will discuss all the different problems, of course. In order to resolve these problems that we have not yet resolved since the end of World War II, the instruments we have put in place must function continuously.

I think that some kind of compromise can and will be found.

Question: Will South Ossetia become part of Russia? Is South Ossetia not abusing your support? They cannot create an independent state and want to join Russia. Will you help them with some kind of legal procedure?

Vladimir Putin: I didn’t understand the question.

Remark: You met with [President of South Ossetia] Tibilov and had discussions.

Vladimir Putin: Yes.

Remark: And then Tibilov went back to Tskhinval and said that there would be a referendum to decide whether the people want to give the head of state the power to establish a union body with Russia and transfer powers to this body, because Russia cannot take South Ossetia into the Russian Federation at the moment for political reasons. Will you establish this union body and have South Ossetia’s territory join Russia? Would this not amount to annexation of South Ossetia’s territory?

Vladimir Putin: We are not looking at such an option for our relations with South Ossetia. Everyone knows that we recognised South Ossetia, and I have set out our position on this matter on many occasions. I think that the former Georgian President made a fundamental strategic mistake when he launched the military operations we remember, without any justification, and it is his fault that he lost this territory as a result.

But we have not discussed the matter you raise in any detail with South Ossetia’s leadership. Mr Tibilov did speak about this matter, and said that South Ossetia’s people want to hold such a referendum. We cannot oppose this. Nothing holds us back except for the interests of the South Ossetian people themselves. We do not yet know though just what this referendum will involve and how the final wording will look. Once we know, depending on this, we will look at the situation and decide from there.

Question: Why are you so sure that any criticism of Russia, including the recent information about your friends and the Panama papers, is a plot against Russia?

And one more question if you’ll allow: Nadia Savchenko, the Ukrainian pilot, has declared a hunger strike. Are you willing to exchange or free her?

Vladimir Putin: Let’s start with the second matter. We are in touch with the Ukrainian government on this matter. Our partners know our position. It is better to take things one step at a time with such things.

As for the matter of news campaigns, we do not think they are plots. I never said this, but I do think that such information does not appear without a reason. We think this because no one in Russia’s leadership is on these lists, but there is a clear desire to smear us with this affair. I just spoke about this in detail during the Direct Line with Russia’s people. Should I repeat myself again? I think there is no need for this.

Let’s take the last question.

What are these areas? Attracting investment, raising the purchasing power, which means increasing demand, and enhancing economic and governance efficiency.

Thank you.

S113 on April 18, 2016 · at 11:06 pm EST/EDT

Martin, Sergey Glazyev may be our economic saviour:

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/social-christianity-will-bring-about-russias-economic-breakthrough/ri13958

“The economic situation is increasingly chaotic. The world economy is out of control. We target inflation, and it doubles. Talk about transitioning to a new direction results in a further degradation of the economy. ‘De-offshorization’ got us more foreign equity in our corporations and industries. Import substitution resulted in further price rises.

This growing crisis is due to two things: our increasing dependence on the America-centric financial system, and American aggression, which we must resist. There’s clearly a dissonance between our financial and economic dependence on a foreign system and the need to pursue a sovereign foreign policy in order to survive.

Two-thirds of our financial market are controlled by non-residents and non-resident equity, and when it comes to currency and financial speculation, it’s 90%. This is the Washington Consensus promoted in Russia by the International Monetary Fund is to subordinate domestic systems to the interests of international financial funds, mostly American, by a non-sovereign monetary policy that pegs the currency to expanding reserves.

Two-thirds of the currency issued comes from foreign sources. At first, this dependency was subtle because there was a flow of cheap loans from abroad: Russian corporations and the government borrowed $700 billion. But only areas of interest to the West – the export of raw materials and the import of consumer goods – developed, ruining the domestic market, especially when sanctions were imposed, preventing us from refinancing our foreign loans and deflating our monetary base.

The ruble is the most gold-backed currency in the world, and our currency reserves are excessive — twice as much as our monetary base. As the most undervalued currency in the world, the ruble is five times undervalued in terms of purchasing power parity, and it’s also the most volatile, driving us artificially into stagnation.

Developed countries’ monetary and industrial policy floods the economy with money. In the last eight years, there has been an unprecedented issuance of dollars, euros, yen and yuan. The value of the world currency in dollars, i.e. the amount of the dollar mass, has grown fourfold since 2007.

Our financial system is shrinking while the West’s expands. The interest rate is being raised while the West innovates. According to Schumpeter, the interest rate is a tax on innovations and investments. We are killing the transition to a new technological system by our macroeconomic policy while strengthening our dependence on foreign sources. Our economy goes where the money is, and because money doesn’t come from here, the economy shrinks.

China, Korea, Vietnam and India are growing fast, based on the new system of industrial relations. In the 1960’s, Pitirim Sorokin called this the ‘integral system’ – combining planning with the market — which was later called the ‘convergence of the two systems’. Convergence has now happened and a new system of industrial relations and institutions that differ drastically from the American liberal model is forming right before our eyes.

The principal mover in the American-centric system is the maximization of profit dominated by financial magnates. The government would sets the rules of a new financial system that will focus on people’s well-being, harmonizing social and economic relationships, with business and the public sphere working together. The Chinese call this Chinese-specific socialism, the Japanese – ‘Japan incorporated’. We suggest a transition to domestic sources for loans, strategic planning, the use of our competitive advantages based on long-term goal-setting and a system of targeted credits at low interest rates based on a private/state partnership.

Russia lacks an ideology, however the Orthodox tradition and the building of socialism in our country provide a new starting point that will enable us to combine our own needs and those of the wider world. All my attempts on the Internet to explain that we need to transit to a conservative synthesis based on traditional values, involving religious confessions in the creation of an ideological base, were rejected by our European partners, although they have both social-Christian and Christian-democratic traditions. They don’t want to return to indigenous values, caring more about same-sex marriage and other Satanic ideas. and that is why ultimately, Europe is doomed.

One very important thing should be said, however. The ideology of social-Christianity corresponds perfectly to the sixth technological level, the knowledge society, where profit doesn’t play a major role, and prices correspond to demand. In this ‘new economy’ the manufacturer sells to the rich at triple the price and gives to the poor for free, combining the Orthodox and socialist doctrines.

The western world has adopted negative interest rates. This is perfectly compatible with both Orthodoxy and socialism. But Russia’s high interest rate economic policy is archaic and makes our situation worse.”

82 Comments

Italia Uno on April 15, 2016 · at 7:18 pm EST/EDT

I think Mr Putin was tired at the end. He seemed to answer the same question twice )))
- Anonymous on April 15, 2016 · at 9:40 pm EST/EDT
  
  And your point is?
- Scott on April 16, 2016 · at 2:28 pm EST/EDT
  
  Live: „Heißer Draht“: Wladimir Putins Fragestunde in Moskau – deutsche Übersetzung
  
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWzMU4yU-wo
  
  Streamed live on Apr 14, 2016
  
  Wladimir Putin stellt sich zum 14. Mal der russischen Bevölkerung im live übertragenen TV-Dialog “Der heiße Draht”. RT Deutsch überträgt die populäre Fragerunde live, ins Deutsche übersetzt von professionellen Dolmetschern. Im Vorfeld der Sendung sind bereits mehr als eine Millionen Fragen per Telefon im Callcenter, SMS, MMS und über die Sozialen Netzwerke eingegangen.
Uncle Bob 1 on April 15, 2016 · at 7:33 pm EST/EDT

In an otherwise good Q&A session. The Nadia Savchenko question is disheartening. She was convicted and sentenced by a Russian court for assisting in the murders of at least two Russian civilian citizens of Russia. And as it came out at trial she was also involved in other war crimes. Now in his answer Putin leaves open the possibility of “making a deal” to release her. That possibility has a foul odor to it.It is saying that Russian courts mean nothing. That court rulings can be changed and criminals released at will. Now we all know that in the real World things like that happen all the time. The problem is that he makes it sound like there is no problem with that type of thing. That instead of a dire exception. That that is more the rule.And its that perception, if it spreads,that undermines the people’s faith in a justice system built on law and not crony deals. And that is exactly what its said Putin has been trying to do away with in the World. That he wants to put law above everything. It makes a mockery of that, if he himself is willing to undermine his own thinking. Once you show your entire mantra as being “flexible”,when it concerns your own interests.You lose the high ground you say you are trying to take. Your people then start to ask themselves what right you have to require from them what you won’t require from yourself. Someone the other day posted the example of Stalin’s son not being released from a nazi POW camp. Because Stalin refused to accord him special treatment above any other Soviet soldier’s.It is exactly that type of story that people agree with. And the type of event that builds loyalty to a leader. Had Stalin traded high-ranking nazi captives for his son. People in the USSR would have asked themselves why their sons were dying in nazi captivity when their leaders family was safe. The worse thing for a hard pressed government, is to allow their moral power to be lessened (and to be seen to be lessened).
- Anonymous on April 15, 2016 · at 7:57 pm EST/EDT
  
  How do you suppose he will get his captured soldiers back if he isnt willing to hand over those Ukrainian psychopaths/murderers? Or should they they be let to rot in Ukrainian captivity? Afterall Ukrainians have a pretty good case for not handing them back. Not matter how you try to spin it they did land in Ukraine during war and I’m sure they werent there on a friendly visit. No attacking other commenters. Mod on Duty.
  - Uncle Bob 1 on April 15, 2016 · at 9:04 pm EST/EDT
    
    The answer to that ,is never to have held a trial to start with.If a murderer was purely a bargaining chip.Then having a trial was counter-productive. If your only concern is to release your prisoners.Then don’t allow them to go in the first place. Or consider “before” hand, how if that happened, you would release them. My thinking is that you “tell” the junta to release them. There is a reason a great power has a huge military force. And the power that gives you.The problem all along in this whole crisis is the reluctance to use the power they possess.I’m sure your answer would be along the lines of “but that wouldn’t be lawful” or such as that. But that is the whole point isn’t it. Either you stand with the law or you don’t.If you are willing to break laws for one wish. Why show reluctance to break them for an even better purpose.If you want the high ground in obeying laws. Then you must stick with the law,no matter what the results. You don’t get to “cherry-pick” the laws you want enforced. That would make you no better than those you claim to oppose.By allowing the junta to get what they want by seizing hostages. Then you allow that to work for them forever.You force them to release their prisoners by the threat (and being willing to carry out those threats) of dire punishments if they refuse.An object lesson at the very beginning of this criminal coup would have saved the lives of thousands. And possibly thousands more in the future. The argument I see sometimes is,that the West might have attacked. I don’t feel that holds any water. They weren’t anymore ready to die 2 years ago than they are now.But the power of Russia to influence persons and politics in Ukraine is less by far now than two years ago.Its an endless argument here and on other sites,as to what should have been done in 2013-14. One side pointing out “this”,and the other side “that”. So that its an unwinnable argument by either side.I do keep hoping though that lessons were learned from that period. But I keep being disappointed that they were.Still, after all this time, a willingness to make any kind of “deal” with a junta that has never once kept their word in any deal .Just confirms my thinking about a lack of lessons learned.
    - Anonymous on April 15, 2016 · at 11:14 pm EST/EDT
      
      Your reply seems to me that if you were in charge you would’ve done things in God mode – free of any weakness and with endless foresight. Or did I miss something?
      - Martin from Soviet East-Berlin on April 15, 2016 · at 11:56 pm EST/EDT
        
        @Anonymous:
        > Or did I miss something?
        
        Yes, you missed for some unknown reason your chance to respond in a somewhat equally qualified mode, step by step, detail after detail.
        
        To compensate or distract from your lack of a response you introduce rehetorical psycho-questions.
        
        Or did I miss something?
    - Cassandra on April 16, 2016 · at 12:47 am EST/EDT
      
      There is currently an agreement in effect that provides for prisoners to be returned to their homeland to serve their sentences there.
      
      Part of the role of law is defining powers of the government, and the law frequently gives supra-legal powers to the executive such as pardoning power.
      - Martin from S.E.B. on April 16, 2016 · at 1:37 am EST/EDT
        
        imho it was a mistake that Moscow ever started to recognize the Liev junta as legitimate “government” after 2014.02.22
        
        The 2014 “elections” in Ukraine were a bad joke because the only oppositions parties were excluded from participating.
        Pornoschenkel won the “election” because he promised “peace with DonBass”.
        And he promised to sell his businesses as required by their constitution.
        Look how how stayed committed to his election promises.
        
        Instead of thinking about easing that “lady’s prospects Moscow should attempt more to show the world which crimes she and her fellows have committed. But: Hard evidence must be published immeditately, which the west can not ignore and not declar “fake”.
        
        But whatever.
        Sad times. No hope. No place one can escape to.
        
        Ralf on April 16, 2016 · at 3:56 am EST/EDT
        
        @ Martin from S.E.B.
        
        “… it was a mistake that Moscow ever started to recognize the Kiev junta as legitimate “government” after 2014.02.22 …”
        
        Of course that it was a mistake. More accurately, a “mistake”. Many of us here were telling that all along, but no, there were all those official Putin “apologists” (seedy Starikov et al. and followers) force feeding the adoring puppies with b.s. that defied common sense. Even presenting the elephant-in-the-room idiocy as a “virtue”: “you see how wise V.V. is, by not allowing to be drawn into a fight”… Is not V.V. *now* drawn into a trouble far deeper? Squealing under sanctions, resorting even to Kudrin (!) wouldn’t he kindly “help” with his “knowledge” of finances… The local “sages” here were already for two years parroting the inane mantra that “Kiev junta is just about to collapse”. Well, it is not. Putin will be already long gone from the presidential post when the Kiev junta will be more firmly in power than ever, the Novorussians still in misery, so the Odessa people (and who knows what will come to pass in Russia itself). And all of that would have been avoided by a swift action at the end of February 2014. Sorry, too late, the cancer has metastasised.
        
        Martin from Soviet East-Berlin on April 16, 2016 · at 4:51 am EST/EDT
        
        Nobody of us knows or can only estimate what would in fact have happened.
        Maybe we would be all dead already.
        
        Having said that: I admit that your points are similar to my own hidden thoughts which I so far could surpress as much as possible from about April/May 2014 on.
        But now it simply doesn’t work anymore.
        
        Martin from S.E.B. on April 16, 2016 · at 5:16 am EST/EDT
        
        Ukraine: Ralf, on the other hand – it is a dual sided coin.
        
        Imagine Russia had freed re-united with Novorossiya, the West would blame every single death (which in this case they never reported about) on the evil evil Russians.
        
        And the citizens of Ukraine would blame the decline of the (global) economy totally on Russia’s “aggressions”.
        EU could still play the card of promising hot air, like the West did during the Cold War: People live in luxury here, “Go West, life is peaceful there …”
        They could promise such things because there was no “danger” to them to ever come forward with such payments.
        
        This way on the other hand the Kiev junta has in fact collapsed.
        And everybody in Ukraine (with functionaing eyes and some brain cells left over) – and also all around the western world – can see that nothing has changed for the better, the West has betrayed them.
        
        The Ntherlands referendum and many peace activists all over the world are the very proof for this positive infowar development.
        
        This must be seen in the longer context.
        One would assume that the Ukrainians finally notice it this time and never forget it (although I had the same hope already after the first Maidan).
        
        In that sense it is not fair to say Putin was wrong.
        But he thinks longer term.
        
        Martin from Soviet East-Berlin on April 16, 2016 · at 5:00 am EST/EDT
        
        Ralf: You are right that was was indeed blinded, 1 year entirely, the other year with declining intensity.
        
        Recently we get it black on white directly from his own statements.
        Militaryly we as normal persons cannot decide what would have happened.
        But in economic terms it is 100% clear now, that he is not interested in fair solutions for the majority.
        Otherwise he needed to be completely dull and naive to make such decisions and statements, e.g. about privatization, but everybody knows that he is neither.
        
        It is no exaggeration that It shocks me through my bones
        The Pravda video influenced me a bit too much.
        
        Martin from S.E.B. on April 16, 2016 · at 5:30 am EST/EDT
        
        Ralf: Look at the headlines we get from countries like Poland, even though Russia did _not_ invade Ukraine:
        
        Russia more dangerous than ‘non-existential ISIS threat’ – Polish FM
        Published time: 16 Apr, 2016 05:08
        https://www.rt.com/news/339796-russia-existential-threat-poland/
        
        Now, what do you suggest would the Baltics and Poland have done if Russia had invaded Ukraine? Maybe called for the NATO attack case == WW3 hot phase?
        
        Just thoughts.
        But it is not ok to say Putin handled it alll wrong with Kiev.
        There were many risks. Agreed – now we have the same risks anyway. But as said – it is complicated.
        
        Anonymous on April 16, 2016 · at 10:32 am EST/EDT
        
        “But it is not ok to say Putin handled it alll wrong with Kiev.”
        
        Agreed 100% Martin – but it is merely semantics between elites for whom the common man is just a pawn or otherwise “cannon fodder”.
        
        I’m tired of quoting Göring’s statement from his Nuremberg cell.
        
        RayB on April 17, 2016 · at 12:27 am EST/EDT
        
        @Anonymous:
        
        It’s however not a matter of mere …”semantics”… to the average Russian citizen who’s wages and pensions have doubled as a result of Putin’s policies in the last decade or to all those Syrians liberated and who’s lives have been spared from the scourge of Western armed and financed terrorist which thanks to Putin’s Russian aerospace forces have helped them to defeat.
        
        PS. Although by now I can recognize you by your anonymous style, since you always harp on the exact same issues and push the same old twisted line about anyone that’s not either a victim of war or living in dire poverty underneath a bridge, all being part of the “elite’s” oligarchy’s capitalist establishment playing their conspiratorial roles in oppressing your championed noble “common man” or “just a pawn and cannon folder” as you put it, you ought nonetheless less be forced to take on a name tag (and stick with it) so as we can more readily and easily just skip past all of your inane Nazi “Göring’” inspired Putin-phobic hate rants endlessly being disseminated here.
      - Uncle Bob 1 on April 16, 2016 · at 2:03 am EST/EDT
        
        The is no possibility at all,that if Russia sent her to Ukraine to “serve her sentence” she would be in jail more than 5 minutes. The thought is even too ridiculous to consider.Unless the part of “Ukraine” she was sent to is the DPR/LPR. Now those areas of “Ukraine”,might actually make her serve her sentence in a prison.
- Peter AU on April 15, 2016 · at 8:14 pm EST/EDT
  
  Best to wait and see what actually happens. As far as law goes, a presidential pardon I believe is also part of Russian law.
  - Uncle Bob 1 on April 15, 2016 · at 11:12 pm EST/EDT
    
    It is,that’s true. But it would also be perceived badly by millions of people in Russia. And certainly by the families of her Russian victims. I’ve read countless posts by Russians that were even unhappy about the leniency of her sentence. And an equal number proud that she was convicted for her crimes. Releasing her would be a slap in the face to those people and so many others that don’t post comments. A slap that they would be unlikely to forget,nor forgive in the future.
    - Martin from S.E.B. on April 16, 2016 · at 1:28 am EST/EDT
      
      +1 and I personally have the very same rage
    - Peter AU on April 16, 2016 · at 5:30 am EST/EDT
      
      Uncle Bob and Martin from SEB I also agree with both of you.
      Though consider this – if she is jailed in Russia there is a good chance she will live for the next 20 years or whatever the jail term is (though I’m unsure of what security is like in Russian jails). If she were to die in jail, Russia would then wear the blame. On the other hand, what are her chances of living for the next twenty years once released back into the wild?
      Putin? Obama’s insults have been like water off a ducks back. Weakness or strength? Putin cannot be pushed into rash moves in a moment of anger. He seem to be eternally optimistic that most world problems can be solved through diplomacy yet at the same time is readying Russia for all out war.
      
      Perhaps a ruthless dictator type is required to fend off/defeat the US and their full spectrum warfare, but then how many people around the world would back a leader like that?
      When the shit hits the fan and people have to decide on which side they are on – US hegemony, or sovereign independent nations side, because if diplomacy fails, that is what will happen….
      
      I’m getting a bit off track here but don’t become good time girls that only want to back a winner.
      - Uncle Bob 1 on April 16, 2016 · at 6:10 am EST/EDT
        
        I don’t know what her chances of a long life are if she’s released. But I have a good idea what her first months after release would be like. She’ll be on every TV talk show in Ukraine. And quite a few throughout the West. Where she will mercilessly attack Russia and praise Ukraine. She’ll take her Rada seat,to a roaring cheer from her fellow fascists. And give a speech attacking Russia and praising Ukraine for “beating” the “Moskals”. She’ll receive medals for her “patriotic” suffering at the hands of the Moskals. And describe to an “adoring” public in detail how much she suffered to stand up for “Great Ukraine” and “European values”. And after the EU gets through saying they are glad Russia “saw the light” and freed their “hostage”. Then they will vote for another extension of the sanctions on Russia. Who knows,someone might even recommend her for the Nobel Peace Prize.
        
        As to Putin,I’m not deserting him. I like “most” of the things he’s done. I just never think of any political leader as infallible. If they were they’d be a God,not a President or King.I don’t see how not agreeing with all the actions of a leader means you are against them. Sometimes they,like we,can make mistakes. And I don’t believe acting like they couldn’t ever make a mistake does them any good.And its certainly not good for accountability in a government.
        
        Martin from S.E.B. on April 16, 2016 · at 6:38 am EST/EDT
        
        I could not write it so well.
        Excellent!
        
        Anonymous on April 16, 2016 · at 11:21 am EST/EDT
        
        “I like “most” of the things he’s done.”
        
        then
        
        “I could not write it so well.”
        
        Martin, you begin to confuse me again.
        
        What exactly do you like?
        
        Martin from S.E.B. on April 16, 2016 · at 1:41 pm EST/EDT
        
        > What exactly do you like?
        
        THIS:
        
        /president-putin-met-with-journalists-following-the-direct-line-april14th-2016/comment-page-1/#comment-229994
        
        “”””” Uncle Bob 1 on April 16, 2016 · at 6:10 am UTC
        
        I don’t know what her chances of a long life are if she’s released. But I have a good idea what her first months after release would be like. She’ll be on every TV talk show in Ukraine. And quite a few throughout the West. Where she will mercilessly attack Russia and praise Ukraine. She’ll take her Rada seat,to a roaring cheer from her fellow fascists. And give a speech attacking Russia and praising Ukraine for “beating” the “Moskals”. She’ll receive medals for her “patriotic” suffering at the hands of the Moskals. And describe to an “adoring” public in detail how much she suffered to stand up for “Great Ukraine” and “European values”. And after the EU gets through saying they are glad Russia “saw the light” and freed their “hostage”. Then they will vote for another extension of the sanctions on Russia. Who knows,someone might even recommend her for the Nobel Peace Prize. “””””
        
        Anonymous on April 16, 2016 · at 4:27 pm EST/EDT
        
        “THIS:”
        
        Ah, understood – I thought you meant the entire comment.
        
        Peter AU on April 17, 2016 · at 12:54 pm EST/EDT
        
        @ Uncle Bob.
        Nobody is infallible for sure, but can others do better? Putin seems the sort of person whose moves can only be judged as to if they are right or wrong in hindsight because not only is he dealing with problems of the day but also putting ducks in a row for much longer term plans. So then you have the problem of deciding if something is a mistake on day to day problems or is it being ducks put in a row ?
        On this particular issue you are judging him on something that has not even happened apart from some words that are for geo-political consumption.
        
        Mistakes? Putin underestimated the stupidity of Erdogan and a couple of lives were lost. The reason for Putins anger and the back stabbing comment. No doubt there have been others.
        
        Katherine on April 19, 2016 · at 5:54 pm EST/EDT
        
        @”But I have a good idea what her first months after release would be like. ”
        
        I think this is a strong argument for not exchanging her—the propaganda use to which she would be put by many, many parties.
        
        People magazine would introduce her to a whole new audience. Ugh. Right now hardly anyone in the mainstream really knows much about her. Releasing her back to Ukraine would be like releasing a propaganda atom bomb—the fallout would be everywhere. Or, a cluster bomb.
        
        Best for Putin, IMO: When questioned about her, make it clear that she will serve out her sentence in Russia. He can always change his mind in the future, if necessary. If she becomes a PR liability in the future, get rid of her in some other way, as with Khordokovsky: Just give her a ticket to London and put her on the plane.
        
        Katherine
      - Anonymous on April 16, 2016 · at 11:17 am EST/EDT
        
        “On the other hand, what are her chances of living for the next twenty years once released back into the wild?”
        
        You have been watching too much James Bond.
    - Isabella on April 16, 2016 · at 1:14 pm EST/EDT
      
      Could you give me an idea where you read this posts please Uncle Bob?? Thanks
- Isabella on April 16, 2016 · at 1:23 pm EST/EDT
  
  I don’t quite agree with you here Uncle Bob.
  You say, if President Putin agrees to an exchange of prisoner, it makes a mockery of the rule of law he has built the regrowth of Russia around?
  They had a legal trial. She was arrested, tried, and convicted according to law.
  However, life is not just about the specifics of law, because this is a somewhat more complicated case. It can be said to be a part of war – that in fact she was tried for committing a war crime.
  If she is a war criminal, then prisoner exchange is a fact – it happens always.
  Putin has also made clear his belief in humanitarianism, and his over riding duty to do his best by Russian citizens, single and en masse.
  If you read his exchange with the reporter Andrei Kolesnikov regarding the exchange of the traitor Babitsky for 5 Russian soldiers he states;
  “It is senseless to execute him, but getting 5 of our Russian soldiers back for him – I think that’s quite acceptable”
  I think in his deliberations one thought will be primary – that of the well being or otherwise of the Russians being tortured and starved and possible illegally killed in Ukraine, whom he could save from that fate, by leaving her to hers.
  And if that ties most closely with his own Moral Code – that is what he will do. Pragmatic and humanitarian together, for which I personally would applaud him.
  - Uncle Bob 1 on April 16, 2016 · at 8:12 pm EST/EDT
    
    First,even if we believe she was tried and convicted for a “war crime”. By law she couldn’t be. And the legal claim wasn’t there. She was tried and convicted on charges of helping in a case of murder.Second,the case of Babitsky was not a worldwide sensation. It wasn’t a propaganda coup throughout the World.While her case is just that. The blow back from releasing her would spread throughout. It would be a propaganda coup of immense proportions for the junta,the EU,and NATO. They would on the one hand trumpet it as a victory throughout the entire World’s MSM. And on the other hand as a sign of Russia’s weakness,giving in to their demands. No matter how we tried to spin it,that’s the message that would be taken from that. And as I said earlier. The way she would play her “suffering” at the hands of the “dreaded” Moskals. While she kept her “loyalty” to the imagine of “European Values” would be the stuff of countless MSM articles,and talk shows. Maybe even a Hollywood movie.The harm from releasing her is far more than any harm that would come from standing by your own courts legal decision.Not the least would also be the harm done internally in Russia. Supporters of Putin would not be happy about it. And his enemies would have a “field day” with “I told you so’s” attacking him for it.
Anonymous on April 15, 2016 · at 7:42 pm EST/EDT

What a guy! I wish all leaders had to be accessible to their people by standing before them on any question that is asked. It is not enough to judge every 4 or 5 years, to many things demand answers and action and in accordance with the peoples concern over problems that are current.

This is a brave man that exposes himself to the people of his country and gives his best answer to their concerns. From this, as is shown by the response of various governors, action is taken. Bravo!!
Anonymous on April 15, 2016 · at 7:45 pm EST/EDT

Sad that nobody asked when will you nuke the horrible plague called USA and save humanity.
- Ralf on April 16, 2016 · at 12:04 am EST/EDT
  
  “Sad that nobody asked when will you nuke the horrible plague called USA and save humanity.”
  
  Of course, your statement is rhetorical, expressing merely our common frustration that that particular plague is presently ineradicable. And that we can only sheepishly wallow in consoling each other that it will somehow “collapse” on its own (yeah, right, just hold your breath…).
  
  Now concerning the real world and Mr. Putin. I don’t think he desires at all to “nuke” his Western “partners”, even if he could. Not by a long shot. Rather, he simply wants to be admitted to their capitalist club and be treated as an equal. Which they have been stubbornly refusing, so far.
  
  BTW, did you notice that Putin considers the bloody fascist murderers in Kiev to be his partners?! Just scroll up and see for yourselves:
  
  “… We are in touch with the Ukrainian government on this matter. Our partners know our position. ….
  
  Well, dear faithful ones, your Putin himself says so. Who would you then be to contradict him?
  - Isabella on April 16, 2016 · at 12:58 am EST/EDT
    
    “did you notice that Putin considers the bloody fascist murderers in Kiev to be his partners?!”
    
    I think that you are maybe being a bit simplistic here Ralf. Just because a word is used, it’ doesn’t necessarily mean it was used as you would use it – or I. President Putin has referred to EVERYONE he interacts in the international political sphere as “partners”.
    
    He has a huge job, the major part of which is to protect Russia and her people. Those murdering facists as you correctly call them are backed by even bigger more powerful murdering fascists you know. And they are itching for an all out nuclear war. Breedhate is down there in Georgia stirring up emotions and beating war drums, as is most of Mainstream america, it’s European and 5 eyes pals, all rabbeting on about “Russian Aggression” and moving more military hardware and troops to the Russian border than Hitler did.
    He makes the smallest slip to give them an excuse, and we could well have death and destruction on a scale to make the last 70 yrs look like a walk in the part.
    Perhaps you need to take a wider and more adult, calmer view.
    Or would you prefer Putin to call them all for the murderers they are, and give an excuse to let loose the dogs of war??
    - sejmon on April 16, 2016 · at 9:15 pm EST/EDT
      
      ISABELLA-You are absolutely right..We all know what Mr.Putin privately think about them…he can not call them publicly what they are it is up to journalists,MP…etc
  - RayB on April 16, 2016 · at 6:19 am EST/EDT
    
    @ Anonymous:
    
    “Sad that nobody asked when will you nuke the horrible plague called USA and save humanity.”
    
    What’s indeed really “Sad” here is that there are people that think like you. Who destroy the people of whole nations just because like you they think they know whats best for them. Suggest you take a good look deep within your own soul and find what’s left of your own humanity and to try and “save” it, before you ever embark on trying to save the rest of us. God forbid.
    
    @ Ralf:
    
    Re your snide and condescending remakes here…..
    
    “… We are in touch with the Ukrainian government on this matter. Our partners know our position. ….
    
    ” Well, dear faithful ones, your Putin himself says so. Who would you then be to contradict him?”
    
    You know as well as anyone does, that the meaning and manner in which both Putin and Lavrov as head of state and as Russian foreign dignitaries commonly use the term “our partners” is strictly as a diplomatic formality and gesture of good faith meant not to invoke petty acromoney between them and their enemies. It’s simply a term that they use to disarm their opponents and thus undermine giving them any excuses for engaging in polemical and rhetorical repudiations while remaining heads above their sworn enemies having taken the moral high ground. No differently then when two opponents upon entering a competitive match may shake hands or bow to each other before combat.
    
    So don’t play dumb here and try to set up some kind straw man argument with us using “your Putin himself” own words against him and us “dear faithful ones” in order to try and prove your asinine theory that “he simply wants to be admitted to their capitalist club and be treated as an equal. Which they have been stubbornly refusing, so far.”
    
    If you actually believe that the man is that stupid, emotionally and morally little, in light of everything that he’s done, then I suggest you take a deep look within yourself in order to determine the source of your own emotional lack of “faith” and moral depravity that would cause you to project such hopeless cynicism and cast such lowly aspirations against one of the greatest statesmen of the century and onto others on this site, before you venture to make any more inane comments here.
    - Anonymous on April 16, 2016 · at 11:35 am EST/EDT
      
      RayB and the ray of light comment…remembered well.
    - Anonymous on April 17, 2016 · at 3:37 am EST/EDT
      
      What’s indeed really “Sad” here is that there are people that think like you. Who destroy the people of whole nations just because like you they think they know whats best for them.
      
      This describes Americans first and foremost, as they have destroyed multiple nations throughout the planet for decades–all in the name of altruistically spreading freedom and democracy. See Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria for only a few examples.
      
      This is part of the Crusader mentality that has defined the West for centuries with their bloodthirsty Civilizing Missions and White Men’s Burdens.
      - RayB on April 17, 2016 · at 8:26 pm EST/EDT
        
        @ Anonymous:….”This describes Americans first and foremost”…….
        
        Of course it does, but it equally describes your own thinking, since by calling for nuking the US you are proposing to destroy the very people that are as much held hostage to the elite’s and theirs American empire’s foreign policies of aggression as they are the victims of it’s exploitation and objects of it’s total control. So it obviously comes down to a case of class warfare and not one of war between nations, since we are all effectively enslaved by the 0.001% of a corrupted class that wield the reins of almost absolute power over the rest of us, regardless of whatever country we happen to inhabit.
Nulyss3s on April 15, 2016 · at 8:14 pm EST/EDT

Saker what are your coments on the proposed privatisation of the state owned giants?
Anonymous on April 15, 2016 · at 9:40 pm EST/EDT

Does anyone have an original link to the Russian version of this encounter with the journalists? Can’t seem to find it anywhere. Thank you.
- Scott on April 15, 2016 · at 11:19 pm EST/EDT
  
  Ответы на вопросы журналистов по итогам «Прямой линии»
  
  http://kremlin.ru/events/president/news/51718
Anonymous on April 15, 2016 · at 9:47 pm EST/EDT

Vlad Putin might want to go a-courting Frau Merkel of Germany. It seems that the Panama Papers is but one shot in a broader ongoing spy war between the United States and Germany, dating back to the Snowden files revelations.

Like a battered wife fleeing her abusive husband, Germany might be ready to “step out” on America and entertain the entreaties of other more gentlemanly callers. ;-)

Panama Papers Heist By CIA-NSA Aimed At Berlin, BRICS, ALBA
http://www.rense.com/general96/panpapBRICS.html
Martin from Soviet East-Berlin on April 15, 2016 · at 11:20 pm EST/EDT

Vladimir Putin:

“””””As for privatisation, there is nothing unusual in this respect. If you look at the articles I published in the run-up to the 2012 presidential election, I wrote that privatisation could be supported, including in the oil and gas sector, which refers to major state-owned companies. So there is nothing unusual.”””””

ECONOMY:

“””””What are these areas? Attracting investment, raising the purchasing power, which means increasing demand, and enhancing economic and governance efficiency.

For that, we need to support specific industries that are facing hardships. This goes for the automobile industry, processing, agriculture should be on this list anyway, which is due to sanctions and retaliatory measures, as well as a number of other industries. They are all mentioned in the Government plan”””””

Sorry, but I’m not convinced anymore.
Anonymous on April 16, 2016 · at 12:07 am EST/EDT

“We need to continue to balance macroeconomic and budget policies, keeping the budget deficit within 3 percent ”

Oh dear. How very neoliberal.
- Martin from Soviet East-Berlin on April 16, 2016 · at 4:24 am EST/EDT
  
  Putin: “to improve the business climate.”
  
  http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/51718
  
  That shows how wrong he is.
  Wall Street tells us fairy tales about “steady growth” (a myth invented to keep Tax payers finaning the Rothschilds) and the “economic climate”.
  But economy in reality has absolutely NOTatHing to do with “climate”, “mood” or “weather”.
  The economy is exactly not a flower.
  That’s only capitalist fluff to keep the mice working longer for less to accelerate the oligarchic mice’s wheel (and for the mice to die quicker or at to make them busy enough until they ask no questions anymore).
  
  There is always enough work: Hungry people, homeless, elderly or ill who need careful professional treatment, children who need a good free education, a Soviet free healthcare system!!!, new roads, new railways, bridges, factories, new (non-nuclear) power plants, new apartment blocks, new museums, theaters, pioneer-parks – after that is done feed Africa and tech them how to grow up Stalin-style and get rid of their corrupt Empire-controlled leaders (then the Africans could feed themselves).
  
  Money???
  I don’t have the link at hand, but yesterday I read that Putin announced that Russia needs more money. Money? Is he talking about Dollars? WTF?
  
  Print your _own_ money!
  Then I read (but where?) that the Kremlin expects – after a “slight downturn” – better GDP’s from next year on. Sorry that I don’t have the link, but it was somewhere. How can he promise Russia such nonsense? It sounds like the western blah blah which we are hearing since 2007.
  
  2 or 3 days ago there was an article on ZH dealing with the question, why everybody in western MSM is pretending all is well, which is really not only intentional lying but to my taste ludicrous
  
  What I’m recently hearing from Putin about the economic outlook sounds similar, which disappoints (not only) me. Telling such things may work out if there is really some economic relief soon (how likely is that, globally??). But if not it can and will dramatically backfire. Depending on how soon it gets worse and how much.
  - Eimar on April 16, 2016 · at 3:28 pm EST/EDT
    
    Some disconnected facts:
    
    The global banking system is leveraged to around 30 times more than the global economy .
    
    Putin is totally against off-shore tax avoidance banking.
    
    Some degree of privatization would encourage Russian oligarchs to invest in Russia.
    
    Anti-monopoly legislation (and I get the impression he’s big on that) would act as a brake on takeovers of public utilities/vital industry/natural resources.
    
    If you have to catch flies, best use a little honey…
    - Martin from Soviet East-Berlin on April 16, 2016 · at 6:23 pm EST/EDT
      
      Catching flies with honey: Interesting theory.
      Well, we can wait another 10 years (16 years have already passed) and then have another talk.
Anonymous on April 16, 2016 · at 5:52 am EST/EDT

It seems that Mr. Putin is threatening Kiev to give them Nadia back. And Poroshenko hopes so much that she dies a hero in the Russian prison, even encouraged her to continue the hunger-strike.
While in jail or dead she is a hero, but if back to Ukraine, she will be seen for what she really is – a murderous psychopath.
•gvp• on April 16, 2016 · at 7:53 am EST/EDT

@ Anonymous

“It seems that Mr. Putin is threatening Kiev to give them Nadia back.”

:) It seems to me you might have been reading V.Tretyakovs essay “You want Nadya Savchenko? You can have her!”, have you? Your train of thoughts makes me smile, but I have my doubts this is what we should realistically expect to happen.

@ Martin from Soviet East-Berlin

“Sorry, but I’m not convinced anymore.”

– How do you mean that? Have you given up on VVP?

Here is what I think:

Re Savchenko: Let’s not forget, weeks ago president Putin’s press secretary already commented on the causa Savchenko in a way which made it clear that a deal with the Ukraine was not impossible.

Just like the rest of us, I would hate to see this abominable woman walk free, plus become a celebrity in the Western world. She makes me want to puke.

I doubt that VV feels any different. Yet, personal feelings are not something that a responsible leader is allowed to base his decisions on. He has to do what is best for his country. And, he has shown multiple times that he is… quite good at that, don’t you agree?

Re privatisations: Whether we like it or not, we have to accept that Russia in its present form is, and has been for years, a capitalist country; we also have to accept that VV seems to be ok with that. I mean, it’s not like this is unexpected news, right?

Let’s be realistic. Nobody can expect of one person to fulfill all his dreams. And by the way, he has only stated in a very vague way that privatisation “could be supported”. Maybe we should wait for the actual details that are to be implemented before we cry foul?

I’ve just seen the whole 3 1/2 hours of his Q&A session, and I’m actually very impressed – once again. How he reacted to the case of the Sakhalin fish plant was quite something, to pick just one example. That’s about 1:29:30 into the video, in case you haven’t seen it.

My question to you: Who would you like to see him replaced with?
- Martin from Soviet East-Berlin on April 16, 2016 · at 3:12 pm EST/EDT
  
  Good point, that’s exactly what annoys me with this anonymous Putin-hating “Martin from Capitalist East-Berlin” stalker poster who believes he has the right or duty to be my personal police of my thoughts. He only always blames Putin but never names any single ideas for improvemnt nor anything else constituting any alternative. I think this person has read too many Nazi quotes, as he himself stated numerous times about this or that or whatever Goehring quote (which most people never heard of) : /president-putin-met-with-journalists-following-the-direct-line-april14th-2016/#comment-230038
  
  > My question to you: Who would you like to see him replaced with?
  
  Today there is nobody I know of who could replace him other than he himself, but as pro-communist pro-Soviet re-incarnation of himself.
  He is perhaps the best leader Russia can have (after Lenin and Stalin), but the probelm is that he is in the wrong party following the wrong ideology supporting the wrong beneficiaries (not the 99.9%) with neocon style mindsets and policies. That’s what is new in my own views, because until now I had attempted to block such thoughts. But now it is no longer deniable because Putin himself says it black on white.
  
  That’s why I had to give up large chunks of my idealism about him, not everything but large parts. As I said: I’m not a blind 100% fanboy anymore who would “Yes, Sir! I follow your orders, Sir!” him.
  Anyway not during “peace” times.
  
  As you saw, I defended Putin on the Ukraine queastion.
  And as I stated: It is a complicated situation geopolitically.
  
  But he lost me on everything he thinks is the best way for Russia’s economy, that sounds like the typical talking I heard 26 years here in East-Germany, I simply don’t fally for such empty talk anymore.
  .
  I made and do repeat this distiction: Putin as geopolitical leader versus as economic leader.
  Geopolitically I also don’t follow him 1:1 as I wrote (Ukraine question).
  But as the situation is very complex and dangerous, I accept his approach because nobody of his critics actually _knows_ what he may have known, in regards to what might have been unleashed had Russia invaded Ukraine. Also, as I stated: /president-putin-met-with-journalists-following-the-direct-line-april14th-2016/#comment-229985
  .
  - •gvp• on April 16, 2016 · at 7:28 pm EST/EDT
    
    “Today there is nobody I know of who could replace him other than he himself, but as pro-communist pro-Soviet re-incarnation of himself.” – Very little chance there, I’m afraid!
    
    I think VVP is mostly a realist. I have never heard him express the desire to return to communist, tsarist or other ideals. In fact, I have never heard heard him talk about any ideals, except maybe for one: his forever insistence that everything has to be done within the law – that is, within the existing law, be it national or international law.
    
    Insofar he is probably best characterised as a conservative. He would never break a law. If he thinks a law is unjust, he will try to change the law but he will not even consider ignoring existing law.
    
    But I do regard him as a very humane person. He gets visibly angry when simple people are being treated badly by superiors, officials, etc. He acts swiftly and energetically to resolve the grievance and to punish the evildoers. I have observed that several times, and I don’t think he does it just for show.
    
    In all honesty I cannot judge his economical competence / orientation.
    
    Yet, I do remember very well a conversation that I had with a young Russian a few years ago. At the time I still believed what I read in the news and naively brought up the subject of the “evil dictator Putin”. The Russian guy to my surprise explained, very politely, that we obviously were not too well informed. He made it clear that Mr. Putin was indeed very popular because he had managed to considerably raise (something like double or so) the income and living standards for the whole population.
    
    Considering all that, it hardly seems justified to me to describe him as a kind of predatory capitalist with no consideration for the well-being of the majority. What do you think?
    
    Of course I don’t know anything, but how I interpret it, he simply acts in a way that he deems best to make Russia strong or even invulnerable, not only from a military but also an economical point of view. That may include his stance on privatisation. Just guessing.
    
    As for president Putin being a “person with a neocon style mindset”, I would respectfully suggest you recheck what the term neocon stands for. VVP most certainly is not one of them.
    - RayB on April 16, 2016 · at 11:07 pm EST/EDT
      
      @gvp: …. “it hardly seems justified to me to describe him as a kind of predatory capitalist with no consideration for the well-being of the majority. What do you think?”……
      
      Modestly but well put! If Vladimir Putin was truly only interested in self-enrichment why wouldn’t he just have carried on Yeltsin’s lacy of plundering the Russia economy and entirely surrendering her sovereignty to the US for his personal gain, instead of causing himself so much pain and trouble and garnering such hate for standing up to the West lead by the nose of the hegemonic American empire? It’s a simple enough question that Putin bashes can’t answer because their criticisms right or wrong are based entirely on false premises to begin with. While no leader can be expected to be perfect in everything that they do, at the same time there are millions of people in the west and world wide that have professed that they’d gladly vote him in anytime as their president. And hundreds of thousands in Syria that dance in the streets and town squares with grateful tears in their eyes for having been liberated from the Wests terrorist scourge thanks to the help of Putin’s Russian aerospace forces. So let all of Putin’s scorning detractors here suggest someone that’s a viable alternative or run for the job, if they think that they can do it better themselves.
      - Martin from Soviet East-Berlin on April 17, 2016 · at 2:09 am EST/EDT
        
        @ RayB on April 16, 2016 · at 11:07 pm UTC
        
        “””””Modestly but well put! If Vladimir Putin was truly only interested in self-enrichment why wouldn’t he … “””””
        
        Where have I claimed that? I know that there are such people who do much such flat claims, but I dind’t and won’t.
        That however doesn’t enlighten us that much. A lot more is going on in this world, freemasons, zionists, vatican, House of Windsor etc.
        
        They are interwoven and plan for centuries, rather than for single life times.
        
        See my comments in /what-is-socialism-an-opinion-from-vermont/comment-page-1/#comment-230191 and /what-is-socialism-an-opinion-from-vermont/#comment-230195
        
        I don’t say nor think myself that VVP is working for them.
        On the other hand nobody of us _knows_ anything.
        All the people I know who were of such a geopolitical importance and at the same time refused to follow orders – well, shall I bring some names and tell how they ended?
        
        The questions remain why VVP cannot or doesn’t want to free Russia from the B.I.S.: https://www.bis.org/
        
        All of this goes far deeper than having some Billions for retirement.
        Sometimes one could think that this entire East-West saga, it is maybe only some game on alien’s TV for their entertainment plus researching the human mind.
        
        We can believe in God or in Putin or in Stalin and Lenin.
        But there are more things than we can imagine of which we have really _no_ clue. Maybe it is better that way.
        
        RayB on April 19, 2016 · at 5:09 am EST/EDT
        
        @gvp: …”Modestly but well put! If Vladimir Putin was truly only interested in self-enrichment why wouldn’t he” … “Where have I claimed that? I know that there are such people who do much such flat claims, but I dind’t and won’t.”
        
        You seen to be confusing two different sentences here….
        
        I said… Modestly but well put! in reference to what you said.. @gvp: …. “it hardly seems justified to me to describe him as a kind of predatory capitalist with no consideration for the well-being of the majority. What do you think?”……
        
        While the next sentence .. ” If Vladimir Putin was truly only interested in self-enrichment why wouldn’t he” … is strictly that of my own opinion.
        
        No claims have ever been made here by me attributing that sentence as a quote from you.
        
        You ask “What do you think” and I simply answered you with my own view on the topic period.
        
        •gvp• on April 19, 2016 · at 6:32 am EST/EDT
        
        @ RayB:
        You’re addressing the wrong person. The post you refer to is not mine.
        
        RayB on April 19, 2016 · at 5:32 pm EST/EDT
        
        @gvp
        
        My apologies for any misunderstandings here. My response was meant to be addressed to @ Martin from Soviet East-Berlin.. above in answer to his…”Where have I claimed that? I know that there are such people who do much such flat claims, but I dind’t and won’t.”…not to you.
      - Isabella on April 17, 2016 · at 1:04 pm EST/EDT
        
        Thank you for your comments and thanks also gvp. – they are sound and well thought out. I too am getting mightily sick of these carping criticisms of a man whose achievements are magnificent and unequalled anywhere for years – certainly nowhere in the AmeroWestern sphere, for more than 100 years.
        The carping gets down to things that are seen through Western eyes, from a Western perspective. President Putin is a pragmatist who is also a humanitarian. He operates from a Moral code which guides and directs how to implement those characteristics.
        
        For those who doubt – go watch again all 5 episodes of the documentary [youtube] called “The Unknown Putin” – put together by a Russian journalist who wanted to explore everything that was the Russia Putin shouldered back in 2000. And then look at Russia today.
        
        As you point out – these carping moaners never offer a viable solution. Like those who criticise Putin for not switching the Rouble to an IMF free gold backed currency, never saying exactly how much gold would be needed and if Russia has it, what the international ramifications would be and how they could realistically be dealt with and so on.
        It could make one laugh. Here is a man who had the perfect 25 yrs of training for the job, which he has held for 15+ yrs, experience as both a President and Prime Minister, has overseen the vast growth and saving of his country — being criticised and occasionally advised by …whom?? People who have experienced and done what, exactly???
        And most of whom, from all I can gather, have never even visited Russia.
        It’s pathetic.
        Is it possible to “please all the people all of the time?” Of course not.
        Even Jesus couldn’t manage it.
        
        Martin from Soviet East-Berlin on April 17, 2016 · at 6:34 pm EST/EDT
        
        @Isabella:
        
        > As you point out – these carping moaners never offer a viable solution.
        
        I pointed that out.
        
        > For those who doubt – go watch again all 5 episodes of the documentary
        > [youtube] called “The Unknown Putin”
        
        I had recommended and spread this video countless times myself, use google.
        The problem however remains, that VVP is a capitalist and keeps most Oligarchs in place to run the country.
        
        If you are not in doubt anymore, maybe you should be.
        If you understand Russian go to the Russian job market in smaller cities (not Moscow or Leningrad) and check out how much you would earn there in whatever profession that is yours.
        
        Then compare it to the unlimited wealth and luxury of the oligarch class.
        If you have never traveled to Russia or other Union republics like Ukraine and have never seen the Oligarch palaces, watch at least some Russian movies, like this one:
        
        Мой грех (2011) SATRip (sub)
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbF2Ke2Kr9A&list=PLqm9FNwsYNwvAdqztFNgrhNBLXU9ayBxn
        
        Now – as you appear to know everything – tell me why it is not possible to tax the Rich in order to help the poor?
        If you doubt that Oligarchs run Russia (like they are running the West), I remind you of another link that I posted before:
        
        Inside Russian billionaire’s son’s insane $1 billion wedding
        Groom’s father Mikhael Gutseriev is oil and media tycoon worth $6.2 billion
        http://www.emirates247.com/lifestyle/inside-russian-billionaire-s-son-s-insane-1-billion-wedding-2016-04-01-1.625899
        
        How does that compare to:
        
        poverty in Russia
        https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=poverty+in+Russia
        
        •gvp• on April 18, 2016 · at 11:24 am EST/EDT
        
        “Russian movies… Мой грех”
        
        Yes :) I have seen this one. I like Natalia Antonova (“Метод Фрнйда”, anybody?).
        
        An even better example is “Знак Судьбы”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttkprMpvKDw. This film actually centers on the oligarch’s lifestyle. You might like it.
        
        BTW, I have written an addendum to my posts – for reasons of layout, down at the end of this thread.
    - Martin from Soviet East-Berlin on April 16, 2016 · at 11:49 pm EST/EDT
      
      Thanks for your interesting long post.
      Certainly valid points, that’s why it is so tough to ever be against him in any aspect.
      
      However, always staying “within the law” – ok, better than in most western countries where the govs break laws and treaties on an hourly basis.
      
      But, and here is the problem: Russias laws were predominantly written and dictated by the US (to administer it like a colony).
      And what is the UN? Where is its HQ? Who dictates so called “international law”?
      
      Maybe it is not always the best solution to stay “within the law”.
      What if the laws were written by the Devil himself?
      
      Maybe that’s the answer to your views and my views.
      Both of us are right and wrong simultanously.
      
      To say it with Reagan’s (speech writer’s) words: “Tear down these inhumane laws” (and capitalism)!
      - S113 on April 17, 2016 · at 4:35 pm EST/EDT
        
        @ Martin from Soviet East-Berlin
        
        Martin, you have such a valuable, informed perspective and opinion: have you ever submitted any comments to the Russian government? I’m totally serious – sometimes the government needs to hear voices from the grassroots, outside of the inner circle they listen to, day in and day out. Please consider it (I ask, even though I am not Russian!!)
        
        Martin from Soviet East-Berlin on April 17, 2016 · at 11:05 pm EST/EDT
        
        @S113
        
        Thank you for your encouraging words.
        I really don’t know if I’m qualified enough.
        However – earlier or later I _must_ contact them, for political asylum.
        And to help Russia (I’m not a welfare migrant who expects to receive without giving).
  - Anonymous on April 17, 2016 · at 11:33 am EST/EDT
    
    “He only always blames Putin but never names any single ideas for improvemnt nor anything else constituting any alternative”
    
    I already pointed you to sysati’s comment as a beginning to an alternative.
    
    I only comment on Putin’s blame as an alternative to the fan-boy’s on this site – I see no difference between Putin’s form of dictatorship of the oligarch’s from any other. I see any support for that as idiotical (unless, of course, you drop the “Soviet” from your moniker).
  - S113 on April 18, 2016 · at 11:06 pm EST/EDT
    
    Martin, Sergey Glazyev may be our economic saviour:
    
    http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/social-christianity-will-bring-about-russias-economic-breakthrough/ri13958
    
    “The economic situation is increasingly chaotic. The world economy is out of control. We target inflation, and it doubles. Talk about transitioning to a new direction results in a further degradation of the economy. ‘De-offshorization’ got us more foreign equity in our corporations and industries. Import substitution resulted in further price rises.
    
    This growing crisis is due to two things: our increasing dependence on the America-centric financial system, and American aggression, which we must resist. There’s clearly a dissonance between our financial and economic dependence on a foreign system and the need to pursue a sovereign foreign policy in order to survive.
    
    Two-thirds of our financial market are controlled by non-residents and non-resident equity, and when it comes to currency and financial speculation, it’s 90%. This is the Washington Consensus promoted in Russia by the International Monetary Fund is to subordinate domestic systems to the interests of international financial funds, mostly American, by a non-sovereign monetary policy that pegs the currency to expanding reserves.
    
    Two-thirds of the currency issued comes from foreign sources. At first, this dependency was subtle because there was a flow of cheap loans from abroad: Russian corporations and the government borrowed $700 billion. But only areas of interest to the West – the export of raw materials and the import of consumer goods – developed, ruining the domestic market, especially when sanctions were imposed, preventing us from refinancing our foreign loans and deflating our monetary base.
    
    The ruble is the most gold-backed currency in the world, and our currency reserves are excessive — twice as much as our monetary base. As the most undervalued currency in the world, the ruble is five times undervalued in terms of purchasing power parity, and it’s also the most volatile, driving us artificially into stagnation.
    
    Developed countries’ monetary and industrial policy floods the economy with money. In the last eight years, there has been an unprecedented issuance of dollars, euros, yen and yuan. The value of the world currency in dollars, i.e. the amount of the dollar mass, has grown fourfold since 2007.
    
    Our financial system is shrinking while the West’s expands. The interest rate is being raised while the West innovates. According to Schumpeter, the interest rate is a tax on innovations and investments. We are killing the transition to a new technological system by our macroeconomic policy while strengthening our dependence on foreign sources. Our economy goes where the money is, and because money doesn’t come from here, the economy shrinks.
    
    China, Korea, Vietnam and India are growing fast, based on the new system of industrial relations. In the 1960’s, Pitirim Sorokin called this the ‘integral system’ – combining planning with the market — which was later called the ‘convergence of the two systems’. Convergence has now happened and a new system of industrial relations and institutions that differ drastically from the American liberal model is forming right before our eyes.
    
    The principal mover in the American-centric system is the maximization of profit dominated by financial magnates. The government would sets the rules of a new financial system that will focus on people’s well-being, harmonizing social and economic relationships, with business and the public sphere working together. The Chinese call this Chinese-specific socialism, the Japanese – ‘Japan incorporated’. We suggest a transition to domestic sources for loans, strategic planning, the use of our competitive advantages based on long-term goal-setting and a system of targeted credits at low interest rates based on a private/state partnership.
    
    Russia lacks an ideology, however the Orthodox tradition and the building of socialism in our country provide a new starting point that will enable us to combine our own needs and those of the wider world. All my attempts on the Internet to explain that we need to transit to a conservative synthesis based on traditional values, involving religious confessions in the creation of an ideological base, were rejected by our European partners, although they have both social-Christian and Christian-democratic traditions. They don’t want to return to indigenous values, caring more about same-sex marriage and other Satanic ideas. and that is why ultimately, Europe is doomed.
    
    One very important thing should be said, however. The ideology of social-Christianity corresponds perfectly to the sixth technological level, the knowledge society, where profit doesn’t play a major role, and prices correspond to demand. In this ‘new economy’ the manufacturer sells to the rich at triple the price and gives to the poor for free, combining the Orthodox and socialist doctrines.
    
    The western world has adopted negative interest rates. This is perfectly compatible with both Orthodoxy and socialism. But Russia’s high interest rate economic policy is archaic and makes our situation worse.”
    - Martin from S.E.B. on April 19, 2016 · at 5:03 am EST/EDT
      
      Hi S113,
      
      thanks for your messges (same applies to Blue and TooLegit2Quit).
      I spent too much time here last week and this week I can visit only very shortly.
      
      Glazyev is one of my long term heros, yes.
      And while I agree with most of what he has said in your link, a few aspects are confusing.
      While it is true that “high” interest rates (even +0.000% is meanwhile “high” by western standards) make borrowing more expensive (at the end of a monetary cycle let’s rather say borrowing simply to pay the old interest-interest), I don’t know where he thinks the “west is innovating”. The only innovations I see are innovating how to polish the jobless statistics, innovate how to bring more muslims to Europe, more technology for wars, more sanctions and how to create more problems for the Non-West.
      The West must have ZPIR and now even NIRP to simply kick the can down the road a bit further, as long as it still works like that.
      Would any of the mentioned western countries raise the interest rate by only 0.5% they would kill their banks and hence the rest of their economies (let alone the gov debt payments).
      Of course the same is also happening in Russia. But Russia is under occupation (all countries are, but the others have no resisting gov-elements anymore). Would Russia only make the sligtest attempt to lower interest rates, the rouble might lose up to a few 100% of its current FOREX rate and therefore also end-user buying power (for imported and or not subsidized goods).
      
      The point that he still talks naively about “ohh boy, our economy is not nice” worries me even more.
      BTW, one can think of Жириновский whatever one wants, but I must say the more I hear out of his real statements the more I respect him (ignoring his AntiCommunism ranting). He said all these things already straight and out-loud in the Duma, for 25 years. Putin respects him and the entire Duma knows what he says. So a bit more is necessary than Glazyev’s latest talk.
      
      Don’t talk, _____ACT____!
      Didn’t Saker write an article some time ago that this is typical Russian’ess? What are they doing with all their Gold if they let enemies handle their central bank (and most other banks)?
      
      The fact that they (from what is so far visible) refuse to perform some secret revolutionary plan makes me wonder (to put it mildly). Maybe I’m doing them wrong and they have such a plan. But the clock is ticking for Russia. And for its leadership. In life there are time windows – one should use them before it is too late. And of course not too early.Only when the timing is ideal! I’m still waiting …
      
      The other thing which makes me wonder for quite some time: Supporting religion and “socialism” at once. Let’s see how that works. If it is only bringing Communists and Christians to the same table or if it is possible to create a new generation of Russians who are religious communists.
      - Anonymous on April 19, 2016 · at 8:45 am EST/EDT
        
        I also didn’t follow him on his discussion of interest rates. Given the broader context of his talks (which I’m just discovering), I am less concerned about the naïve speech he uses in discussing the state of the economy. Personally, I would see this as a means of getting his message across to his audience, as opposed to reflecting true cluelessness on his part. :) That’s my take on it.
        
        His talk gave me a ray of hope, which I am grateful for right now. Your point about action is well made, though. Hope is nice, but as you point out, it must be acted on at some point or its just empty talk.
      - S113 on April 19, 2016 · at 8:46 am EST/EDT
        
        That anonymous comment was me. Forgot to identify myself!!
        
        Martin from S.E.B. on April 19, 2016 · at 1:38 pm EST/EDT
        
        Hmm, agreed.
        
        btw, for the privatization situation in Germany: /what-is-socialism-an-opinion-from-vermont/#comment-230755
        
        And as for Glazyev, here is his homepage with always the latest subjects: http://www.glazev.ru/
        
        Such as:
        http://www.glazev.ru/econom_polit/485/
        
        (Why was the FOREX ratio to the Dollar 1:30 two years ago and why is it now almost 1:80)?)
        
        Note: The article was published 3 weeks ago, meanwhile the ratio has been imporoved back to 1:65, how it all depends on the crude oil prices …
        The USD has also lost to other currencies, such as the 3% to the EUR during resent weeks.
        
        https://de.finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=USDRUB%3DX#symbol=USDRUB=X;range=5y
        
        S113 on April 19, 2016 · at 7:53 pm EST/EDT
        
        Thank you for the links, Martin. I will now become a student of Glazyev! :)
        
        I am interested in your comments on privatization in Germany, but am avoiding the socialism article commentary at the moment for the sake of my emotional health. :) This appears to be a quest for an exceptional form of socialism, and while I respect that, it stirs a strong emotional response in me. The unexceptional forms practiced in the past, in India and Canada are the ones I’m more oriented towards. And I consider imperfection to be a characteristic of a properly functioning socialist system (the idea of a perfect ideological system is a tool/weapon of oligarchy – don’t get me started on this.).
        
        For now, the soothing sounds of Glazyev’s steady analysis will take the pain away. :) His quote about “stepping on the rake for the thirtieth time” made me smile for several hours. He seems familiar with frustration!
        
        Andrew Korybko’s article about Serbia reminds me to be thankful that in my country the warfare is strictly political and economic at this time.
        
        Given the appetite among so many of the Saker community for advanced economic analysis, would the Saker consider making an appeal to someone like Glazyev for a really in-depth article?
Il Discobolo on April 16, 2016 · at 10:29 am EST/EDT

Regarding the relations of the Russian Federation with Japan, a Peace Treaty can be done, as for a War Declaration, between two Countries each one enjoying full sovereignty, autonomy and independence.
For instance, on 14 July 1945 the Government in charge of Italy declared war to Japan. Quite correctly Japan never considered valid such a declaration, being Italy under military occupation by the US-GB Armies and hence enjoying no one of the above requirements. Indeed there was no presence of any Italian representative during the formal surrender of Japan on 2nd September 1945.
Nowadays, while it is undoubtedly true for the Russian Federation that She enjoys full sovereignty, autonomy and independence, can it be said the same for Japan…?
From those days of August-September 1945, when those Regions went under the full control of the Soviet Union, have passed 71 years. For the question of the South Kuriles – Northern Territories possession, however, the correct timing should be not +71 years since then, but -28 years from when it will be 99 year that it happened. And after 99 year of full control and possession of a territory, no one can any more put any question on that.
So, Japan has yet available 28 years from now to gain its full sovereignty, autonomy and independence in order to hope to negotiate with Russia any meaningful agreement regarding the South Kuriles – Northern Territories.
- Scott on April 16, 2016 · at 1:49 pm EST/EDT
  
  Russia handed Kuril islands to Japan in 1875 and took them back in 1945.
  http://www.market-studio.com/library-market-studio/history-lib-menu/174-kuril-islands
  
  In 2015, per the UN decision the Sea of Okhotsk became an inner sea of Russia.
  
  A United Nations commission has officially recognized the Sea of Okhotsk enclave, off Russia’s southeastern coast, as part of the country’s continental shelf, the Russian minister of natural resources said Saturday.
  
  It’s became possible only because Russia owns Kuril Islands and Sakhalin. No international vessels are allowed to the Sea of Okhotsk any longer.
  /magadan-is-a-port-on-the-russias-sea-of-okhotsk/
  
  Russian Navy may create Pacific Fleet base in Kuril Islands — defense minister
  http://tass.ru/en/defense/865081
  
  Why Russia Won’t Cede Southern Kuril Islands to Japan
  Besides emotive issues and natural resources, the Southern Kuril Island chain holds immense strategic value and is one of Russia’s main naval gateways to the Pacific Ocean
  http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/why-russia-wont-cede-southern-kuril-islands-japan/ri7920
David on April 16, 2016 · at 6:49 pm EST/EDT

I appreciate President Putin’s answer to the question about the exit of Obama. What is the view of Americans? The general consensus may be up for debate, but I can offer you mine, in the form of an open statement to Congress:

I have cautioned you previously, on several occasions, to stay out of Syria. This means you DO NOT have permission, neither by proxy nor by first person invasion . Stay out means stay out, and the reason beyond the moral one is clear, obvious, that the United States is in no condition fiscally or spiritually to become enbroiled into a protracted war that ends either in escalation to a world war, or by ignominously being forced with withdraw empty handed. Either situation becomes the end of the United States, and becomes undeniably, the Obama legacy. There is no winning situation available because Russia has strategically obviated any such move, such that the ONLY move Obama has left is forthright honesty, and repentance. He MUST join with, cooperate with Russia, regardless how distasteful that may be, if he hopes to leave office with a legacy that is not totally a national disgrace. To this end, Congress must swallow its rhetoric, and cease being his enablers. At stake is a Dark Ages redux, vs. global renaissance. Swallowing uselss pride now to realize economic recovery has dividends you cannot imagine right now because all of you are most interested in maintaining hegemony over accepting leadership from anyone but yourselves. And that’s because in order to have the former, many of you will be forced to stand down. But instead of reading the handwriting on the wall, we see continued rebellion as you desperately try to cobble together your “Plan B:” You will not be allowed to take advantage any longer, increasing your ill-gotten spoils that you have no rights to. The whole world is fed up with you, and the truth you have to face is that you can’t hide any longer.
Vlad Pufagtinenko on April 17, 2016 · at 2:21 am EST/EDT

You mean President Putin met with journalists and didn’t have them killed?
•gvp• on April 18, 2016 · at 12:39 am EST/EDT

@ Martin from S.E.B., Isabella

As I am basically a critical person, I feel compelled to specify / complement what I have written above.

Yes, I am painfully aware that all is not well in Vladimir Vladimirovich’s Tsarstwo.

For one thing, Martin, I strongly agree with you on one thing: the extent to which the class of the so called “oligarchy” has usurped the country’s wealth, is absolutely disgusting, or should I say from my personal point of view: disappointing.

One percent of the population is in possession of 70 percent of the wealth; the shamelessness with which some of these guys are parading this stolen wealth is sickening. Poverty is on the rise. You are right, this makes Russia, and its leadership, look very bad indeed.

But then there is also another thing and that’s the fact that VV has dark secrets. This is not something that I know because I read it somewhere. I know it because logic dictates that it must be so. I am not saying he was involved in murder, or that kind of stuff. I don’t know. Maybe he was (he may have been forced to, in his days as an agent), maybe not.

But I am absolutely certain that at the very least he was actively involved in the cover up of some huge scandals. I am just giving one example: the Smolensk crash 6 years ago.

Yes, I know, the official version of events is such and such, and I guess that many readers here on this website will swear to high heaven the official version is true. But it’s a little like 9/11: the more you hear about it the less believable the official story gets – until, at the end, you realize that the official story is simply not possible.

I am not saying the Russians did it. Actually I’m certain they did not. They had nothing to gain from it, like with MH17. But: VVP was prime minister at the time, plus he was personally in command of the situation in Smolensk.

Whatever happened on this day – he is the one who must know what happened. And if, for whatever reasons, on the Russian side some “amoral” orders were given – he must have given these orders.

What do I want to say? That he is a bad person, a “scumbag” (S. Edmonds) after all?

No. What I want to say is, that at this level of power the rules of the game are different. A dangerous international situation may necessitate a seemingly ruthless decision. For any “civilian” to act like this would be a crime, still for the leader it would be morally justified – if it prevents a worse outcome.

Let’s finally talk about your demand of a more just society, Martin.

In principle I’m totally d’accord with you. But.

E. Fedorov in one of his interviews has convincingly explained that, although Putin seems to have enormous power, his power in reality is in most situations very limited. What do you think would happen if let’s say, he decided to take away half of each oligarch’s wealth and give it to the poor and to the health care system? – Right. They would unite and one day they would kill him.

This is an oversimplified example, of course, but it demonstrates how much planning, scheming, plotting and time it may take him to get certain things done. Indeed, what he’s done so far proves that he is planning not in months and years but in decades.

So. How on earth do you expect him to simply “tear down these inhuman laws”?
- Anonymous on April 18, 2016 · at 6:44 am EST/EDT
  
  “what he’s done so far”
  
  Which is what exactly?
  
  Although GDP has risen, wealth disparity in Russia has increased during the entire duration of Putin’s oversight i.e. his administration is part of the problem – not solution.
  
  If he is as powerless as you describe wtf hold him up as a beacon of light in the first place – i’d love the poor of Donbass to rip him (& Gutseriev) to shreds.
  - •gvp• on April 18, 2016 · at 9:03 am EST/EDT
    
    I am not interested in your deliberate provocations. If you were here for an honest debate you would get yourself a name and provide some real arguments. Your statement makes no sense.
- Martin from S.E.B. on April 26, 2016 · at 6:12 am EST/EDT
  
  @•gvp•: Thanks for your long mostly good post which I only saw today (last week I had little time).
  
  I can so far follow you with one bold exception: Smolensk was imho either a real accident (because the drunk polish high-ranks may indeed have forced the pilot to land there despite heavy fog and poor weather conditions), or it was {B} a western intelligence job.
  I stated this here on this site more than 2 years ago. But forget it that Putin or Russia shot them down. The more interesting question must be: How silly can any country be to put its entire ruling class into a single plane … ?
  And who can have organized it that way …
  Definitely not Putin.
  
  Then ask: Who benefitted?
  Response: The West to eternally discredit Russia in Poland and the world.
  
  As for Putin’s black secrets there are other things which would come into mind (at the very beginning 1999/2000), but I don’t know if these rumors are true and so I won’t speak them out.
  - •gvp• on April 29, 2016 · at 9:17 pm EST/EDT
    
    @ Martin from S.E.B.
    
    Thank you for your answer. You misunderstood. I did not suggest the Russians brought down the plane. On the contrary, I explicitly said, “I am not saying the Russians did it. Actually I’m certain they did not. They had nothing to gain from it, like with MH17″.
    
    I read a lot about the Smolensk disaster. There are just too many improbabilities/oddities, many of them having happened before the flight in Poland. I think that many Polish people (and not-only-Polish scientists) are right in being suspicious. They are just drawing the wrong conclusions by accusing the Russians.
    
    Of course, it’s much harder to point the finger at who actually “did it”. Yes, it might have been a “Western intelligence job”, as you said. To me, the most striking thing is that actually the Polish circle of power around D.Tusk was far more active in preventing a real investigation than the Russians.
    
    But, to set things straight, the Russians were not interested either. VVP was there. With his background he must have known (or at least have had a hunch) what really happened. My guess is he did know – and helped cover it up for raison d’état.