🎙 Russian President Vladimir Putin’s answer to a question from the Moscow.Kremlin.Putin TV programme (December 17, 2023)

❓ Could you have been described as naive in the 2000s?

💬 Vladimir Putin: Yes, there was some naivety <…> I had the naïve idea that the whole world, and above all, the so called “civilised” world realised what had happened to Russia, that it had become a different country, that there was no longer any ideological confrontation, which meant that there were no grounds for confrontation.

If there were any negative elements in the Western nations’ policies towards Russia (among other things, their support for separatism and terrorism in Russia was apparent, I saw it as director of the Federal Security Service), I gullibly believed that this was just inertia in thinking and action: they were used to fighting the Soviet Union and kept on doing it.

<…>

Meanwhile, the reality was (I got a 100 percent confirmation of this later) that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, they thought that “we just need to be patient – and we will make Russia collapse, too.”

Such a big country by European standards, with the world’s largest territory and a fairly large population … “is generally redundant.” It would be better, as Brzezinski suggested, to split it into five parts and subjugate them separately, and to use their resources, but proceeding from the premise that all of them will lack weight on their own, they will not have their own voice or the ability to defend their national interests the way the Russian state is doing now.

It was only later that I realised that.

🎙 President Vladimir Putin's answers to questions from the Moscow. Kremlin. Putin programme (December 17, 2023)

❓Question: You said that the US is pursuing an imperial policy, and that [US President] Biden claims that if Putin is not stopped in Ukraine, then that means Russia will attack NATO.

💬 This is complete nonsense, and I believe President Biden understands this as well. It is just a figure of speech to justify his misguided policy towards Russia. This policy is misguided because I don't think that the US is as interested today, in terms of global development, as it was 20 years ago, in inflicting, as they publicly claim, a “strategic defeat” on Russia. I don't think it aligns with the national interests of the US itself. That's the first point.

Secondly, the president of any major NATO country, especially sole NATO master (and the US is the master of NATO, and all of NATO is their backyard) cannot fail to realise that Russia has no reason, no interest – be it geopolitical, economic, political or military – to wage war against NATO countries. We have no territorial claims against each other, and we harbour no intentions to jeopardise our relations with them. We are interested in developing relations.

They [the US] dragged Finland into NATO. Did we have any disputes with Finland? All disputes, including territorial ones, were solved long ago, in the middle of the XX century. We enjoyed the most kind, cordial relations, including economic relations. Everything was developing. <...> There were no problems. And now there will be because we will create the Leningrad Military District and deploy certain military units there.

Do we have a problem with anyone? No we don't. It is they who artificially create problems with us, because they do not want to have Russia as their competitor. That is all.

❓Question: How can we find common ground when there are accusations from all sides?

💬 They will have to find common ground with us, because they will have to reckon with our perspective.