margarita simovna shared her emotions after valdai, and i would like to share some conceptual conclusions from what happened there, it was not an ordinary valdai, absolutely, it was a turning point, i’ll try to formulate why? firstly, for the first time, as far as i remember, the conversation shifted from an analysis of what is happening in this world to an analysis of how we will further rebuild this world, but this is absolutely fundamental, and especially since the president voiced six points how we see our role and how we see our country, civilization, in the future world, how we will work with partners, who our partners are, this is probably

the first time that real offensiveness has appeared in our political discourse, that is, we are no longer sitting and waiting , we are working on this world, i understand that besides us there are no more players who are interested in preserving it, on the one hand, as he said, i’m sorry, i’m going too far a little, but nevertheless, either a scoundrel or an idiot... and count on them to accept and walk along the washington corridors, as they were just told to look for in the exchangeable ones, well, most likely we won’t find it for a long time, so we need to take it into our own hands and start building this world somehow with our partners, and what i state, and there for the first time, well, i don’t know

, probably most of all, of course, i don’t remember so many people who would represent the rest of the world as experts, they were, of course, from the west, but they were essentially from everywhere, and in large numbers, the level of conversation was very confidential, very serious and i i state, i simply have no other words, i am convinced that... at the moment our strategic thought, our quality of strategic thought is the best in the world. this has not happened before, but now i am stating that we are changing their minds. we think better, we think more conceptually, we think more accurately. and that is of course.

opens up enormous opportunities for us, because our allies see this, they come to us for ideas, i participated in these conversations, they say: yes, you understand the world deeper than they do, we are ready to work with you, because that we support what you propose, he should live, and another thought that appeared after all these conversations is that uncertainty about where russia is and where russia is going and what is happening in russia, and uncertainty is sharply increasing about what is happening in the rest of the world, and how it will live, especially in the western world. and this

is very interesting, because again, from my point of view, and i’m not the only one who thinks so, i heard these conversations, russia found itself in its usual situation for herself, she understands what she is fighting for, she has been in this situation before , she knows how to do what needs to be done in this situation, she is calm inside, she has found herself, and at this time our opponents begin to rush around, so we see this in every reaction they have, we are comfortable, it is hard for us, but we understand where we are, we understand what we are fighting for, we understand what to do next, and this struggle cleanses us very much, because we are no longer concerned with trifles , we are talking about the main thing, the president is talking about the main thing, but he is not the only one, and he is moving from

some minor things, the main thing, and this is in many ways. the essence of our civilization, when we always, even from the point of view of the electoral agenda, listen, this is by the way , konstantin bogomololov noted, he said, i said, russia is a civilization of restlessness, we lived, yes, that’s it, now we’re quoting this too. yes, well, yes, now, one comment regarding strategic depth, now we have seen from the example of karabakh, from the example of israel now, what

the lack of strategic depth means, and what a huge margin of safety ours gives us. in comparison with the same ukraine with many other countries, and those countries that do not have strategic depth , in such a very difficult, very conflict-ridden world, both of them, i mean, both armenia and israel, did not arrive on time thought about how to build normal relationships with neighbors. and in the absence of strategic depth, does this become a major issue of national security and survival? well , armenia is now confident that instead of russia they can call france and everything will work out. i would like to advise them to ask mali how much

it turns out to ask niger how it works when they call france, and the main thing is interesting, why france, how they think they will fight with azerbaijan and turkey, i can directly see how france is a nato country, which actually has. the army, well, to put it bluntly, is absent, will go and fight against turkey, vladimir, sorry, france will not fight against turkey about cherbaijan, the french total is known to work in azerbaijan, so when macron says no, sanctions cannot be imposed, he understands, because these big ones are putting pressure on him, it’s necessary, it’s just this is the level of mentality of the current armenian leadership, this is a level, well, how can i put it to you, well, it disgraces petty people, you know, it has no understanding of the consciousness of what is happening around. let this be his problem, our problem, our problem now is that historically we have to seize the initiative, and we are not ready for this. we , unlike the anglo-saxons, have neither mechanisms

for promoting our agenda, nor people who are currently ready to do this; they exist, but there are very few of them. no systems, no funding, now the question arises, well, if we propose these six points, how will we rebuild our entire mechanism of influence , our entire mechanism, by the way, and the economy, we must project not just words, we must project projects, we must project alliances, and this means people. this means systems, this means finances, this is where we need to be very concerned, because lately, i note that even in our neighboring countries, due to the lack of all these instruments, we are losing influence, it’s

interesting, where to go now, they are every time they talk about our operation... but this is how the son of president trump wrote, he says, how did it happen that in your 24 hours i saw how this is possible, that in a few hours i saw more videos about the war in israel than in almost 2 years from ukraine, this is not enough, but what cruelty , honestly, what julian asansh is in prison for, when he showed real cruelty, this is... british and american troops, this is cruelty, this is a nightmare, although this is real cruelty, let him watch the ukrainian segment where they show that they they are doing to our prisoners of war, this is cruelty, they are provoked, well, stop being stupid, today they are provoked, you provoked us for a long time

, it is not by chance, in valdai a very correct idea was voiced, there for the first time the counter was outlined, they say exactly what the task is, all sorts of cryptoban bastards like to say, no, you explain, it’s time to condemn these devils who entered our country with ukrainian passports and fully support the extremists, gather this bastard and get out of the country, wherever they want, let them go there. a the president clearly said, our task is very simple, the question is nowhere, the question is not in the territory, the question of security, security, if for this purpose it is necessary , i will add, to go beyond the borders of ukraine, then so, but the task is set exactly like this, security, putin i didn’t say that no, we will reach this geographical point, we will reach this water line, no, security, this , by the way, is conceptually very, very important. generalovich. i am in detail about this current

escalation in palestine now and give out, i probably won’t, because there are two generals present, and semyon arkadevich, who generally knows the names of all the inhabitants of the middle east, so, if possible, i will outline more of the global contours associated with this. probably, if the same exacerbation would have happened several years ago, 5, 6, 10 years ago. well, within the framework of your program, in one section, one or two experts on the middle east would pay attention to this, and then move on to discussing other issues, but such a sharp reaction from the international community, our understanding that this is not just an escalation caused by the fact that this conflict does not occur alone, but in fact, well, on a historical scale, almost every second with conflicts in ukraine, the south caucasus, africa, those where they are currently taking place there may be such conflicts. you asked a question at the beginning, you said, what

led to this, how did it happen that all this happened. i think that we are now dealing with an absolute decline in the immunity of the current world order and international security, and as a person, when immunity drops to a dangerously low level, any disease can become fatal, any disease causes the need for a very acute struggle of the body , which it turns out to be unable to provide, and the current system, the current world order, is more likely to provide opportunities, at least in any way, to regulate those conflicts that exist on the world map are apparently not capable of, we see that wherever there was potential for conflicts to flare up, they are either already approaching to enter the hot phase, or are already there entered, and there are no..." groups of negotiators who could take the initiative and separate the conflicting parties, earn

the trust of both parties and somehow ensure at least the negotiation process, there are no institutions that could claim a neutral status in order to so that a negotiation process is organized on the platform of these institutions, to be honest, there are not even mechanisms to ensure the implementation of the functions of already existing institutions, even they are no longer capable of anything on earth when it comes to not about adopting resolutions, recommendations, statements, shedding tears, publishing reports and other things, quite specific actions to resolve conflicts, such an opportunity no longer exists, as for how the future of this world is outlined, that is, we are, apparently, all agree that this order that was in effect until recently... it, uh , at least from the point of view of its functionality, ceases its effective activity, and

the question is what could happen in the future, you you see, you were absolutely right in what you said, in my opinion, vladimirovich, as for the principles, it is important to outline the principles, these are doctrinal things, they contain such an ideological background, they actually carry out programming for the future, determine our position, it is very important , that we have taken the term multipolarity as the main term that we use, but this does not say anything about how it will all work, because multipolarity is a description of the environment, the environment can be unipolar when institutions, the mechanisms are the same as in a bipolar system, but only one power dominates on a global scale, the environment is such that it single-handedly imposes any decisions on everyone, there can be many environments. as we describe it, but this does not say anything about what the law will be like that will regulate

the relationship between these policies, it does not say anything about what the institutions will be like that will organize the interaction between, at least, at least here these policies, between them, moreover, it doesn’t even say anything about who in general, the actors of this multipolarity, who are the very poles that will participate in this, so these are questions. which depends not only at this stage, not so much on us, because no matter how you always laugh at the fact that france is there, and therefore the ranks. other, well, in some cases, friendly states there were identified as victorious powers following the second world war, therefore they have a place on the un security website, nevertheless, this is a completely understandable principle, you participated, you were in during the collision, a balance of power has developed that allows you today to claim a leading role in the world , so you are sitting at this table, and

are not on the table itself and are not an object, but at least you are claiming to be a subject in this context . that's why i think that in the near future, wherever these conflicts arise, you see, today we are discussing whether iran is behind this or not, there may be different points of view, i trust the expert opinion of colleagues who know this so well region, but it is already obvious that iran is becoming a very important player in the middle east, and these are the realities that will certainly be taken into account in the future of the world. without iran, at least the middle east region, i think, even a little wider, without its influence it will be difficult to imagine, this means that it will have to be integrated into various kinds of mechanisms, institutions that should be the centers for making these decisions. in conclusion , i want to touch on the issue, because it arose so impromptu, when you spoke about

the post-soviet space, i am with you i completely agree that you can always... say that there is not enough money , there are no resources, and in general it is difficult, but i can tell you for sure that no matter how much money is given, if goal setting is not defined, there will always be little money, because that even the largest sums, billions, will still not produce results if it is spent on the wrong things, i will give you an example of the narrative with which we enter any post-soviet country, say, if it is moldova, russian-moldovan... brotherhood, our grandfathers fought together, we are fraternal peoples, we are connected by history, how we are with what through the narrative we go to, say, georgia, the russian-georgian brotherhood, the grandfathers fought together for 300 years, the treaty of st. george , they defended, we love, we value, we respect, thank you, there in armenia, the russian-armenian brotherhood, that’s how many nobles there were, with whom

americans come to moldova with narratives, have you ever heard the american embassy or foundations... talk about the fact that the american and moldovan peoples have been linked by unbreakable bonds of brotherhood, friendship and love over the past century. americans and georgians represent a single culture, and there, therefore, never these cramped ones, you will never hear this in your life, they come with very clear narratives, freedom, welfare, business, democracy, i’m not saying that all this exists, i’m saying that this attracts people, this is quite understandable, they come and people say, here we are bringing you a way of life, people say it’s great. we are asked what you bring to us, we say, have you forgotten how our grandfathers were friends, i consider it extremely important and an excellent cultural basis for the cooperation of peoples to history, which connects people throughout centuries, but i consider this absolutely insufficient if you do not offer an image of the future and do not convey to each individual

resident of these countries what advantages the integration of the union with russia gives them, how specifically it changes... their lives are for the better if they connect their future with russia, this is the first, second, after at least our goal setting is formulated here, at least our main ideologies are developed and will be implemented, then, of course, the mechanisms need to be changed, of course, but in the current conditions when 20 public opinion leaders through their social networks can do more than the largest television channel in some... in a soviet country, not to use this, i think, is wrong, and not to work on the network principle, not to create in these countries actually have effective functioning institutions of a non-governmental order, which, but this is all in particular, we are leaving there for the post-soviet countries, i repeat this every time, even when you do all this,

we do not have an organization in the country where you, let's say, vladimirovich, tomorrow they could send... a request and say: please tell me how much international assistance russia provided to kyrgyzstan over the past year, no one can tell you, because the ministry of agriculture, through its own line, provided one assistance, it could be, let’s say there are tractors there, someone through their line gave vaccines, someone through their line of the ministry of emergency situations sent fires there, someone collectively would at least appreciate that over the course of a year we spent several billion dollars on good relations with this country, let’s say, that’s how much it is to the penny you can’t... can’t say anything, because we don’t have such a mechanism, and my colleagues from various western centers and institutions quite rightly argue that in matters of providing international assistance there is always much more the donor wins, not the recipient, and practice shows this, we do this out of the kindness of our hearts very sincerely, but to little extent we use

it to promote our own interests, we voiced an interesting idea, but indeed, formally the world has passed from multipolarity to unipolarity, is now moving into a slightly different polarity, without legal changes. architecture, it was as it was, remains as it was, all the structures remain, yes, the warsaw pact disappeared there, but by and large, this is like a slightly different side, that is, well, no one described what unipolarity or multipolarity is, that is, what mechanisms implementation, this does not exist at all, this is also the topic of such a separate study, andrey, well, they actually wrote a lot about this, another thing is that to what extent, to what extent, so to speak, understanding of one the one who wrote coincides with the second one who wrote, and if the general concept, have you read each other, and have you read each other’s writing, well , i would like to draw

attention here, of course, to the fact that it’s in vain that you are so jake, in vain, in vain, of course, he not a stupid person, the simple fact is that when the whole concept, the general strategic concept , was laid down after the end of the cold war, then it begins to fall apart, after all, it was 1992, when there were elections, there was one simple concept: win-win, then we are in any conflict that occurs in the world, the united states can enter into an unlimited number of conflicts and they will win everywhere, well, of course, of course, these are the people who thought so, they lost this election, kids economist stupid, the famous phrase, but the point is in economics, a fool is clinton in relation to bush, but then the concept developed that we were winning two conflicts, holding back the third, and keeping everything else under control. and so they, so they went, yes, in principle, of course, they tried to exclude the middle east from the equation, bush already tried to exclude it from the equation, for him

the main thing was china, no, it happened on september 11, 2001, then iraq and the like, obama, when he came to power, how he thought focusing on the pacific ocean, that is , the whole rebalancing is going on in the pacific ocean, with russia, that with russia there is a reset , start-3, let's be calm about this. and what about the cairo speech, he said everything, what he thinks about the arabs, that we are ready to cooperate, that’s all, we are not against islam, to focus on china, then this famous arab awakening happened, the arab spring, the ukrainian crisis, everything was thrown back there, but here they were counting, until recently the biden administration , the same jake salevan, believed that we were entering, we were already in a conflict with russia, we were heading towards an aggravation in common with china, and we were holding the middle east, not did you pay attention now that the middle east is happening, that’s it, the concept is closed, but with two we are ready, but the third, the third

is not included in the scheme, something needs to be done here , it’s already there, yesterday there were statements about that we want to come to an agreement with the chinese now, there is a congressional delegation there, but if sedzienpen comes to san francisco , biden is ready to meet with him, that at least agree that the conflict is brewing, and january is not so far away, but if the democratic progressive party wins there, we will be ready, and the americans will be ready to say , the chinese, we won’t declare independence, you just don’t impose a blockade, then they will deal with these two conflicts, that is, the conflict with us in ukraine, and the conflict in the middle east, now, will this work out, now this is not working out, this means... that a power that had a unipolar order, an american-centric order, if at the beginning, after the end of the cold war, at the beginning of this period,

the united states was ready to solve any problem , remember how they concluded the dreytin agreements, they came to the europeans, they suffered for 2 years, the americans intervened, in a couple of months they signed what they signed, well, at least they stopped the clash, intervened calmly, bombed, flew, but now it’s not like that. .. it will work out, that’s all i can do there is not enough strength for this, there is already not enough strength for two conflicts, in principle we need to move on to the conflict to the idea expressed by the american military, hold winhold, that is, we hold everything and participate in one major conflict, then we are on our own let’s pull it, now they won’t be able to do this, so the saliva here only reflects the line of the current administration, which seems to have bought into the fact that its own, so to speak, ideas that the world is controlled, stalin is not to blame for embodying the line of that very administration which he painted, well, in principle, yes, that he is not to blame for the fact that his own idea turned out to be wrong, yes, what they have,

what they have developed, that’s... the picture is often like this, because the point is the fact that when they remembered the un, it was also created under a different picture of the world, that there would be a world government in the person of the security council, four policemen, everything else would be subordinate to them, immediately this picture shattered, this is literally how the un was created , and even before the un, already before september of forty-five, it was already flying apart, and the flexibility of this administration does not allow for a quick, quick switch to some. to say that biden is not flexible and not fast, oh, i think that biden is a poor man, many ladders are ready to argue with you, an unhappy, unhappy person, here's another, moreover, besides, if we say so, here's the administration , now there is one main problem, this is where trump will be, if he comes for 30, 60 or 90 days, and you saw, by the way, an amazing speech about israel, i saw it, yesterday i just had a nightingale bluff to work and we are laying out

program, and the guys say, biden is speaking, i say, guests, don’t let him go, he still won’t last more than 3 minutes , they won’t have time to write a speech for him, it’s invalid , he’s late, in 3 minutes he said a bunch of platitudes left, why did he get out, why came out, why, they pulled, there are assistants to say that there needs to be a picture, it doesn’t matter what he said, the sound could be turned off there, it would be better, of course, i would of course prefer to listen to kamala, well , what to do, for now for now there is biden, transfer this one conflict to the european union, well, here you go, they tried to decide, mishe there , michel should have been in charge of karabakh, for 2 years he has been positioning himself as the person who is charles michel, i mean the chairman of the european, european, forever, well, here you go

throw it on the europeans, yes, they tried to build a european political space, the third summit has now passed , for a long time now everyone has been talking about what it’s about, because everyone wanted to find out this at the press conference, but there was no press conference, you gave the final result accordingly the declaration, also there, it seems, on the key issue, too, there’s practically nothing there either, they were supposed to discuss the issue, but what were they even going to do? well, this is... macron’s idea that he is a unification of europe, which , strictly speaking, opposes russia, this is from the first summit, and what, or like everything macron does, nothing, petty and soft? well, i think so, because the first summit, it was still in prague, which took place in october last year, a year ago, it was basically there, at least it was clearly expressed there that so we want to discuss, why

were we meeting now? now the task should have been to bring together negotiations there, respectively , azerbaijan and armenia should have arrived, everything turns out, kosovo refused to talk, met with tikhonovskaya, this was generally not enough for govaido.