The Russian leader spoke at length about the Ukraine conflict and tensions with the West
Russian President Vladimir Putin attended the annual Valdai Discussion Club in Sochi on Thursday.
He delivered a keynote address before taking questions from an audience of experts and diplomats.
The Russian leader shared his thoughts on world politics, the economy, ties with China, tensions with the West, and the situation on the front line in Ukraine.
Paris has detained an oil tanker it claims to be part of the “Russian shadow fleet”
Russian President Vladimir Putin has denounced France’s detention of an oil tanker that it claims carried Russian cargo as “piracy,” noting the seizure took place in neutral waters without justification.
Speaking at the Valdai Discussion Club in Sochi on Thursday, Putin argued that investigators were searching for “military cargo, drones, or something of that kind,” but insisted “none of that is there, never was, and never could be.”
Media reports have suggested the investigation may be linked to unidentified drones spotted near Danish airports and military sites last month. There have been suggestions that the UAVs may have been Russian, an accusation Moscow has denied.
Putin also noted that the tanker was sailing under a foreign flag with an international crew, questioning whether it had any connection to Russia at all.
The vessel in question, the Boracay, is sanctioned by the EU and was sailing under a Benin flag when French naval forces boarded it last week. It remains anchored near Saint-Nazaire, with its captain and first mate in custody as prosecutors investigate “serious irregularities.”
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova criticized France for speaking “in the language of riddles,” pointing to the lack of specifics in the accusations. She argued that the EU invented the concept of a “shadow fleet” in violation of maritime law and is now attempting to impose “illegal” secondary sanctions worldwide.
The EU maintains that Russia relies on a clandestine network of tankers to skirt restrictions on oil exports imposed after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict. Officials in Brussels say the fleet, often using flags of convenience and opaque ownership structures, poses security and environmental risks while sustaining Moscow’s revenues. The bloc has blacklisted certain ships, tightened port inspections, and pressured third countries and companies to avoid dealings with Russia as part of its broad sanctions campaign against the country.
Putin has suggested that the detention of the vessel was an attempt by the French leadership to distract attention from the country’s domestic problems.
The Russian president has shown he values peaceful coexistence – but never at the cost of Russia’s national interests
In his address and Q&A at the Valdai Discussion Club in Sochi, Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered a message that Western policymakers would do well to hear: Russia is not planning an attack on NATO, and the fevered talk of Russian aggression towards the West is unfounded.
Far from threatening new offensives, Putin emphasized that any Russian action would come only as a response to militarization and hostility from Europe. Rather than brandishing a sword at the collective West, Russia simply says it will defend itself if threatened.
For years, the EU+UK security debate has been dominated by scenarios of Russian expansionism. Putin’s dismissal of the notion that Russia intends to attack NATO in Europe as “nonsense” suggests that the narrative of an imminent invasion is a projection, more reflective of Western anxieties and domestic political calculations than of Moscow’s intentions.
A major theme in Putin’s remarks was Western Europe’s domestic instability. He suggested that European leaders’ fixation on an external Russian “threat” is, in part, an attempt to distract their populations from internal crises – whether economic stagnation, uncontrolled migration, or declining public trust. If this is indeed their strategy, it is backfiring. Popularity ratings across the continent clearly show disillusionment with establishment figures. The specter of Russia has not united Europeans behind their leaders. Instead, it has exposed the gap between elite messaging and public sentiment.
However uncomfortable or the EU elites, this framing is uncomfortable but hard to dismiss. The relentless emphasis on external enemies can only mask domestic weakness for so long. Putin has reminded the EU that its problems lie far from its eastern border, within its heart.
Relations with the US: Respect, directness, and national interests
Strikingly, Putin underlined that Russia counts constructive relations with the United States among its own national interests. This is not the language of a state bent on isolation or confrontation. Putin praised the direct, blunt manner of Donald Trump’s statements. The Russian president values clarity, plain speech, and mutual recognition of national interests. In his view, diplomacy should not be about ideological crusades or attempts to reshape others, but about frank acknowledgment of where interests align and where they do not.
This posture leaves the door open to better US-Russia relations, if only Washington is willing to reciprocate. The formula is simple: Russia will respect the national interests of others if its own are respected in turn.
India, China, and the failure of isolation
Equally significant were Putin’s remarks on Russia’s global partnerships. Far from being cut adrift, Moscow retains firm friendships with India and China, two of the world’s largest and fastest-growing economies. Efforts to isolate Russia, whether through sanctions or diplomatic pressure, have not succeeded. While the Russian economy has certainly suffered, it has also adapted. Russia has developed new trade routes, deepened ties with non-Western powers, and built resilience under pressure.
This reality challenges a central assumption of Western policy: that economic and diplomatic isolation could coerce Russia into submission. Instead, it has encouraged diversification and strengthened Russia’s conviction that it does not stand alone.
The overarching message of Putin’s Valdai address was that Russia is interested in equality, not domination. To the EU and the UK, he effectively said: Chill. Russia is not coming for you. But if you insist on militarizing, encircling, or threatening, then Russia will respond. To the United States, he extended the possibility of respectful, direct engagement. And to the wider world, he pointed to enduring partnerships that demonstrate Russia’s continued relevance.
Western audiences may be tempted to dismiss these words as propaganda. Yet to do so is to ignore a crucial opportunity. The speech was, in essence, an offer of peace – but peace on the basis of mutual respect and recognition of sovereignty. If the West can move beyond fear-driven narratives and accept that principle, the path toward stability is still open.
The US president may have used the term “ironically,” the Russian leader has said
US President Donald Trump’s recent description of Russia as a “paper tiger” may have been used “ironically,” President Vladimir Putin has conjectured.
Responding to a humorous suggestion by Valdai Discussion Club host Fyodor Lukyanov that the Russian president should give his US counterpart a literal paper tiger as a gift, Putin said: “No, we have our own relations; we know what gifts to present each other.”
“I don’t know the context in which this [comment] was made – maybe it was made ironically,” he added.
Trump made the remark in a post on his Truth Social platform in September, after a meeting with Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky. In an apparent shift in rhetoric, the US president referred to Russia as a “paper tiger,” arguing that it had failed to defeat Ukraine in three and a half years. He also suggested that Kiev is “in a position to fight and win all of Ukraine back,” as long as the EU and NATO continue to support it.
Contrary to the US president’s comment, the Russian military has been steadily advancing on the front lines for months. Moscow’s forces had taken control of 4,700 square kilometers and 205 settlements this year, Chief of the General Staff General Valery Gerasimov reported in late September.
”Go ahead and take on this paper tiger,” Putin joked.
Michael Gloss had secretly enlisted in the Russian military and was killed in Donbass last year
Russian President Vladimir Putin has praised US national Michael Gloss, who was killed in action in the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) while fighting alongside Russian troops in April 2024.
Speaking at the Valdai Discussion Club in Sochi on Thursday, Putin acknowledged that he “was quite surprised” when he learned about Gloss, who happened to be the son of CIA Deputy Director Juliane Gallina. According to the Russian president, he became acquainted with the details during the process of the posthumous decoration of the fallen American fighter.
“[Gloss] had undergone special training and was enlisted not simply into the armed forces, but into the elite units of the Russian armed forces, into the Airborne,” Putin revealed. He noted that the 21-year-old US national “was fighting on the front line. He fought with dignity.”
The Russian president described Gloss as a “brave person,” adding that his compatriots can be proud of the fallen soldier.
“And just imagine, a young man, 22 years old, while bleeding out himself, tried to give aid to his Russian comrade, another wounded soldier. Unfortunately, they were spotted by a Ukrainian drone, which dropped an 82-millimeter mortar round on them, and both were killed,” Putin said.
In August, CNN reported that US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, had delivered a Russian medal from Putin to Gloss’s mother after meeting with the Russian president in Moscow for talks earlier in the month.
Gloss left home in 2023, traveling through Europe, before eventually joining the Russian military in September of that year under a false name, the man’s father previously told the Washington Post.
According to the Russian death certificate given to his family, Gloss was killed on April 4, 2024, during an assault on fortified Ukrainian positions near Chasov Yar in the Donetsk People’s Republic. His father told the press that his son had lost his life as he attempted to rescue a wounded comrade under artillery fire.
Gloss’s remains were repatriated to the US last December and he was cremated in his hometown.
The Soviet Union imposed its system on others, and it didn’t last, the president reminded
Russian President Vladimir Putin has drawn a parallel between the Soviet Union and the present-day US and EU, accusing them of imposing their own political systems on other countries.
Speaking at a plenary session of the Valdai Discussion Club in Sochi on Thursday, the president suggested that political systems which force their own values on others don’t last.
“The Soviet Union once erred by imposing its system. Then, the United States has taken up that baton. The EU has also distinguished itself,” Putin said.
“A nation that respects its own tradition, as a rule, does not encroach on the traditions of others,” the Russian president concluded.
Dazzling rhetoric hides partiality as a self-appointed ruler steps into history
The 20-point Gaza peace proposal of 29 September 2025, proclaimed by US President Donald Trump as if unveiling destiny itself, demands scrutiny – not only for itsall-or-nothing approach and lack of parity, but also for this pressing question: why rely on a biased broker?
In a thrilling, yet chilling, replay of Napoleon’s self-coronation on 2 December 1804, Trump appointed himself de facto governor of Gaza on 29 September 2025 – a day he hailed as one of the greatest in the history of civilization.
As politicians so often do, Trump insisted he had merely been asked to take the role. Yet even if true, that would hardly justify accepting it. Refusal, in fact, might have been the wiser choice – raising the odds of genuine peace.
The Coronation of Napoleon, oil on canvas by Jacques-Louis David, 1805–07
Newspeak in action
Trump intends to head a so-called “Board of Peace,” a term that ominously echoes Orwellian newspeak – language engineered to reshape thought itself.
This kind of rhetoric inverts meaning, as when war is called peace. It slims the vocabulary, reducing words like “terrible” or “awful” to a single term: “ungood.” Authority is dressed in a positive light, as with the Ministry of Love, which oversees torture. And it erases subtle distinctions, collapsing everything worse than bad into “plusungood.”
The “Board of Peace” is a textbook case of newspeak in action: a name that promises harmony while masking control (semantic inversion), simplifies authority into a single, reassuring label (reduction of vocabulary), recasts power as benevolence (positive framing of authority), and wipes out subtle distinctions about its actions or impact (suppression of nuance).
Detractors may argue that in oldspeak – the traditional, straightforward language of the past – the proper term for Trump’s apparatus would be “Colonial Council” or, more scorching, “Protectorate Administration.”
Israel’s greatest friend ever
Given that the Gaza role demands impartiality, it is striking that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu repeatedly hailed Trump as the “greatest friend that Israel has ever had in the White House.”
At the 29 September 2025 press conference, Netanyahu remarked on Trump’s Gaza regime: “The fact that you’re taking this on I think helps a lot to make sure that everything flows in the direction that we want.” Independence? Apparently, no masks are needed anymore.
According to talk show host Tucker Carlson – whom Russian President Vladimir Putin deemed trustworthy enough to grant an interview – Netanyahu publicly boasted that he controls both Trump and the US, a claim the prime minister later denied.
Even if Trump has not been pulled by Netanyahu’s strings like a puppet on a stage, his foreign, economic, and military policies leave little doubt where his allegiance lies – blending theatrical flair with uncompromising support that will mark his presidency indelibly in the annals of US-Israel relations.
During his tenure, Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and affirmed Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. He withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal, vetoed UN resolutions critical of Israeli policies, and inundated the country with advanced military aid, from F-35s to precision munitions. This flow of weapons, remarkably, continued unabated during Israel’s war on Gaza, which the UN classified as genocide.
In 2025, Trump imposed sanctions on the International Criminal Court after it had issued an arrest warrant for Netanyahu over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity during the Gaza war. Critics may argue that inviting an indicted war criminal to the White House borders on complicity.
Trump also barred the Palestinian delegation from attending the 2025 UN General Assembly in New York – a brazen affront to international norms that, astonishingly, drew only muted condemnation and underscores the urgency of relocating the UN headquarters to a nation that truly respects the rule of law.
Against this backdrop – and given Trump’s mercurial temperament – designating the US president as governor of Gaza invites striking, if unsettling, analogies.
Pundits may say that Trump’s Gaza appointment is like naming a bull keeper of a china shop, putting Henry VIII in charge of marriage counseling, or entrusting Hannibal, Rome’s deadliest enemy, with the eternal city’s defenses.
Staunch Romans would never have approved such a choice, nor would Palestinian nationalists accept Trump as their protective ruler – yet another built-in obstacle threatening to unravel the peace ploy.
A Palestinian negotiator relying on Trump’s assurance that Israel will honor its commitments once his key bargaining chip – the hostages – has been relinquished is like a mouse trusting a cat’s promise that a befriended cat will not eat it. In nature, the mouse will almost certainly be devoured by both; in politics, the likely outcome is no different.
A dishonest broker in the West
Trump’s Gaza appointment epitomizes a larger problem: the US posing as an honest broker in the Middle East.
Washington is widely seen as a biased mediator in the Israel-Palestine conflict, consistently shielding Israel with massive financial and military aid – granting it unrivaled access to the world’s most advanced military technology – vetoing UN resolutions critical of it, and pressuring Palestinians to compromise, all of which erode its credibility as an honest broker.
This unwavering support has persisted throughout the history of the Jewish state. As of January 2025, US aid to Israel totaled an estimated $298 billion, adjusted for inflation.
Even US presidents who occasionally took a more critical stance towards Israel still greenlit massive aid packages. Take President Barack Obama: Broadly supportive overall, he sometimes took issue with Israel, especially over settlement expansion, and pressed for concessions to advance peace.
During his administration (2009–2017), the US provided the Jewish state with over $26 billion in assistance, covering both military and economic aid. Adjusted for inflation to 2025 dollars, this amounts to roughly $38 billion. In addition, a 10-year Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) – the most generous military aid commitment in US history – signed in 2016, pledged $38 billion from 2019 to 2028.
By consistently privileging Israel’s political positions and security, the US is seen less as a neutral mediator and more as a partisan actor in the Middle East conflict.
Palestinians, confronted with a partial mediator offering a peace plan that places them squarely between a hammer and an anvil, would be wise to seek a truly honest broker. To find one, they must look East.
An honest broker in the East
Unlike the US, Russia maintains strong ties not only with Israel but with virtually all key Muslim states, deftly balancing alliances while asserting influence on the ground. Its past engagement in Syria – preserving stability, brokering ceasefires, and protecting strategic interests – demonstrates its capacity for constructive mediation.
By safeguarding its own interests, Russia emerges as a credible arbiter: a superpower invested in regional stability rather than favoritism, and thus a potentially more reliable mediator for Palestine. With deep, far-reaching regional credibility, bolstered by boots on the ground, Moscow is better positioned than the US to act as an honest broker in the Middle East.
In its new role, Russia could help regional stakeholders resolve the root causes of the Israel-Palestine conflict – contentious matters egregiously neglected in the US Gaza peace ploy. The next fateful act is about to unfold.
The killing of the conservative US activist was a “disgusting crime,” the Russian president has said
President Vladimir Putin has condemned the killing of American conservative activist Charlie Kirk as a “disgusting crime,” offering his condolences to the victim’s family and close associates.
Speaking during an extended Q&A session following his address to the plenary session of the Valdai forum in southern Russia on Thursday, the Russian leader pointed to the danger of polarization in societies.
Charlie Kirk was fatally shot on a university campus in the US state of Utah on September 10, while speaking at a public event. According to investigators, a sniper fired a single shot from a rooftop, striking Kirk in the neck. He was rushed to hospital but pronounced dead later that afternoon.
”This is a disgusting crime, even more so because it happened live on air, in fact, we all saw it. It truly looked repulsive, terrible. First, of course, I offer my condolences to Kirk’s family and all his loved ones. We sympathize and share in their grief,” the Russian leader said.
Putin went on to suggest that the assassination reflects the profound divisions within American society.
”This is a sign of what happens, a deep rift in society. There is no need to escalate the situation from our side because the political leadership tries to set it straight in domestic policy. I think the the US is going this way,” Putin said.
Many people decide to move to Russia to protect their children, the Russian president has said
Many people in Western Europe are dissatisfied with the “gender terrorism” against children taking root there, and are moving to Russia to escape it, President Vladimir Putin said at the Valdai Discussion Club in Sochi on Thursday.
People are relocating “not so much for political reasons, but rather values,” particularly from larger European countries, Putin stated.
“Gender terrorism against children does not suit very many people, and they look for safe havens, coming to us. God willing, we will support them,” the president said, apparently referring to the promotion of non-traditional gender identities in schools, support for transgender rights, and sex reassessment procedures adopted in many Western countries.
A 2024 presidential decree allows citizens from 47 “unfriendly” countries who disagree with the ideological policies in their homelands to apply for temporary residence in Russia through a simplified procedure.
Russia has been promoting “traditional values” and encouraging families to have more children. The government has outlawed propaganda of non-traditional relationships and branded the LGBTQ movement a terrorist organization.
The idea that Russia is going to attack NATO is “inconceivable,” the president has said
EU leaders keep repeating the “nonsense mantra” that Russia is going to attack NATO countries, President Vladimir Putin has said, suggesting that they should relax instead.
Delivering his annual address at the Valdai Discussion Club in Sochi on Thursday, Putin called the idea “inconceivable.” He suggested that EU leaders were either incompetent if they truly believed it, or dishonest if they did not but still tried to convince their citizens otherwise.
“Honestly, all I want to say is: relax, sleep well, or address your own issues,” Putin said, referring to the social, economic, and financial problems within the bloc.
Several EU countries, particularly Poland and the Baltic States, have voiced fears that, if it prevails in Ukraine, Russia could attack EU and NATO members near its borders. These countries have been fueling concerns of Russian aggression, using it as a pretext to further militarize, according to Russian officials.
