Putin speech on Ukraine / Il testo (in inglese) del discorso di Vladimir Putin
Putin speech on Ukraine
Il testo completo, in inglese, del discorso di Vladimir Putin con il quale il presidente russo ha annunciato il riconoscimento dell’indipendenza delle autoproclamate repubbliche di Donetsk e Lugansk.
***
Russia President Vladimir Putin’s speech as he recognizes regions of Donetsk and Luhansk as independent countries on Monday, 21 February 2022.
My address concerns the events in Ukraine and why this is so important for us, for Russia. Of course, my message is also addressed to our compatriots in Ukraine.
The matter is very serious and needs to be discussed in depth.
The situation in Donbass has reached a critical, acute stage. I am speaking to you directly today not only to explain what is happening but also to inform you of the decisions being made as well as potential further steps.
I would like to emphasise again that Ukraine is not just a neighbouring country for us. It is an inalienable part of our own history, culture and spiritual space. These are our comrades, those dearest to us – not only colleagues, friends and people who once served together, but also relatives, people bound by blood, by family ties.
Since time immemorial, the people living in the south-west of what has historically been Russian land have called themselves Russians and Orthodox Christians. This was the case before the 17th century, when a portion of this territory rejoined the Russian state, and after.
It seems to us that, generally speaking, we all know these facts, that this is common knowledge. Still, it is necessary to say at least a few words about the history of this issue in order to understand what is happening today, to explain the motives behind Russia’s actions and what we aim to achieve.
So, I will start with the fact that modern Ukraine was entirely created by Russia or, to be more precise, by Bolshevik, Communist Russia. This process started practically right after the 1917 revolution, and Lenin and his associates did it in a way that was extremely harsh on Russia – by separating, severing what is historically Russian land. Nobody asked the millions of people living there what they thought.
Then, both before and after the Great Patriotic War, Stalin incorporated in the USSR and transferred to Ukraine some lands that previously belonged to Poland, Romania and Hungary. In the process, he gave Poland part of what was traditionally German land as compensation, and in 1954, Khrushchev took Crimea away from Russia for some reason and also gave it to Ukraine. In effect, this is how the territory of modern Ukraine was formed.
But now I would like to focus attention on the initial period of the USSR’s formation. I believe this is extremely important for us. I will have to approach it from a distance, so to speak.
I will remind you that after the 1917 October Revolution and the subsequent Civil War, the Bolsheviks set about creating a new statehood. They had rather serious disagreements among themselves on this point. In 1922, Stalin occupied the positions of both the General Secretary of the Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) and the People’s Commissar for Ethnic Affairs. He suggested building the country on the principles of autonomisation that is, giving the republics – the future administrative and territorial entities – broad powers upon joining a unified state.
Lenin criticised this plan and suggested making concessions to the nationalists, whom he called “independents” at that time. Lenin’s ideas of what amounted in essence to a confederative state arrangement and a slogan about the right of nations to self-determination, up to secession, were laid in the foundation of Soviet statehood. Initially they were confirmed in the Declaration on the Formation of the USSR in 1922, and later on, after Lenin’s death, were enshrined in the 1924 Soviet Constitution.
This immediately raises many questions. The first is really the main one: why was it necessary to appease the nationalists, to satisfy the ceaselessly growing nationalist ambitions on the outskirts of the former empire? What was the point of transferring to the newly, often arbitrarily formed administrative units – the union republics – vast territories that had nothing to do with them? Let me repeat that these territories were transferred along with the population of what was historically Russia.
Moreover, these administrative units were de facto given the status and form of national state entities. That raises another question: why was it necessary to make such generous gifts, beyond the wildest dreams of the most zealous nationalists and, on top of all that, give the republics the right to secede from the unified state without any conditions?
Now, I can only say that the ideas of current political realities, no matter how beneficial they may appear, should never be used to build a state.
But the infection of nationalism that was undermining this state did not go away, and it was just waiting for its hour to come because, once again, the communist party leadership, instead of analyzing the situation and making thoughtful decisions in the economy and the political system, in the governing system, they were only talking about restoring the principles of national self-determination.
At the same time, despite stealing from the people, our country tried to help its CIS partners, including Ukrainian partners.
The total profit for the Ukrainian budget from 1991 to 2013 was about 250 billion dollars.
According to expert estimates, the total debt of the USSR in front of other states in the international fund was about 100 billion dollars.
As a result, Maidan did not bring Ukraine closer to democracy.
The country is divided, and it is experiencing a severe economic crisis.
According to international organizations’ estimates, nearly 6 million Ukrainians, or nearly 15% of the able population, lost their jobs in 2018.
These industries were once proud of the Soviet Union.
Poverty and loss of the industrial and technological potential is that the pro-western choice that was put into the heads of the people for years now is that, in reality, everything comes down to the fact that the collapse of the Ukrainian economy goes along with robbing the Ukrainian people.
It is perpetrated not only by the instructions from the west but also locally by a network of foreign consultants, NGOs, and other institutions deployed in Ukraine.
They have direct influence on all the important decisions at all the levels of government, from the center down to the municipal.
It influences the main state corporations.
The Ukrainian railways and energy complex post administration of the seaports of Ukraine doesn’t have an independent court system anymore, preferential right to choose the members of the supreme legislation, and the embassy of the US directly controls the national agency on preventing corruption.
Okay, but where are the results because corruption persists and has worsened? Do Ukrainians believe this? What are your thoughts on these options?Do they understand that their country has become not even a protectorate anymore, but a colony with puppets?
The privatization of the state has led to the fact that the authorities that call themselves patriots don’t have the power to assimilate Russian speakers by force.
They are adopting more and more discriminatory decrees. Now they have a law on the native nations.
Those people who deem themselves Russians are told to know that they do not belong in Ukraine.
According to the laws on education and on the Ukrainian language as a state language, the Russian language is being thrown away from schools and from all public spaces, including shops.
The so-called illustration law We know the sad practice of unilateral illegitimate sanctions against other states by foreign individuals and legal entities, and in Ukraine they went even further than their western partners.
They came up with such an instrument as sanctions against their own citizens, entities, media outlets, and parliament members.
If they are preparing against the Russian Orthodox church, and that’s not an emotional estimate, we have certain documents, we have decisions talking about this. They cynically turned the split in the Kiev church into a tool of national policy.
The current leadership of the country does not react to the requests of the people to cancel the laws that undermine the rights of the believers, and now they have new laws adopted again.
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church and I would like to talk separately about Crimea. The population of the Crimea peninsula made their choice.
The Ukrainian authorities have nothing to say about this. That’s why they placed their bets on aggression by using cells of extremists, including radical Islamic organizations.
They are sending cemeteries to destroy vital infrastructure. They kidnap citizens of Russia. We have proof. We have evidence that such aggressive activities are perpetrated with the support of foreign special services.
In March of 2021, Ukraine adopted a new military strategy based on the belief that this document is almost completely aimed at confrontation with Russia.
They want to drag foreign states into the conflict with our country. The strategy suggests organizing Russian Crimea and Donbass as basically terrorist undergrounds, and it also outlines the possible war.
It is supposed to be the way the Ukrainian strategists now think with the support of the international community on the beneficial conditions beneficial for Ukraine and also, as they say in Cave now, and I’m quoting, also just listen to it carefully with the military support of the world community and geopolitical confrontation against the Russian Federation.
Basically, that’s nothing but preparation for our conflict with Russia. We also heard statements about Ukraine’s wanting to create its own nuclear power plant. That’s not just an idle threat. Ukraine really has nuclear technology and carriers to deliver such weapons back from the Soviet times.
They have touched launchers that were also designed in the Soviet Union. It has a range of more than 100 kilometers, and they can increase that. It’s just a matter of time.
They still have this technology from the Soviet times. So, getting tactical nuclear weapons will be much easier for Ukraine than for certain other states.
I’m not going to list those states that are now researching this, especially if they have technological support from abroad. And we can’t exclude this. If Ukraine has a weapon of mass destruction, the situation in the world will change drastically, especially for us, Russia and Ukraine.
We cannot help but react to this real threat, especially since I would like to retract that western backers can help Ukraine with getting this weapon to create yet another threat to our country because we can see how consistently they are pumping Ukraine with weapons of mass destruction.
In recent months, Western weapons have been sent to Ukraine in recent months, in front of the entire world, and the Ukrainian army’s activities are governed by foreign consultants.
We are well aware that last year, under the guise of war games, NATO countries’ military contingents were deployed in Ukraine.
The Ukrainian army is already integrated into Nato, which means that Ukrainian units have already been approved directly by the NATO headquarters.
The west has started to explore the territory of Ukraine as the future theater of military action on the future battlefield, and it is aimed against Russia.
Last year alone, it had more than 20 thousand troops and more than a thousand. They have already adopted the law to allow their foreign troops to enter the territory of Ukraine to participate in the war games.
First and foremost, it refers to NATO troops, of which no fewer than ten are planned for this year.The network of airfields from Brisbane, Ivana, Francops, and so on can be used to deploy troops in the shortest possible time. The naval operations center, built by the Americans on a chunk of land that allows NATO ships to use it as a port and allows them to use high-precision weapons against the Black Sea Navy and our entire infrastructure on the Black Sea Coast, was given a name.
Without this name, now they want to forget it, just as they want to forget the deeds of the famous commanders, without whom Ukraine itself wouldn’t have access to the Black Sea. Recently, in Poltava, they demolished the monument to Alexander’s Worth.
Well, what can I say? You are renouncing your own path. Well, the so-called colonial legacy of the Soviet empire may be consistent then.
In other words, if Ukraine joins Nato, it would pose a direct threat to Russia’s security. I would like to remind you that in April of 2018, at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s Bucharest summit, the US forced these members to make a decision that states were to join Nato.
Many European allies already understood all the risks of such a step, but they had to subdue them to the will of their older partners because the Americans used them to pursue Antarctica.
We are getting a signal from some NATO members who are still skeptical about Ukraine’s joining NATO. They say, “So what are you worried about? It’s not going to happen tomorrow. And now their American counterparts are saying the same. We say, “Okay, it’s not going to happen tomorrow, but what will it change in historical context?” They insisted on increasing the potential of collective security that was supposed to be deployed against Russia.
More than that, I will say something that I have never said in public before. I first said it back in 2000, when President Clinton was visiting Moscow at the end of his term, and I asked him how America saw Russia joining Nato.
You can see it in their practical steps with regard to our country’s open support of terrorists and security areas withdrawing from treaties, arms treaties, and so on and so forth.
As a result, their alliance military infrastructure has drawn really close to the borders of Russia. That’s one of the reasons for the security crisis.
As a result, the entire system of international relations was affected. The situation continues to get worse in strategic areas, as well as in Romania and Poland, as part of the US project to deploy anti-missile defensive systems.
We all know that the launchers deployed there can be used for cruise missiles.
The USA is also developing standard six missiles that can not only be used as an anti-missile defensive tool but can strike targets. They are expanding their infrastructure and developing new offensive capabilities from the information that we get.
We have every reason to believe that further deploying the sites and facilities of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization will This decision has already been made; it is simply a matter of time.
We understand clearly that, under this scenario, the level of military threat to Russia will be multiplied. I would like to draw your attention once more to the fact that there will be a greater threat of immediate attack against our country in the American strategic document doctrine.
There is such a possibility of preventive work against the adversary’s missile complexes, which is the main adversary of T. We are all aware that Russia is officially designated as a major threat to North Atlantic security in NATO documents.
As they have previously done when they expanded NATO to the east, moving infrastructure and military infrastructure closer to our borders, ignoring our protests and warnings, they simply did whatever they deemed necessary and appropriate, and I believe they intend to continue doing so because they see us as dogs working at the caravan, which we have never agreed to and will never agree to.
Remember how that ended? Almost every day, we shell settlements in Don Pass.
They have amazed large troops. They are using offensive unmanned vehicles to torture people, including children, women, and elderly people.
It doesn’t stop, it doesn’t cease, we see no end to it and our western colleagues proclaim themselves the only representatives of this free world.
They prefer not to notice this, as if there was nothing like this happening, no genocide perpetuated against almost 14 million people, and the only reason is that these people didn’t want to back the kudut 2014; they stood against the nationalist movement, the movement towards nationalism.
How much longer can that go on? And how long can they stay together?We worked hard to implement the resolution of the United Nations Security Council of 2202 that endorsed the Minsk agreements on resolving the situation in the past, but everything was futile. The presidents change, the parliament members change, but the idea of an aggressive regime remains the same regime that seized power in Kiev, created by the Kudata of 2014.
Fonte: mandynews.com
