- Mr. President, you have observed four American presidents at close quarters and maybe five and maybe five, you've had direct experience of communication with them. How much is Mr. Trump different from his predecessors?
Vladimir Putin: We are all different. No two people are the same, just like there are no identical sets of fingerprints. Everyone has his or her own advantages. Let their voters judge their shortcomings. On the whole, I maintained sufficiently good-natured and stable relations with all of the leaders of the United States. I communicated more with some of them and less with others. The first American president that I came into contact with was Bill Clinton. Generally, I viewed this as a positive experience. We established sufficiently stable and business-like ties for a short period of time because his tenure was already coming to an end. I was only a very young president then and had just started working. I continue to recall how he established a partnership-like relationship with me. I'm still very grateful to him for this. There were different times, and we had to address various problems with all other colleagues.
Unfortunately, this often involved debates, and our opinions did not coincide on some matters that, undoubtedly, can be called key aspects for Russia, the USA, and the entire world. For example, this includes the United States's unilateral withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, that, as we have always believed, and as I am still convinced, was the cornerstone of the entire international security system. We debated this matter for a long time, argued, and suggested various solutions. In any event, I made very energetic attempts to convince our American partners not to withdraw from the treaty. And, if the U.S. still wanted to withdraw from the treaty, it should have done so in such a way so as to guarantee international security for a long period of time. I've suggested this, I've already discussed this in public, and I reiterate it because I consider this matter to be very important. I suggested working jointly on missile-defense projects that should have involved the three of us — the U.S., Russia, and Europe. It included specific parameters of this cooperation, determining dangerous missile approaches, technology exchanges, the elaboration of decision-making mechanisms, etc. Those were absolutely specific proposals. I am convinced that the world would be a different place today, had our American partners accepted this proposal. Unfortunately, this did not happen. We can see that the situation is developing in another direction. It is connected with the development of the most advanced weapons and military technology. Well, this is not our choice. But today, we should at least do everything so as to not aggravate the situation.
- But Mr. President, you have studied history. You have spent many hours discussing different issues with Henry Kissinger. You've read his book World Order. With Mr. Trump, we have seen something new, something much more transactional. He is very critical of alliances and allies in Europe. Is this advantageous to Russia?
- You'd better ask what is to America's advantage in this case. But Mr. Trump is not a career politician. He has a distinct world outlook and vision of the USA's national interests. For example, I do not agree on many aspects, do not accept many of the methods for addressing problems that he uses. But you know what I think? He's a talented person. He knows very well what his voters expect from him. Russia has been accused, and, as strange as it may seem, despite the Mueller report, they continue to play that music, accusing Russia of being involved in a mythical interference with the U.S. elections. What really happened there? Mr. Trump looked into his opponents' attitude and saw changes in American society. He saw changes in American society very well. And he took advantage of it.
You and I are talking ahead of the G20 meeting. It's an economic forum. And it will undoubtedly have discussions on globalization, global trade, and international finance. Has anyone ever given a thought to who actually benefited and what benefits were gained from globalization and in what way, which we have been observing and participating in over the past 25 years, since the 1990s? China has made use of globalization, in particular, to pull millions of Chinese out of poverty. What happened in the United States, and how did it happen? In the USA, the leading American companies — the companies, their managers, shareholders, and partners — made use of these benefits. The American middle class hardly benefited from globalization. The take-home pay in the U.S., we will probably talk later about real incomes in Russia, which needs special attention from the Russian government. The middle class in the U.S. has not benefited from globalization It was left out when this pie was divided up. The Trump team sensed this very keenly and clearly. And they used this in the election campaign. That is where you should look, look for reasons behind Trump’s victory, rather than in any alleged foreign interference.
I think that this is what we should talk about, including when it comes to the global economy. I believe this may explain his seemingly extravagant economic decisions and even his relations with his partners and allies. But he thinks that the distribution of resources and benefits of globalization in the past decade was unfair to the United States. I'm not going to discuss whether it was fair or not. I don't want to assess what he is doing and say whether it is right or wrong. Just like you, I would like to understand his motives, which is what you asked me about. Maybe this could explain his unusual behavior.
