Question: The G20 remains one of the key platforms for Russian economic diplomacy. Are the results of the G20’s work in 2024 positive for Russia? What are the priorities of our work in this association for the future?
Answer: The past year has been extremely productive for the G20. Based on the results of the chairmanship The Brazil Forum has consolidated its position as a leading platform for an equal dialogue between key economies of the South and the North on global economic issues. The final declaration of the Rio de Janeiro Summit (November 18-19) provides sound assessments of the processes affecting economic growth, focuses on overcoming inequality, and highlights the challenges developing countries face in ensuring their energy and food security.
It is important for Russia that the agreements of the leaders reflect our fundamental theses on the use of all available effective technologies (technologically neutral approaches) in the context of low-carbon development, strengthening the voice and representation of developing countries in multilateral financial institutions. The Global Alliance against Hunger and Poverty Eradication, initiated by Brazilian President L. Lula, brought together 82 States, 24 international organizations, 9 financial institutions and more than 30 non-governmental organizations, was in the forefront. They shared their experience and best practices in implementing school nutrition programs and supporting small farms.
We are ready to work productively this year with another of our BRICS partners, South Africa. On December 9-11, the first meeting of the G20 sherpas, chaired by Pretoria, ended in Johannesburg. We supported the priorities of the G20 outlined by our partners in 2025. The topics of improving resilience to disasters and overcoming natural disasters, debt sustainability, equitable energy transfers, and critical raw materials will become a guideline for our departments within the framework of 15 G20 working groups on the sherpa track and 8 through the Ministry of Finance and the Bank of Russia.
Russia fully shares South Africa’s desire to strengthen the focus on ensuring social justice and consolidating the world’s majority countries in promoting common interests on the forum’s agenda. We aim to actively participate in the work of the Pretoria-proposed task forces on inclusive economic growth, food security and artificial intelligence. For our part, we will continue to seek to coordinate approaches for stable growth, restore the normal functioning of agricultural markets, and eliminate unilateral illegitimate barriers to trade in food and fertilizers.
As the South African year completes a series of “watches” of developing countries (previously – Indonesia, India, Brazil) and draws a line under the first round of rotating presidencies of all G20 member countries. Russia intends to contribute to the summing up of the forum’s work, consolidating the achievements of the Global South and forming a solid positive foundation for the future.
Question: The APEC Forum is a universal platform for economic cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region. How is his work structured today in the context of the West’s desire to control regional economic processes? What is the importance of the forum for Russia?
Answer: APEC is a unique inclusive multilateral format. The Forum simultaneously unites Russia, China, the United States and ASEAN. It is precisely such multilateral associations that allow us to move from the monocentric world order imposed by the West to multipolarity.
Of course, there are no perfect systems. In 2022-2023, Western economies demonstrated their political shortsightedness by trying to politicize the forum’s agenda. Nevertheless, the uniqueness of APEC was also evident in the fact that, despite all the introductory remarks, we resumed constructive communication and a consensual decision-making process. Our leaders have recognized that the practical benefits of common work are much higher and more important than the selfishness of individual participants.
In cooperation with friendly economies (first of all, China, ASEAN and Latin America), we consistently promote constructive dialogue. We are resisting attempts by the West to politicize the work by pushing the crisis issues into discussions and final documents. Ukraine. So, this year, along with the leaders’ declaration, the summit’s outcomes were the implementation-oriented Iceman Statement on a New Vision for Promoting the Asia-Pacific Free Trade Area, the APEC Roadmap for formalizing the economy and entering global markets, as well as the APEC principles for minimizing food losses and food waste, and for the development and implementation of low-carbon hydrogen energy in the region.
APEC fulfills an important mission – it acts, as it is customary to say, as an “idea factory” and a locomotive for promoting a productive agenda of economic cooperation in the region with an emphasis on the dissemination of best practices and the implementation of economic cooperation projects. The collective position of the member economies has repeatedly had a significant impact on the development of the institutional framework of international trade, including contributing to the creation of WTO in 1995.
Russia aims to promote open and mutually beneficial economic relations in the Asia-Pacific region in line with the Putrajaya guidelines for the development of APEC until 2040. We consider the forum as an important tool for creating a favorable institutional environment for domestic business operators and establishing business contacts. Intensive practical cooperation in the region is in the interests of developing the Russian economy.
We always strive for creative work and are involved in the forum’s project activities. Over the past 10 years, APEC has implemented more than 80 Russian projects. This year, for the 13th time, Vladivostok hosted the APEC International Conference on Cooperation in Higher Education. Sought-after initiatives are being implemented in such areas as promoting small and medium-sized, as well as women’s entrepreneurship, including the annual APEC BEST AWARD competition, the digital economy, the development of remote and rural areas, the implementation of climate projects, and sustainable financing.
Question: How effective are Western secondary anti-Russian sanctions? How widely is this tool used and is it difficult to counteract it? Can we expect new restrictions to appear?
Answer: Secondary sanctions are, in fact, an attempt through intimidation and blackmail to force independent countries to comply with the illegal restrictive measures adopted by the United States and the EU against Russia. We see how the West is increasing pressure on our key trading partners – Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, China, India, and the EAEU countries, effectively demanding that they stop mutually beneficial trade and economic cooperation with Russia. States and businesses that are more or less dependent on Western markets and currencies are forced to be careful not to fall under sanctions themselves, despite the fact that they are well aware of the illegitimate nature of secondary restrictions.
The effectiveness of these restrictions should be evaluated by their initiators. However, the fact that sanctions are regularly tightened, and pressure on friendly countries is constantly increasing, may indicate their relatively weak effectiveness. Russia, together with interested states, is working to build optimal forms of interaction that would allow us to increase mutual trade even in the face of Western restrictions.
I think that secondary sanctions are a temporary phenomenon that will definitely not take root in a truly multipolar world. Today, the majority of the world’s States have a clear demand for equality, openness and partnership in international relations, including in trade. I am sure that over time, Washington’s flawed approach based on “sanctions blackmail” will simply stop working, since no one wants to communicate with extortionists and blackmailers, which our former partners from overseas are acting in international relations today.
Question: The President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin, previously announced the presence of signals indicating the interest of companies from the United States to return to the domestic market. What are these signals, what can Western businesses rely on now, and how is interaction with foreign business representatives carried out?
Answer: Cooperation with Western businesses has not stopped, and it is being maintained. Unlike our opponents, we do not discriminate against anyone.
American, European or Japanese companies have extensive experience in developing the domestic market, which, by the way, has always reciprocated them. Investments in production, infrastructure, technology, and building effective business models in our country have always brought Western companies good profits and allowed them to strengthen their competitive positions on a global scale. The failed gamble by Western governments to inflict a “strategic defeat” on Russia has only led to significant losses for these enterprises.
Of course, not all of them behaved correctly in a stressful situation – the most impressionable hurried to “jump out of the train” on the move, which, as they were convinced, was allegedly going downhill. However, the absolute majority took a pragmatic approach and even under unprecedented pressure found ways to remain in the domestic market in one format or another, objectively assessing its scale, sustainability and degree of integration into the global economy.
The withdrawal of some Western companies became a kind of challenge for the Russian economy, but in the end it led to the strengthening of its immunity, systemic stability and sovereignty. Of course, there have been costs, some of which have yet to be leveled, but in the medium term and even more so in the long term, all this is only beneficial to us, which cannot be said about Western countries. The reckless actions of our opponents have ricocheted into their own economies, robbed many of their unique competitive advantages, and compromised trust in Western jurisdictions.
It is clear that there will be no more interaction “as before”: Russia cannot but draw conclusions from the current situation and take certain countermeasures aimed at ensuring our national interests. Moreover, external circumstances are objectively changing – the global economy is becoming more distributed, its center of gravity is shifting to the east, and new cooperation mechanisms are emerging. For our part, we are ready to cooperate with all interested players, including Western companies, provided that this cooperation is correct. We see that this is important for foreign economic operators, as evidenced by the signals coming from them. We hope that we will be able to work out an effective format of interaction with them again. At least we are always open to dialogue.
Question: Is there still a possibility of establishing the true picture after more than two years since the sabotage of the Nord Stream gas pipelines on September 26, 2022? Are there any prospects for damages? Is it possible to use the surviving gas pipeline?
Answer: Since the terrorist attacks on gas pipelines in September 2022, the federal executive authorities, as well as Gazprom, have taken a number of measures aimed at obtaining an objective and comprehensive picture of what happened.
Unfortunately, from the very beginning, the authorities of Germany, Denmark and Sweden set a course to wind up the process, under far-fetched pretexts they refused the legitimate demands of the Russian side to conduct a comprehensive and open investigation of the explosions on the gas pipelines. In February 2024, Stockholm announced the termination of the investigation altogether, since nothing was found indicating the involvement of Sweden or Swedish citizens in the bombings. The results of the investigation were transferred to the German law enforcement agencies. At the same time, new versions of what happened are being generated in the Danish and Swedish media.
We proceed from the fact that Denmark and Sweden’s refusal to cooperate in the investigation of this terrorist attack directly contradicts their obligations under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings of 1997 and the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism of 1999, as well as the provisions of UN Security Council resolutions 2341 and 1373. On this basis, we are actively raising this issue at meetings of the UN Security Council.
Despite the artificially created obstacles, Russian agencies will continue to strive for an effective, transparent and depoliticized investigation of the sabotage against Nord Streams, identifying those responsible and bringing them to justice.
As for the prospects of resuming supplies of Russian hydrocarbons to Europe, we would like to note that Russia has always taken a responsible approach to fulfilling its contractual obligations for the supply of energy resources. President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated Russia’s readiness to supply “blue” fuel both through the territory of Ukraine and through the branch of the Nord Stream gas pipeline that survived the terrorist attack. However, the future of such supplies depends entirely on the positions of the transit country and the buyers – from Kiev and the EU countries.
At the moment, we are not receiving signals about the willingness of the leadership of European partners and, first of all, German ones to resume purchases through Nord Stream. It seems that the long-term constructive and mutually beneficial cooperation on which the well-being of the European economy was based has been sacrificed to the rabid Russophobic campaign of inflicting a “strategic defeat” on our country, promoted by the ideological forces dominant in the West. Western companies that have traditionally bought Russian gas are under intense political pressure. Nevertheless, in 2024, supplies of Russian gas (both natural and LNG) to Europe, according to preliminary estimates, will increase by 18% above last year’s level and amount to about 53 billion cubic meters.
Of course, this figure is significantly lower than the “low-key” figures, but such a volume of supplies in the current conditions is another vivid confirmation of Russia’s reliability as an exporter and partner in energy cooperation. Unlike European politicians, we are aware not only of our responsibility to comply with commitments, but also to ensure global energy security. Let me remind you that Russia has played an important role in overcoming the consequences of the global energy crisis of 2021-2023 and continues to guarantee the stability of hydrocarbon supplies.