Why did Putin describe Navalny as “Russian Saakashvili. Why Navalny is not Trump Navalny about Trump

On November 8, 2016, Republican billionaire Donald Trump won the US presidential election, overtaking his rival Hillary Clinton. On January 20, the inauguration took place, after which Trump began to fulfill his campaign promises. The 45th President of the United States was able to implement some of them single-handedly, and some measures met with sharp rebuff from Congress. Republic talks about what Trump managed to accomplish in the first year of his presidency, and what promises he has not yet been able to fulfill.

1. Withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Three days after his inauguration, Trump signed a memorandum of withdrawal of the United States from the treaty. According to the US President, the TPP would deprive the country of jobs. In addition to the United States, the project included Japan, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, Brunei, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Mexico, Chile and Peru. The administration of former US President Barack Obama actively lobbied for the treaty. Trump considered the document “unfavorable.” At the same time, the American leader launched a review of the terms of US participation in the free trade agreement (NAFTA).

2. Resumption of energy production. Trump ordered the continuation of the construction of two oil pipelines at once: the Dakota Access Pipeline and Keystone XL. Both projects were shelved under Obama after protests from Native American tribes and environmentalists. Trump also decided to reconsider the Clean Power Plan, which was adopted by the previous administration. The US President lifted restrictions on oil and natural gas production in the country and allowed the development of coal deposits.

3. Paris climate agreement. On June 1, 2017, Trump announced that the United States was withdrawing from the Paris climate agreement. The country's complete withdrawal from the treaty will be completed by 2020. Trump believes that the fight against global warming will lead to the loss of "millions of jobs and billions of dollars." The decision of the American president was criticized by other parties to the agreement, including Russia.

4. Health care reform and repeal of Obamacare. Trump spoke about his desire to cancel Obama's health care support program during the election campaign. In 2017, the Senate failed to vote to repeal Obamacare twice. On October 31, Trump again promised to fix the health care situation. The US President believes that the program has increased the cost of medical services and increased the influence of the state on medicine in general.

5. Wall on the border with Mexico. Back on January 25, Trump signed a decree on the construction of a wall, which he has not stopped talking about for the past two years. In the following months, the US presidential administration announced a design competition, and construction of prototypes even began in San Diego. But the Mexican leadership is still skeptical about Trump’s idea of ​​fencing off with a giant wall and refuses to pay for its construction. The US President is confident that the uncontrolled border with Mexico is the reason for illegal migration and an increase in crime.

6. Toughening of entry into the United States. On January 27, Trump restricted entry for migrants from Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Iran, Sudan and Somalia. The US President has suspended the refugee program. Soon the court blocked the document. On March 6, Trump responded with a new package of entry restrictions, but this time the court challenged the president’s decision and did not allow entry to be closed to thousands of people.

7. Conflict with North Korea. Over the past 10 months, North Korea has tested ballistic missiles of various ranges about 25 times. The Trump administration has long called on Pyongyang to stop the launches and threatened new sanctions. As a result, North Korea promised to launch a missile attack on the US base on the island of Guam. Trump immediately responded to the words of the North Korean leadership and promised that in the event of an attack, Pyongyang “will face such fire and fury as the world has never seen.” In the last couple of months, the conflict has been reduced to military rhetoric; the verbal skirmish has not yet reached real hostilities.

8. Relations with Russia. On January 28, Trump spoke for the first time with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Then the conversation took place over the phone. The parties outlined areas for cooperation and spoke in favor of improving relations that were damaged during the Obama presidency. On July 7, the two leaders met in person for the first time on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Hamburg. The normalization of relations did not last long - on July 27, the US Senate approved new sanctions against Russia, and 4 days later Moscow responded to Washington by expelling 755 American diplomats. In response, the United States deprived Russia of some of its diplomatic property in the country and also temporarily stopped issuing non-immigrant visas. The process resumed a week later, but only in Moscow (diplomatic missions in St. Petersburg, Yekaterinburg and Vladivostok ceased their work due to lack of staff).

9. Impact on the US economy. The first quarter of 2017 was the worst in three years - US GDP showed minimal growth of 0.7%. At the same time, the Dow Jones index broke through the 20 thousand point mark in the very first days of Trump's presidency and continued to grow throughout the year. Inflation in September 2017 was 0.53% (a year ago it was not much lower - 0.23%), and unemployment fell to a 16-year minimum - 4.2%. However, the figure changed not because of the actions of the Trump administration, but because of the consequences of hurricanes Harvey and Irma that hit the United States.

10. Trump in numbers. Data for the 365 days of the US presidency have not yet been calculated because the anniversary of the inauguration is still about two and a half months away, but here is what is known about Trump's first half of the year as head of state: he published 991 posts on Twitter (with repeated mentions of the phrase fake news), traveled to his own golf courses almost 40 times, met with 50 country leaders and gave 48 interviews (13 times for Fox News).

https://republic.ru/posts/87533

Trump administration strains relations with Russia through Ukraine

“Trump crossed the line and approved the sale of lethal weapons - a significant shift in the approach of his administration, as well as in American politics in general... It doesn't appear to be a coincidence that Canada also approved the sale of lethal weapons to Ukraine this week, since that could only have happened if the Canadian government knew about the United States' decision, Josh Rogin wrote in (12/20). — The State Department this month approved a commercial license authorizing the export to Ukraine of the Model M107A1 sniper system, ammunition, related spare parts and other accessories valued at $41.5 million. As for the export of heavier types of weapons requested by Ukraine, including Javelin anti-tank missile systems, there is no permission for their supply.”

“The war in Ukraine is flaring up again after a lull,” Andrew Cramer noted in the New York Times that same day (12/20). — Ukrainian authorities have linked the escalation to the Russian military's decision to remove officers from the Joint Ceasefire Control and Coordination Center (JCCC), which helped oversee the shaky ceasefire known as Minsk II. The Russian Foreign Ministry blamed this on Ukraine, saying that the Ukrainians intimidated Russian officers and that “all responsibility for possible consequences lies entirely on the Ukrainian side.”

On Monday, the White House released a new national security strategy that called Russia a “revisionist” power bent on upending the global order. On Wednesday, President Trump confirmed that he has approved the sale of lethal defensive weapons to Ukraine as it resists Vladimir Putin's aggression... The Trump administration has approved $41.5 million in weapons sales, including 107A1 sniper systems, ammunition and parts,” the Wall Street Journal reported (12/21).

From an editorial perspective, “Putin probes ways to expand Russian power and then strikes, gauges the response, and then keeps attacking until the cost becomes too high. With Barack Obama, he discovered that he could do all this with little consequence to himself. A strong US response in defense of Ukraine will do more to impress Putin than all of Trump's rhetoric about wanting good relations with Russia."

Patrick Lawrence from the magazine has a different opinion (12/21): “Putin’s statements about the state of affairs in Ukraine, of course, completely contradict Washington’s statements on this topic. But they do not contradict reality. Washington contradicts reality. As Putin rather calmly noted, the number one obstacle to a settlement in Ukraine for three years has been the completely corrupt government installed in Kyiv after the US-assisted coup in 2014.”

“The State Department announced the decision to provide Ukraine with powerful defensive weapons on December 22, just a few days after the administration announced that it was ready to allow Ukraine to buy small arms from American manufacturers,” the channel stated (12/24).

“Russian officials said Saturday that a U.S. decision to supply Ukraine with military weapons to fight Russian-backed separatists will cause more bloodshed, with long-standing tensions between Washington and Moscow escalating over the conflict in Ukraine,” the Washington Post reported, (12/23). ). “These complaints from Moscow come after the State Department announced Friday evening that the United States would provide heavy weapons to Ukraine for the first time, a step forward from support equipment and personnel training offered so far.”

“The United States has crossed the line by announcing its intention to supply Ukraine with lethal weapons,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said on Saturday. “American weapons can lead to new victims in our neighboring country, and we cannot remain indifferent to this,” the newspaper pointed out.

“Hundreds of supporters of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny nominated him for president on Sunday, allowing him to prepare the necessary paperwork for his candidacy and pressure the Kremlin to allow him to run,” the New York Times reported (12/24). to the Associated Press.

“Vladimir Putin, you should no longer be president,” Navalny said during a meeting of the “initiative group” that registered his application. - You are a bad president. You don't have a positive platform. We are sending you a warning signal in this election and are ready to win,” said Washington Post correspondent (12/24) Andrew Roth.

As he testified, “It was a rare political action in Russia, which contrasted with the ebb and flow of protests over the past five years, an action with a clear political agenda: register the country’s most prominent opposition politician to run for president, despite the government’s clear desire to keep him from this."

“The head of the Russian Central Election Commission, Ella Pamfilova, has repeatedly stated that Navalny will not be allowed to run for president because of his previous conviction,” the journalist recalled. “However, the procedure must be followed and the issue of disqualification will be decided later. On Sunday, election officials said they would wait for Navalny to deliver his documents.”

The same correspondent reported on Monday that “the Central Election Commission has banned Russia’s main opposition leader Alexei Navalny from running as an opponent of President Vladimir Putin in the 2018 elections” (, 12/25). “Navalny said,” according to the journalist, “that his supporters should organize observation of the elections and protest against them due to the fact that this vote is illegal.”

“We won’t have elections because Vladimir Putin is terribly afraid, he sees competition with me as a threat,” Mr. Navalny said in a video posted online. “He instructed his servants from the Central Election Commission to reject my registration,” a New York Times correspondent reported (12/25).

“Navalny noted that the candidates officially registered to participate in the elections were personally selected by President Vladimir Putin. He promised nationwide street protests. “We will campaign against these fake elections and persuade people not to participate in them,” Mr. Navalny said in the video.”

“At the Central Election Commission, Navalny had a heated debate with its chairman Ella Pamfilova. “More than anyone else, we would like you to take part in the elections and demonstrate a result adequate to your popularity,” Pamfilova said. “But since there is a criminal charge,” she said, the commission had no choice. “We are simply following the law,” Pamfilova said, telling Navalny that he was “fooling poor youth” with his election campaign.”

The leading media did not even mention the registration of Ksenia Sobchak.

InoSMI materials contain assessments exclusively of foreign media and do not reflect the position of the InoSMI editorial staff.

“There is only one person whose participation in the elections could change these elections, and that is Navalny.” And you and I know this, everyone knows this, he knows this, our political management is excellent, in general, this is not a topic of discussion for anyone, because this is clear to everyone. Why would his participation make a difference? Because he is able to bring the elections to the second round. Everyone knows this, too, deep down in their souls, but they don’t formulate it in this form, let’s say it frankly. Why?

“That almost didn’t happen with Sobyanin.”

— With Sobyanin, I think it’s a long-standing matter. I think that this is how it turned out, because when the current leader participating in the elections is shown a result of just over 51%, this means that he actually had 49%, but they were just afraid to show it. Now that so many years have passed, it seems to me that this is approximately how it was. Why is this the situation? Not because Navalny has some magical properties, but because at the moment he already has a political structure, these systems of regional headquarters. This is more like a party than all our other parties, I would say, combined. Therefore, his participation would change the situation. Therefore, he will not participate. This means that everything else is like “flowers”.

During this campaign, through the participation of one or another candidate, will something be stated that would generally sound good in the public space, some revelations, the right words? If we are having an election campaign at all, it would be better to say the right words than the wrong ones. Let someone say at least something similar to human speech. Is this a serious motive? Is this very important? Not really. I wouldn’t make far-reaching predictions here, because the candidate is the one who has been registered. There is still a long way to go. Let's not forget about the excellent structure of our electoral legislation, the need to collect signatures or support a party that has the appropriate quota. Once signatures have been collected, they must be submitted and accepted. This is not at all guaranteed or promised to anyone.

- Everything is ahead, yes. And the last question then: can Sobchak be such a “Russian Trump”, who was marginalized, and then took over and won?

— He won the primaries in his party. The American party system does not fit into the heads of almost any Russian, not to mention citizens there, and in general even researchers and observers of the political process. The entire American system is built on these two parties, which have been rooted there for centuries and which permeate all American public life, from schools and universities to all levels of government. We don't have anything like it. Trump came to power this way, through his party. How this happened inside them, we will not discuss now, just keep in mind that parallels of this kind are completely irrelevant.

What is implied in your question: our politics are all frivolous, everything is gamified, and any populist can come out and gather “new” crazy votes that don’t know where to apply themselves. Is this possible in our case?

I'm not into election technology, so I don't have a lot of insight into this kind of stuff. The only thing I can say is: if, in principle, a candidate appears who positions himself as a candidate “against everyone,” like “I am for those,” “I am the voice of your discontent,” “I am not a candidate with a program, I am the voice of the voiceless,” “ vote for me if you don’t like anything,” “let’s show how many of us there are who don’t like anything,” and if suddenly he gets about 20% or, say, 15%, this is a certain reality, a certain political fact that cannot be dealt with not to be considered.

How he should be taken into account is more difficult to understand, because this specific candidate cannot accumulate these votes and become a political figure: this is difficult to imagine. Nevertheless, this, to put it delicately, is like sticking your tongue out at the system, and this will be a kind of sign: “look how many people don’t like all this.” On the other hand, there will be even more people who will not come to the polls at all. Can they all be considered dissatisfied?

There is a version that non-presence, as it were, dissolves you in a sea of ​​non-arrivers, for unknown reasons. This is also true. On the other hand, being present and voting for any of the proposed candidates seems to immerse you in the system against which you, in fact, want to protest. Both options, if you consider or not consider, change or not change, is solely a matter of the political system that does not take into account the opinion of voters, replacing it with various kinds of imitation games, then I don’t think there is a winning tactic here .

Donald Trump's victory did not come as a surprise to everyone. Some political scientists and American studies experts predicted this outcome of the vote. First of all, those analysts turned out to be right who argued that not only his supporters and fellow party members would vote for the billionaire, but also those who would prefer to see anyone in the White House, but not Hillary Clinton.

The Americans ultimately elected as the 45th president someone who harshly criticized the actions of the current administration. Clinton symbolized the continuation of Obama's course, in which over 8 years the majority of US citizens had become disillusioned, judging by the voting results.

The Democratic candidate, using Russophobic rhetoric in her campaign, naturally delighted Russian liberals, who were confident of the defeat of the “Kremlin agent.” Clinton's statements about Moscow's interference in the US election process had a much greater impact on Russian non-systemic oppositionists than on American voters.

Just yesterday, Khodorkovsky warned that if Clinton wins, the Kremlin will pay for “interfering” in US affairs. Those who feared that a less than adequate woman would become the head of the strongest army in the world were called “fools” by the fugitive oligarch.

When it turned out that Trump had won, Khodorkovsky predicted Apocalypse. At the same time, he noted that the election result is an indicator of real democracy. Like, in Russia this is impossible, because there is propaganda everywhere.

The oppositionists were in disarray. They believed in Clinton's victory and hoped that the new White House administration would continue the confrontation with the Kremlin in a tougher format. Alexey Navalny was so disappointed that he offered to feed all the experts who had given him so much hope to the lions.

In this case, the first person to be thrown into the cage is Navalny’s closest ally, Leonid Volkov, who confidently bet on Clinton to win.

Volkov's expert instinct failed him. He decided to get out of the situation by admiring the American electoral system.

Dmitry Gudkov was glad that some “Kremlin plan” had failed, according to which Clinton should have won.

Stunned by Trump’s victory, liberals have no choice but to gloat (which they always do well). There were predictions that Moscow would not be able to improve relations with Washington, because Trump is unpredictable, and America is unpredictable, but still wonderful and remains a model of democracy and equality, unlike Russia.

The majority of representatives of the Russian liberal opposition cannot be called experts. Their topical comments are often baseless and lack political literacy. Nevertheless, their reaction has long been an excellent marker of certain events. And if Clinton’s defeat in the elections caused groans among Russian liberals, then this voting result in the United States should be considered as positive for our country.

During the press conference, Vladimir Putin spoke about the method of nomination for the next term.

“This will be self-nomination,” the president said.

About Saakashvili and “spitting” in the face of Ukraine

Vladimir Putin called the activities of the former President of Georgia and ex-governor of the Odessa region Mikheil Saakashvili “spit in the face of both the Ukrainian and Georgian peoples.”

“How do you still tolerate this? — the Russian president is perplexed. “He’s the man who was the president of Georgia, and now he’s running around the squares and shouting to the whole world: “I’m Ukrainian.”

On political competition and “immature” opposition

TV presenter and presidential candidate Kenya Sobchak asked the president a question. The “against all” candidate asked Putin about political competition in Russia.

“There must, of course, be competition, and there certainly will be,” the president assured.

Putin also called opposition politician Alexei Navalny “Saakashvili in the Russian edition.” “Do you want dozens of these “Saakashvili” to run around our squares? And you want such “Saakashvili” to destabilize the situation in the country? Do you want us to worry from one “Maidan” to another, so that we have attempted coups?” he reacted to Sobchak’s mention of Navalny.

About Trump

An American journalist asked Putin how he assessed US President Donald Trump. Putin noted that it is not he who should evaluate Trump, but the Americans who elected him.

“Mr. Trump and I address each other by first names, so I don’t know. If there were “you” or “you” (in English there is no variant of the pronoun “you” - “Gazeta.Ru”), would we switch to “you”? Probably yes",

About the work of the government and plans for the new term

Putin expressed satisfaction with the work of the current government. “In general, the government is acting quite confidently and the results of its work are satisfactory,” the president noted.

Putin avoided a direct answer to the question about his plans for the new term. “Well, we will need to talk about this after the elections... But I have ideas,” said the current head of the Russian Federation.

About army expenses

“Military spending will not affect social programs and will not lead to the destruction of the country’s economy,” the president said. In 2018, they will amount to 2.8 trillion rubles,” the president said.

“Whoever does not want to feed his own army will feed someone else’s”

- Putin joked instructively.

About rising taxes

Putin admitted that the tax burden is growing. “Not all taxes meet the interests of citizens and the state as a whole. Tax debts, for example, concern 42 million people, their total volume is 41 billion rubles. We need to free people from these payments and do it automatically - without contacting the tax authorities,” the president answered a question from a Gazeta.Ru correspondent.

About abortion

Opponents of abortion were also present at Putin's press conference.

“As for the ban on abortion. In most countries, these decisions are left to women. In the event of a total ban, illegal abortions will increase,” the president noted, adding that it is necessary to develop support measures for families: introduce payments at the birth of the first child, extend the maternity capital program, and so on.

About US hopes for help with North Korea

The foreign correspondent recalled the US desire for Russia to convince Pyongyang to curtail its nuclear program and asked whether cooperation in this area could improve relations between the US and the Russian Federation.

“Your congressmen and senators look so good, their suits and shirts are beautiful, they seem to be smart people. They put us on a par with North Korea and Iran. And at the same time, they are pushing the president (of the United States) to persuade us to solve the problems of North Korea and Iran together with you. Are you even normal people?"

— the president was indignant.

On increasing the retirement age

Putin acknowledged that the authorities are planning to increase the retirement age in the country, but noted that this is a difficult issue. The President hinted that given the course towards an innovative economy, there may not be enough work for everyone. Therefore, everything needs to be calculated.

“I want to emphasize once again that no decision has been made yet,” Putin stated.

The current retirement plan was adopted in the 30s of the twentieth century, but since then life expectancy has increased significantly, the head of the Russian Federation recalled. “Our women give birth at the age of 55 - thank God and God bless them,” Putin added.

Gazeta.Ru reported from this press conference.