10. Çin Komünist Partisi genel sekreteri
Two senior officers promoted to general, highest military rank in China
The last time Xi Jinping promoted officers to the rank of general was in December 2025.
Chinese leader promotes 2 generals in wake of military anti-corruption probe
Chinese President Xi Jinping has promoted two generals, the first time he has done so in nearly a year. The announcement follows Beijing’s far-reaching anti-corruption probe targeting the military leadership. More to follow …
Xi vows to strengthen China’s military, fight corruption in key speech
President Xi Jinping on Wednesday stressed the importance of a "strong military" and swore to "uphold the party's absolute leadership" of the armed forces in a speech marking the 105th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party. Fighting corruption was also a priority, Xi said, after a recent anti-graft purge gutted the military's top ranks.
Çin, Venezuela Depremine 14,7 Milyon Dolar Yardım ve Uydu Desteği Taahhüt EttiXi touts China Communist Party's global influence in speech marking 105th anniversary
Chinese President Xi Jinping spoke Wednesday to commemorate the 105th anniversary of the ruling Communist Party of China.
Xi, Çin Komünist Partisi'ni Küresel İlerlemenin Gücü Olarak KonumlandırdıXi vows to strengthen China's military, stamp out corruption
Chinese President Xi Jinping vowed on Wednesday to strengthen and modernise the military and to stamp out corruption within the ruling Communist Party. Xi underscored the importance of a “strong military” in a speech to political and military leaders as well as Chinese Communist Party members gathered at the Great Hall of the People for the party’s 105th founding anniversary. Analysts have questioned the ability of China’s armed forces to fight effectively since Xi’s sweeping anti-graft campaign gutted its top ranks. Xi’s years-long effort to purge corruption has brought down two defence ministers in the past three years and reduced the once seven-member Central Military Commission — China’s top military body — to just himself and one other general. The Chinese leader on Wednesday swore to “uphold the party’s absolute leadership” over the armed forces and strengthen the military. “We must advance the modernisation of national defence and the armed forces,” Xi told party members. The CCP also has to “resolutely wage the critical, protracted, and comprehensive battle against corruption”, he added. The Central Military Commission — which Xi heads — has published new measures that would “establish iron rules for strict education, strict management, and strict supervision” of senior military cadres, state media reported in May. Xi also reiterated on Wednesday his commitment to see China gain control of Taiwan, the self-ruled island Beijing claims as its territory. “Resolving the Taiwan question and realising the complete unification of the motherland is an unswerving historical mission of our party and the shared aspiration of all Chinese people,” he said. Xi urged his country to “oppose interference by external forces”, without naming any specific countries. The CCP was founded on July 1, 1921 and had more than 101 million members as of late 2025, according to state news agency Xinhua.
Çin, Venezuela Depremine 14,7 Milyon Dolar Yardım ve Uydu Desteği Taahhüt EttiChina to accelerate development of world-class armed forces — Xi Jinping
The Chinese leader emphasized that "a strong country must have a strong military" and that national security is impossible without powerful armed forces
Xi projects confidence for China’s Communist Party at home and on world stage
President Xi Jinping has projected strong confidence for the Communist Party on both domestic governance and international standing in a speech on Wednesday to mark the 105th anniversary of the founding of the party. In a comprehensive and wide-ranging address, Xi reviewed the history of the party, recounting its historical achievements and summarising the key factors behind its success, including maintaining the party’s purity and discipline. Xi highlighted the party’s success as a new path for...
Xi Positions China’s Ruling Party as Global Force for Progress
Chinese leader Xi Jinping made a case for his ruling party as a force for global progress and prosperity – a role that would be backed by a strong military – signaling his ambition for the nation to stand at the fore of global affairs.
Xi, Çin Komünist Partisi'ni Küresel İlerlemenin Gücü Olarak KonumlandırdıXi Jinping calls reunification with Taiwan Chinese Communist Party’s ‘historic mission’
The Chinese leader noted that Beijing intended to adhere to the one-China principle and the 1992 Consensus, resolutely combat "separatist forces advocating Taiwan independence" and resist external interference
Xi Jinping: Tayvan ile birleşme Komünist Parti'nin tarihi misyonuXi Jinping meets foreign leaders: tracker, June 2026
Chinese President Xi Jinping hosted the leaders of Laos, Myanmar, Cambodia, Bangladesh and Belarus in June. He also travelled to North Korea on his first overseas journey this year and his first visit to Pyongyang since 2019. In total, 20 national leaders have met Xi in Beijing this year, including US President Donald Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin. The long list shows China’s growing global influence amid rising geopolitical tensions. Xi may meet Trump three more times this year. He...
Trump: US top court upholding birthright citizenship a win for China
U.S. President Donald Trump called China a winner Tuesday after the Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship, dealing a major blow to his push to restrict who counts as an American. “I would like to congratulate President Xi (Jinping), and the Great Country of China, on their massive Birthright Citizenship WIN,” Trump wrote on social media.
ABD Yüksek Mahkemesi Göçmenlikte Hem Sınırladı Hem KoruduXi Jinping Just Made It a Crime to Be Taiwanese
China’s attack on Taiwan has already started – with the Ethnic Unity Law as a weapon.
US hollows out G20 agenda, casts Miami summit as ‘backdrop for Trump-Xi meeting’: sources
The United States is working to hollow out the G20’s agenda and turn its December summit “into a backdrop” for a likely meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Miami, the South China Morning Post has learned. Two delegation members described the effort as the group’s top negotiators, also known as sherpas, met in Washington on Monday and Tuesday for their second in a planned series of sessions to draft the Joint Declaration that leaders are to issue at the...
China’s Politburo orders rapid-response overhaul in the face of floods and extreme heat
China’s top leadership has warned of the dangers of extreme weather and urged advances in forecast accuracy, rapid emergency rescue and local capabilities for disaster relief in its first meeting for the year on flood and drought prevention, according to state media. The meeting, held in Beijing on Tuesday by the Politburo, was chaired by Chinese President Xi Jinping. The Politburo urged local governments to take “forceful” measures against drought, flooding and typhoons, to “always put the...
2026 state visit by Donald Trump to China
Meeting between US President Donald Trump and CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping in 2026
2026 state visit by Donald Trump to ChinaLost in Translation: How A Premier Chinese Think Tank Views U.S.-Chinese Competition
On May 13, 2026, Air Force One landed in Beijing for President Donald Trump’s first state visit to China in nearly a decade. That same morning, the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations published a report titled The Evolving World and the Right Way to China-US Coexistence. The summit dominated global media coverage for two days. The report received almost none.The Beijing summit produced familiar imagery: honor guards, a state banquet in the Great Hall of the People, and carefully choreographed warmth. Chinese leader Xi Jinping announced that both sides had agreed to “strategic stability” as a framework for the The post Lost in Translation: How A Premier Chinese Think Tank Views U.S.-Chinese Competition appeared first on War on the Rocks.
Lukashenko holds talks with Xi Jinping in China after meeting Putin
Chinese leader Xi Jinping described Belarus-China relations as being at a "historic peak" and called the two countries "iron friends."
China-Belarus relations reach historic high — Xi Jinping
Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, who is currently on a working visit to China, noted that he highly values such a positive assessment of the bilateral ties
After meeting with Putin, Lukashenko goes to see Xi
Self-proclaimed Belarusian president Alexander Lukashenko travelled to China to meet Chinese leader Xi Jinping after holding talks with Russian ruler Vladimir Putin.
China’s Xi Jinping meets Belarus leader Lukashenko in Beijing
BEIJING — Chinese President Xi Jinping met with Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko, a key Russian ally, in Beijing on Monday, state media said. Xi hosted Lukashenko at the ornate Diaoyutai state guesthouse, Chinese state broadcaster CCTV said, without immediately providing further detail. Lukashenko, who has been in power since 1994, allowed Moscow to launch its
Çin'de yolsuzlukla mücadele tasfiyesi derinleşiyor
Çin'de yürütülen yolsuzlukla mücadele kampanyası kapsamında, aralarında üst düzey generallerin ve Politbüro üyelerinin de bulunduğu çok sayıda isim milletvekilliğinden ihraç edildi. Çin'de aralarında altı askeri milletvekilinin, eski finansal düzenleyici kurum başkanı Li Yunze'nin ve hakkında yakın zamanda soruşturma başlatılan Politbüro üyesi Ma Xingrui'nin de bulunduğu sekiz isim, ülkenin en üst yasama organı olan Ulusal Halk Kongresi'ndeki görevlerinden ihraç edildi. Çin devlet haber ajansı Xinhua'nın aktardığına göre, karar cuma günü yürürlüğe girdi. Bu hamle, Devlet Başkanı Şi Jinping'in iktidara geldiği 2012 yılından bu yana yürüttüğü ve çok sayıda üst düzey yetkili ile generalin soruşturulmasına, görevden alınmasına ve tasfiye edilmesine yol açan geniş kapsamlı yolsuzlukla mücadele kampanyasının son halkasını oluşturuyor. Görevden alınan askeri temsilciler arasında; Çin Halk Kurtuluş Ordusu'nun (PLA) teçhizat geliştirme, tedarik ve test süreçlerini denetlemekten sorumlu olan en üst askeri merci konumundaki Merkezi Askeri Komisyon'un (CMC) Teçhizat Geliştirme Dairesi Başkanı General Xu Xueqiang da var. Xu, aynı zamanda 2022 yılından bu yana Çin'in İnsanlı Uzay Programı'nın genel komutanlığı görevini yürütüyordu. Kararla birlikte görevden uzaklaştırılan diğer askeri delegeler arasında, Batı Cephesi Komutanlığı Siyasi Komiseri olarak görev yapmış olan General Li Fengbiao ve Hava Kuvvetleri Siyasi Komiseri olan General Guo Puxiao yer alıyor. Ayrıca Doğu Cephesi Komutanlığı'ndan Wang Kangping, Siber Güvenlik Güçleri'nden Zhang Minghua ve Kara Kuvvetleri'nden Yin Hongxing de milletvekilliği görevinden ihraç edilen diğer askeri isimler oldu. YOLSUZLUKLA MÜCADELE SINIR ÖTESİNE TAŞINIYOR Öte yandan Çin, yolsuzlukla mücadeleye yönelik yasal çerçeveyi genişletmek amacıyla bu yıl sınır ötesi yolsuzlukla mücadeleye ilişkin yeni bir yasa çıkarmayı hedefliyor. Ulusal Halk Kongresi Daimi Komitesi'nin mart ayında yayımladığı çalışma raporunda, yasanın doğrudan neleri hedef alacağına dair ayrıntılı bilgi verilmezken, düzenlemenin Pekin'in yolsuzlukla mücadele kampanyasını daha da güçlendirecek geniş kapsamlı bir adım olacağı kaydedildi. Devlet Başkanı Şi liderliğindeki Pekin yönetimi, özellikle ordu kademesindeki üst düzey isimleri hedef alan bu kampanyayı kararlılıkla sürdürüyor. Şi, son olarak askeri yetkililerden Çin Komünist Partisi'ne mutlak sadakat göstermelerini ve yolsuzluğun kökünü kazımalarını talep etmişti. Çin Yüksek Halk Mahkemesi tarafından sunulan bir diğer çalışma raporunda ise ülkedeki mahkemelerin geçen yıl, 40 bin kişiyi kapsayan yolsuzluk davalarını yüzde 22,4 oranında daha fazla karara bağladığı açıklandı. Cezalandırılanlar arasında eski Tarım Bakanı Tang Renjian ve eski Hainan eyaleti parti sekreteri Luo Baoming de dahil olmak üzere merkezi yönetimde görev yapmış 57 eski üst düzey yetkili bulunuyor. Rapora göre, Çin mahkemeleri yurtdışına kaçan yolsuzluk zanlılarının iadesini de sağlayarak 18,14 milyar yuan (yaklaşık 2,6 milyar dolar) değerindeki yasadışı kazancı geri kazandı. Mahkemelerin ayrıca gelecekteki getiriler için yapılan gizli anlaşmalar, üzerinde anlaşılan hisse ortaklıkları ve kamu görevlileri ile iş dünyası arasındaki "döner kapı" yolsuzluğu gibi yeni usulsüzlük biçimlerine de odaklandığı aktarıldı. Bununla birlikte, Çin yasama organının Çin vatandaşlarının yurtdışındaki hak ve çıkarlarını korumaya yönelik yeni bir yasa çıkaracağı, merkez bankası ve bankacılık düzenleme yasalarını revize edeceği ve yapay zeka mevzuatına yönelik araştırmaları derinleştireceği bildirildi. TASFİYE DEVLET BAŞKANI Şİ'NİN EN YAKINLARINA UZANDI Ocak ayında Çin'in en kıdemli generali hakkında başlatılan soruşturma, Şi Jinping'in yıllardır sürdürdüğü yolsuzluk tasfiyesini en yakın çalışma arkadaşlarına kadar genişlettiğini ortaya koydu. Uzmanlar; Şi'nin uzun süreli müttefiki ve Politbüro üyesi General Zhang Youxia'ya yönelik bu hamlesinin, kişisel bağların bile parti liderliğine sadakat söz konusu olduğunda koruma sağlamadığını gösterdiğini belirtiyor. Washington merkezli Brookings Enstitüsü'nden ve aynı zamanda CIA'i neski Çin analisti ve eski Beyaz Saray Ulusal Güvenlik Konseyi Çin Direktörü olan Jonathan Czin, yaptığı değerlendirmede, "Zhang'ın görevden alınması, lider kadrosunda artık hiç kimsenin güvende olmadığını gösteriyor" dedi ve soruşturmayı şaşırtıcı bir gelişme ve Çin siyasetinde köklü bir değişim olarak nitelendirdi. Czin, geçmişteki tasfiyelerin Şi ile yolları kesişen ancak güçlü kişisel bağları olmayan isimleri hedef aldığını, bu kez ise operasyonun Şi'nin siyasi sisteminin merkezine ulaştığını kaydetti. Hem Şi hem de 75 yaşındaki Zhang, eski üst düzey subayların çocukları olan "prensler" sınıfından geliyor. Zhang'ın normal şartlarda 2022'de emekli olması beklenirken, Şi aralarındaki yakınlık nedeniyle onu Merkezi Askeri Komisyon'da (CMC) üçüncü bir dönem için tutmuştu. Çin Savunma Bakanlığı, CMC Başkan Yardımcısı ve Şi'nin ardından ikinci komutan konumundaki Zhang hakkında "ciddi disiplin ve yasa ihlali şüpheleriyle" soruşturma başlatıldığını duyurmuştu. Ordu, Şi'nin 2012'de göreve gelmesinden bu yana başlatılan temizliğin ana hedeflerinden biri oldu. Tasfiyeler 2023 yılında hem nükleer hem de konvansiyonel füzeleri denetleyen seçkin Roket Kuvvetleri'ne de ulaşmış, eski Savunma Bakanı Li Shangfu da dahil olmak üzere iki eski savunma bakanı askeri tedarik süreçlerindeki yolsuzluk şüpheleri nedeniyle partiden ihraç edilmişti. Soruşturma kapsamında CMC Ortak Kurmay Dairesi Başkanı Liu Zhenli'nin de inceleme altına alınmasıyla, yedi üyeli komisyon fiilen sadece Şi'nin başında bulunduğu iki üyeli bir yapıya dönüştü. Ordunun resmi yayın organı PLA Daily'de yayımlanan başyazıda, soruşturma büyük bir başarı olarak nitelendirilirken, iki generalin "Başkanlık Sorumluluk Sistemi"ni ciddi şekilde baltaladığı ve ihlal ettiği belirtildi. Bu sistem, CMC Başkanı olarak Şi'ye nihai askeri karar alma yetkisini veriyor. Asia Society Politika Enstitüsü Çin Analiz Merkezi'nden Lyle Morris, bu ihlalin Zhang'ın Şi'nin dışında çok fazla güce sahip olduğuna işaret ettiğini belirtti. Singapur'daki S. Rajaratnam Uluslararası Çalışmalar Okulu'ndan akademisyen James Char ise Şi'nin, askeri yolsuzluk operasyonunun seçici yürütüldüğü ve "prens" müttefiklerinin kayrıldığı yönündeki eleştirilere bu soruşturmayla yanıt verdiğini kaydetti. Komuta kademesinin boşalması, dünyanın en büyük ordusunun nasıl yönetileceği sorusunu da beraberinde getiriyor. Uzmanlar, ortak askeri eğitimlerin genişletilmesi gibi üst düzey girişimlerin Şi komisyonu yeniden yapılandırana kadar yavaşlayabileceğini öngörüyor. Asia Society'den Neil Thomas, Şi'nin askeri liderliği yenilemek istediğini ve uygun adayları belirlemek için gelecek yıl yapılacak Komünist Parti Kongresi'ni bekleyebileceğini ifade etti. Thomas, "Ordunun yüksek komuta kademesinin tasfiye edilmesi, Şi'nin yakın vadede Tayvan'a karşı büyük bir askeri tırmanma planlamadığını gösteriyor. Ancak bu operasyon, gelecekte daha büyük bir tehdit oluşturacak daha yetkin ve sadık generallerden oluşan yeni bir kadro yetiştirmek üzere tasarlandı" değerlendirmesinde bulundu.
Çin'de Yolsuzlukla Mücadelede Üst Düzey İhraçlar: Generaller ve Politbüro Üyesi HedefteXi's military purge widens: China strips 6 generals, ex-Politburo member of lawmaker posts
China has removed six top military officers, a former financial regulator, and a former Politburo member from their legislative posts, signaling President Xi Jinping's ongoing anti-corruption purge. This move targets the nation's political and military elite, with prominent figures like General Xu Xueqiang, head of military equipment development, among those dismissed. The campaign continues to reshape the highest echelons of power.
Xi stresses carrying forward revolutionary traditions
TEHRAN, Jun. 25 (MNA) – Xi Jinping, general secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee, has called on Party members in the new era to carry forward revolutionary traditions and strive for new accomplishments on the new journey.
Inside China’s ideological training camp where PLA top brass study Xi’s speeches
Hundreds of China’s top military officials have spent weeks at an unprecedented ideology training camp – studying President Xi Jinping’s speeches, reading corrupt cadres’ confessions and marching in formation – as the anti-corruption drive in the military deepens. The details of the training camp, which concluded last week, were published in the People’s Liberation Army Daily, the military’s official newspaper, on Wednesday. Xi personally decided to launch the exercise, which began on April 8,...
Did Myanmar-China talks spawn a more emboldened junta?
A recent meeting between the leaders of Myanmar and China has given the military junta an opening to persuade Asean to allow it to return to the bloc’s summits. Analysts also say, however, that Myanmar’s regime could feel emboldened to escalate action against resistance forces, revving up its “military approach” to deal with the country’s civil war. Last Tuesday, Chinese President Xi Jinping met his Myanmar counterpart Min Aung Hlaing in Beijing, providing vital political endorsement to the...
Trump says Pakistan 'really helped us' with Iran deal
United States President Donald Trump has said that Pakistan “really helped” Washington with the memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Iran. He made the remarks during an interview with American news outlet Axios. During the interview, the US president was asked about which global leaders he “liked”. In addition to Chinese President Xi Jinping, Chinese President Xi Jinping, Trump talked about Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, before mentioning Pakistan’s leadership. “In Pakistan, you have the field marshal, who is great. Munir, he’s great. And you have the prime minister, and they just get along great … He totally respects the prime minister. It’s a beautiful thing to see,” he said, talking about Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Chief of Defence Forces and Chief of Army Staff Field Marshal Asim Munir. “But they really helped us with this deal. They knew the Iranians, they knew the people and they were good,” he said. During the interview, Trump was also asked about the lessons he had learned about the “limits” on his power. “There are no limits,” he said. “I haven’t learned that lesson yet. I know there are, but there are no limits. We defeated them totally militarily. I was asked by Pakistan because they’re close to please not do anymore. I said, I like them a lot,” he said. Talking about last year’s military conflict with India, he said, “You know, I stopped Pakistan from fighting India, two nuclear nations, and the prime minister of Pakistan said, ‘President Trump saved 50 million lives’. They were going to use nuclear weapons. “Eleven planes were shot down. They were at it. And I was hearing about it, then I saw some really terrible pictures. They were going at it, Pakistan and India. They have gone at it in the past, but this was, and they’re both nuclear-armed, heavily, and they were going to use those nuclear weapons. And the prime minister of Pakistan said, ‘Donald Trump saved 50 million lives’. But it’s not 50. I think it was much more than that. Fifty is nothing when you look at 1.5 billion people just in India alone. So I think that there are no limits,” he said. “We have the most powerful military in the world by far. Who else could have done a blockade like that? I did a naval blockade where not one ship was able to get through. Some tried. They didn’t, you know, it didn’t last very long,” he said. It is worth mentioning that the US president has repeatedly commented on the brief military conflict between Pakistan and India in May 2025. He has also praised PM Shehbaz and CDF Munir on several occasions, specifically calling the latter a “highly respected general”, a “great fighter” and “my favourite”. Thursday proved to be a red-letter day for Pakistan, as the country awoke to news of a long-awaited peace deal finally being signed between the US and Iran, heralding an end to the bitter animosity that has afflicted the Middle East and plunged the world into crisis for months. The honour of announcing that the ‘Islamabad MoU’ had been ‘electronically’ signed by all parties, fittingly fell to Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who put his signature to the historic document after US President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, bringing it into effect two days earlier than previously expected. Earlier in the day, Trump signed the document during a reception at the Palace of Versailles — also the venue for the landmark treaty that ended World War I — with French President Emmanuel Macron looking over his shoulder. Meanwhile, Iranian media released photos of Dr Pezeshkian signing the deal in his office.
ABD-İran Müzakereleri Petrolü Düşürdü, Nükleer Düğüm ÇözülemediWhen the Davidson Window Meets the ‘Xi Window’
The Davidson Window measures China’s military capability to invade Taiwan. Arguably more important is Xi Jinping’s confidence in his military.
ABD-İsrail gerilimi büyüyor mu? Trump bir kez daha Netanyahu'yu işaret etti: Ben olmasam yok olurlardı
ABD Başkanı Donald Trump, Axios Show programında İran ve İsrail Başbakanı Netanyahu hakkında dikkat çeken ifadeler kullandı. ‘GÜCÜMÜN BİR SINIRI YOK’ Trump, İran’a yönelik savaşın ardından ‘gücünde hiçbir sınır olmadığını’ fark ettiğini söyledi. Yakında yayımlanacak bir kitaba atıfla, Trump’ın kendisini tarihteki en güçlü liderler arasında konumlandıran daha iddialı bir güç anlayışı geliştirdiği ifade edildi. ‘G7 LİDERLERİ BENİ ‘PATRON’ OLARAK GÖRÜYOR Axios’un aktardığına göre Trump, G7 liderlerinin kendisini ‘patron’ olarak gördüğünü, İsrail’in ise kendisine ‘büyük saygı duyduğunu’ ve yönlendirmelerine uyduğunu belirtti. Habere göre, The New York Times muhabirleri Maggie Haberman ve Jonathan Swan’ın yakında yayımlanacak ‘Regime Change’ adlı kitabında, Trump’ın Attila, Cengiz Han, Napolyon, Stalin, Mao ve Hitler gibi tarihsel figürlerle kıyaslandığı bir belgeyi incelediği ve bu figürlerin ‘kendi başkanlık gücünün gerisinde kaldığını’ savunduğu iddia edildi. Axios’un haberinde, Trump’ın Büyük İskender, Sezar ve William the Conqueror gibi tarihsel liderleri değerlendirirken ‘uçak ve modern ulaşım imkanlarının olmamasının’ onların gücünü sınırladığını söylediği aktarıldı. ÇİN VE HİNDİSTAN LİDERLERİNE ÖVGÜ Habere göre Trump, Çin Devlet Başkanı Xi Jinping ve Hindistan Başbakanı Modi’yi en çok saygı duyduğu liderler arasında sayarken, Xi’yi ‘tam bir iş insanı’, Modi’yi ise ‘çok sert biri’ olarak tanımladı. Axios, Trump’ın Rusya Devlet Başkanı Putin’in G7’den dışlanmasını eleştirdiğini ve Fransa Cumhurbaşkanı Macron’un Versailles’da kendisine verdiği yemeği ‘imparatorluk sahnesi’ olarak nitelendirdiğini bildirdi. Haberde ayrıca Trump’ın İsrail ile ilgili olarak, ‘İsrail’in varlığının kendi politikaları sayesinde sürdüğünü’ öne sürdüğü ve İsrail Başbakanı Netanyahu ile ilişkisini ‘iyi ancak kontrollü’ olarak tanımladığı ifade edildi. ‘BEN OLMASAYDIM İSRAİL BUGÜN YOK OLURDU’ Trump, “Ben olmasaydın, İsrail bugün yok olurdu. Netanyahu’yu dengede tutmamız gerekiyor” ifadelerini kullandı. Axios’a göre Trump, İran’la ilgili sürecin ekonomik etkilerine dikkat çekerek savaşın genişlemesinin küresel bir ekonomik krize yol açabileceğini, petrol fiyatlarındaki düşüş ve borsa yükselişini ise aldığı kararların doğruluğuna işaret olarak sundu. Haberde, Trump’ın ABD ekonomisinin sınırlayıcı bir unsur olduğunu kabul ettiği ve ‘büyük buhranla özdeşleşmek istemediğini’ söylediği de yer aldı. GREAT MAN BELGESİ ‘SAHTE TARİHÇİ’YE AİT ÇIKTI Axios’un aktardığına göre Trump, Truth Social’da paylaştığı ve ‘Great Man’ olarak adlandırılan belgede, tarih boyunca birçok lideri geride bıraktığını savunan bir değerlendirmeye yer verdi. Belgenin yazarının ise resmi bir tarihçi değil, golfçü Gary Player’ın uzun süredir yakın çevresinde bulunan bir isim olduğu öne sürüldü. Belgenin sonuç bölümünde, Trump’ın küresel ölçekte güç kullanma kapasitesinin onu ‘dünya tarihinde yaşamış en güçlü insan’ yaptığı iddia edildi. NE OLMUŞTU? The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) gazetesinin konuya yakın kaynaklara dayandırdığı haberinde, Trump ile Netanyahu'nun sık sık yaptığı görüşmelerin artık dostane olmadığı ve Trump'ın ABD ekonomisini zorlayan ABD-İsrail/İran Savaşı'na son vermeye çalışırken kendisini bu savaşa iten Netanyahu'ya sert sözler sarf ettiği öne sürüldü. Trump'ın Lübnan konusunda son zamanlarda yaptığı bir telefon görüşmesinde, Netanyahu'ya "Neden binaları havaya uçuruyorsunuz? Binaları havaya uçurmayı bırakın." dediği aktarılan haberde, bir başka görüşmede ise Trump'ın savaşın tetiklediği küresel ekonomik gerilemenin kendisini 1930'lardaki Büyük Buhran ve Herbert Hoover ile ilişkilendirebileceğinden şikayet ettiği belirtildi. Haberde açıklamalarına yer verilen bir kaynak, mutabakat öncesi nükleer silahlarla ilgili hükümler hakkında yapılan bir görüşmede Netanyahu'nun Trump'a "Donald, bunu nasıl doğrulayacaksın?" sorusunu sorduğunu ve diğer görüşmelerde de geçmişteki olaylara dayanarak İranlılara güvenilmemesi gerektiğini söylediğini iddia etti. Üst düzey bir yönetim yetkilisi de görüşmelerde Netanyahu'nun daha fazla askeri harekat yapılması yönünde ısrarcı olduğunu ve Trump'ın ise bu durumdan bıktığını belirterek "Bibi (Netanyahu), başkana neden bir şeyi havaya uçurması gerektiğini, İsrail istihbaratının bunu nasıl ve ne zaman yapacağını bildiğini anlatıyor. Başkan da dinliyor. Görüşmeler genellikle aynı şekilde geçiyor." dedi. Söz konusu iddialara ilişkin görüşleri sorulan İsrail Başbakanlık Ofisi, yorum taleplerini yanıtsız bıraktı. Bir Beyaz Saray yetkilisi ise "Trump'ın Netanyahu ve İsrail ile harika bir ortaklığı olduğunu" ancak "hiçbir ülke ya da liderin Başkan Trump'a bir şey yapması için baskı uygulayamayacağını" söyledi. TRUMP, SAVAŞ İLERLEDİKÇE NETANYAHU'NUN İDDİALARINA ŞÜPHEYLE YAKLAŞMAYA BAŞLADI Durumu yakından takip eden kaynaklar, Trump'ın İran ile savaşa girmeye, danışmanlarının çoğundan ve İsraillilerin tahmin ettiğinden daha fazla istekli olduğunu belirterek Netanyahu'nun İran'a yönelik ayrıntılı saldırı planları hazırladığını ve bunları başkana sunduğunu ifade etti. Başlangıçta Trump'ın Netanyahu ile birlikte saldırıların hedefleri isabetli vurması, kaç İranlı liderin etkisiz hale getirildiği ve bir sonraki bombalamanın nereye yapılacağı konusunda heyecan duyduğunu aktaran kaynaklar, savaş ilerledikçe Trump'ın Netanyahu'nun bazı iddialarına şüpheyle yaklaştığını ve İran hükümetini devirmek için Iraklı silahlı Kürt grupların İran'a girmesi planını reddettiğini belirtti. Kaynaklar, ateşkes olmasına rağmen İsrail'in Lübnan'ı bombalamaya devam etmesinin Trump'ı en çok sinirlendiren şey olduğunu ve Trump'ın bir ara İsrailli ve Lübnanlı yetkilileri Oval Ofis'e çağırarak anlaşmayı bizzat arabuluculuk yoluyla sağlamaya çalıştığını aktardı. İki fay hattı aynı anda kırılabilir! ABD'yi bekleyen korkunç deprem senaryosu Dünyanın en çok balistik füzeye sahip 10 ülkesi belli oldu! Türkiye kaçıncı sırada?
Trump: 'Ben Olmasam İsrail Yok Olurdu', Gücüm SınırsızDon't be fooled by the new China-North Korea love fest
Chinese President Xi Jinping’s summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Pyongyang earlier this month celebrated their decades-long alliance, with both sides vowing to elevate their ties to “new heights.” However, the summit reflected a marriage of convenience with clear limitations. The Xi-Kim summit was a meaningful indication that China-North Korea bilateral ties have returned to pre-COVID-19 levels. At the working level, China and North Korea have gradually expanded practical cooperation in areas such as trade, tourism, construction, and civilian exchanges, but leader-level meetings were put on pause. Xi’s trip to Pyongyang, alongside Kim’s trip to Beijing last September, fully restores the structure of bilateral diplomacy between Beijing and Pyongyang. Against the backdrop of reinvigorated China-North Korea ties, both sides aim to rebalance their respective positions with regard to Russia. In recent years, North Korea has tilted toward Russia and drifted away from China. Pyongyang formed a military alliance with Moscow and aided its war against Ukraine as an arms supplier and a co-belligerent on the battlefield. In the process, Pyongyang reduced its strategic dependence on Beijing and also gained greater Russian support for its nuclear and missile programs. Moscow now openly helps Pyongyang evade international sanctions and defends North Korea’s nuclear buildup. Russia might also be sharing advanced military technologies with the regime. These developments have greatly emboldened North Korea, and China cannot be comfortable with the situation. Beijing has long prioritized stability and predictability on China’s periphery. In that sense, North Korea’s aggressive nuclear buildup and military posture, backed by Russia, have been worrisome. Improved bilateral ties and strategic communications with Pyongyang would put Beijing in a better position to manage the risk. Pyongyang also has an interest in strengthening its ties with Beijing as part of a broader effort to dual-hedge vis-à-vis Russia and China. Pyongyang wants to avoid overdependence on either Moscow or Beijing, while leveraging both sides to extract strategic benefits. Ultimately, China offers North Korea incentives that Russia cannot. The financial gains North Korea has enjoyed from its wartime transactions with Russia are unlikely to last after hostilities in Ukraine end at some point, and broader North Korea-Russia economic cooperation is limited by international sanctions on both countries. For boosting North Korea’s economy, Chinese support is essential. Despite the overall positive spirit, the Xi-Kim summit still raised more questions than it answered regarding the future of strategic relations between China and North Korea. The summit readouts on regional security lacked clarity and substance compared to the language on economic cooperation and civilian engagement. Beijing and Pyongyang broadly agreed to “strengthen strategic coordination, firmly safeguard their respective sovereignty, security, and development interests, and jointly uphold regional peace and development,” but there was no mention of specific regional issues. Another potentially noteworthy point was that, while the North Korean readout stated that both sides “reached a satisfactory consensus of views” on regional issues, that phrase was excluded from the Chinese readout. The overall weak language and substance on regional security make sense. Beijing and Pyongyang have divergent geopolitical and security interests. Some analysts might suspect that the two countries are consolidating their alliance for military confrontation with the United States and its regional allies. Pyongyang may want to move in that direction, but Beijing has good reasons to be reluctant. China and North Korea have quite different grand strategic outlooks. North Korea has openly characterized the regional security landscape in Northeast Asia as a “new Cold War,” stressing the need to prepare for bloc confrontation. In contrast, China has consistently rejected such a notion. The optics of the September 2025 Tiananmen military parade — where Xi stood next to Putin and Kim — left an impression of an emerging “authoritarian axis.” In reality, such an arrangement can conflict with China’s interests, and Beijing has therefore maintained some distance from Moscow and Pyongyang. China’s growth remains dependent on global and regional integration, and forming a rigid security bloc with North Korea and Russia to wage a “new Cold War” will have the opposite effect, encouraging more regional actors to decouple from Beijing and align with Washington. Continued integration and interdependence with the West are also valuable deterrent tools for China. For instance, Washington and countries in Asia and Europe have had to worry about how Beijing could weaponize its rare-earth dominance and other supply-chain advantages if they escalate against China in security and economic disputes. Moreover, a China-Russia-North Korea security bloc could further undermine China’s regional deterrence posture. Over the years, North Korea’s escalatory behavior has created pretexts for U.S. military buildup in Northeast Asia, as seen in the U.S. deployment of the THAAD system in South Korea and the institutionalization of U.S.-Japan-South Korea military cooperation. North Korea’s participation in the Ukraine war has also invited more European military engagement in Northeast Asia. European naval vessels now routinely travel to Northeast Asian waters in support of missions to monitor and contain North Korea’s illicit economic activities at sea. Given this track record, the consequences will predictably be counterproductive if China expands its cooperation with North Korea to the military realm. Overall, North Korea is strategically valuable enough for China to maintain its alliance, as a buffer between China's border and Washington’s forward presence in Northeast Asia and as a regional distraction that diverts U.S. strategic resources and attention. However, it is also a strategic burden that requires avoiding overcommitment and overalignment. The Xi-Kim summit’s relative lack of substance on regional security can be understood in this context. One development at the Xi-Kim summit that raised concerns in Washington, Seoul, and Tokyo was Beijing's silence on the North Korean nuclear issue. Some observers view Beijing’s silence as an unspoken acceptance of Pyongyang’s nuclear status. While the suspicion is valid, China’s stance may remain that of passive opposition rather than acceptance. In recent years, as Pyongyang has shifted toward a non-negotiable position on its nuclear arsenal, Beijing has also reduced rhetorical support for North Korean denuclearization, while upholding it as a security interest in principle. This passivity was observed at Xi’s summit with President Donald Trump last month, where both sides “confirmed their shared goal to denuclearize North Korea,” according to the U.S. readout. The phrase was omitted from the Chinese readout, but Beijing did not deny the U.S. statement. China’s ambiguous stance is disappointing to the United States, South Korea, and Japan, but it is also not ideal for North Korea. Pyongyang appeared clearly disturbed by Xi and Trump’s reported discussion of denuclearization, accusing Washington of lying. Days before Xi’s arrival, Kim inspected a new nuclear plant and pledged an "exponential" nuclear expansion. Pyongyang ideally wants to see a Russia-China-North Korea coalition in support of recognition of its nuclear status. Russian officials now publicly endorse North Korea’s nuclear status, calling denuclearization “a closed issue” and nuclear weapons “the key to North Korea’s prosperity.” Beijing, for its part, has yet to show any willingness to follow Moscow’s path. Ultimately, the Xi-Kim summit portended continued strategic gaps in the China-North Korea alliance. The United States, South Korea, and Japan can exploit these gaps by pursuing more proactive diplomacy with China. To prevent the militarization of the China-North Korea alliance, or, more precisely, to avoid driving Beijing toward that path, Washington, Seoul, and Tokyo can collectively work to reassure Beijing that they do not aim to undermine China’s core security interests. Simultaneously, they can seek Beijing’s reassurance that it will not pursue military cooperation with Pyongyang. Improving China-North Korea ties also presents an opportunity for the United States, South Korea, and Japan to increase regional communication in dealing with North Korea. Beijing will not pressure Pyongyang to denuclearize; that era is over. Nonetheless, Beijing, Washington, Seoul, and Tokyo all share an interest in reducing instability on the Korean Peninsula and preventing an emboldened Pyongyang from creating a crisis. Beijing could play a positive role here, and Washington, Seoul, and Tokyo could benefit from stepping up engagement with Beijing.
Çin-Kuzey Kore zirvesi: Gösterişli birliktelik, sınırlı ittifakUK envoy to China visits Yanan, historic party site rarely seen by Western officials
The British ambassador to China has paid a rare visit to a Chinese communist heartland where President Xi Jinping performed hard labour as a young man. Ambassador Peter Wilson on Wednesday visited Yanan in the northwestern Chinese province of Shaanxi along with Lu Kang, vice-minister of the Communist Party’s International Department, the department said. State newspaper China Daily said Wilson made the trip at the invitation of the International Department. The two men toured the former...
NPT Review Conference Falls at Last Hurdle
NPT Review Conference Falls at Last Hurdle Tue, 06/16/2026 - 14:00 June 16, 2026 The April 28-May 22 nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference failed to adopt a final consensus document on May 22 after conference president Ambassador Do Hung Viet withheld the final document for debate due to unresolvable disagreements over how to address Iran’s nuclear program and the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. This marks the third straight failure of the NPT review process. The conference, which takes place every five years, involved some 130 states-parties. The review conferences aim to review NPT commitments, reaffirm support for the treaty, and create a concrete action plan for the next five years. The conference took place during a time when each of the three pillars of the NPT – nonproliferation, disarmament, and the peaceful use of nuclear energy – are under severe strain. Viet said at a news conference May 22 that, “No one [state] blocked consensus because I realized there was not consensus, and so I did not put the document forward.” The exchanges at the conference also revealed the discord among the nuclear five on how and whether to reduce nuclear risks and nuclear arsenals. The U.S. delegation sought to focus attention on China’s nuclear buildup and said it had proposed “multilateral strategic stability talks” on “transparency, risk reduction, and nuclear testing.” China and Russia expressed regret that the United States had failed to take up opportunities to negotiate a follow-on to the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which expired in February. They urged Washington to actively consider Moscow’s proposal to respect that treaty’s numerical limits for one more year and explore a follow-on agreement “in a responsible manner.” On April 29, China’s director-general for disarmament, Sun Xiaobo stated that “China has no interest in [strategic stability talks],” because China views the proposed talks as a way for the United States “to shift the responsibility for nuclear disarmament to other countries.” After the conference, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov also rejected the premise of the talks, stating, “the conditions for launching a substantive, equitable, and mutually acceptable strategic dialogue, which could include a discussion of arms control, are currently fundamentally lacking.” Later this month, Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Arms Control and Nonproliferation Christopher Yeaw, who appeared at the review conference to briefly lead the U.S. NPT delegation, will testify June 30 before the House Foreign Affairs Committee Europe subcommittee to discuss U.S. plans for “Arms Control and Nonproliferation in an Era of Great Power Competition.” –LIBBY FLATOFF, XIAODON LIANG, and MIA CLARKE For more on the outcome of the NPT Review Conference, see this month’s ACT news report: “2026 NPT Review Conference Stymied by Disputes.” NPT President Viet: NPT Failure “Not Surprising” Addressing the Arms Control Association’s Annual Meeting on June 2, Vietnamese Ambassador Do Hung Viet, the president of the 2026 nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference, said the inability of states-parties to reach consensus was “disappointing, but it was not surprising.” Viet addressed the annual meeting by live video, days after completing duties as president of the review conference, to share his reflections on the third consecutive failure by states-parties to agree on a final document. Viet called for a broadening of the international understanding of “risk” as a necessary next step. He suggested that the “growing attractiveness” of nuclear weapons and nuclear deterrence have placed pressure on key norms, seriously affecting nuclear risk reduction efforts. Expressing cautious optimism, the ambassador shared his belief that “common ground has narrowed but has remained,” and that the NPT remains a foundation for peace and security even in the face of new challenges. He also stressed the importance of sustained dialogue among the nuclear weapons states to navigate new disagreements, conflicts, and challenges. Viet concluded by emphasizing that “a safer future will not emerge automatically,” and that today’s efforts to reduce nuclear risks and increase cooperation will profoundly shape the future security environment. A full video recording of the Arms Control Association Annual Meeting, including Ambassador Viet’s remarks, is available online. Trump Claims “Denuclearization” Proposal Presented to China U.S. President Donald Trump told reporters May 15 that he had discussed “denuclearization” with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, during a May 14-15 state visit. Although Trump received “a very positive response,” the Chinese side made no commitments on the subject, according to the president. Trump noted that he would meet Xi three more times in 2026, suggesting the president hopes for a resumption of talks on the strategic nuclear relationship later this year. For more on the status of U.S.-China nuclear talks, see the June issue of Arms Control Today. SIPRI: Deployed Weapons and Stockpiles Grow The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) released June 8 its 2026 annual yearbook on disarmament, including a detailed assessment of the forces, doctrines, and modernization efforts of the nuclear-armed states. The assessment, which draws on the open-source research of the Federation of American Scientists, concludes that the “world’s nuclear arsenals expanded and upgraded” during 2025, according to a press release. Although the total inventory of nuclear forces around the world likely declined due to the dismantlement and retirement of older warheads, the size of active stockpiles and the number of deployed warheads increased in 2025. Additionally, all nuclear-armed states are believed to be conducting modernization or upgrade programs to various degrees. The most notable changes occurred in China and India. China has pursued advances in missile defense and launch-on-warning systems, and has begun deploying some missiles at heightened levels of readiness in silos. Additionally, China’s number of deployed missiles increased by between 24 and 34 between January 2025 and 2026. Coupled with new deployments of warheads on missiles with mobile battalions and near-constant SSBN deterrence patrols, these changes may signal China’s transition away from the strictest interpretation of a “no-first use” policy and toward an “early warning counter strike strategy” as it seeks to reinforce its second-strike capability. India appears to have changed its policy of storing warheads and missiles separately and has begun loading missiles in canisters and deploying warheads on an SSBN conducting deterrence patrols. SIPRI reported that in January 2025 India was believed to have no warheads regularly deployed on missiles, but by January 2026, it had twelve. In conjunction with the May 2025 conflict between India and Pakistan, which included conventional strikes on Pakistani sites housing components of Islamabad’s nuclear weapons program, this policy change may indicate increased escalation risks within the region. The yearbook also details a growing coordination and collaboration between the UK and France. Both countries are seeking to supplement and stabilize deterrence of the perceived risk of Russian aggression as the Trump administration’s anti-NATO rhetoric has intensified. Looking forward, the yearbook predicts that increases in stockpiles and deployed weapons, as well as decreases in transparency and data-sharing, will continue. France Talks Nuclear Planning with Allies With the addition of Norway and Finland, the number of NATO countries that are consulting with Paris on supporting French nuclear forces in contingencies has increased to ten. The dialogues follow the announcement in March by French President Emmanuel Macron of a new strategy of “forward” deterrence that could allow for the temporary deployment of nuclear strike aircraft outside of France. Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Poland, and Sweden have also expressed an intention to discuss cooperation with France. Norway’s involvement in the scheme advanced May 27 with the signing of a mutual defense agreement with France and the announcement of further consultations on participation in a “process to determine how France’s nuclear weapons can contribute to security and deterrence in Europe,” according to a Norwegian government press release. Finland’s involvement remains at a preliminary stage, with Prime Minister Petteri Orpo informing Finnish news agency STT on June 4 that Macron’s government had transferred further details regarding the proposed arrangement, which is now under discussion in Helsinki. The shift in French policy responds to perceptions in Europe of a weakened U.S. commitment to the defense of the continent. The Financial Times reported June 2 that the United States has held talks through NATO channels with several states on potentially hosting U.S. nuclear weapons under an expansion of the existing NATO nuclear sharing arrangement. The newspaper reported that sources indicate the talks were intended to demonstrate a willingness to provide a greater nuclear commitment to Europe while Washington draws down conventional forces. U.S. to Return Intermediate-Range System to Japan Japan will host U.S. intermediate-range ground-launched missiles for military exercises in June, the Japanese newswire Kyodo News reported May 21. A ground-launched Tomahawk cruise missile unit will deploy to Kanoya Airbase in Kagoshima prefecture, southwestern Japan, as part of the Valiant Shield and Orient Shield joint exercises, the newswire reported. This marks the second deployment of the Typhon mid-range capability system to Japan after a unit participated in exercises last September. Although the report said that the missiles and launchers would remain in storage in Japan following the exercises, the Russian news agency TASS reported May 22 that the Japanese Embassy in Moscow had informed press the unit would be gone “by mid-October.” The Russian government criticized the move as “seriously detrimental” to the “stability and security of the Asia-Pacific region.” The missile unit is intended to contribute to long-range land- and maritime-attack capabilities of U.S. military forces in the Asia-Pacific, mirroring similar long-range conventional weapons in the Chinese arsenal. A Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson described the Tomahawk ground-launcher as “a strategic offensive weapon [that] will harm the legitimate security interests of other countries,” at a May 22 press conference. Comment Period on U.S. Plutonium Pit Production Plan Closes July 15 The Department of Energy’s semi-autonomous National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) will continue receiving written public comments on its draft programmatic environmental impact statement for plans to expand plutonium pit production until July 15. The agency invites comments from state and local governments, public interest groups, businesses, and individual members of the public. The draft programmatic environmental impact statement assesses the likely consequences of three production alternatives, none of which include no expansion of plutonium pit production capacity. The draft ultimately endorses the NNSA’s plans to produce 80 pits per year at Los Alamos National Laboratories and the Savannah River Site, as mandated by Congress. Vatican Calls for Nuclear Disarmament, Limits on Autonomous Weapons In a major May 15 theological statement, the Catholic Church called for limits on autonomous weapons and decried the “erroneous belief that nuclear deterrence is an indispensable prerequisite for security.” The statement, an encyclical promulgated by Pope Leo XIV, comes after months of rhetorical clashes with the White House over the church’s promotion of peace and disarmament. The encyclical primarily addresses the implications of artificial intelligence technologies, but also touches on other peace and security issues. In a brief section on nuclear weapons, it criticizes the belief that lower-yield “miniaturized” nuclear weapons can be “a more viable option” for use in warfare. It laments that a shared “recognition of the threat posed by weapons capable of destroying all of humanity” has been “left behind,” contributing to a new arms race. The encyclical also acknowledges the 2021 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, but notes that major nuclear powers have not acceded to the treaty. The new theological statement calls for accountability built into and responsible human control over autonomous weapons, as well as an international regime to “curb the technological arms race and ensure robust protection for civilians and the infrastructures necessary for their survival.” For further coverage of the Papal encyclical, please look forward to the July/August edition of Arms Control Today. In Case You Missed It: “2026 Adopted Resolutions: Urging the United States to Lead a Global Effort to Halt and Reverse the Nuclear Arms Race,” U.S. Conference of Mayors, June 2026. “Premeditated: 2025 Global Nuclear Weapons Spending,” Alicia Sanders-Zakre and Susi Snyder, International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, June 2026. “Friendly Proliferation: Assessing U.S. Perceptions on Proliferation Among Allies and Partners,” Astrid Chevreuil, Center for Strategic International Studies, June 9. “Mitigating Miscalculation: The Role of Pre-Launch Notifications in Strategic Stability,” William Alberque et al., Pacific Forum, May 2026. “Contriving Imaginary Gaps in Nuclear Deterrence,”Jay Tilden, War on the Rocks, May 29. “Trump's Nuclear Review,” Madelyn Creedon et al., RealClearDefense, May 26. “Restrain and Hedge: A New U.S. Nuclear Strategy for a Two-Peer World,” Tyler Bowen, War on the Rocks, May 15. “The “Karaganov Debate”: How Policy Entrepreneurs Shape Russia’s Nuclear Doctrine,” Alexander Graef and Gabriela Iveliz Rosa Hernandez, Global Studies Quarterly, April 24. “Future-Proofing U.S. Nuclear Policy: Forecasting Outcomes of the Nuclear-Armed Sea-Launched Cruise Missile,” Amy J. Nelson and Mariam Kvaratskhelia, New America, Feb. 26. On the Disarmament Calendar July 7: 9th anniversary of the adoption of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons July 16: 81st anniversary of the Trinity test August 6 and 9: 81st anniversary of the U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki August 29: International Day Against Nuclear Tests September 24: 30th anniversary of the opening for signature of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Nov. 30- Dec. 3: First Review Conference of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, New York
2026 NPT Konferansı İran ve ABD-İsrail Anlaşmazlıklarıyla ÇöktüChina’s Xi vows support for Myanmar as President Min Aung Hlaing moves to bridge isolation
Chinese President Xi Jinping reaffirmed support for Myanmar’s leadership under former junta chief Min Aung Hlaing on Tuesday, reinforcing Beijing’s influence as its southern neighbour struggles to contain a gruelling civil war. Speaking after a welcome ceremony at the Great Hall of the People, Xi said Beijing prioritised its ties with Myanmar, which he said held an “important position” in China’s neighbourhood diplomacy. “I am willing to strengthen strategic guidance with you, carry forward our...
Trump'ın 80. Yaş Gününde Yoğun Diplomasi: İran Anlaşması ve Ukrayna AteşkesiChina's Xi backs Myanmar's president as two leaders meet in Beijing
BEIJING, June 16 - Chinese President Xi Jinping on Tuesday endorsed the political leadership of Myanmar's military chief-turned-president Min Aung Hlaing as the two met in Beijing to map out the future development of bilateral ties.
IN BRIEF: Aide Ushakov on trust between Putin and Xi, two countries’ role in world
Yury Ushakov noted that cooperation between Russia and China is strengthening thanks to efforts made by Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping
Can the deal between US and Iran become a lasting settlement?
Can the deal between US and Iran become a lasting settlement? The World Today iallan.drupal 8 June 2026 Only if Washington and Tehran agree all the difficult pieces they are trying at put together, and keep Israel on board – otherwise the deal will be fragile, says Catherine Ashton, who led the talks that established the 2015 nuclear accord. The United States and Iran have announced a deal to end the war and open the Strait of Hormuz. It is expected to be signed in Switzerland on Friday. The text of the agreement has yet to be published, but it’s thought that both sides are extending the ceasefire agreed in April for 60 days, during which time Washington and Tehran will commit to further talks. The announcement is a step forward. Nevertheless, much remains unclear. The pieces of the jigsaw puzzle that could end the US–Israel war with Iran remain scattered. Put together properly, the shape and size of each piece matters less than the picture they form, showing that major issues have been resolved, with no gaps. But pulling the pieces together to turn the deal announced over the weekend into one that lasts requires all participants to know what they are trying to achieve. Uncertainty about the reasons for the war in the first place, combined with a lack of clarity or consistency about its objectives, makes this more difficult. On the crucial points of Iran’s nuclear programme and its ability to develop nuclear weaponry – issues repeatedly prioritized by US president Donald Trump and Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu – there are indications that these will be discussed as part of the framework agreement. Nuclear negotiations That last, important piece of the puzzle was central to Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) negotiations that I chaired between 2009 and 2014 as foreign policy chief of the European Union, on behalf of the United Nations. The team of six nations – China, Russia, the United States, France and Britain, along with Germany – had one objective in their talks with Iran: to give confidence in the purely peaceful nature of Tehran’s nuclear programme. Other issues, from human rights to the role of Iran’s proxies, important as they were, could be dealt with later. (They weren’t.) The closure of the Strait of Hormuz was a consequence of the war – resolving it does not get to the heart of what the war has been about. Our jigsaw puzzle had to show that Iran was not building a nuclear bomb. The JCPOA was finally agreed in 2015, and it worked – until President Trump in 2018, during his first administration, decided it was insufficient and effectively killed it. In this new jigsaw puzzle, putting the pieces together must begin from the answer to a fundamental question – which objectives for this war, that began on 28 February, are to be satisfied by a lasting deal? The most obvious answer now is to open the Strait of Hormuz fully and get supplies moving. This conflict has had a global impact, requiring urgent action if the consequences are not to cause greater hardship, rising prices and shortages. It’s to be welcomed that the framework agreement focuses on reopening the strait. Yet its closure was a consequence of the war, not its cause. So, resolving it does not get to the heart of what the war has been about. Proposals between the US and Iran have been scornfully rejected by one or the other as unrealistic or insignificant or both, leaving a nervous world looking on. It is vital for both sides to agree what puzzle pieces will form an agreement that develops into a lasting accord, and for Israel to accept the result. Otherwise, any deal will be at best fragile, or at worst impossible. The ‘no surprises round’ A crucial aspect of the talks that led to the JCPOA was the ‘no surprises round’. This enabled progress from the interim Joint Plan of Action agreement in 2013, to the final JCPOA deal, allowing us to add that all-important adjective ‘comprehensive’ two years later. The team laid out exactly what issues were to be discussed: from stockpiles of enriched uranium to Arak, the heavy water reactor, and from sanctions relief to repatriation of seized funds. Iran at the beginning did not have to agree even that they were prepared to talk about the issues. But they had to understand that without some recognition of the issues, there was no possibility of a final agreement. The JCPOA negotiations succeeded through painstaking work on specifics. Getting a lasting peace from the current negotiations will require the same. As importantly, the list of issues was complete. There would be no surprises: neither side would suddenly raise a new issue. The Iranian team could calibrate their response – or offers – knowing exactly what areas we were going to need them to respond to. This helped with the laborious task of building trust – in stark contrast to today’s deep levels of suspicion on both sides. We succeeded through painstaking, detailed work around specifics that put the puzzle together. Getting a lasting peace from the current negotiations will require the same. In a good outcome, both sides get what they need – not everything they want. One of the ‘surprises’ that may make negotiations difficult is the role of Israel. Arguably, Netanyahu’s objectives are different to Trump’s. He has long wanted to see the role of Iran downgraded to the point where it is incapable of looking outward and causing any kind of regional mayhem, especially that directed at Israel. In Trump he has found someone willing to back this ambition. As long as the war lasts, Netanyahu hopes to keep US support, allowing him to deal with Hezbollah in Lebanon and cause as much damage as possible in Iran. However, the assassinations of significant numbers of potential Iranian leaders in the first instance have not helped. One, Ali Larijani, who served as secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, could have been a hardline but pragmatic interlocutor for the Americans. Instead, Iran is left with equally hardline but unknown and less experienced leaders. The assassinations of potential Iranian leaders have not helped. The exception is the foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, known to the international community as the deputy chief negotiator of the JCPOA. His apparent removal from any ‘kill’ list has allowed him to come forward and lead on negotiations, although the conduct of these discussions will be unlike anything he has experienced in the past. It is important to be able to engage with interlocutors willing and able to take up the serious, detailed discussions necessary to get to a deal. Based on previous experience, Araghchi and some of the team around him know how to do this. How much flexibility they might have in their negotiating positions remains to be seen. — An Iranian woman walks past a mural painted on the outer wall of the former American embassy in Tehran, depicting the US and Iran negotiations in Oman in February. Photo: AFP via Getty Images. Whereas the JCPOA was conducted by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany, so far major discussions have been between the US and Iran, with Israel watching closely. Of course, this reflects the nature of the war; but the longer-term solutions, especially for traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, require a regional response at least. The talks need to be conducted in a way that generates confidence that the deal will hold. The failure of the JCPOA showed that fragility is not always in the agreement itself, but in the politics that surround it. That is just as true for Iran, Israel or the region as it is for the US. The new ‘yachts’ While the UN and Europe languish on the sidelines, despite their critical roles in previous crises, new informal groupings come to the fore to solve problems that confront them. The engagement of Pakistan as mediator and host has been significant as part of a new quartet with Egypt, Turkey and Saudi Arabia – it was Islamabad that announced the framework agreement at the weekend. Excited media have pointed to Pakistan’s nuclear weapon capacity, Egypt’s control of the Suez Canal, Saudi’s energy reserves and Turkey’s growing political strength. Whatever influence these countries have, they are using well-trodden methods such as bringing both sides together on ‘trusted’ territory to thrash out their problems. The durability of their efforts will depend on whether they can put a few jigsaw pieces together to show progress. Related work Why Egypt is helping to end the Iran war These new ‘yachts’ move faster than the old style ‘tankers’ of international diplomacy. However, their ability to keep moving in the same direction will be sorely tested if negotiations drag on. They will also have to decide on who the guardians of the outcome are. To whom will the responsibility to police, support, pressure or sanction fall? The US no longer wants to be the world’s policeman, and for many would be unacceptable. So, if the old structures are not supported, how will long-term, painstaking diplomatic efforts be managed? While the neighbours deliberate, Trump’s meeting with President Xi Jinping in May focused on what China might do. Following that meeting, China’s foreign ministry issued a statement on social media emphasizing that ‘dialogue and negotiation is the right way forward, and the use of force is a dead end’. Don’t ignore China In all the discussions on the JCPOA, the role of China is often ignored. I found it to be important. China participated in every meeting over the years it took to get a deal, was prepared to lead on difficult areas and did not push hard on a future role. How might a long-lasting, robust deal come about? Although Trump has no time for the JCPOA outcomes, its process offers clues. Vital though the US and its brilliant team were to the 2015 deal, it was a group effort. The six nations stuck together through it all and the EU provided the glue. Europe might play a role once again, either through the EU or with the E3 – France, Germany and the UK – or both. There are people who have extensive knowledge of talking to Iran, how to make proposals and how to challenge ideas. If nothing else, European diplomats could help set the backdrop to serious discussions. It is clear that the American and Iranian negotiators are bemused by each other, struggling to understand what is being offered or refused, nor capturing what they have agreed or talked about – witness the differing interpretations of whether Israel’s war in Lebanon was included in the April ceasefire. Get confidence-building measures under way … put a few pieces of the jigsaw in place and assess what that means for the bigger picture. The question of how much enrichment of its uranium, if any, Iran should be allowed will be tricky. Netanyahu has long held the view there should be no enrichment of any kind, while Iran will argue for some capability for energy and medical purposes, as they were given under the JCPOA. Reports on the effects of the bombing in June 2025 suggest Iran is a long way off being able to put back together its nuclear sites and to move towards the 90 per cent enrichment required for weapon capability. From there it is still a journey to a fully armed missile, ready to launch – especially without being noticed. My experience leads me to believe that the only way to approach the broader deal is to get confidence-building measures under way. The apparent willingness by the US and Iran, as reflected in the framework agreement, to reopen the Strait of Hormuz safely for ships and cease military hostilities are steps in the right direction. In other words, get a few pieces of the jigsaw in place, show how they fit together and assess what that means for the broader picture. In diplomatic language – drip, drip, drip. What it means for the ‘tankers’ What does this fractured diplomatic process mean for the ‘tankers’, the major organizations of the world based on deep, long-term commitments? The UN has been struggling for years, accused of a bloated bureaucracy, buffeted by threats of withheld funds, dominated by an outdated structure. Its failures to resolve the conflicts in the Middle East, Ukraine or Sudan have left it on the sidelines.
ABD-İran Anlaşmasının Kalıcı Olması İsrail'in Onayına BağlıBirthday greetings to President of China Xi Jinping
Vladimir Putin wished a happy birthday to President of the People’s Republic of China Xi Jinping. Mr President, Dear friend, Please accept my heartfelt greetings on your birthday. Under your leadership, the People’s Republic of China has achieved impressive progress in economic, social, scientific and technological development, while steadily strengthening its standing on the international stage. You rightly enjoy great respect and authority both among your fellow citizens and abroad. I warmly recall our recent meeting in Beijing, which fully confirmed the positive momentum of Russian-Chinese relations across all key areas of cooperation. The agreements reached are of great importance for further strengthening the comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation between our countries. We will undoubtedly continue our constructive dialogue and close joint efforts for the benefit of our friendly nations and in the interests of building a just, truly democratic multipolar world order. Dear friend, I sincerely wish you good health, happiness, prosperity and every success in your important state duties. Respectfully, Vladimir Putin
Trump'ın 80. Yaş Gününde Yoğun Diplomasi: İran Anlaşması ve Ukrayna AteşkesiTime for US wishful thinking on North Korean denuclearisation is over
Chinese President Xi Jinping’s recent Pyongyang visit may ultimately be remembered as a turning point in the international debate over North Korea’s nuclear weapons. While most headlines focused on the visit’s timing and the many pledges made by the two leaders aimed at expanding cooperation, the most significant development may have been what was left unsaid. Throughout the visit, neither side publicly referenced the denuclearisation issue. On the contrary, Xi called for expanded cooperation in...
Kuzey Kore'den Xi'nin Ziyareti Öncesi 'Geri Dönülemez Nükleer Statü' ÇıkışıWhat does North Korea get from its blossoming ties with Russia?
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un’s latest message of reassurance to Russian President Vladimir Putin, coming shortly after Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Pyongyang, constitutes a form of strategic hedging, according to observers. The letter suggested that Pyongyang-Moscow ties were evolving beyond a largely transactional relationship into a firm military alliance, even as North Korea sought to rekindle its traditional “blood alliance” with China, they said. In a congratulatory message...
Kuzey Kore'nin Rusya ile Bağları Askeri İttifaka DönüşüyorWas Kim Jong-un the real winner from Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to North Korea?
Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to North Korea this week helped to improve Kim Jong-un’s international standing and gave him a “big strategic win”, analysts said. Pyongyang has become increasingly close to Russia in recent years and has sent thousands of troops to support its war against Ukraine, but Xi’s visit reinforced the long-standing economic and cultural ties between China and North Korea. It was the Chinese leader’s first foreign trip of the year and came less than a month after he...
Kuzey Kore'den Xi'nin Ziyareti Öncesi 'Geri Dönülemez Nükleer Statü' ÇıkışıKim Jong-un turns out to be the cleverest of them all
Even Western pundits grudgingly admitted the summit between President Xi Jinping and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un was a success. Both sides, according to Bloomberg, “appear to have walked away with what they wanted”. Given China’s rising pre-eminence while avoiding any damaging war, it’s no surprise that Xi had the upper hand in his recent meetings with US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. But with Kim, the stakes for Beijing were just as high, in light of Tokyo’s...
Xi Jinping Önümüzdeki Hafta Kuzey Kore’ye GidiyorChina Confirms Arrest of American Citizen on Spying Charges
Beijing confirmed the arrest of a US citizen on spy allegations, a move that may test a trade truce upheld at a recent summit between President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
Xi on North Korean military ties; US blacklists Chinese tech firms: SCMP’s 7 highlights
We have selected seven stories from this week’s news across Hong Kong, mainland China, the wider Asia region and beyond that resonated with our readers and shed light on topical issues. If you would like to see more of our reporting, please consider subscribing. 1. Was Xi’s stance on North Korea military ties also a message for US, Russia? During his meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un on Monday, Chinese President Xi Jinping said both sides should “enhance exchanges in diplomacy, law...
Has Beijing given up on a nuclear weapon-free Korean peninsula?
China might be downplaying nuclear weapons by not mentioning the issue after Xi Jinping’s visit to North Korea but that does not mean it has accepted its neighbour’s growing arsenal, according to analysts. Neither Beijing nor Pyongyang mentioned nuclear weapons or denuclearisation in their statements on the Chinese president’s two-day state visit to Pyongyang this week. Since Xi’s summit with US President Donald Trump in May, observers have been speculating that Beijing’s stance on Pyongyang’s...
Xi Jinping'in Kuzey Kore Ziyareti: Pekin Nükleersizleştirmeden Vaz mı Geçti?What did the Trump-Xi summit actually achieve?
After months of anticipation, US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping finally met in Beijing. But beyond a few concrete announcements—including a Chinese pledge to buy two hundred Boeing jets—the summit raised more questions than it answered. Together with Melanie Hart, senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Global China Hub, Josh and Jessie unpack what actually came out of the meeting: from purchase commitments and assurances around critical minerals to Trump’s controversial comments on Taiwan. The post What did the Trump-Xi summit actually achieve? appeared first on Atlantic Council.
Meeting with heads of international news agencies
Vladimir Putin’s meeting with heads of the world’s leading news agencies took place in the Constantine Palace. Director General of TASS News Agency, moderator of the meeting Andrei Kondrashov: Mr President, guests, Allow me to begin by expressing my deepest gratitude for upholding the steadfast tradition whereby the leaders of the world’s news agencies gather here, in the Northern capital, during the St Petersburg International Economic Forum, for an open dialogue with you. TASS has the honour of inviting our colleagues to this meeting. I would note that some of our guests have forewarned us that they have come prepared with some rather incisive questions. In turn, we have cautioned them that you too may have a few questions for certain journalists from various countries. President of Russia Vladimir Putin: No, I will not be asking questions. I am not a journalist. It is you who will be asking questions; I will be providing the answers. Andrei Kondrashov: In any event, let us strive to make our meeting today open, candid, and dynamic. The purpose of such gatherings is, as in previous years, that the discussions here will be rapidly disseminated in hundreds of news flashes across the globe for those present here today and the agencies they represent are responsible for generating more than three-quarters of the global information flow. Therefore, today, we will not follow any alphabetical order, but we will maintain one tradition. Let us begin our discussion with a representative of the fairer half of journalism – Ms Raushan Kazhibayeva, Director General of the Television and Radio Complex of the President of Kazakhstan. Please, Ms Kazhibayeva, you have the floor for the first question. Director of the Television and Radio Complex of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan Raushan Kazhibayeva: Thank you very much. Mr President, I have two questions for you. Your recent state visit to Kazakhstan was a great success and undoubtedly one of the most significant events on our bilateral agenda this year. During the visit, you and our President, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, adopted a joint document on the seven foundations of friendship and good-neighbourly relations between the peoples of Kazakhstan and Russia. My first question: what, in your view, is the significance of this document? My second question relates to one of the most talked-about moments of the visit – the Amur tigers that Russia gifted to Kazakhstan. President Tokayev called this gift the highlight of the visit. Could you tell us whether this is not just an environmental project, but rather a symbol – a vivid symbol of trust between our countries? Thank you. Vladimir Putin: Our relations with Kazakhstan are advancing steadily; they are on the rise. That said, I should point out straight away that our Kazakhstani friends and partners are not easy partners. We always have very heated debates on almost every issue – whether it is financial relations, industrial cooperation, investment conditions, or major joint projects. But on both sides, there is a desire to find a compromise that doesn’t just satisfy both parties but also helps us achieve shared goals. And our shared goal is clear: development and prosperity for the citizens of Kazakhstan and Russia. We fully understand – we know that we are bound by centuries of shared history, no exaggeration here, and we have certain advantages inherited from the time we were part of a single state. What are those advantages? Cooperation, and particularly unified transport links. You asked your question in Russian, and I am grateful for that. That too is an important factor – one that, to some extent, and in many cases, takes on a purely economic dimension. Everything is clear: we understand each other, and we speak the same language. There is also enormous interest in continuing the benefits of education – both the evolving education system in Kazakhstan and the developments and new trends emerging in the Russian Federation. As you may recall, the President of Kazakhstan and I attended the launch of the Sirius system, which has proven successful in developing effective methods for identifying and supporting gifted children. Of course, Kazakhstan has many gifted children – they just need to be found – and this area of our cooperation will focus on this. Energy, as you know, industrial production, space, as well as our latest major project – the construction of a nuclear power plant in Kazakhstan. I want to note that Kazakhstan is a country with abundant resources that are in high demand by the rest of the world. These resources include fuel for power plants and NPPs. We cooperate successfully with Kazakhstan in this area. I am confident that, by relying on its own resource base and developing our joint potential, Kazakhstan will achieve great success and tackle many tasks in energy, diversifying its energy resources. I believe Kazakhstan will obtain up to 20 percent of its electrical energy from the nuclear power plant. We produce uranium together, as I said, and will continue this production. But the most important thing is not the fact that NPP units will be built in Kazakhstan. Most importantly, a new industry will emerge. This new industry will provide for professional training, research and production activities. We will work on this together. It is an extremely important sector for both us and Kazakhstan. We will continue our cooperation in space, machine engineering, and many other industries. I have already talked about humanitarian links. Education plays an enormous role. A great number of Kazakhstani are enrolled to study in Russian universities, and we are very grateful to the President of Kazakhstan for launching an international body to support the Russian language. I believe it is a forward-looking initiative that will help preserve our relations and promote their development across all fields, including humanitarian cooperation. So, as concerns tigers, it is quite a natural thing. We are simply focused on the restoration of nature, the environment, flora and fauna. We also receive help – for example, Tajikistan has transferred snow leopards to us, for which we are immensely grateful to our Tajikistani friends. We have done a great deal to preserve the population of Amur tigers. By the way, they are the largest tigers in the world, second to none. Amur tigers are the largest. There were similar tigers in Kazakhstan in the past. If we can help our friends in Kazakhstan in any way, we will certainly do so. I have seen this picture, and it is impressive. By the way, we held an event called a tiger summit here. So many countries are concerned about preserving the population of these beautiful animals. I think our cooperation on this and other environmental projects is very important. This has to do with a very pragmatic matter of trans-border river resource utilisation. There is much to discuss in this area. Our work here is quite extensive. I am certain all the goals will be achieved. Thank you. Andrei Kondrashov: Mr President, to your left is Mr Fu Hua, representing the Xinhua News Agency from China. Just two weeks ago, if you recall, he helped organise an exhibition for you and President of China Xi Jinping, together with the TASS news agency. And now, two weeks later, he is here with us to ask his question. Please, go ahead, Comrade Fu Hua. President of Xinhua News Agency (PRC) Fu Hua (retranslated): Mr President, It was a real pleasure to have you visit us in China. A remarkable visit – and a highly successful one. This year, we held a very important exhibition marking the anniversary of our news agencies. Thank you for your special attention to it. May I take this opportunity to ask you a couple of questions? In May, you made your 25th visit to China, where you discussed major issues concerning our international relations with President Xi Jinping. We have counted: over the past 14 years, you have met more than 50 times. This is truly an extraordinary, unprecedented achievement. Our relationship is good-neighbourly, friendly, and truly at its peak. I believe this visit left a real mark. This close engagement at such a senior level – how did we achieve it? How did we reach this unprecedented level? That is my first question. My second question: We have jointly issued a new, comprehensive joint statement. We, of course, remain committed to the UN Charter, upholding its principles and purposes in full, and we defend the international order. We were the victors in World War II. What should we do to protect historical truth? How do we pass it on to future generations, without allowing anyone to distort or destroy it? Those are my two questions. Thank you. Vladimir Putin: First of all, I would like to thank you for the warm welcome during my visit to Beijing, and for the exhibition you organised together with your colleague, Mr Kondrashov. It was a fascinating and substantive exhibition. Thank you very much. As for the results of our cooperation, here is what I would say. In recent years, especially since the events still unfolding in Ukraine, people have increasingly said: “Russia has pivoted towards Asia. It has changed its policy.” But Russia has not changed anything, and it has not made any pivot. The agreement that underpins our cooperation – and is the foundation for our current results, which are impressive (according to various figures, our mutual trade is somewhere around $250 billion, and diversification is progressing strongly) – that agreement was signed back in 2001. We are natural allies and partners. Indeed, we are neighbours, sharing an extensive common border. One cannot choose one’s neighbours – that is a fact of life. Such is the course of history. Over the centuries, throughout our interactions, a particular system of principles governing our relations has emerged. Not yesterday, not today, and not five years ago – but over centuries, these principles have taken shape. China is progressing rapidly and dynamically, assuming an increasingly significant role in the global economy, world politics, and international affairs as a whole. Naturally, we have been observing this closely – and not merely observing; we have been engaging in close collaboration and cooperation. Twenty five years ago, we signed the foundational Treaty, which established favourable preconditions and a robust foundation for the development of bilateral cooperation in all areas. Such is the result. In recent years, as both the Chinese and Russian economies have expanded and diversified, new opportunities have emerged for us – encompassing a vast array of fields. I will refrain from enumerating everything I deem significant and important. The most crucial aspect is that in recent years, we have increasingly focused on matters relating to the new economy, which is rooted in artificial intelligence, information technology, advancements in biology, genetics, and so forth. We have always cooperated – not just in the last five years, but consistently – in the military sphere, and our interaction continues unabated. There is nothing new in this regard; it is simply a tradition of our relations, both military and military-technical cooperation. We are jointly considering certain developments in this domain. I reiterate, this is not connected to current events that are capturing global attention, including those in Ukraine or even in the Middle East. We simply cooperate and maintain friendship with China – not directed against anyone, as I have stated, but rather in each other’s interests. That is all. Here, particularly in the pursuit of advancements in the realms of artificial intelligence and high technology, lies the future of our collaboration. This is a subject we invariably discuss during our meetings with President Xi Jinping. Incidentally, we have truly trust-based relations. He addresses me as “my old friend,” and I reciprocate. This is neither an exaggeration nor a figure of speech. We have cultivated a relationship of trust. Naturally, we are guided first and foremost by the national interests of our countries, yet these interests often align, and personal relationships provide a solid foundation for reaching ever-new horizons. That is why I believe we have established favourable preconditions for enhancing our interaction with China. I am confident that all the tasks we have set during my visit will be accomplished, and all the objectives will be achieved. President Xi Jinping and I have outlined our schedule of bilateral contacts for this year – and this applies not only to us: the governments, ministries, and agencies, along with our leading companies, are meeting and collaborating, including in the energy sector, where, I am sure, we will soon delight the global energy market with new agreements between Russia and China. Andrei Kondrashov: Colleagues, who would like to speak next? Vijay Joshi, CEO and Editor-in-Chief of the Press Trust of India. CEO and Editor-in-Chief at The Press Trust of India (India) Vijay Joshi: Mr President, first of all, thank you for this opportunity and for your hospitality. Mr President, as you are preparing to travel to India for the BRICS summit in September and the global community is watching the evolving dynamics between Moscow and New Delhi very closely. While this special and privileged strategic partnership remains the cornerstone for both nations, some observers say that India’s alignment with Washington creates structural frictions with Russia. From your perspective, how will you seek to inject fresh momentum into the bilateral relationship? What steps can be taken to ensure that Russia-India ties remain resilient against external geopolitical pressures? And how would you describe Russia-India relations in this redrawn geopolitical landscape in your words? Thank you. Vladimir Putin: You have described these relations yourself, and you characterised them accurately. As you noted, this is a special and privileged strategic partnership. Such a relationship was not built overnight, or over the course of a few years. It is the result of decades of cooperation. The Soviet Union established diplomatic relations with India in 1947 and consistently supported the development of the young state. We are happy to see that, thanks to the tireless work, talent, and determination of the Indian people, India has achieved remarkable success and made tremendous progress in its development. Everyone present here knows that India is currently demonstrating the highest economic growth rates among the world’s major economies. This doesn’t fall out of the sky; it is the result of consistent and purposeful efforts, above all by the government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The country’s strong economic performance reflects the successful implementation of the policies and development strategies pursued under his leadership. We still have a lot of work to do together, but we are confident that bilateral trade will reach $100 billion in the coming years. At present, trade turnover stands at approximately $58 – $60 billion. However, all the necessary conditions are in place to intensify our joint efforts and achieve even more ambitious goals. Our cooperation extends far beyond the energy sector, including nuclear power. The Kudankulam Nuclear Power Plant is already operating and continues to expand, and we expect decisions on additional sites in the future. We will also continue to deepen cooperation in the hydrocarbon sector. Russia remains one of the largest foreign investors in the Indian economy, and we intend to further strengthen investment cooperation on a reciprocal basis. Everybody knows that we also maintain close cooperation in the pharmaceutical industry, where Russian companies are ready to offer a wide range of products and solutions. I will not go into details, but we have outlined a number of highly promising, long-term initiatives that are of mutual interest to both India and Russia. However, I find your question somewhat surprising. You suggested that India’s cooperation with the United States is creating difficulties in its relations with Russia. We do not see it that way at all. Where did you get that from? We are glad that India is developing relations with all countries. India is a major global power with a population of 1.5 billion people, a rapidly growing economy, and one of the world’s largest democracies. It is entirely natural for India to develop relations with a wide range of countries in accordance with its national interests. It is another thing that the United States is trying to pressure India on certain issues, particularly on certain issues of cooperation with Russia. But I think everyone has long since realised that pressuring Prime Minister Modi, who leads a country with a population of 1.5 billion, is futile. Moreover, it harms international relations and bilateral relations, no matter from which side this pressure comes. We do not see any negative consequences arising from the current situation. We believe that mutually acceptable solutions can be found with all parties involved. To date, we have not observed any serious adverse effects. Russia and India continue to strengthen their partnership, and we regard India as a reliable partner. Andrei Kondrashov: And here’s the United States. James Jordan is one of those who came from The Associated Press to ask tough questions. Please. Vladimir Putin: Go ahead, play hard ball. News Director for Europe & Africa at the Associated Press James Jordan: Thank you, Mr Kondrashov, for the organisation of this gathering. It is always fascinating to hear President Putin’s views on many global matters. I have been here for three years now and it is always an interesting experience, so thank you. President Putin, yesterday hundreds of drones were launched into Russia from Ukraine. Some struck a naval base nearby, some struck an oil depot nearby, causing a plume of smoke over St Petersburg, your home city. Flights were also disrupted into the airport here. More broadly, the Russian economy has dipped recently; your personal approval ratings have also dipped; and the US says the invasion has become a strategic disaster – those are the words of Marco Rubio. He also added that Russia won’t achieve its war aims by military means alone. Given this, is it still logical to pursue your war aim of controlling the hold of the Donbass region or are you ready to make a deal? Thank you. Vladimir Putin: First of all, one does not exclude the other. Controlling the entire Donbass region and making a deal are not mutually exclusive. Why do you think they are in conflict? You mentioned Mr Rubio’s statement. He is a serious partner; we are in contact with him. He recently spoke in the Senate or Congress. It is clear that the domestic political situation in the United States is complex – some support him, some attack him. What the Secretary of State says on a specific issue inside his home country is certainly of interest to us, but ultimately, we are more interested in the real situation. And if you are talking about the conflict in Ukraine right now, we are interested in the actual situation on the ground. What does that situation look like? It is as follows. First of all, and this needs to be emphasised, Russian troops are advancing along the entire line of contact. There is not a single place where Russian troops are not advancing. The biggest problem facing the Ukrainian Armed Forces today is a disastrous shortage of personnel. Recently, the Ukrainian Armed Forces have been reduced by 100,000 personnel. Monthly losses are around 40,000. As a result of forced mobilisation – people, as you know, are being snatched off the streets, like stray dogs, and forced into the army. I will tell you about the consequences now. Monthly losses are approximately 40,000. Forced mobilisation brings in around 15,000–16,000 per month, and about 14,000 return from hospitals after being wounded. So each month, there is a net loss of roughly 10,000 personnel. On top of that, around 20,000 desert each month. At the start of this year, the number of deserters was around 60,000. People are being forcibly taken – there is no motivation, no one wants to fight. The almost official figure is that 200,000 criminal cases have been opened for desertions. That is one of the problems, but the most significant one. It leads to the loss of territory and towns. Just recently – I will not give the exact number of communities now, in case I am mistaken – the Russian army has brought approximately 2,440 square kilometres under its control. The offensive, as I said, is ongoing daily. Since you mentioned Donbass, the Russian army is currently in full control of the Lugansk People’s Republic – 100 percent. Over 85 percent of the territory of the Donetsk People’s Republic is under our control. Only recently, Ukraine controlled some 25 percent of the territory, and now it’s down to less than 15 percent. We also control 80 percent of the Zaporozhye Region. This process continues on a daily basis. True, Western sponsors supply a great number of drones for Ukraine – different categories, including long-range UAVs. Unfortunately, some of them do break through. But Russia has its own air defence system. We must sure refine it. Yes, we must reinforce it, and we will by all means do it. Ukraine has no such system whatsoever. They have some of its elements but no system. They have Patriots and other types of weapons but the shortage is catastrophic. But the system as such does not exist. Similarly, Ukraine has no strike systems like those the Russian Federation has. By that I mean hypersonic missiles, cruise missiles – sea-, air- and ground-launched. We also have something vital – the Russian people’s patriotism and strong will that guarantee that we will achieve all the goals and objectives of the special military operation. While listing essential issues, I should mention one more circumstance. We have our own production, resource, research and workforce base to address all the objectives concerning the provisions of the Russian Armed Forces. This base is gaining strength with every passing month and, certainly, serves as the foundation for all the achievements and advances that I have just mentioned. To summarise, I would like to add the following: Without doubt, we are ready and willing to reach an agreement with Ukraine by peaceful means – and based on what we have discussed at the meeting with President Trump in Anchorage. At that meeting, certain questions were put before Russia so that we could agree on certain compromises. Russia agrees to the compromises discussed in Anchorage. It is necessary that Ukraine also agrees to make them. Then, the conflict will be resolved naturally and quickly. Andrei Kondrashov: Have you received answers to all your questions, Mr Jordan? Should time permit, you may pose additional queries, but for the moment, allow me, Mr President, to put my question to you. The retaliatory strikes we are carrying out today in response to the incessant terrorist assaults from Ukraine – targeting infrastructure used by the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) and military-industrial complex facilities – are, before our very eyes, taking on a systemic character. Indeed, one of our recent retaliatory strikes raises the question – was the Oreshnik used in that instance? Furthermore, what, broadly speaking, does the use of such weaponry afford us? Vladimir Putin: As for our new systems, they are being developed – this includes the Oreshnik. However, they differ somewhat from what we used to do prior to the conflict in Ukraine. What do I mean by this? You see, we tested such systems at proving grounds, but the Oreshnik was not tested in this way, and this did not constitute a combat use. Across the territory of Ukraine, there has essentially been no full combat use of the Oreshnik, and as for the latest instance – it is not quite that … To be perfectly candid, I will share a major state military secret with you: we simply struck locations where it was possible to observe the results. This applies to Belaya Tserkov and, even more so, to the DPR area within the main fortified zone. Afterwards, our drones flew into the structure we hit, and we meticulously observed how the separating warheads were dispersed, calculating everything to the millimetre. This is crucial for us to make future decisions on the full-scale employment of the Oreshnik against designated targets, including urban areas. Andrei Kondrashov: Thank you. Colleagues, who is next? Martin Romanczyk, Deutsche Presse-Agentur (DPA), Germany. But, you know, I would first like to put a question to Martin myself, if I may. You represent Germany’s largest and leading news agency. As a journalist, do you get the impression that your country is preparing for war? Is this really the case, or does it merely appear so to us? And is it truly gearing up to engage in conflict with Russia? Vladimir Putin: I object. There is no need for you to respond. You are not here to be interrogated – you are here as an investigator; interrogate others. Andrei Kondrashov: Then we will speak separately after this meeting. Please, go ahead. Head of the News Service of the Deutsche Presse-Agentur (DPA) (Germany) Martin Romanczyk (retranslated): I would like to respond to your question. No, I do not think so. Mr President, thank you very much for the invitation. I would also like to address the topic of Ukraine and return to a question that has already been asked here. You spoke about peace. Germany and many European countries wish to take part in these peace negotiations currently being mediated by the United States, despite the conflict in Iran. What role can Germany play, and what role can the Federal Chancellor assume? And, if I may, I would like to add to this question. You mentioned Gerhard Schröder as a negotiator on behalf of the Europeans. Apart from Gerhard Schröder, whom else can you envisage in this role – who could undertake these mediation functions on behalf of Germany? Thank you. Vladimir Putin: You raised two points that I would like to pay attention to. First, you said that Europe would like to participate in the negotiations. Right? Second, you asked who, apart from Mr Schroeder, could serve as a mediator. One thing is to participate in the negotiations, and another thing is to be a mediator. How can the European Union or separate countries of the European Union be a mediator if they directly abet the efforts of the country which we have an armed conflict with? What kind of mediators can they be? If you want to be a mediator, you have to be neutral.That is my first point. And secondly, I was surprised by the reaction to my mention of Mr Schroeder as a possible mediator. An immediate outcry followed: “No, Schroeder cannot be involved because he is Putin’s friend.” He is not Putin’s friend. He is a German statesman, and one of the best, in my view, because he has his own position and the courage to defend it. Unfortunately, there are not many politicians in Europe today who possess those qualities. Europe is currently facing significant energy challenges. However, it was Gerhard Schroeder who championed infrastructure projects such as Nord Stream, designed to provide the German economy with reliable and affordable energy supplies from Russia. Moreover, these projects were not only about securing deliveries; they also created a framework of mutual commitments and obligations between the parties involved. What matters is not that we have a good relationship with him. What matters is that, while pursuing his country’s national interests, he has demonstrated that he is a person whose word can be trusted. That is the essence of the matter. Any individual seeking to act as a mediator must be trusted by both sides. Frankly, I find it difficult to understand how Russia could trust people who, for years, have been saying about the need to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia. That is precisely the issue, Martin, das ist das Problem. Nevertheless, we are not refusing to talk. We have never refused contacts with representatives of the European Union in any format. As for the EU acting as a mediator in negotiations with Ukraine, there are obvious difficulties, as I have already mentioned, and I think that is difficult to dispute. But we are not rejecting contacts. If they want to talk, they know how to reach us. They can pick up the phone and call. If they want to come, they are welcome to do so. It is not Russia that is refusing engagement. I was also surprised to hear claims that the evil Russia had stopped supplying energy to Europe. We did not stop. Europe chose to stop buying, hoping that this would cause our economy to collapse. Well, they have seen that nothing has collapsed, that it’s time to stop, to realize that it was a wrong approach and perhaps make some adjustments. But instead we continue to hear the same rhetoric. They have made so many public statements and political commitments that it is difficult to change their position now. I’m not going to comment. I just want to say that we never rejected a dialogue. I want to reaffirm it. If anybody considers it reasonable to resume dialogue with Russia – go ahead. Who will be the negotiator from Europe? I don’t know. We are not imposing anything. I’ve heard this hubbub about Russia wanting to impose something, suggest some negotiators. We are not imposing anything or anyone. Naturally, we want to know who this could be. Let me repeat: It must be some people we could trust. It is just a working matter that could be discussed quietly and calmly, say, at the level of foreign ministers or intelligence services. The contacts between our intelligence agencies continue, by the way. Martin Romanczyk (retranslated): Mr President, you spoke about Nord Stream. Members of the Alternative for Germany party are present at this economic forum. They are supporting the resumption of Russia’s gas supplies via Nord Stream. What do you think of this party? We are holding regional and federal elections soon. What are your expectations of this party? What is your general attitude towards the Alternative for Germany party? Thank you. Vladimir Putin: I believe it would be improper for me to give assessments of the political forces of the Federal Republic. We know – and I know – that, if this corresponds to reality, or as far as I was informed, Alternative for Germany is currently ranked at the top among the political parties of the Federal Republic. It is ahead of CDU/CSU – in fact, quite significantly. It is also ahead of the Social Democratic Party of Germany by miles. I don’t want to comment, but I will say one thing. In my opinion, it is happening because this party’s leaders can formulate the interests of the German people and the German economy clearly and precisely. They are not afraid to declare them and they are willing to fight for them. Hence their rating and results. I don’t know and I don’t want to speculate about further developments on the political stage of the Federal Republic. As for opinions, we welcome any German political forces that are willing to restore and develop relations with Russia, be it Alternative for Germany or any other party. We will work with everybody who wants to work with us. Andrei Kondrashov: If there is a country that definitely wants to work with us, it is Belarus. I would like to give the floor to BelTA, the Belarusian news agency. Andrei Mokhor, go ahead, please. Director General of the Belarusian Telegraph Agency (BetTA) Andrei Mokhor: Good evening, Mr President. First, thank you for the opportunity to have this genuinely open discussion on topics that have been a matter of concern far beyond the circle of people sitting around this table. It has already been said on multiple occasions that the relations between Belarus and Russia can be regarded as a benchmark of sorts in terms of interstate relations and striking a balance between integration and the unconditional commitment to preserving sovereignty. Even the EAEU has yet to achieve this level of interaction. I would like to ask your opinion about ways of overcoming the emerging crisis of trust between long-standing partners, our partners, whose actions sometimes de facto amount to severing ties. Vladimir Putin: A crisis of trust with our partners? Andrei Mokhor: Yes. A crisis of trust with our partners within the post-Soviet space. In particular, I am referring to the developments concerning Armenia. Vladimir Putin: You know, there is nothing extraordinary about this. The political forces behind the current Prime Minister have been talking about this for quite some time now. They have no qualms and are open about it. In fact, there is nothing wrong with striving to follow Western standards, the European standards. I believe that any sovereign country, and Armenia is of course one of them – every sovereign country has the right to set what it views as priority standards which can benefit the country and reinforce its independence, sovereignty and, most importantly, its economy, as well as to choose its partners accordingly. What has raised our concerns? It was the fact that Armenia has adopted a law on launching the process to join the European Union – this is how it is titled, by the way, and it was Mr Lukashenko who drew our attention to this fact, while I even forgot about this, but he pointed out the actual title of the law. Business as usual, nothing extraordinary about this, if not for the fact that Armenia, as I have already said, and we discussed this in Kazakhstan too when we had a meeting with our colleagues – Armenia operates within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union. There are different standards, technical regulations in agriculture, transport, and logistics – there are so many divergences. I would very much like to see, at some point in the historical perspective, technical standards, logistics and all the other numerous factors involved – many of which may seem a mere formality at first glance but are in fact crucial to economic development – become aligned between the European Union and the EAEU. This would make us a truly vast economic space “from Lisbon to the Urals,” as De Gaulle said, though it would be even better if it extended all the way to Vladivostok. However, this is currently impossible for technological reasons, as the EAEU and EU free trade zones are incompatible. Of course, this is a concern for us. If a relevant law is adopted, this goes beyond mere talk – it is the law, and we would like to ask our Armenian colleagues to decide on their development path as soon as possible. The market organisation and the legal framework within the EAEU depend on this, because we debate every issue just as it is done in the EU. Without wishing to overstate this, our colleagues sometimes become quite animated in these discussions. Every comma is sometimes important. But it is also important for us to know how this interaction will be structured. This not only concerns energy, although this is important because the common energy market is one of the few issues that has not been coordinated in terms of our policy as a whole. As you can see, even our colleagues in Germany are concerned about Nord Stream. This [energy] is a crucial element today, and it is especially important in the post-Soviet space, that is, within the EAEU. Moreover, Prime Minister Pashinyan has said just recently that he considers it important to hold a referendum on this issue. Our only request is that this is clarified as quickly as possible. Nothing more. We have no objections. We will maintain good relations with Armenia no matter what development path it chooses to follow. As for other countries, as I said, we manage to come to terms, we always do, despite all the challenges of negotiations. I am confident that we will be able to do this in the future as well. As for Armenia, Russia advocated, at Armenia’s request, for its accession to the EAEU. I mean that, in terms of a number of economic indicators, Armenia did not fully fit the overall framework at the time. However, it has now decided that it should explore a different direction. We have no objection to that – it is entirely their choice. Our only request is that a decision be made as quickly as possible and that we proceed openly and transparently. That’s all. So I do not see any major political problem here. There are, of course, economic and technical issues to address, but I hope we will be able to resolve those as well. By the way, regarding Nord Stream. As you know, the Nord Stream pipelines were blown up, correct? But one string of Nord Stream 2 remains intact and undamaged. Through it, Russian gas could be pumped to the Federal Republic of Germany starting as early as tomorrow. You just need — and I am not joking — simply to press a button, and the gas will start flowing. But that requires a decision by the Government of the Federal Republic. We have an existing contract between Gazprom and its partner in the Federal Republic, and contacts with Gazprom are ongoing; they remain in communication. Gazprom has never refused supplies and is ready to deliver tomorrow. Its partners also want this. All that is needed is a decision by the Government of the Federal Republic. And here we come to the key issue – a political question, a question of sovereignty. Because this system was not only blown up – I consider it an act of state terrorism, and I think you would agree – but even though one line remains intact and operational, it is still subject to US sanctions. If the German government reaches agreement with its partners, the sanctions will be lifted, we will press the button, and gas will start flowing – tomorrow, if necessary. This is a matter of sovereignty: whether they agree or do not agree, or whether, without agreeing with anyone, they simply say no, or explain to their partners in Washington that they need this because they are going through a very difficult period. High energy prices are undermining the competitiveness of the German economy and harming the European Union as a whole, because Germany remains the locomotive of the European economy. This system needs to be put back into operation. They could reach an agreement peacefully, explaining the seriousness of the situation. That is all. With increased capacity, up to 25, and potentially 28 billion cubic metres per year could be supplied – starting tomorrow. But what Gazprom needs from its German partners is a clear answer: will they take the gas or not? Otherwise, we will redirect it to other markets and sell it to other partners. The contract remains in force. And it is not Gazprom that is failing to meet its obligations – Gazprom is ready. The German partner is not taking the gas, because there are instructions from Brussels and Berlin not to take it. That is all. Let’s continue. Andrei Kondrashov: Middle East News Agency MENA, Egypt. Shohrat Aref, please go ahead. Managing Editor for European and Middle Eastern countries at the Middle East News Agency (MENA) (Egypt) Shohrat Aref (retranslated): Thank you, Mr President, for inviting me to take part in this dialogue. I have the following question: What are your thoughts about President el-Sisi’s role in promoting stability in the Middle East? What role could Egypt and Russia play in reducing tension in the Middle East? Vladimir Putin: President el-Sisi is a good friend, and I have a very good relationship with him. I also hope this helps us expand our bilateral ties. Trade between our two countries has been stable and is enjoying positive momentum, and there are good prospects for undertaking major projects. For many years now, we have been discussing the project to create a Russian technology valley in Egypt’s Nile Valley. Today, we are working hard on the project to build a nuclear power plant in Egypt. I hope its first block becomes operational in 2028. There is significant, effective momentum in our relations. We have engaged quite a few local specialists to perform construction work, which means that this is a very impactful project. We are also working in other sectors. We have developed a relationship of trust in our political cooperation on the international stage. Russia appreciates President el-Sisi’s efforts to bring about a settlement in the Middle East. The Palestine tragedy has been somewhat relegated to the background considering the developments in and around Iran and the Strait of Hormuz, but the Palestine issue has not disappeared. It remains acute. In this regard, the President of Egypt has made and continues to make a meaningful contribution to achieving a settlement, which means arriving at a fair resolution regarding all Palestine-related matters. Of course, I would like to stress again that in the opinion of the Russian Federation, the creation of a viable Palestinian state is the only fundamental approach to resolving this issue. I know that the President of Egypt has been working hard on the agenda dealing with settling the Iranian crisis. He has been in touch with all parties to this process at all times, and we have also maintained contact. We seek each other’s advice, listen to each other, hear each other, and take our respective positions into account. I would like to thank President el-Sisi for attaching so much importance to strengthening Russia-Egypt ties. This is instrumental. Egypt is one of our priority partners in the region. Andrei Kondrashov: Spain has been a country that has protested conflicts in the Middle East. We have José Manuel Sanz Mingote, Editor-in-Chief of Agencia EFE, with us. You have the floor. Editor-in-Chief and Director of International Information at the Spanish news agency EFE José Manuel Sanz Mingote (retranslated): Thank you. I would like to thank our friends at the TASS News Agency for their hospitality. Mr President, my question concerns Ukraine. What is preventing the achievement of a durable peace in Ukraine, one that would allow all of Russia’s legitimate concerns related to the conflict to be discussed? We can see that some progress has been made, and you have told us about this. But it is taking too long to achieve these goals, especially in Donbass. We have seen numerous exchanges of strikes between the sides. Is now the right time for a ceasefire, for sitting down at the negotiation table to discuss all issues? Even if the EU and European countries cannot mediate the process, they could help look for a solution. Thank you very much. Vladimir Putin: I believe that the EU could indeed help look for a solution. In my opinion, a solution should be reached within the framework of the arrangements made in Anchorage, and the Ukrainian side is fully aware of this. I would like to reiterate that the question raised before the meeting in Anchorage was whether Russia was ready to make certain compromises. I said during my visit to Anchorage and my meeting with the US President that we were ready, and I specified the agreements and compromises we would be prepared to make. The issue is for the Ukrainian side to accept these compromises. However, judging by all indications, primarily the internal political situation, Kiev is not ready for this. The reason is that if peace is achieved, internal political strife and the struggle for power in Kiev will intensify dramatically, and the economic situation will further deteriorate against this backdrop. It seems to me that the ruling authorities [in Kiev] are not interested in stopping the hostilities because in this situation they are unlikely to have any good prospects – let’s put this tactfully – for retaining power. Furthermore, they will have to address economic matters. European experts know how much it will cost to rebuild the Ukrainian economy – hundreds of billions of euros – and how long this will take. I am aware of the German Chancellor’s proposals for making Ukraine an associated member, and so on. That is none of our business. We are not against this – go ahead. But we are against turning the EU into a military bloc. This is a matter of concern to us. But we are not against economic integration. Go right ahead. European experts know how much this will cost, and European farmers know what will happen if European markets open to Ukraine’s agricultural products. I could speak about this for a long time, but this is how I will reply to your question: Yes, the EU could potentially play a positive role, though not by supplying weapons but by trying to convince Kiev to accept the compromises we discussed in Anchorage. That is all. Andrei Kondrashov: Please, Chairman of the Board of AZERTAC news agency Vugar Aliyev, Azerbaijan. Please, go ahead. Chairman of the Board of the Azerbaijan State News Agency (AZERTAC) Vugar Aliyev: Good evening, Mr President. Thank you very much for taking the time to meet with us journalists. My question relates to relations between our countries. May I ask how you assess the prospects for developing relations between Azerbaijan and Russia? Vladimir Putin: I would rate them as highly favourable. Our relations with Azerbaijan have always been, and continue to be, very positive. This extends to both the economic and political spheres. We signed a Declaration on Allied Interaction a couple of years ago, and relations are developing accordingly. President Aliyev is making significant efforts to infuse this treaty with tangible substance. This is evident in the specific areas of our cooperation. I believe that accumulated Russian investment in the Azerbaijani economy exceeds 10 billion rubles. Numerous enterprises operate with Russian capital. We also have close cooperation on cultural and educational matters. A substantial number of Azerbaijanis, as is well known, work in the Russian Federation. They send money to support their families. We are striving to organise this in a proper, civilised manner. We have numerous areas of mutual interest in logistics, in particular, the North-South corridor providing access to Iran. At present, of course, this has been somewhat hampered due to the events surrounding Iran, yet it remains an area of significant mutual interest. We are deeply grateful to President Aliyev for assisting us in the delivery of humanitarian aid to Iran. It should be noted that the Azerbaijani side has been diligent and effective in this regard, responding promptly to our requests. This is crucial for alleviating the situation in that region as well. Trade turnover is on the rise, and it should be noted that additional opportunities for the mutual supply of goods are emerging. We are engaged in negotiations on a wide range of specific areas. At this stage, I deem it premature to elaborate on this, but it pertains primarily to the energy sector. We will meet with President Aliyev and will certainly discuss all matters in due course. On the whole, I believe that relations between the two countries are evolving – and evolving very positively. Andrei Kondrashov: Colleagues, the next question, please. Who is next? The Kyrgyz agency Kabar. Director Mederbek Shermetaliyev, please. Director of the Kyrgyz National News Agency Kabar Mederbek Shermetaliyev: Thank you, Mr Kondrashov. Good afternoon, Mr President. Thank you for this opportunity to take part in today’s meeting with you alongside the heads of news agencies. Allow me to ask two questions. Mr President, President Sadyr Japarov has repeatedly underscored that Central Asia should become a region of peace, neighbourliness, and shared development. Against this backdrop, Kyrgyzstan’s election to the UN Security Council was an important event not only for our country but also for the entire region. What role, in your opinion, can Central Asia play in strengthening international security in the coming years? That is my first question. My second question concerns the fact that this year, Bishkek is hosting the SCO summit. Against the backdrop of growing global challenges and instability, what joint initiatives within the SCO does Russia consider a priority for strengthening regional security, and what key proposals does the Russian side plan to put forward for discussion during the summit? Thank you. Vladimir Putin: As for what we intend to put forward at the summit, we will, first and foremost, be guided by the proposals of the Kyrgyz side as the host country of this event. We know that both the President of Kyrgyzstan and all our colleagues are giving this their close attention and working on it. Our respective government bodies are in constant contact, both through the foreign ministries and through the relevant economic agencies, coordinating their efforts. I am confident that this will lead to the necessary compromises being reached where required. More broadly, it will result not merely in formulations but in the definition of objectives for the further development of the association as a whole. What I would like to draw attention to is the following. It was initially established as a mechanism for resolving border issues between the People’s Republic of China and those republics of the former Soviet Union that share a border with China. Today, how many member states are there – 27 countries? It is, indeed, a major organisation. Few outside observers take note, but substantive work on economic integration is underway, and this is becoming a prominent factor in regional affairs, at the very least. And given that there are, after all, 27 countries involved, this is a significant undertaking. What is important is that Central Asia – with the resources of the Central Asian countries, its vast territory, and its growing population – is attracting ever-greater attention from the entire international community, primarily, of course, on the basis of the region’s economic potential. Everything that is being done within the framework of the organisation itself will undoubtedly be of interest both to Russia and to all our partners. Therefore, we certainly wish our Kyrgyz friends every success and will do everything we can to ensure that this significant event, in my view, proves a success. Andrei Kondrashov: We have not had questions from France or Great Britain yet. Let’s start with France. A major agency, Agence France-Presse – Pierre Ausseill, Regional Director for Africa and Europe, please. AFP Regional Director for Africa and Europe Pierre Ausseill (retranslated): Good evening, Mr President. I have a short question on Ukraine, covering the economy and Mr Zelensky. Russian military spending has risen considerably due to the special military operation, and the economy is showing signs of strain. Can the Russian economy withstand this? My second question concerns Mr Zelensky. If you were to sit down at the negotiating table with him to sign a peace treaty, what would you say to him? And do you consider him the legitimate representative of Ukraine? Vladimir Putin: On the question of his legitimacy, that is a matter for lawyers, for legal analysis. Of course, if we reach the point of signing any documents – and that is not a whim on our part; any country in our position would want to sign documents of this kind, which would be truly historic for both Russia and Ukraine – then we would want to sign them with someone who is legitimate under the other country’s constitution, the fundamental law of Ukraine. This requires careful legal analysis. I will not go into the details now – I have spoken on this before, and anyone can look up what I have said. Here is the core issue. Two years ago, in May 2024, President Zelensky’s term expired. At the end of last year and the start of this year, there was much talk of elections in Ukraine. Where is that talk now? Will there be elections or not? I suggest that you ask them these questions as well. That matters. Yet no one is asking these questions now. If elections are held, when? And of course, the outcome would be crucial. Under the Ukrainian Constitution, a president is limited to serving two five-year consecutive terms. If we accept the view of those who say that President Zelensky has legally extended his powers, two years [of his second term] are completed. Will he run for another five-year term? This is contrary to the Constitution, which only stipulates two five-year consecutive terms, 10 years altogether. What about the two years he has been in power now? There are many questions, but if we ever reach the stage of signing documents, I believe that if there is a desire to end this military conflict peacefully – and Russia would like to do this, we will find those who should sign the relevant document. When there is a will, there is a way. This is extremely important, but we must remember that it is a legal issue. As for what we could tell each other if we reach the end of the conflict, at the very least, we could and should say, Thank God it’s all over. However, the legal side of the matter should be analysed at the level of good experts. I believe this is obvious. I would like to reiterate that we can only sign such documents with those who are fully legitimate to do so. There are many options, such as the Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada, and possibly even Zelensky himself. We need to analyse the documents and what legal consequences their signing would have. Once again, there must be the will to do it. As for the procedure, there are ways to coordinate it. Pierre Ausseill: I also asked about the economy, if you recall. Vladimir Putin: Regarding the [Russian] economy, as Mark Twain said – I think it was he who said it, “The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated.” That is how he joked about it once. The same here. There were forecasts of our defeat on the battlefield, and it was even said – I think it was the former US President who said it, that the Russian economy was in tatters. Don’t engage in wishful thinking. Make your assessments based on real figures, real trends and the real situation, in this case the real situation in our economy. How much has the EU’s economy grown over the past three years? Don’t wrack your brains – it has grown by about 3 percent. And how has the Russian economy grown? It has grown by 10 percent, three times more than the EU’s economy. Germany, the leading economy of the eurozone, has grown by less than 1 percent, while the Russian economy has grown by 1 percent last year, even if this is a modest figure, and it continues to grow. It is true that there are issues in terms of the overall macroeconomic landscape, primarily the rising inflation. It is for this reason that the Central Bank and the financial bloc have taken several decisions – and these decisions were quite harsh – to suppress inflation and improve macroeconomic indicators. The decision to raise the key interest rate was one of them. However, these measures have been effective and yielded results. As of April, the economy has not fully recovered to where it was a year before that, but we are making steady progress towards reaching the planned, or to be more exact target indicator of 5.4 percent. This is a positive development in itself. At the same time, industrial output has continued to grow, and so did real household incomes. In fact, real household incomes increased by over 28 percent which is largely due to higher salaries, and I am talking about real, not nominal, wages. There was an increase of over 25 percent. We have been fulfilling all the social commitments we have to the people of Russia, including by adjusting for inflation pensions, benefits, minimum wages, and entitlements to support families with children, and so on and so forth. We had a plan to reduce the number of people living below the poverty line to seven percent by 2030. In 2025, we achieved this objective ahead of schedule and went even further by reaching a level of 6.7 percent. I want to go back to Mark Twain’s quote. Let me reiterate that our economic and financial agencies have been effective in their actions and delivering results. It goes without saying that we intentionally went down this road, of course, when the Central Bank decided to significantly increase the key interest rate. It has already cut the interest rate several times and brought it down to 14.5 percent. Many believe that this is too little, and that we need more cuts. I will not make any comments in this regard right now, since this can turn into a lengthy debate. I have been following these discussions between the Government’s economic bloc and the Central Bank, etc. But the results are there. We did this on purpose while understanding that this would lead to a decrease in capital investment. How could it be otherwise? Of course, investment was expected to shrink with the Central Bank’s key interest rate at this level. Our decision to cool down the economy was intentional. Some may argue that there was too much cooling, or that more needs to be done in this regard. Still, we did this on purpose. We do not want hyperinflation of up to 30, 60, or 70 percent, as it happened in some countries. We are fighting for the overall health of the Russian economy. I would like to draw your attention to another important indicator. Our public debt is equal to 15.6 percent. How big is it in France? It exceeds 100 percent, probably. I think it is 112 percent, approximately. But we have 15.6 percent. All this gives us reasons to believe that we are headed in the right direction and can feel confident. Andrei Kondrashov: Reuters, UK, Mark Bendeich, please. Global Managing Editor, World News, at Reuters news agency (Great Britain) Mark Bendeich: Thank you, Mr President. I’ve got two questions. The first is on Ukraine. How do you rate President Trump’s performance in trying to end the conflict in Ukraine? Whether he has become distracted by the Iran war and indeed whether he miscalculated there, perhaps at the cost of pushing forward talks over Ukraine? My second question is about your own political future, Mr President. You have been running the country now, been in power for 26 years, and whether you plan to stay in office until 2036, I think under the Constitution. And if you don’t mind me saying so, you look quite fit, whether you feel you have the stamina and the health to go the distance to 2036? Thank you. Vladimir Putin: Only God knows whether any of us – you, me, everyone in this room – stay healthy enough to survive until tomorrow or the day after, let alone to solve the problems we face and reach the goals we have set. That is for starters. As for my own plans: yes, the Constitution allows me to run for re-election in 2030. But frankly, it is far too early to talk about that. I am not even thinking about it right now – I tell you completely honestly. The country faces many large, far-reaching, and urgent issues. The way to address them is not to think about that, it is to think about Russia’s future. That’s the first point. Now, on Ukraine and what the US President has done to try to resolve the conflict. I have said this before, and I do not mind repeating it. I believe President Trump is genuinely committed to resolving the Ukraine crisis. He has already said publicly that he did not expect it to be so difficult. And yes – from the outside, some things may look straightforward, but once you dig in, you realise there are many unknown factors, and they matter. Now, settling another crisis, the one concerning Iran is indeed urgent. We see that the US administration is distracted and forced to focus primarily on that issue. But here is the difference: the Ukraine crisis is primarily local, though I regret that European countries are trying to give it a global dimension. The crisis around Iran, by contrast, is clearly global. Just look at the impact the closure of the Strait of Hormuz has on the world economy. So of course, the administration is giving it serious attention. That said, President Trump’s proposals, as I have already mentioned, could very well form the basis of a peace agreement. So to answer your question of whether the administration was on the right track – yes. Those proposals require compromise – for both countries. For Russia, too. And we have broadly agreed to those compromises. We just need to convince the Ukrainian side. That’s all. Overall, I believe these proposals could serve as the foundation for an agreement between Russia and Ukraine, and could end the conflict. Global Managing Editor, World News, at Reuters news agency (Great Britain) Mark Bendeich: Sorry, just one follow-up question on Iran. Do you think Russia could play a role in terms of settling that dispute in particular in relation to the highly enriched uranium? Vladimir Putin: I believe so. We harbour no desire to impose our assistance; however, our proposal is well known to the US administration, as well as to our Iranian friends and partners. In 2015, Russia played an entirely positive role by facilitating the removal of enriched uranium from Iran to the Russian Federation, thereby establishing the foundation for the JCPOA– effectively resolving the crisis. This endeavour was supported by the American administration of the time, implemented successfully, and led to a de-escalation of the situation. What is the current state of affairs? The uranium is present on Iranian territory, a fact currently undisputed by any party. The question that therefore arises is: what follows? The uranium would immediately come under the control of the IAEA, and consequently, the entire international community – including the United States and Israel – would become engaged in the process of eliminating highly enriched uranium. This is because everything would be under their purview – effectively, under IAEA control – while all parties contribute to the IAEA’s efforts, and there is universal trust in the IAEA. Immediately, the uranium is accounted for in terms of volume and quantity, control is established, and the process of de-enrichment and dilution commences. We possess the capability to undertake this now as well – if you will. However, I reiterate, this decision rests with all parties seeking a resolution to the crisis. We have successfully implemented this before and stand ready to do so again. Our relations with Iran are good and based on trust; Iran is a friendly country. It is no secret that we are implementing a project there to construct the Bushehr nuclear power plant. We have completed one unit, which is now operational, and are continuing with further construction. I believe that the Iranian leadership and the Iranian people repose complete trust in us. Incidentally, this uranium could, in the future, be diluted and utilised for peaceful nuclear programmes within Iran under the oversight of the international community and the IAEA. I think that this constitutes a viable option. In this regard, I believe that Iran would find such a resolution acceptable, and all other parties involved – who may harbour certain suspicions – should also find it satisfactory. The uranium would be declared, removed, and placed under control. Wherein lies the problem? I see none. I may be mistaken in some respects, yet I struggle to see what could be objectionable to anyone in this scenario. Furthermore, initially – since we have broached the topic, I will elaborate – initially, and admittedly not this year – there was unanimous agreement. Subsequently, positions hardened on all sides. We said: “Very well. If not, then not. Please, resolve this among yourselves.” The proposals remain on the table – please, we are prepared to proceed as we did in 2015. If that is not the case, we hope that the parties involved in this conflict will find an alternative solution. Should another solution emerge, we would be most pleased. And if our assistance is required, we would gladly support any solution of this nature that leads to a de-escalation of the situation. Andrei Kondrashov: Mr President, we have already been speaking for an hour and a half. Would you allow us another 20 minutes? Vladimir Putin: We can do a couple of questions. The President of Uzbekistan is due to arrive shortly, and we have an event scheduled – the launch of a nuclear power plant construction project in Uzbekistan. Andrei Kondrashov: I have already caught the eye of three colleagues – Martin Romanczyk, Vijay Joshi, and Jose Manuel Sanz Mingote. Vladimir Putin: Well, by all means. Andrei Kondrashov: Three more questions, colleagues, and then we’ll conclude. Vladimir Putin: Please. Andrei Kondrashov: Martin, go ahead please. Martin Romanczyk (retranslated): Mr President, two years ago, when asked whether Russia was planning to attack NATO, you said that such claims were nonsense. At least, that is how your remarks were reported. Yet today, amid US plans not to deploy intermediate-range missiles in Germany and new details concerning the redeployment of American troops from Europe to Asia, there is still speculation that Russia could attack NATO territory in the foreseeable future. How do you assess such claims? Vladimir Putin: You know, anyone who seriously considers such claims should ask themselves a simple question: What for? Why would Russia need that? It’s clear – the conflict in Ukraine. At the heart of the conflict are the coup d’état and the subsequent suppression of everything associated with Russia as well as of a significant portion of the country’s population who refused to accept the outcome of that coup. Ukraine is, after all, a largely Russian-speaking country. Even those so-called nationalists speak Russian at home. But that is not really the point. The point is that the coup was followed by a series of developments inside Ukraine itself. In the end – and I will not go into all the details of how this unfolded, including the Minsk agreements and everything that followed – we found ourselves in a situation where it was necessary to support those people living in the territories that did not recognise the outcome of the coup. At the same time, there were ongoing efforts to bring Ukraine into NATO. Just think about it. We were simply deceived – openly deceived. You know that perfectly well. Since 1991, we were repeatedly told that NATO would not move one inch to the east. This was stated at the time by NATO Secretary General, a citizen of the Federal Republic of Germany – I must admit I cannot recall his surname at the moment. That was the assurance we were given. But what does Europe have to do with this? Why would Russia attack Europe or go to war with NATO? What would be the purpose? As I have said before, these claims are not merely nonsense. In my view, they are a deliberate provocation designed to create the impression of a threat that does not actually exist. The objective is to persuade their populations to increase defence spending and, as a first step, to pay for the regime that seized power in Kiev. That, I believe, is the real explanation. It is not simply nonsense; it is a provocation. What surprises me, however, is that some people in European countries appear to believe it. I find that astonishing. The whole notion is simply absurd. It would be amusing if it were not so sad. We have consistently stated that one of the objectives of our special military operation is the denazification of Ukraine. Yet, from various quarters, we have been asked: “What do you mean by denazification? What is this “denazification” you refer to? You are speaking irrationally. (And they say we are speaking irrationally.) Why denazify Ukraine?” Colleagues, let me be clear. This has been plain to see for all, yet scarcely anyone addresses it – the reburial of Nazis and nationalists who, during the Second World War, exterminated Jews, Poles, and Russians in Ukraine. How many, you ask? In my view, a million Jews were exterminated in Ukraine. A million innocent souls. And now, in Ukraine, their [Nazis’ and nationalists’] remains have been reburied with military honours and a gun salute, hailed as heroes of Ukraine. Only Poland reacted, albeit feebly; Israel – even more feebly. Everyone seeks not to notice, shamefully ignoring the truth. And who is responsible for this? The current head of the Kiev regime, ethnically Jewish. His grandfather, who fought against Nazism, must be turning in his grave. There exists an organisation of Ukrainian nationalists known as the UPA [Ukrainian Insurgent Army] – an entirely pro-Nazi entity. Its name is currently being bestowed upon active units within the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Observe: to the best of my knowledge, it has been enshrined in legislation, or is on the brink of being enshrined, that Nazi propaganda is forbidden. However, the Ukrainian authorities should be reminded that enshrining it into law is insufficient – the law must be implemented effectively. Listen, I understand that the so-called collective West does not want Russia to grow stronger. The collective West wants to use Ukraine so that Russia does not defend its national interests so vigorously, that it should know its place, and so forth. But you must understand what a threat the revival of Nazism poses to everyone. Not only is weaponry spreading from the territory of Ukraine across the world – that is already a matter of record. Not only is corruption flourishing there, it has taken over everything, it has sunk such deep roots. But Nazism is being revived. What then is to be done about that? Colleagues say that Ukraine should be part of the European Union, or an associated member, or in some other capacity. Very well, so be it. But one ought at least to reflect upon this. These are facts; this happened just recently. A few days ago, one of the Nazis was reburied. It was by his hands that Jews, Poles, Russians, and Roma people were exterminated – a million people. Yet he was reburied with military honours, with a gun salute, and – silence. I understand that some countries want to use everything in their fight against Russia. But this is a threat to everyone. One ought to think about this. Therefore, as regards the notion of Russia attacking Europe – this is, of course, nonsense, but not only that. It is also a provocation and misinformation aimed at deceiving their own populations in order to secure funding for the fight against Russia and for the militarisation of their own economies. CEO and Editor-in-Chief at The Press Trust of India (India) Vijay Joshi: Mr President, earlier in this interaction you spoke about Russia’s relations with China. You said it was not born yesterday; it has grown over and been fostered over centuries. India has a similar relationship with China, but probably of a different nature. It is a difficult relationship. At the same time, India has a difficult relationship on its western border with Pakistan. I think you see where I am going with this. Pakistan today is helped by China in military terms. About 80 percent of Pakistan’s military hardware is of Chinese origin. China is also supplying technology, advanced technology to Pakistan, intelligence, and military hardware. So, this is causing some concern in India. You have very good relations with both China and Pakistan. Is there anything you would like to do at all in ensuring that India’s security interests are not compromised? And a related question to that is that I just heard today that the S-400’s latest battalion has been delivered to India. A fifth one remains. What is the advanced technology that the fifth battalion will include? And if you can give maybe a definitive timeline on the joint development of the Su-57 stealth fighter and the delivery of the Akula-class nuclear submarine? Thank you. Vladimir Putin: Of course, we are well aware of all the potential issues and challenges, even if not all of them, but the main challenges dealing with the situation along the border and in terms of Pakistan – India relations – we know them. You said that China has Pakistan under its total control, but I do not think so. First, Pakistan is quite a big country, and Pakistan has multifaceted ties. Of course, matters dealing with Pakistan’s cooperation with the People’s Republic of China have a lot of importance for the country. But everyone seeks to expand relations with China. This is one of the world’s largest economies and it is second to none around the world in terms of purchasing power parity. It is the number one economy by this indicator. India is third, and Russia is fourth in terms of purchasing power parity. By the way, this also answers the question from your French colleague about the state of the Russian economy. China, the United States, India and Russia are the world’s top four countries in terms of purchasing power parity. By the way, we have surpassed all European countries, as well as Japan. What an ingrate thing it would be to interfere in these sensitive and multifaceted relations between two countries, India and China. That said, we maintain contacts with our friends in both India and China. What I would like to point out in this context without going into much detail, since it would be inappropriate for me, is that I can assure you that both Prime Minister Modi and President of the PRC Xi Jinping are both committed to addressing all matters of mutual interest, including in terms of border relations. I have no doubt about this whatsoever. Russia has special relations with both China and India, as you have said. This is not a problem for anyone, trust me. It took decades to forge these ties, decade after decade of work. It all came together quite naturally. Relations between Russia and India do not cause any trouble to China, and the same goes for Russia’s relations with China not causing any trouble to India, while everyone stands to benefit from the three countries working together. We are talking about BRICS. Do you know where BRICS was born? It was here, in St Petersburg. It was here that I suggested having a meeting between the Chinese leader, the head of the Indian Government and yours truly. And all three of us had a meeting here. This is how the RIC – Russia, India, China – format was born. It goes without saying that we found topics on which we could agree, and agree we did. Brazil joined us later by asking to become part of this trilateral format. This is how we got the BRIC group. After that South Africa followed, and we got BRICS. And the group continued expanding. This goes to say that when we come together and talk to each other, we are able to reach agreements. Let me reiterate that no one questions Russia’s cooperation with China or Russia’s cooperation with India. Everyone knows the multi-pronged ties we have in terms of military technical cooperation. It is true that we are working with India, including on developing the latest weapons systems. Everyone knows the BrahMos intermediate-range missiles. They now exist in sea-based and ground-based declinations. And the list goes on, and we are expanding it. As for the Su-57, there was a time when we offered our friends from India to work together on developing this plane. This is a fifth-generation plane, and I think that it is currently the best in the world. Our Indian friends told us to go ahead and do it on our own, while they would wait and see. This plane could have been our joint manufacturing venture, but we developed it on our own. Of course, we are ready to work with India by supplying these planes and developing them. The sky is the limit in this regard, and we are free from any restrictions. The same goes for air defence systems. Having specific hardware may be important, but creating an air defence system has even greater importance. What does this mean? This means being able to engage various types of targets at various altitudes, including low-altitude, slow-flying and high-altitude targets. It is instrumental that all these elements are part of a single information system working in real time. This is a formidable, tech-intensive task. Russia is now working on perfecting this system. There are still pending questions, but this is a unique experience. No one else has any experience of this kind. We have it, and we are ready to share it with both our Chinese and Indian friends. And share we do. There is work in progress on all these fronts, and we will continue working with India too. Andrei Kondrashov: Colleagues, one final question, please. Keep it brief. José Manuel Sanz Mingote of EFE news agency. José Manuel Sanz Mingote (retranslated): Thank you very much. I would like to ask a brief question to clarify whether I understood your answer correctly. Are you ruling out a suspension of military action for starting negotiations? My second question concerns Latin America. Over the past few months, have you had any contacts with the United States regarding Cuban issue? And regarding what happened in Venezuela. Have you mentioned the capture of President Nicolás Maduro? What will Russia’s response be? Vladimir Putin: As regards contacts on the Cuban issue, I will answer your question directly. You asked whether we have had contacts with the US administration regarding the Cuban issue. Yes, we had, but I do not wish to comment further. As you know, we recently delivered a tanker carrying oil products to Cuba. Cuba is our friendly nation; we have maintained longstanding relations with it for decades. The US administration is aware of this, and our contacts with Cuba continue. As for the suspension of hostilities in order to begin negotiations, such a suspension is not necessary for starting negotiations. Negotiations can take place while military actions continue. We have already had such a situation: negotiations took place while the military operations continued. So where is the issue? Speaking candidly, I have already outlined the key factors that shape the course of the conflict when answering the question posed by an American colleague. There are many factors at play. Russian forces are advancing every day, and anyone following developments closely can see that new settlements are coming under the control of the Russian Armed Forces on a daily basis. Recently, I repeat, nearly 2,500 square kilometres – specifically, 2,440 square kilometres – have come under Russian control. Under these circumstances, it is understandable that the Ukrainian side would prefer Russian troops to halt their advance. Our forces continue to make advances daily in the Zaporozhye Region by kilometres – say, by 1,200, 1,300 or 800 metres along the front and in depth. Obviously, there is a desire to stop this advance. However, rather than merely halting military actions, it would be better to end the war altogether by reaching the compromises that were discussed in Anchorage. Please go ahead. News Director for Europe & Africa at The Associated Press (USA) James Jordan: Thank you, Mr President. One more question about Russia’s relationships with its European neighbours. Associated Press reporting has tracked 191 incidents of malign or illegal activity across Europe since 2022. Western officials attribute these to Russia and its proxies, and they include…. Vladimir Putin: Do you mean Russia’s activity on the territory of European countries? James Jordan: Correct, Russia and its proxies. These actions include sabotage, attempted assassination, cyberattacks and influence operations. Western officials say this is just the tip of the iceberg, and these are the ones that have been tracked or proven. Does this mean that Russia is already waging a war against the West and does it not risk escalation? Vladimir Putin: This means only one thing: an attempt by certain political figures in Western European countries to push ahead with their aggressive plans against the Russian Federation. You mentioned cyberattacks and other attempts, and you pointed out that you are only talking about proven, verified facts. What does this prove? Name even one proven fact. How did one prime minister put it? She said: “highly likely.” Andrei Kondrashov: “Highly likely.” Vladimir Putin: “Highly likely.” Everything you have described is highly likely. Where is even one fact? There is not a single one. That means there is no desire to engage with Russia as an equal partner. But that will have to happen – we are in no hurry. As the saying goes, even if you put nine pregnant women together, the baby still will not be born in a month. The situation needs time to mature. I believe that is where we are heading. And it seems to me that it is gradually maturing. We, I repeat, are ready. We need to stop these mutual accusations. And if the Europeans want to work with us, then they should drop their colonial attitude, talk to Russia as an equal partner, and look for solutions together. Even with highly complex issues – issues that need to be resolved in the interests of both Russia and our European partners – we are ready for that. Please. Andrei Kondrashov: Thank you very much, Mr President. Vladimir Putin: You should’t treat women like that or end this meeting like that. Proceed, please. Shohrat Aref (retranslated): Thank you. I would like to hear your views on the energy crisis caused by the crisis around Iran and its outlook. Vladimir Putin: If you addressed this question to members of the US administration, they would probably not answer it because I have a feeling that they have not found the solution yet. However, it is obvious that the Iranian people have demonstrated that their interests must be also taken into consideration in the resolution of such crises. The Iranian people have demonstrated cohesion and determination to fight. This factor must certainly be taken into consideration in the final resolution of these problems. Of course, the situation is not simple for us from the political perspective, in part because we have developed very good and friendly relations with Arab countries, including Persian Gulf states, over the past decades. We always emphasise this in our contacts with our Iranian friends. I can tell you frankly that since the start of the conflict, especially since it began during the month of Ramadan, we have been urging our Iranian friends to refrain from military actions against other Islamic countries, especially in the holy month of Ramadan. But the logic and dynamics of events took a different turn. We hope that the efforts of the US administration and President Trump, and the consistent stance of Iran’s spiritual leader to protect the interests of his country and look for a compromise – we see that both sides are doing this – we hope that these efforts will succeed and an end will be put to the conflict. If anything depends on Russia, we are always ready to lend a hand. If not, we will celebrate together with everyone else when this crisis ends. It is nothing more than an unsubstantiated allegation that Russia is well-nigh the sole beneficiary of this conflict because of growing energy prices. It is true that prices are growing, which we can see, and we understand that our companies will benefit from this, to a certain extent. But such benefits are temporary and short-lived, whereas we would like to develop long-term relations with all our partners on the solid basis of mutual interest. In this case, we are interested in the conflict to end as soon as possible. It is gratifying that the ceasefire regime is being maintained, even if despite certain problems. We are doing everything we can to help this bring out an overall settlement. We maintain contacts with all our friends and, as I have said, we will do everything we can if our assistance is needed to end the conflict. This will be all. Thank you very much. Andrei Kondrashov: Mr President, thank you very much for this frank conversation. All the best.
Putin, St. Petersburg'da uluslararası haber ajansı liderleriyle görüştüConversation with Vice President of China Han Zheng
Vladimir Putin had a meeting with Vice President of the People’s Republic of China Han Zheng on the sidelines of the St Petersburg International Economic Forum. President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Your Excellency Mr Vice President, Comrade Han Zheng, once again, welcome to St Petersburg. You and I have just taken part in the plenary session of the St Petersburg International Economic Forum, which serves as one of the leading platforms for discussing economic matters. However, as we saw during the session, there is no getting away from political issues. In any case, I would like to thank you for your substantive and insightful presentation, as well as the fact that the People’s Republic of China is represented at the level of Vice President, which is a very high level. This adds a certain global dimension to this forum. You have my gratitude for coming here. Of course, I would like to ask you to convey my best wishes to my friend, President of the PRC Xi Jinping for taking the decision to send you to Russia, to St Petersburg. As you have just noted during your remarks at the session, the relations between our countries are at their all-time high and have gathered substantial momentum. Our trade and economic ties have been following an upward trajectory in keeping with the Treaty. We are marking its anniversary this year. July 16 will mark 25 years since the signing of the fundamental treaty on friendship and cooperation between Russia and China. I have mentioned trade and economic cooperation. Trade has been rising steadily. A growth rate of 10 percent is quite a positive result, and we hope to keep this momentum going. There is a list of joint projects for specific sectors, and we know them. This includes energy, manufacturing, agriculture, transport, logistics, innovation, civilian nuclear programmes, space exploration, and artificial intelligence. Congratulations on your achievements in this very important domain. China has been demonstrating excellent results, I would say. There is no doubt that holding the years of cooperation in education in 2026 and 2027 is expected to make a meaningful contribution to expanding our humanitarian ties. I am convinced that this would promote direct contacts between our citizens. Once again, thank you so much for coming to St Petersburg and attending the economic forum here. Vice President of China Han Zheng (retranslated): Mr President, thank you. I’m delighted to see you again. This time, I’m visiting St Petersburg at the instruction of President Xi Jinping, to take part in the plenary session of the St Petersburg International Economic Forum. First of all, I want to pass sincere regards and best wishes from President Xi Jinping. Congratulations on the success of the St Petersburg International Economic Forum. Your address was very substantive. Not only did you analyse the global economic situation and the economic development in Russia, but you also outlined some important plans for Russia’s economic development. So, congratulations. Recently, you and President Xi held successful talks in Beijing. When answering questions, I explained the importance of those talks at length. You reached some extremely important new agreements on the development of bilateral relations and multi-dimensional cooperation. We reaffirm our readiness to fulfill our agreements at the top level, in cooperation with our Russian colleagues, to deepen our political mutual trust, expand practical cooperation, and enrich our bilateral relations with new monumental meaning. This year, we mark 30 years of strategic cooperation and partnership and 25 years of the Treaty of Neighbourliness, Friendship and Cooperation. As part of this landmark year, we are ready to advance our bilateral multidimensional cooperation and bilateral relations. Thank you.
Putin, Çin Başkan Yardımcısı Han Zheng ile St. Petersburg'da GörüştüNorth Korea, China claim wins from Xi visit, but limits remain
NORTH Korea and China both walked away claiming major wins from Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit this week to the isolated state, which helped elevate North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s global stature and pulled Pyongyang more tightly into China’s orbit.
Was Xi’s stand on China-North Korea military ties also a message for US, Russia?
North Korea is gaining in strategic importance for China to counter the United States, but Pyongyang may refrain from intensifying military ties with Beijing, analysts say. During his meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un on Monday, Chinese President Xi Jinping said both sides should “enhance exchanges in diplomacy, law enforcement and military affairs”, according to state news agency Xinhua. Despite pledges from both sides to strengthen strategic communications, denuclearisation of the...
Pekin’in Tayvan Hesapları: Zaman Çin’in Lehine mi?China, North Korea to expand cooperation after Xi-Kim talks
Chinese President Xi Jinping and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un promised deepening exchanges in politics and business between their countries. Pyongyang's nuclear program was notably not on the table.
Kuzey Kore'den Xi'nin Ziyareti Öncesi 'Geri Dönülemez Nükleer Statü' ÇıkışıChina, North Korea boast better ties after Xi-Kim talks
Chinese President Xi Jinping and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un promised an array of cooperative measures, while avoiding the thorny issue of Pyongyang's nuclear program.
Kuzey Kore'den Xi'nin Ziyareti Öncesi 'Geri Dönülemez Nükleer Statü' Çıkışı