Since the end of the Second World War, we are probably facing the most dangerous, unpredictable, and at the same time most important decade - among other things, Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke to the guests of the Valdai Club on October 27.
Ladies and gentlemen, my friends!
I had a chance to get an idea of what they were talking about here in the last few days. It was an interesting and meaningful discussion. I hope they didn't regret coming to Russia and talking to each other.
Nice to see you all.
We used the Valdaj Club platform to discuss the big and serious changes that have already taken place and are taking place in the world. The degradation of global institutions, the erosion of the principles of collective security and the risks posed by the replacement of international law with "rules". I was tempted to say "we know who came up with these rules", but maybe that wouldn't be an accurate statement. We have no idea who came up with these rules, what these rules are based on, and what these rules contain.
“We seem to be witnessing an attempt to enforce a single rule whereby those in power—we talked about power, and now I'm talking about global power—can live without any rules and get away with anything. These are the rules on which, as they say, they constantly rely, that is, they constantly talk about them."
The Valdaj debates are important because different assessments and predictions are made here. Life always shows how accurate they were, because life is the strictest and most objective teacher. So life shows how accurate the predictions of previous years were.
Unfortunately, the events continue to follow a negative scenario, which we have discussed several times during our previous meetings. In addition, they turned into a significant, system-wide crisis, which affects the economic and humanitarian sphere in addition to the military-political sphere.
"The so-called West - which is a theoretical construct, since it is not unified and is obviously an extremely complex conglomerate - has taken a number of steps in recent years and especially in recent months aimed at escalating the situation."
As a matter of fact, they have always sought to aggravate the situation, which is also nothing new. These include war-mongering in Ukraine, provocations around Taiwan, and destabilization of global food and energy markets. The latter was certainly not done on purpose, that's for sure. The destabilization of the energy market is a consequence of the many systemic mistakes made by Western authorities, which I mentioned above. As we can see now, the situation was further aggravated by the destruction of the pan-European gas pipelines. It is a completely different world, but we are still witnessing these sad developments.
"The stake is exactly global power in the game of the so-called West. But this game is dangerous, bloody and dirty.”
It denies the sovereignty, identity and uniqueness of countries and peoples, and tramples on the interests of other states. Anyway, even if they don't use the word denial, they actually do. Apart from the creators of the rules I mentioned, no one has the right to retain their identity: everyone else must comply with these rules.
In this regard, let me remind you of Russia's proposals to our Western partners, which are aimed at building trust and the collective security system. These were discarded again in December 2021.
However, in the modern world, waiting can hardly work. As the saying goes, whoever sows wind reaps storm. The crisis has truly reached global proportions and affects everyone. We can have no illusions about this.
"Humanity has come to a crossroads: either it keeps piling up the problems and eventually collapses under their weight, or together we find solutions - even imperfect ones, once they work - that can make our world more stable and safer."
You know, I've always believed in the power of common sense. That is why I am convinced that sooner or later the new centers of the multipolar international order and the West must start a dialogue on an equal footing about the common future of all of us, and of course the sooner the better. In this regard, I will highlight some of the most important aspects for all of us.
Current developments have relegated environmental issues to the background. Strange as it may seem, this is the first thing I want to talk about today. Climate change is no longer the most important topic on the agenda. However, this challenge has not disappeared, it is still with us and is becoming more and more serious.
The decrease in biological diversity is one of the most dangerous consequences of the disruption of the environmental balance. This brings me to the most important point, which is why we are all gathered here. Is it not equally important to maintain cultural, social, political and civilizational diversity?
"At the same time, the modern West is essentially about smoothing and erasing all differences. What is behind this? Above all, the declining creative potential of the West and the desire to restrain and prevent the free development of other civilizations.”
Of course, there is also an overtly mercantilist interest. By imposing their values, consumption habits and standards on others, our opponents - I will be careful with the words - try to expand the market for their products. The goal in this course is ultimately very primitive. It is noteworthy that it promotes the universal value of the culture and worldview of the West. Even if they do not say it openly, although in fact they often say it, they behave as if it is so, as if it is the basis of life, and the policy they pursue is designed to show that these values are unconditionally accepted by all other members of the international community. you have to accept.
I would like to quote from Alexander Solzhenitsyn's famous Harvard graduation speech in 1978. He said it was the "continuing blindness of superiority" characteristic of the West - and it continues to this day - that "perpetuates the belief that vast regions of our planet everywhere must develop and mature to the level of the Western systems of today". He said this in 1978. Nothing changed.
"In the nearly 50 years since then, the blindness that Solzhenitsyn spoke of, which is openly racist and neo-colonialist, has taken on particularly distorted forms, especially after the emergence of the so-called unipolar world."
What am I referring to? Belief in infallibility is very dangerous; but one step from the desire of the infallible to destroy those whom they dislike, or, as they say, to obliterate them. Just think about the meaning of this word!
Even at the height of the Cold War, at the height of the clash of the two systems, ideologies and military competition, no one thought of denying the mere existence of the culture, art and science of other peoples, their adversaries. No one thought of it. Yes, certain restrictions have been imposed on relations in the fields of education, science, culture and, unfortunately, sports. But nevertheless, both Soviet and American leaders understood that the humanitarian field must be handled tactfully, study and respect rivals, and sometimes even borrow from them, so that at least for the future the basis of good and fruitful relations remains.
And what happens now? Once the Nazis went so far as to burn books, now the Western "guardians of liberalism and progress" have gone so far as to ban Dostoyevsky and Tchaikovsky. The "culture of erasure", and in reality - as we have said many times - the true erasure of culture is the extermination of everything that is alive and creative, and it stifles free thought in all areas, be it economy, politics or culture.
"Today, the liberal ideology itself has changed beyond recognition. If in the beginning, classical liberalism meant that every person can do and say what they want, in the 20th century century, liberals began to say that the so-called open society had enemies, and that the freedom of these enemies could and should be limited or even abolished. It has reached the point of absurdity where any alternative opinion is declared subversive and dangerous to democracy.”
Everything that comes from Russia is branded as "Kremlin's intrigue". But look at yourselves! Are we really that omnipotent? Against our opponents, any - any! - criticism is considered "an intrigue of the Kremlin", "the hand of the Kremlin". This is madness. Where did they sink? At least use your mind, say something more interesting, formulate your position conceptually! You can't blame everything on the Kremlin's scheming.
Fyodor Dostoyevsky prophetically predicted all this as early as the 19th century. century. One of the characters in his novel Devils, the nihilist Sigalev, described the bright future he envisioned as follows: "Starting from boundless freedom, I arrive at boundless tyranny." Our Western opponents have also arrived here. He is echoed by another character in the novel, Pyotr Verhovensky, who speaks of the need for universal treason, denunciation, and espionage, and claims that society does not need talents or major abilities: "Cicero's tongue is cut out, Copernicus's eyes gouged out, Shakespeare and will be stoned". This is what our Western opponents are getting at. What is this if not the Western culture of abolition?
These were great thinkers and honestly, I am grateful to my helpers for finding these quotes.
"What can you say to that? History will certainly put everything in its place and will know who to erase, and it will certainly not be the greatest works of the generally recognized geniuses of world culture, but those who for some reason decided that they have the right to use world culture as they see fit. Their self-esteem is truly limitless. In a few years, no one will even remember their names. But Dostoyevsky will live, as will Tchaikovsky, Pushkin, no matter how much they would have liked otherwise."
Standardization, financial and technological monopoly, the erasure of all differences are behind the Western model of globalization, which is neocolonial in nature. Their goal was clear: to establish the unconditional dominance of the West in the global economy and politics. To this end, the West has put the planet's entire natural and financial resources, as well as all its intellectual, human and economic capabilities, at its service, while claiming that this is a natural consequence of the so-called new global interdependence.
Here I would like to recall another Russian philosopher, Alexander Zinoviev, whose centenary we celebrate on October 29. More than twenty years ago, he said that Western civilization needed the entire planet as a habitat and all of humanity's resources to survive at the level it had reached. That's what they want, that's right.
Moreover, the West initially gave itself a huge advantage in this system because it developed the principles and mechanisms - the same rules that are constantly talked about today and remain an incomprehensible black hole because no one really knows what they are. But as soon as non-Western countries, above all the large countries of Asia, began to benefit somewhat from globalization, the West immediately changed or abolished most of these rules. And the so-called sacred principles of free trade, economic openness, equal competition, and even property rights were suddenly completely forgotten. They change the rules on the fly, on the spot, wherever they see an opportunity.
Here is another example of interchange of concepts and meanings. Western ideologues and politicians have told the world for many years that there is no alternative to democracy. Admittedly, they were thinking of the Western-type, so-called liberal democracy model. They arrogantly rejected all other versions and forms of government by the people and, I emphasize, they did so with contempt and disdain.
"This style has developed since colonial times, as if everyone else is second-rate, while they are exceptional. It has been going on for centuries and continues to this day.”
Currently, the vast majority of the international community demands democracy in international affairs and rejects all forms of autocratic dictation by individual countries or groups of countries. What is this if not the direct application of democratic principles in international relations?
What position did the "civilized" West take? If you are a democrat, you should welcome the natural desire for freedom expressed by billions of people, but you don't. The West calls this the undermining of the liberal rules-based order. It resorts to economic and trade wars, sanctions, boycotts and color revolutions, and prepares and executes coups of all kinds.
"One of them had tragic consequences in Ukraine in 2014. They supported it and even told how much money they spent on this coup. They have the image to act as they please and have no inhibitions in anything they do. Iranian General Soleimani was killed. We can think whatever we want about Soleimani, but he was still a foreign public official."
He was killed in a third country and claimed responsibility. What does that mean, for God's sake? What kind of world do we live in?
As usual, Washington continues to call the current international order American-style liberal, but in fact this infamous "order" is increasing chaos day by day and, I might add, is becoming more and more intolerant even of Western countries and their attempts to act independently. . They nip everything in the bud and don't even shy away from imposing sanctions on allies who bow their heads obediently.
"For example, the July proposal of the Hungarian representatives to codify the commitment to European Christian values and culture in the European Union treaty was not even received as an insult, but as a hostile act of sabotage. What is this? What it means? Indeed, some may like it, others may not.”
Over a thousand years, a unique culture has emerged in Russia from the interaction between world religions. There is no need to erase anything, be it Christian values, Islamic values or Jewish values. We also have other world religions. You just have to respect each other. In many of our regions - I know this firsthand - people celebrate Christian, Islamic, Buddhist and Jewish holidays together, and they do so with joy, as they congratulate each other and make each other happy.
But not here. Why not? At least I could talk. Amazing.
"We can claim without exaggeration that this is not a systemic but a doctrinal crisis of the neoliberal American model of the international order. They have no ideas for progress and positive development. They simply have nothing to offer the world except to perpetuate their rule.”
I am convinced that real democracy in a multipolar world is primarily about whether any nation, I emphasize, any society or civilization can follow its own path and organize its own socio-political system. If the US or EU countries enjoy this right, then countries in Asia, Islamic states, Gulf monarchies, and countries in other continents certainly have this right as well. Of course, our country, Russia, also has this right, and no one will ever tell our people what kind of society we should build and what principles it should be based on.
The political, economic and ideological monopoly of the West is directly threatened by the fact that the world is able to come up with alternative social models that are more efficient; I emphasize, today they are more efficient, brighter and more attractive than the currently existing models. These models will definitely be created. This is inevitable. By the way, American political scientists and analysts also write about this. To be fair, their government doesn't listen to what they say, although you can't help but see these concepts in political science journals and mentioned in debates.
"Development must rely on dialogue between civilizations and spiritual and moral values. Indeed, the perception of humans and their nature differs from civilization to civilization, but this difference is often superficial, and all recognize the ultimate dignity and spiritual essence of humans. It is critically important to have a common foundation on which we can and must build our future.”
There is something I want to emphasize here. Traditional values are certainly not rigid postulates that everyone must follow. The difference compared to the so-called neoliberal values is that they are unique in each case, because they originate from the traditions, culture and historical background of a given society. Therefore, traditional values cannot be imposed on anyone. It is simply necessary to respect them and treat with care what each nation has chosen for itself over the centuries.
This is how we interpret traditional values, and the majority of humanity shares and accepts this approach. This is understandable, since the traditional societies of the East, Latin America, Africa and Eurasia form the basis of world civilization.
Respecting the customs and habits of peoples and civilizations is in the interest of all of us. In fact, this is also the interest of the "West", which is rapidly becoming a minority on the international scene as it loses its dominance. Of course, the right of the Western minority to its own cultural identity - I would like to emphasize this - must be ensured and respected, but what is important, on the same basis as the rights of all other nations.
“If the Western elite think they can get people and societies to accept what I think are strange and fashionable ideas like dozens of genders or gay parades, so be it. Let them do what they want. But they certainly don't have the right to call others to follow them."
We see the complex demographic, political and social processes taking place in Western countries. That's their job, of course. Russia does not and does not intend to interfere in such matters. Unlike the West, we mind our own business. But we hope that pragmatism will prevail, and that Russia's dialogue with the real, traditional West, as well as with other equal centers of development, will be a significant contribution to the construction of a multipolar world order.
I would add that multipolarity is real and in fact the only chance for Europe to restore its political and economic identity. To tell the truth - and this idea is clearly expressed in Europe today - Europe's legal capacity is very limited. I tried to put it delicately so as not to offend anyone.
“The world is diverse by nature, and Western attempts to squeeze everyone into one scheme are clearly doomed to failure. Nothing will come out of them.”
The presumptuous pursuit of global supremacy and, essentially, dictation and preservation of leadership by dictation actually diminishes the international authority of Western world leaders, including the United States, and increases distrust in their ability to negotiate in general. Today they say something different than tomorrow; they sign documents and then deny them, they do what they want. There is no stability in anything. How the documents are signed, what was discussed, what we can hope for - all this is completely unclear.
Previously, only a few countries dared to argue with America, and it seemed almost sensational, while now it has become routine for all kinds of states to reject Washington's unfounded demands, despite its constant attempts to put pressure on everyone. This is a failed policy that will lead nowhere. But let's leave it to them, it's their decision too.
“I am convinced that the nations of the world will not turn a blind eye to a coercive policy that has discredited itself. Each time, the West pays a greater price for its attempts to maintain its hegemony. If I were a member of the Western elite, I would seriously consider this prospect. As I said, some political scientists and politicians in the United States are already thinking about this.”
In the circumstances of the current intense conflict, I will be forthright about certain things. Russia, as an independent and unique civilization, has never considered and does not consider itself an enemy of the West. Americaphobia, Anglophobia, Francophobia and Germanophobia are the same forms of racism as Russophobia or anti-Semitism, and by the way xenophobia in all its guises.
It is simply necessary to clearly understand that, as I have said before, there are two Wests - at least two, maybe more, but at least two - the West of traditional, primarily Christian values, freedom, patriotism, great culture, and now even the West of Islamic values - in many Western countries, a significant part of the population follows Islam. This West is somewhat close to us. We have common, even ancient roots with him.
“But there is another West – aggressive, cosmopolitan and neo-colonial. It functions as a tool of the neoliberal elites. Russia, of course, will never acquiesce to the dictates of this West.”
I will always remember what I faced in 2000 after I was elected president. I will remember the price we paid to destroy the den of terrorism in the North Caucasus, which was almost openly supported by the West at that time. We are all adults; most of the people present in this room understand what I'm talking about. We know that this is exactly what happened in practice: financial, political and informational support. We've all experienced this.
What's more, the West has not only actively supported terrorists on the territory of Russia, but in many ways has fueled this threat. We know that too. However, after the situation stabilized, when we defeated the main terrorist gangs, thanks, among other things, to the courage of the Chechen people, we decided not to turn back, not to play the victim, but to go forward, to build relations even with those who actually acted against us, we build and develop relationships with all those who wanted it, based on mutual benefits and mutual respect.
We thought it was in everyone's best interest. Thanks to God, Russia survived the difficulties of that time, stood firm, became stronger, was able to cope with internal and external terrorism, its economy was preserved, it began to develop, and its defense capabilities began to improve. We tried to build relations with the leading countries of the West and with NATO. The message was the same: stop being enemies, live together as friends, continue dialogue, build trust and thus peace. We were completely honest, I want to emphasize that. We were aware of the complexity of this approach, but agreed with it.
"What did we get in response? In short, we got no on all major areas of possible cooperation. We've got increasing pressure and sources of tension near our borders."
And if I may ask, what is the purpose of this pressure? What is this pressure? Is it just for practice? Of course not. The goal was to make Russia more vulnerable. The goal is to make Russia a tool to achieve their own geopolitical goals.
As a matter of fact, this is a general rule: they try to make everyone a tool to use these tools for their own purposes. And those who do not give in to this pressure, who do not want to be such instruments, are sanctioned: all kinds of economic restrictions are maintained against them and in relation to them, coups are prepared or, where possible, carried out, and so on. And finally, if nothing can be done, the goal is the same: to destroy them, to wipe them off the political map. But in relation to Russia, such a scenario could never be drawn up and implemented.
“What else can I add? Russia does not challenge the Western elite. Russia simply maintains its right to exist and develop freely. It is important that we ourselves will not become the new hegemon. Russia does not propose to replace the unipolar world with a bipolar, tripolar or other dominant order, or to replace Western rule with Eastern, Northern or Southern rule. This would inevitably lead to another impasse.”
At this point, I would like to quote the words of the great Russian philosopher Nikolai Danilevsky. He believed that development does not consist of everyone moving in the same direction, as some of our opponents seem to want. This would only result in development stopping, Danilevsky said. Progress consists of "traversing the field of human historical activity, moving in all directions," he said, adding that no civilization can boast of being at the pinnacle of development.
I am convinced that the only way to combat dictatorship is through the free development of countries and peoples; the degradation of the individual can be counterbalanced by the love of man as a creator; primitive simplification and prohibition can be replaced by the flourishing complexity of culture and tradition.
The significance of today's historical moment lies in the possibilities of everyone's democratic and specific development path, which is open to all civilizations, states and integration alliances. Above all, we believe that the new world order must be based on law and justice, free, clear and just.
"The world economy and trade must also become fairer and more open."
Russia considers the creation of new international financial platforms inevitable; this includes international transactions. These platforms should be above national jurisdictions. They must be secure, depoliticized and automated and not dependent on any central control center. Is this feasible or not? Of course it's possible. However, this will require a lot of effort. Many countries will have to join their efforts, but it is possible.
This eliminates the possibility of abuse in a new global financial infrastructure. It would enable efficient, profitable and secure international transactions without the dollar or any so-called reserve currency.
“This is all the more important because the dollar is now being used as a weapon. The United States and the West in general have discredited the institution of international financial reserves.”
First, they devalued the dollar and the euro zone with inflation, and then they took our gold and currency reserves.
The transition to transactions in national currencies will quickly gain momentum. This is inevitable. Of course, this depends on the status of the issuers of these currencies and the state of their economy, but these currencies will become stronger and stronger, and these transactions will surely gradually overtake the rest. This is the logic of sovereign economic and financial policy in a multipolar world.
Furthermore, the new global development centers are already applying unparalleled technology and research in various fields and are successfully competing with Western transnational corporations in many areas.
It is clear that our common and very pragmatic interest is free and open scientific and technological exchange. We can gain more together than if we act separately. The majority should benefit from these exchanges, not some super-rich corporations.
How are things today? If the West sells drugs or seeds to other countries, it tells them to eliminate their national pharmaceutical industries and breeding. In fact, that's what it's all about: your machine tool and equipment shipments are ruining the local machinery industry. I realized this already when I served as Prime Minister. As soon as you open your market to a certain group of products, the local manufacturer is immediately ruined and it is almost impossible to raise your head. This is how they build relationships. This is how markets and resources are taken over, and countries lose their technological and scientific potential.
"This is not development, this is enslavement and the lowering of economies to a primitive level."
Technological progress should not increase, but reduce global inequality. This is how Russia traditionally implements its foreign technology policy. For example, when we build nuclear power plants in other countries, we create competence centers and train local personnel. We are creating an industry. We are not just building a power plant, we are creating an entire industry. In fact, we are giving other countries the opportunity to break new ground in their scientific and technological development, reduce inequality and raise their energy sector to new levels of efficiency and environmental friendliness.
"Let me emphasize once again that sovereignty and a unique development path in no way mean isolation or autarky. On the contrary, it is an energetic and mutually beneficial cooperation based on the principles of fairness and equality.”
If liberal globalization is about depersonalizing the Western model and imposing it on the whole world, integration, on the other hand, is about exploiting the potential of individual civilizations for the benefit of all. If globalism is a dictum – and it ends up being that – then integration means teamwork to develop common strategies from which everyone can benefit.
In this regard, Russia considers it important to make wider use of mechanisms for the creation of large spaces, which are based on the interaction between neighboring countries whose economies and social systems, as well as resource bases and infrastructure complement each other. In fact, these large spaces form the economic basis of the multipolar world order. Their dialogue creates a true unity in humanity, which is much more complex, unique and multidimensional than the simplistic ideas held by some Western flamers.
“Unity among mankind cannot be established by issuing orders such as obsession . Unity is created by taking everyone's opinion into account and carefully approaching the identity of each society and each nation. This is the principle that can be the basis of long-term cooperation in a multipolar world."
In this regard, it may be worth reviewing the structure of the United Nations, including the Security Council, to better reflect the diversity of the world. After all, the world of tomorrow will depend much more on Asia, Africa and Latin America than is generally thought today, and their increasing influence is undoubtedly a positive development.
Let me remind you that Western civilization is not the only one even in our common Eurasian region. Moreover, the majority of the population is concentrated in the eastern part of Eurasia, where the centers of the oldest human civilizations emerged.
"Eurasia's value and importance lies in the fact that it represents a self-sufficient complex with all kinds of huge resources and enormous potential. The more we work on improving Eurasia's internal relations and creating new ways and forms of cooperation, the more spectacular results we will achieve."
The successful performance of the Eurasian Economic Union, the rapid growth of the authority and prestige of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the large-scale One Belt, One Road initiatives, plans for multilateral cooperation to build the North-South Transport Corridor and many other projects are the beginning of a new era, a new stage in Eurasia in its development. I am sure. The integration projects there do not contradict each other, but complement each other - of course, if they are carried out by the neighboring countries according to their own interests and not introduced by external forces with the aim of dividing the Eurasian space and turning it into a zone of confrontation between blocs.
Europe, the western end of Greater Eurasia, can also become a natural part of it. However, many of its leaders are held back by the belief that Europeans are superior to others, that it is beneath their dignity to participate in joint ventures with others as equals. This arrogance prevents them from seeing that they themselves have become an alien periphery and in fact vassals, often without the right to vote.
Co-workers!
"The collapse of the Soviet Union upset the balance of geopolitical forces. The West felt victorious and proclaimed a unipolar world order in which only its will, culture and interests have the right to exist. Now this historic period of unlimited Western dominance in world affairs is coming to an end.”
The unipolar world is a thing of the past. We have come to a historical crossroads. We are facing probably the most dangerous, unpredictable and at the same time most important decade since the end of the Second World War. The West is unable to control humanity alone, and the majority of nations are no longer willing to accept this. This is the main contradiction of the new era. To quote a classic, this is to some extent a revolutionary situation - the elites cannot and the people do not want to live like this any longer.
This state is fraught with global conflicts or a whole chain of conflicts, which poses a threat to humanity, including the West itself. The main historical task of today is to solve this contradiction in a constructive and positive way.
"The change of era is a painful, although natural and inevitable process. The world order of the future is taking shape before our eyes."
In this world order, we must listen to everyone, take into account all opinions, all nations, societies, cultures and all systems of worldviews, ideas and religious ideas, without imposing a single truth on anyone. Only on this basis, understanding our responsibility for the fate of nations and our planet, can we create the symphony of human civilization.
At this point, I would like to conclude my remarks by thanking you for your patience during your hearing.
Thank you very much!
(The Hungarian translation of Vladimir Putin's speech was originally published in the weekly newspaper Demokrata.)
Featured image: Kremlin.ru
