In anticipation of visits to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, Vladimir Putin answered questions from Al Arabiya senior correspondent Mohammed Tomaihi, Sky News Arabia senior correspondent Mohannad Khatib and head of the public affairs program RT Arabic Salam Musafira.
- We welcome you to this unique interview that we are recording in Sochi with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Thank you very much for giving us this rare opportunity, given that your visit to Saudi Arabia is approaching.
“I am also pleased to see you.” I think this is a good tradition. Before a visit to a particular country, I meet with representatives of the mass media of this state.
As for the visit to Saudi Arabia, we attach great importance to this. This is in a sense a return visit after the visit of the King of Saudi Arabia, the Guardian of two shrines, to Russia. It was the first historical one, in fact - we call it a historical visit, as it is.
There is something else that I consider very important to note. In Soviet times, relations between Saudi Arabia and the Soviet Union were at a rather low level. Over the past years, the quality of our relations has changed dramatically. We see Saudi Arabia as a friendly state.
I have a very good relationship with the king, and with the crown prince. We are developing relations in almost all areas.
I'll start with the economy. Here we still have a lot to do, but the pace is good. Last year, growth was 15%, this year for the first half of the year it is already 38%. We are considering good joint projects. Our Private Equity Fund and the Saudi Arabia Sovereign Fund have created a joint platform in the amount of $ 10 billion, $ 2 billion has already been invested, work is underway on other projects, and several fairly promising and interesting ones have already been implemented.
We also consider it possible to work in Saudi Arabia. One of our companies is considering the possibility of building a petrochemical complex with an investment volume of more than $ 1 billion. This is SIBUR Holding, our largest company in this sector of the economy.
- RIA News
- © Vitaly Belousov
We are also building relations in such a very trusting, sensitive sphere as military-technical cooperation. We have been negotiating for a long time on this part.
No less important, of course, is our joint work to resolve regional crisis situations. In this regard, I would like to note the positive role of Saudi Arabia in resolving the crisis in Syria. We work most closely with Turkey, Iran, this is well known to all. But without the contribution of Saudi Arabia to the settlement processes in Syria, it seems to me that it would be absolutely impossible to achieve a positive trend. Therefore, I want to immediately express my gratitude to both the king and the crown prince for this constructive position. I am sure that my visit will give a good impetus to the development of both bilateral ties and our cooperation in the international arena.
- Mr. President, of course, your visit to the Middle East region will also affect, possibly, the United Arab Emirates. What do you think about strategic cooperation between these states, between Russia and the UAE? How this cooperation will develop and whether it can play a role in strengthening collective security, also taking into account the Russian initiative to create collective security in the Persian Gulf, especially in the Strait of Hormuz.
- You just now yourself said about the strategic nature of our relations. Indeed, last year we signed a memorandum on strategic partnership, cooperation and we consider the United Arab Emirates as one of our very close and promising partners. It is no coincidence that we came to the signing of this document, this indicates the quality, the nature of relations between the United Arab Emirates and the Russian Federation.
I must say that just like in the case with Saudi Arabia, our partnership is developing in all directions quite energetically. In the country dimension, if you look at the Gulf area, this is the largest turnover - $ 1.7 billion. But this, of course, is not enough, we understand this very well and now we are also working with the Sovereign Fund of the United Arab Emirates. Shared platform somewhere $ 7 billion. $ 2 billion has already been implemented in projects; active work is underway on other projects. And of course, the United Arab Emirates is making a very serious contribution to resolving crises in the region and playing a stabilizing role - without exaggeration.
I will not reveal great secrets if I say that we are in constant contact with the leadership of the United Arab Emirates. We even have a tradition and practice - we have the opportunity to compare watches with each other in different directions and do it. We do this, in my opinion, with great benefit not only for both sides, but also for the region as a whole.
- During your more than ten-year presidency in the Middle East, really harsh, dramatic events have taken place: the foundations of a number of states - in Iraq, Libya, have been undermined. A similar fate awaits, perhaps, other countries.
Now we see what happened in the Syrian Arab Republic, what catastrophic events. And many members of the Arab public think that Russia can strengthen its role in this region. Of course, you know that our RT Arabic channel also covers the foreign policy of the Russian Federation. Many of our viewers ask: why did Russia take such a firm stance against Syria, but perhaps not such a firm stance against Libya and Iraq?
- Firstly, when the events around Iraq and Libya took place, I was not the president. But the point, of course, is not only this or not at all. The fact is that in the first case, the United States, as you know, acted bypassing the United Nations Security Council. The United States did not have a mandate to use force against Iraq. Oh no! Then I was already in this position, of course, but Russia did not support it. Russia, France, Germany - we did not support the US plans for Iraq. Moreover, we warned of possible negative consequences. And so it happened.
And the first euphoria about military victories quickly gave way to despondency and pessimism about the consequences of this victory. Because there was a destruction of all state structures in Iraq, and they were not replaced by any new structures, as in the first stage, in any case, it was not created. On the contrary, radical forces intensified, the aspect that we call terrorist intensified.
Many former officers of the army of Saddam Hussein and special services just migrated, joined the ranks, and with their help ISIS * was created. Therefore, no one calculated the consequences of those who did and supported this action.
We very much hope that today Iraq will develop in a positive manner and, despite some internal problems, will nevertheless move forward. Although there are, unfortunately, still a lot of problems, and we are well aware of this.
As for Libya, the chaos that reigned after the military operations, unfortunately, has not yet stopped. But in this case, our Western partners are just us - they say among our people, I don’t know how translators will translate, - they cheated. Russia voted in favor of a relevant Security Council resolution. After all, what is written there in this resolution, if you should read it properly? The resolution forbade Gaddafi to use aircraft against the rebels, but there was nothing said that the bombing of any kind of aviation in the territory of Libya was allowed, and that was exactly what was done. That is, in fact, also in violation of, bypassing the UN Security Council, everything that happened in practice. And what followed, we well know. There is still chaos, confusion, a flood of migrants poured through Libya, which Gaddafi always warned about: he closes the way for migrants from Africa to Europe. As soon as this “wall” was gone, the stream began to flow. Now they have what they warned about. But this is perhaps not the most important thing. And most importantly, it destabilizes the entire Middle East.
As for Syria, we came to Syria in order to support a legitimate government, namely a legitimate one, I want to emphasize this. This does not mean that there are no internal problems, I am ready to say more about this later in more detail. This does not mean that the current leadership has no responsibility for the situation. Yes, but this does not mean at all that we should have allowed terrorist organizations to seize the territory of Syria and set up a quasi-state terrorist formation there. We could not allow the flow of militants to flow into the countries of the former Soviet Union, with which we have transparent borders and no visa regime. We could not allow the militants to infiltrate Russian territory from there. We have already done this well and we know what this may lead to, according to not so long-standing events in the North Caucasus of Russia. Therefore, all this was the motive, why we decided to provide assistance to the legitimate authorities.
We did not just provide assistance to the legitimate authorities. We proceed from the fact that internal political contradictions should be and can be resolved only by political means. Therefore, we insisted so - and I am very glad that this is happening now - at the beginning of the political process as a result of the creation of the so-called constitutional committee. His idea was born right here, where we are now, in Sochi, at the Congress of the Syrian people, where various political forces were represented, including opposition and government structures. And then it was precisely here that the Syrians agreed among themselves that they would create a constitutional committee, he would begin work on amending the Syrian Constitution or on the adoption of a new Constitution. We have gone through a rather complicated, difficult and long way of forming this committee. Now it is finally formed both from the government, from the side of President Assad, and from the opposition. I hope that in the coming days he will begin to take his first steps in Geneva under the auspices of the UN.
- Mr. President, you spoke about the relations that connect Saudi Arabia and Russia. As you know, this is a strategic partner of the Russian Federation with regard to the energy security sector. You have recently heard of two missile bomb strikes at the refinery and what is happening now. We are now in Saudi Arabia talking about the fact that Iran can play a destabilizing role in the region. You said that you need to find evidence that Iran is really behind it. What is the official position of the Russian Federation in relation to this incident?
- The official position is this: we condemn any acts of this kind, and it cannot be otherwise. This is our official position. We announced this from the very beginning, and I myself spoke about this recently at the Russian Energy Week in Moscow. There can be no doubt. Such actions do not bring results for anyone, including those who prepare and carry out such actions. Why? Because if someone expected that this would somehow affect the oil market, then the goal was not achieved. The fluctuations were, in my opinion, not so significant. The first push was noticeable, but literally within a week everything again returned to natural price indices. Because the fundamental factors that shape the market will not allow the price to jump anywhere - neither down nor up. This is the first.
The second one. We, I personally, in contacts with the leadership of Saudi Arabia, including the crown prince, we discussed with him this incident. I told him that I consider it necessary to obtain evidence, find the perpetrators, confirm that someone is behind this action. In principle, Prince bin Salman agreed with me, and he asked whether Russia could participate in the investigation of this incident. I said that yes, we are ready to provide everything that is required of us, and everything that we have, so that this incident is thoroughly investigated. Therefore, our position remains unchanged. Before it becomes reliably clear and understandable who is behind this action, “appointing the perpetrators” is inexpedient.
- Mr. President, can we even get assurance from Russia that if it turns out that Iran is behind this attack, then Russia will also join those countries that condemn it?
- I just said, I want to repeat: whoever stood behind this incident, we condemn actions of this kind. I said just that. There can be no double interpretation.
- Mr. President, let's digress a bit from these attacks at the refinery. Without a doubt, you understand that now there really is concern throughout the region, and you analyze this situation yourself. There is concern about the role of Iran, not only in relation to the latest attacks, but also in other countries - in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, Syria.
Do you also feel concern in Russia that the activities of Iran, in our opinion, are destabilizing? What do you think, Russia can influence to change this behavior?
- I said that we have had unprecedentedly warm partnership and even friendly relations with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. But Russia never makes friends with someone against someone. We build bilateral relations based on positive trends in our contacts, and do not create an alliance in the fight against someone, this is the first thesis.
The second one. I think that it will also be understood by you and your listeners and viewers: Russia and Iran are neighbors, we cannot but take this factor into account.
Third. Iran is a major regional power. This is an ancient nation with its ancient, deep culture. And if we want to build good relations with someone - and I proceed from the fact that all countries of the region want to have good relations with each other, no one seeks confrontation and, God forbid, some kind of clashes, no one seeks. I know that in Saudi Arabia no one wants this, and in the Emirates no one wants it, but if we want a positive agenda, then we must proceed from the fact that we recognize the legitimate interests of our partners. I want to emphasize this. I do not list now what is legal, what is illegal, but such a large power as Iran, which has been in this territory for thousands of years (Iranians, Persians, lived here for centuries), cannot but have its own interests, and they should be treated with respect .
- Presidents of Iran and Russia Hassan Rouhani and Vladimir Putin
- RIA News
- © Alexey Druzhinin
It is clear that it is legal and illegal, where there are legitimate interests and where they cross borders - this, of course, is the subject of discussion. But in order to understand each other, in order to understand these nuances, subtleties and problematic issues, it is necessary to conduct a dialogue. Without dialogue it is impossible to solve a single problem at all. Therefore, I imagine that I can share the concerns of both the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, but only these states themselves can solve the problems between the two states.
As for Russia, we will do everything in order to create the necessary conditions for such positive dynamics. I think the fact that Russia has good relations with Iran and very good relations with our Arab friends ... There was no high level of relations with Saudi Arabia under the Soviet Union, but with the Arab world they were excellent, with almost everything. The Soviet Union still had very good relations with the entire Arab world. Therefore, we are not returning now, but have returned to this quality of relationship. If we use our good relations with Iran and the Arab world, with Saudi Arabia, with the UAE, it seems to me that we can find something that could be of common interest.
I talked about our positive work in Syria. Yes, we - Turkey, Iran, Russia - are very actively working within the framework of this troika and achieving results. But without the support of Saudi Arabia, this would be absolutely impossible, yet they are aware of this. Without appropriate support from the UAE, too.Therefore, there is something that, despite sharp contradictions, makes us all join forces to achieve a common goal. We must find these goals and work on them together. This will create conditions for the normalization of relations in the region between countries.
- As for Iran, Mr. President, today they talk about the need to revive the negotiations within the framework of the "five plus one." And now everyone is talking about the need to tie this treaty to a ballistic missile program. What is the position of the Russian Federation regarding the revival of this format in order to possibly model the agreement and introduce other issues into it?
- There is a so-called JCPOA treaty, the Treaty on the Iranian Nuclear Program, on the relevant restrictions. Iran has made certain commitments. Let's talk frankly, otherwise the conversation will be uninteresting, it will be lean. There are contradictions that you just mentioned, among the countries of the region. There are contradictions between Iran and Israel, Iran and the United States. I proceed from the fact that we need to strive to resolve these contradictions, to look for ways out of these difficult situations. But if we proceed from the fact that there are contradictions between the countries of the region with Iran, then who can be the judge in resolving the issue does Iran fulfill its obligations under the JCPO or not. The judge must be neutral, right? The first one.Professional is the second. And recognized by the international community - the third. And there is such a judge - this is the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency. And it publicly, without shyness, directly says that Iran is fully fulfilling all its obligations.
It is simply not very productive (I'm not talking about the fact that it is dishonest) - to make claims to Iran about what it is not doing. This is not very productive, because when any person or any country faces such injustice, he begins to behave differently, and not as written on paper.
If obligations are not fulfilled with respect to him, why should he fulfill? Nevertheless, my opinion is that it would be better for Iran to adhere to the letter and spirit of this agreement. But that is another question.
As for the missile program, this, probably, can and should be discussed as well. I think that the representatives of Islam will also understand this, in Russia there is such an expression: do not confuse God's gift with fried eggs. These are different topics. A missile program is one thing, a nuclear program is another. This does not mean that there is no need to talk about this topic, especially if it causes concern. Of course, it is necessary, but just do not need to mix one with the other, so as not to kill the achievement that has already been made.
Therefore, I believe that yes, such a conversation is possible, but this should not lead to the destruction of the results already achieved on the first most important topic - limiting the nuclear activity of Iran itself.
- Let me ask you a question on this issue, namely about security in the Persian Gulf. Indeed, in recent years, many dramatic events have occurred in this region. This is the detention of tankers, and bombing raids on the Saudi Aramco refinery, and the aggression that continues in the region of Yemen. And in relation to the latest attacks on Aramco, we see that they had a really huge impact on the mood in the region.
From your point of view, how will all these serious events affect cooperation under the OPEC + agreement? So far, we have not heard a clear position from the countries of the region regarding the proposal of the Russian Federation on a collective security strategy in this region, in this zone.
How will you promote a collective security initiative? Do you think she will see the light?
- These are the questions connected among themselves which you now formulated, but all the same it is not the same. Our cooperation in the framework of OPEC + is one story, and the issues of security, stability in the region and our proposals on how to ensure it are still a little different.
As for the first, if someone thinks that such actions, such as the seizure of tankers, attacks on the oil infrastructure, will somehow affect the cooperation of Russia and our Arab friends - Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, they will somehow influence or will destroy our cooperation in the direction of OPEC +, they are all deeply mistaken. On the contrary, it will only unite us. Because our goal is to stabilize the situation on world energy markets. But as a technical task - to reduce the volume of reserves, reserves in the world to reasonable so that these reserves do not put pressure on the price.
By the way, everything that has been done (and quite a lot has been done) was done in the interests of not only manufacturers, but also consumers, because both of them are interested not so much in the high price as in the stability in the world market. All this was done, frankly, under the leadership of Crown Prince Ben Salman. In many ways, these were his initiatives, we supported it and see that we did the right thing.
Anything that destabilizes the market should meet our feedback. Of course, we will work with Saudi Arabia and with our other partners and friends in the Arab world in order to neutralize, reduce to zero attempts to destabilize the market.
Now, with regard to our initiative to stabilize the situation in the Persian Gulf zone. Yes, you know, some time ago we came up with such an initiative - to create some kind of organization from the countries of the region, add interested states (both the United States, the European Union, and so on) so that there is a platform for discussing crisis situations and the most hot questions. Someone supports this initiative, and someone considers it premature, by the way, based on the sharp contradictions between the countries of the region. In my opinion, all the same, just on the basis of this circumstance - because of the presence of sharp contradictions - it would be right to create such a platform so that people can at least meet each other. You know, sometimes it’s not even the fact of negotiations that matters, but a handshake. It already matters.
- Is it possible to count on the role of the Russian Federation as a possible mediator between the Islamic Republic and Saudi Arabia or as a whole in order to resolve acute crises of the Persian Gulf?
- The role of an intermediary is not the most grateful. I think that our partners neither in Iran, nor in Saudi Arabia need mediation.
Since we have very good relations with all countries of the region - with the Iranians, and with the Arab world, in a country-wide relationship with Saudi Arabia, with the United Arab Emirates in this case, then, of course, we could convey some kind of position from them to the ears of others. But I know, I personally know the leaders of these countries: they do not need advice and mediation. You can only speak with them in friendship, as a friend formulate some ideas. I know that, being smart people, they listen, analyze what they are told. In this sense, we could play a positive role.
- Mr. President, I would also like to speak sincerely. Now you say that it is too early to blame Iran for delivering these attacks. You also had a meeting recently with President Rouhani. Did you receive any assurances from him that Iran was in no way connected with these attacks and that, in principle, Iran had not been involved in these attacks in any way?
- Yes, he said so that Iran has nothing to do with it. We met recently on the sidelines of an international event, this is the Eurasian Economic Union, which we created with some countries of the former Soviet Union. A few months ago, an agreement was signed with Iran on a free trade zone - this organization and Iran - an interim agreement. Incidentally, we have signed the same agreement on a free trade zone with Singapore and Vietnam. Now, by the way, we are also working on this agenda with Israel and Egypt. Relations of this organization are developing positively with many countries of the world. Iran also joins this work, we met recently on the sidelines of the work of this organization in Yerevan and talked about this topic.
- Of course, Russia plays its role in the events in the Persian Gulf. Your special services have serious potential. After all, the Russian Federation cannot but know what really happened during those attacks on refineries.
- Imagine, we don’t know. The very next day, I asked both the heads of the Foreign Intelligence Service and the Ministry of Defense. No, we don’t know. I will not comment on who should know this in order not to offend anyone, but we do not have any reliable information on this issue.
- You recently announced that large-scale military operations in Syria are being suspended, and now we are really full of hope for a political settlement. You talked about this Navaldai event. You said that Syria really can be a real example of how to resolve this kind of conflict.
Do you think that we can talk about any political settlement while other countries are present on the territory of the state of Syria - these are the USA, Russia, Turkey, Iran? Still, in the conditions of this unstable space, can one hope for any stability in Syria?
- Hope you need. Hope dies last. I cannot disagree with you only that all who are on the territory of any state, in this case the Syrian Arab Republic, are illegitimate, must leave this territory. This applies in general to all states.If the future leadership, the legitimate leadership of Syria says that it no longer needs the presence of the Russian Armed Forces, this also applies to the Russian Federation, of course. Today, we are discussing this issue absolutely openly with all our partners: both Iranian and Turkish partners, and our American partners have repeatedly talked about this. And just as I tell you now, I spoke openly to my colleagues: the territory of Syria should be freed from foreign military presence and the territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic should be fully restored.
- Do you have any idea of what the political future of Syria will be and what role Russia will play in this future?
- You know, only the Syrians themselves can answer this question (and this is the most difficult question). I hope that not with the help of weapons, not with the help of armed confrontation, not with the help of fratricidal war, but in the course of negotiations among themselves, in this case, as I have already said, in Geneva. And the first stage, of course, is work on the basic law of the country, on the Constitution: either as amended or with the new Constitution. But, without any doubt, the interests of all ethnic, religious groups must be guaranteed. People should understand that they live in their own country, reliably enjoy the protection of this country and its laws. This applies to the Sunnis, Shiites, and Alawites, this applies to Christians. After all, Syria has always been a multi-confessional state and could be proud of it. Only people deprived of their sanity could launch a massacre campaign like the terrorist elements in Syria did.
But, I repeat, this will be a difficult process, complicated, but, in my opinion, it is possible. And you know what makes me think in a positive way? Today, many are returning to their homes. It is about thousands of people. And from abroad they are returning, and from other territories of Syria they are returning home, to their native places, home centers. This is a sure sign that people trust the current situation, trust state guarantees, and trust those guarantor countries that are present there.
I am very pleased to note that the Syrians are very positive and with great confidence in the Russian military, in our military police. The military police, which carries out their service there, do it with dignity, to a large extent formed from immigrants from the North Caucasus. They all profess Islam. And the locals (I have specific examples) just go to them for protection. I am very pleased to note this.
But, of course, in the end, in order for the situation to become stable and to be designed for the long term, people must agree among themselves. Even the worst world is always better than a good war.
- Now let's leave for a while from the Middle East region and the Persian Gulf. You regularly say that Russian-American relations should improve, because otherwise, if there is any breakdown, so to speak, in these relations, this will really create an unfavorable situation throughout the world. Do you have any hope that we can really see steps towards improving bilateral relations by looking at Donald Trump's Twitter posts? You probably follow what the American president says.
- Sorry, I myself do not have any Twitter, I do not follow this. Of course, from time to time my employees report. The opinion of the President of the United States is always important, it always matters to very many, to the world as a whole. But I don’t read it myself.
- Suppose US President Donald Trump is still re-elected next year. Do you think that during the next presidency he will nevertheless be more promising and more courageous in the matter of a real relaxation of relations with Moscow? And will Moscow be ready to resume dialogue?
- Excuse me, do you work for Russia Today?
Thanks to people like you, Russia will be blamed for interfering in the election because you have now allowed Trump to be re-elected. They will say: yeah, this is already an element of interference on the part of Russia in the election campaign.
But seriously, we know, we all know what and how the President of the United States, Mr. Trump, speaks about Russian-American relations. We know that during the pre-election campaign, the previous one, he spoke out for normalization. But, unfortunately, this has not yet been done. But we are not in a claim, because we see what is happening in the internal political life of the United States. And the domestic political agenda allows the incumbent president to take steps to radically improve Russian-American relations.
In any case, we will work with any administration as much as it wants. But we cannot, of course, be disturbed by the situation related to international strategic stability and security. This is the obvious thing.
In 2002 - and Trump had nothing to do with it - the United States withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which, I want to emphasize it again, was the cornerstone of the entire strategic security system in the world, because it limited the possibility of creating an anti-ballistic defense for both states. That is, what's the point? That neither side has the illusion that it can win a nuclear war. That is the whole point. They withdrew from this agreement, trying to secure obvious strategic advantages for themselves, believing that they would have such an “umbrella”, and Russia would not, and thus Russia would be very vulnerable, and the United States and its territory would receive cover in the form of a missile defense system.
- Putin on Russian-American relations
I then told our American colleagues that we still do not know how this system will work, and we will not spend tens of billions on it. But we will have to maintain a strategic balance. This means that we will work on such strike systems, which, of course, will overcome any missile defense system. And we did it, now it’s already obvious. Because the missile defense system works against ballistic missiles, that is, missiles flying along a ballistic trajectory, and we, in addition to improving them many times, also created other weapons that no one else has in the world. These are missile systems that fly not along a ballistic trajectory, but along a flat trajectory, but with hypersonic speed. No one has hypersonic weapons either. But it will appear, of course. In the leading armies of the world, sooner or later, of course, will appear. Well, by this time, something will also appear here. I already know what our scientists, designers and engineers are working on. Unfortunately, all this led one way or another to a certain arms race. This is an accomplished fact. Unfortunately it is so.
More recently, the United States withdrew from the Treaty on the Limitation of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (INF Treaty). Also, in my opinion, an erroneous step, it would be possible to build in a different way. In fact, the concerns of the United States, by the way, are clear to me. I am sympathetic.
Other countries are developing these types of weapons, and Russia and the United States have limited themselves in this. But still, in my opinion, it would not be worth breaking the agreement; other options for the development of the situation were possible.
Now we have practically the last instrument for limiting the arms race, such an already serious arms race, that is START III. This is the Strategic Offensive Arms Limitation Treaty, that is, the entire complex, the entire triad of strategic weapons: ground, sea and air-based missile defense systems. It ends in 2021. In order for it to be extended, work must be done right now. We made these proposals; they are on the table at the American administration. No answer.We understand that they have not yet decided whether it is necessary to extend this agreement, as they believe, or not. But even if it is eliminated, then nothing will remain in the world in terms of limiting offensive weapons, and this is bad. The situation in the world will be different. It will certainly become more dangerous, and the world will become more dangerous and less predictable than the one in which we live now.
- Let's get back to the disarmament issue. Do you think, Mr. President, that a new arms race can really bring us back, reload into the situation of the second cold war?
- I would not want to. In any case, this will affect Russia to the least extent, because, as I have already said, promising types of weapons that are absolutely exclusive, which no one in the world have, we have. To a certain extent we have already gone our own way in this sense. Now we are thinking about prospects, working calmly.
And more importantly, defense spending is important. I’m probably not going to tell you any secret, or maybe I’ll surprise you, I don’t know, but Russia ranks seventh in terms of expenses. Saudi Arabia is the third after the United States, which they spend 716, in my opinion, billions and have already requested 750 next year; after China - there are about 177 with a little billion; then Saudi Arabia - how many there, I don't know, 59, in my opinion; then Great Britain, France;then Japan - 48.1 billion, according to my data; and then only Russia - in seventh place (48 billion). And at the same time we have weapons that are not in the world.
This is the result of what? Purposeful work in the most important areas, we must pay tribute to our specialists, the ability to identify these areas, concentrate resources, this is the presence of schools: scientific schools, industrial schools, basic knowledge, and competencies.
The arms race is bad, and it does not bode well for the world. But we will not be drawn into exorbitant budget expenditures.
- Despite this, NATO, the Alliance, has begun to move forward. Do you feel the threat of this advance to your borders? And how will you react to this?
- We feel, of course. We always felt it, always talked about it.And they answered us all the time: “Don’t be afraid, it’s not against you, and there’s nothing wrong with it, because NATO is transforming, it’s not a military organization at all, it is not aggressive, and so on.” But no one has changed the Charter of NATO. There is an article there that says (I don’t remember, the fifth, perhaps, or which one, I can be mistaken) about military support for members of my organization and so on. This is a military unit. And of course, when the military bloc’s infrastructure approaches our borders, this does not cause us any joy.
What else is the trick? The fact that NATO is just an instrument of US foreign policy, I think that no one doubts anymore. This is said in Europe. Look what the president of France says.I don’t even have to invent anything here. And what trick are we still observing? Countries are members of NATO, and then almost no one asks when they deploy certain types of weapons. So there were elements of a missile defense system in Romania. Now they will be soon in Poland. It is very close to our borders.
This, of course, poses a threat to us, because it is an attempt to level our strategic nuclear potential.It is doomed to failure, this attempt, it is already obvious. I think that for experts it is already obvious. It’s just that they are armed with such systems, which I already spoke about, they are no longer a threat to us (they won’t say what they are). But still, there is nothing good here. Therefore, yes, we feel that this is a destructive activity, it is fueling the situation, and there is nothing good about it.
- Mr. President, another dossier that was previously very relevant, namely Palestinian-Israeli reconciliation. Russia and the Soviet Union played an important role in solving this problem - the Madrid Conference, for example. Now we do not see Russia's great activity in this dossier, while the United States solemnly declares the so-called deal of the century, while the Israeli government continues its arbitrary arbitrary tyranny. But where is Russia in solving these fundamental problems for the Middle East?
- After all, this does not depend on us, not on our activity. It depends on the desire of all participants in this process to see someone in this process or not to see.
Incidentally, we have very good relations with Israel. Nearly 1.5 million Israeli citizens come from the former Soviet Union. This is an almost Russian-speaking country. Everywhere you go, to the store, everyone speaks Russian. Therefore, we are not indifferent to what is happening there. But we have a principled position on a Palestinian settlement. We strictly adhere to all decisions of the United Nations and believe that they must be implemented.
As for the “deal of the century,” we will support any deal that leads to peace. But we need to understand what it is. Indeed, while the details of these proposals in the framework of the so-called deal of the century are not clear - the United States has not presented them to the public (world and their own country), the Middle East, Palestine.
We proceed from the need to implement the plan of the two states and create a Palestinian state. We proposed at one time to hold direct contacts in Moscow between the Israeli Prime Minister and the leadership of the Palestinian Authority, but they, unfortunately, did not take place. We are doing everything - we held several sessions, several meetings between various groups of Palestine. We believe that the restoration of Palestinian unity would be a very important factor, because acting from different positions - this weakens the common Palestinian position.
We are working. This does not mean that we have left this process completely and that we are not interested. We are very interested in this, and above all, because, we believe, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the key to solving many of the region’s problems. And until it is resolved, this is also the source of radicalism and terrorism. Because when people feel that they don’t have the opportunity to legally protect their rights, they take up arms. And in this sense, it seems to me that not only Palestine, but also the Israeli people are interested in a final solution, in a long-term solution to this problem.
- Mr. President, it seems that we are running out of time. Of course, we do not want to deprive our colleagues.
You spoke about Muhammad bin Salman, the crown prince, quite positively. It seems that you maintain some kind of good, close relationship with this person. Do you count on the positive role that Muhammad bin Salman himself can play in the development of relations between Russia and Saudi Arabia and the Middle East agenda as a whole?
- So he plays, he already performs this role, and quite successfully. We have a really very good personal relationship with him. He is the initiator of many of our endeavors, and these initiatives are moving, living, being implemented. I have already said OPEC + - it was his initiative to work with us in this vein. It was he who supported the creation of the platform of our investment funds and has already invested 2 billion. It is he who raises the question of expanding our cooperation in the field of military-technical cooperation, and we already have a good package of joint measures in this direction. Therefore, it already is, it is already happening. I hope that in the future we will expand our interaction.
As for the role of Saudi Arabia in the region - of course, Saudi Arabia is one of the key countries in the region, of course. It has an impact because of its capabilities and the scale of its activities in the energy sector. Saudi Arabia can be considered not only a regional, but a global player. It has an impact on the global energy market and, in this sense, on the entire global energy industry.
Therefore, for us, interaction with Saudi Arabia, with the king and with Prince bin Salman is very important, and we will develop these relations further.
- Before coming here, we conducted a public opinion poll on the website of our television channel RT Arabic. Indeed, a huge number of people responded. We asked a simple question: “If you meet with the President of Russia, what would you like to ask Vladimir Putin?” Of course, we have collected the most popular ones, we will not list them all now. But one of the most pressing issues that we received that interested Arab listeners is the excitement about Russia's relations with the Arab world, when you will no longer be the president of this state. They are afraid of how relations between Russia and the Arab world will change. Your heir who will ever appear - how will he solve this issue?
- It’s not the name of the leader of Russia, it’s in our national interests. The national interests of Russia, the Russian and other peoples of the Russian Federation dictate the need to develop relations with the Arab world. The Arab world has always attracted Russia with its mystery, its culture, its capabilities and potential. I have no doubt that Russia will develop relations with the Arab world at an even faster pace in the coming years.
- Putin on the importance of developing relations between Russia and the Arab world
- Now, of course, we are all following the development of events both in Russia and in the Arab world, we see the “Arab spring”. Indeed, we are observing how rapidly the situation is changing in Sudan, Algeria, in the Tunisian elections. Do you see positive indicators and, in fact, the region is now entering a new phase, a new period that will be crowned with some kind of stability in the Middle East?
- Of course, it cannot be said that the region is now in a stable condition. We all understand this very well, we see now with our own eyes. But everything passes. I hope that this one day will pass. By itself, this will not end quickly if everything is sent along the waves, as they say, and no attempts are made to normalize the situation. Russia will do everything to ensure that this normalization comes and comes as quickly as possible.
We do not believe that we can and should lead the situation from somewhere in heaven. I have already said that we have a lot of friends in the Arab world. Incidentally, it seems time for Syria to return to the family of Arab peoples, to return it to the League of Arab States.We will do everything so that the situation normalizes, we will help our friends. But, of course, in the end, the speed of change in the situation for the better depends precisely on those people who are responsible for the situation in a particular country. I am sure that stabilization is inevitable, and I wish it to happen as soon as possible.
You can watch the video interview with Vladimir Putin on the RTD website.
* “Islamic State” (ISIS, ISIS) - the organization was recognized as terrorist by decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 29, 2014.