Russia
Putin says Russia did not start war and warns of nuclear risks
Russian President Vladimir Putin addressed the traditional plenary session moderated by Fyodor Lukyanov, research director of the Foundation for Development and Support of the Valdai Discussion Club, a Russia-based think tank.
Stating that a profound rupture has occurred in world politics, Putin said humanity faces its greatest perils at a time when the international security architecture has collapsed and former legal norms have been abandoned.
Opening the session, Fyodor Lukyanov, research director of the Valdai Discussion Club, noted that the concepts of change, responsibility, and composure stood out during the three-day forum. Recalling that the annual report they prepared this year was titled “No Panic”, Lukyanov said: “Under such complex conditions, we propose avoiding the most erroneous step: succumbing to unnecessary panic.”
Lukyanov noted that international turmoil is gathering pace with every passing day and handed over the floor to the Russian leader.
“We were confronted with war”
Addressing the war in Ukraine, the most urgent issue on the international agenda, Putin evaluated the origins of the crisis. Recalling that certain quarters question Moscow’s rhetoric of peace, Russian President Putin said: “The question ‘Russia speaks of peace, but started the war itself’ is on the minds of many experts. From this podium, I want to state the truth once more. The truth is that we did not want the war, and we did not start it; they began fighting us.”
Stating that for years there was an effort to turn Ukraine into an anti-Russian instrument, Putin pointed to the actions of the Western alliance.
Russian President Putin said: “There was no need to fuel aggressive nationalism and anti-Russian sentiment in Ukraine. NATO should not have attempted to establish a military foothold on our historical lands for its own ends, nor planned bases there. There was no need to encourage radicals in Kyiv toward a coup d’etat, and then equip this illegitimate administration with offensive weapons.”
Stating that the civilian population in the Crimea and Donbass regions was targeted, the Russian leader noted that military intervention was made inevitable.
Putin said: “Plans should not have been made to set up camps for the residents of Donbass and Crimea. People should not have been crushed by tanks, struck by missiles, strafed by aircraft, and burned alive simply because of their ethnic and cultural identity. Russia was deliberately brought to a point where it would be forced to defend itself with arms in the face of this blatant aggression. They dragged us to this line intentionally.”
“Let us live amicably”
Recalling that the goal of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia was openly proclaimed, Vladimir Putin drew attention to the scale of the threat faced.
Putin said: “Destroying Russia should not have been made into state ideology, nor should the objective of strategic defeat have been set against us. All of this was stated; no one has forgotten. We certainly do not forget. If we all wish to survive, as I have said before, let us live amicably and search together for ways to achieve this.”
Stating that establishing trust is an exceedingly fragile and arduous process, Russian President Putin pointed out that interests can never fully coincide, even among the closest partners.
Noting that for countries in competition and confrontation, balance can only be established through mutual compromise, Putin said: “The former hegemon will have to accept the realities of a multipolar world. Trends in the global economy demonstrate this clearly. The West will have to learn to cooperate with the countries that constitute the global majority, while respecting their fundamental interests.”
“The naivety of Soviet leaders caused immense harm”
Addressing the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the fundamental upheavals experienced over the past 35 years, Russian leader Putin stressed that lessons must be drawn from history.
Recalling that millions of people found themselves across borders overnight, Putin shared his criticisms of the Moscow leadership of that era. Putin said: “One must acknowledge that the figures governing the state during the final years of the Soviet era acted with a certain naivety, excessive goodwill, and perhaps heedlessness. Blind trust in Western partners and the belief that verbal understandings would suffice caused immense harm to the Soviet Union.”
Detailing the errors of past leaders, Vladimir Putin said: “Soviet leaders wished to please the West; Western leaders, however, sought to reshape the world according to their own interests and tear away as large a share as possible from the Soviet legacy. The collapse was, above all, the outcome of imbalances that had accumulated internally and management errors committed across generations. Embracing narrow ideological dogmas rather than pragmatism, sweeping problems under the carpet, and professional inadequacy drove the system to collapse.”
Sharing the 1990 foresight of Egon Bahr, one of the leaders of Germany’s Social Democratic Party, with the audience, Putin drew attention to the warnings issued at that time.
Describing Bahr’s proposals to prevent division in post-Cold War Europe, Putin said: “Bahr was concerned about the continuation of confrontation in Europe following German reunification and the strengthening of anti-cooperation circles within NATO. Bahr warned: ‘If decisive steps are not taken to overcome the division of Europe into hostile blocs, developments could evolve in a negative direction that condemns the Soviet Union to international isolation.'”
“The objective was to dismember the Russian Federation as well”
Stating that Egon Bahr proposed a joint security council encompassing Eastern and Central Europe, in which both Moscow and Washington would participate with broad authorities, Putin noted that the West did not choose this path.
The Russian leader said: “Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the forces that took the reins in the West disregarded the internal political transformations in Russia and continued to view this country as the core backbone of the historical Russian Empire. The objective was to completely isolate and dismember the Russian Federation. This mindset lies at the root of the dangerous situation we face today in Europe and across the world.”
Evaluating the relationship between historical heritage and visions of the future, Putin stated that it is an imperative for nations to respect their past.
Stating, however, that one cannot remain fixated on the past, Russian President Putin said: “Our nation requires a forward-looking perspective. However magnificent the achievements of our ancestors may be, we cannot turn into a museum showcasing past greatness. True state greatness is possible by capturing the spirit of the times and, if possible, moving ahead of the era. While preserving our historical roots, we must focus on the vibrant productive environment of the future.”
“Can we be certain nuclear weapons will never be used? Of course not”
Pointing to the possibility that tensions in world politics could spiral out of control, Russian President Vladimir Putin noted that sensible diplomacy has been abandoned in crisis management.
Emphasising that escalation policies yield reciprocal consequences, Putin warned: “Those who reject realistic diplomacy escalate tensions, call bluffs, and violate red lines in the hope of crushing the opposing side. Yet escalation is never unilateral; provocative steps are met with counter-steps. Arrogance and overconfidence are driving humanity to the edge of the abyss.”
Referring to the existence of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction, Putin recalled a well-known rule of dramatic literature.
Putin said: “In the arsenals of the great powers are weapons capable of destroying all life on earth. Can we be certain these weapons will never be used? Of course not. There is a rule we all know: if a rifle hangs on the stage at the beginning of a play, that rifle will eventually fire. The more irreconcilable the conflict becomes, and the more openly strategic defeat objectives are articulated, the higher the probability that the struggle will move into its most destructive phase.”
“The UN is governed less democratically”
Stating that the global regulatory mechanisms established after the Second World War fail to meet contemporary requirements, the Russian President said there is a need for comprehensive reform in international institutions.
Criticising the current structure of the United Nations, Putin said: “Although the United Nations is the most broadly representative body, in practice it is governed through methods far less participatory and democratic than originally conceived. Western countries, which constitute a numerical minority in the world, dominate the organisation’s mechanisms disproportionately and attempt to monopolise its governance.”
Pointing out that the centre of gravity across the world has shifted, Putin noted that countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East must attain the standing they deserve in decision-making processes.
Recalling that Russia supports an equitable reform of the United Nations, Putin said: “The transformation of the organisation does not consist merely of expanding the Security Council. Renewing the substance of its activities, ensuring geographical justice, and reflecting the will of the global majority within the institutions are essential. Yet such a consensus does not appear easy under present conditions.”
“Artificial intelligence could turn into digital totalitarianism”
Devoting substantial space to the threats technological progress poses to the future of humanity, Vladimir Putin issued warnings regarding the unregulated use of artificial intelligence.
Emphasising that the impact of algorithms on human morality and cultural heritage must be examined meticulously, the Russian leader said: “The proliferation of artificial intelligence carries the danger of uniformisation by making all of society dependent on algorithms programmed by specific centres. Such digital totalitarianism would create a dead end as dangerous as the dark and inhumane totalitarian regimes of the past.”
Stating that developments in biotechnology and genetics have reached levels capable of fundamentally altering human nature, Putin noted that ethical rules must be determined on a global scale.
Addressing technologies that intervene in the realm of human creation, Putin said: “Common principles must be established on existential matters such as personality development, the steering of behaviour, and the programming of ways of thinking. Yet existing international frameworks remain under the control of a narrow segment focused on preserving its own power rather than the progress of all humanity.”
“Had Stanislav Petrov not doubted, disaster was inevitable”
Illustrating the risks of using artificial intelligence in the military domain with a historical event, Russian President Putin recounted the conduct of Soviet officer Lieutenant Colonel Stanislav Petrov in 1983. Pointing to the deception produced by early-warning systems, Putin said: “In September 1983, while on duty, Lieutenant Colonel Stanislav Petrov received a signal from the early-warning system indicating that the US had launched five intercontinental ballistic missiles. At that time, any algorithm would have immediately treated this as justification for a retaliatory nuclear strike. However, being an experienced officer, Petrov suspected there might be a technical malfunction, and he was proven right. Had an artificial intelligence been in his place, the outcome could have been entirely different.”
Noting that automating war technologies would yield catastrophic results, Putin stressed that machines cannot replace the human conscience. Putin warned: “Human intuition, conscience, and the capacity to take the correct decision in unexpected moments do not exist in machines. Defining the boundaries of artificial intelligence in the security sphere is a matter of survival for humanity. Turning conflicts into computer games and reducing bloodshed to an ordinary mechanical routine leads to the brutalisation of humanity.”
“Eyes have been shut to global catastrophes”
Stating that profound polarisation in world politics has pushed common human problems into the background, the Russian leader noted that issues such as the climate crisis, environmental pollution, poverty, and income inequality are being ignored.
Vladimir Putin said: “In an environment of international tension, urgent global issues concerning all humanity have been sacrificed. The topics of climate, ecology, and poverty, which were continuously debated until recently, have been cast aside. No hope remains that the current international community will resolve these problems on a global scale. If these issues cannot be addressed globally, solutions must be generated on regional platforms.”
Emphasising that the broader Eurasian region constitutes Russia’s fundamental living space, Vladimir Putin noted that the transition to a multipolar order will be painful.
Reiterating at the conclusion of his address that establishing a new balance will take time, Putin concluded: “We will continue to work for the security and prosperity of our own geography, above all our shared home of Eurasia. Although the road ahead is fraught with uncertainty, Russia is determined to build a shared future with all countries willing to cooperate on the basis of equality and mutual respect.”
Russia
Europe ready for arms and missile control talks with Russia, FT says
Representatives of European nations are ready to renegotiate arms control and military conflict prevention agreements with Russia, according to a Financial Times report citing unnamed European officials.
The US is seeking to include European countries in discussions on a future security architecture.
In this context, Europeans look favourably upon returning to arms control mechanisms, including agreements limiting missile deployment and the restoration of arrangements operating during the Cold War era.
The newspaper cited the Open Skies Treaty, which allowed the US and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) to monitor each other’s military installations, and accords restricting the deployment of specific missile types among potential examples.
Participating states of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) signed the Open Skies Treaty in March 1992.
Signatory states are obliged to permit observation flights by other party nations over their territories using photographic and video surveillance.
Russia withdrew from the treaty in 2021.
Russian authorities emphasized in statements at the time that Russia had done everything possible to preserve the agreement, “despite numerous violations of the Open Skies Treaty by the US, its allies, and dependent states.”
According to information obtained by the newspaper, US President Donald Trump’s administration is seeking Moscow’s consent to organize a multilateral meeting involving European representatives.
A source speaking to the Financial Times noted that the European security architecture is among the main agenda items at the United Arab Emirates (UAE) summit, though Trump will make the final decision regarding the nature of security guarantees the US will offer.
The first day of trilateral negotiations among Russia, the US, and Ukraine concluded on 10 November in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates, with the meeting lasting more than four hours.
According to Politico, the parties plan to address territorial matters, including borders and lines of contact, on 11 November during the second day of negotiations.
Sources speaking to the publication stated that resolving the territorial issue and the future security mechanisms of Ukraine and Europe are interconnected and must be discussed in parallel.
“It is obvious that the current system does not work. We need to create something new that will work effectively today,” one source said.
According to Politico and the Financial Times, American negotiators Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner plan to invite Europeans to join the negotiations after the trilateral meeting concludes.
“We need Europe at the negotiating table,” a source told Politico.
The Financial Times source likewise stressed that European participation is essential to reach an agreement aimed at ending the conflict.
European capitals fear that Moscow and Washington could agree on security guarantees for Ukraine and the continent’s new security architecture without the involvement of European Union (EU) and NATO allies.
Furthermore, the issue of EU participation in talks resolving the conflict in Ukraine has caused differences of opinion between Moscow and European capitals.
Russia previously stated that the EU currently has no place at the negotiating table due to its stance on the conflict.
Russia
US raises NATO-style guarantees for Kyiv ahead of Abu Dhabi talks
US President Donald Trump’s administration has asked the Russian side whether Moscow objects to granting Ukraine security guarantees akin to NATO’s Article 5 on collective defence, and to having such guarantees provided directly by the alliance itself.
According to a Financial Times report citing a US official, the final decision on the nature of the US security guarantees will be made by US President Donald Trump.
The US official said the White House is seeking Russia’s consent for multilateral negotiations that would also include European representatives.
“At this stage, we firmly believe Europe must be part of the negotiations to end the war,” the official said on the matter.
According to the report, prior to the trilateral talks, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner will hold consultations with representatives from Ukraine, the European Union, NATO, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and Italy.
Rustem Umerov, representing the Ukrainian delegation, also confirmed that Kyiv will hold separate coordination meetings with European partners in Abu Dhabi to align positions and subsequent steps.
The newspaper reported that while European diplomats are sceptical about the prospects of a breakthrough in the Abu Dhabi talks, they consider participation in the diplomatic process essential to support Ukraine and prevent broader European security issues from being addressed without their involvement.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated in late October that talks held in Oslo between Ukraine, EU countries, and US representatives discussed granting Kyiv security guarantees similar to the provisions of NATO’s Article 5 collective defence clause.
In February, Zelenskyy described credible guarantees for Kyiv as the “only real basis” for peace.
The issue of security guarantees will form one of the agenda items at the trilateral negotiations between Russia, the US, and Ukraine, scheduled for 10-11 November in Abu Dhabi.
These contacts mark the first trilateral meeting in roughly nine months, following the previous round held in Geneva in February.
Presidential Aide Vladimir Medinsky will head the Russian delegation at the talks, while the US side will be represented by the president’s special envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.
Rustem Umerov will lead the Ukrainian delegation.
Moscow insists that the future security guarantees slated for discussion at the meetings must also cover Russia.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted that guarantees can only be mutual.
At the beginning of the year, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr Grushko stated that security guarantees for Russia are an essential component in reaching a peace agreement on Ukraine.
“We accept that a peaceful settlement in Ukraine must take Ukraine’s security interests into account, but the key issue is, of course, Russia’s security interests,” Grushko said.
Russia
Putin proposes Arctic energy cooperation to US to ease gas sanctions
Following a diesel arrangement with the US and the prospect of expanding Russian fertiliser shipments, Moscow is offering Washington joint cooperation in the Arctic.
Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that Moscow is considering the possibility of working together with US partners in the Arctic region.
Speaking at the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF) summit, Putin described the regional situation:
“We are actively working in the Arctic, which I mentioned, with many countries around the world, and we are interested in joint work. Until very recently, our European partners and our Chinese partners were working alongside us at our fields. Now we are considering the possibility of joint work with American partners.”
So, which fields could a partnership between the two countries in the Arctic encompass, and what could Moscow offer Washington in exchange for lifting sanctions on Russian gas? Liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects stand at the heart of the matter.
European companies pulled out of Russian gas projects such as Yamal LNG and Arctic LNG 2 due to sanctions imposed on Russia after 2022.
According to Igor Yushkov, an expert at the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation and the National Energy Security Fund (NESF) who spoke to the Vzglyad newspaper, cooperation with Chinese companies moved to a new dimension following the departure of the Europeans.
Two Chinese shareholders, CNPC and CNOOC, are involved in the Arctic LNG 2 project. Initially, both companies froze their participation out of concern over US sanctions targeting the venture.
Mikhail Vakilyan, an expert at the Institute for the Development of Fuel and Energy Complex Technologies, told Vzglyad that Beijing did not alter its policy, but rather that Chinese firms CNPC and CNOOC simply did not want to risk their access to the US dollar.
Yet, a year and a half later, the picture shifted entirely. In the second half of 2025, China began purchasing gas from the sanctioned Arctic LNG 2 facility and dedicated a standalone terminal to the project.
Furthermore, it opened a second terminal this year serving exclusively Russian LNG.
China even resumed module deliveries needed to complete the third train of Arctic LNG 2, despite having halted shipments previously.
Moscow seeks markets and turbines, offering technology for Alaska
Despite all these developments, Russia’s expectations from the US in the Arctic remain clear. Mikhail Vakilyan summarised this requirement:
“Russia needs two things: first, markets; and second, hardware. Lifting sanctions on Arctic LNG 2 and its gas carriers will bring back buyers in Japan, India, and South East Asia, eliminating the discount currently enjoyed by China as the sole customer. As for hardware, the turbines driving the liquefaction compressors at Yamal LNG and Arctic LNG 2 are manufactured by the US company Baker Hughes. Maintenance, spare parts, and modernization for these machines are blocked by US export bans.”
Igor Yushkov viewed the process through the lens of a political and economic trade-off:
“The exact same scheme seen in the diesel agreement is operating here. In exchange for easing anti-Russian sanctions and putting pressure on Ukraine, we are offering the US mutually beneficial projects and broader economic cooperation. We are showing that this cooperation can be versatile across various fields such as diesel, fertilisers, LNG, and similar sectors.”
The tangible offer Russia could present to the US in the LNG sector in exchange for sanctions relief is technological support for an LNG plant to be built in Alaska, referring to the $25 billion Polar LNG project.
Yushkov explained the card held by Russian energy company Novatek:
“Novatek possesses a technological solution applied at Arctic LNG 2 that would also suit the LNG project in Alaska. These are reinforced concrete gravity-based structures carrying liquefaction equipment; essentially floating LNG factories. Novatek has already built two such platforms alongside their equipment and established an offshore super-structure construction centre in Belokamenka. The issue is that both this centre and the Arctic LNG 2 plant itself fell under US sanctions. Therefore, in exchange for lifting sanctions at least on the super-structure construction centre, we could build such a facility for Alaska.”
According to the expert, Russia could cast the reinforced concrete platform at this centre in Belokamenka, install the LNG plant atop it, and tow it to Alaska once completed.
Because building from scratch in the Arctic itself is both costly and creates constraints regarding time and equipment transport, this method offers a much simpler solution.
Nevertheless, Yushkov warned that the plan is not finalised:
“Owing to numerous sanctions-related issues and questions surrounding the project’s economics, it is not certain this scenario will materialize; however, the Americans are still interested in our technologies for Alaska, and Russia is stating it can capitalize on this and deliver it.”
Conversely, Yushkov recalled that Russia remains the primary rival to the US, particularly in the gas sector, and that the US administration has systematically squeezed Russian gas out of the European market in recent years.
According to the expert, helping US LNG capture the market share lost by Russia is hardly a brilliant idea.
Europe’s 2027 ban, China price talks, and rare earth metals
Arctic LNG 2 is not the only Russian project that could benefit from potential cooperation with the US; a new opening could also emerge for Yamal LNG, which is unaffected by US sanctions.
The crux here is not sanctions, but the European Union’s upcoming ban on all Russian LNG shipments starting from 1 January 2027.
Vakilyan explained the approaching risk and a potential solution using figures:
“In the first half of the year, Europe took nearly the entire output of the plant, amounting to 9.89 million tonnes. In two months, these volumes will need a new route and a new buyer; a US trading company appears very well suited for this role.”
Another winner in the equation could be Gazprom, which is conducting negotiations with China for the Power of Baikal pipeline, formerly known as Power of Siberia 2.
Vakilyan said: “Cooperation with the US is Russia’s trump card in price negotiations. China has long negotiated with Gazprom assuming Russian gas has nowhere else to go; an American company in the Arctic would disrupt that calculation.”
Viewed from a wider perspective, Russia and the US share two additional points of contact: oil projects and rare earth metals.
The Vostok Oil project, which awaits the lifting of sanctions on Rosneft, is the first among them.
Vakilyan listed the other areas:
“It is impossible to make headway on the Pobeda shelf, which could not be developed since 2014, without the Americans; that site requires subsea production complexes and drilling services in icy seas, where US companies are strongest. Another issue not apparent at first glance is rare metals. The Trump administration is seeking them across the globe, and Tomtor, one of the largest rare earth metal deposits, lies in the Arctic region of Yakutia.”
-
Diplomacy1 week agoSecular dress code dispute exposes deeper Türkiye-Azerbaijan strains
-
Russia2 weeks agoUS and Russia weigh energy deals and corporate return in peace talks
-
Europe2 weeks agoMerz visits Asia to seek new markets for German defence firms
-
Opinion2 weeks agoGaza exposes the myth of the “most moral army in the world”
-
Middle East2 weeks agoUS warns Gulf allies of possible Iran strikes after midterms
-
Europe5 days agoEU urges citizens to prepare 72-hour survival kits for crises
-
America2 weeks agoDemocrats target Trump-Putin Russian diesel deal with legal push
-
America2 weeks agoBolsonaro reportedly leaves Brazil on jet linked to scandal-hit firm
