google.com, pub-1075295645606918, DIRECT, f08c47fec0942fa0 TKS

Putin Admits Receiving Sputnik V Vaccine

Vladimir Putin disclosed during his annual Q&A session on Wednesday that he had been inoculated with the Sputnik V coronavirus vaccine.


'As for me, when I did this and this took place in February, there were actually two [vaccines] in circulation: EpiVacCorona from the Novosibirsk-based Vector Center and Sputnik V, as you know. Both of them are good,' the Russian president assured.
'I proceeded from the fact that I needed to be protected as long as possible, and I made my decision to get the Sputnik V jab,' Putin said.
The Russian leader said that his daughter had also been inoculated with the Sputnik V jab and stressed that the vaccine was needed and it entailed no serious consequences.
'There are people with different bodily constitutions, with chronic diseases and the elderly, the so-called risk groups. [Here] this is life-threatening. The inoculation, however, is not dangerous, and we haven’t had a single complication in our country,' the head of state noted.
Putin said he had for long refrained from specifying the vaccine he had been inoculated with in order not to create competitive advantages among the inoculations.
Russia’s Sputnik V vaccine has been approved for use in 67 countries totaling over 3.5 billion people. More than 30 nations have already launched mass vaccination campaigns using Sputnik V. The Russian vaccine boasts a 91.6% efficiency rate, which is confirmed by the data published in the Lancet medical journal.

Putin's Direct Line 2021

At about four hours, the President answered the questions of the Russians during the Direct Line with Vladimir Putin.


The main Russian topic today is the Direct Line with Vladimir Putin. This year the communication took place in a new way, no spectators or experts in the studio.
Only questions from the field, received by phone, through the website or mobile application. There were also live broadcasts from the localities. In total, about two million applications were received.
It is clear that all of them could not get on the air, but many, even in different regions, are sometimes similar. As Vladimir Putin himself noted, Direct Line allows us to make a certain selection of the most pressing problems throughout the country.
At the beginning of the meeting and at the end of the meeting, the President himself stressed that all issues would be fixed and worked out. And for some there is already a result.

Russia's Military Planes Prevent Border Violation By Dutch Frigate

On June 24, 2021 the Black Sea Fleet's means of monitoring NATO ships' movements in the Black Sea established that the Dutch frigate The Evertsen changed course in international waters and started moving towards the Kerch Strait. To prevent a violation of Russia's territorial waters Sukhoi-30 fighters and Sukhoi-24 bombers were scrambled to fly near the Dutch naval ship at a safe distance. The frigate promptly turned away from the Russian border and continued along the original course.


Earlier, the Dutch Defense Ministry claimed that Russian fighters created an unsafe situation in the Black Sea by flying too low over the frigate The Evertsen. The incident occurred the next day after a British frigate intruded into Russia's territorial waters.
According to the Dutch side, "the fighters were armed with bombs and air-to-surface missiles intended to strike targets from the air" and "flew dangerously close by and low [over the frigate], performing feint attacks." Besides, the frigate suffered disruptions of its electronic equipment after the flyover.
The planes strictly followed international rules, the Russian Defense Ministry said. "All flights by Russian planes were carried out in strict compliance with international rules of using airspace," it said.

Rosatom Began Construction Of Fifth Block Of India's Kudankulam NPP

Rosatom has begun construction of the fifth block of the Kudankulam NPP in India


Rosatom has begun construction of the fifth block of the Kudankulam NPP in India. The start was a solemn ceremony - pouring concrete into the foundation slab of the reactor building.
Large-scale project: the most modern Russian technologies are used. The power units of the Kudankulam NPP comply with all international safety requirements.

Joint Statement of the Russia and the China on the Twentieth Anniversary of the Treaty of Good Neighbourliness and Friendly Cooperation between the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China

 


On the eve of the twentieth anniversary of the Treaty of Good Neighbourliness and Friendly Cooperation between the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China, signed on 16 July 2001, the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China, hereinafter referred to as the Parties, in order to continue the dynamic development of comprehensive partnership and strategic interaction in a new era, in accordance with the spirit and letter of the Treaty, declare as follows: 



The Treaty organically combined the historical experience of the development of the Russian-Chinese relations and the generally accepted norms of international law. This basic policy document created the legal framework for the long-term and stable development of the Russian-Chinese comprehensive partnership and strategic interaction in the twenty-first century. 


Guided by the Treaty, Russia and China have formed a model of a new type of interstate relations that meets the fundamental national interests of the two countries and aspirations of their peoples, which also plays an important role in promoting a multipolar world order and ensuring international and regional security and stability. Twenty years of experience of dynamic and comprehensive development of the Russian-Chinese cooperation show that the Treaty successfully reflects the realities of the international environment that is undergoing unprecedented change. 


Today, when the largest pandemic in this century is making more acute global competition, the provisions of the Treaty not only remain relevant, but also are gaining a new meaning and continue to serve as a solid support for Russian-Chinese relations. The Heads of State of Russia and China appreciate the historic and practical importance of the Treaty and agree to extend it in accordance with article 25.


 II 


The Russian-Chinese relations have reached the highest level in their history. They are mature, constructive and sustainable and promote the development and prosperity of the two countries and the well-being of their peoples, representing a model of harmonious coexistence of the States and mutually beneficial cooperation between them. 


Russia is interested in a stable and prosperous China and China is interested in a strong and successful Russia. Considering each other as priority partners, the Parties, guided by the Treaty, will further strengthen coordination and cooperation in all fields, including political, security, military, trade and economic, humanitarian and international spheres. Having defined strategic support and mutual assistance, integration, a focus on innovation, common advantage and mutual benefit as benchmarks, they will continue developing their comprehensive partnership and strategic interaction in the new era. 


The Russian-Chinese relations are based on equality, deep mutual trust, commitment to international law, support in defending each other's core interests, the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity. While not being a military and political alliance, such as those formed during the Cold War, the Russian-Chinese relations exceed this form of interstate interaction. They are not opportunistic, are free of ideologisation, involve comprehensive consideration of the partner's interests and non-interference in each other's internal affairs, they are self-sufficient and not directed against third countries, they display international relations of a new type.


 Russia and China have completely resolved the border issue inherited from history and now the two countries have no mutual territorial claims. The Parties are determined to turn the common border into a belt of eternal peace and friendship handed down from generation to generation, which will be the cornerstone of our interstate relations. 


III 


Guided by Article 10 of the Treaty, the Parties will continue to develop an intensive dialogue at the top and high levels, which is an essential tool for the promotion of the whole spectrum of Russian-Chinese relations. 


The Parties will continue to use leaders' diplomacy which plays a leading role in ensuring a progressive deepening of the bilateral strategic partnership, including mutual visits, meetings on the margins of international forums, and other contacts between Heads of State. They will continue to improve the mechanism of regular meetings between the Heads of Governments, the work of the intergovernmental commissions at the level of deputy prime ministers, the various formats of interregional cooperation as key instruments for 3 coordinating and expanding bilateral practical and humanitarian cooperation; develop contacts between the heads of the highest legislative bodies, exchanges and dialogue through interparliamentary commission, specialized committees and commissions, and deputy friendship groups; maintain a direct dialogue between the Presidential Executive Office of the Russian Federation and apparatus of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China in order to coordinate and harmonize matters relating to contacts between the Heads of State and implementation of the agreements reached between them; cooperate actively, through consultations of the high representatives for strategic security and for public security, justice, and law enforcement, on global, regional and national security and on addressing traditional and emerging challenges and threats. 


IV 


In accordance with the principles set forth in Article 7 of the Treaty, Russian-Chinese military and military technology cooperation is developing in a spirit of comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation and is not directed against third countries. The Parties adhere strictly to agreements on the mutual reduction of armed forces in the State border areas and on building confidence in the military field. Russia and China successfully cooperate on multilateral forums in the framework of the SCO and ADMM-Plus to ensure global and regional security. 


The Parties intend to continue deepening interaction between the armed forces by maintaining a regular dialogue between the heads of defence agencies, increasing the number and scope of joint exercises, exchanges between military districts, services and branches of the armed forces, and improving the legal framework and cooperation in the field of military training. 



Russian-Chinese economic cooperation is in conformity with the fundamental interests of the two countries and contributes to the well-being of their citizens. Welcoming the achievements of practical cooperation in recent years and guided by Articles 16 and 17 of the Treaty, the Parties intend to consistently expand the scope and ensure the genuinely strategic nature of such interaction, focus on providing favourable conditions for it, bearing in mind primarily each other's interests and acting on the basis of the principle of mutual benefit, in accordance with national legislation and each Party's international commitments. 


To this end, the Parties have agreed: 


to increase the volume of bilateral trade, including by developing long-term investment cooperation and supporting business entities in implementing investment projects, creating a stable business environment, strengthening cooperation in the field of antimonopoly and competition policy, and identifying new points of economic growth; 


to strengthen strategic and comprehensive energy cooperation, implement existing and reach meaningful new agreements on the supply and processing of hydrocarbons, peaceful use of nuclear energy, and on other areas of cooperation; 


to deepen trust-based financial interaction, support the expansion of mutual payments in national currencies in bilateral trade, investment and lending, facilitate non-stop payments between economic entities, and encourage access to each other's capital markets of investors and issuers of the two countries; 


to strengthen cooperation in the field of industry, information and communication technologies, space and aviation; 


to enhance cooperation in the field of scientific and technological innovations, maintain mutually-beneficial cooperation of the Parties in fundamental science, high technologies, promote bilateral exchanges of experts, expand innovative cooperation; 


to ensure effective protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights; to increase interaction in agriculture, facilitate mutual access of agricultural products to the markets of the Parties, develop investment cooperation in agro-industry; 


to promote an early post-epidemic recovery of transport links, deepen cooperation in the field of transport, resolve cross-border and transit transportation issues on the basis of equal rights and for the mutual benefit, promote the development and facilitation of bilateral transportation procedures, modernize and build points of entry and transport infrastructure along the common border, deepen customs cooperation, as well as facilitate the customs procedures by ensuring the transparency and security of international trade, enhance interaction along the border rivers; 


to strengthen cooperation on the use of the Northern Sea Route on the principles of mutual benefit, respect for and consideration of littoral State’s interests, promote sustainable development of the Arctic; 


and to enhance interregional ties. 


VI 


The Parties reaffirmed their commitment to implementing the agreements reached between the leaders of Russia and China to create the Greater Eurasian Partnership in a 5 parallel and coordinated manner, as well as to developing the One Belt One Road initiative. The Parties noted the importance of the Eurasian Economic Union and One Belt One Road construction plans and their interrelation to ensure continuous and sustainable economic growth in the Eurasian Macro-Region, as well as the importance of enhancing regional and economic integration, maintaining peace in the region and developing the region itself. 


VII 


The Parties will continue to pay special attention to the development of humanitarian exchanges that play an important role in deepening the mutual understanding and passing the traditions of good-neighbourliness and friendship between the peoples of Russia and China from one generation to the next. 


To this end, the Parties have agreed: 


to expand bilateral education, inter-university and academic ties, encourage the learning and teaching of the Russian language in the People's Republic of China and the Chinese language in the Russian Federation; 


to deepen interaction in cultural exchanges and enhance the role of cultural centres, friendship societies and public organizations, strengthen cooperation among artistic groups, theatres, museums and other cultural organizations of both countries, develop dialogue on the preservation, restoration and use of historic and religious sites and historic and cultural monuments, pay special attention to military and memorial sites, strengthen the legal framework for cooperation in this area; 


to promote secure, comprehensive and planned recovery and harmonious development of tourist exchanges between the two countries and improve the quality of tourist services with due consideration of the changing epidemiological situation; 


to deepen cooperation between the two countries on archival affairs; based on the principles of mutual trust and benefit, to promote cooperation in health care and health sciences, expand interaction in ensuring public health and epidemiological well-being by paying special attention to the prevention of and response to the spread of infectious diseases, the development of diagnostics, drugs and vaccines; 


to enhance mutually beneficial cooperation in physical culture and sports, oppose the politicization of sports on the international arena, support China's hosting of the 2022 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games in Beijing; 


to promote cooperation in the field of ecology and environmental protection, early notification and exchange of information concerning transboundary environmental 6 emergencies, in the field of rational use and protection of transboundary water bodies, biodiversity conservation and establishment of specially protected natural territories, solid waste management; 


to enhance exchanges concerning environmental protection and response to climate change within the UN, BRICS, SCO and other multilateral formats; to strengthen interaction on media policy, mutual broadcasting of television programs; 


to increase cooperation between print, electronic, and new media; to continue to implement joint projects in book publishing, inter alia, to translate works of Russian classical and modern literature into Chinese and works of Chinese classical and modern literature into Russian and to publish them; 


to help deepen mutual exchanges, expand dialogue between the two countries’ think tanks, and conduct joint research; 


to strengthen friendly ties between the young people in Russia and China, and to support the development of professional exchanges among young entrepreneurs. 


VIII 


The world is facing turbulence, with markedly increased instability and uncertainty. Humanity has been afflicted by a growing lack of governability and trust in international affairs, increased disparities in development and the rise in the potential for conflict. Ensuring common security and promoting sustainable development remain crucial challenges. Some states encourage rivalry and confrontation between major powers in a “zero sum game”. Force is becoming an increasingly important factor in international relations. Negative factors also include: attempts of certain countries to divide the world on ideological grounds, brazen interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states, unilateral arbitrary sanctions, and undermining of the legal framework of the international relations system, including in the area of arms control. These actions complicate the process of resolving international conflicts and problems. The threats of terrorism, extremism and separatism are increasing, especially in the territories of the neighboring states and regions. 


Russia and China share a common understanding of the need to form a more equitable democratic world order. To this end, the Parties should strengthen foreign policy coordination, uphold common interests on the global stage, and maintain global and regional balance of power. As global turbulence intensifies, the relevance of Russian-Chinese strategic cooperation increases. 


The Parties will remain committed to genuine multilateralism, will jointly defend the international system with the UN playing a central coordinating role and a world order based on international law, will stand for the principles of equality and mutual benefit, non- 7 interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states, peaceful settlement of disputes, rejection of the use of unilateral coercive measures that contravene the principles of international law and the UN Charter. The Parties will resist attempts to replace universally agreed international legal instruments and mechanisms with non-inclusive formats whereby non-consensual methods of resolving international problems are elaborated; and will resist attempts to unleash political struggle in multilateral structures. 


The Parties note that the spread of the new COVID-19 coronavirus infection has become an international factor with a long-term impact on the world's economic, social and political processes and the entire system of inter-State relations, and invite all countries to set aside their differences, demonstrate genuine humanism and solidarity, strengthen cooperation and relinquish attempts to use the problems caused by the COVID-19 pandemic for geopolitical purposes. The Parties support the central coordinating role of the World Health Organization in the fight against the pandemic. 


Heads of States unanimously believe that the initiative to convene a summit of the UN Security Council permanent Member States proposed by the Russian Party is of great practical importance and should serve as a basis for starting a serious and direct conversation between the leaders of the five founding powers of the UN that bear special responsibility for maintaining international peace and security concerning the principles of multilateral cooperation and ways to address the most critical problems faced by humanity. 


The Russian Party notes the positive significance of the China-proposed concept of building a community of shared future for humanity to enhance the solidarity of the world community and unite the efforts against common challenges. The Chinese Party notes the positive significance of the efforts of the Russian Party to create a fair multipolar system of international relations. The Parties believe that these doctrinal ideas will contribute to strengthening international peace and security, implementing the UN’s 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda and ensuring progressive development and prosperity of the entire humankind. 


The Parties urge States and associations of States to refrain from using unilateral coercive measures (including extraterritorial ones) that impede the full implementation of sustainable socio-economic development goals, especially in developing countries, and have an adverse humanitarian impact on the civil population. 


The Parties intend to continue their joint efforts to promote the use by the UN human rights mechanisms of an even-handed approach to systemic advancement of human rights and counter politicization of the international human rights agenda, the policy of double 8 standards and the use of the human rights issues as a tool to interfere in the internal affairs of sovereign States. 


The Parties consider that nuclear States have a particular responsibility to maintain international security and global strategic stability and should therefore address existing concerns through dialogue and consultations, increase mutual trust, strengthen general security and avoid misunderstandings and erroneous strategic decisions that could exacerbate tensions and cause a military confrontation. The Parties are firmly convinced that nuclear war has no winners and should never be unleashed. Given the risks of nuclear escalation, we should also do our utmost to prevent any armed conflicts between any States with military nuclear capabilities. 


Russia and China reaffirm their commitment to their obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and will continue coordinating their efforts with a view to preserving and strengthening the Treaty for the benefit of international peace and security. 


The Parties note that global and regional security and stability are gravely affected by the US decision to withdraw from several crucial international arms control agreements. The Parties express their concern over the implementation of the US plans to develop its global missile defence system and the deployment of its elements in various parts of the world, coupled with the building of the capacity of high-precision non-nuclear weapons capable of attaining strategic objectives. Such actions jeopardize international and regional security and global strategic stability. 


The Parties underline that after withdrawing from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the United States has accelerated its research and development of land-based intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles. The US Party seeks to deploy them in the Asia-Pacific and European regions, thus aggravating tensions and increasing mutual distrust. The risks to international and regional security are on the rise, while the international arms control and non-proliferation system is weakening, which undermines global strategic stability. Russia and China call upon the United States and relevant stakeholders to show restraint and positively react to the Russia-sponsored initiative to impose a moratorium on deployment of intermediate- and shorter-range ground-based missiles. The Parties intend to maintain a close dialogue and coordinate their positions on the issue. 


The Parties stand against actions of certain Western countries to transform outer space into a sphere of military confrontation and reiterate the need to exert all possible efforts to prevent an arms race in outer space and space weaponization, and its transformation into an arena for military confrontation and to ensure the safety of space activities and preserve outer 9 space for peaceful purposes. The Parties reaffirm the urgency of elaboration of a legally binding multilateral instrument that provides solid guarantees for the prevention of an arms race in outer space and placement of weapons in outer space, on the basis of the Russia-China draft treaty on the prevention of the placement of weapons in outer space, the threat or use of force against outer space objects. They encourage all States, especially space-faring nations, to assume a political commitment not to be the first to place weapons in outer space. The Parties will continue their joint efforts to promote the peaceful use of outer space in the interests of more effective advancement of economic development and social progress. 


The Parties reaffirm their commitment to the goals and objectives of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction and call upon the States Parties to the Convention to hold regular consultations and cooperate in addressing any issues related to its implementation on the basis of consensus and strictly within the mechanisms provided for in the Convention. 


The Parties stress the importance of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction as a pillar of the international security system, support the compliance with and strengthening of the Convention, including through the adoption of a legally binding protocol to the Convention with an efficient verification mechanism, call upon the States Parties to the Convention to refrain from preventing negotiations on the mentioned protocol and increase transparency of their military biological research conducted in their countries and abroad, and encourage the States Parties to the Convention to actively cooperate with each other, including via consultations, in addressing any issues related to the implementation of the Convention. 


With a view to countering the threat of chemical and biological terrorism, the Parties underline the need for the launch of multilateral negotiations on an international convention on the suppression of acts of chemical and biological terrorism, including at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva. 


The Parties share the understanding that multilateral interaction in the field of nonproliferation and export controls should not target certain States or prevent the legitimate economic and scientific and technical cooperation between countries. The Parties intend to strongly counter discriminatory approaches in this field and the use of export control tools as a lever for imposing political pressure or sanctions. 


The Parties reaffirm their commitment to strengthen international information security both at bilateral and multilateral levels, and they will further contribute to establishing a 10 global international information security system based on such principles as prevention of conflicts in information space and promotion of the use of information and communication technologies for peaceful purposes. In this context, they underline the applicability of international law, in particular the UN Charter, to information space, however, a common understanding on how it is used given the specifics of information and communication technologies is required, express their support for the work being done within the UN to elaborate new rules, norms and principles of responsible behaviour of States in information space and reiterate the key role of the UN in countering threats in the field of international information security. 


The Parties emphasize the need to ensure an ongoing and continuous specialized negotiation process under the aegis of the United Nations within the new UN Open-Ended Working Group 2021–2025, set up at the initiative of Russia with active support from the People's Republic of China. 


Russia and China strongly support the work of the Ad Hoc Intergovernmental Committee of Experts established under UN General Assembly resolutions 74/247 and 75/282, promote the early adoption of a comprehensive UN convention on combating the use of information and communication technologies for criminal purposes, and call on all parties to engage constructively in negotiations. 


The Parties underscore their unity on issues related to Internet governance, which include ensuring that all States have equal rights to participate in global-network governance, increasing their role in this process and preserving the sovereign right of States to regulate the national segment of the Internet. Russia and China emphasize the need to enhance the role of the International Telecommunication Union and strengthen the representation of the two countries in its governing bodies. 


Russia supports the Global Initiative on Data Security launched by China, and both Parties intend to continue promoting the development of possible joint measures to counter threats to international information security, including data security, within the UN OpenEnded Working Group 2021–2025. 


The Parties are determined to continue deepening bilateral cooperation on the basis of the joint statement of the President of the Russian Federation and the President of the People's Republic of China on cooperation in the development of information space of 25 June 2016 and the Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the People's Republic of China on Cooperation in Ensuring International Information Security of 8 May 2015. 


The Parties will continue to mutually support one another's efforts to combat terrorism and extremism and counter the policy of double standards in combating terrorism. They will further strengthen cooperation to counter the spread of terrorist and extremist ideologies, recruitment activities, and the phenomenon of relocating foreign terrorist fighters, suppress material and financial support to terrorist organizations, combat incitement to terrorism and investigate terrorist crimes. 


The Parties will continue to jointly advocate for an open, transparent, inclusive, and non-discriminatory multilateral trading system, with the World Trade Organization playing a central role, and to take coordinated action to ensure its effective and uninterrupted functioning. 


The Parties will continue to strengthen international cooperation to jointly address global challenges, including climate change and biodiversity conservation. 


The Parties call for taking concerted region-wide efforts to build an equal and indivisible security system in the Asia-Pacific region based on the principles of noninterference in the internal affairs of sovereign States, peaceful settlement of disputes, and non-use of force or threat of force, and establishing truly constructive non-conflict interaction to find effective pathways for regional development. 


The Parties will continue to step up cooperation to strengthen the SCO, BRICS, RIC, G20 and other multilateral mechanisms as responsible and influential actors contributing to the process of shaping a more equitable and representative world order to ensure equal, indivisible, comprehensive, co-operative and sustainable security and stable economic development. 


*** 

The Parties, guided by the Treaty and adhering to the principles set forth therein, will develop bilateral relations in keeping with the spirit of friendship and mutually beneficial cooperation passed down from generation to generation. They appeal to the international community to move forward together and to protect and nurture common values such as peace, development, justice, democracy, and freedom. 


28 June 2021


Article by Sergey Lavrov “The Law, the Rights and the Rules”

 

The frank and generally constructive conversation that took place at the June 16, 2021 summit meeting between presidents Vladimir Putin and Joseph Biden in Geneva resulted in an agreement to launch a substantive dialogue on strategic stability, reaffirming the crucial premise that nuclear war is unacceptable. The two sides also reached an understanding on the advisability of engaging in consultations on cybersecurity, the operation of diplomatic missions, the fate of imprisoned Russian and US citizens and a number of regional conflicts.

The Russian leader made it clear, including in his public statements, that finding a mutually acceptable balance of interests strictly on a parity basis is the only way to deliver on any of these tracks. There were no objections during the talks. However, in their immediate aftermath, US officials, including those who participated in the Geneva meeting, started asserting what seemed to be foregone tenets, perorating that they had “made it clear” to Moscow, “warned it, and stated their demands.” Moreover, all these “warnings” went hand in hand with threats: if Moscow does not accept the “rules of the road” set forth in Geneva in a matter of several months, it would come under renewed pressure.

Of course, it has yet to be seen how the consultations to define specific ways for fulfilling the Geneva understandings as mentioned above will proceed. As Vladimir Putin said during his news conference following the talks, “we have a lot to work on.” That said, it is telling that Washington’s ineradicable position was voiced immediately following the talks, especially since European capitals immediately took heed of the Big Brother’s sentiment and picked up the tune with much gusto and relish. The gist of their statements is that they are ready to normalise their relations with Moscow, but only after it changes the way it behaves.

It is as if a choir has been pre-arranged to sing along with the lead vocalist. It seems that this was what the series of high-level Western events in the build-up to the Russia-US talks was all about: the Group of Seven Summit in Cornwall, UK, the NATO Summit in Brussels, as well as Joseph Biden’s meeting with President of the European Council Charles Michel and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen.

These meetings were carefully prepared in a way that leaves no doubt that the West wanted to send a clear message: it stands united like never before and will do what it believes to be right in international affairs, while forcing others, primarily Russia and China, to follow its lead. The documents adopted at the Cornwall and Brussels summits cemented the rules-based world order concept as a counterweight to the universal principles of international law with the UN Charter as its primary source.

In doing so, the West deliberately shies away from spelling out the rules it purports to follow, just as it refrains from explaining why they are needed. After all, there are already thousands of universal international legal instruments setting out clear national commitments and transparent verification mechanisms. The beauty of these Western “rules” lies precisely in the fact that they lack any specific content. When someone acts against the will of the West, it immediately responds with a groundless claim that “the rules have been broken” (without bothering to present any evidence) and declares its “right to hold the perpetrators accountable.” The less specific they get, the freer their hand to carry on with the arbitrary practice of employing dirty tactics as a way to pressure competitors. During the so-called “wild 1990s” in Russia, we used to refer to such practices as laying down the law.

To the participants in the G7, NATO and US-EU summits, this series of high-level events signalled the return by the United States into European affairs and the restored consolidation of the Old World under the wing of the new administration in Washington. Most NATO and EU members met this U-turn with enthusiastic comments rather than just a sigh of relief. The adherence to liberal values as the humanity’s guiding star provides an ideological underpinning for the reunification of the “Western family.” Without any false modesty, Washington and Brussels called themselves “an anchor for democracy, peace and security,” as opposed to “authoritarianism in all its forms.” In particular, they proclaimed their intent to use sanctions to “support democracy across the globe.” To this effect, they took on board the American idea of convening a Summit for Democracy. Make no mistake, the West will cherry pick the participants in this summit. It will also set an agenda that is unlikely to meet any opposition from the participants of its choosing. There has been talk of democracy-exporting countries undertaking “enhanced commitments” to ensure universal adherence to “democratic standards” and devising mechanisms for controlling these processes.

The revitalised Anglo-American Atlantic Charter approved by Joseph Biden and Boris Johnson on June 10, 2021 on the sidelines of the G7 Summit is also worth noting. It was cast as an updated version of the 1941 document signed by Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill under the same title. At the time, it played an important role in shaping the contours of the post-war world order.

However, neither Washington, nor London mentioned an essential historical fact: eighty years ago, the USSR and a number of European governments in exile joined the 1941 charter, paving the way to making it one of the conceptual pillars of the Anti-Hitler Coalition and one of the legal blueprints of the UN Charter.

By the same token, the New Atlantic Charter has been designed as a starting point for building a new world order, but guided solely by Western “rules.” Its provisions are ideologically tainted. They seek to widen the gap between the so-called liberal democracies and all other nations, as well as legitimise the rules-based order. The new charter fails to mention the UN or the OSCE, while stating without any reservations the adherence by the Western nations to their commitments as NATO members, viewed de facto as the only legitimate decision-making centre (at least this is how former NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen described NATO’s role). It is clear that the same philosophy will guide the preparations for the Summit for Democracy.

Labelled as “authoritarian powers,” Russia and China have been designated as the main obstacles to delivering on the agenda set out at the June summits. From a general perspective, they face two groups of grievances, loosely defined as external and internal. In terms of international affairs, Beijing is accused of being too assertive in pursuing its economic interests (the Belt and Road initiative), as well as expanding its military and, in general, technological might with a view to increasing its influence. Russia stands accused of adopting an “aggressive posture” in a number of regions. This is the way they treat Moscow’s policy aimed at countering ultra-radical and neo-Nazi aspirations in its immediate neighbourhood, where the rights of Russians, as well as other ethnic minorities, are being suppressed, and the Russian language, education and culture rooted out. They also dislike the fact than Moscow stands up for countries that became victims to Western gambles, were attacked by international terrorists and risked losing their statehood, as was the case with Syria.

Still, the West reserved its biggest words to the inner workings of the “non-democratic” countries and its commitment to reshape them to fit into the Western mould. This entails bringing society in compliance with the vision of democracy as preached by Washington and Brussels. This lies at the root of the demands that Moscow and Beijing, as well as all others, follow the Western prescriptions on human rights, civil society, opposition treatment, the media, governance and the interaction between the branches of power. While proclaiming the “right” to interfere in the domestic affairs of other countries for the sake of promoting democracy as it understands it, the West instantly loses all interest when we raise the prospect of making international relations more democratic, including renouncing arrogant behaviour and committing to abide by the universally recognised tenets of international law instead of “rules.” By expanding sanctions and other illegitimate coercive measures against sovereign states, the West promotes totalitarian rule in global affairs, assuming an imperial, neo-colonial stance in its relations with third countries. They are asked to adopt the democratic rule under the model of the Western choosing, and forget about democracy in international affairs, since someone will be deciding everything for them. All that is asked of these third countries is to keep quiet, or face reprisals.

Clearheaded politicians in Europe and America realise that this uncompromising policy leads nowhere, and are beginning to think pragmatically, albeit out of public view, recognising that the world has more than just one civilisation. They are beginning to recognise that Russia, China and other major powers have a history that dates back a thousand years, and have their own traditions, values and way of life. Attempts to decide whose values are better, and whose are worse, seem pointless. Instead, the West must simply recognise that there are other ways to govern that may be different from the Western approaches, and accept and respect this as a given. No country is immune to human rights issues, so why all this high-browed hubris? Why do the Western countries assume that they can deal with these issues on their own, since they are democracies, while others have yet to reach this level, and are in need of assistance that the West will generously provide.

International relations are going through fundamental shifts that affect everyone without exception. Trying to predict where it will take us is impossible. Still, there is a question: messianic aspirations apart, what is the most effective form of government for coping with and removing threats that transcend borders and affect all people, no matter where they live? Political scientists are beginning to compare the available toolboxes used by the so-called liberal democracies and by “autocratic regimes.” In this context, it is telling that the term “autocratic democracy” has been suggested, even if timidly.

These are useful considerations, and serious-minded politicians who are currently in power, among others, must take heed. Thinking and scrutinising what is going on around us has never hurt anyone. The multipolar world is becoming reality. Attempts to ignore this reality by asserting oneself as the only legitimate decision-making centre will hardly bring about solutions to real, rather than farfetched challenges. Instead, what is needed is mutually respectful dialogue involving the leading powers and with due regard for the interests of all other members of the international community. This implies an unconditional commitment to abide by the universally accepted norms and principles of international law, including respecting the sovereign equality of states, non-interference in their domestic affairs, peaceful resolution of conflict, and the right to self-determination.

Taken as a whole, the historical West dominated the world for five hundred years. However, there is no doubt that it now sees that this era is coming to a close, while clinging to the status it used to enjoy, and putting artificial brakes on the objective process consisting in the emergence of a polycentric world. This brought about an attempt to provide a conceptual underpinning to the new vision of multilateralism. For example, France and Germany tried to promote “effective multilateralism,” rooted in the EU ideals and actions, and serving as a model to everyone else, rather than promoting UN’s inclusive multilateralism.

By imposing the concept of a rules-based order, the West seeks to shift the conversation on key issues to the platforms of its liking, where no dissident voices can be heard. This is how like-minded groups and various “appeals” emerge. This is about coordinating prescriptions and then making everyone else follow them. Examples include an "appeal for trust and security in cyberspace”, “the humanitarian appeal for action”, and a "global partnership to protect media freedom." Each of these platforms brings together only several dozen countries, which is far from a majority, as far as the international community is concerned. The UN system offers inclusive negotiations platforms on all of the abovementioned subjects. Understandably, this gives rise to alternative points of view that have to be taken into consideration in search of a compromise, but all the West wants is to impose its own rules.

At the same time, the EU develops dedicated horizontal sanctions regimes for each of its “like-minded groups,” of course, without looking back at the UN Charter. This is how it works: those who join these “appeals” or “partnerships” decide among themselves who violates their requirements in a given sphere, and the European Union imposes sanctions on those at fault. What a convenient method. They can indict and punish all by themselves without ever needing to turn to the UN Security Council. They even came up with a rationale to this effect: since we have an alliance of the most effective multilateralists, we can teach others to master these best practices. To those who believe this to be undemocratic or at odds with a vision of genuine multilateralism, President of France Emmanuel Macron offered an explanation in his remarks on May 11, 2021: multilateralism does not mean necessity to strike unanimity, and the position of those "who do not wish to continue moving forward must not be able to stop ... an ambitious avant-garde" of the world community.

Make no mistake: there is nothing wrong with the rules per se. On the contrary, the UN Charter is a set of rules, but these rules were approved by all countries of the world, rather than by a closed group at a cosy get-together.

An interesting detail: in Russian, the words “law” and “rule” share a single root. To us, a rule that is genuine and just is inseparable from the law. This is not the case for Western languages. For instance, in English, the words “law” and “rule” do not share any resemblance. See the difference? “Rule” is not so much about the law, in the sense of generally accepted laws, as it is about the decisions taken by the one who rules or governs. It is also worth noting that “rule” shares a single root with “ruler,” with the latter’s meanings including the commonplace device for measuring and drawing straight lines. It can be inferred that through its concept of “rules” the West seeks to align everyone around its vision or apply the same yardstick to everybody, so that everyone falls into a single file.

While reflecting on linguistics, worldview, sentiment, and the way they vary from one nation or culture to another, it is worth recollecting how the West has been justifying NATO’s unreserved eastward expansion towards the Russian border. When we point to the assurances provided to the Soviet Union that this would not happen, we hear that these were merely spoken promises, and there were no documents signed to this effect. There is a centuries-old tradition in Russia of making handshake deals without signing anything and holding one’s word as sacrosanct, but it seems unlikely to ever take hold in the West.

Efforts to replace international law by Western “rules” include an immanently dangerous policy of revising the history and outcomes of the Second World War and the Nuremberg trials verdicts as the foundation of today’s world order. The West refuses to support a Russia-sponsored UN resolution proclaiming that glorifying Nazism is unacceptable, and rejects our proposals to discuss the demolition of monuments to those who liberated Europe. They also want to condemn to oblivion momentous post-war developments, such as the 1960 UN Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, initiated by our country. The former colonial powers seek to efface this memory by replacing it with hastily concocted rituals like taking a knee ahead of sports competitions, in order to divert attention from their historical responsibility for colonial-era crimes.

The rules-based order is the embodiment of double standards. The right to self-determination is recognised as an absolute “rule” whenever it can be used to an advantage. This applies to the Malvinas Islands, or the Falklands, some 12,000 kilometres from Great Britain, to the remote former colonial territories Paris and London retain despite multiple UN resolutions and rulings by the International Court of Justice, as well as Kosovo, which obtained its “independence” in violation of a UN Security Council resolution. However, if self-determination runs counter to the Western geopolitical interests, as it happened when the people of Crimea voted for reunification with Russia, this principle is cast aside, while condemning the free choice made by the people and punishing them with sanctions.

Apart from encroaching on international law, the “rules” concept also manifests itself in attempts to encroach on the very human nature. In a number of Western countries, students learn at school that Jesus Christ was bisexual. Attempts by reasonable politicians to shield the younger generation from aggressive LGBT propaganda are met with bellicose protests from the “enlightened Europe.” All world religions, the genetic code of the planet’s key civilisations, are under attack. The United States is at the forefront of state interference in church affairs, openly seeking to drive a wedge into the Orthodox world, whose values are viewed as a powerful spiritual obstacle for the liberal concept of boundless permissiveness.

The insistence and even stubbornness demonstrated by the West in imposing its “rules” are striking. Of course, domestic politics is a factor, with the need to show voters how tough your foreign policy can get when dealing with “autocratic foes” during every electoral cycle, which happen every two years in the United States.

Still, it was also the West that coined the “liberty, equality, fraternity” motto. I do not know whether the term “fraternity” is politically correct in today’s Europe from a “gender perspective,” but there were no attempts to encroach on equality so far. As mentioned above, while preaching equality and democracy in their countries and demanding that other follow its lead, the West refuses to discuss ways to ensure equality and democracy in international affairs.

This approach is clearly at odds with the ideals of freedom. The veil of its superiority conceals weakness and the fear of engaging in a frank conversation not only with yes-men and those eager to fall in line, but also with opponents with different beliefs and values, not neo-liberal or neo-conservative ones, but those learned at mother’s knee, inherited from many past generations, traditions and beliefs.

It is much harder to accept the diversity and competition of ideas in the development of the world than to invent prescriptions for all of humanity within a narrow circle of the like-minded, free from any disputes on matters of principle, which makes the emergence of truth all but impossible. However, universal platforms can produce agreements that are much more solid, sustainable, and can be subject to objective verification.

This immutable truth struggles to make it through to the Western elites, consumed as they are with the exceptionalism complex. As I mentioned earlier in this article, right after the talks between Vladimir Putin and Joseph Biden, EU and NATO officials rushed to announce that nothing has changed in the way they treat Russia. Moreover, they are ready to see their relations with Moscow deteriorate further, they claimed.

Moreover, it is an aggressive Russophobic minority that increasingly sets the EU’s policy, as confirmed by the EU Summit in Brussels on June 24 and 25, 2021, where the future of relations with Russia was on the agenda. The idea voiced by Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron to hold a meeting with Vladimir Putin was killed before it saw the light of day. Observers noted that the Russia-US Summit in Geneva was tantamount to a go-ahead by the United States to have this meeting, but the Baltic states, siding with Poland, cut short this “uncoordinated” attempt by Berlin and Paris, while the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry summoned the German and French ambassadors to explain their governments’ actions. What came out of the debates at the Brussels summit was an instruction to the European Commission and the European Union External Action Service to devise new sanctions against Moscow without referring to any specific “sins,” just in case. No doubt they will come up with something, should the need arise.

Neither NATO, nor the EU intend to divert from their policy of subjugating other regions of the world, proclaiming a self-designated global messianic mission. The North-Atlantic Treaty Organisation is seeking to proactively contribute to America’s strategy for the Indo-Pacific Region, clearly targeted at containing China, and undermining ASEAN’s role in its decades-long efforts to build an inclusive cooperation architecture for Asia-Pacific. In turn, the European Union drafts programmes to “embrace” geopolitical spaces in its neighbourhood and beyond, without coordinating these initiatives even with the invited countries. This is what the Eastern Partnership, as well as a recent programme approved by Brussels for Central Asia, are all about. There is a fundamental difference between these approaches and the ones guiding integration processes with Russia’s involvement: the CIS, the CSTO, EurAsEC and the SCO, which seek to develop relations with external partners exclusively on the basis of parity and mutual agreement.

With its contemptuous attitude towards other members of the international community, the West finds itself on the wrong side of history.

Serious, self-respecting countries will never tolerate attempts to talk to them through ultimatums and will discuss any issues only on an equal footing.

As for Russia, it is high time that everyone understands that we have drawn a definitive line under any attempts to play a one-way game with us. All the mantras we hear from the Western capitals on their readiness to put their relations with Moscow back on track, as long as it repents and changes its tack, are meaningless. Still, many persist, as if by inertia, in presenting us with unilateral demands, which does little, if any, credit to how realistic they are.

The policy of having the Russian Federation develop on its own, independently and protecting national interests, while remaining open to reaching agreements with foreign partners on an equal basis, has long been at the core of all its position papers on foreign policy, national security and defence. However, judging by the practical steps taken over the recent years by the West, they probably thought that Russia did not really mean what it preached, as if it did not intend to follow through on these principles. This includes the hysterical response to Moscow’s efforts to stand up for the rights of Russians in the aftermath of the bloody 2014 government coup in Ukraine, supported by the United States, NATO and the EU. They thought that if they applied some more pressure on the elites and targeted their interests, while expanding personal, financial and other sectoral sanctions, Moscow would come to its senses and realise that it would face mounting challenges on its development path, as long as it did not “change its behaviour,” which implies obeying the West. Even when Russia made it clear that we view this policy by the United States and Europe as a new reality and will proceed on economic and other matters from the premise that we cannot depend on unreliable partners, the West persisted in believing that, at the end of the day, Moscow “will come to its senses” and will make the required concessions for the sake of financial reward. Let me emphasise what President Vladimir Putin has said on multiple occasions: there have been no unilateral concessions since the late 1990s and there never will be. If you want to work with us, recover lost profits and business reputations, let us sit down and agree on ways we can meet each other half way in order to find fair solutions and compromises.

It is essential that the West understands that this is a firmly ingrained worldview among the people of Russia, reflecting the attitude of the overwhelming majority here. The “irreconcilable” opponents of the Russian government who have placed their stakes on the West and believe that all Russia’s woes come from its anti-Western stance advocate unilateral concessions for the sake of seeing the sanctions lifted and receiving hypothetical financial gains. But they are totally marginal in Russian society. During his June 16, 2021 news conference in Geneva, Vladimir Putin made it abundantly clear what the West is after when it supports these marginal forces.

These are disruptive efforts as far as history is concerned, while Russians have always demonstrated maturity, a sense of self-respect, dignity and national pride, and the ability to think independently, especially during hard times, while remaining open to the rest of the world, but only on an equal, mutually beneficial footing. Once we put the confusion and mayhem of the 1990s behind us, these values became the bedrock of Russia’s foreign policy concept in the 21st century. The people of Russia can decide on how they view the actions by their government without getting any prompts from abroad.

As to the question on how to proceed on the international stage, there is no doubt that leaders will always play an important role, but they have to reaffirm their authority, offer new ideas and lead by conviction, not ultimatums. The Group of Twenty, among others, is a natural platform for working out mutually acceptable agreements. It brings together the leading economies, young and old, including the G7, as well as the BRICS and its like-minded countries. Russia’s initiative to form a Greater Eurasian Partnership by coordinating the efforts of countries and organisations across the continent holds a powerful consolidating potential. Seeking to facilitate an honest conversation on the key global stability matters, President Vladimir Putin suggested convening a summit of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council that have special responsibility for maintaining international peace and stability on the planet.

Efforts to bring more democracy to international relations and affirm a polycentric world order include reforming the UN Security Council by strengthening it with Asian, African and Latin American countries, and ending the anomaly with the excessive representation of the West in the UN’s main body.

Regardless of any ambitions and threats, our country remains committed to a sovereign and independent foreign policy, while also ready to offer a unifying agenda in international affairs with due account for the cultural and civilisational diversity in today’s world. Confrontation is not our choice, no matter the rationale. On June 22, 2021, Vladimir Putin published an article “Being Open, Despite the Past,” in which he emphasised: “We simply cannot afford to carry the burden of past misunderstandings, hard feelings, conflicts, and mistakes.” He also discussed the need to ensure security without dividing lines, a common space for equitable cooperation and inclusive development. This approach hinges on Russia’s thousand-year history and is fully consistent with the current stage in its development. We will persist in promoting the emergence of an international relations culture based on the supreme values of justice and enabling all countries, large and small, to develop in peace and freedom. We will always remain open to honest dialogue with anyone who demonstrates a reciprocal readiness to find a balance of interests firmly rooted in international law. These are the rules we adhere to.

NATO's Sea Breeze 2021 Starts In Ukraine

NATO has started the Sea Breeze exercises, which are held every year on the territory of Ukraine.


Officially, Sea Breeze is an annual multinational exercise, the format of which was determined by the Ukrainian-American agreement back in the 90s. In a nutshell: Washington pays for maneuvers, Kiev provides territory and water area.
Exercises by ships of the United States and other NATO countries near the Russian borders are a challenge in itself. Moreover, this year, due to the tense situation in the region, the Sea Breeze looks like a provocative step towards exacerbation.
A record number of participants - 32 countries, more than 30 ships, aviation and paratroopers. It is not hard to guess who is considered here as an enemy.
Last week, Russian diplomats urged the United States and its allies not to rehearse a war in the Black Sea, at least because such maneuvers could provoke an accidental incident.
Not to mention the fact that they only fuel the belligerent mood of Kiev. And some of the military equipment - this has been said more than once in Moscow - after the end of the exercises may generally remain in Ukraine.
This brings to mind the hysteria raised by the West in the spring around the Russian military exercises. Russia conducted them on its territory, but it was declared the aggressor.
What, then, to say about the American ships maneuvering right at the Russian borders? Or about a British destroyer who staged a provocation in Russian territorial waters off Cape Fiolent?
With regard to the Sea Breeze exercises, even before their start, the RF Ministry of Defense promised that it would closely follow the progress of the maneuvers.

Putin Hosts Best Military Graduates In The Kremlin

In the Grand Kremlin Palace, Vladimir Putin met with the top graduates of higher military schools of the Defence and Emergencies Ministries, the Federal Security Service, the Federal Guard Service, and the National Guard.


The Kremlin invited 400 top graduates from 18 military schools, who graduated with honours and gold medals, as well as professors and heads of military education institutions.
Like many generations of the sons and daughters of the Fatherland, they devoted themselves to military service, as well as to other areas that are necessary for the confident, stable development of Russia. Graduates will continue and strengthen the legendary traditions of valor and honor, courage and patriotism, which at all times served as a reference point for the Russian officer corps.
Service in the army is, by and large, prosaic. However, the formation of a new state armaments program based on the advanced developments of leading research groups, defense research institutes and design bureaus with a planning horizon until 2034 has already begun, and its implementation will be aimed at further strengthening the country's defense capability.
Оn the walls of the Kremlin’s St George Hall, there are names of units and names of people who distinguished themselves in the armed conflicts and wars waged in the interests of the country. 'The people who served in these units committed heroic deeds in the interests of Russia without thinking that their names will be eternalised on the walls of a Kremlin hall. Certainly not.
They believed that they had been granted a great honour, namely to serve their Motherland. Live up to this honour, be worthy of our predecessors.
I wish you good luck in your difficult military work,' Putin said in conclusion.

Putin, Xi Underscores Unwavering Strategic Partnership

Vladimir Putin on Monday held an online meeting with Xi Jinping, timed to coincide with the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Russian-Chinese Treaty on Good Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation.


The Russian-Chinese relations are at their highest point, the ties between both states serve as an example of intergovernmental cooperation in the 21st century, Russian President Vladimir Putin said during a videoconference with his Chinese counterpart Xi.
According to Putin, the countries created a unique multi-level mechanism of bilateral coordination, which includes regular contacts between leaders and heads of government, five intergovernmental commissions at the level of deputy prime ministers, dialogue formats between parliaments and regional organizations. 'All this helps resolve any issues arising during cooperation between both sides and plan our future work.'

Figure Skating Legend Tamara Moskvina's Birthday

Today, the legend of figure skating and the best coach of sports couples in the world Tamara Moskvina celebrates her birthday.


A fragile woman with an unbending character and willpower, she can rightfully be called the creator of the ice factory of figure skating stars.
In his congratulatory telegram, Vladimir Putin noted that exceptional efficiency, a creative approach to business and an invariably positive attitude helped Tamara Nikolaevna to become a bright, successful athlete, to fully realize herself in the coaching field.
Even while resting, the honored coach still thinks about work. But in her group today, obviously, the two best couples in the world. At the Championship in Stockholm - gold and silver. Although Moskvina never sets the task of being the first by all means, her position is simply to be better every day than yesterday. After all, Moskvina, back in the 50s, when she was a loner, invented that very rotation with a raised leg, which would later be called Biellmann, after the name of the Swiss figure skater.
After the single skating there was pair skating. Together with Alexei Mishin, they took the gold of the world championship. Together they left the ice. But their duet would not have worked out without Igor Moskvin - first the coach, and then the husband, with whom they became rivals on the ice. Their pairs on the ice fought among themselves. Moskvin against Moskvina. Therefore, the spouses were almost one step away from the break. But Tamara Nikolaevna - a real diplomat, figure skating strategist - will always find a way out.
Her skaters understand this sign well: if there is a rattle in their hands, then the coach is happy. She never forces her students to work by force and never even raised voice.
The most successful coach of sports couples in the world always says: the main thing is not to give up. As it was in 2002, when the well-deserved gold of Elena Berezhnaya and Anton Sikharulidze, due to an alleged judicial error, they shared with the Canadians. It was also her decision, so that the two championship pairs would first skate together on the ice, and then climb the podium together. And now, 20 years later, she is again before the main start.
And after all, her energy is enough for everyone who is near. As if a perpetual motion machine rushes forward. It seems that there are not 24 hours in her day, but much more. Such is the rhythm of life, which once she set herself to herself.

Putin Fulfilled The New Year's Wish Of 13 Year Old Ksenia

Vladimir Putin talked by telephone with Ksenia Mazneva, 13, from St Petersburg, who took part in the New Year Tree of Wishes charity campaig...