This is the final part of the interview.

Т. Carlson: So he traded more with Russia than with the European Union and Ukraine?
V. Putin: Of course. It’s not even about the volume of trade, even if it was higher. It’s a question of cooperative ties, on which the entire Ukrainian economy was based. Cooperative ties between companies had remained very close since the days of the Soviet Union. One company in Ukraine produced components for final assembly in Russia and vice versa. The links were very close.
The coup took place, although the United States told us – I won’t go into details now, I think it’s incorrect – but nevertheless: you calm Yanukovych down there, and we’ll calm down the opposition; let everything go in the direction of a political settlement. We said: “Okay, we agree, let’s do it that way”. Yanukovych did not use the armed forces or the police, as the Americans had asked us to do. But the armed opposition in Kiev staged a coup. “What the hell is this? Who do you think you are?” – I would have liked to ask the leaders of the United States at the time.
Т. Carlson: With whose support?
V. Putin: With the support of the CIA, of course. An organization for which, as I understand it, you once wanted to work. Thank God you weren’t caught. Although it’s a serious organization, I know. These are my former colleagues, in the sense that I worked in the first main directorate, the intelligence services of the Soviet Union. They’ve always been our adversaries. That’s their job.
Technically, they did everything right, they got what they wanted – they changed the government. But politically, it was a colossal mistake. Here, obviously, the political leaders weren’t up to the job. The political leaders should have seen where this was going.
So, in 2008, they opened the NATO door to Ukraine. In 2014, they staged a coup, and those who didn’t recognize the coup, because it was a coup, began to be persecuted; they began creating a threat to Crimea, which we were forced to take under our protection. They started a war in the Donbass in 2014, using planes and artillery against civilians. Yes, that’s where it all started. Videos show planes striking Donetsk from the sky. They undertook a large-scale military operation, then another, which failed – and they’re still at it. And always in the context of the military development of this territory and the opening of the door to NATO.
How could we not be concerned about what was happening? It would have been criminal negligence on our part, that’s all. It’s simply that the political leaders of the United States had brought us to a limit that we could no longer cross, because it was destroying Russia itself. And we couldn’t throw our co-religionists and, indeed, part of the Russian people under this war machine.
Т. Carlson: So that was eight years before the start of the conflict. And what provoked this conflict, when did you finally decide that you had to take this step?
V. Putin: The conflict was first provoked by the coup in Ukraine.
In fact, representatives of three European countries – Germany, Poland and France – came and vouched for the agreement signed between Yanukovych’s government and the opposition. They signed as guarantors. Despite this, the opposition staged a coup, and all these countries pretended not to remember that they were guarantors of a peaceful settlement. They immediately threw it in the fire, and nobody remembers.
I don’t know if the United States is aware of this agreement between the opposition, the authorities and the three guarantors who, instead of bringing the whole process back into the political arena, supported the coup. Even if it was pointless, believe me. Because President Yanukovych accepted everything, he was ready for early elections, in which he had no chance of winning, to be honest, no chance. Everyone knew that.
But why the coup, why the victims? Why the threats against Crimea? Why then launch operations in the Donbass? That’s what I don’t understand. That’s where the mistake lies. The CIA did its job by implementing the coup. And I think one of the assistant secretaries of state said they even spent a significant amount of money on it, almost five billion [dollars]. But the political error is colossal. Why did they do it? All the same things could have been done, but legally, without sacrifices, without launching military operations and without losing Crimea. And we wouldn’t have lifted a finger if it hadn’t been for the bloody events on the Maïdan; it would never have occurred to us.
Because we agreed that, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, everything would happen according to the borders of the Union’s republics. We agreed with that. But we never agreed with the expansion of NATO, in particular we never agreed that Ukraine should be part of NATO. We have never agreed to NATO bases in that country without our having discussed them. All we did for decades was beg: don’t do this, don’t do that.
And what triggered recent events? First of all, the current Ukrainian leadership declared that they would not honor the Minsk agreements, which were signed in Minsk, as you know, after the events of 2014, when a plan for a peaceful settlement in the Donbass was presented. No, today’s Ukrainian leaders, the foreign minister, all the other officials and the president himself have declared that they don’t like anything about these Minsk agreements. In other words, they wouldn’t respect them. And the former leaders of Germany and France said not so long ago – a year and a half ago – they told the whole world, honestly, that yes, they had signed these Minsk agreements, but they were never going to respect them. We were simply being played for fools.
Т. Carlson: Did you talk to the secretary of state, the president? Maybe they were afraid to talk to you? And did you tell them that if they continued to send weapons to Ukraine, you would take action?
V. Putin: We talked about it all the time. We asked the leaders of the United States and European countries to stop this process immediately and respect the Minsk agreements. Frankly, I didn’t know how we were going to proceed, but I was ready to respect them. They are complicated for Ukraine; there are many elements of independence for the Donbass, for these territories, it’s true. But I was absolutely sure, and I’m going to tell you now: I sincerely believed that if we managed to persuade the people of Donbass – we had to persuade them to return to the framework of the Ukrainian state – then, slowly, gradually, the wounds would close. Gradually, when this part of the territory returned to economic life, to the general social environment, when pensions and social benefits were paid out, everything would be sorted out little by little, gradually. No, nobody wanted that, everybody wanted to solve the problem by military force alone. But we couldn’t allow that.
And we ended up in this situation, when they announced in Ukraine: “No, we won’t do anything”. They started preparing for military action. They started the war in 2014. Our goal was to stop this war. And we didn’t start it in 2022, it was an attempt to stop it.
Т. Carlson: Do you think you’ve succeeded in stopping it now? Have you achieved your goals?
V. Putin: No, we haven’t achieved our goals yet, because one of them is denazification. This means banning all types of neo-Nazi movements. This was one of the issues we discussed during the negotiation process that ended in Istanbul early last year, but not at our initiative, because the Europeans in particular told us that it was necessary to create conditions for the final signing of the documents. My French and German colleagues said: “How can you expect them to sign the treaty with a gun to their heads? You must withdraw your troops from Kiev”. I said: Okay. We withdrew our troops from Kiev.
As soon as we withdrew our troops from Kiev, our Ukrainian negotiators immediately rejected all the agreements reached in Istanbul and prepared for a long armed confrontation with the help of the United States and its satellites in Europe. This is how the situation evolved. And that’s how it is today.
Т. Carlson: What is denazification? What does it mean?
V. Putin: I just wanted to talk about it. It’s a very important question.
Denazification. After gaining its independence, Ukraine began to search, as some Western analysts say, for its identity. And it found nothing better than to place at the center of this identity false heroes who had collaborated with Hitler.
I’ve already said that at the beginning of the 19th century, when the theorists of Ukrainian independence and sovereignty appeared, they assumed that an independent Ukraine should have very good and cordial relations with Russia. But because of historical developments, because when these territories were part of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, part of Poland, Ukrainians were persecuted quite brutally, their property was confiscated, attempts were made to destroy their identity, the Poles behaved very cruelly, all this has remained in people’s memories. When the Second World War broke out, part of this extremely nationalistic elite began to cooperate with Hitler, believing that Hitler would bring them freedom. The German troops, and even the SS troops, entrusted the dirtiest work of exterminating the Polish population, the Jewish population, to the collaborators who cooperated with Hitler. Hence the brutal massacre of the Polish, Jewish and Russian population. At their head were well-known figures such as Bandera and Shukhevich. These were the people who were elevated to the status of national heroes. And that’s the problem. And they keep telling us: nationalism and neo-Nazism exist in other countries too. Yes, there are seeds, but we’re crushing them, and in other countries too, they’re being crushed. But in Ukraine – no, in Ukraine, they have become national heroes, monuments are erected to them, they appear on flags, their names are shouted by crowds marching with torches, as in Nazi Germany. These are the people who exterminated Poles, Jews and Russians. We must put an end to this practice and theory.
Of course, any nation that has reached a certain level of development considers that some of its members… I say they’re part of the Russian people, they say: no, we’re a separate people. I agree. If someone considers himself a people apart, he has the right to do so. But not on the basis of Nazism, Nazi ideology.
Т. Carlson: Will you be content with the territory you possess today?
V. Putin: I’ll finish on the subject first. You asked about neo-Nazism and denazification.
The Ukrainian president came to Canada (this is well known, but it’s passed over in silence in the West), and they presented to the Canadian parliament a man who, as the speaker of parliament said, had fought against the Russians in the Second World War. Well, who fought the Russians in the Second World War? Hitler and his henchmen. As it turned out, this man had served in the SS troops and had personally killed Russians, Poles and Jews. The SS troops, made up of Ukrainian nationalists, were engaged in this dirty business. The President of Ukraine stood up with the entire Canadian Parliament and applauded this man. How can anyone imagine that? The Ukrainian president himself, by the way, is Jewish by nationality.
Т. Carlson: And what do you want to do? Hitler has been dead for 80 years, Nazi Germany no longer exists, that’s true. You say you want to put out this fire of Ukrainian nationalism. How are you going to do that?
V. Putin: Listen to me. Your question is very subtle… And may I tell you what I think? You won’t take offense?
Т. Carlson: Of course not.
V. Putin: Your question seems subtle, but it’s very perverse.
You say: Hitler has been gone for so many years, 80 years. But his cause lives on. The people who exterminated the Jews, the Russians and the Poles are still alive. And the president of today’s Ukraine applauds him in the Canadian parliament – a standing ovation! Can we say that we have completely uprooted this ideology if we see what is happening today? That’s what we call denazification. We have to get rid of the people who keep this theory and practice alive and try to preserve it – that’s denazification. That’s what we mean by it.
Т. Carlson: Right. I’m certainly not defending Nazism or neo-Nazism. But my question is a practical one: you don’t control the whole country, and it seems to me that you’d like to control the whole country. But how can you uproot ideology, culture, certain feelings and history in a country you don’t control? How do you achieve that?
V. Putin: You know, strange as it may seem to you, at the Istanbul talks we agreed that (it’s all there in writing) neo-Nazism will not be cultivated in Ukraine, and that it will be banned in particular at the legislative level.
Mr. Carlson, we agreed on this. It turns out that this can be done during the negotiation process. And there’s nothing humiliating for Ukraine as a modern civilized state. Is a state allowed to propagandize Nazis? No, it isn’t, is it? That’s all there is to it.
Т. Carlson: Will there be negotiations? And why have there been no such negotiations – peace talks – regarding the settlement of the conflict in Ukraine so far?
V. Putin: There have been, and they’ve reached a very high stage of agreement on the positions of an admittedly complex process, but they’ve almost come to an end. But after our troops withdrew from Kiev, I’ve already said that the other side, Ukraine, rejected all these agreements and accepted the instructions of the Western countries – the European countries, the United States – to fight Russia to the bitter end.
What’s more, the Ukrainian president has legislated to prevent any negotiations with Russia. He has signed a decree forbidding anyone to negotiate with Russia. But how are we going to negotiate if he’s forbidden it to himself and to everyone else? We know he has some ideas about this settlement. But to agree on something, you have to dialogue, don’t you?
Т. Carlson: Yes, but you’re not going to talk to the Ukrainian president, you’re going to talk to the American president. When was the last time you spoke to Joe Biden?
V. Putin: I don’t remember when I spoke to him. I don’t remember, you can check.
Т. Carlson: You don’t remember?
V. Putin: No, why should I remember everything? I have my own affairs. We have domestic political affairs.
Т. Carlson: But he’s financing the war you’re waging.
V. Putin: Yes, that’s true, but when I spoke to him, it was before the special military operation, of course, and I said to him then – I won’t go into details, I never do – but I said to him then: I think you’re making a huge mistake on a historical scale by supporting everything that’s happening over there, in Ukraine, by pushing Russia back. I told him so – I’ve repeated it several times, by the way. I think it’ll be okay – I’ll stop there.
Т. Carlson: What did he say?
V. Putin: Ask him, please. It’s easy for you: you’re a citizen of the United States, go and ask him. It’s not right for me to comment on our conversation.
Т. Carlson: But you haven’t spoken to him since then – since February 2022?
V. Putin: No, we haven’t spoken. But we have certain contacts. By the way, do you remember what I told you about my proposal to work together on a missile defense system?
Т. Carlson: Yes.
V. Putin: You can ask anyone – they’re all alive and well, thank God. The former president, as well as Condoleezza [Rice] are alive and well, and I think Mr. Gates, and the current director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Mr. Burns – he was ambassador to Russia at the time, and I think he was a very successful ambassador. They all witnessed these conversations. Just ask them.
It’s the same here: if you want to know what President Biden said to me, ask him. In any case, he and I talked about this subject.
Т. Carlson: I understand that perfectly, but from the outside, to an outside observer, it would seem that all this could lead to a situation where the whole world is on the brink of war, maybe even nuclear strikes. Why not call Biden and say: let’s solve this problem somehow.
V. Putin: What is there to solve? It’s very simple. As I said, we have contacts through various agencies. I’ll tell you what we’re saying about this and what we’re proposing to the American leadership: if you really want to stop the fighting, you have to stop supplying weapons – it’ll all be over in a few weeks, that’s all, and then you can negotiate certain conditions before taking action – just stop.
What could be simpler than that? Why should I call him? What should I talk or beg about? “Are you going to deliver this or that weapon to the Ukraine? Oh, I’m afraid, I’m afraid, please don’t.” What’s there to say?
Т. Carlson: Do you think NATO fears this could escalate into a world war or even a nuclear conflict?
V. Putin: In any case, they’re talking about it and trying to scare their population with an imaginary Russian threat. It’s an obvious fact. And thinking people – not ordinary people, but thinking people, analysts, those involved in real politics, intelligent people – understand perfectly well that it’s a fake. The Russian threat is artificially inflated.
Т. Carlson: Do you mean the threat of a Russian invasion of, say, Poland or Latvia? Can you imagine a scenario in which you would send Russian troops into Poland?
V. Putin: Only in one case: if there’s an attack on Russia from Poland. Why would we do that? Because we have no interest in Poland or Latvia – anywhere. Why would we do that? We simply have no interests. We only have threats.
Т. Carlson: The argument – I think you know it very well – is: yes, he invaded Ukraine, he has territorial claims all over the continent. Are you saying unequivocally that you have no such territorial claims?
V. Putin: Absolutely not. You don’t have to be an analyst: it’s against common sense to get involved in some kind of world war. And a world war would bring all humanity to the brink of destruction. That much is obvious.
Of course, there are deterrents. All the while, we’re scaring everyone: tomorrow, Russia will use tactical nuclear weapons, tomorrow it will use this one, no, the day after tomorrow. So what? It’s just scaremongering for ordinary people, to squeeze more money out of American and European taxpayers as part of the confrontation with Russia in the Ukrainian theater of war. The aim is to weaken Russia as much as possible.
Т. CARLSON: One of the leading Senators, Chuck Schumer, seemed to say yesterday: we must continue to fund Ukraine, or American soldiers will one day have to fight in Ukraine instead of the Ukrainians. What do you think of such a statement?
V. Putin: It’s a provocation, and a cheap one at that. I don’t understand why American soldiers should fight in Ukraine. There are American mercenaries there. Most of the mercenaries come from Poland, second place goes to US mercenaries and third place to mercenaries from Georgia. If anyone has the desire to send regular troops, it will certainly bring humanity to the brink of a very serious global conflict. That much is obvious.
Does the United States need this? Why does the U.S. need this? Thousands of miles from home! Don’t you have anything better to do? You’ve got border problems, immigration problems, problems with the national debt-over $33 trillion. Don’t you have anything better to do than fight in Ukraine?
Wouldn’t it be better to negotiate with Russia? To come to an agreement, already understanding the situation as it is today, understanding that Russia will fight for its interests to the end, and, understanding that, to come back to common sense, start treating our country and its interests with respect, and look for solutions? It seems to me that this is much more intelligent and rational.
Т. Carlson: Who blew up Nord Stream?
V. Putin: You did, of course (Laughter).
Т. Carlson: I was busy that day. I didn’t blow up Nord Stream.
V. Putin: You may have an alibi, but the CIA doesn’t.
Т. Carlson: Do you have any proof that NATO or the CIA did it?
V. Putin: You know, I won’t go into details, but we always say in these kinds of cases: look for who benefits. But in this case, we have to look not only at who benefits, but also at who can do it. There may be many people interested, but not all of them can dive to the bottom of the Baltic Sea and make this explosion happen. These two elements must be linked: who is interested and who can do it.
Т. Carlson: But I don’t quite understand. We’re talking about the biggest act of industrial terrorism in history and, what’s more, the biggest release of CO2 into the atmosphere. But given that you have evidence and your intelligence agencies, why don’t you present this evidence and win this propaganda war?
V. Putin: It’s very difficult to defeat the US in a propaganda war, because the US controls all the world’s media and many European media. The ultimate beneficiaries of Europe’s biggest media outlets are American foundations. Don’t you know that? So it’s possible to get involved in this work, but I’d say it’s not worth the effort. We can simply expose our sources of information, but we won’t get any results. The whole world knows what happened, and even American analysts are talking directly about it. It’s the truth.
Т. Carlson: Yes, but here’s a question: you’ve worked in Germany, it’s well known, and the Germans clearly understand that their NATO partners did it, of course, it was a blow to the German economy, so why are the Germans silent? I’m puzzled: why haven’t the Germans said anything about this?
V. Putin: That surprises me too. But today’s German leaders are not guided by national interests, but by the interests of the collective West, otherwise it’s hard to explain the logic of their actions or inaction. After all, it’s not just Nord Stream-1 that blew up. Nord Stream-2 was damaged, but one of the pipes is in good shape and can be used to supply gas to Europe, but Germany won’t open it. We’re ready.
There is another route through Poland, called Yamal-Europe, which can also carry a significant flow. Poland has closed it, but Poland receives money from the Germans, it receives money from the pan-European funds, and Germany is the main donor of these pan-European funds. Germany feeds Poland to a certain extent. And they’ve closed the road to Germany. I don’t understand it.
Ukraine, to whom the Germans supply arms and give money. Germany is second only to the United States in terms of financial aid to Ukraine. Ukraine is crossed by two gas pipelines. The Ukrainians have simply closed one of them. Open the second route and, go ahead, get gas from Russia. They don’t want it.
Why don’t the Germans say, “Look, guys, we’ll give you money and weapons. Unscrew the valve, please, get the gas from Russia for us. We buy liquefied gas in Europe at inflated prices, which reduces our competitiveness and the economy as a whole to zero. Do you want us to give you money? Let us live normally, let our economy make money, and we’ll give you money from there.” No, they don’t. Why won’t they? Ask them. (He knocks on the table.) What’s here, what’s in their heads, it’s the same thing. The people over there are very incompetent.
Т. Carlson: Maybe the world is now divided into two hemispheres: one hemisphere with cheap energy, the other hemisphere without energy.
I’d like to ask a question: the world is now multipolar – can you describe the alliances, the blocs, who’s on whose side, in your opinion?
V. Putin: You said that the world was divided into two hemispheres. The head is divided into two hemispheres: one is responsible for a sphere of activity, the other is more creative, and so on. But it’s still one head. The world must be united, and security must be common, not designed for the “golden billion”. Then – and only then – will the world be stable, sustainable and predictable. In the meantime, as long as the head is divided into two parts, it is an illness, a serious illness. The world is going through this period of serious illness.
But it seems to me that thanks to honest journalism, among other things – they [journalists] work like doctors – it may be possible to patch things up somehow.
Т. Carlson: Let me give you an example. The American dollar has united the whole world in many ways. Do you think the dollar will disappear as a reserve currency? How have sanctions changed the dollar’s place in the world?
V. Putin: You know, this is one of the biggest strategic mistakes made by the political leadership of the United States: using the dollar as an instrument of foreign policy struggle. The dollar is the foundation of American power. I think everyone understands this very well: no matter how many dollars you print, they circulate all over the world. Inflation in the United States is minimal: I think it’s 3%, about 3.4%, which is perfectly acceptable for the United States. And they’re printing non-stop, of course. What does the 33,000 billion debt say? It’s a money issue.
Nevertheless, it’s the main weapon used to maintain American power in the world. As soon as political leaders decided to use the dollar as an instrument of political struggle, they dealt a blow to this American power. I don’t want to use vulgar expressions, but this is a stupidity and a huge mistake.
Look at what’s happening in the world. Even among U.S. allies, dollar reserves are dwindling right now. Everyone is watching what’s going on and looking for ways to protect themselves. But if the United States applies restrictive measures to certain countries, such as limiting payments, freezing assets and so on, it’s a huge cause for concern and a signal to the whole world.
What has happened in our country? Until 2022, around 80% of Russia’s foreign trade payments were made in dollars and euros. At the same time, dollars accounted for around 50% of our settlements with third countries; today, I think it’s down to 13%. But we haven’t banned the use of dollars, nor have we sought to do so. The United States decided to limit our dollar settlements. I think this is a mistake, you know, from the point of view of the interests of the United States itself, of American taxpayers. Because it’s a blow to the U.S. economy, it undermines U.S. power in the world.
By the way, yuan settlements used to account for around 3%. Today, we settle 34% in rubles and about the same amount, 34% or so, in yuan.
Why did the USA do this? I can only explain it by arrogance. They probably thought everything was going to collapse, but nothing happened. By the way, look, other countries, including oil-producing countries, are starting to talk and do things, they’re paying for oil sales in yuan. Do you realize that this is happening or not? Is anyone in the United States aware of this? What are you doing? You’re cutting yourself off from the world… Ask any expert, any intelligent, thoughtful person in the U.S.: what does the dollar mean to the U.S.? You’re killing it yourself.
Т. Carlson: I think that’s a very fair assessment.
Next question. Perhaps you’ve traded one colonial power for another, but one that would be more forgiving? Perhaps the BRICS are now in danger of being dominated by China, a more generous colonial power? Do you think this is good for sovereignty? Are you worried about this?
V. Putin: We’re familiar with all these scarecrows. They’re scare stories. We’re China’s neighbors. You can’t choose your neighbors, just like you can’t choose your relatives. We share a border with them several thousand kilometers long. That’s the first thing.
Secondly, we’ve been used to living together for centuries.
Thirdly, China’s foreign policy philosophy is non-aggressive, China’s foreign policy thinking is always looking for compromise, and that’s what we see.
The next point is this. We’re told all the time, and now you’ve tried to tone it down, but nevertheless it’s always the same scare stories: the volume of cooperation with China is increasing. The growth rate of cooperation between China and Europe is higher than the growth rate of cooperation between the Russian Federation and China. Ask the Europeans: aren’t they afraid? Maybe, I don’t know, but they’re trying to penetrate the Chinese market at all costs, especially when they’re faced with economic problems. And Chinese companies are exploring the European market.
Isn’t there a small presence of Chinese companies in the United States? Yes, political decisions are such that they try to limit cooperation with China. Mr. Tucker, you’re doing it to your own detriment: by limiting cooperation with China, you’re doing yourself a disservice. This is a delicate area, and there are no simple linear solutions, just as there are for the dollar.
That’s why we need to think carefully before imposing illegitimate sanctions, illegitimate from the point of view of the UN Charter. I think those who make the decisions have problems with that.
Т. Carlson: You said a moment ago that the world would be a much better place today if there weren’t two competing alliances against each other. Maybe the current U.S. administration, as you say, as you think, is against you, but maybe the next U.S. administration, the administration after Joe Biden will want to connect with you and you’ll want to connect with them? Or does that not play a role?
V. Putin: I’ll tell you.
But to conclude on the previous question. We have $200 billion, and we set a goal with my colleague, my friend, with President Xi Jinping, that this year we would reach $200 billion in trade with China. And we have exceeded that target. According to our data, it’s already 230 billion dollars, and according to Chinese statistics, it’s 240 billion dollars, if you count everything in dollars, that’s the trade turnover with China.
And one very important thing: our sales are balanced, and we complement each other in the high-tech sphere, in the energy sector and in scientific research. It’s very balanced.
As for the BRICS as a whole, of which Russia has held the presidency since this year, they are developing very rapidly.
Unless I’m mistaken, in 1992, the G7 countries’ share of the world economy was 47%, and by 2022 it will have fallen to something like 30%. The BRICS’ share was only 16% in 1992, and is now higher than that of the G7. And this has nothing to do with events in Ukraine. The trends in the development of the world and the global economy are as I’ve just said, and it’s inevitable. It will continue to happen: just as the sun rises, you can’t stop it, you have to adapt to it.
How does the United States adapt? By force: sanctions, pressure, bombing, use of armed forces. This is due to arrogance. Your political elite doesn’t understand that the world changes according to objective circumstances and that it’s necessary to make the right decisions competently, in time, to maintain your level, excuse me, even if we want to talk about domination. Such crude actions, including towards Russia, let’s say, other countries, lead to the opposite result. It’s an obvious fact, and it’s already obvious today.
You just asked me: will another leader come along and change something? It’s not about the leader, or the personality of any particular person. I had a very good relationship with Bush, for example. I know that in the United States, he’s been portrayed as a country boy who doesn’t know much. I assure you that’s not the case. I think he’s also made a lot of mistakes with Russia. I told you about 2008 and the decision taken in Bucharest to open the door of NATO to the Ukraine, etc. It was under his mandate that the Russian government was able to open the door to NATO. It was under his mandate that he put pressure on the Europeans.
But in general, on a human level, I had very good relations with him. He’s no worse than any other American, Russian or European politician. I can assure you that he understood what he was doing as well as anyone. I also had a personal relationship with Trump.
It’s not about the personality of the leader, it’s about the mindset of the elites. If American society is governed by the idea of domination at all costs, and by forceful actions, nothing will change, it will only get worse. But if, at the end of the day, there is an awareness that the world is changing due to objective circumstances, and that we need to be able to adapt to them in time, using the advantages that the United States still has today, then perhaps something might change.
The Chinese economy has become the world’s leading economy in terms of purchasing power parity, in terms of volume, overtaking the United States a long time ago. Next in line are the United States, then India, with its 1.5 billion inhabitants, then Japan and, in fifth place, Russia. Last year, Russia became Europe’s biggest economy, despite all the sanctions and restrictions. Is this normal, in your view? Sanctions, restrictions, inability to pay in dollars, disconnection from SWIFT, sanctions against our oil tankers, sanctions against aircraft, sanctions in everything, everywhere. The largest number of sanctions in the world is against Russia. And we have become Europe’s leading economy during this period.
The tools used by the United States don’t work. We need to think about what to do. If the ruling elites realize this, then yes, the first person in the state will act in anticipation of what voters and decision-makers at various levels expect of them. Things could then change.
Т. Carlson: You’re describing two different systems, saying that the ruler acts in the interests of the voters, but at the same time certain decisions are made by the ruling classes. You’ve been running the country for many years, with your experience, who do you think makes the decisions in America?
V. Putin: I don’t know. America is a complex country, very conservative on the one hand and changing rapidly on the other. It’s not easy for us to understand.
Who makes the decisions in elections? How can we understand it when each state has its own legislation, each state regulates itself, someone can be excluded from state-level elections. It’s a two-tier electoral system, which is very difficult for us to understand. Of course, there are two dominant parties: the Republicans and the Democrats. And within this party system, the centers that make the decisions, that prepare the decisions.
So why, in my opinion, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, has there been such a mistaken, crude and unjustified policy of pressure against Russia? It is indeed a policy of pressure. NATO expansion, support for separatists in the Caucasus and the creation of a missile defense system are all elements of pressure. Pressure, pressure, pressure… Then Ukraine was drawn into NATO. It’s all pressure, pressure, pressure. But why?
I think, among other things, that excessive production capacities were created. During the fight against the Soviet Union, there were many centers and specialists on the Soviet Union, who could do nothing else. They convinced the political leadership that it was necessary to continue harassing Russia, to try to break it up, to create several quasi-state formations on this territory and subjugate them in a divided form, in order to use their overall potential for the future struggle against China. This is a mistake, including the excessive potential of those who worked on the confrontation with the Soviet Union. We need to get rid of them, we need new, fresh forces, people who look to the future and understand what’s going on in the world.
Look at how Indonesia is developing! 600 million inhabitants. How can we resist? There is no way we can. We have to assume that Indonesia will join the club of the world’s leading economies, whether some people like it or not.
Yes, we understand and we are aware that in the United States, despite all the economic problems, you have a comfortable situation and decent economic growth – 2.5% GDP growth, I think.
But if we want to secure the future, we need to change our approach to what’s changing. As I said, the world will continue to change whatever happens in Ukraine. The world is changing. American experts write that the United States is gradually changing its position in the world, your experts write, I read them. The only question is, how will it happen: painfully, quickly or gently, gradually? And this is written by people who are not anti-American, they are simply observing development trends in the world. That’s all. To evaluate them, to change policy, we need people who think, who look to the future, who can analyze and recommend certain decisions at the level of political leaders.
Т. Carlson: I have to ask you a question. You’ve made it clear that NATO expansion has become a breach of promise and a threat to your country. But before sending troops to Ukraine, at a security conference, the U.S. vice president supported the Ukrainian president’s desire to join NATO. Do you think this, among other things, provoked the military actions?
V. Putin: I repeat: we have repeatedly suggested seeking a solution to the problems that arose in Ukraine after the 2014 coup by peaceful means. But nobody listened to us. And what’s more, the Ukrainian leadership, which was under total US control, suddenly declared that it would not abide by the Minsk agreements – they don’t like anything in them – and continued its military activity on this territory. At the same time, NATO military structures were developing this territory under the guise of various training and retraining centers. They actually started setting up bases there. That’s all there is to it.
In Ukraine, they declared the Russians to be (they passed a law) a non-titular nation, and at the same time, they passed laws restricting the rights of non-titular nations. Ukraine. Ukraine, which received all these southeastern territories as a gift from the Russian people, has suddenly announced that the Russians on this territory are a non-titular nation. Is this normal? All this prompted the decision to end the war that neo-Nazis started in Ukraine in 2014, with arms.
Т. Carlson: Do you think Zelensky has the freedom to negotiate a resolution to this conflict?
V. Putin: I don’t know. It’s difficult for me to judge the details. But I think he has it, or at least he had it. His father fought the Nazis in the Second World War, and I talked to him about it once. I said to him: “Volodya, what are you doing? Why are you supporting the neo-Nazis in Ukraine today, when your father fought fascism? He was a frontline soldier.” I won’t say what he replied, that’s another subject, and I think it would be incorrect.
But as for freedom of choice, why not? He came to power because the Ukrainian people expected him to lead Ukraine to peace. He talked about it and won the elections with a huge advantage thanks to that. But then, when he came to power, he realized, in my opinion, two things. Firstly, it’s better not to argue with neo-Nazis and nationalists, because they’re aggressive and very active – you can expect anything from them. Secondly, the West, led by the USA, supports them and will always support those who fight Russia, it’s profitable and safe. So he took the appropriate position despite his promise to his people to end the war in Ukraine. He has deceived his voters.
Т. Carlson: Do you think that now, in February 2024, he has the freedom to talk to your government, to try to help his country in any way? Can he even do it himself?
V. Putin: Why not? He considers himself head of state, he won the elections. In Russia, we believe that everything that happened after 2014 is a coup d’état, and in that sense, even the current government is tainted by irregularities. But he considers himself president and, as such, is recognized by the United States, the rest of Europe and practically the rest of the world. Why not do it? He can do it.
We negotiated with Ukraine in Istanbul, we agreed, he knew. What’s more, the head of the negotiating group, Mr Arahamya – I think that’s his name – still heads the ruling party faction, the President’s party in the Rada, and he still sits there. He even signed the document I’m talking about. But then he publicly told the world: “We were ready to sign this document, but Mr. Johnson, then Prime Minister of Great Britain, came to dissuade us and told us that it would be better to go to war with Russia. They would give us everything we needed to regain what we had lost in the fighting with Russia. We accepted this proposal. His statement was published. He said it publicly.
Can they go back on it or not? That’s the question: do they want to or not? And after that, the President of Ukraine issued a decree forbidding negotiations with us. Let him cancel this decree, that’s all. We have never refused to negotiate. We hear all the time: is Russia ready, is Russia ready? We didn’t refuse! They refused publicly. Well, let them cancel their decree and negotiate. We never refused.
And the fact that they bowed to the request or pleas of the former British Prime Minister, Mr. Johnson, I find ridiculous and very, how shall I say, sad. Because, as Mr Arahamya said, “we could have stopped these hostilities, stopped this war a year and a half ago, but we were persuaded by the British and we backed down”. Where is Mr. Johnson today? And the war goes on.
Т. CARLSON: That’s a good question. Why did he do that?
V. Putin: I don’t know, I don’t understand it myself. There was a general attitude. For some reason, everyone was under the illusion that Russia could be defeated on the battlefield – out of pride, out of simplicity of heart, but not out of great intelligence.
Т. Carlson: You’ve described the link between Russia and Ukraine, you’ve described Russia as an Orthodox country, you’ve talked about it. What does that mean to you? You’re the leader of a Christian country, as you describe yourself. What effect does that have on you?
V. Putin: You know, as I’ve already said, in 988, Prince Vladimir was baptized, following the example of his grandmother Princess Olga, then he baptized his retinue, and then gradually, over several years, he baptized the whole of Russia. It was a long process: from pagan to Christian, it took many years. But in the end, this Orthodoxy, this Eastern Christianity, was deeply rooted in the consciousness of the Russian people.
When Russia expanded and absorbed other peoples practicing Islam, Buddhism or Judaism, it always showed great loyalty to those practicing other religions. This is its strength. It is absolutely unambiguous.
And the fact is that in all the world religions I’ve just mentioned, which are traditional religions of the Russian Federation, in fact, the basic theses, the basic values are very similar, if not identical. And the Russian authorities have always treated with great care the culture and religion of the peoples who were part of the Russian Empire. In my opinion, this is the basis of the security and stability of the Russian state. Indeed, all the peoples who live in Russia generally regard it as their homeland.
If people come to you from, say, Latin America or Europe (an even clearer and more understandable example), they have come from their historical homeland to you or to European countries. But people who practice different religions in Russia consider Russia their homeland – they have no other homeland. We’re all one big family. And our traditional values are very similar. When I say “it’s one big family”, everyone has their own family, and that’s the basis of our society. And if we say that the fatherland and the family are very closely linked, then it’s true. Because we can’t ensure a normal future for our children and our family if we don’t ensure a normal, sustainable future for the country as a whole, for the fatherland. That’s why patriotism is so highly developed in Russia.
Т. Carlson: If I may say so, religions are different. The fact is that Christianity is a non-violent religion, Christ says “turn the other cheek”, “don’t kill”, etc. And how can a leader be a Christian if he has to kill someone else? How can we reconcile this with ourselves?
V. Putin: Very easily, if it’s a question of defending oneself, one’s family, one’s homeland. We don’t attack anyone. How did events in Ukraine begin? With the coup d’état and the start of hostilities in the Donbass – that’s where they began. And we’re defending our people, ourselves, our homeland and our future.
As for religion in general, you know, it’s not in outward manifestations, it’s not in going to church every day or banging your head on the floor, it’s in the heart. It’s in the heart. And we have a man-centered culture. Dostoyevsky, who is very famous in the West as the genius of Russian culture, of Russian literature, spoke a lot about this – about the Russian soul.
Yet Western society is more pragmatic. A Russian, an inhabitant of Russia, thinks more about the eternal, about moral values. I don’t know, you might disagree with me, but Western culture is more pragmatic. I’m not saying it’s bad, it allows today’s “golden billion” to make good progress in production, even in science and so on. There’s nothing wrong with that, I’m just saying that we’re similar, but our consciousness is slightly different.
Т. Carlson: So you think something supernatural is at work here? When you look at what’s going on in the world, do you see the works of God? Are you saying to yourself that I see superhuman forces at work here?
V. Putin: No, frankly, I don’t think so. I think that the world community is developing according to its own internal laws, and that they are what they are. There’s no escaping it; it’s always been that way in the history of mankind. Certain peoples and countries rise, multiply, strengthen themselves, then withdraw from the international arena with the quality to which they are accustomed. I probably don’t need to give these examples: starting with the conquerors of the Horde, with Genghis Khan, then with the Golden Horde, ending with the great Roman Empire. There seems to be nothing else in human history comparable to the great Roman Empire.
Nevertheless, the potential of the barbarians gradually accumulated, accumulated, and under their blows, the Roman Empire collapsed, because the barbarians became more numerous, they began to develop generally well, as we say now, economically, they began to strengthen. And this regime, which had been imposed on the world by the great Roman Empire, collapsed. However, it took a long time for it to collapse – 500 years, this process of decomposition of the great Roman Empire lasted 500 years. The difference with today’s situation is that change processes are much faster today than in the days of the great Roman Empire.
Т. Carlson: But then, when will the empire of AI – artificial intelligence – begin?
V. Putin: You’re plunging me into increasingly complex questions. To answer them, of course, you need to be a specialist in large numbers and artificial intelligence.
There are many threats to mankind: research in the field of genetics, which can create supermen, a special person – a warrior, a scientist, an athlete. Today, it is said that in the United States, Elon Musk has already implanted a chip in a person’s brain.
Т. Carlson: What do you think?
V. Putin: I think we can’t stop Musk, he’ll always do what he thinks is necessary. But we have to negotiate with him somehow, we have to find ways to convince him. I think he’s an intelligent man, I’m sure. We should agree with him that this process should be controlled and subject to certain rules.
Humanity, of course, should think about what will happen to it in relation to the development of this latest research and technology in genetics or artificial intelligence. It is possible to predict approximately what will happen. That’s why, when mankind felt threatened by nuclear weapons, all those who had nuclear weapons began to agree among themselves, because they understood that their indiscriminate use could lead to complete, total annihilation.
When it is understood that the unlimited and uncontrolled development of artificial intelligence, genetics or any other modern trend, which is impossible to stop, will continue to be researched, just as it was impossible to hide from mankind what gunpowder is, and it’s impossible to stop research in this or that field, that research will continue to be carried out, but when mankind feels threatened, for itself, for mankind as a whole, then, I think, there will be a period to agree at the interstate level on how we’re going to control all this.
Т. Carlson: Thank you very much for your time. I’d just like to ask one last question.
Evan Gershkovich, 32, an American journalist, has been detained for over a year. I’d like to ask you if you’re willing to release him so we can take him to the United States?
V. Putin: We’ve made so many gestures of goodwill that I think we’ve exhausted all the limits. No one has ever responded to our goodwill gestures with similar gestures. But in principle we are ready to talk about the fact that we do not exclude the possibility of doing so with a quid pro quo from our partners.
And when I say “partners”, I mean above all the representatives of the special services. They are in contact with each other, and they are discussing this subject. We have no taboos about not solving this problem. We are ready to solve it, but there are certain conditions that are discussed through the partnership channels between the special services. It seems to me that it is possible to agree on this point.
Т. Carlson: Of course, it’s all been going on for centuries: one country catches a spy, detains him, then exchanges him for someone else. Of course, it’s none of my business, but what makes this situation different is that this person is certainly not a spy – he’s just a kid. He’s certainly broken your laws, but he’s not a spy and he’s definitely not spying. Perhaps he belongs in a different category after all? Perhaps it would be unfair to ask for someone else in return?
V. Putin: You know, you can say what a spy is and who isn’t, but there are certain things that are stipulated by law. If someone obtains secret information and does so on the basis of a conspiracy, that’s called espionage. That’s exactly what he was doing: he was obtaining classified and secret information, and he was doing it clandestinely. I don’t know if he was dragged into it, if someone could have dragged him into it, if he did it recklessly, on his own initiative. But in fact, it’s called espionage. And it’s all proven, because he was caught red-handed when he received this information. If it had been something far-fetched, invented, unproven, that would be another story. He was caught red-handed obtaining classified information on the basis of a conspiracy. How to qualify that?
Т. CARLSON: Are you saying that he was working for the US government, for NATO, or that he was just a journalist who obtained information that shouldn’t have been in his hands? I think there’s a difference between the two categories.
V. Putin: I don’t know who he was working for. But I’ll say it again: obtaining secret information on the basis of a conspiracy is called espionage, and he was working in the interests of American intelligence services or other structures. I don’t think he was working for Monaco, it’s unlikely that Monaco would be interested in obtaining this information. It’s the special services that have to agree amongst themselves, you know? There are developments, there are people who, in our opinion, are not linked to the intelligence services.
Look, I’ll tell you this: there’s a man in a country, a country allied with the United States, who has liquidated a bandit in one of Europe’s capitals for patriotic reasons. During the events in the Caucasus, do you know what he [the bandit] did? I don’t want to say, but I’m going to say it anyway: he made our soldiers lie down on the road as prisoners, and then he drove a car over them. What kind of a man is that, and is he even a man? But a patriot liquidated him in one of Europe’s capitals. Whether he did it on his own initiative or not is another question.
Т. Carlson: Evan Gershkovich did no such thing, that’s another story altogether.
V. Putin: He did something else.
Т. Carlson: He’s just a journalist.
V. Putin: He’s not just a journalist, I repeat once again. He’s a journalist who received secret information on the basis of a conspiracy. Yes, that’s another story altogether.
I’m simply talking about these people who are essentially under the control of the American authorities, wherever they are in prison, and that there is a dialogue between the intelligence services. This issue must be handled calmly, serenely and professionally. There are contacts, let’s let them work.
I wouldn’t rule out the possibility that the person you mentioned, Mr. Gershkovich, could end up in his country of origin. Why not? It makes no sense to keep him more or less in prison in Russia. But let’s allow our American colleagues to think about how to solve the problems facing our intelligence services. We are not closed to negotiations. In fact, these negotiations are ongoing, and there have been many cases where we have reached agreement. We can still reach agreement, but we simply have to negotiate.
Т. Carlson: I hope you’ll release him. Thank you very much, Mr. President.
V. Putin: I too would like him to go home after all. I’m speaking sincerely. But, I repeat, a dialogue is underway. The more we publicize this kind of thing, the harder it is to resolve. Everything must remain calm.
Т. Carlson: Honestly, with the war, I don’t know if it will work or not. If I may ask one last question.
Maybe you don’t want to answer for strategic reasons, but aren’t you concerned that what’s happening in Ukraine could lead to something much bigger and much more serious? And to what extent are you ready, to what extent are you motivated to call, for example, the United States and say to them: “Let’s negotiate”?
V. Putin: Look, I’ve already said it: we haven’t refused to negotiate. We’re not refusing, it’s the Western side, and Ukraine is certainly a satellite of the United States today. That much is obvious. I don’t want this to sound like blasphemy or an insult to anyone, but we understand, don’t we, what’s going on?
Financial support – 72 billion – has been given, Germany is in second place, other European countries, tens of billions of dollars are going to Ukraine. There is a huge flow of arms.
Tell Ukraine’s current leaders: listen, sit down, negotiate, cancel your stupid decree and sit down and negotiate. We have never refused.
Т. Carlson: Yes, you’ve already said that. I’m well aware, of course, that this is not blasphemy. Indeed, it has been reported that Ukraine was prevented from signing the peace at the behest of the former British Prime Minister, who was acting on Washington’s instructions. That’s why I’m asking you why you don’t raise these issues directly with the Biden administration, which controls the Zelensky administration in Ukraine?
V. Putin: If the Zelensky administration in Ukraine refused to negotiate, I assume they did so on Washington’s instructions. Now, if they see in Washington that it’s a bad decision, let them abandon it, let them find a subtle excuse that doesn’t shame anyone, let them find a solution. We didn’t make these decisions, they made the decision over there, so let them drop it. That’s all there is to it.
But they made a bad decision, and now we have to look for a way out of that bad decision, to go back, to correct their mistakes? They made one, let them correct it. We’re all for it.
Т. Carlson: I want to make sure I’ve understood you correctly. So you want to reach a negotiated solution to what’s happening in Ukraine right now, don’t you?
V. Putin: That’s right. But we have succeeded in doing so. We created a large document in Istanbul, which was initialed by the head of the Ukrainian delegation. His signature is on an extract of this agreement – not the whole document, but the extract. He affixed his signature, then said: “We were ready to sign and the war would have ended a long time ago, a year and a half ago. But Mr. Johnson came and talked us out of it, and we missed the opportunity.” We missed it, we made a mistake, let them come back to it, that’s all. But why should we go out of our way to correct other people’s mistakes?
I understand, you could say that it was our mistake to have stepped up the actions and to have decided, with the help of weapons, to put an end to this war, as I said, which started in 2014 in the Donbass. But I’m going to take you back even further, I’ve already talked about this, you and I have just discussed it. So let’s go back to 1991, when we were promised no enlargement of NATO, let’s go back to 2008, when NATO’s doors were opened, let’s go back to Ukraine’s declaration of independence, where it declared itself a neutral state. Let’s go back to the fact that NATO bases, American bases, British bases started appearing on Ukrainian territory, to create these threats against us. Let’s go back to the fact that there was a coup d’état in Ukraine in 2014. It’s pointless, isn’t it? We can pass the buck ad infinitum. But they stopped negotiating. Was that a mistake? Yes. Fix it. We’re ready. What else can we do?
Т. Carlson: Don’t you think it would be too humiliating for NATO to now recognize Russia’s control over what was Ukrainian territory two years ago?
V. Putin: I told you: let them think about how to do it honorably. There are options, there just has to be a desire to do it.
Up until now, they’ve been making a fuss, shouting: we must achieve a strategic defeat of Russia, a defeat on the battlefield… But now, apparently, they realize that it’s not easy to do, if at all possible. In my opinion, it’s impossible by definition, it will never happen. I think those who control power in the West have realized this. But if this is true, and if this realization has taken place, think now about what to do next. We’re ready for that dialogue.
Т. Carlson: Are you ready to say, for example, to NATO: congratulations, you’ve won, let’s maintain the situation as it is today.
V. Putin: You know, this is the subject of negotiations: nobody wants to negotiate with us, or, to be more precise, they want to, but they don’t know how. I know they want to do it, I don’t just see it, I know they want to do it, but they don’t know how to do it. They’ve thought about it, they’ve brought us to the situation we’re in. It’s not us who have got ourselves into this situation, but our “partners”, our adversaries. Well, let them now think about how to reverse the situation. We’re not saying no.
It would be funny if it weren’t so sad. This endless mobilization in Ukraine, the hysteria, the internal problems, all that… Sooner or later, we’ll reach an agreement anyway. And do you know what? It may even seem strange in the current situation: relations between peoples will be re-established anyway. It will take a long time, but they will be re-established.
Let me give you a few unusual examples. On the battlefield, there’s a confrontation, a concrete example: Ukrainian soldiers are surrounded (this is a concrete example of life, of combat operations), our soldiers shout at them: “There’s no chance, surrender! Come out, you’ll be alive, surrender!” And suddenly, in Russian, in good Russian, they shout, “The Russians don’t surrender!” – and everyone’s dead. They still feel Russian.
In that sense, what’s happening is, to some extent, an element of civil war. And everyone in the West thinks that the fighting has definitively separated one part of the Russian people from the other. Reunification will happen. It has always been there.
Why are the Ukrainian authorities tearing the Russian Orthodox Church apart? Because it unites not the territory, but the soul, and no one can divide it.
Can we finish or is there something else?
Т. Carlson: I’ve finished.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
SOURCE: Kremlin website

https://www.pnp.ru/politics/intervyu-prezidenta-rf-vladimira-putina-zhurnalistu-takeru-karlsonu-polnyy-tekst.html
and https://histoireetsociete.com/2024/02/11/interview-du-president-russe-vladimir-poutine-avec-le-journaliste-tucker-carlson-texte-complet-fin/