Putin: "The world has radically changed"

(Speech at Valdai)
rubn ramos

On October 24 of this year 2014, under the XIth International Meeting of Valdai,
President Russian and world leader, Vladimir Putin delivered the most important
speech on global issues and answered questions of their partners with the clarity the
urgent situation of the world, besieged by the American Zionist terror and its allies in
Israel and Europe, demand for leaders committed to peace and international security.
The "Valdai Discussion Club" is an international framework to promote scientific
analysis and independent and impartial dialogue of political, economic and social
developments in Russia and elsewhere. Involved the best minds of the Russian
intelligentsia and the world. It was founded in 2004 near Lake Valdai (from which
comes the name) that is one of the largest lakes in Novgorod Oblast (in the
Northwestern Federal District, between Moscow and St. Petersburg in Russia) in the
center of Valdaysky National Park . Here the first meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club
International was performed. Every year attending meetings over 800 representatives
of the international academic community in nearly 50 countries. Professors from
leading universities worldwide, including Harvard, Columbia, Georgetown, Stanford,
Carleton University, University of London, University of Cairo, Tehran University, East
China University, the University of Tokyo are included , Tel Aviv University, the
University of Messina, Johns Hopkins University, the London School of Economics,
Kings College London, Sciences Po and the Sorbonne in Paris.
(http://valdaiclub.com/about/).
The intellectual potential Valdai Club is appreciated both in Russia and in the outside
pressure from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the American Bilderberg
Club, the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) academic and political world and
the British Chatham house, and conservative think tanks Anglo-Americans.
The President and Prime Minister of Russia usually meets with members of the club,
and politicians and public figures of Russia and other states in meetings as giving rise
to speech thanks to a translation posted on November 10 by "Iaki" blog Salsarusa
(http://salsarusa.blogspot.com.ar/2014/11/discurso-de-putin-en-valdai.html), you can
read and understand it, now here.
The speech was not part of the news programs decadent world press. Neither his
brainy commentators looked after him. It is not surprising when you consider who
subsidize media of any kind in the world and the esteem genuflexa who have
1

themselves, their owners and scribes. This makes them instinctively react to any fact or
information that conflicts or contradicts the dictates of their puppeteers.
I can disagree with what President Putin said on specific institutions of the
international order that emerged after the Second War, because for me this order
served and still serves to impose or manipulate "consensus" and bring up the American
imperial decisions as "democratic" or "veto" those that might affect their interests, or
simply ignore them as in the case of the invasion of Granada, Panama, Iraq to Libya, to
remember a few.
Disagree regarding the September 11 authored responded to emergency Zionist war
against Islam contained in the doctrines of terror civil-military elites Empire and are
being applied from Reagan to Obama.
Have no qualms about the attitude of Russia when the invasion of Libya and the
assassination of its leader Muammar Gaddafi, builder of sovereignty, integration and
quality of life in this country.
But what is undeniable is that this is a speech that weaves impeccably logical rigor
world affairs since World War II to ensure their understanding and interpretation
beyond the dogma that permeates Manichaeism Zionist intelligentsia and their
followers in all sides.
A diplomatic discourse that unlike those who speak at conferences and meetings
"diplomatic" about world problems, says all clear that this is a politician who uses his
tongue to tell the truth and not to conceal as do rulers, scholars and diplomats, as
President Putin himself made clear.
A speech that avoids the intricacies of pseudo-science that serves to make reality
unintelligible gibberish problems. A speech in which the analysis and future action
proposed by President Putin, feed in the reflection of the events that have generated
greed and American horror together with its European partners in the Middle East,
Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, and the rest of the world.
In which the valuation of Russian confidence in the US is confronted with the bend in
his political proceed.
Where in the certain and prospective sanctions imposed by the US and its European
partners to Russia, prosecution warn pernicious blindness to their crisis and deepening
threat might have on humanity.
In which, over Nazi-Zionist irrationality is being pushed through "armies" of
mercenaries as the Islamic State (or ISIS), and to encourage religious wars and ethnic
conflicts, projects look into a world statesman different, where "Russia does not claim
any exclusive place but respect for the interests of others and their position." A new
2

international order based on the understanding that "the world has entered an era of
change and profound transformations, when everyone needs to be careful and take
steps flee without thinking".
"Participants in world politics, (says Putin) have lost some its qualities. Now we have to
remember them. Otherwise the hopes of a peaceful and stable development is a
dangerous illusion, and current shocks a prelude to the destruction of the world
"order. (Ruben Ramos).
Speech by President Putin in Valdai
Dear colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, dear friends. I am pleased to welcome you to
this conference XI Valdai discussion club.
It has already been said here that this year's club for new co-organizers, including
Russian NGOs, experts, universities. It has also expressed the idea of adding to the
Russian problematic discussion and policy issues and global economy.
I hope these organizational and content changes reinforce the positions of the club as
an important forum for discussion and expert meeting. This I hope the spirit called
Valdai be maintained, and freedom, openness, ability to express the most diverse
views and thus the opinions sincere.
In this sense I say that I will not disappoint, I will speak clearly and honestly. Some
things may seem harsh. But if we did not talk directly and honestly what we really
would not make sense together. Then we should meet in a diplomatic meeting where
nobody says anything clear, and, remembering the words of a diplomat known, we can
say that the language was given to diplomats for not telling the truth.
We gather here to speak honestly. We need openness and hardness of the
assessments; not to attack each other but to try to clarify what actually happens in the
world, why is it less safe and less predictable, because -for tanto- growing risks.
The theme of today's meeting has been called "New rules or game without rules?".
In my opinion this topic, describe exactly the situation we are in, the choice we have to
make all.
The thesis that the contemporary world is changing radically, of course, is not new.
And I know you have talked about it in the course of this discussion. True, it's hard not
to notice the radical transformations in global politics, economics, social life, in the
field of social technologies, information, production.

I apologize if I repeat now expressed by some participants in this forum. It is difficult to

avoid, you have spoken in detail, but I will express my point of view, which may
coincide or differ from what was said by the participants of the forum.
Do not forget, when analyzing the current situation, the lessons of history. First, the
change in the world order (and such events we observe now). Generally if they are
accompanied by a global war or global shocks, by a chain of intensive local conflicts.
Second, world politics is primarily economic leadership, issues of war and peace,
humanitarian sphere, including human rights.
In the world have accumulated many contradictions. And we sincerely ask each other if
we have a safety net. Unfortunately there is no guarantee that the existing system of
global and regional security can get away from the disaster. International and regional
cultural institutions of political and economic relations, and in difficult times.
Yes, many security mechanisms of the peace were created long time ago, following the
Second World War in particular. The strength of this system was based not only on the
balance of forces, I want to emphasize this, and not just on the right of the victors, but
also that the "founding fathers" of this security system is respectfully related to each
other, not trying to "squeeze everything", but tried to reach agreements.
The important thing is that this system was developed and with all faults helped, if not
solved, at least to contain the existing global problems, difficulties regulating
competition between countries.
I am sure that this mechanism contentions and balances, in recent decades, has been
developed with difficulty, sometimes with efforts. In any case, should not break
without creating something in place before, since otherwise there would be no
instruments except brute force. We should carry out a rational reconstruction, adapt
to new realities the system of international relations.
However, the United States, who has declared himself winner of the cold war, consider
that presumptuous way, think that there is no need for it. And instead of establishing a
new balance of forces, it is indispensable condition of order and stability, in contrast,
has taken steps that have led to a strong destabilization of balance.
The Cold War ended. But he did with a declaration of "peace" with understandable and
transparent arrangements for observing the rules and existing or creating new
standards. It seemed that the so-called Cold War victors decided to exploit the
situation, taking worldwide exclusively for them, for their interests. And if the existing
system of international relations and international law, the system of contentions and
balances bothered to achieve these goals, then declared invalid and need to remove it.

So behave, excuse me, the new rich, who suddenly achieve great wealth, in this case in
the form of world domination, world leadership. And instead of with this wealth,
behave politely and carefully, including of course, for their own benefit, I think they
have done many things wrong.
It has begun a period of different interpretations and silences in world politics. Under
pressure from the legal, step by step nihilism has receded international law. Objectivity
and justice have been victims of political expediency. Legal rules have been replaced
by arbitrary interpretations and partial valuations. In addition, the total control of the
media has allowed him to pass for black and white black for white.
Under the conditions of domination of a country and its allies, or to put it another way,
their satellites, the search for global solutions has partially become the attempt to pass
universal own recipes. The ambitions of this group have grown so much that the
policies they agree to present them as the views of the entire international
community. But that is not so.
The concept of "national sovereignty" for most countries has become relative. In
essence, the formula was proposed: the greater the loyalty to one center of influence
in the larger world is the legitimacy of this or that system of government.
Then you and I will have a free discussion, and gladly answer questions and allow them
to exercise their right to ask questions. But in the course of this discussion try to deny
the thesis I have just made.
The measures against those who do not follow this are well known and proven many
times: use of force, economic and propaganda pressure, interference in internal
affairs, appeal to certain "supralegal" legitimacy when to justify a non-legal solution to
the conflict, demolition of uncomfortable regimes. In recent times we have seen that
against certain leaders has exerted an open blackmail. Not surprisingly called big
brother spends billions of dollars to monitor everyone, including his closest allies.
Let us question how we live comfortably and secure in a world, to what extent is fair
and rational. Can it be that we have no reason to worry, discuss, ask uncomfortable
questions? Can it be that the exclusivity of the United States, as they exercise their
leadership is really beneficial for all, and continuous interference in the affairs of the
world take tranquility, profit, progress, flowering, democracy and just have to relax
and enjoy?
I would say no. Not so.
The unilateral dictation and imposition of the models themselves produce the opposite
effect: instead of settling disputes, they increase; instead of sovereign states and firm,

increasing chaos; instead of democracy, support of a dubious public: from openly neoNazi to Islamic radicals.
Why support them? Because at some stage used as a tool to achieve their ends, then
burned and thrown back. I am inspired when our partners again and again fall into the
same hole, ie make the same mistake.
In their time they funded extremist Islamist movements to fight the Soviet Union,
which gained experience in Afghanistan. From there came the Taliban and Al Qaeda.
West, if he did not support them, closed his eyes, and I would say informatively
supported politically and financially international terrorists attack Russia (have not
forgotten this), and the countries of Central Asia. Only after the terrible attacks in the
United States itself understood the general threat of terrorism. I remember then were
the first to support the people of the United States of America, react as friends and
partners in this terrible tragedy of September 11th.
During my conversations with European leaders and the United States always speak of
the need for a joint struggle against terrorism as a global task. In this task we can not
surrender, we can not divide, using double standards. They agreed with us, but spent
some time and everything went on as before. Interference in Iraq, and Libya was
developed.
This country certainly stood on the brink of dissolution. Why I was in that situation?
Now it has become a terrorist training polygon.
Only the will and intelligence of the current Egyptian leadership has allowed out of
chaos and extremism in this key Arab country.
In Syria, as in the past, the United States and its allies have begun directly to fund and
arm the rebels and allowing complete their ranks with mercenaries from different
countries.
Let me ask where the money comes from, weapons and military specialists. Where
does all this? Why ISIL has become a powerful armed group?
With regard to financing, today comes not only from drug proceeds, the production, by
the way, during the stay of international forces in Afghanistan has increased
enormously, not just a small percentage.
You know, the funding comes from the sale of oil extraction in territories controlled by
terrorists. Sell it pulled prices, extracted and transported. Someone buy this oil, resells,
earn money with it without thinking that is funding the terrorists who eventually come
to their territory and sow death in his country.

Where do the new recruits? In Iraq itself resulted in the overthrow of Saddam Hussein
destroyed state institutions, including the army. So we said, beware of where to drive
out all these people. A Street. What will they do? Do not forget that, just or unjust,
were commanding a relatively large regional power. What have turned?
What happened? Tens of thousands of soldiers and officers, former Baath party
activists thrown into the street now complete the ranks of the guerrillas. Can it be that
there is the key to the ability of ISIS? They act very effectively from the military point
of view, they are very professional people.
Russia has clearly expressed its concern about the danger of unilateral military actions,
interference in the affairs of sovereign states, play with extremists and radicals. We
have insisted on the inclusion of groups fighting against the Syrian central government,
including ISIS, in the list of terrorist organizations. What was the result? None.
Sometimes we feel that our colleagues and friends constantly struggle with the results
of its own policy, devote their efforts to combat the risk that they themselves have
created, they pay a growing price.
Dear Colleagues, This period of unipolar dominance has clearly demonstrated that the
domain of a single center of force does not lead to increased manageability of global
processes. Unlike the flimsy construction has shown its inability to fight threats such as
regional conflicts, terrorism, drug trafficking, religious fanaticism, chauvinism and neoNazism. At the same time he has left free passage to the emergence of national pride,
manipulating public opinion, with strong pressure from the will of the weak by the
strong will.
Fundamentally the unipolar world is a defense of the dictatorship on people and on
countries. Incidentally, the unipolar world is not comfortable, livable and is difficult to
control even for the self-proclaimed leader. They have commented on it and I totally
agree. There are current attempts and a new historical stage of creating something like
a cuasibipolar world at a cuasibipolar system as convenient model perpetuation of
American leadership. And not in vain American propaganda presents the place of the
"center of evil," the place of the USSR as the main opponent: is Iran, as the country
tries to nuclear technology, China as world's largest economy, or Russia as a nuclear
superpower.
Now we see again attempts to break the world, to create new dividing lines, build
coalitions not by the principle of "for" but "against" anyone; reshape an image of the
enemy, as it did during the Cold War, and getting the right leadership, or if you prefer,
the right to dictation.

This is how the situation was during the era of the Cold War, we all know and
understand. For the allies of the United States they are always said, "we have a
common enemy, is terrible, it is the center of evil. We will defend you, our allies, of
them and therefore have the right to direct you, make them victims of our political and
economic interests; we take care of the costs of collective defense but that defense, of
course, headed us. "
In a word, it is now clear attempt to carry out the usual patterns of global governance
in a changing world, and everything to ensure uniqueness and get political and
economic dividends.
These attempts are unrealistic, oppose a plural world. Similar steps inevitably create
clashes response reactions and eventually cause the opposite effect.
We also see what happens when you mix politics with the economy recklessly, rational
logic gives way to the logic of confrontation, even when harms own positions and
economic interests, including business interests of the country.
The joint economic projects, mutual investment approach objectively countries, help
amortize the current problems in interstate relations. But today the global economic
society suffers unprecedented pressure from Western governments. What business,
what economic objective, what pragmatism may be when the slogan appears: "The
country is in danger, the free world is in danger, democracy is in danger"? We have to
mobilize. This is a political mobilization.
The sanctions are undermining the foundations of world trade, the WTO rules and
principles of inviolability of private property. Threaten the liberal model of
globalization, market-based, freedom and competition, a model whose biggest
beneficiaries are, I stress, Western countries.
Now they risk losing confidence as leaders of globalization. We wonder, why do this?
The welfare of the United States itself depends largely on the confidence of investors,
foreign holders of dollars and US bonds. Now is undermining trust and distrust signals
appear in the fruits of globalization in many countries.
The Cypriot precedent and the political motivation of sanctions have reinforced trends
towards economic and financial sovereignty, the attempt of the states or their regional
unions somehow ensure against risks of external pressure. So, more and more
countries are trying to get out of dependence on the dollar and create alternative
financial and accounting systems, reserve currencies.
In my opinion our American friends are simply cutting the branch on which they are
supported. No mixing politics and economics, but this is precisely what happens. I

thought and still think that sanctions are politically motivated an error that causes
damage at all, but I'm sure they'll talk about this later.
Understand who exerted pressure to make these decisions. Yet Russia, I want to draw
your attention to this, it will not be offended by someone, ask anyone. Russia is selfsufficient. We will work in international economic conditions there, develop our
production and technology, act decisively in the development of reforms, and foreign
pressure, as has happened more than once, only strengthens our society does not
allow relax, I'd say that makes us concentrate on the main directions of our
development.
The sanctions, of course, annoy us with these sanctions trying to hurt us, blocking our
development, isolate politically, economically and culturally, ie, force us to go back.
But the world, I want to emphasize, as I said and I repeat, the world has changed
radically. We can not lock ourselves and choose a development road closed by an
autonomous way. We are always open to dialogue, even for the normalization of
economic and political relations. We here at the positions and pragmatic behavior of
economic groups of the world leading countries.
Today is heard say that Russia turns its back on Europe, surely heard in the course of
this discussion, you are looking for other partners, especially in Asia. I mean this is not
the case at all. Our active policy in the Asia-Pacific has not started now or in relation to
the sanctions, but many years ago. We acted like many other countries, including
Western, because East and represents a major role in the economic and political
world. This is something that can not miss.
I emphasize again that all they do, and we will do it, especially since a significant
portion of our territory is in Asia. Why do not we will use an advantage of this type?
That would be simply a lack of long-term vision.
The development of economic relations with these countries, joint integration projects
are a serious stimulus for our internal development. Current demographic, economic,
and cultural trends tell us that the dependence of a superpower, of course, objectively
decrease. This is what European and American experts who write about it say.
Probably in world politics we expect the same facts as in the global economy, strong
competition in niche, a partial change of leadership in specific directions. Everything is
possible.
Undoubtedly, in global competition growing role of humanitarian factors: education,
science, health, culture. This, in turn, influences significantly in international relations,
because the use of the "soft power" will depend largely on actual achievements in the
formation of human capital, rather than propaganda.

At the same time, the formation of so-called polycentric world, I also want to draw
attention to this, gentlemen, by itself does not reinforce stability, rather the opposite.
The goal of achieving an overall balance becomes a complicated puzzle, in an equation
with many unknowns.
What awaits us if we prefer not to live by those rules, which are severe and
uncomfortable, but without any rules? Precisely this scenario is quite real, we can not
exclude, seeing the stresses of the world situation. You can make many predictions to
see current trends, and unfortunately are not optimistic. If we do not create a clear
system of mutual obligations and agreements not create a mechanism for resolving
crisis situations, and signs of global anarchy inevitably increase.
Already today we see growth opportunities in a number of strong conflict with direct
or indirect participation of the great powers. Besides this risk factor includes not only
traditional contradictions between countries, but also internal instability in some
countries, especially when it comes to countries located at the intersection of the
geopolitical interests of the great powers, or at the border of large historical-cultural,
economic and civilizations areas.
Ukraine, which'm sure much has been said and to be discussed further, is one example
of this type of conflict that influence the global distribution of power, and I think it is
far from the last. Hence the following real prospect of destroying the system of
agreements on arms limitation and control. And the beginning of this process comes
from the United States, when in 2002 unilaterally abandoned the ABM Treaty, and
then began, and today actively continues with the creation of its global missile system.
Colleagues, friends, I want to draw your attention to the fact that we have not begun
us. We are returning to the days when it was not the balance of interests and mutual
guarantees, but the fear, the balance of self-destruction, which countries away from
direct attack. A lack of legal and political instruments arms become the center of the
global situation, are used where appropriate and as appropriate, without penalty
Security Council of the UN. And if the Security Council rejects such decisions, it
immediately says it is an old and ineffective instrument.
Many countries see no other guarantees of their sovereignty to create their own
bombs. This is very dangerous. We are in favor of continuing the talks, not only talks
but talks to reduce nuclear arsenals. The less nuclear weapons in the world is better.
And we are willing to more serious discussions on the issue of nuclear disarmament.
But seriously, without double standards.

10

What do I mean? Today many kinds of high precision weapons, their ability approach
to weapons of mass destruction, and in case of negative or critical nuclear arsenal has
decreased, the country holding the lead in the creation and production of these
systems precision will have a clear military dominance. Strategic parity will break and
this is clearly destabilizing. The temptation to use the so-called global preemptive
strike appears. In short, the risks will not decrease but increase.
he next obvious threat is rising ethnic and religious conflicts. These conflicts are
dangerous not only for themselves, but also because they are in areas with a vacuum
of power and law, chaos, where they feel comfortable terrorists and criminals, piracy
flourishes, trade in human beings, drug trafficking.
By the way, our colleagues at the time tried to direct these processes, using regional
conflicts, build "color revolutions" to their interests, but the genie out of the bottle.
What can we do, it seems that neither its authors understand chaos theory directed.
No more division and doubt among them.
We observe carefully the discussions between the ruling elites and experts. Just look at
the headwaters of the Western press over the last year: the same people who called
fighters for democracy and then Islamists, initially writing speed and after pogroms
and coups. The result is clear: further expansion of global chaos.
Dear colleagues, in such a situation the world must find an agreement on matters of
principle. This is tremendously important and necessary, it is much better to separate,
each in his corner, the more when we face common problems, we are, as they say, in
the same boat. And the logical path is cooperation between countries, societies and
collective search for answers to the many problems, a common risk management.
Certainly one of our partners, for some reason, just remember this when responding
to their interests.
Practical experience shows that joint responses to problems are not always a panacea,
of course, admittedly, and also in most cases are hard to get. It is very difficult to
overcome national interests, subjectivity, especially when it comes to countries with
different cultural and historical tradition. But there are examples of that when we are
guided common goals and act based on unified criteria together we can achieve real
success.
Recall the solution of the problem of chemical weapons in Syria, and dialogue on the
Iranian nuclear program, and our work in the North Korean issue has also had some
positive results. Why not use all this experience for solving local and global problems?

11

What should be the legal, political and economic foundation of the new world order
that ensures stability and security, to ensure healthy competition and not allow the
formation of new monopolies that block development?
It is difficult that no one can now give a complete answer to this question. A long
process involving a wide circle of countries, companies, civil society and expert forums
like ours needs. However it is clear that success, a real result is only possible if the key
international life participants can agree on basic interests, a logical restraint, if you give
an example of responsible leadership.
We must clearly define where the limits of unilateral actions are and where the
requirement of multilateral mechanisms appear, resolve within the framework of
international law improves the dilemma between the actions of the international
community to guarantee security and human rights and the principle of national
sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of countries.
Such collisions lead increasingly arbitrary often very complicated foreign interference
in internal processes, and again and again cause dangerous contradictions in the
world's top agents.
The question of the content of sovereignty becomes very important for the
maintenance and strengthening of global stability.
It is clear that the discussion on the criteria for use of external force is very
complicated, it is almost impossible to separate the interests of one country or
another. However it is far more dangerous lack of understandable by all agreements,
clear conditions in which the interference is essential and legal.
I add that international relations should be built on international law, according to
which should be the moral principles such as justice, equality, right. The most
important thing is respect for the partner and their interests. An obvious formula, but
if followed root can change the situation in the world.
I'm sure if we will restore the effectiveness of the system of international and regional
institutions. No need to even build something new from scratch, this is not a
"greenfield", especially since the institutions created after World War II are universal
and can be filled with modern content, appropriate to the current situation.
This refers to improving the work of the UN, whose central role is irreplaceable. And
the OSCE, (or OECD), which in 40 years has proven to be a mechanism to guarantee
security and cooperation in the Euro zone. Note that right now, in solving the crisis in
southeastern Ukraine OSCE plays a positive role.

12

Against the background of fundamental changes in the international situation, the

increasing lawlessness and different threats require us to a new consensus forces
responsible. It is not any local agreement or a separation of spheres of influence in the
style of classical diplomacy, or any global dominance.
I think a new "edition" of interdependence is needed. Do not be afraid. Rather, it is a
good tool to ... This is as current, considering the strengthening and growth of certain
regions of the planet, which is an objective requirement of institutional formalization
of said poles, creating powerful regional organizations and standards development
their interaction.
The cooperation of these centers would add considerably to global security, political
and economic force. But to achieve success in this dialogue must be assumed that all
regional centers, integration projects born around it have an equal right to be
developed to complement each other and no one come between them artificially. As a
result of this destructive line relations between countries would break, and the
countries themselves suffer difficult situations, even to his own destruction.
I would remind the events of last year. So we said our partners, both Americans and
Europeans, that hasty decisions and sneaking about, say, the association of Ukraine
and the EU, had large exposures, we did not say nothing even about politics, spoke
only of economics, risk serious in the economic field because such steps affect the
interests of many third countries, including Russia as a key trading partner of Ukraine,
which necessitated a comprehensive study of the issue. By the way, I remember in this
connection, that the entry of Russia, for example, in the WTO, took 19 years. This was
a hard work and a consensus was achieved.
Why do I mention this? Because the project in partnership with Ukraine, as if through a
back door, enter our partners with their products and services, and we have not
accepted, no one has asked us. We kept discussing these issues related to the
association between Ukraine and the EU but I want to stress that a fully civilized
manner, indicating possible problems, showing arguments and reasons. Nobody
wanted to listen or talk to us, we just said, this is not your affair, that was it, that was
the whole discussion. Instead of a complicated dialogue, but they emphasize, civilized,
things came to a coup, led the country into chaos and destroyed the economy, social
protection, provoked a civil war with many victims.
For what? When I ask my colleagues to do, no answer. Nobody answered nothing, so.
All gesturing with hands: that is what has happened. No one would have to have
encouraged such actions. As I said, the former Ukrainian President Yanukovich signed
everything, accepted everything. What we had to do this, what sense did? Is this a
civilized way to resolve issues? It seems that those who organize more and more "color
revolutions" are considered some great artists and can not stop.
13

I am sure that the work of integration associations, regional influence structures

should be built on a clear and understandable base. A good example of this opening is
the formation of the Eurasian economic union. The member countries of this project
previously informed their partners of their intentions, the parameters of our union, of
the principles of their operation, they were completely agree with the rules of the
World Trade Organization. I would add that we also welcomed the start of dialogue
between European and Eurasian unions. Certainly in this we have also rejected almost
always, nor is it clear why, what's wrong with it? And of course that we work together
we believe that dialogue is necessary, I have talked about it many times and I've heard
many of our Western partners accept the need for the formation of a single economic
space, humanitarian cooperation that extends from the Atlantic to the Pacific.
Dear colleagues, Russia has made its choice, our priorities are to an improvement of
democratic institutions and open economy, internal development accelerated with all
the current positive trends in the world and the consolidation of society based on
traditional values and patriotism. We have a sheet peaceful, positive path of
integration, we actively work with our colleagues in the Eurasian Economic Union, the
organization of Shanghai, the BRICS and other partners.
This roadmap is aimed at the development of relations between countries, not
separation. We do not want to create any block, an exchange of blows. Have no basis
who claim that Russia is trying to restore an empire that attacks the sovereignty of its
neighbors. Russia claims no exclusive place in the world, I want to emphasize this.
Respecting the interests of others simply want to take into account our interests and
our position is respected.
Understand well that the world has entered an era of change and profound
transformations, when everyone needs to be careful and take steps flee without
thinking. Years after the Cold War, participants in world politics have lost some its
qualities. Now we have to remember them. Otherwise the hopes of a peaceful and
stable development is a dangerous illusion, and current shocks a prelude to the
destruction of world order.
Yes, of course I have already spoken of this, building a stronger system of world order
is a difficult task, it is a long and difficult job. We were able to create interaction rules
after the Second World War, we were able to reach agreement on the 70 in Helsinki.
Our common obligation is to find a solution to this fundamental task in this new stage
of development.

Thank you very much for your attention.

14