Oliver Stone - The Putin Interviews

OS:Are you talking about arms to the Chechens? Are you talking about money, about Saudi Arabia contributing, too?

VP:Saudi Arabia at the state level didn’t grant them any support. We have always had good relations with Saudi Arabia—with the late king and with the current leadership of the country. We do not have any proof that the official government supported terrorism in any way. There is another thing. There are many private funds and physical persons who provided support and we know about that. That was also a source of concern to the royal family of Saudi Arabia. They were always preoccupied with this threat of a surge in terrorism. Bin Laden is a Saudi. But Saudi Arabia is not our ally, it’s the ally of the United States in the first place.

OS:But the US support was covert—you say you have evidence that they were supporting the Chechens?

VP:Yes, certainly. I’ve been telling you about that. As to information and political support, no proof is required. That was evident to everyone, because it was done publicly, openly. And as to the operative support and the financial support, we have this proof and moreover some of this proof we submitted to our American counterparts, and I’ve just told you about that. And you know the response—I’ve told you about it as well. There was this official letter and they told us that, “We support all the political forces including the opposition forces and we’re going to continue to do that.” And it was evident that they were not just talking about the opposition forces. They were also talking about the terrorist organizations and structures. Nevertheless, they were painted just as regular opposition.

OS:In your mind, what was the most dangerous moment in the Chechen wars—the first one, the second one, what years?

VP:You know, I find it difficult to name a particular moment. The so-called Second Chechen War started with the attack of international armed gangs from the territory of Chechnya on Dagestan, and it was a tragedy. [27] Background Information: See, “Miscalculations Paved Path to Chechen War,” David Hoffman, Washington Post (March 20, 2000). Retrieved at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2000/03/20/miscalculations-paved-path-to-chechen-war/e675f17a-d286-4b5e-b33a-708d819d43f0/?utm_term=.2549af78ab19 Hoffman explains that “[o]n the Chechen side, rebel leaders launched an attack against neighboring Dagestan last August in the mistaken belief that they would encounter weak Russian resistance and spark an Islamic uprising. The uprising didn’t materialize, and the incursions were repelled.” The thing is, it all started with the federal forces opposing the terrorists. It started with common citizens in Dagestan, and Dagestan is also a Muslim republic. They took up arms and they organized resistance to the terrorists. I remember those days very well. I remember well when Dagestan was not just urging us, they were crying to us: “If you don’t want to protect us, Russia, then give us arms and we’ll do that ourselves.” And back then I had to be actively involved in sorting out this issue. Back then I was acting prime minister.

OS:Meanwhile the United States, while they’re in Afghanistan, invades Iraq in March 2003. What was your reaction to the build-up to the war, as well as the invasion?

VP:We understood that the developments, which were nascent in Afghanistan, were related to the attacks of terrorists against New York. And we had this information saying that there was a terrorist cell—the concentration of terrorists in those territories. And we said right away we would contemplate providing support to the United States. As to Iraq, I told you already. We believed that, in the end, that would lead to the disintegration of the country, to the disappearance of structures which were able to resist terrorism, which in turn would lead to large scale regional problems. We put forward proposals to cooperate in this direction, but they were left unanswered. The United States prefers to make these decisions unilaterally. Incidentally, you know that not all NATO allies of the United States supported their action. France and Germany were against that decision. Moreover, there was this unique situation—both France and Germany, not we, formulated their own position on Iraq and they tried to convince us to support the European position.

OS:I’m sorry if I didn’t understand, but you were saying that the Russians had evidence that there were terrorist cells related to the attack in New York in Iraq? Is that what you’re saying?

VP:No, it was in Afghanistan.

OS:Right, but I thought you said Iraq. So you knew that there was no link between the New York attacks and Iraq, you knew that?

VP:Certainly, there was no link whatsoever. There was a link with these terrorist groups which were in parts of the Afghan territory. But Iraq had nothing to do with that.

OS:But that was put forward by the Bush administration, particularly by Richard Cheney, the Vice President—that there was a link.

VP:We didn’t have any proof of that.

OS:So you knew this was a manufactured theory.

VP:Concocted in some way where probably the official government of the United States used some information which was not entirely correct. I do not think that I have the right to put forward any accusations. But that was a great mistake, as we are witnessing right now.

OS:The weapons of mass destruction—I presume you had a similar reaction.

VP:Yes, absolutely the same. Moreover, we had exact data that there were no WMDs whatsoever in Iraq. [28] Claim: “Moreover, we had exact data that there were no WMDs whatsoever in Iraq” Supporting: It is true, as Putin claims, that the Russia’s assessment, which it shared with the US at the time, was that Iraq possessed no Weapons of Mass Destruction to justify the 2003 military invasion. As Newsweek explained, “[p]lenty of the best-informed intelligence sources were certain the WMDs were a fantasy. French intelligence knew it; so did Russia and Germany.” “Dick Cheney’s Biggest Lie,” Kurt Eichenwald, Newsweek (May 19, 2015). Retrieved at: http://www.newsweek.com/2015/05/29/dick-cheneys-biggest-lie-333097.html

OS:You never discussed this with Mr. Bush?

VP:Yes we discussed it, but our American partners thought that they had enough proof and that was sufficient. That’s what they thought.

OS:Well, so from your viewpoint—and you’ve talked to many world leaders—Mr. Bush is a decent man, he has integrity, and yet he’s misled time and again by his experts, his specialists.

VP:Well, not always—not all the time. Secondly, after the terrorist attack in New York, President Bush certainly thought how to protect the United States and to protect the citizens of the United States. He thought how to do that. And it was easy for him to believe the data he was provided with by the intelligence services. Even though that data was not entirely correct. There are attempts at demonizing Bush, and I don’t think that’s the right thing to do.

OS:Okay. Okay. So Mr. Bush did continue to expand NATO during his presidency, after Clinton had started to re-expand NATO.

VP:That was another mistake.

OS:Okay… How did you feel? I mean from what I’ve heard from Mr. Gorbachev, as well as read from American officials including James Baker, there was a deal with the Soviet Union not to expand NATO eastward.