close the secondly, they proposed to close the ukrainian- _ secondly, they proposed to close the ukrainian— russian border in this area, _ ukrainian— russian border in this area, and — ukrainian— russian border in this area, and third, to hold elections after_ area, and third, to hold elections after these — area, and third, to hold elections after these two steps. one does not need to— after these two steps. one does not need to be _ after these two steps. one does not need to be a lawyer and one does not need to be a lawyer and one does not need to be a lawyer and one does not need to— need to be a lawyer and one does not need to have — need to be a lawyer and one does not need to have a special experience to understand — need to have a special experience to understand that has nothing to do with the _ understand that has nothing to do with the agreements. it contradicts the hames— with the agreements. it contradicts the names agreements so what kind of an additional operation should russia — an additional operation should russia take care? the answer is pretty— russia take care? the answer is pretty understandable. as for the exercises — pretty understandable. as for the exercises where holding these exercises where holding these exercises in our territoryjust like the united — exercises in our territoryjust like the united states does with the many drills the united states does with the many dritis but— the united states does with the many drills but you do not hold our exercises _ drills but you do not hold our exercises by deploying military equipment close to the us border and unfortunately that's what the american partners are doing with regard _ american partners are doing with regard to — american partners are doing with regard to us so we need to have

these _ regard to us so we need to have these consents, not them. this is these consents, not them. this is the subject— these consents, not them. this is the subject of discussion and of clarifying — the subject of discussion and of clarifying positions. with regard to our non—systemic opposition and a citizen _ our non—systemic opposition and a citizen that — our non—systemic opposition and a citizen that you had mentioned. first. _ citizen that you had mentioned. first. this— citizen that you had mentioned. first, this person knew full well that he — first, this person knew full well that he violates the law that exists in russia _ that he violates the law that exists in russia and had to understand that he is a _ in russia and had to understand that he is a person that is a repeat offender _ he is a person that is a repeat offender. he repeatedly violated case law, — offender. he repeatedly violated case law, he went abroad to receive nredicai— case law, he went abroad to receive medical treatment and once he went out of— medical treatment and once he went out of hospital and posted his videos — out of hospital and posted his videos on _ out of hospital and posted his videos on nine but he ignored the requirement of the law and he knew

full requirement of the law and he knew futi weit— requirement of the law and he knew full well that he is wanted and nevertheless he came back to russia and he _ nevertheless he came back to russia and he deliberately wanted to be arrested — and he deliberately wanted to be arrested. so he did what he wanted to do _ arrested. so he did what he wanted to do what — arrested. so he did what he wanted to do. what can we say here with regard _ to do. what can we say here with regard to — to do. what can we say here with regard to persons like himself and a systemic— regard to persons like himself and a systemic opposition at large. unfortunately the format of the conference does not allow us to have a detailed _ conference does not allow us to have a detailed conversation of that. let me say— a detailed conversation of that. let me say the — a detailed conversation of that. let me say the following, i believe that it's pretty _ me say the following, i believe that it's pretty simple and it would be clear— it's pretty simple and it would be clear if— it's pretty simple and it would be clear if everyone and if he could 'ust clear if everyone and if he could just have — clear if everyone and if he could just have an unbiased coverage of this i_ just have an unbiased coverage of this i would appreciate it. so, the united _ this i would appreciate it. so, the united states declared russia as its enemy— united states declared russia as its enemy and adversary and the congress made _ enemy and adversary and the congress made back— enemy and adversary and the congress made back in 2017, the us legislation have provisions that the united _ legislation have provisions that the united states should support the

order— united states should support the order and rule of democratic order in our— order and rule of democratic order in our country and support democratic organisations contained in this— democratic organisations contained in this nation lets ask the question, if russia is an enemy, then— question, if russia is an enemy, then what— question, if russia is an enemy, then what kind of organisations would — then what kind of organisations would be — then what kind of organisations would be supplanted by the united states— would be supplanted by the united states and russia? —— supported? i believe _ states and russia? —— supported? i believe these are not organisations that make — believe these are not organisations that make russia stronger, but those who deter— that make russia stronger, but those who deter russia and that is the -oal who deter russia and that is the goat of— who deter russia and that is the goal of the united states be made public— goal of the united states be made public -- — goal of the united states be made public —— but they made public. these _ public —— but they made public. these are — public —— but they made public. these are organisations and people that help _ these are organisations and people that help implement the us policy on the russian track. so, what should be i the russian track. so, what should be i would — the russian track. so, what should be i would take on this? i believe that clearly we should be cautious about _ that clearly we should be cautious about it _ that clearly we should be cautious about it but we would be guided and be with— about it but we would be guided and be with the activating russian law.

-- we _ be with the activating russian law. -- we act — be with the activating russian law. —— we act within russian nah. americans are continuously keeping up americans are continuously keeping up with political prisoners in russia, have you even brought up the topic during the talks and if you did and what to an oddity? and the second question. we are seeing a new stage of russia american relations. it started with a rather harsh statement in his description of you. president biden has indeed dodged the subject of human rights and their people who think they are in tune with the subject and that this topic in russia. we have discussed

statements as well. he called me right afterwards he explained himself and i was pretty all right with what he said. this was his initiative, we met, and once again the conversation was quite constructive and i once again understood that president biden is an experienced statesman, our one—on—one conversation took almost two hours. it's not every world leader that gets this amount of attention. i mean his predecessor was asked the same question. he evaded this. this president decided to respond to the question directly and in peace, he is very different from president trump. but look at it

this way, everything that happens in our country is something that political leadership is responsible for and presidents included. who stands accused of what but look at it this way, look american streaks. people are getting killed there, including those who are leading various critical organisations. you can get a bullet in the back of your neck. a woman just ran away from the police and they shot her in the back stop but take afghanistan, one english strike can appeal to the tune of 120 people. i'll right assuming this is an estate, it happens in a wire, but shooting from a drone, and an unarmed crowd,

clearly a civilian crowd, what is this about? what would you call that? and who is responsible for these? kind who is the killer now? going back to the human rights record. the guantanamo prison is still operating, it does not even start to resemble what is the traits of international law are in the us legislation and get it exists. secret cia prisons across the globe, including those in european countries where people were tortured, is this the great human rights record? i doubt that. would anyone here agree that this is how you protect human rights? but these are the facts on the ground and this is the reality of the politics today and we understand that this is how it's being done and on the basis of

facts we respond. so when people get funding from abroad to stand for the hidden agenda of those who copy them, who pays the piper? a question about the arctic. you mentioned the discussion on this and the united states have been accusing russia of miniaturising the arctic and so do the united states allies. state secretary placed _ the united states allies. state secretary placed his _ the united states allies. state secretary placed his consent l the united states allies. statel secretary placed his consent so the united states allies. state secretary placed his consent so what have you _ secretary placed his consent so what have you discussed in detail? well, we have discussed _ have you discussed in detail? well, we have discussed this _ have you discussed in detail? well, we have discussed this in _ have you discussed in detail? well, we have discussed this in an - we have discussed this in an extended format all our eggs president, this is an interesting field. i mean the expiration of the arctic and in general and of huge interest from many countries. not just us and the united states. so yes, the united states have concerns

but they are completely baked baseless. the concerned about the miniaturisation are baseless. we are not doing anything new. we are simply restoring the infrastructure that has already been there. all right, we are doing this, we are retrofitting case, the borderline infrastructure, the military infrastructure, the military infrastructure but also environment conservation and emergency mandated search and rescue infrastructure. we are creating the capacity to save people if that happens we are trying to protect the environment. i told of her colleagues that i see no grounds for concern whatsoever. quite the opposite. i think there is plenty of ground for cooperation and we should co—operate in days. after all russia and united states are one of the eight members of the arctic council and by the way, russia chair is that are to year. moreover as you probably know, there is a straight

between alaska and one side you have united states and the other is russia. all of these taken together should actually prompt us to work together to redouble the efforts and the use of northern syria, eight is regulated by international law. there are two major regulations. it dates back to 1982 if i'm not mistaking and the polar code which is comprised of several documents which was rectified in 2017. still it's the legal framework. i drew the attention of our counterparts to enter the fact that we, russia party stand ready to stand by this international regulation and we have never infringed upon any of them. we stand ready to lend a helping hand to all the countries and companies who wish to explore the

possibilities of more than syria. now the navigation is open for half a year. in fact it's more than that. and as the panic alarms, this medication will be open for a longer time. —— the panic alarms. new icebreaker is including those that are put under the mind and really have them atheist icebreaker defeats in the world. this proves much demand for now the united nations describes and sets the legal framework in and around the international waters. adjacent to the bill is economic zones and the freedom of the sea. internal cds, what is that? those idcs that lie within this sovereign territory of the country. 12 miles, and

adjacency, 12 more miles. in terms of adjacent fees on the country in question should give the right of passage, even did the military ships. do the exact? no we don't. it's something different. they are not obliged to provide anyone anything but to bury in mind in case, they are a carrier of internal sees, five of them. the names of the base is to the tune of thousands nautical miles well, this is a suffering ride back we enjoy weatherby want to give the right of passage but when are

abusing this ride, last year alone we had a thousand requests across them. and think we've only rejected ten requests and the majority of them is that ships that fly the russian flag. and the regulating agencies deem them unfit to comply with the polar code and the polar code itself defines and spells out the requirements for the ships that are crossing case so keep us altogether, the stakeholders date, member is of an arctic council, we can do much good together. there are plenty of things for concerns and contradictions but i think that there is no issue that cannot be solved if we engage in earnest efforts.

good afternoon mr president. good or at least _ good afternoon mr president. good or at least not _ good afternoon mr president. good or at least not bad relations between russia _ at least not bad relations between russia and the united states has always— russia and the united states has always been they guarantee of the stability— always been they guarantee of the stability in the world. what you 'ust stability in the world. what you just said. — stability in the world. what you just said, but i with you, now taiking — just said, but i with you, now talking about the mutual respect and relative _ talking about the mutual respect and relative calm and warmth of a something that can characterise space — something that can characterise space. you've probably talked about rediines _ space. you've probably talked about redlines but the americans have left names— redlines but the americans have left names as _ redlines but the americans have left names as well. did you manage at this meeting to agree on holland not to cross _ this meeting to agree on holland not to cross the — this meeting to agree on holland not to cross the redlines and pay doing things— to cross the redlines and pay doing things to _ to cross the redlines and pay doing things to improve or at least not deteriorate the relations? let me ut it this deteriorate the relations? let me put it this way- — deteriorate the relations? let me put it this way. we _ deteriorate the relations? let me put it this way. we understand i deteriorate the relations? let me i put it this way. we understand what our american partners are talking about and they understand what we are talking about when we say is a redline. i will give it to you

pointblank, we have not learned so far as to define the specifics. but we have agreed to work together to continue and follow through on cyber security and strategic stability and i think that it is during this consultation in our common effort in the arctic will be able to step out the arctic will be able to step out the specific details. abc news piece. ouramerican the specific details. abc news piece. our american partners. the specific details. abc news piece. ouramerican partners. mr president thank you for taking my question — president thank you for taking my question. president biden has said that he _ question. president biden has said that he would respond if cyber attacks — that he would respond if cyber attacks from russia did not stop. i am curious. — attacks from russia did not stop. i am curious, what did he tell you? did he _ am curious, what did he tell you? did he make any threats and a quick fottow— did he make any threats and a quick follow up _ did he make any threats and a quick follow up if— did he make any threats and a quick follow up if i may. the list of your political _ follow up if i may. the list of your political opponents who are bad, imprisoned, orjailed is wrong. his

organisation calls for free and fair etections — organisation calls for free and fair elections and an end to corruption. but russia — elections and an end to corruption. but russia has outlawed that weaponisation and the extremist and you have _ weaponisation and the extremist and you have now prevented anyone who supports _ you have now prevented anyone who supports him to run for office. my question— supports him to run for office. my question is, — supports him to run for office. my question is, what are you so afraid of? . . , of? let me reiterate what i 'ust said on this fl of? let me reiterate what i 'ust said on this so-called �* of? let me reiterate what ijust said on this so-called foreign . said on this so—called foreign agents and people who portray themselves as the nonsystemic opposition. i think i responded to your cnn colleagues but i think these are the rules of the game so i have to repeat it when i get your question. fine, ican have to repeat it when i get your question. fine, i can do it. the united states has a law that spells out that the united states will

support specific entities and organisations in russia and at the same time the russian federation was labelled as an adversary. they went on the record and said publicly that they will still the development of russia. it begs the question, what kind of organisations the united states and the west will be supporting unpaid and. it's quite clear that make the united states backin clear that make the united states back in the 30s, we have labelled them as foreign agents but we have not banned them. they can operate. if you are labelled as a foreign agent, that does not preclude you from operating in the country. it is an extremist organisation, that is a whole different story. the organisation in question publicly has called for riots and public this friday. it has openly instructed

people on how to make molotov cocktails and use them against law enforcement that called for the desperation of underage persons in riots. america hasjust recently learned to grieve this chain of events after certain african—american individual was killed and impaired eye movement, the black lives matter movement appeared. i will not go into details, i will spare you but we have seen programmes we have seen a i'm violations and riots and the sympathiser at the americans but we do not want to buy the same thing to happen on the russian soil. we will do anything possible to prevent this. it's not about me peering anything, if you want to think that, can you please give to mike? if diiii

can you please give to mike? if all of our can you please give to mike? if all of your political — can you please give to mike? if all of your political opponents are dead in prison, _ of your political opponents are dead in prison, poison, does not send a message — in prison, poison, does not send a message that you do not want a fair political— message that you do not want a fair political fight?— political fight? about my opponents bein: 'ailed political fight? about my opponents being jailed or _ political fight? about my opponents being jailed or imprisoned, - political fight? about my opponents being jailed or imprisoned, people i being jailed or imprisoned, people went into us congress with political demands. 400 people are now facing criminal charges. we are facing prison terms of up to 20, maybe 25 years. they are called home—grown terrorists. they are being accused of many other things. 70 people were arrested right there on the spot. 30 of them i still arrested. on what grounds? i am of them i still arrested. on what grounds? lam not of them i still arrested. on what grounds? i am not quite clear. i mean, none of the official

authorities from states informed us about it. so we do not know. one of the participants, a woman, was shot dead on the spot. she was not threatening with arms or anything. why am i bringing this up? many people are facing the same things we do and i am stressing these. we are a sympathising with the united states but we do not want the same pain repeating here. a couple more questions please. did you manage to agree with the us sites on _ did you manage to agree with the us sites on the return of certain russian _ sites on the return of certain russian citizens that are jailed in us prisons— russian citizens that are jailed in us prisons and it is the case, when could _ us prisons and it is the case, when could it _ us prisons and it is the case, when could it happen? indeed, we brought this up— could it happen? indeed, we brought this up and _ could it happen? indeed, we brought this up and president biden brought

this up and president biden brought this up— this up and president biden brought this up with regard to us citizens that are — this up with regard to us citizens that are currently in russian prisons _ that are currently in russian prisons and we discussed this. there could _ prisons and we discussed this. there could be _ prisons and we discussed this. there could be some ground for compromise. the russian _ could be some ground for compromise. the russian foreign ministry and the us state _ the russian foreign ministry and the us state department will work in this direction. the recapping question _ this direction. the recapping question. you said that you discussed trade with president biden, — discussed trade with president biden, maybe that's one of their positive — biden, maybe that's one of their positive points. business communities seek cooperation from both sides. — communities seek cooperation from both sides, what are the prospects for corporations? that both sides, what are the prospects for corporations?— for corporations? that does not de-end for corporations? that does not depend on _ for corporations? that does not depend on us — for corporations? that does not depend on us but _ for corporations? that does not depend on us but rather - for corporations? that does not depend on us but rather on - for corporations? that does not depend on us but rather on the | for corporations? that does not. depend on us but rather on the left side, we did not impose any restrictions. i believe that after imposing certain restrictions in economy, the us lost as much as

russia. indeed, it somehow affected our development to a certain extent. and to a certain extent, the us implemented their goal of deterring russia and there is nothing quite important here. second thing, the interest of the us business community. the us had the biggest delegation at the st. petersburg international economic forum. 200 persons. as for restrictions against the us companies, some us companies lost in russia and the game this business to their rivals, what for? explain this but they still have losses. i will trade with the us in orderfor $28 billion but in the first quarter of this year it grew by 16%.

first quarter of this year it grew by16%. | first quarter of this year it grew by 16%. i believe that if this trend persists it will benefit everybody. and we talked about this. you know what? i will have a couple of questions from the side and a couple of questions on the other side. if the floor to the lady. a couple of years ago you met president _ a couple of years ago you met president biden when he was face president — president biden when he was face president and he said that he looked into your— president and he said that he looked into your eyes and he did not see a soul bear— into your eyes and he did not see a soul bear and you said that means that we _ soul bear and you said that means that we understand each other. you looked _ that we understand each other. you looked into — that we understand each other. you looked into his eyes and what did you see? — looked into his eyes and what did you see? did you see a person that

you see? did you see a person that you can _ you see? did you see a person that you can work— you see? did you see a person that you can work with and please tell me has president biden invited you to the white — has president biden invited you to the white house and if that is the case: _ the white house and if that is the case, did — the white house and if that is the case, did you agree to go there? president — case, did you agree to go there? president biden did not invite me and i have not made the relevant indication myself. i believe that for such meetings and for such visit stopping there should be conditions that should be ripe. as for looking into the eyes and seeing us all, or not seeing anything, it's not the first time that i heard that. to be honest i don't remember such conversation but axiom that it could have happened. if you ask me what kind of a person president biden is i can say is a constructive person, well—balanced, and experienced, seasoned politician and i expected

that. he recalled his family and conversations he had with his mother. these things don't have directly something to do with our business but nevertheless shows his quantities and his moral values. it's all appealing and i believe that he spoke the same language. he does not necessarily mean we need to look into the eyes and seeing assault and to pledge eternal love. we defend the international interests of other countries and this relationship are based on

pragmatism. mr president, following this meeting, did you have any illusions? i did meeting, did you have any illusions? i did not— meeting, did you have any illusions? i did not have any old illusions let alone new ones. there have been no illusions whatsoever. at to decide. at the back of the hall please, give the mike and then lady will decide for herself. mr the mike and then lady will decide for herself. ~ , ., for herself. mr president, i have two questions — for herself. mr president, i have two questions if _ for herself. mr president, i have two questions if i _ for herself. mr president, i have two questions if i may. - for herself. mr president, i have l two questions if i may. regarding global— two questions if i may. regarding global climate change, have you discussed this with president biden and the _ discussed this with president biden and the second question regarding american — and the second question regarding american media outlets, recently you .ave american media outlets, recently you gave at _ american media outlets, recently you gave at the _ american media outlets, recently you gave at the interview today channel, is it fair— gave at the interview today channel, is it fair that — gave at the interview today channel, is it fair that you gave an interview to american media outlets

whereas _ interview to american media outlets whereas american presidents do not -ive whereas american presidents do not give any— whereas american presidents do not give any interviews to our media outlets — give any interviews to our media outlets and do you see a positive impact _ outlets and do you see a positive impact of — outlets and do you see a positive impact of this interview if your words — impact of this interview if your words are _ impact of this interview if your words are always distracted and you are treated — words are always distracted and you are treated and not a very respectable way but with regard to distillations and misinterpretations, that is the practice — misinterpretations, that is the practice of international relations here and — practice of international relations here and there is nothing to do about— here and there is nothing to do about it — here and there is nothing to do about it here. | here and there is nothing to do about it here.— here and there is nothing to do about it here. ., . .. , ., ., about it here. i got accustomed to face. about it here. i got accustomed to face- have — about it here. i got accustomed to face. have been _ about it here. i got accustomed to face. have been living _ about it here. i got accustomed to face. have been living with - about it here. i got accustomed to face. have been living with it - about it here. i got accustomed to face. have been living with it for l face. have been living with it for decades. as for the interviews and who gives these interviews, that's up who gives these interviews, that's up to the leaders to decide he wants to send a message to the people we

try to do that and that's exactly the essence of my interviews to the american media outlets. for instance, president biden raised the issue on the work and on the work of radio freedom europe that we declared as foreign agents. i got an impression that members of the us delegation were not aware that before that we actually had to media outlets that are broadcasting for foreign audiences and before that the us declared them as foreign agents and they deprived them of their accreditation. so what we did was retaliation and at the same time russia today abides by the requirements of the us regulator. it's registered in this way although

they face some problems with regards to hiring personnel and financial transactions by three gallons —— but they don't have such problems. the us media outlets do not abide by the russian. we spread the word on our opinion and we hope that we would be able to work at the level of foreign ministries in this matter. i actually wanted a lady to ask a question. thanks a lot, could you please speak up. late question. thanks a lot, could you please speak bp— question. thanks a lot, could you please speak up. we all knew how you shook hands — please speak up. we all knew how you shook hands with _ please speak up. we all knew how you shook hands with joe _ please speak up. we all knew how you shook hands with joe biden _ please speak up. we all knew how you shook hands with joe biden at - please speak up. we all knew how you shook hands with joe biden at the - shook hands with joe biden at the very beginning, have you managed to reach _ very beginning, have you managed to reach a _ very beginning, have you managed to reach a new— very beginning, have you managed to reach a new level of mutual understanding and confidence, do you believe _ understanding and confidence, do you believe it— understanding and confidence, do you believe it he had a at this stage to reach _ believe it he had a at this stage to reach a _ believe it he had a at this stage to reach a new— believe it he had a at this stage to reach a new level of relationship

that would be totally clear, transparent, that is the ultimate -oal transparent, that is the ultimate goal of— transparent, that is the ultimate goal of two countries? he transparent, that is the ultimate goal of two countries?— transparent, that is the ultimate goal of two countries? he once said there is no — goal of two countries? he once said there is no happiness _ goal of two countries? he once said there is no happiness in _ goal of two countries? he once said there is no happiness in life - goal of two countries? he once said there is no happiness in life as - there is no happiness in life as just a glimpse of happiness and do cherish it. i believe that harriet there can be no confidence and ultimate confidence that i see that some glimpse of this confidence. please, you have to make but you want the second one. this one is not plugged in. want the second one. this one is not au: ued in. ., " ,., want the second one. this one is not au: ued in. ., " _, ., want the second one. this one is not plugged in-— plugged in. covid-19 is one of the key subjects _ plugged in. covid-19 is one of the key subjects here, _ plugged in. covid-19 is one of the key subjects here, have _ plugged in. covid-19 is one of the key subjects here, have you - plugged in. covid-19 is one of the i key subjects here, have you brought it up during — key subjects here, have you brought it up during your meeting late day us president and if that is the case, — us president and if that is the case, what are the prospects of joint _ case, what are the prospects of joint work— case, what are the prospects of joint work with the us colleagues to overcome _ joint work with the us colleagues to overcome the pandemic and we could talk about— overcome the pandemic and we could talk about mutual recognition of vaccines — talk about mutual recognition of vaccines. we talk about mutual recognition of vaccines. ~ , ., , , , vaccines. we brought this up but 'ust vaccines. we brought this up but just briefly- _ vaccines. we brought this up but

just briefly. in _ vaccines. we brought this up but just briefly. in passing. - vaccines. we brought this up but just briefly. in passing. in - vaccines. we brought this up but just briefly. in passing. in the i just briefly. in passing. in the times of the previous us administration, we accommodated the us request and we send our equipment as part of the humanitarian assistance but it's not that they ran out of money, it's just that at that point in time they were in dire need of them tomatoes. we have done it selflessly and we are ready for such corporation but we have not discussed this in detail. after the meeting with president trump, — after the meeting with president trump, the ledge of his deteriorated between _ trump, the ledge of his deteriorated between our two countries. are there any factors— between our two countries. are there any factors that would tell that this will— any factors that would tell that this will not be the case today? has the religion — this will not be the case today? has the religion of reached rock bottom? i can the religion of reached rock bottom? i can say— the religion of reached rock bottom? i can say all— the religion of reached rock bottom? i can say all the action related to the deterioration of russia— us

relations work initiated by the us, not russia. congressman are quite inventive and i do not know what they will invent further on. yes, please. do you know that the finished team won~~~ _ do you know that the finished team won... ., . . ., , |f do you know that the finished team won- - -_ if we - do you know that the finished team won. . ._ if we take l won... congratulations. if we take the same assessment _ won... congratulations. if we take the same assessment from - won... congratulations. if we take the same assessment from samel won... congratulations. if we take - the same assessment from same scale to the _ the same assessment from same scale to the putin- _ the same assessment from same scale to the putin— biden meeting. what is the score? _ to the putin— biden meeting. what is the score? who won coachella and before coming to geneva, the americans were saying they were going _ americans were saying they were going to — americans were saying they were going to exert pressure on putin. have _ going to exert pressure on putin. have you — going to exert pressure on putin. have you thought that pressure, have you stood _ have you thought that pressure, have you stood up to a? i think the entire — you stood up to a? i think the

entire russia is thinking, how our president— entire russia is thinking, how our president is— entire russia is thinking, how our president is doing up there? no president is doing up there? pressure at president is doing up there? mr? pressure at all. it was a frank and candid conversation. without, you know, without going unattended from the set agenda. like i said, neither us nor united states have tried to exert any pressure, but this was not the point of the meeting. and the score? the score, i think before we met president biden, this is not a competition, and ifully dovetail with him. this was a productive meeting. it was fruitful, it was to the point. and it took place in an atmosphere that was actually

enabling, enabling to create, to accomplish something, and the most important thing is the glances of confidence and hope that we had. bbc news, please. mr president, joe biden cause for stable _ mr president, joe biden cause for stable and — mr president, joe biden cause for stable and productive relationship with russia. however, the west leaves _ with russia. however, the west leaves that one particular t is an inherent — leaves that one particular t is an inherent trait of the russian policy — inherent trait of the russian policy. are you ready to forgo instability in order to improve the relation _ instability in order to improve the relation with the west?— instability in order to improve the relation with the west? quite... it was difficult _ relation with the west? quite... it was difficult to _ relation with the west? quite... it was difficult to follow _ relation with the west? quite... it was difficult to follow the - relation with the west? quite... it was difficult to follow the logic. i l was difficult to follow the logic. i am really envious. it is like a conjuration of terms. you said the west believes and then the second part. are you ready to forgo this?

if the west believes this, this does not mean that this is the objective truth, so let me address your question in parts. to dissect it. you said the west believes russian policy is unpredictable, let me reciprocate. the us withdrawalfrom the abm treaty in 2002 was not predictable. why would they do that? and disrupt and undermine the basis of the strategic stability? the treaty withdrawal in 2019, is that what you call stability? the open skies agreement withdrawal, is that what you call stability? the resume is nothing, almost no legs to stand upon. thankfully, the start treaty was saved and i'm grateful that president biden has made a wise decision to extend the new start treaty for five years. take the

situation in iran, ukraine, crime area. —— crimea. this of where it all started, right? ok, let me plant all started, right? ok, let me plant a question. what was stable about supporting a coup d'etat, and uprising in ukraine? the president was ready to announce new elections, he agreed with all the demands. no, no, it would not work. you would have to go with a coup. the ramifications that followed, the crimea, the east of ukraine, and you say that we are sick of the instability? i don't think so. in my mind we see it differently. we do nothing of these terms. with the queer trying to create stability, but for the situation to be stable, we need an agreed set of rules of conduct. across all areas. the

strategic stability, the cybersecurity, the original conflict. my —— i thing we can agree on these things and i have an impression that we can agree. let us draw this to... cannot hear. speak to the make. the popular tunes? cannot hear. speak to the make. the populartunes? let's cannot hear. speak to the make. the popular tunes? let's do something, speak something intelligible and reasonable. and we will wrap it up then. final question to the lady. bloomberg news. in 2016, after you met trump, — bloomberg news. in 2016, after you met trump, a new set of american sentience — met trump, a new set of american sentience was quickly imposed. what about— sentience was quickly imposed. what about this _ sentience was quickly imposed. what about this round of negotiations? have _ about this round of negotiations? have you — about this round of negotiations? have you got any assurances they will be — have you got any assurances they will be no _ have you got any assurances they will be no new sanctions in the near

term _ will be no new sanctions in the near term coming — will be no new sanctions in the near term coming from the united states? and you _ term coming from the united states? and you said about the guns of —— glances of hope. do you have any ideas _ —— glances of hope. do you have any ideas on _ —— glances of hope. do you have any ideas on how— —— glances of hope. do you have any ideas on how visible it is to expect that president biden would be able to deliver, to follow through on the promises _ to deliver, to follow through on the promises was met it is believed the american _ promises was met it is believed the american political apparatus is actually— american political apparatus is actually showing more solidarity with president biden then it showed during _ with president biden then it showed during the _ with president biden then it showed during the president trump presidency. you've agreed on cybersecurity, on ukraine. do you think— cybersecurity, on ukraine. do you think there — cybersecurity, on ukraine. do you think there will be any working group — think there will be any working group established? any redlines will be respected? can you describe something? i be respected? can you describe something?— be respected? can you describe somethin: ? ,, . , something? i think i have spoken about the redlines _ something? i think i have spoken about the redlines at _ something? i think i have spoken about the redlines at length. i something? i think i have spoken about the redlines at length. you j about the redlines at length. you see, the understanding and confidence in this, it is created,

it stems from negotiations. there is no reason to meet each other and threaten and to exchange, trade verbal attacks of that is not the point system restrictions, the sanctions, it is something i have brought up already. we do not know what is brewing in the american political apparatus. what is brewing in the american politicalapparatus. i what is brewing in the american political apparatus. i mean, we know the broad strokes, the current, but we do not the details. there are probably opponents and proponents of developing that it relations with russia. who will prevail? it is difficult to say. hopefully that will be taken after this summit, hopefully one might think so. but it would only mean a missed opportunity if it happens. and the final question. ajournalist from canada. question. a journalist from canada. mr question. ajournalist from canada. mr president, think you for an

opportunity. you said to a couple of mycology— opportunity. you said to a couple of mycology wanted unbiased, do you have a _ mycology wanted unbiased, do you have a translation? no. do you hear me now? i will try and repeat. he speaks in russian thank you. you said to a couple of mycology— thank you. you said to a couple of

mycology wanted unbiased, fair questions and coverage. i have a fair question for you. it actually comes— fair question for you. it actually comes from i—9—year—old daughter. she asked _ comes from i—9—year—old daughter. she asked me before i left to come here about — she asked me before i left to come here about what is the big deal with this summit? and it is quite a competent answer for a nine—year—old, so i would like us in your— nine—year—old, so i would like us in your own _ nine—year—old, so i would like us in your own words, mr president, why is this relationship so complicated? and also— this relationship so complicated? and also she would like to know and i and also she would like to know and i would _ and also she would like to know and i would like — and also she would like to know and i would like to know why our young people _ i would like to know why our young people not— i would like to know why our young people not allowed to protest in russia? — people not allowed to protest in russia? it people not allowed to protest in russia? , ., people not allowed to protest in russia? , . ., people not allowed to protest in russia? , . . . russia? it is a great thing about our russia? it is a great thing about your nine-year-old _ russia? it is a great thing about your nine-year-old is _ russia? it is a great thing about your nine-year-old is actually i your nine—year—old is actually interested in this, and the answer is pretty simple. you've got to look around and just see, think you yourself, it is a wonderful world. i mean, the grown—ups of these adults, leaders of two major countries, two major nuclear countries, our meeting

to try to make this world a safer place to stop a secure place, a prospering place to live for many people, from across the glove. they will discuss the stuff about the horrible weapons that can kill us all, that has to be somehow prevented... they will discuss nature, how to make rivers clean, how to make seas clean, how to stop floods and droughts. how to make sure everybody has plenty of food to eat, for anyone in the globe. what else would they discuss? able discuss health and medicine, so that when kids grow up, they will be healthy. they can study and have a bright future, and i wish very much.

this meeting will be covered with this ideas and mine. thank you. —— these ideas in mind. you are watching bbc news, where the russian president latimer putin has just held a press conference, a solo press conference, about an hour, after his meeting with the us presidentsjoe biden. giving his version or his view of exactly what the two men discussed in talks that actually lasted for under four hours, even though they respect to last longer than that, so a lengthy press conference following slightly shorter i lateral talks between the two leaders. talks that the russian president to describe is fruitful. he said they had a part medic dialect. he said the two men spoke the same language and top limited

joe biden for being inexperienced statesmen and a very constructive experienced partner. even said that joe biden had spoken to him about his mother and his family, so that is where the pleasantries ended. then there were plenty of areas disagreement that they discussed, the russian president said that they had talked about cybersecurity but denied any russian involvement in cybersecurity, and cyber hacks. indeed, said alexei navalny, the opposition figure had been imprisoned, had broken the law. just to say that we are waiting for the us presidentjoe biden to give his solo press conference, which will come very, very shortly. we can see the podium wherejoe biden will give his solo press conference shortly. but there were also some areas where they did reach some agreements, so they did reach some agreements, so they are restoring the ambassadors, for example, go been withdrawn earlier in the year, and that they

say they talked about some talks that would be held about cybersecurity and indeed adopting a joint declaration on your teaching nuclear stability. let's just deconstruct all of this with our moscow correspondent, who is here. it was, there were points of compromise, point of disagreement twisted what stood out for you? this is 'ust one twisted what stood out for you? try 3 isjust one side of the story as twisted what stood out for you? try 3 is just one side of the story as you are mentioning there. usually after these kind of event you got a joint press conference will this time, it did not happen, because it was so bad last time with what happened with donald trump and valery putin. separate description of what happened. i think it was interesting latimer putin was so keen to spin a positive line on what happened. he said he was quite... once “ one —— one thing that stood out as they had spoken i to i for about two hours. yet said it is not often you can speak to a luer leader in such

detail. important talks, and there a soup points in which they managed to move this related forward. you mentioned the return of ambassadors. without ambassadors in a country, it is hard to thing about how you can talk about any relationship phonetically speaking. there is an agreement that the foreign ministry will look at the release or swap of some high—profile prisoners both in russia and the united states, so again it's mall point moving forward, and talks will be held on cybersecurity. vladimir putin was keen to underline several times that russia is a nuclear power, it is an important country. a heck of a lot smaller than the united states but it is a nuclear nuclear power. that is why he came to talk to him. {leer is why he came to talk to him. clear lines of neither— is why he came to talk to him. clear lines of neither side _ is why he came to talk to him. clear lines of neither side wanted - is why he came to talk to him. clear lines of neither side wanted to move on, and vladimir putin said alexei navalny knew that he was breaking the law when he came from germany to

russia, he said that there was nothing to talk about in terms of ukraine's possible member of nato. they talk about it. do you get the sense, really, that there was genuine movement from either side, albeit tinkering around the edges? i albeit tinkering around the edges? i do not think so, and a anybody was expecting breakthroughs. they were both talking this down. it was about looking each other in the eye, it was about a frank conversation. joe biden's team in moscow had told me you have time thatjoe biden likes to do that, elect to be face—to—face and talk, thrash things out, sol think that is what this was about the but nobody was expecting let putin to shift ground, and surly not admit to that publicly. bear in mind there is a election this year in autumn and vladimir putin wants to be bolstered by this summit, not we can buy it, so he was presenting this as making clear russia's redlines. alexei navalny, his future

not in fate, as far as putin is concerned. he also said funded to weaken russia, so there is no way his portrayal of the situation is going to change. find his portrayal of the situation is going to change.— his portrayal of the situation is auoin to chance. �* , going to change. and quite listening which also on _ going to change. and quite listening which also on the _ going to change. and quite listening which also on the issue _ going to change. and quite listening which also on the issue of— which also on the issue of ransomware attacks in cybersecurity. —— quite bullish language. president putin accused the us of having done cyber attacks on russia. they have talked about cybersecurity full stub you what extent are we expecting the cyber attacks to suddenly stop? are we expected some progress? are we expecting maybe more of a show of strength from both sides in terms of the cyber sphere? i strength from both sides in terms of the cyber sphere?— the cyber sphere? i think it depends what message _ the cyber sphere? i think it depends what message joe _ the cyber sphere? i think it depends what message joe biden _ the cyber sphere? i think it depends what message joe biden brought i the cyber sphere? i think it depends what message joe biden brought to | what messagejoe biden brought to the summit. what did he threaten vladimir putin with? if you came to this summit saying we know you're doing x, y, z, we know you're doing this, there's a chance of latimer putin in russia a rollback a little bit on the aggression. i think certainly speaking to experts in moscow before this summit, they were

telling me they do believe that larry putin wants to lower the temperature somewhat in this relationship and they were saying is not in the kremlin's interest at this point to escalate things any further, so looking to find points of cooperation and points where they overlap in terms of their interests and to present that to the world is stages. and to present that to the world is sta . es. .. . and to present that to the world is staues. . . , ., . ,, stages. 0k, sarah rainsford, thank ou ve stages. 0k, sarah rainsford, thank you very much _ stages. 0k, sarah rainsford, thank you very much indeed. _ stages. 0k, sarah rainsford, thank you very much indeed. a _ stages. 0k, sarah rainsford, thank you very much indeed. a little i stages. 0k, sarah rainsford, thank you very much indeed. a little bit l you very much indeed. a little bit of police action behind us, which suggests the convoy of latimer putin is likely to depart the villa soon —— latimer putin. live pictures of vladimir putin stepping out of the villa, probably, and getting into the convent to depart. we still wait for this press conference from the american presidentjoe biden. let's bring in ambassadorjames f collins, who was the us invested or to russia between 1997 and 2001. —— ambassador to russia can i ask you first of all, are you surprised by the

relatively warm tone that vladimir putin came out with towardsjoe biden? where you expect more hostility, or do you think that there has been a rather low level of achievement as we have learned from vitamin putin in that press conference was —— in that press conference coachella frankly, my expectations for this meeting were not great. i for this meeting were not great. i think they were very little. it came out that way from what i could gather. obviously have not heard what present invited has to say, but —— present invited hedges a. i took three things on it.. they seem to have agreed, and i listed any place where there would be consultations, that was in agreement that we are going to engage in a much greater and more intense way, that we have done over the last many many months. and i think that is possible. exec liao that is going to happen, remain

to be seen. secondly i thought they did come to terms on the fact that we will engage and conduct discussions on strategic stability, including cyber realms. by was... that was a hope i had. i do get is good news. yes, go ahead. sorry, i was auoin good news. yes, go ahead. sorry, i was going to _ good news. yes, go ahead. sorry, i was going to ask. — good news. yes, go ahead. sorry, i was going to ask, do _ good news. yes, go ahead. sorry, i was going to ask, do you _ good news. yes, go ahead. sorry, i was going to ask, do you feel- good news. yes, go ahead. sorry, i was going to ask, do you feel more| was going to ask, do you feel more optimistic about the relationship between the two judging from what we have heard? it is only from the putin site at the moment. do you feel that there are grounds for optimism in reaching common ground between these two foes? i optimism in reaching common ground between these two foes?— between these two foes? i think i am alwa s an between these two foes? i think i am always an optimist. _ between these two foes? i think i am always an optimist. it'd _ between these two foes? i think i am always an optimist. it'd certainly i always an optimist. it'd certainly good news that there will be now serious discussions of key issues, everything from climate to strategic stability and so forth. will we come to terms and make new agreements on

these or reach accommodations? i think it is going to be a long haul. we have a lot on which we disagree by think the one hope we might have is that rather than spending our time limit each other for everything orfinding answers to time limit each other for everything or finding answers to who is guilty on any of these charges, we can begin to discuss what differences are and perhaps approach find the accommodations or defining, as mr putin said, the redlines in a better and more practical, pragmatic way for stopping that would be an improvement. it would mean relationship looking not worse than they are now. == relationship looking not worse than they are now— they are now. -- it would mean relations _ they are now. -- it would mean relations are _ they are now. -- it would mean relations are not _ they are now. -- it would mean relations are not looking - they are now. -- it would mean relations are not looking worse| they are now. -- it would mean i relations are not looking worse than they are now. you touched on the issue of cyber which was central to that press conference and clearly central to the talks of those two leaders, and yet of latimer put was very bullish. he denied any responsible by russia in the solar winds attacked last year —— vladimir putin. or indeed on the attack on

the colonial oil pipeline a few weeks ago that disrupted that major oil pipeline and americans feel barely hall of the russians. and then went so far as to accuse america of orchestra and cyber attacks on russia. is this a flexing of muscles? do you feel that these cyber talks could go anywhere? and from your time as ambassador, how much of an issue is that? the from your time as ambassador, how much of an issue is that?— much of an issue is that? the cyber field is externally _ much of an issue is that? the cyber field is externally complex - much of an issue is that? the cyber field is externally complex and i field is externally complex and difficult. we have not ever really had serious talks about its coming to the best of my knowledge. and so this is going to open new territory. all i can say is we go nowhere by simply accusing the other of being guilty of cyber crimes. i am not judging here who has done what. i will leave that to the experts. but the reality is that unless we begin to discuss how we are going to manage this sphere of activity, in a

way that does not disrupt each other�*s civilisations, we are going to have a problem. sol other�*s civilisations, we are going to have a problem. so i thick it is good news that at least we have agreed we are going to begin to talk about it. whether that will have a positive outcome i think is going to remain very much a matter of how the negotiations take place and what we are willing to talk about. and are willing to talk about. and ambassador, _ are willing to talk about. and ambassador, when _ are willing to talk about. and ambassador, when you work in post, for some of the time at least, vladimir putin was already in office. judging from this press conference today, is this vintage putin from what you saw? or were there some things that surprised you about it? i there some things that surprised you about it? ., ., ~' there some things that surprised you about it? ., ., ,, . , about it? i do not think i was surprised. — about it? i do not think i was surprised, really, _ about it? i do not think i was surprised, really, at- about it? i do not think i was surprised, really, at all. i. about it? i do not think i was| surprised, really, at all. iwill also say this putin is exactly the same 2001 as he is today. in terms of his positions and his policies. but, no, iwas not of his positions and his policies. but, no, i was not surprised. of his positions and his policies. but, no, iwas not surprised. i of his positions and his policies. but, no, i was not surprised. i did not expect mr putin to admit to all

of the things that we say russia has done wrong. and i expected him to come back and say cub you are guilty of the same kinds of charges that you're trying to levy against me. but that does not get us anywhere. what was constructive was the fact that the engagement is restarted, it seems to be cub and they've agreed to talk and least about a broad area of the relations, on strategic civility, and i gather they have discussed also that there will now be discussions of things like climate change and so forth, all issues in which there should be plenty of area in which we could come to terms of using competition. and i do think it is good that the ambassadors are coming back. i hope we will expand on that, restore the effectiveness of missions in both countries getting diplomats back to work and getting agreement that it

makes sense to have good, solid representation by both members in the other. what is been going on is just frankly unconscionable, and if you want to develop a vision, that's the way to do but. i hope we are in is improving on that. in the way to do but. i hope we are in is improving on that.— is improving on that. in terms of the wider region, _ is improving on that. in terms of the wider region, ambassador, l is improving on that. in terms of i the wider region, ambassador, again, vladimir putin was quite bullish and talking about ukraine, accusing ukraine of breaking agreements come in terms of massing of soldiers. i do not think we heard much about cub we did not hear anything about belarus and there. do you feel largely there could be a kind of, let's say, a holding back of putin cosmic adventurism in the region? do you see some curtailment of russian expansionism in its backyard? iciluite

expansionism in its backyard? quite honestl , expansionism in its backyard? quite honestly. we _ expansionism in its backyard? quite honestly, we have _ expansionism in its backyard? quite honestly, we have not _ expansionism in its backyard? quite honestly, we have not seen - expansionism in its backyard? qt its: honestly, we have not seen an expansionism in its backyard? (iei its: honestly, we have not seen an awful lot new in ukraine since 2014, and he kept repeating the same mantra that we heard for a long time about everything would be fine if ukraine would just if lament the minsk agreements, and we all know that there are difficulties with that. —— implement. i did not hear anything that suggested there respectability on any site on this, but i do not know what mr biden is saying. on belarus,... pa. know what mr biden is saying. on belarus-u— belarus,... a final quick one, if i ma , belarus,... a final quick one, if i may, ambassador, _ belarus,... a final quick one, if i may, ambassador, sorry- belarus,... a final quick one, if i may, ambassador, sorry to i belarus,... a final quick one, if i i may, ambassador, sorry to interrupt. if you had been us ambassador to moscow and you heard just watched the russian president give that press conference and give his version of events, would you think that that had gone pretty well in talks between the two leaders? i talks between the two leaders? i think given where they started out, they went reasonably well and the outcomes about what i would've

expected. no great breakthroughs, but some commitment to continue to find a way to talk to one another and address issues that are clearly dangerous for the two of us. {lilia dangerous for the two of us. ok, ambassador— dangerous for the two of us. ok, ambassador james _ dangerous for the two of us. ok, ambassadorjames f collins, ambassadorjames f collins, ambassador to russia, us ambassador to russia cub between 1997—2001 for some thank you very much indeed for joining us. so we continue to wait for a solo press conference by the us presidentjoe biden cub to see whether or not he echoes vladimir putin's version of the summit, we see whether or not he gives a more optimistic cub more pessimistic version of events, and where the us red lines were. so we will bring that life to you here on bbc news, but for now i hand you back to london. mark, thank you very much. ijust want to take you see live shot. we have heard from the russian

president. we have heard done axing the pictures in geneva. at the set there, we are seeing they did the final sound checks, so we do not think we are far from hearing from the american president. it is fascinating, the hour of hearing from the russian president, as mark was rightly saying, some of the instructive dialogue, the return of ambassadors, progress, but then in areas like ukraine, in areas like alexei navalny cub a huge amount of pushback from vladimir putin comes not expecting. steve rosenberg at one stage asking him the question about, would russian foreign policy, would he forgo instability, which is how steve phrased it, and he simply would not accept the premise put forward, accused the americans of being very common terms of decisions, unpredictable themselves. so a lot of pushback within that

news conference as well, as the progress that blood report talking up. —— that vladimir putin was talking of. this the scene live in geneva as we awaitjoe biden. the us and russian presidents have met for the first time. the much anticipated summit has finished and switzerland. in a news conference, putin says the two men discussed at strategic nuclear stability and agreement that us and russian ambassadors will return to their capitals. translation: there has been no hostility. on the contrary, our meeting took place in a constructive spirit. abs, contrary, our meeting took place in a constructive spirit.— a constructive spirit. a thumbs up from president _ a constructive spirit. a thumbs up from president biden _ a constructive spirit. a thumbs up from president biden as - a constructive spirit. a thumbs up from president biden as he i a constructive spirit. a thumbs up| from president biden as he leaves the summit. he will give a news conference before heading back to

washington.