In the event of a retaliatory nuclear strike, the enemy will be destroyed!
Does Russia allow a preemptive nuclear strike?
Russian President Vladimir Putin answered journalists' questions at a press conference in Vietnam. Some of the questions concerned the crisis around Ukraine.
Support the channel (Bitcoin BTC): 1P85W41S85gEbNCYdb6uazxVDQtM67W779
Russian President Vladimir Putin answered journalists' questions at a press conference in Vietnam. Some of the questions concerned the crisis around Ukraine.
Support the channel (Bitcoin BTC): 1P85W41S85gEbNCYdb6uazxVDQtM67W779
Transcript
00:06Good evening.
00:07Hello.
00:09Interfax Agency.
00:11Will you allow it?
00:12Certainly.
00:12Russia and North Korea have concluded a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Agreement,
00:20which also provides for cooperation in the military-technical and defense spheres.
00:27The last item in the defense sphere provides for mutual assistance of the states parties to this treaty in the event of an attack by a third party.
00:34I have a question in connection with this,
00:36but it will consist of several questions,
00:38of several parts.
00:39First.
00:40In what cases is this part of the agreement envisaged?
00:46Including,
00:47secondly,
00:47does this apply to the situation in Ukraine?
00:50And do you allow the possibility of involving volunteers and soldiers from North Korea in a special operation?
01:02And in the development of the military-technical sphere there is a third question.
01:07Russia and North Korea are the only ones subject to such a large number of sanctions.
01:16Does Moscow intend to abandon all restrictions,
01:18including those imposed on North Korea through international sanctions?
01:22And does Moscow intend to fully develop cooperation with North Korea in the military-technical sphere?
01:31Well,
01:31you have a whole set of questions,
01:33so let me answer in parts.
01:35First,
01:35under what conditions will those parts of the treaty relating to mutual assistance in the military sphere be activated,
01:43right?
01:44The first thing I want to say and what I want to draw attention to is.
01:47For some reason,
01:48analysts did not pay attention to this,
01:50but I did not notice it,
01:52in any case,
01:53to be honest,
01:53I had no time.
01:54But nevertheless,
01:55I want to draw attention to the following.
01:57After all,
01:58this agreement is not some kind of new thing.
02:00We concluded this agreement with North Korea due to the fact,
02:04that the old agreement ceased to exist,
02:06and in our previous agreement,
02:08in my opinion,
02:09in the 1962 agreement,
02:11everything was the same.
02:12There is no novelty here.
02:16Of course,
02:16in modern conditions this looks especially sharp.
02:19But nevertheless,
02:21we have changed almost nothing,
02:23and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea has similar agreements with other countries.
02:30First.
02:31Further.
02:31Regarding the issues of providing mutual military assistance,
02:34it is also written there:
02:36assistance is provided in the event of aggression,
02:38military aggression.
02:39Now regarding Ukraine.
02:41The Ukrainian regime did not begin aggression against Russia,
02:47it began aggression against the Lugansk and Donetsk peoples republics recognized by us before they became part of the Russian Federation.
02:58Now lets talk about how to somehow use each others capabilities in this conflict.
03:05Well,
03:06we dont ask anyone for this,
03:08no one offered it to us,
03:10so there is no need.
03:12What else was there?
03:15Regarding sanctions.
03:18Oh,
03:19sanctions,
03:19yes.
03:20Look.
03:21As for sanctions.
03:22I have already spoken and,
03:24in my opinion,
03:24at a meeting with your colleagues,
03:26at a meeting with the heads of world news agencies.
03:30I said then,
03:31that some of the sanctions,
03:33that were imposed against North Korea,
03:36to put it mildly,
03:37look very strange.
03:39As you know,
03:39I come from Leningrad.
03:41What Leningrad experienced during the World War Two,
03:46during the Great Patriotic War,
03:48everyone knows this very well.
03:50This is a blockade when they starved people.
03:54As you know,
03:57there are losses in my family in this regard:
04:01my brother died of hunger during this blockade,
04:05he got sick and died.
04:06But what is happening to North Korea now?
04:11You can treat the sanctions regime any way you like,
04:14but introducing,
04:15say,
04:15restrictions related to labor migration looks somehow strange.
04:18Where does this lead?
04:20This leads to the fact,
04:22that families,
04:22even if they are in a very difficult financial situation,
04:26do not have the opportunity to earn money somewhere and feed their children.
04:31Does this remind you of anything?
04:32Is this humane?
04:34Therefore,
04:35the sanctions,
04:35that are introduced,
04:37first of all,
04:38of course,
04:38in this case for political reasons,
04:41they still must correspond to the current level of human development.
04:45Therefore,
04:46I said,
04:46speaking in Pyongyang,
04:47I said it sincerely,
04:49of course,
04:49that we all need to think together about how and what needs to be changed in this sanctions regime,
04:55and in general,
04:56whether this regime meets the requirements of today.
04:59Good afternoon.
05:04TV channel Zvezda.
05:05Kokoveshnikov Konstantin.
05:06Please tell me,
05:07how could you comment on the reaction of Western countries,
05:10or rather,
05:11in fact,
05:11their refusal of the conditions you proposed for a peaceful end to the conflict in Ukraine?
05:16After all,
05:17you could hardly not expect such a reaction.
05:19And what was behind your decision to publicly name the conditions for a peaceful end to the conflict,
05:27which seemed to be the subject of behind-the-scenes negotiations?
05:31Or have hopes for them now been completely dashed?
05:37Well,
05:38you know,
05:38we conducted these behind-the-scenes negotiations,
05:42and our hopes for this have not really come true yet.
05:46As for the reaction of our so-called Western partners.
05:50You said,
05:51that I apparently did not expect such a reaction.
05:53No,
05:53on the contrary,
05:54I expected exactly such a reaction at the first stage.
05:58But what will happen later,
06:01only time will tell.
06:02Everything will depend on how the situation on earth changes.
06:07And I think,
06:10that some sensible politicians will still think about whether the proposals I made are realistic,
06:18objective and consistent with the interests of all contracting parties,
06:23and the interests of the whole of Europe,
06:27including if it really wants to end the conflict in the center of Europe.
06:32Well,
06:33we'll see about that.
06:34I am not sure,
06:38that this attitude towards the proposals we have made will last forever.
06:44We can already hear the voices of some politicians who say,
06:48that yes,
06:48maybe this is an ultimatum,
06:50yes,
06:50these are excessive demands,
06:51but we cannot refuse,
06:53we need to think and figure it out.
06:55Isnt what our partners set out an ultimatum?
07:01They came up with some formulas,
07:03although there is the result of our negotiations in Minsk and Istanbul.
07:08Why doesn't anyone remember this?
07:10In the same place,
07:11I have already said this a hundred times,
07:14if we agreed then and if there is a signature of the head of the negotiating group on the Ukrainian side,
07:21that the agreements reached in Istanbul were,
07:24in principle,
07:25acceptable to the Ukrainian side.
07:27What happened on the ground,
07:29on the battlefield,
07:31that this allows them to put forward some additional conditions,
07:35that are in no way related to our agreements in Istanbul?
07:40There is nothing like that that could somehow change the position of another negotiating country,
07:48in this case Ukraine.
07:50Therefore,
07:54I do not think,
07:55that such nihilism regarding our proposals will remain forever.
08:00Surely something will change,
08:03including our conditions,
08:05depending on the situation on earth.
08:07Pavel Zarubin,
08:09Russia TV channel.
08:10How long can these terms remain in effect?
08:13After all,
08:14at that very conference in Switzerland,
08:16numerous signals and statements were made,
08:19that Russia should be present at the next conference,
08:22if it takes place.
08:24It is clear,
08:24that there are a lot of nuances.
08:26But nevertheless,
08:27would Russia respond?
08:28Thank you.
08:29Yes.
08:29I have already said,
08:30that it was not us who refused negotiations.
08:31The Ukrainian side forbade itself from negotiating.
08:36We didn't do this.
08:36We are for negotiations,
08:38and we have never refused this.
08:39But not on the basis of some ephemeral forms,
08:42but on the basis of those agreements,
08:44I want to repeat this again,
08:46which were reached during difficult negotiations,
08:49almost a month and a half of negotiations in Istanbul and Minsk.
08:53It is on this basis,
08:54that we are ready to continue our dialogue with the Ukrainian side.
08:58It doesnt matter where these negotiations will take place,
09:04in Minsk,
09:05Istanbul or Switzerland.
09:07How long will these terms remain in effect?
09:09We have proposals from our side on the table.
09:11It is no longer up to us when all the subjects interested in these negotiations will take what is on their table and begin these negotiations.
09:25We are ready even tomorrow.
09:28But when they deign to do this,
09:30thats their business.
09:31But,
09:32I repeat,
09:32everything will depend on what happens in real life.
09:35And then,
09:36of course,
09:37we will proceed from this.
09:39But the fundamental approach will be the same.
09:42Vladimir Vladimirovich,
09:45hello.
09:45Ekaterina Lazareva,
09:46URARU agency.
09:47I have a question about nuclear weapons.
09:49You recently said,
09:51that you admitted the possibility of changes to our nuclear doctrine.
09:55I would like to understand under what circumstances this is possible?
09:59What conditions must exist for this to happen?
10:05Do you admit,
10:07that our nuclear doctrine will include a clause on the possibility of launching a preventive nuclear strike?
10:16You know,
10:16I think I said,
10:17that we are still thinking about what and how in this nuclear doctrine,
10:23in this strategy,
10:24could be changed.
10:25And this is connected with the following things.
10:27This is due to the fact,
10:31and we know,
10:32that the potential adversary is working on this,
10:36that new elements are emerging related to lowering the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons.
10:44In particular,
10:47ultra-low power explosive nuclear devices are being developed.
10:51And we know,
10:52that in expert circles in the West there are ideas,
10:56that such weapons could be used,
10:58and there is nothing particularly terrible about it.
11:02Maybe there is nothing wrong with this,
11:04but we must pay attention to this.
11:06And we pay attention to this.
11:08This is related to my statement,
11:10that we are thinking about possible changes in our strategies.
11:15What about a pre-emptive strike?
11:17We dont need a preventive strike yet,
11:23because in a retaliatory strike the enemy will be guaranteed to be destroyed.
11:29Konstantin Panyushkin,
11:32Channel One.
11:33You just said,
11:34that there are no proposals from North Korea,
11:36and there is also no request from your side to use their soldiers.
11:39But at the same time,
11:41if we understand correctly,
11:43article four of the treaty actually implies collective defense.
11:48This is in the case of aggression.
11:50Yes,
11:50in case of aggression.
11:51But there is already aggression against Russia.
11:53I have already answered this question.
11:54The Kyiv regime committed aggression against two republics,
11:58that we did not recognize at that time.
12:00What was the determining factor for Kim Jong-un to sign this treaty in such a difficult situation,
12:07when this undeclared war is being waged against Russia?
12:11You ask him.
12:13How can I know this?
12:15As for the essence,
12:16I have already said it.
12:18This almost completely reproduces our agreement,
12:23which,
12:24due to the expiration of its term,
12:26ended its validity.
12:28Therefore,
12:29there is no novelty here.
12:31Please ask,
12:32I will satisfy your curiosity.
12:35Well?
12:35There is also the ever-smoldering Korean crisis,
12:39which could also theoretically escalate into full-scale hostilities.
12:44In this case,
12:45what was decisive for you when signing this agreement,
12:48taking into account these circumstances?
12:50Well,
12:50I said it twice,
12:51I can repeat it a third time:
12:53we reproduced the agreement of 1960 or 1962,
12:58which ended its existence.
13:00Yes,
13:00of course,
13:01the Korean crisis is smoldering.
13:03But we proceed from the fact,
13:05and we hope,
13:06that our agreements with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea will,
13:10to a certain extent,
13:12be a restraining factor so,
13:13that this crisis does not develop into some kind of hot phase.
13:17Kommersant newspaper,
13:18Andrey Kolesnikov.
13:19Can the use of Western long-range weapons be considered an act of aggression?
13:26Can shelling of Belgorod,
13:27and shelling of Russian territory in general,
13:29be considered an act of aggression?
13:31Well,
13:31this requires more research,
13:33but it is close to aggression.
13:35We are analyzing this.
13:36What are we talking about in this case?
13:39Those who supply these weapons believe,
13:43that they are not at war with us.
13:45Well,
13:45I said,
13:45including in Pyongyang,
13:47that then we reserve the right to supply weapons to other regions of the world.
13:52Bearing in mind our agreements with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea,
13:56I do not exclude this.
13:58Where these weapons will end up next,
14:00we can also say in the same way.
14:02The Westerners supply weapons to Ukraine,
14:05and they say,
14:05that they do not control anything further,
14:07and they do not care how these weapons are used.
14:10Well,
14:10we can also say,
14:11that we supplied someone with some kind of weapon,
14:14and then we have no control over anything.
14:16And let them think about this topic.
14:18So,
14:19at this stage,
14:20the most important task for us is to repel these attacks.