ah, there's things we dare to ask simply to r t for an exclusive interview. today we're joined by a new dream. inventive chairman of united russia and deputy chairman of russia security council. mr. mid if thank you very much for sitting down with our team. hello. my 1st question is about the party you live. united russia has retained the majority in the russian parliament since 2003. however, unlike the 2016 election with the 54 percent of the vote, this time popular support was just 50 percent. but could you comment on the outcome and why the ruling party losing ground? someone in the party cookie, my good senior, the good a little bit. what should i say? it's a big win for the party. we must not grow complacently and rest on our laurels just

because the ruling party enjoys great popularity among russian voters. still, it is a very impressive outcome. well, most political parties in the majority of countries around the world would be quite happy with such results. we certainly very much are. we've discussed this with my colleagues with presidents who helped our party during the campaign. as head of state, he was really key to our success. so the results are fine, but it doesn't mean that we can rest on our laurels. keller, the russians are happy about everything. that is not the case. the elections are always about trust that you will be able to deliver going forward. it is an acid test on where we have been doing well and not so well. reveal the concerns of our people that should be addressed in our agenda. and those we've largely resolved. what are united rushes goals for the next turn that you know, what are the priorities? how have they changed if at all the election that there were 2 main objectives?

one like for any party is to implement our agenda. i'll go into detail a little bit later since we're the party that supports the incumbent president. i was 2nd objective as monsieur his policy to get to the best of our ability. i national development goals, national projects and the priorities in his address to the federal assembly. so it is a twin mandate. offline, you're putting the president's policies into action is pretty straightforward. but executing a political agenda is a more new and stefan this year. it was put together in an unusual way. why did we call it the people platform to the proposals from about 2000000 people? not just party members. yes, we have about 2000000 members shaped by ordinary russian people. some of them probably don't even like united russia would least didn't vote for it. and still they had a hand in drafting this agenda and the most essential and relevant ideas were

incorporated in our campaign agenda. the 1st part of focuses on living standards and welfare will cover a wide range of critical areas such as health care, education, social benefits, families, people with disabilities, as well as a number of the most pressing issues among them, housing, utilities, and so on. it's not some high level blueprint. these are not just promises facilitates develop and 80. it's very granular. we need to do this, this and this. we shall bring household income up to this level where we shall by this number of buses, a school children, an ambulance, and that is all very specific, which is why i believe this agenda is a particularly good one. it has other sections to on economic growth on government relations and lawmaking when united, russia, once again hold a constitutional majority in the state. duma, it has all been laid out in detail. the equally important is to make sure it's put in practice during the previous and the current campaign thing i kept telling my

fellow party members of our agenda is not just a bunch of slogans like it often happens in many countries. when you, when you forget about the agenda, you know, over the previous term, we held regular meetings, so called platform commissions. every 3 months i gathered my fellow party members and ask them about the progress on governance, lawmaking and social policy or demographics. false modesty aside. i can tell you that reservation bath, our 2016 agenda to a large extent, been implemented. and that's why russians voted for united russia despite dislike to diss and popularity. i will. so it's clear that it's a sign of sorts, but let's be realistic. out of $225.00 single seat constituency. m. p 's, 198 united russia members. and it's a remarkably good result. as for the party on the whole, the result is slightly worse, but it's not surprising to me, it's been a challenging for you years. unfortunately, with the pandemic and incomes falling,

as well as other issues sill, our party has never shirked responsibility. we supported many different decisions and not all of them. people are happy about what i believe that this is the main goal of the ruling party. it's not slogans and promises and hand shaking. it's about actually making important decisions for the benefit of our people. even if they are, sometimes i'm popular. i think we've managed to find the balance there. previously, the parties chairman used to be at the top of the national election lead letter and who has held that position you have as well. but this year, 5 other people had the less well known and get your in stand respected in their fields. but none of them have any experience in law making. denise protests, for example, as an entirely new name and russian politics falling in and why were they chosen? what will their future in the party be? well, i already addressed this question at the party convention when we came up with the

names of these 5 people, but it may sound obvious, but a political party is not about one person or 2 people who actually it's not just vladimir putin or dmitri madrid. if why anyone else for that matter, poverty is a big team to be reckoned with. a social organism if you're like. and one of the main goals a party need like su, is to be constantly on the look out for new names, new people, for politics, and you people for political projects and new heavyweights, people who are well known and respected, either in politics or in their professional area, i think we did what was right for the party. the 5 leaders we have chosen are well known, even popular individuals. they are very well known in the community. also those who come to cost that balance and care about the evolution of russia political system, i would like to see new faces by new faces. i don't necessarily mean entirely new you'd never seen before. well, there can be young and inexperienced, of course, it could be people who have never engaged and political battles. that's who we have

on the ticket. with the exception of sag a show you who is closely connected with the party. in fact, it was he who helped create the party 20 years ago. so he is a well known figure among the party members and supporters with more we asked for the future within the party. it's clear that most of them will stay in that professional field. we continue working in the fields, one person's my colleague and whose name server will work in the state duma from now on. however, none of them are going to sever that ties with the party. they will continue to make a difference in one way or another. some will stay with the parties governing bodies . others will supervise party project for the president earlier suggested that 5 leaders could subsequently take on a project closest to that professional field. i am positive that the future in the party is going to be bright. here if united russia a right wing worry last week party, do you think that

a ruling party should have one dominant ideology? knew those men? no, i don't think so. it's my deep conviction. there are some well known theories and political science that prove my point. so does the russian constitution, modern, russia doesn't have a national ideology. the way it did in the past was trying in the 1977 constitution . article 6. today parties are focused on just one thing, the supporting the wellbeing of the people, helping the country grow and all parties of the political spectrum, the right wing left ramos centrist, proclaim, this is their ultimate goal. in reality, we'll see that the key goal for any party are basically the same. we all want to have a good life. we all want our country to grow. we all want to drive away poverty and make our health care strong and efficient. we will want to have the best education for our kids. this is what all parties have on their agenda, and the only difference here is in the methods to achieve these goals. and

selection of methods is not necessarily dictated by the parties. place on the political spectrum division into rights and left wing political ideologies will still be there. but look how blurred these lines are between them and other countries in today we no longer have a wide ideological gap between the platforms of various political parties in russia . way it was back in the early 20th century, the part of the game. it boils down to the methods each party chooses to achieve the results in the country. me. and there are significant differences united, russia, as motto, it goes through, by the way, is the party of real action. we do our best to deliver on everything we have put on the paper. and we want to set an example for others. of course, some things come out well, but sometimes we fail. people would criticize harshly every time we do. but it's easy to monitor out performance anyway and see where we succeed and where we fail

a person in the same time. we understand that each party has it. that is important . every punch to grow, it's as much as possible. this is exactly why we chose, have no party ideology, because if a party says ok, we're a party for the proletariat. it will only get the votes of those people who identify themselves or feel related to the pro, carry it, and so on. for a party, for large businesses, it just doesn't work the same way anymore. used to in the early 20th century. fill that where does united russia belong? on the political spectrum, i would call it a conservative and central party chunk of the national guard. what do you think about the current state of competition and russian politics? critic say it is waning the number of parties with a chance to run has shrunk by over 50 percent from 74 in 2016 to 32 in 2021. out of 47 parties that are no longer active, 43 were de sold by the supreme court. not by themselves. do you see the problem

here? nathan, dancing lets you know, its neither a problem. no, a particularly good thing. just to find them, i would like to remind you about the amendments introduced during my presidency for back in 2012 or allowed for more pets units for political parties. prior to that, we only had a limited number of parties. and after that, the number grew in the work quite a lot of them. this however, didn't necessarily mean that they all came to stay on that some of them simply failed to win. persevere on the competition games trying to fail to raise the funds or failed to secure a vote to base some failed to comply the law, and the supreme court issued a routing case spam them. so i don't see this as much of a problem when you parties can emerge as well, but they need to meet the criteria stipulation by law with them. they need to have the support in the cities than in the regions they want to compete on the

nationwide level. they need to have extensive support throughout the country, which can you show up. let me also ask you about online voting and nothing that has there has been a mixed response to. it was nice as we know, the communist party didn't accept the results in moscow wants to find an online vote count was announced. what's your take is everything fine myself. well, online voting is a fresh trend. i am strongly convinced that sooner or later the entire world will be voting on line. it's inevitable. there's only one issue here, verifying the outcome. there is still some work out standing here. the government must provide the right conditions. people need to trust the outcome of the online procedure. it is beyond any doubt that online voting is the future. at the same time, those and i believe that in the short russian citizens should have both options. in the traditional voting procedure and online voting. do you think, mr. vindictive did a good job as the head of the observer is during the selection you watched online

voting and he took some lead online. mostly, well, everybody take some heat on line. so there is no surprise that list of any dictates of is no exception. i think it all worked out pretty well. i mentioned this before, but you need to verify the outcome of credit, but there's also another points. it's also about convenience. the last time the leaders of the political parties and factions meant mr. sure enough sky said that voting has to be a duty rather than rights. that should be a penalty failing to vote many countries or habits, by the way, in some it is punishable with a fine. in others, it is a criminal offense. i don't think we'll want to criminalize non voting. will they some countries do. but i think that use a convenience becomes ever so important in our world today. it was level to follow him out to become a couple more questions about the election. this time there was no live video feed from the polling stations available to everyone. party members and authorized

individuals had access, but not the general public. and another novelty was that devote itself lasted 3 days. no one can do that. how did all this affect the public perception of the election? i believe a 3 day vote is a must these days can no longer be done any other way. as long as we have to deal with the demick prolonged vote, a 3 day vote for example, is unavoidable. and there's nothing wrong with it. whether it'll stay this way later on when we, when the global fight against cove at 19, as i hope we will. i can't say for sure, but in any case it seems to be a practical and convenient option. we take some advanced democracies like the united states where voting takes months and everyone's okay with the under the circumstances. 3 days of both necessary and always easy for the broadcasts. it's in fact very expensive and haven't all the cameras working. 247 go up and you'll check here is not to satisfy someone's curiosity. and that's done for the sake of

verifying the outcome for the sake of integrity at each and every polling station. that's why we need the recordings, me all 3 days. the cameras were recording the vote from the very beginning to the very end. and down we can look it up. the questions that i need be take its course . recordings will be stored for 12 months. the the i choose

ah, the if he questions about the luncheon in the context of international relations rushes ministry of foreign affairs has summon john sullivan, the u. s. investor to moscow over launched election interference by american tech giant. we all remember how the 2016 us presidential election resulted in the american political establishment, launching the 3 year investigation into russian madly. do you think something similar could be initiated in russia now against u. s. companies, for example, and what would be the impact of such a prob, you lonely, i don't really know. i stick to the well known latin formula for quid pro quo cool, a favor for a favor, quote unquote. since they did a favor,

why wouldn't we reciprocate? i think we could look into loans to probes human being. this is the job for the law enforcement wasn't, is now a central election commissioner in the ministry of foreign affairs. if there is enough evidence to prove their interference, why not? according to the data we have during the 3 day central election commission servers were under contract, an attack, the ministry of digital developments, or port that's around half came from the united states. that's reason enough fights, right? i was the new woman open. the you mentioned the attack on the central election commission servers. i mean, we've also registered cases when google directly interfered in the russian election by placing banners and video ads and chrome and unused to have created by a legacy in the valid esteem. they contained adverse publicity aimed at united russia. the candidate is russia planning to introduce any restriction or hon. issue any way the american tech giants for fear in the election in this way. is it possible to put pressure on companies like google, besides issuing political?

steve mentioned slapping them with fine, google, it is possible and necessary because the way i see it for everyone sick and tired of big tech, including the united states, even biden's administration, which at some point seemed to have an advantage of a trump's team. you know, the digital space is not considering legislation that would limit these companies, but the big tech plays by its own corporate rules. they made the most amount. that's how they decide things. they let some of the hook, but give others the chop. they belong to the former us president, everywhere he had 851900 1000000 followers. by, by why we don't like him. we didn't like something he said. but these decisions were not based on us law, on an applicable ruling american because they were based on the internal corporate rulings. they have some serious power. now, when you mentioned that activities during our election, if it isn't, hopefully unacceptable until have basically interfered with russians politics. yes,

they complied without talk, telecom watchdog eventually and hope to these activities. but when exactly on the, on the day of the vote before that this whole machine was going full speed. promoting video is created by a person who is serving a prison sentence for criminal offense will say they were showing videos of criminal to advance their political agenda on foreign soil. this is outrageous and we have to react. of course, we could react in various ways. for example, we could apply the law that we already have in place, and it allows us to restrict block slow down the activities majors. social media platforms are wrong. we can also find them. so this is not just a slap on the wrist, must be a high cost finding them in russia altogether than under the new legislation. taking effect from january. the 1st 2020 to all digital platforms with over 500000 register uses have to open office in russia. this measure will help us to have

a say on the policies of these companies operating in this country. and they will have to abide by these regulations. and so i can relate it to myself. i have about 4500000 follow twitter. and when i checked, which recommendations on who to follow, of course, the 1st person who comes up is an invalid and he was serving a criminal center. this isn't this interference in the affairs of a foreign country. it's blatant interference. company, open and private i, as you mentioned, a possible then in western platforms. this is a major statement and there are many active rushing years of youtube. for example. do you think this decision might have some negative consequence or i didn't say that we should. bam, the platform, as i said, we should have options to have a say on their operations. even the us is working on these regulation. when these won't be just corporate rules, we see the same trend in europe. they realize that digital media can be used to influence foreign elections and preferences and they are concerned. we should also

have all the options to regulate the tech. it doesn't mean they should be banned. on the contrary, if they follow all the rules, that's great. i'm a social media use it myself, much convenient and fun, but i just play by the rules abide by the laws of the country the way you operate. and that is exactly why they need to have a registered office in the country is nothing special that you are a digital platform that has tens of millions uses in the country. would it be so crazy to have an office then you make money that after all the most, we talked about fine. of course, we could mention that kevin a center for what you make money by operating in a foreign states and ignore the law of that state. people will not tolerate that. so i am sure that this legislation will eventually be passed in every country. some western leaders have called the russian election, illegitimate, and politicians firms the neighboring countries refused to recognize the results in crimea at the same time. and we mentioned it's getting harder and harder to

question election results in the united states will know what happened to trump supporters to give them chicago so they didn't enjoy nice, right? that's showing you. some of them are in jail, and most of them have been thrown out of all those social media platforms. just before our interview, we got the news about the tubes of data policy. we will delete all content claiming falsification in the us presidential election and recent parliamentary vote in germany. the when you doesn't say anything about our know nothing about our election yet much. that sounds like them. i would be very original, but these are classic double standard policies. what was your question again? semester, on the mcguire movies and we see that elections in western countries can be challenged at all. while a vote in russia is questioned even before it starts. so what's your response?

no, that's just ignores the as the saying goes. dogs bark is often worse than it is bytes . we couldn't care less about these allegations live, but we are a large independent conduit that has sovereignty over its entire territory. and we have our own laws and they can say whatever they want, it won't matter to us from food and you tell them when russia suggested cutting, a number with me observer is due to co. we related restrictions. he decided not to send any tax for his to the russian parliamentary election. don't you think this looks like an attempt to undermine the credibility of the russian election from the start? and actually, if you go, that is exactly what it is. this is obviously an attempt to discredit the russian election beforehand with an all day she is shameless. brazen attempts are slow and they said they would send 500 experts from the office for democratic institutions and human rights because of cove. it. we said, hey guys, that's too many people. you sent 30 observers to the united things. you sent 50 on

average, and why do you want to bring 500 this time? let's cut this number to a more standard size. and then you are welcome to come observe that i think they said no, little caesar or ne hill all or nothing. i the caesar, oh no one else. you know one, it is then literally obviously there was some hidden agenda from the very beginning . much they decided by default at the election, legitimate loan that some people say, perhaps it would have been worth interest to do as the asked and to allow, as many observers as they wanted to avoid such allegations, we're just going to, well, let's just start with we couldn't care less about all that noise, to be honest with you. secondly, the 2008 election when i ran for president also generated a lot of noise. there were also claims made about a lack of observers that it change anything, but you know, it didn't switch and you know,

it's no good when international organizations i exploited by a group of certain countries to influence the others. what is the mission of the c originally? you don't remember it, but back in the 970. it started as a conference on security and cooperation in europe and not the organization the way it's called today. and its purpose was to provide a platform for all members to be able to work out mutually acceptable decisions on all kinds of issues. when an international organization is used to put pressure on us whenever our policy differs, in fact, runs counter to the very essence of such an organization. that's the problem. in some cases, only mutual agreement is the only way forward. let's say, why does the you and charter include a veto power put the put many criticized saying it needs to be dropped. what it has a genuine value for. international politics is applied in situations when one un member or a group of members do not support the motion. if someone disagrees,

they weren't comply. so what's the use of such motions? even if they are possible, they will only generate more attention, more becker's more discord. i believe the value of such organizations including observe emissions, is defined by the principle of mutual agreement. i said in my final question, before the election, there was a lot of speculation about your future and you'll be 2nd to be the next speaker of state duma. express the speaker, it was norma. wow, that's some way to put it. i'll be succumbed. it was a why didn't side not to ron that of course, not us with what i see live a well since you are what at least i'd say a personal question. but i'll tell you if you know that the state duma, or is the most important legislative agency we have in our country, it passes laws working. there is extremely interesting and rewarding when i was young and worked as a lawyer in petersburg in the late 19 eighties and early ninety's. that's when we

already have the state duma established. i was thinking about my future employments . with enough experience i source, i could make it to the state duma and work on your laws show. it's actually very interesting, but it all worked out in a different way. for me professionally it's there happened that i became a state and then i was appointed head of government post. i held longer than anyone else in recent years at least. and this has brought a drastic change to my career. of course, you see there are not many job options for an ex president way form ahead of states . in some countries, ex presidents are not allowed to hold public off as a tool. they give lectures or moderate forums, etc. in russia, we don't have this rule. however, there is a clear understanding of what jobs are acceptable for an ex presidents. at present, i am deputy chairman of russia security council. so when the russian president, is it the chairman, i deal with exciting and important issues of russia's national security and defense abilities and was appointed largely due to the experience that had accumulated

interruption in the capacity of president and prime minister. asked for my experience in the state, do them and i have to say was all very delicate. you have to coordinate. a lot of things in your juggle interests and political will always trying to find a compromise between various factions. it's a very delicate, an artful, painstaking job that you have to do day in and day out of your previous experience . and your track record has nothing to do with it. was that you do it just because it just happened this way. you were elected to the state duma in the past and i can tell you how i feel about this now. i believe it's not how x president, fates need to be decided. this is not right for obvious reasons. phil, i want to say once again, left the job of an m p is very interesting. in many of my colleagues, think of their experience in the duma as the combination of professional career law career. not everyone has a lawyer, but it's still about lawmaking. and it's

a really exciting job play music. thank you very much for sitting down with us. i said, thank you for having liberal and all the best to you and all your viewers will come all the so much happening in paris. they are taking it all in geo politics. gone for zurich, australia, france, the u. k. ball battling it out. what appears to be a new york. so what we've got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy plantation let it be an arms race is often very dramatic. development only personally, i'm going to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very critical time time to sit down and talk to

me. ah ah, the thing you choose red line platform permanently bound to volunteer german language channel for allegedly violating its community guidelines. these editor in chief schools at a full fledged declaration of media war by germany and russia marine is sent to a military prison after busting his country's leadership for the scan. this done pull at the bar, lou would have been a series of increasingly popular online video that says the international criminal court says it will no longer pursue allegations of us walker. i'm going to get this on this probably the furious rights group, the keys, the i c c been count by washington sanction.