Russia: Weekly Report (12.06-18.06)

1. Putin’s meeting with war correspondents 

On Tuesday, 13 June, Vladimir Putin met the war correspondents in the Kremlin. The event was arranged in an open and confidential format for communication between the Russian president and those correspondents who write war news from the front line. At the same time, during more than two hours of communication, Putin made several important statements.

Key theses:

• “Ukraine is one of the areas of work to demolish Russia. By and large, this should have been kept in mind when decisions were made on the collapse of the Soviet Union. But then, apparently, they counted on the fact that our deep relations would be decisive. But the situation took a different path due to a number of historical, economic, and political circumstances. And also, in this direction, they just didn’t do anything. For decades, if they didn’t feed, they supported the economy – there is no need to repeat; I have already written and talked about this – at the expense of cheap energy, this and that, loans and so on. But nothing helped. And how did it end? Our supporters began to be killed on the streets simply; they came to a coup d’état.”

• “Now we know that our so-called partners simply tricked us, generally: they just “threw” us. And it turned out that they were not going to adhere to their words, which led to the current situation.”

• “In general, I am surprised how a person with Jewish blood in his veins, who heads the state of Ukraine, can support neo-Nazis. I just don’t get it. When they simply destroyed, you know, they destroyed the civilian Jewish population, and this person [Stepan Bandera – ed.] became a national hero and others like him. And now they are walking around with these posters.”

• “Demilitarisation. We are gradually, methodically doing this. What is the Ukrainian Army fighting with? What do they produce, “Leopards”, or “Bradleys”, or F-16s that they have not yet provided with? They don’t manufacture anything. Altogether, the Ukrainian defence industry will soon cease to exist. What do they produce? Ammunition is brought to them; equipment is brought in; guns are brought in; they bring everything. You will not last long like this. So the issue related to demilitarisation, of course, is significant in practical terms.”

• “Speaking about irretrievable losses, it is clear that the defending side suffers fewer losses, but still this ratio is one to ten, as they say, in our favour: we have lost ten times less than the Armed Forces of Ukraine.”

• “As for armoured vehicles, it is even more serious. During this time, they lost over 160 tanks and 360 various armoured vehicles. This is just what we see. There are also losses that we do not see; those inflicted by long-range precision weapons on clusters of personnel and equipment. So, in fact, these losses are even more. According to my calculations, they are about 25, maybe 30 per cent of the volume of the equipment supplied from abroad.”

• “[About the Kakhovka HPP] We must now take environmental and sanitary safety seriously because there were cattle burial grounds and cemeteries under water. It is a serious but a resolvable problem. It will be necessary to involve the chemical defence troops. The Minister has already reported to me; he gave respective orders. By uniting forces, I think we will solve all problems, including water supply.”

• “As for the border territories, there is a problem, it is connected – and I think you understand this too – mostly with the desire to divert our forces and means to this side, to withdraw part of the units from those areas that are considered the most important and critical from the point of view of a possible Ukrainian army offensive. We don’t need to do this, but we must keep our citizens safe.”

• “Unlike the current Ukrainian authorities, we cannot act using terrorist ways: we still have a state, a country, and there is a regime. They operate as a regime based on terror: they have a very tough counterintelligence regime with martial law imposed. I don’t think we need to do it now. We just need to improve and expand the work of law enforcement and special services. And it seems to me that the tasks in this regard are also solvable.”

• “We have increased production by 2.7 times for the main types of weapons over the year. And by ten times in the most popular areas. By ten times! Some industrial enterprises work in two shifts, and many work in three, nearly day and night, and they work very well.”

• “We said many times: “Don’t do this, don’t. Let’s do it this way, and we are ready for negotiations.” Ultimately, they encouraged us to try to end the war they started in 2014 by force of arms. They tell us: “You started the war; Putin is the aggressor.” No, they are the aggressors, they started this war, and we are trying to stop it, but we are forced to do it with the help of the Armed Forces. But isn’t this the answer to crossing some “red lines”?

• “Not everything, perhaps, reaches the media, although there is nothing to be ashamed of. It can also be seen when the strikes on the entire energy system of Ukraine. Isn’t this the answer to overcoming the “red lines”? And the destruction of the headquarters of the Main Directorate of Intelligence of the Ukrainian Armed Forces near Kyiv – almost in Kyiv, isn’t this the answer? The answer”.

• “We will continue to work selectively; we will not do what these idiots do – they hit civilian objects, residential areas. Of course, we will not do this. We will selectively continue to respond.”

• “I think that by understanding – I say this with good faith – understanding their catastrophic losses, the leadership, whatever it may be, should think about what to do next. They do have a head on their shoulders. And we will see what the situation will be, and we will take further steps considering this. We have plans of a different nature, depending on the condition that will develop when we believe it necessary to do something.

• “We have a lot of such military supplies, with depleted uranium. And, if they use it, we also reserve the right to use the same ammunition. We have them in stock – we don’t just use them.”

• “The Ukrainian army now spends more, probably, five or six thousand large-calibre shells, 155 millimetres. And in the United States, they produce 15,000 a month. 15,000 a month is produced in the United States, while the Ukrainian army spends 5-6,000 a day.”

• “But then the Americans behave very pragmatically, and everything is only in their interests – they didn’t care about the interests of their allies. They have no allies; they only have vassals. And the vassals began to understand what role they were destined for. In fact, at the level of public consciousness, they do not really like all this. Some of my friends tell me: the situation is like in the Soviet Union. I say, “How is it?” Everyone sits at home, at the enterprise, in the office, and discusses Russia; when they come home to the kitchen, everything is different. Probably, these are people who sympathise with us; probably, they also exaggerate something. But the trends are.”

• “I have already spoken about this many times, about the total volume of delivered Ukrainian grain. Only three and a half per cent went to the poorest countries in the world. There it fluctuates a little – 3.2-3.4 as it depends on where the next dry cargo ship goes. A ship with grain changes a little, but generally, the total is nearly three and a half per cent. More than 40 per cent goes to quite prosperous EU countries. They are the main recipients of Ukrainian grain: it is cheaper, they get it, and they feel good, and Ukraine is paid money for it. I might be wrong today, but it seems to me that this is Ukraine’s main source of foreign exchange earnings.”

• “The United States is more and more, almost directly plunging into this conflict and causing serious international security crises because correcting the actions of drones that attack our warship is still a serious thing. And they should know that we know about it. We’re still thinking about what to do with it for the future, but generally, this is such a thing.

• “Firstly, as far as the grain deal is concerned, we are thinking about ending our participation.  The second thing is the volume of grain that the poorest countries receive. And this, I repeat, is just over three per cent – we will be ready to deliver to the poorest countries free of charge. But we need to discuss everything, including when our friends from African states will arrive very soon. I will also talk to them on how to proceed.

Outcomes and outlook:

There is an attempt to bring a group of “war correspondents” to the side of the Kremlin. Previously, they have taken a rather challenging position regarding the Russian political leadership, accusing it of inconsistency and incompetence and actively criticising the Ministry of Defense and Sergei Shoigu. In disputes between the Ministry of Defense and PMC Wagner, war correspondents mostly took the side of Prigozhin. In the minds of the townsfolk, “military correspondents” have become a special caste which not only covers war events but also reveals the generals’ corruption, ignorance or outright stupidity. For this reason, Putin’s entourage decided to shape the activities of the correspondents, establishing relations with them. Most likely, Sergei Novikov, head of the Russian Presidential Administration’s department for public projects, which deals with public relations, media contacts etc., will be responsible for this matter. They want to simply “buy” military correspondents and make them tame, which is very important on the eve of the presidential elections. Also, the Presidential Administration will try to build a unified information policy regarding the so-called “special military operation”, eliminating discord in interpreting certain events.

2. Russian-Algerian negotiations in Moscow

On Thursday, 15 June, Vladimir Putin held a meeting in the Kremlin with the President of the People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria, Abdelmajid Tebbun, who paid a state visit to Russia. As a result, a declaration on an in-depth strategic partnership between Russia and Algeria was signed.

Key theses:

• Vladimir Putin: “Algeria is one of Russia’s three leading trade partners on the African continent. Yesterday, as far as I know, you were supposed to attend the Russian-Algerian business forum. I hope that interest from both sides in events of this kind will only increase.”

• Vladimir Putin: “I would also like to note that Russian-Algerian coordination within the multilateral formats and organisations framework is also at a good level. Our efforts under the auspices of OPEC Plus and the Forum of Gas Exporting Countries contribute to stabilising world energy markets.”

• Tebbun: “We had almost agreed – even before we started negotiations – on all international issues. As you know, the situation is very tense. It is necessary that we speed up the process, that we enter the BRICS group and that we accept not dollars, not euros. This will be beneficial for Algeria. God forbid.”

• Tebbun: “Regarding the geopolitical situation, relations here, we must touch on the Libyan issue. Libya is a friend of Russia and Algeria, so we always want stability in this country. Regarding the Sahel region, we support the relations between Mali and the Russian Federation. Mali is a neighbour of our country. In all conditions, we must talk and discuss all issues. We have an agreement called the Algiers Agreement.”

Following the results of the Russian-Algerian talks, the leaders of the countries made statements for the media:

• Vladimir Putin: “During today talks, a wide range of issues were discussed in detail. They included bilateral relations in the political, economic and humanitarian areas, as well as current topics on the regional and international agenda.”

• Putin: “As for economic cooperation, Algeria has consistently been among Russia’s leading trading partners on the African continent for many years. Suffice it to say that in the first quarter of this year alone, the increase in trade turnover amounted to over 73 per cent. At the same time, mutual trade in agricultural products has doubled.”

• Vladimir Putin: “We know that Algeria is showing interest in developing national nuclear energy. Rosatom State Corporation, which has unique experience and competencies and, by the way, has no analogues in the world [technologies], is ready to participate in joint projects, including those related to the non-energy use of nuclear technologies, for example, in the field of medicine and agriculture”.

• Vladimir Putin: “And of course, we attach great importance to joint work with Algerian colleagues to stabilise the situation on world energy markets, including in the OPEC Plus format, as well as within the framework of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum.”

• Vladimir Putin: “Among the regional topics, they discussed the state of affairs in Libya, Sudan, and Western Sahara, as well as the Palestinian-Israeli settlement. Considering that Algeria is a member of the Contact Group of the League of Arab States on Ukraine, for its part, I outlined to my Algerian colleague the Russian vision of the root causes of the conflict and assessment of the current situation. Just now, before entering the hall, the President and I spoke about this in detail, and we are grateful to Algeria, the President of Algeria, for their readiness to provide mediation services.”

• Vladimir Putin: “Of course, the interaction between Russia and Algeria in the military and military-technical spheres, which has been successfully developing for decades, was also discussed. Russia is assisting the power structures of Algeria in the fight against the terrorist threat. In November last year, the Russian-Algerian joint anti-terrorist exercise “Desert Shield” was held on Algerian territory.

• Tebbun: “Negotiations with the President of the Russian Federation were frank and friendly. This testifies to the high degree of our relations. I will open the brackets to say that we agreed and agreed with everything Comrade Putin said. We talked as friends about bilateral relations in all areas and how to strengthen them.”

• Tebbun: “This meeting allowed us, I would like to thank the Russian Federation for Algeria’s support, to become a non-permanent member of the [UN] Security Council. This testifies to the good relations between Algeria and the Russian Federation. This is reflected in the signing and adopting a new Declaration on the in-depth strategic partnership between the two countries, which has already been signed.”

• Tebbun: “Many thanks to Comrade Putin, a friendly country – the Russian Federation. Thank you very much for your trust; your trust will be in its place. In conclusion, I would like to congratulate Comrade Putin for strengthening our political partnership and thank him for his efforts. Long live Russia, Russian-Algerian friendship and Russian-Algerian cooperation!

Outcomes and outlook:

Putin’s bet on promoting the interests of the Russian Federation on the African continent will not be complete without strengthening its presence in the Maghreb countries. Until now, Russia could boast of warm relations with the leadership of Egypt and active influence on the conflict inside Libya. Now we are talking about strengthening the presence in Algeria. Algeria has long been considered one of the most friendly states concerning Russia – since the war for independence, during which the USSR actively helped the rebels of Ahmed Ben Bela. The military-technical, as well as trade cooperation between the USSR and Algeria, was unchanged. Now we are talking about rooting Russian interests in Algeria, which would allow not only to obtain guarantees of friendship for a long period (it should be borne in mind that pro-Western sentiments among part of the intelligentsia are also strong in Algeria) but also to obtain an outpost of a policy that allows you to actively influence the situation both in the Libyan issue and in the promotion of interests in the Sahara region.

3. Vladimir Putin’s meeting with UAE President Mohammed Al Nahyan

On Friday, 16 June, on the sidelines of the XXVI St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, Vladimir Putin met with the President of the United Arab Emirates, Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan. According to the official statements of the parties, during the meeting, the parties discussed economic relations between the states and possible ways of their further development. The UAE participated in the forum as the primary guest.

Key theses:

• Putin: “Relations between Russia and the Emirates are thriving. Now I will not talk about specific figures – they are impressive. But the main thing is that they benefit both Russia and the United Arab Emirates – to a large extent, thanks to your support.”

• Putin: “At the beginning of our conversation, I would like to thank you for your efforts to resolve humanitarian issues in the course of events in Ukraine related to the exchange of detainees and to resolve other humanitarian issues of this kind. It matters for specific people, and this is always the most important thing, so thank you very much for that too.”

• Al Nahyan: “We are building a strong and strong relationship – I am grateful to you for this, Mr President, and so that the world also benefits from our relationship. I thank you, Mr President, for your attitude towards the United Arab Emirates and you personally for this opportunity. As for Ukraine, thank you for your words. And suppose you think that the Emirates can play some other role in developing the situation there, in stabilising the situation, in humanitarian matters. In that case, we are ready to assist this in every possible way.”

• Al Nahyan: “Thank you for allowing Emirati companies to speak at this forum. This forum has a huge role this year. I believe that private sector cooperation – between the private sectors of the two countries – [plays] a big role in developing our bilateral relations. For example, bilateral tourism is developing very strongly: we hope to receive a million Russian tourists this year.”

Outcomes and outlook:

The United Arab Emirates did not support the sanctions against the Russian Federation. Moreover, the UAE cooperates closely with Russia and has also become a state actively helping to avoid sanctions against Russia. Numerous world brands that loudly left the Russian Federation at the beginning of Russia’s full-scale aggression against Ukraine are now returning to the Russian market but under different names. The UAE is a state that actively helps to legalise these same brands and provide new legends before delivery to Russia. In addition, Russia’s cooperation with the UAE (as well as with Algeria and Saudi Arabia) allows Russian energy companies to ensure the stability of interests when considering the issue of world oil prices.

Moreover, according to available information, strengthening relations between Russia and the UAE poses a severe threat to some Russian opposition and former officials who have settled in the Emirates. At the interstate level, tacit agreements were reached on assistance in the return of opponents important to the Kremlin regime. Most likely, soon, we will be able to observe the strengthening of such trends.

Talking about the strategic prospects for Russia, it is essential to note that strengthening ties with the states of the Middle East cannot be accompanied by long-term guarantees since, in such alliances, Russia comes second and is too dependent on the positions of Middle Eastern leaders. First of all, we are talking about energy issues.

4. Plenary session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum

From 14 to 17 June, St. Petersburg hosted the XXVI St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. The event was attended by several thousand people. Among them there were many Russian politicians and officials. The main guest of the 2023 forum was the UAE delegation led by President Mohammed Al Nahyan. Algerian President Abdelmajid Tebbun also attended the forum.

On Friday, 16 June, a plenary session was held at the forum, in which the Russian and Algerian leaders participated. Political scientist Dmitry Simes moderated the discussion.

Putin’s speech:

• “Let me remind you that it was the second quarter of last year that became the most difficult for our economy, for domestic business, when circumstances, the usual order of trade, settlements, and logistics were rapidly changing, when the whole fabric of business and economic life was essentially redrawn.”

• “In April of this year, the gross domestic product grew by 3.3 per cent annually, and by the end of the year, it will add more than a per cent. So, in any case, according to the IMF – 0.7 per cent. But, in my opinion, I agree with those our experts who believe that growth will still be more: somewhere up to one and a half, and maybe even under two per cent. This will allow our country to maintain its place among the leading economies in the world.”

• “We have maintained a responsible, balanced budgetary and monetary policy. Their effective combination made it possible to reach the minimum levels of unemployment and inflation, which is now lower in Russia than in many Western countries, both in the eurozone and other regions and is close to a historical minimum of 2.9 per cent. Unemployment is 3.3 per cent; it has never been so low in our history.”

• “Revenues from the non-oil and gas attract attention. In January-May, they grew by 9.1 per cent, which is noticeably higher than forecasts. At the same time, in May, the growth was 28.5 per cent.”

• “You know very well that we did not expel anyone from our market, from our economy; on the contrary, we offered to weigh all the pros and cons, to think carefully about our Russian partners and the possible consequences of such a step. Each of our partners had the right to choose.”

• “We will pay special attention to the North-South corridor. We plan to double 2025 and triple 2030 the volume of export traffic along this route. As many people know, we signed an agreement with Iranian partners to construct the missing railway section on Iranian territory in May. We are also doing dredging work on the Volga-Caspian Canal: already this year, it will be able to receive vessels with a draft of 4.5 meters.”

• “As for the Eastern direction, by 2025, its export cargo traffic should increase by a third, and by 2030 add another 100 million tons to the level of 2022.”

• “The development of transport corridors and logistics capabilities of Russia allows our business to strengthen foreign trade and cooperation ties, primarily with the countries of the EAEU, Asia, the Middle East and Africa, and Latin America.”

• “In fact, we are talking about a transition to a qualitatively new level of development – a sovereign economy that not only responds to market conditions and takes into account demand but also forms this demand itself.”

• “Today, I already spoke about the record-low unemployment in Russia, which we can rightly be proud of. However, this achievement also has a downside. Representatives of the companies in this hall, of course, understand what is at stake. I am talking about the difficulties associated with the selection of employees with a shortage of personnel.

• “Many of our businessmen were convinced of this by their example when they saw, they were surprised to find that both accounts and assets were frozen in the West. But as we have said many times, it had never occurred to anyone before that this was possible. In violation of all the norms of their own and international legislation – robbery – they simply closed it, took it away and did not even explain why; they don’t even want to talk. Surprisingly simple, some kind of Middle Ages.

• “In Russia, due to objective demographic processes, the supply on the labour market will be limited. Under these conditions, it is vital for us to increase the pace of automation of the mining and manufacturing industries, agriculture, transport and logistics, trade and many other areas.”

• “One of the key indicators that our approaches are being implemented correctly is the level of inflation – I have already mentioned this. We must simultaneously achieve high economic growth rates and keep prices close to our target of four per cent. You know, the Central Bank is talking about possible inflation at the end of the year in the region of five per cent.”

• “Today, Russia has a rich and very ambitious economic agenda. The difficulties and problems we face are an incentive for all of us, an incentive to increase the pace and quality of transformations, to achieve more in improving the quality of life, well-being and well-being of our citizens.”

Putin’s answers to the moderator’s questions:

• “I recently met our war correspondents. And answering the same question, I recalled that the Ukrainian regime started the Ukraine war in the southeast of Ukraine with the support of their sponsors in the West in 2014. No one tries not to talk about this in the West. But I must remind you: aviation, tanks, and artillery were used in the northwest against the Donbas. What if this is not a war? This is what war is. And it went on for almost nine years. And then our so-called partners, counter-partners, publicly renounced the settlement peacefully. And it forced us to use the Armed Forces in an attempt to end this war.”

• “As for demilitarisation… After all, Ukraine will soon stop using its equipment altogether; nothing remains. Everything on which they fight, and everything that they use, they bring it all from the outside, but you won’t win for so long. And our defence industry is spinning up day by day. We have increased the output of military products by 2.7 times over the past year, and for the most popular samples, an increase of ten times, and further growth is taking place. Enterprises work in two or three shifts, someday and at night. And this tells us that we have a huge margin of safety.”

• “Indeed, their [the Ukrainian side] losses are substantial, approximately more than one in ten compared to the Russian army. It is a fact. In terms of technology: every day, there is an increase in the loss of this equipment; somewhere now. To date, 186 tanks have been lost by the Ukrainian army and 418 armoured vehicles of various classes. I’m not talking about the personnel now; this is necessary for the Ministry of Defense to voice itself. But, I repeat, the most important thing is that there is no success in any area. The enemy was not successful, according to the military.”

• “I have had many Jewish friends since childhood. They say: Zelensky is not a Jew; this is a disgrace to the Jewish people. This is not a joke, not irony, you understand? After all, neo-Nazis, the last of Hitler, have been erected on the podium as heroes of Ukraine today. The Holocaust is the extermination of six million Jews; one and a half million were exterminated in Ukraine, and above all by the hands of Bandera.”

• “And we have good – not just good neighbourly – relations with China, India, and other countries. In the same place, other countries are developing at a huge, rapid pace. Indonesia, for example, is a huge market and growing rapidly. Latin America will also develop – and is developing now and will continue to develop. There are huge opportunities in Africa too.”

• “Of course, NATO is drawn into the war in Ukraine. What are we talking about? Deliveries are made of military gear and heavy equipment. Now the option of supplying aircraft is being considered. Today, I have already said that in one sector, attempts are being made to attack with the forces of two groups supported by five tanks. In another section, also one and a half companies, approximately with the support of two tanks. Tanks are on fire; several tanks have been destroyed, including Leopards. Yesterday it was the same, and yesterday there were Leopards. They are burning. F-16s will also be burned; there is no doubt about it.”

• “But if they will be located at air bases outside Ukraine and used in hostilities, we will have to look at how and where we can hit those weapons that are used in hostilities against us. This is a danger of further drawing NATO into this armed conflict.”

• “Everything you said is an attempt to provoke us into retaliatory, already serious, powerful actions. But this attempt to damage the Kremlin, the residence of the President of the Russian Federation, and the attacks on the Belgorod Region and neighbouring regions of Russia are all attempts to provoke us into retaliatory actions. But try to understand us: if we destroyed five Patriot complexes near Kyiv, why should we destroy any building and structure in Kyiv? There are no such restrictions. We do not do this for several reasons. There are many of them; I will tell you about these considerations later. I’ll tell you yet, not publicly.”

• “I have already said that if these attacks on our adjacent territories continue further, we will consider the possibility of creating a cordon sanitaire on Ukrainian territory. They just need to understand what they are leading to. We are progressing in these areas, working on military targets with high-precision, long-range, high-yield weapons.”

• “This use of nuclear weapons is certainly theoretically possible. For Russia, this is possible if a threat is created to our territorial integrity, independence and sovereignty, the existence of the Russian state. Nuclear weapons are created to ensure our security in the broadest sense of the word and the existence of the Russian state. But we, firstly, do not have such a need. Secondly, the very factor of reasoning on this topic already lowers the possibility of lowering the threshold for using weapons. This is the first part. The second is that we have more such weapons than the NATO countries. They know about it, and all the time, they persuade us to start negotiations on reductions. Fuck them, you know? As our people say. Because this is our competitive advantage in the clumsy language of economic terms.”

• “As you know, we have been negotiating with our allied state, with President Lukashenko, that we will transfer part of these tactical nuclear weapons to Belarusian territory. It happened. The first nuclear charges were delivered to the territory of Belarus, but only the first ones. This is the first part. But before the end of the summer and the year’s end, we will complete this work completely and completely.”

Address by Algerian President Abdelmajid Tebbuna:

• “Russia plays an important role in reducing the severity of the current crises. It is thanks to its policy, thanks to the wheat supply, which Russia gives to the needy world countries. It is thanks to those efforts to develop cooperation, to foster partnerships with various countries, and first of all – with poor countries. Russia helps them because these countries are suffering, especially from the onset of crises.”

• “Algeria is among a small group of virtually debt-free countries on the African continent. GDP growth in our country is 4.3 per cent, much higher than in the countries around us.”

• “The population of Algeria is now approximately 60 million people, and the majority of the population is young people. We must ensure the future of these youth. And this demographic growth puts Algeria in such a position that by 2030 the population will probably be more than 60 million people. We need to produce more energy, oil, and gas.”

• “In addition, Algeria also consumes about half of the gas it produces. We consume approximately 72 per cent, or, one might say, we consume half of the gas that we produce. We produce enough for economic growth.”

• “Today we see a new cold, undeclared war – an economic one. Such a war is unnatural because there is a difference between what happened in the early 1950s and what is happening now. After all, needs have naturally changed.”

Outcomes and outlook:

Putin’s address at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum has already been called a “historical one” in Russia. Its main task is to show that “everything is fine” in Russia; the sanctions have not worked, and the economy is demonstrating a strengthening trend. The Russian President emphasised the work of the defence complex, which operates “in two or three shifts.” The emphasis on the fact that “the demilitarisation of Ukraine has essentially taken place” is a mine in case of a bad game and, possibly, preparation for some kind of rollback: one of the points of the primary plan in the war with Ukraine was fulfilled, Ukrainian equipment was destroyed, and “you won’t get much” on foreign. Generally, Putin’s speech was sustained in a tone addressed to the West: “We are not expelling anyone, but we can manage without you”. The role of economic relations with China and India and the vector of movement of goods along the North-South axis was emphasised especially. In general, Putin’s bravado during the speech seems unnatural. But it was less aggressive than his previous speeches since February 2022. Theoretically, specific messages to Western leaders, especially to the US President, are sewn into the text of the address. Russia expects them to be correctly read and understood. One gets the impression that this is Putin’s first message to the West with a veiled proposal for a joint search for a way out of the current situation. It sends a clear message that there can be no discussions of the capitulation of the Russian Federation. It is important to note that Putin’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov named presidential aide Maxim Oreshkin, a former Russian economic policy minister, as the key author of Putin’s speech. Considering that Oreshkin has recently become able to put his people in government positions, at the same time also clearly positioning himself favourably against the background of other economic bloc representatives, it can be assumed that soon, Oreshkin may take one of the essential positions in Russia. It is worth attention considering the fact that now his informal “weight” has become more significant than his opponents – both Minister of Finance Siluanov and Deputy Prime Minister Belousov.

5. Putin’s meeting with the African presidents’ delegation

On Saturday, 17 June, Vladimir Putin met with a delegation of African states in St. Petersburg. The delegation included: the President of Zambia, Hakainde Hichilema; Chairman of the African Union; President of Comoros, Azali Asumani; President Macchi of Senegal Sall; President of South Africa, Cyril Ramaphosa; Prime Minister of Egypt, Mustafa Madbouli; Minister of State, Director of the Cabinet of the President of the Congo Florent Ntsiba and Special Envoy of the President of Uganda at Large Ruhakana Rugunda. Earlier, the delegation visited Kyiv, where they met with the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky.

The main announced topic of the meeting was negotiations on possible ways to resolve the situation in Ukraine.

Key statements of the parties:

• Putin: “Comprehensive development of connections with the African continent countries is a priority of Russian foreign policy. We consistently stand for the further strengthening of traditionally friendly relations with them and the leading regional association – the African Union. Our relations are based on the principles of equality, mutual respect and non-interference in internal affairs.

• Vladimir Putin: “I want to emphasise that Russia has great respect for the principled position of African countries in favour of maintaining global and regional stability and security, the peaceful conflict settlement, and the formation of a fairer model of international relations.”

• Vladimir Putin: “I know you have exact ideas and suggestions on this matter. Mr President of the Republic of South Africa and I have discussed this topic more than once. I am grateful to him for raising this issue.”

• Asumani: “We decided to come to your country now as a delegation representing the African continent. And in this way, we wanted to demonstrate our friendship, which has always connected Russia and Africa. We have also come to listen to you and through you to hear the opinion of the Russian people. We would also like to encourage you to enter into negotiations with Ukraine to end this difficult test.”

• Sall: “I would like to emphasise that this initiative is a mission of good deeds, good offices, which conveys the good intentions of the African continent in this large, large-scale war. We want to solve humanitarian problems and establish the conditions that will be necessary to restore trust and dialogue between the participants in this conflict.”

• Ramaphosa: “Seven African states have taken the initiative in the search for peace. We are looking for peace. We would like to try to serve as mediators in achieving peace between Russia and Ukraine within the framework of this conflict. We would like to offer you ten items because our proposals centre around ten items.”

• Ramaphosa: Seven African states have taken the initiative in the search for peace. We are looking for peace. We would like to try to serve as mediators in achieving peace between Russia and Ukraine within the framework of this conflict. We would like to offer you ten items because our proposals focus on ten statements.

• Ramaphosa: “We would like to listen to you first, just as we listened to President Zelensky yesterday. He outlined many questions for us, and we answered him that we would hold a meeting with you and at this meeting, we would also listen to your point of view on this war. We would like to listen to you with respect for your points of view.”

• Ramaphosa: “The second point that we would like to draw attention to is another key element of our common proposal, is that we firmly believe that this war must be completed, the conflict must be resolved through negotiations and diplomacy. The war cannot go on forever. All wars must end at some point. And we are here today to give you a clear message that we would like this war to end. I express this because the war has negative consequences for the African continent and beyond for many other countries worldwide.”

• Ramaphosa: “Our continent is being hit economically: energy prices have risen, as have fertiliser and food prices, fuel prices have also risen, and these are the consequences of the ongoing war. It is for this reason, including this reason, that we are here today because it would be in our common interest to end this war.”

• Ramaphosa: “The third point is that we would like to see a de-escalation of the conflict from both sides because escalation is not conducive to peace negotiations. Therefore, we would be interested in de-escalating the conflict to find a way to peace.”

• Ramaphosa: “The fourth point, which also appeared in other proposals, is that we recognise countries’ sovereignty in understanding the UN Charter. And, yes, in understanding the UN Charter, we believe that we must all work based on internationally recognised principles. That is why we would like to declare that we recognise countries’ sovereignty in understanding the UN Charter.”

• Ramaphosa: “The fifth point we would like to touch on is that all countries need security guarantees. All parties have already raised this issue. All parties want certain guarantees, and we agree with that.”

• Ramaphosa: “Point six is what directly affects our countries. We would like to call for the opening of the movement of grains across the Black Sea so that any obstacles that now exist are removed so that grains and other commodities reach the markets.”

• Ramaphosa: “Seventh point. We must ensure that there is humanitarian support for those who need it, as well as those who suffer because of this conflict.”

• Ramaphosa: “Eighth point, which President Macchi Sallom has already mentioned, concerns the release of prisoners of war on both sides. A related issue concerns children who have been held hostage by this conflict. These children must return to where they came from, to their homes.”

• Ramaphosa: “Ninth point. Wars breed destruction, and therefore post-conflict reconstruction is necessary. And we must support this recovery that will take place after this war.”

• Ramaphosa: “The tenth point is that we would like to see certain work, specific processes that will entail the end of this war. We expressed this idea very clearly with President Zelensky. He agreed that we, the African continent, the African countries present here, can play a certain role in this.”

• Vladimir Putin: “Russia has never refused negotiations. I want to draw your attention to the fact that with the assistance of the same President Erdogan, as you know, a whole series of negotiations between Russia and Ukraine took place in Turkey to develop the confidence-building measures you mentioned and to prepare the text of the treaty itself. We did not agree with the Ukrainian side that this agreement would be confidential, but we never presented it, did not comment on it.”

• Putin: “The draft of this treaty was initialled by the head of the negotiating group from Kyiv – he put his signature there. Here it is. It is called the “Agreement on Permanent Neutrality and Security Guarantees for Ukraine.” It is about the guarantees you mentioned, dear friend President of the Republic of South Africa. There are 18 articles.”

• Putin: “But after we withdrew the troops from Kyiv, as we promised, the Kyiv authorities, as their owners usually do, threw it all into the dustbin of history, let’s say it carefully, and I will try to express myself intelligently. They refused it. Where is the guarantee that they will not continue to refuse any other agreements? But even under these conditions, we have never refused to negotiate.”

Outcomes and outlook:

In essence, Putin made it clear that he could not end the conflict on the terms proposed by the African countries. Given that most African countries are now under the political influence of China, firstly, this is a veiled response to China regarding the need to amend its proposals for a peaceful settlement of the “Ukrainian crisis”. Putin focuses on the lack of independence of Ukraine in the decision-making process: he makes it clear that he could negotiate with Ukraine if it fulfilled previous agreements. And as an illustration, he cited the text of the allegedly initialled document, allegedly signed by the Ukrainian side in April last year. In this way, Putin hints that any negotiations must foresee some kind of guarantor of their implementation, indicating that only Washington can become such. It can be predicted that any version of peacekeeping will anticipate Washington’s clear and precise position on this issue since the world does not consider Ukraine an absolutely subject country capable of accepting and maintaining its obligations. As predicted, the mission of the leaders of African states turned out to be a failure. Still, it is important to emphasise that this is almost the first attempt by representatives of the African continent to act as a geopolitical force trying to influence political processes outside their region.

6. Lavrov’s statements on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg Economic Forum

On Friday, 16 June, during the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov gave several interviews and comments to the Russian media. As all of them are connected to the topic of Russian foreign policy, in this report, we decided to merge all his statements into one section, providing a summary with the most significant remarks.

Key theses:

• “We can no longer rely on those promises, those agreements that the West signed with us and were presented as an opportunity to develop a constructive partnership. Relations between the West and the Russian Federation for a long time have not only changed radically but have been suspended in most areas and stopped for long periods. I don’t know when this will all change. At the current historical stage, the West has “lost” Russia. I don’t have any doubts about it. The sooner we eliminate the remaining illusions, the better it will be for our development.”

• “Now we are seeing in the West that the Anglo-Saxons and the rest of the “collective West” have “built” (in simple terms) and are using the current situation, the war they unleashed with Ukraine against the Russian Federation, only to remove competitors. They see us and, at the same time China as a competitor. This is directly stated in the doctrinal documents. But the Anglo-Saxons are also removing continental Europe as a competitor. This is obvious to everyone. In Germany, depressing processes in terms of the economy and the social sphere. In many other countries, it is no better. The US is the main beneficiary. They always have English with them, which helps them achieve their selfish goals.

• “Ukraine is being pumped up with more and more modern weapons and long-range systems, which are used not just to reach our territories, but to attack us. Now we are talking about F-16 aircraft, which can be equipped for carrying nuclear weapons. We have spoken about it publicly. Within the framework of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, there is a “nuclear five” where experts meet; we made a serious demarche there. The Americans tried to refuse and say that they thought that they would give Ukraine planes that would carry nuclear weapons. We told them that we did not even think. Our systems that will monitor these aircraft will not be able to distinguish between an aircraft not equipped with a nuclear weapon and one that carries one. Answering your question, how we will react is the answer for the military. They know what to do.”

• “Let me remind you of the realities “on the ground”. When in July 2022, Vladimir Putin was asked whether Russia was ready for negotiations, he clearly expressed that we do not refuse peace negotiations. Still, those who refused should understand that the further the situation goes, the more difficult it will be for them to negotiate with us. This is the conceptual framework in which we now exist. Speaking from a wider perspective, in geopolitical terms, this will mean the need to solve the problem of security guarantees. We will not be ready to build these guarantees based on other promises and documents the West can offer. We have to guarantee our safety.”

• “The UAE holds the record for the growth rates of our mutual trade, our trade turnover. There are many investment plans. They are interested in investing in the North-South transport corridor project, which will provide the world’s shortest, competitive route, an alternative to the Suez Canal, from the Baltic Sea to the Indian Ocean. There are many concrete prospects here.”

• “They talk about democracy only when they teach others how to live: “you must hold elections”, “you must transfer power from the military to civilians” or vice versa. “Be sure to call such and such observers,” etc. But when it comes to democracy in the international arena, the West immediately “goes into the bushes” and does not want to talk about this topic. This is indicative because, as I have said more than once, the UN Charter contains the duty of each state to respect the sovereign equality of all states. The West doesn’t do that.”

• “[On the extension of the Grain Deal] How can something that doesn’t work be extended? Exactly half of the “package” proposed by UN Secretary-General António Guterres regarding Russian fertilisers and food did not budge. Only the Ukrainian part works. And that is not in the context proposed by Antonio Guterres (to meet the needs of the poorest countries) but in a commercial sense. Less than three per cent of the volumes that Ukraine “shipped” in the grain part of this “package” ended up in developing countries on the special list of the UN World Food Program. These are the poorest countries.”

• “All those months when the Russian part of the “grain deal” was blocked, we continued to supply grain to developing countries by other routes that do not depend on the obstacles created by the West. We will continue to do this. There is no doubt about this. Everything that Ukraine could supply to the poorest countries in almost a year of this agreement, we will supply the same amount (even exceeding it) free of charge.”

• “When the instincts of the United States and their allies began to manifest themselves (I would say, the Anglo-Saxons and their allies, because the Anglo-Saxons now “crushed” the whole of Europe and the rest of the “collective West”, to which we include Japan, Australia, New Zealand) was forced a “special military operation” was launched after years of persuading our Western colleagues about the absolute unacceptability of the line they took about Ukraine, turning it into a direct threat to the Russian Federation, a threat to our security and into an instrument for the destruction of the Russian language, education, culture, up to physical destruction of people whom they called “creatures” (I mean residents of Donbas), and whom they threatened to liquidate either legally or physically.”

• “If everyone fulfils the requirements of the UN Charter, then the role of the World Organization is far from being exhausted. It would begin to rise if the principles of the Charter guided everyone. I mean that the key principle is that the United Nations is based on the sovereign equality of states. If you look at the actions of the West, it tramples on this principle every day in various situations.”

• “There is the SCO, BRICS and other associations formed on the African continent. There is the Community of Latin American and Caribbean Countries (CELAC), which, after President Lula da Silva came to power in Brazil, is gaining a “second wind” and is actively developing, including in the context of isolation from the global monetary and financial system controlled by the United States. This is an objective process. The same President of Brazil, Lula da Silva, advocated that, within the framework of CELAC, think about some kind of settlement, banking mechanisms that would be protected from gross interference from outside for political reasons. He is promoting the same idea within the framework of the BRICS association.”

• “The Ukrainian case is just an episode. The major, serious, maybe even decisive, but still, it is part of the process of starting a multipolar world. The West has yet to understand that it must also know its place concerning what is happening in Asia, where NATO is already (as they used to say) stretching its tentacles.”

Outcomes and outlook:

Lavrov did not express something new. He tried to demonstrate that the Russian opinion on the key issues of the current agenda remains unchanged. Russia’s priority will be the struggle for influence in the direction of the Global South. Once again, demonstrated position can be characterised by the formula: “We are interested in peace with the West, but we will not be the first to put up with it.” Additionally, the thesis about the futility of the “grain deal” was voiced. It shows that this issue will continue to be decisive regarding Russian pressure on the West.

7. Article by Sergei Karaganov in the “Profile” journal

Karaganov’s “Usage of nuclear weapons can save humanity from a global catastrophe” was published in the “Profile” journal. The author discusses the possibility of using nuclear weapons and its consequences for other geopolitical processes. Notably, this article appeared on the eve of several of Putin’s statements concerning the possible use of nuclear weapons, as well as their location on the territory of Belarus.

Key theses:

• “It seems to me, that our country, its leadership is facing a difficult choice. It is increasingly clear that the clash with the West will not end if we win a partial or even a crushing victory in Ukraine.”

• “If we liberate Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson oblasts completely, this will be a minimal victory. A little more success will be the liberation within a year or two of the entire east and south of present-day Ukraine. But all the same time, a piece of it will remain with an even more embittered ultra-nationalist population pumped up with weapons. This bleeding wound threatens, with inevitable complications, war again. An almost worse situation could arise if, at the cost of monstrous sacrifices, we liberate the whole of Ukraine, remaining in ruins with a population that mostly hates us. It will take more than a decade to “re-educate” him.”

• “A more attractive option is the liberation and reunification of the east and south, and the imposition of capitulation on the remnants of Ukraine with complete demilitarisation, creating a buffer, friendly state. But such an outcome is possible only if and when we can break the will of the West to support the “Kyiv junta” and incite it against us, force it to retreat strategically.”

• “The deep, even the main reason for the Ukrainian crisis, like many other conflicts in the world, the general increase in the military threat is the accelerating failure of the modern ruling Western elites created by the globalisation tour of the last decades – mostly compradors in Europe (the Portuguese colonialists called compradors the local merchants who served them. – “Profile”). This failure is accompanied by an unprecedentedly rapid change in the balance of power in the world in favour of the global majority, the economic locomotive of which is China and partly India, and history has put forward Russia as a military-strategic pillar. ”

• “The West is losing the ability it had for five centuries to suck out wealth from the whole world, imposing, first of all, by brute force, political, economic orders and establishing its cultural dominance. So, the defensive, but at the same time, aggressive confrontation being deployed by the West cannot be expected to end quickly.”

• “At the same time, the weakened United States is finishing off Europe and other countries dependent on them, trying to throw them into the furnace of confrontation after Ukraine. The elites in most of these states have lost their bearings and, panicking because of the failure of their positions inside and out, obediently lead their countries to slaughter. At the same time, due to a more significant failure, a sense of powerlessness, centuries-old Russophobia, degradation of the intellectual level and loss of strategic culture, their hatred is almost more fierce than in the United States.”

• “Moreover, and this is the most important thing, it will only get worse there. Truces are possible, but reconciliation is not. Anger and despair will continue to grow in waves and with manoeuvres. This vector of movement of the West serves as an unambiguous sign of drift towards the outbreak of the Third World War. It is already beginning and can flare up into a full-fledged fire due to chance or the growing incompetence and irresponsibility of the ruling circles of the West.”

• “The fear of nuclear escalation needs to be restored. Otherwise, humanity is doomed. Now, the future world order is being decided on the margins of Ukraine, not only, and not even so much of what will be Russia. But also whether the world familiar to us will be preserved or only radioactive ruins will remain on the planet.”

• “I have written many times, and I am not the only one, that great states without a great idea cease to be such or simply go nowhere. History is strewn with shadows and graves of powers that have lost it. This idea must be created from above, not relying, as fools or lazy people do, on the fact that it will come from below. It must meet the deep values and aspirations of the people and, most importantly, lead us all forward. But formulating it is the duty of the elite and the country’s leadership. The delay in formulating and putting forward such an idea-dream has been unacceptably delayed.”

• “We can fight for another year or two or three, sacrificing thousands and thousands of our best men and grinding tens and hundreds of thousands of people who fell into a tragic historical trap of the inhabitants of the territory now called Ukraine. But this military operation cannot end with a decisive victory without imposing a strategic retreat or capitulation on the West. We must force the West to give up trying to turn back history, give up its attempts at global dominance and force it to take care of itself, digesting its current multi-level crisis. Roughly speaking, it is necessary that the West just “back off” and not prevent Russia and the world from moving forward.”

• “We will have to restore the credibility of nuclear deterrence by lowering the unacceptably high threshold for using nuclear weapons, prudently but quickly moving up the deterrence-escalation ladder. The first steps have already been taken. These are the corresponding statements by President Putin and other leaders, the beginning of the deployment of nuclear weapons and their carriers in Belarus and the increase in the combat capability of the strategic deterrence forces. There are many steps on this staircase. I counted two dozen. It may even go so far as to warn compatriots and all people of goodwill about the need to leave their places of residence near objects that could become targets of nuclear strikes in countries that directly support the Kyiv regime. The enemy must know: we are ready to strike a preemptive retaliatory strike for all its current and past aggressions to prevent a slide into a global thermonuclear war.”

• “I have said and written many times that if a strategy of deterrence and even use is properly built, the risk of a “retaliatory” nuclear, and indeed any other strike on our territory, can be minimised. Only if a madman sits in the White House, besides hating his country, America will decide to strike at the “defence” of the Europeans, incurring a response, sacrificing a conditional Boston for the sake of a conditional Poznan. This is well understood in the USA and Europe, but they prefer not to think about it. Yes, and we contributed to this thoughtlessness with our peace-loving statements. Having studied the history of American nuclear strategy, I know that after the USSR gained a convincing ability to retaliate with a nuclear strike, Washington did not seriously consider the possibility of using nuclear weapons on Soviet territory, although it publicly bluffed. If nuclear weapons were considered, then only against the “advancing” Soviet troops in Western Europe. I know that Chancellors Kohl and Schmidt fled from the bunkers as soon as the question of such use arose during the exercises.”

• “You can not repeat the “Ukrainian scenario”. For a quarter of a century, we did not listen to those who warned that the expansion of NATO would lead to war; we tried to delay, to “agree”. And the result was a severe armed conflict. Now the price of indecision is an order of magnitude higher.”

• “But in the end, the winners are not judged. And thanks to the saviours. The European political culture does not remember the good. But in the rest of the world, they remember with gratitude how we helped the Chinese to free themselves from the brutal Japanese occupation and the colonies to throw off the colonial yoke. If we are not understood at first, there will be even more incentives to engage in self-improvement. But still, there is a high probability that it will be possible to win, reason with the enemy without extreme measures, and force him to retreat. And in a few years, take a position behind China, as it now stands behind ours, supporting it in a fight with the United States. Then this fight can do without a big war. And together, we will win for the benefit of everyone, including the inhabitants of Western countries.”

Outcomes and outlook:

Being one of the leading modern Russian government ideologists, Karaganov sets an intellectual foundation for Dmitry Medvedev’s hysterical statements. Suppose Medvedev writes short but loud publications on Twitter or Facebook, scaring the world with a nuclear war. In that case, Karaganov writes lengthy texts on the same topic, explaining the possibilities, setting conditions, and discussing the pros and cons. But in general, Karaganov is playing the same game as Medvedev: he is fanning a wave of nuclear blackmail, which (due to Karaganov’s social weight) is actively discussed in the West and influences the decision-making of many Western pacifist politicians.

8. Flag Raising Ceremony

On Saturday, 17 June, a ceremony of raising the flags of the Russian Federation, the USSR and the Russian Empire took place on the territory of the park of the 300th anniversary of St. Petersburg. The erection of the flags is dedicated to the dates of the establishment of each of them: 330 years – the tricolour of Peter the Great, 165 years – the flag of the Russian Empire, and 100 years – the Red Banner. Vladimir Putin took part in the flag-raising ceremony. He watched the ceremony from the Gulf of Finland.

Outcomes and outlook:

Emphasising Russian history’s continuity over the past three hundred years is very important for Putin. In his opinion, each current step of the Russian leadership should find an appropriate justification in history. “A living connection of times” is a slogan actively exploited in modern Russia. In this case, there is also an appeal to the imperial past, the imperial spirit, which is being revived in the Russian Federation.