What we expect from the next Putin’s term

This week has been rich in significant events. The Russian Team was sidelined from the participation in the Olympics. The USA threaten us with sanctions again. Vladimir Putin announced that he would run for president. And that decision is expected, the election outcome is predictable. The main issue is about Putin’s presidency new term and how they would put pressure on us before the election. It’s obvious that suspension of our Team from the Olympics is not the first and not necessarily final example of such a pressure. The discription of the whole intrigue about the Olympics has just been given by Dimitri Konstantinovich. And probably we won’t refer to this topic again today. And speaking of absolutely expected and completely predicted Mr. Putin’s standing for election, the central intrigue is about what program Vladimir Vladimirovich has for the election. I mean, what’s the idea of what we want to see from our country and what kind of country we want to see.

However, I should say a couple words about the Olympics. In terms of that if it’s right or not that we are going to the Olympics, I think that it should be considered from the technological positions. Just imagine: before the elections we would prohibit our Team to participate in the Olympics, but a group of sportsmen still would go to the Olympics. So then we would witness a political demonstration. It would be a political demonstration. They would be a part of a political action. Those, who would go there, would become a political action and enemies of the Russia would use 100% of it.

Just before the elections.

Just before the elections. Exactly. I think that it was one of the moves which should have worked. “They’re going or not. We’ll see. If they don’t go, then we’ll find somebody else and make them dissidents, make a group of them which will be a political group of protest supporters. And it would be shown just before the elections. So I think that there was no other choice in terms of technological position. Yes, emotionally, I’d definitely tell them where to go, too. I mean there are some cramp accusations, pardon my language. But in terms of technological point of view, especially in context of elections, there was no other way to do it differently. So, this is an optimal reaction, it has its defined pros and cons. With regard to other possible problems, which will be created before the elections, in my opinion, it would be about Syria. Yes, defeat of terrorists is mainly completed, the peace process is initiated. But, firstly, there’s no end in sight to this peace process, but it’s typical for the East, and especially for the Middle East. Secondly, I’m absolutely confident that we could expect some provocations in Syria, armed provocations, which would be arranged to discredit our position regarding the completion of the defeat etc. This is a very eventual moment, which, in my opinion, could happen, unfortunately.

By the way, as we all have learned today, the French won as well.

Everybody won, even those, who weren’t anywhere near.

Again the French won. – Undoubtedly.

So, if something happens, then Russia lost, and Al-Assad. But speaking about victory, it’s for the French. This is clear. Talking about possible political actions within Russia, I think, the opposition, anti-Putin opposition, in my opinion, has already lost. It’s almost impossible to do something serious before the elections. Yes, probably, they would practice some scenarios. Yes, probably, we would something, especially in large cities, some attempts to gather people through the networks. But most likely, it wouldn’t have any serious effect. Although the large cities is a problem spot traditionally for a federal election. That’s clear. Because it is there most of opposition-leaning electorate is concentrated. And thirdly, lastly, about what it should be, what we expect from the next Putin’s term, because it’s very important. At least, according to the Constitution, it will be the last Putin’s term. I think that he has already gone down in history, no doubts, regardless of how to treat him, but still.
According to the Constitution, it’s not.


Two terms in a row are not allowed. So, after a gap. So, this will be a question of his age and opportunities. No, it’s two terms in a row, according to the Constitution.

However, honestly, I personally would like this term to be really historical in scope of changes in Russia. All these years. Because speaking about economy, we have already mentioned this repeatedly in your studio. 30 years of reforms, and the result is negligible, in my opinion. Negligible. So far there’s no a compromise working model, which would combine government’s participation in scale of Russia, infrastructure projects and private initiative. Such a compromise model isn’t found yet; so much ideology. Our approach to the economy is: firstly, determined by ideological stamps, like free market economy, competitiveness and etc. In this case, we’re barely different from the Soviet model, in terms of the ideological stance. When it’s not effectiveness which is the most important, but compliance to a particular economic schools.
Just now Gaidar is instead of Marx.

Gaidar. Honestly, I don’t want to compare them.

Marx was more powerful.

To put it mildly. Though I’m not a Marx’s supporter.

Marx was objectively a famous scientist, whose name was written in golden letters. So, you can agree or not, but to deny his role in science would be ridiculous.

I’m far from a Marxist, but it should be admitted.

But Gaidar is far from the weakest scientist.

No disrespect, but they’re incomparable.


Really incomparable.

Vladimir, and secondly. Our economy is determined by…

Aunt Rosa is Senior Economist. And Marx is just a politician…

More important than Marx. Secondly, our economy is determined by personal interests of particular influence group, including those, who constantly move their money outside our country and doesn’t work efficiently for the economy. It’s necessary to find the model, which would set goals, and ways should comply with the achieving the goals, not with premises. and, of course, I think that a lot of people expect from this economy not only some workplaces, not 5,000, 6,000 or 3,000 how it’s reported, but hundreds of thousands of workplaces. And undoubtedly, social policy. Social justice, what a lot of people talk about. They actually believe that it has been lacking so far. These two directions, because the foreign policy is quite alright, should be focused on by Putin next year.

We can’t step back of sport topic for the reason that sport has long been a show business. And the large number of people got into it like into drugs, and watch it again and again. That’s why I call on all of us, including the audience, not to confuse it, not to burden it with a political sense. But in fact, we also fall victims to provocation, the outer one, when burden it with some extra-bloated political issues. Yes, it’s present, this political sense. I completely agree with the words toward…
Sport is a national idea. We did this pump ourselves. By the way, why?
Not me, Mikhail.

I get it.

We’re doing it ourselves, so let’s stop and see things clear-headed. And after all, first of all, the money should be spent on sport not for people staring at the TV, but to maintain the people’s health at a high enough level. This is important, not to fall into the trap of show business, which makes a person TV-addicted who always has to watch and watch. Something isn’t shown – he’s in frustration. Like there’s no other points in life. And one more thing. In addition to the joining to all these organizations etc., it’s absolutely correct, this is really alternative games. Look, we have SCO. let’s make the SCO winter games, and we will always be on the top there, firstly, and secondly, I assure you, seriously, if we make a good prize fund, everybody will come: the Americans will get there, the Europeans will, and all. They will be coming and coming; come and compete, come and compete. It’s not a bad alternative. Thirdly, towards the elections, I return to it. In fact, the question about the programs is important in terms of technological point of view, because on the one hand, nobody reads them. But it’s still important. When we talk about opposition, when we talk about the alternative ideas, we should be honest. In fact, we have only KPRF (the Communist Party) with its own program, because they have historical and ideological legacy. All the rest. What is their weakness? In fact, they don’t say anything, but “off with Putin”. This is the only item of their programs. All the rest is that we heard a million times and that doesn’t work, or just a rubbish of some greenhorns, pardon my language, who don’t have a program at all. “Not Putin, let it be not Putin, but me”. and by the way, this is a conceptual weakness of those who pretend to be an opposition.

Leave a Comment