Oliver Stone - The Putin Interviews

VP:The problem is, we were not the ones to initiate that conflict. We are not responsible for organizing or supporting a coup d’état. And we’re not the ones to blame for the fact that part of the Ukrainian people didn’t agree with that.

OS:Could the US have a strategy here? A long-term strategy saying, “We know China is going to be this economic global power, we know Russia is—can we start to attack this problem by dismantling Russia?”

VP:I don’t know anything about that. You’d have to ask them. I wouldn’t want to think that is the case. But that would be the wrong way. The right way is to build equal relationships and to achieve mutual respect. Russia doesn’t need any expansion. We have an enormous territory—the largest one in the world. We have vast natural resources. We have wonderful people. We’ve got a profound system for developing and renovating our own country—any conflict just diverts us from this strategic goal.

OS:I totally agree, I’m just looking at the alternatives, which is that China is building up its nuclear capacity.

VP:Yes, and China is going to continue to do that—that’s quite logical.

OS:With Russian cooperation, or not?

VP:We are not cooperating in the nuclear military field. We are developing joint projects in peaceful nuclear energy. And solely for peaceful purposes. But we have a huge military/technical cooperation, but it has no nuclear elements to it.

OS:You recognize that China would not have guaranteed Snowden asylum?

VP:I cannot comment on that. You have to ask our Chinese friends.

OS:I notice they haven’t let RT—the Russian television network—into China.

VP:Well, I don’t know anything about that. I don’t think that Russia Today is operating in the Chinese language—not yet. But I don’t think that’s a problem of our bilateral relations. It’s just a matter for discussion, for negotiations.

OS:I saw the head of RT, Margarita Simonyan, and she was telling me that China would not let them in yet.

VP:And yet, negotiations have to take place—I believe this is a matter of business.

OS:Like the apricots from Greece? I heard the story when Alexis Tsipras was here, that you wouldn’t give Greece some kind of import license for apricots?

VP:No, it’s not that. We cannot make any exemptions for the countries of the European Union. But to all countries of the European Union we can offer cooperation and establish joint enterprises. And if these joint ventures are created in Russian territory, then they can partly import produce for their own purposes.

OS:Well, China has talked about wanting to create the Silk Road again through Eurasia. We know that Russia signed an oil and gas deal with China—a huge one. So there’s a new business renaissance here in Eurasia, with Russia, China, and all the Eurasian countries.

VP:There is nothing new about that.

OS:I know.

VP:We’ve been long pursuing that purpose and the so-called sanctions introduced by the West, they simply pushed this process forward. Apart from what you know, we also have plans for developing the so-called Trans-Siberian Railroad, the Baikal Railroad, and it all corresponds well to the Chinese plans of reviving the Silk Road. So, on the whole, we have very harmonious relations which are complimentary to each other.

OS:Yes.

VP:Let’s have a look at the horses.

[walking into the stables]

OS:Ah, beautiful—nicely done.

VP:You like it?

OS:Well, so far, yeah. That’s a beauty—wow. What is this, a race horse?

VP:I’ll have to ask.

OS:Wow. Looks like a thoroughbred. Is he one? Looks like he’s fast.

VP:Yes, he’s very fast.

OS:You ride them all?

VP:Seldom, unfortunately.

OS:Well, if they throw you, these are big horses.

VP:Yes, once I fell and flew over the head of the horse.

OS:Yeah, that’s dangerous. I must’ve fallen off five or six times. Many concussions. And here’s a tiny one.

OS:Did you read the article recently—there was a big break by the investigative reporter Sy Hersh in London, he’s an American reporter, on the bin Laden raid? [77] Background Information: Oliver Stone is here referring to the alternative account of the killing of Osama bin Laden by Pulitzer-prize winning journalist, Seymour M. Hersh, entitled, The Killing of Osama Bin Laden (Verso 2016).

VP:No.

OS:It’s an amazing story and makes sense to me.

VP:What does it say?

OS:It says that Pakistan’s ISI—their intelligence agency—made the raid possible by opening its airspace and letting the US in to basically take the man or kill him, as long, of course, as the Americans didn’t divulge this. As you know it was staged as a big heroic action, but it was essentially a mercy kill. There was no resistance in Pakistani airspace—none at all. Whereas they are in a state of alert for war against India. And he presents numerous other pieces of evidence of what really happened on that night.

VP:Where can we sit?

OP: Over there—it’s pretty. Back to what I was saying about the bin Laden raid, what do you think?

VP:I don’t know anything about that.

OS:Is it possible?

VP:Yes, I think it’s possible. Well, if they’re partners, why wouldn’t the Pakistani intelligence and the American intelligence agree on that? That was quite possible. But I cannot comment on that because I don’t know anything about that.

OS:And that he was there since 2006 and then he was basically a pariah and he was no longer really running anything. He was a guest of Pakistan.

VP:Well, that’s possible.

OS:And we knew about it for a while. But we didn’t really verify it until 2012 and then we took him very easily.

OS:Okay, you said you’re a global power—Russia is a global power. You did not say a regional power.

VP:Do you think there is a strict definition? Well there are certain issues which cannot be solved without Russia. And in that sense Russia is a world power. So, international nuclear security cannot be guaranteed without Russia. Nor is it possible to globally solve energy-related issues. And in that regard, Russia is also a world power. Russia is a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. And just as all the other permanent members, it has veto power, which means that a whole number of the key issues of the international agenda cannot be solved without Russia. But we understand full well that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, we lost 40 percent of our production capacities [78] Background Information: For a detailed account of the economic and social disaster which followed the collapse of the USSR—a disaster even greater than that of the US’s Great Depression – see, Cohen, Stephen F. Soviet Fates and Lost Alternatives (Columbia University Press 2011). and the Soviet legacy was a semi-ruined and outdated economic management system, as well as technologies which were outdated. But at the same time, it gave us certain chances of making resolute steps to revive our economy and our social sphere. And that’s why we are not exaggerating our importance. Nor are we trying to get some status of a superpower. We don’t need that. Because the superpower status means a certain burden—primarily a financial and economic burden. And why would we need that? We don’t need that at all.