DSCUS

UNBELIEVABLE: ‘Gaddafi was taking drugs when I visited him’ - Former First Lady of France





She achieved success where even the most powerful men have failed – in Libya. For years she stood by the side of her husband, Nicolas Sarcozy, on his way to the presidency. She was the First Lady of France. Now she’s an author and works to ease the plight of women across the entire planet. Cecilia Attias is in today’s Sophie & Co.
Sophie Shevardnadze: Our guest today is Cecilia Attias, former First Lady of France. Cecilia, your new book is called “Une envie de verite” – “The desire for truth,” an autobiography. Now, the most remarkable episode in your life, as First Lady – as you’ve said many times – was the role you played in liberating a number of Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor who’d been jailed in Libya when Muammar Gaddafi was still in charge. What was it like? I know you get that question a lot, but I still want to hear it from you once again.

Cecilia Attias: It’s a very interesting part of my life, if not the most important part of my life, because, I mean, just to say I tried and I released six persons, it’s important in the life. Those nurses and this doctor were condemned to death as you might know, and they were in jail for more than nine years, and I went there trying to make a difference, trying to talk not only with Gaddafi, but with his government, his prime minister and the people of Saif Al-Islam, who is his son. I tried hard with all my will to liberate those nurses and I succeeded. There were two important trips, one was 20 hours there, the second one was 45 hours dealing with all those people, and when I came back with the nurses it was really fabulous for me. I tell a lot in my book about this episode, it’s something very important for me, and think my life is all about that – trying to help others. That’s what I’m trying to do with my Foundation and to be able to release those nurses was for me a very important part of my life. I would like to tell you more about that, because it was really something huge and I’m happy that I did it.
SS:But also, Gaddafi wasn’t the easiest person to negotiate with – I mean many people who’ve met him or even those who knew him briefly, all say he wasn’t completely sane, and his son wasn’t the easiest person to communicate or negotiate with. What was he like when you were talking to him and negotiating with him about the lives of these people? Gaddafi, I mean.
CA: You know, he was very – how can I say? – maybe, he was on drugs or medicine… but he was listening. Maybe I was in the right place at the right moment, because as you might remember, those nurses were dying and part of his government wanted to keep those nurses and I told him, “It’s like killing someone, if you don’t release them, they are going to die in your jail. It’s maybe not the best image that you want to send to the world before not being anymore in charge of the country.”
Maybe I offered him something that he was lucky to receive – a chance to release those nurses and the doctor, they were really dying, and… I don’t know if you remember, he was always wearing a big map of Africa in his jacket and he told me, “I want to be a gate[way] for Africa,” and I told him, “How do you want to be a gate of anything if you are going to kill those nurses?” so I think it was a win-win deal and I went to see the nurses in the prison and then I went to see kids – remember, it was 450 kids infected with the HIV virus and 50 or 60 were already dead, and the others were in the hospital.
I went there, and there were very small kids and it was really sad. I told them that maybe we can help, send some medicine, doctors to take care of those kids, so… I think he was listening to me. When I was talking to him, in the middle of his, I mean, drugs, I don’t know, he was listening and he understood that it was maybe a way for him to [carry out] a humanitarian act in his life. I think I was at the right moment at the right place.
SS:You say “right moment, right place” – you went there as yourself, but also as the wife of the French president, and at that moment everyone knew that Nicolas Sarcozy and Gaddafi were friends. Why did their friendship end?
CA: Not at that moment, there were not friends; they were not talking to each other. It’s one part of the deal, and I told him that the French president will go on an official trip to Libya if they release the doctor and the nurses. It was part of the deal to be back again in the international scene – remember, he went to the UN after that. So, it was in his own interest as well. I knew how to deal with him; it was tough, it was long, it was a lot of discussions. It took me hours to deal with him, but he was listening and I think I had the right words and I knew, I felt… you know, women feel these kind of things – how to touch him and how to make him realize in his own interest. He had no interest to release them – people have tried, all the international community tried for years to go and release the nurses, and they didn’t succeed. Maybe, I found the right words to touch him and to make him interested in the deal. That was the only way to make him react.
SS:But also, I’m sure you’ve heard for many years now the allegations that Gaddafi was sponsoring Nicolas Sarkozy’s presidential campaign. What do you say to them when people tell you about that?
CA: I don’t want to hear about that… I mean, I’m not interested in that, I don’t want to hear these kinds of things. I think it’s nonsense.
SS:So you sound like it was you being a woman who actually persuaded him and probably that actually added to the negotiating process. So, after that with your success as the negotiator, did that persuade you that you can actually play your own role in politics, beyond that of First Lady?
CA: Not in politics. The first reaction I had is to create my Foundation, because I receive a lot of e-mails and messages from all over the world – from Women’s Foundations or NGOs asking for help – and they thought I could help because I’ve had a will to do it, and they trust [me]. And I receive e-mails from all over the world [from] women really in need, asking me to give them a hand, which I did.
I created my own Foundation in the US, which is the “Cecilia Attias Foundation for Women” and it was like a foundation built by itself, because of what happened in Libya. Having a role in politics… at some point we thought about it, a few years ago, and to have, like, a legitimacy for me to work by Nicolas’ side, it was a way not to be criticized and to have a role.
As you might know, in France there is no official role for the First Lady. I think it was part, maybe, of helping me to help others, to have a special role and to really have a legitimacy and official role as the First Lady, or even the wife of a minister or prefect, what we call in France those people in charge of the regions. If the role is really official, with a budget and an [office], nobody could criticize... I think it’s important to talk about this, because you have the power to do a lot when you’re a First Lady or when you work with a minister on the side of your husband, and you can do a lot. But to do so you have to have really, you know, a frame[work].
That was the first thing, and then we thought maybe I could be elected, and then… you know my family, my kids were still very young and I wanted to take care of them and still work with my husband at that time.
SS:Does a woman need a strong man by her side to succeed in French politics, to actually push forward her ideas, or is she better off alone?
CA: I think a woman or a man… it’s not a gender problem. We have fabulous women and men politicians; it’s not a question of gender. If you’re married to a politician you can have your own professional life – it’s a question of choice – or decide to help your husband. If you want to be elected you have your own autonomy. But I think it’s not a question of gender, everyone chooses his own life and work in the skill he wanted to work in.
SS:But you waited until the end of Nicolas Sarcozy’s campaign to divorce him – why did you feel that was important to wait?
CA: I didn’t think it was important to wait; it was not a question of politics. I was married for a long time, I was living with him for more than 20 years, and our family, our couple had some problems, some issues and I tried to rebuild after those years – you know, we had a family – so I tried to rebuild my couple and my family. You cannot quit like this and get divorce in one or two months. It is too important, and I tried hard to rebuild my family and it was not the question of politics or agenda, never. It was only a matter of a couple having issues and trying to solve them. I didn’t succeed in solving my issues, but I tried hard.
SS:Now, your ex-husband’s party is picking up again these days. Do you share their vision for the country?
CA: You know, I try not to talk about politics, because for me… I left this country six years ago, I’m living on the other side of the Atlantic, in the US, and of course I have the news immediately, because of the media, internet – I know exactly what happens here in France as soon as you can know, but I don’t want to take part in the debate and I don’t want to judge anything. It’s not my role. Of course, I have my own opinion, but it’s for me and I don’t want to share it. The only thing is that I love this country, it’s my country, I love France and I would like this country to go better and be better, because we deserve it. There are amazing people living here, we have great talents. It’s a fabulous country and we deserve now to put this country back on the international scene.
SS:Now, you have said that France reminds you of a “beautiful lamp which isn’t lit.” What exactly do you mean by that?
CA: It’s like a museum, it’s a beautiful country, Paris is a beautiful city, but people are sad and it’s like there [is] no more will or dynamism in this country. When you travel all over the world, which I’m doing with my husband for my Foundation, I can see countries really with a fantastic dynamism and I think we have lost that in this country. When I talk to people, they have lost hope – and that’s a problem for me, because we are living in the fantastic world and in a great country, we have been through an economic crisis all over the world and France deserves to get out of the crisis and deserves to have back all that people which are leaving the country to go and work in other places. It’s very sad to see that, and it’s really like that, like a lamp with no light, and it’s sad for me.
SS:You surely thought about it, because you love your country more than anything – why did France lose its dynamism, what would you say is the main reason? Is this France’s problem only, alone, or is it because of the crisis, like you’ve said, a crisis in the Eurozone, maybe?
CA: The crisis was not only in the Eurozone, even in the US we had a crisis, it was a worldwide crisis, and the thing is that… Spain is starting to be back in the game, Ireland is starting to be back in the game, in the US unemployment is going below 7.2 percent, and they are creating jobs every month, so now we need France to be back in the game. Why is it longer and more difficult in our country? I don’t know, there is no miracle solution, and there is no explanation, I’m not a specialist in that and there are many people much more intelligent than me and specialist than me are working on that and they cannot find the solution. So I cannot give an explanation, but what I want is my country to be back.
SS:I just want to touch upon the theme of women in politics one more time, but precisely in France. I know that being a mayor of Paris is a stepping stone for many presidents of France. In the coming election in Paris two women will be fighting for the position – do these women have any chance, in your opinion, of becoming presidential candidates one day?
CA: I hope so, I really hope so. Look at the US, Hillary Clinton has more than a chance, she should and she might be the next president. [So] why not in our country? We are not that bad and we are smart enough for that demand, there is not much difference. I think it’s not because she’s a woman that she has more or less a chance, I think it’s about being a smart woman or man – once again, it’s not a gender problem, it’s about being capable, to have the will, the courage – because it’s not easy, politics is very violent, and that’s my only concern: are women tough enough?
Politics is very violent today and I hope that women will have the will and the desire to run for important jobs as minister or president of this country. I hope so.
SS: So, do you think you could run for president of France one day? I mean, you certainly have all it takes.
CA: No, I’m not sure that I’m capable of it. I’m living in the States now, so… we’ll see.
SS:So I take it’s not a definite “no” and we’ll leave it at that. But, you know, I was actually growing up in Paris, Cecilia, and when I was growing up in Paris, the National Front…
CA: Your French is perfect, I’ve heard you.
SS:Thank you very much, but our viewers haven’t heard my French, so they will have to take your word for my French. Anyway, to get back to my childhood – I was growing up in Paris, and when I was growing up, the National Front, “Front National,” was a marginal party that no one took seriously. Now Marine Le Pen, whom I’ve interviewed couple of months ago, is one of the most popular politicians in France and her party is gaining ground. As someone who knows France, how do you explain this, why does this party resonate with one-third of your country so much?
CA: You know, when country is afraid or worried, you go to the extremes. Marine Le Pen tried to change the image of her party, but it’s the same, it’s the “Front National,” it is the extreme party of the right, which is frightening and I don’t want that for my country. People have to be aware that it’s not a joke, we are not talking about something easy. It’s a danger for our country: you have to be very, very careful with that, so when the country is worried, people are worried, they don’t know what’s going to happen tomorrow, they don’t know where the employment is going, they don’t know how the economy is going, they are starting to put hope into those extremes. We have to be very careful with that.
SS:Every French person that I’ve spoken to recently admits that immigration has become more of a problem, since the boundaries are open now. If it were up to you, as a regular citizen, what would you do with the immigration problem, because I have to say it does uncomfortable on the streets of Paris sometimes and this wasn’t there 10-15 years ago?
CA: It’s very difficult to me to answer your question, because that’s internal politics and we have people in charge today, so it’s very difficult to me to answer. I know that we have to be careful with the immigration, we cannot open our doors to everybody every time, but we have to be very tolerant – so it’s a mix of a lot of different postures. It’s not my role to talk about it.
SS:Neither of your parents were born French – your father was from the Russian Empire and your mom was from Spain. You’ve became a target for Marine Le Pen because of that. Now, having felt it personally, what do you think about the level of xenophobia in France.
CA: We have a global world and people are moving from one country to the other, which is a good thing, because if you have difficulties or issues in your country you can go and find work in other foreign countries. In the US if you don’t have work and you are living in Montana, you’re trying to go to Wyoming to find work. Europe is big and we created Europe to have this citizenship, going from one country to the other. The world now is getting smaller and smaller because of the internet and the way of communications, planes, trains, cars, whatever. We have to have a special rule because of that – we have to protect our identity, we have to protect our country, but we cannot close it completely, so it’s very delicate subject but we have to think about it and try to find the right way to live in a modern world.
SS:I want to talk to you about Gerard Depardieu; he made a lot of headlines here in Russia after giving up his French citizenship. There are others like him as well; they are leaving the country to avoid such high taxes – what is your attitude, your opinion toward that? Is it unpatriotic or is it okay?
CA: I told you at the very beginning of our talk. We have great talents in this country and I don’t want talents to leave this country, it is so dramatic and sad. Those people have to stay in their country and we have to find the way to have the economy back, employment back. I was in London few days ago to sign my book in a French bookstore, and there were a lot of people, French people, who left their country not because of the taxes but because they have no hope in France and not because they don’t want to pay anything, it’s because they found a job in London or in England or in Belgium and they didn’t find a job in France. So, it’s a bigger problem than that, it’s only that our country is not doing well at all and people are leaving because they need to work and to earn money – and they don’t have chances or opportunities in this country.
SS:I want to talk a bit about your Foundation; you talk about it in your book, you’ve mentioned it twice during our interview. It’s called “Fondation Cécilia Attias pour les femmes”, there are forums and discussions hosted by it. How exactly is your Foundation helping real women in everyday life?
CA: We’re helping more than [just] women; we’re helping foundations or NGOs around the world. It’s very difficult for me to be in the field, to go to Africa or to South America to help people. I try to be a helping hand for foundations in need around the world and that started, as I told you, after the Libyan episode in my life. We’re trying to give a voice to these foundations. What does it mean? It means putting them around the table and giving them a voice to tell us their issues and what they are looking for, what they are fighting against. It’s always women’s matters, but we try to find what I call “the response” – the dialog for action that happens every year, it’s like helping those foundations to find a response to their problems. We can sit around the table with some media partners, some people from the government, in charge of the country, people from the business world, to try to find a solutions or responses to those foundations in need.
SS:Cecilia, thank you so much for this interview, and I want to wish you good luck with everything you decide to undertake.
CA: Thank you so much.
SS:That’s all that we have for now. We were talking to Cecilia Attias, author and former First Lady of France. We will see you in the next edition of Sophie & Co.

SOURCE: rt.com




TECHNOLOGY: Galaxy S7 Vs iPhone 6S Review

Welcome to the year the master surpassed the apprentice. Having spent years making plastic ugly but highly practical phones, in 2015 Samsung launched the Galaxy S6 and proved it could craft handsets every bit as well as Apple. One year later Samsung has now surpassed them.
Yes, the iPhone 6S remains a beautifully sculpted phone. Carved from a block of aluminium, it exudes quality. Every port, speaker hole and curve is machined to within an inch of its life and the quality of the iPhone 6S is obvious the moment you pick it up. But that’s where the good news stops.

Where the iPhone 6S is luxurious so is the Galaxy S7 but, unlike Apple’s handset, the Samsung’s phone is actually nice to hold. It’s curvature feels far more comfortable and secure in hand. Meanwhile the Galaxy S7’s top and bottom bezels are far narrower making the 5.1-inch device feel little bigger or heavier than the 4.7-inch iPhone 6S:
  • Galaxy S7: 142.4 x 69.6 x 7.9mm (5.61 x 2.74 x 0.31in) and 152g (5.36oz)
  • iPhone 6S: 138.3 x 67.1 x 7.1mm (5.44 x 2.64 x 0.28in) and 143g (5.04oz)
On top of this the Galaxy S7 adds substance: wireless charging, the return of expandable storage and water resistance – none of which the iPhone 6S can match.
I’ll deal with wireless charging and expandable storage later and focus on water resistance now because it works brilliantly. Yes the iPhone 6S has some (unofficial)water resistance, but the Galaxy S7 fully lives up to its claims of surviving full submersion for up to an hour in 1.5m of water. Being able to take that call in the shower, adjust your music playback in the bath and not worry about emailing during a heavy downpour makes for a very welcome differentiator.
And yet neither of these phones are perfect. Both remain far too slippy in hand and you’d need to be Spider-Man not to drop them at some point without a case. The glass back of the Galaxy S7 is a key factor in this and it also gets sticky when warm as well as being a fingerprint magnet. So why have it? Currently glass is key to wireless charging, but a solution could be on the horizon.
In 2010 Apple changed the smartphone market with the ‘Retina Display’ in the iPhone 4, but in 2016 it is Samsung which is now way out in front.
  • Galaxy S7: 5.1-inch, 2560 x 1440 pixels, 534 pixels per inch (ppi), Super AMOLED
  • iPhone 6S: 4.7-inch, 1334 x 750 pixels, 326 ppi, LCD
Yes the stats imply Samsung has a significant edge, but in truth their resolutions and panel types are not the main factors. The Galaxy S7 simply gets the big stuff right: it is brighter, sharper, has more vivid colours, deeper blacks and works better in bright daylight. Side by side there’s simply no comparison. The Galaxy S7, coupled with theGalaxy S7 Edge, have the best smartphone displays currently available, period.
Also looking good – though of less value, in my opinion – is the S7’s new ‘Always-on’ display.
What this translates to is the ability to permanently show the time/date/calendar or an image at all times which can be handy. That said it isn’t as useful as similar screens on Google and Motorola’s Nexus and Moto ranges which provide glanceable information that includes Android notifications. So yes, Always-on looks nice and battery drain is reasonable (circa 1% per hour) but I ended up switching it off.  
And yet where the Galaxy S7 has beauty, the iPhone 6S has brains.
Arguably the headline feature of the iPhone 6S is ‘3D Touch’, a pressure sensitive panel which can differentiate between taps, firmer presses and pushes. The good news is this adds a new dynamic to iOS – you can deep press on icons for quick launch options (eg on the camera: selfie, video and slow mo modes) or ‘peek’ (preview items with a press – like emails and URLs) or ‘pop’ (open the aforementioned items with a further push).
This isn’t original (the BlackBerry Storm had similar functionality in 2008), but in theory it is brilliant and the potential for third party developers (particularly in gaming) is vast. So why is the reality a lot less appealing? I put it down to software implementation.
As it stands iOS has no obvious way to indicate when 3D Touch options are available. Consequently you just hard press everything and see if anything happens: app icons, UI elements, etc. It’s complete guesswork and there’s no consistency between how third party developers implement it. Consequently using 3D Touch currently degenerates into speculation and memory.
In time I’m sure this will improve and 3D Touch, like the Retina Display, will prove a hugely important and influential feature (probably copied by others) but for now it’s a work in progress that doesn’t make up for a screen which is falling far behind the competition.
Winner: Galaxy S7 – the iPhone 6S has the more interesting tech, but many will forget about 3D Touch until it becomes more intuitive. Conversely the S7’s jaw dropping display will make you smile every time you wake up the phone.


SOURCE: http://www.forbes.com

GAY RIGHT: LGBT activist wins court case against Russian region over gay pride ban

A court in the Northern Russian city of Kostroma has ruled that municipal authorities had wrongly banned LGBT marches and pickets and ordered monetary compensation in favor of gay rights activist Nikolay Alekseyev.
The press service of the Sverdlovsk District Court in Kostroma reported on Monday that the judge ruled to partially fulfill two lawsuits filed by Alekseyev against the Financial Directorate of the city administration and ordered the city authorities to pay the activist compensation of 6,000 rubles plus 300 rubles of court fees (about $90 in total). The press service added that one more “Alekseyev vs. Kostroma administration” case was still being considered.

According to Russian news portal RBC, the court decision concerned the events of April 2014, when city authorities in Kostroma refused to license a gay pride event that organizers named ‘For Ranevskaya!’ in honor of Soviet-era movie actress Faina Ranevskaya, known for a collection of her witty sayings. One such famous saying was “Homosexuality is not a perversion. Field hockey and ballet on ice are,” and activists intended to carry slogans with this phrase at their event. The other court decision dealt with the official ban on the gay pride parade in Kostroma in June 2014.
One of the best-known figures in the Russian LGBT movement, Alekseyev has repeatedly attempted to organize gay pride events in various parts of the country, but with no success. Usually the authorities refuse the required license for such events over fears of potential conflicts between their participants and ordinary citizens. In addition, Russian law currently forbids the promotion of ‘non-traditional sexual relations’ to minors and the format of street march or picket does not allow for control of children’s access to the event.
In 2013, two Russian female MPs, who were key sponsors of the ‘gay propaganda bill’, sued Alekseyev over insults he allegedly used while commenting on their legislative initiatives on Twitter. The lawmakers asked the Prosecutor General’s Office to start a criminal case into insulting a state official – a felony punishable by a fine of up to 40,000 rubles (US$1,200 back then) or up to one year of community service.
Law enforcers started the case, but it was closed in October 2015 due to expiration of the statute of limitations and because of a nationwide amnesty.

SOURCE: rt.com

TERROR ATTACK: Suicide bombing in central Istanbul main shopping street kills 5, injures 36(VIDEO)



At least five people, including the attacker, have been killed, and at least 36 others injured after a suicide bombing rocked the main shopping street in central Istanbul, according to the local governor.
Photos from the scene on Istiklal Street in Taksim district that have emerged online show badly maimed bodies and body parts lying in the street. Dozens of ambulances and emergency workers are on the spot.

Of the 36 wounded, at least seven are in serious condition, Governor Vasip Sahin said in a live statement on CNN Turk. 
Twelve of the injured were foreign citizens. “Six Israelis, two Irish, a German, an Icelander, an Iranian and a UAE national, injured during the attack, are being treated in five hospitals,” the Health Ministry statement says as cited by RIA Novosti.
One Turkish official said the terrorist wanted to target a more crowded place, but was deterred by the presence of police.
"The attacker detonated the bomb before reaching the target point because they were scared of the police,” the unnamed official said as quoted by Reuters.
Turkish officials have also indicated there is fresh evidence suggesting the attacker may have been from Islamic State or the PKK, Reuters reports.
According to unconfirmed reports, Turkish police are focusing on three possible male suspects with two of them being from the southern city of Gaziantep near the Syrian border, Reuters says.
Two victims of the attack are foreigners: an Iranian and an Israeli, Turkish officials told Reuters.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that at least two Israeli citizens were killed by the blast adding that one more Israeli may also have lost the life during the attack.
Earlier reports citing an unnamed official suggested Kurdish militants were behind the attack.
Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu called the attack “inhumane” and vowed to continue the struggle against "centers of terrorism".
"No center of terrorism will reach its aim with such monstrous attacks. Our struggle will continue with the same resolution and determination until terrorism ends completely," Davutoglu said in a statement, according to Reuters.
Diplomats have begun expressing their solidarity with the Turkish authorities.
"I strongly condemn this despicable and cowardly act that has caused the death of several people," French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said in a statement, as quoted by Reuters.
Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif who is on an official visit to Istanbul said the attack showed “the ugly face of terrorism.”
The attack was also condemned by Turkey's Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP), a Kurdish-rooted opposition party.
"Just as in the Ankara attack, this is a terrorist act that directly targets civilians. Whoever carried out this attack, it is unacceptable and inexcusable,” the HDP said as cited by Reuters.
Tensions in Turkey have been running high over the past few months, with terror attacks on the rise.
This latest bombing comes about a fortnight after the Turkish capital Ankara was hit by a grenade-and-gun attack, carried out by two female terrorists. Last month, at least 28 people were killed and 61 wounded in a car explosion in Ankara. The blast targeted military personnel near the parliament building.

SOURCE: rt.com



CRUEL: Tigers 'starved to death' to make $500 aphrodisiac wine with their bones(VIDEO)

Tiger wine, an aphrodisiac which sells for more than $500 a bottle, now faces backlash from animal rights activists who say the big cats are being kept in shocking conditions before their bones are eventually mixed in as the special ingredient.
Popular with many Chinese men who believe drinking the wine will enhance their sex drive and make them stronger, the bones are soaked for up to eight years and then mixed with snake extract and herbs.
This growing demand has led to an increase in tiger farming, even extending to neighboring Laos and Vietnam.
Although breeding them for their body parts is illegal, there are an estimated 6,000 tigers in captivity in China, which is more than double the amount of wild tigers in the world.
China is a signatory of the international wildlife treaty, which bans tiger breeding, but makes an exemption for doing it in captivity under the belief that the parks reduce poaching.
The tigers in captivity are reportedly emaciated and overcrowded. In the Xiongsen Bear and Tiger Mountain park, there are more than 1,800 tigers, and a further 1,000 live in the Siberian Tiger Park in northern China.


The farms are open to the public as tourist attractions. At Xiongsen, there is a circus performance held each day, where tigers do tricks.
What they don't show the children is what happens when the tigers at Xiongsen die, because they are taken to a factory where their bones are soaked in vats of tiger wine for eight years.
A Change.org petition to stop tiger farming has reached 202,864 signatures.
SOURCE: rt.com

RUSSIA: Flydubai Boeing crash in Rostov-on-Don kills all 62 on board(VIDEO)


Flydubai flight FZ981 has crashed in the southern Russian city of Rostov-on-Don killing all 62 passengers and crew on board. The flight was en route from Dubai and crashed during its second landing approach amid poor weather conditions.
Air-traffic control and local emergency services confirmed that the Boeing 737-800 jet crashed near the runway during a second approach in conditions of poor visibility.
“According to preliminary data, the Boeing 738 crashed in poor visibility conditions, some 50-100 meters left of the runway,”the source said.
A video recorded at the crash site reveals the Boeing-737-800 disintegrated on impact. Tiny pieces of the aircraft are scattered over a large part of the runway at Rostov-on-Don’s airport.
An eyewitness, Arina Kozlova, who was driving near Rostov-on-Don Airport at the time of the crash, said the blaze from the explosion was so bright it was like having dawn in the middle of the night.
CCTV camera footage posted on YouTube claims to have captured the moment of the explosion as the aircraft impacted the ground. However, its authenticity could not be immediately verified.
All crew and passengers on board the plane were killed in the crash, according to the regional Emergencies Ministry.
“During the landing approach a Boeing-737 crashed. It had 55 passengers on board. All of them died,” a regional spokesman told TASS.
There were 55 passengers and seven crew members on board FlyDubai flight FZ981, Victor Yatsutsenko, head of EMERCOM National Crisis Management Centre (NCMC), confirmed during a press statement in Moscow. Seventeen were foreign citizens.
“Eleven of the 55 passengers were citizens of foreign states and their names have already been identified. Six of seven crew members were also citizens of foreign states,” Yatsutsenko said.
Ten of the 23 flights, scheduled to arrive at Rostov-on-Don, were canceled while three others landed in Krasnodar. The remaining 10 due in will also be redirected to Kransodar.
“The plane, according to preliminary data, crashed during the second approach,” the source told Interfax.
Spokesman for the southern bureau of Russia’s Investigative Committee, Oksana Kovrizhnaya, has put forward two versions of the crash: “Pilot error in deteriorating weather conditions or a technical failure,” she said.
Both FZ981 flight data recorders have been recovered from the crash site. Experts are evaluating whether any data can be retrieved from them, said Vladimir Markin, spokesman for the Russia’s Investigative Committee (IC). The cockpit voice recorder was found in the morning and the parametric recorder was recovered later in the day.
According Investigative Committee experts who examined the flight recorders, the black boxes are in a "normal condition,"Oksana Kovrizhnaya said.
She said the data would be extracted as soon as possible.
For the FlyDubai air company, which started operations in 2009, the crash in Rostov-on-Don was the first fatal incident in the company’s history.
Ghaith Al-Ghaith, CEO of FlyDubai, has excluded the possibility of a terror act on ill-fated flight FZ981. No distress signal had been issued by the pilots either, he said.
Al-Ghaith insists the captain, Aristos Socratous, was a highly experienced pilot with over 5,700 flight hours and that the plane was new. Manufactured in 2011, the aircraft passed its latest maintenance on January 21, 2016.
Initial reports suggested that all passengers on board were Russians, however the Emergencies Ministry later confirmed that 11 foreigners were on board the flight, including all the crew members.
FlyDubai says the passengers included 44 Russians, eight Ukrainians, two Indians and one Uzbekistani, altogether 55 people.
LifeNews reports citizens of Cyprus (captain), Colombia, Kirgizia, Russia, Spain (2) and the Seychelles were among the crew members.
The company confirmed that there were 62 people on board.
The Russian Foreign Ministry has offered its condolences to the authorities of all states that lost citizens in flight FZ981, including Colombia, Cyprus, India, Kirgizia, the Seychelles, Spain, Ukraine and Uzbekistan.
Contact has been established with relatives of 47 out of the 55 passengers on FlyDubai flight FZ981, the governor of the Rostov region Vasily Golubev reported.
The relatives of the foreign citizens that died in the crash would be granted Russian visas using a simplified procedure, Transport Minister Maksim Sokolov told media.
Forensic identification of FZ981 passengers might start as early as Saturday, Transport Minister Maksim Sokolov announced.
Flight FZ981 from Dubai arrived in Rostov-on-Don at about 1:30am, but due to harsh weather conditions, strong side winds gusting at 25-30 meters per second, it spent the next two hours in the air, picking its moment to land.
As FZ981 was cruising near Rostov-on-Don (ROV), several other flights opted for alternative airports, but the captain of FZ981 decided to wait for a chance to land at ROV.
A record of what appears to be conversation of the pilot of the crashed Boeing-737-800 with the control tower in Rostov-on-Don has been published on the web.
The FlyDubai company has issued an official statement about flight FZ981.
“FlyDubai is deeply sorry to confirm the following information in relation to the tragic accident involving flight FZ981 which was flying from Dubai International (DXB) to Rostov on Don (ROV).”
“Preliminary numbers indicate 55 passengers and seven crew on the Next-Generation Boeing 737-800 aircraft.”
Emergency crews are working at the scene of the crash and have already put out the fire, according to a TASS source.
IC spokesman Vladimir Markin said "no less than 50" experts and experienced investigators are at the crash site, collecting evidence.
“Site inspection is actively underway. IC investigators are collecting the remains of the passengers for subsequent forensic, genetic examination,” Markin said in a statement published on the Russian Investigative Committee’s official website.
There are some 25 psychologists currently working with relatives of the crash victims at the airport. Thirteen are specialists from the Emergency Ministry, including the director of the Center for Emergency Psychological Aid, Yulia Shoigu told RT. Several hotline phone numbers have been opened in both Rostov-on-Don and Moscow, Shoigu added.
Emergency Ministry hotline phones for Rostov-on-Don Boeing 737 crash: 8-863-23-99999 and 8-800-775-17-17
The airport is to remain closed until at least March 20, 7:00am Moscow time. The inbound flights are getting rerouted to Krasnodar.
The Emergencies Ministry has opened up a hotline while a team of psychologists has been sent to help the grieving relatives.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has expressed has expressed condolences to the relatives and loved ones of the crashed Boeing.
“The Russian president feels deeply for all those who lost their loved ones in the Boeing 737 crash in Rostov-on-Don,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov announced on Saturday, stressing that the president has made it a priority to provide all possible assistance to the relatives of the victims.
The Russian Defense Ministry has joined the recovery operation following the crash of the Boeing-737-800, it said in a statement. A military airfield, Rostov-Central, is ready to open its runway for Emergency Ministry aircraft, deploy engineering hardware and transport vehicles to help to clear the crash site, and take away debris. Military psychologists are working alongside other specialists at Rostov-on-Don Airport.
Russia’s Investigative Committee has launched a probe into the incident with preliminary data indicating that the plane disintegrated and caught fire upon touching the ground.
The head of the Emergency Ministry Vladimir Puchkov has held a special meeting, with all the ministry’s efforts, and resources of the local response teams and authorities, directed to the crash site.
The Russian Emergency Ministry reports that over 850 specialists from various organizations are currently working at the crash site, along with 170 vehicles and hardware units. Transport Minister Maksim Sokolov said earlier that repairs to the airstrip in Rostov-on-Don would take at least 10 hours.
Relatives of the victims are gathering at the airport, Vasily Golubev, governor of Rostov region, told media. He stressed that everyone will get sympathetic and personal attention.
Golubev said most of the Russian passengers were tourists.
The governor said the weather conditions at the crash site are better than they were at nighttime, and though it is still raining, the wind has weakened and the well-equipped response teams will continue to work while there is light.

SOURCE: https://www.rt.com

FOOTBALL: RUMOURS: Mourinho wants Kane at Manchester United

Jose Mourinho will target a move for Tottenham striker Harry Kane if he becomes Manchester United’s new manager, according to ESPN.
The report claims that Mourinho’s representatives are still confident that the Portuguese will replace Louis van Gaal at Old Trafford this summer, and the former Chelsea boss feels Kane’s work rate will be vital in his bid to improve United.
Mourinho is also targeting a central midfielder, two defenders, a right winger and a striker.
But Spurs are reportedly unwilling to listen to offers for Kane and are confident that he wants to remain at White Hart Lane.

FOOTBALL: Real Madrid make Palestinian orphan's dream come true


Real Madrid made a young fan's dream come true this week when they flew Ahmad Dawabsha, a Palestinian orphan, to the Santiago Bernabeu for an extensive tour.
The five-year-old was the only survivor of an attack in the West Bank last year that killed his parents and brother.
Madrid, having heard that he was a big fan, made sure to bring him to Spain, with the likes of Cristiano Ronaldo, Gareth Bale and Marcelo on hand to say hello and show him around.
Ahmad was treated to a shirt and ball signed by the entire Madrid team at the training ground before watching one of coach Zinedine Zidane's training sessions.
Later, a trip to the Bernabeu was in order as the youngster, there with his grandfather, got to walk around on the famous pitch and visit the dressing rooms and the royal box.

SOURCE: GOAL.COM

RUSSIA: Lavrov: Russia open to widest possible cooperation with West

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has discussed the role of Russia in international relations, stressing the need for cooperation between Moscow and the West, in an article published in the Russia in Global Affairs magazine.
International relations have entered a very difficult period, and Russia once again finds itself at the crossroads of key trends that determine the vector of future global development.
Many different opinions have been expressed in this connection including the fear that we have a distorted view of the international situation and Russia’s international standing. I perceive this as an echo of the eternal dispute between pro-Western liberals and the advocates of Russia’s unique path. There are also those, both in Russia and outside of it, who believe that Russia is doomed to drag behind, trying to catch up with the West and forced to bend to other players’ rules, and hence will be unable to claim its rightful place in international affairs. I’d like to use this opportunity to express some of my views and to back them with examples from history and historical parallels.

It is an established fact that a substantiated policy is impossible without reliance on history. This reference to history is absolutely justified, especially considering recent celebrations. In 2015, we celebrated the 70th anniversary of Victory in WWII, and in 2014, we marked a century since the start of WWI. In 2012, we marked 200 years of the Battle of Borodino and 400 years of Moscow’s liberation from the Polish invaders. If we look at these events carefully, we’ll see that they clearly point to Russia’s special role in European and global history.
History doesn’t confirm the widespread belief that Russia has always camped in Europe’s backyard and has been Europe’s political outsider. I’d like to remind you that the adoption of Christianity in Russia in 988 – we marked 1025 years of that event quite recently – boosted the development of state institutions, social relations and culture and eventually made Kievan Rus a full member of the European community. At that time, dynastic marriages were the best gauge of a country’s role in the system of international relations. In the 11th century, three daughters of Grand Prince Yaroslav the Wise became the queens of Norway and Denmark, Hungary and France. Yaroslav’s sister married the Polish king and granddaughter the German emperor.
Numerous scientific investigations bear witness to the high cultural and spiritual level of Rus of those days, a level that was frequently higher than in western European states. Many prominent Western thinkers recognized that Rus was part of the European context. At the same time, Russian people possessed a cultural matrix of their own and an original type of spirituality and never merged with the West. It is instructive to recall in this connection what was for my people a tragic and in many respects critical epoch of the Mongolian invasion. The great Russian poet and writer Alexander Pushkin wrote:“The barbarians did not dare to leave an enslaved Rus in their rear and returned to their Eastern steppes. Christian enlightenment was saved by a ravaged and dying Russia.” We also know an alternative view offered by prominent historian and ethnologist Lev Gumilyov, who believed that the Mongolian invasion had prompted the emergence of a new Russian ethnos and that the Great Steppe had given us an additional impetus for development.
However that may be, it is clear that the said period was extremely important for the assertion of the Russian State’s independent role in Eurasia. Let us recall in this connection the policy pursued by Grand Prince Alexander Nevsky, who opted to temporarily submit to Golden Horde rulers, who were tolerant of Christianity, in order to uphold the Russians’ right to have a faith of their own and to decide their fate, despite the European West’s attempts to put Russian lands under full control and to deprive Russians of their identity. I am confident that this wise and forward-looking policy is in our genes.
Rus bent under but was not broken by the heavy Mongolian yoke, and managed to emerge from this dire trial as a single state, which was later regarded by both the West and the East as the successor to the Byzantine Empire that ceased to exist in 1453. An imposing country stretching along what was practically the entire eastern perimeter of Europe, Russia began a natural expansion towards the Urals and Siberia, absorbing their huge territories. Already then it was a powerful balancing factor in European political combinations, including the well-known Thirty Years’ War that gave birth to the Westphalian system of international relations, whose principles, primarily respect for state sovereignty, are of importance even today.    
At this point we are approaching a dilemma that has been evident for several centuries. While the rapidly developing Moscow state naturally played an increasing role in European affairs, the European countries had apprehensions about the nascent giant in the East and tried to isolate it whenever possible and prevent it from taking part in Europe’s most important affairs.
The seeming contradiction between the traditional social order and a striving for modernisation based on the most advanced experience also dates back centuries. In reality, a rapidly developing state is bound to try and make a leap forward, relying on modern technology, which does not necessarily imply the renunciation of its “cultural code.” There are many examples of Eastern societies modernising without the radical breakdown of their traditions. This is all the more typical of Russia that is essentially a branch of European civilisation. 
Incidentally, the need for modernisation based on European achievements was clearly manifest in Russian society under Tsar Alexis, while talented and ambitious Peter the Great gave it a strong boost. Relying on tough domestic measures and resolute, and successful, foreign policy, Peter the Great managed to put Russia into the category of Europe’s leading countries in a little over two decades. Since that time Russia’s position could no longer be ignored. Not a single European issue can be resolved without Russia’s opinion.
It wouldn’t be accurate to assume that everyone was happy about this state of affairs. Repeated attempts to return this country into the pre-Peter times were made over subsequent centuries but failed. In the middle 18th century Russia played a key role in a pan-European conflict – the Seven Years’ War. At that time, Russian troops made a triumphal entry into Berlin, the capital of Prussia under Frederick II who had a reputation for invincibility. Prussia was saved from an inevitable rout only because Empress Elizabeth died a sudden death and was succeeded by Peter III who sympathised with Frederick II. This turn in German history is still referred to as the Miracle of the House of Brandenburg. Russia’s size, power and influence grew substantially under Catherine the Great when, as then Chancellor Alexander Bezborodko put it, “Not a single cannon in Europe could be fired without our consent.”
I’d like to quote the opinion of a reputable researcher of Russian history, Hélène Carrère d'Encausse, the permanent secretary of the French Academy. She said the Russian Empire was the greatest empire of all times in the totality of all parameters – its size, an ability to administer its territories and the longevity of its existence. Following Russian philosopher Nikolai Berdyayev, she insists that history has imbued Russia with the mission of being a link between the East and the West.
During at least the past two centuries any attempts to unite Europe without Russia and against it have inevitably led to grim tragedies, the consequences of which were always overcome with the decisive participation of our country. I’m referring, in part, to the Napoleonic wars upon the completion of which Russia rescued the system of international relations that was based on the balance of forces and mutual consideration for national interests and ruled out the total dominance of one state in Europe. We remember that Emperor Alexander I took an active role in the drafting of decisions of the 1815 Vienna Congress that ensured the development of Europe without serious armed clashes during the subsequent 40 years.
Incidentally, to a certain extent the ideas of Alexander I could be described as a prototype of the concept on subordinating national interests to common goals, primarily, the maintenance of peace and order in Europe. As the Russian emperor said,“there can be no more English, French, Russian or Austrian policy. There can be only one policy – a common policy that must be accepted by both peoples and sovereigns for common happiness.”
By the same token, the Vienna system was destroyed in the wake of the desire to marginalise Russia in European affairs. Paris was obsessed with this idea during the reign of Emperor Napoleon III. In his attempt to forge an anti-Russian alliance, the French monarch was willing, as a hapless chess grandmaster, to sacrifice all the other figures. How did it play out? Indeed, Russia was defeated in the Crimean War of 1853-1856, the consequences of which it managed to overcome soon due to a consistent and far-sighted policy pursued by Chancellor Alexander Gorchakov. As for Napoleon III, he ended his rule in German captivity, and the nightmare of the Franco-German confrontation loomed over Western Europe for decades.
Here is another Crimean War-related episode. As we know, the Austrian Emperor refused to help Russia, which, a few years earlier, in 1849, had come to his help during the Hungarian revolt. Then Austrian Foreign Minister Felix Schwarzenberg famously said: “Europe would be astonished by the extent of Austria’s ingratitude.” In general, the imbalance of pan-European mechanisms triggered a chain of events that led to the First World War.
Notably, back then Russian diplomacy also advanced ideas that were ahead of their time. The Hague Peace conferences of 1899 and 1907, convened at the initiative of Emperor Nicholas II, were the first attempts to agree on curbing the arms race and stopping preparations for a devastating war. But not many people know about it.
The First World War claimed lives and caused the suffering of countless millions of people and led to the collapse of four empires. In this connection, it is appropriate to recall yet another anniversary, which will be marked next year – the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution. Today we are faced with the need to develop a balanced and objective assessment of those events, especially in an environment where, particularly in the West, many are willing to use this date to mount even more information attacks on Russia, and to portray the 1917 Revolution as a barbaric coup that dragged down all of European history. Even worse, they want to equate the Soviet regime to Nazism, and partially blame it for starting WWII.
Without a doubt, the Revolution of 1917 and the ensuing Civil War were a terrible tragedy for our nation. However, all other revolutions were tragic as well. This does not prevent our French colleagues from extolling their upheaval, which, in addition to the slogans of liberty, equality and fraternity, also involved the use of the guillotine, and rivers of blood.
Undoubtedly, the Russian Revolution was a major event which impacted world history in many controversial ways. It has become regarded as a kind of experiment in implementing socialist ideas, which were then widely spread across Europe. The people supported them, because wide masses gravitated towards social organisation with reliance on the collective and community principles.
Serious researchers clearly see the impact of reforms in the Soviet Union on the formation of the so-called welfare state in Western Europe in the post-WWII period. European governments decided to introduce unprecedented measures of social protection under the influence of the example of the Soviet Union in an effort to cut the ground from under the feet of the left-wing political forces.
One can say that the 40 years following World War II were a surprisingly good time for Western Europe, which was spared the need to make its own major decisions under the umbrella of the US-Soviet confrontation and enjoyed unique opportunities for steady development.
In these circumstances, Western European countries have implemented several ideas regarding ​​conversion of the capitalist and socialist models, which, as a preferred form of socioeconomic progress, were promoted by Pitirim Sorokin and other outstanding thinkers of the 20th century. Over the past 20 years, we have been witnessing the reverse process in Europe and the United States: the reduction of the middle class, increased social inequality, and the dismantling of controls over big business.
The role which the Soviet Union played in decolonisation, and promoting international relations principles, such as the independent development of nations and their right to self-determination, is undeniable.
I will not dwell on the points related to Europe slipping into WWII. Clearly, the anti-Russian aspirations of the European elites, and their desire to unleash Hitler's war machine on the Soviet Union played their fatal part here. Redressing the situation after this terrible disaster involved the participation of our country as a key partner in determining the parameters of the European and the world order.
In this context, the notion of the “clash of two totalitarianisms,” which is now actively inculcated in European minds, including at schools, is groundless and immoral. The Soviet Union, for all its evils, never aimed to destroy entire nations. Winston Churchill, who all his life was a principled opponent of the Soviet Union and played a major role in going from the WWII alliance to a new confrontation with the Soviet Union, said that graciousness, i.e. life in accordance with conscience, is the Russian way of doing things.
If you take an unbiased look at the smaller European countries, which previously were part of the Warsaw Treaty, and are now members of the EU or NATO, it is clear that the issue was not about going from subjugation to freedom, which Western masterminds like to talk about, but rather a change of leadership.Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke about it not long ago. The representatives of these countries concede behind closed doors that they can’t take any significant decision without the green light from Washington or Brussels.
It seems that in the context of the 100th anniversary of the Russian Revolution, it is important for us to understand the continuity of Russian history, which should include all of its periods without exception, and the importance of the synthesis of all the positive traditions and historical experience as the basis for making dynamic advances and upholding the rightful role of our country as a leading centre of the modern world, and a provider of the values of sustainable development, security and stability.
The post-war world order relied on confrontation between two world systems and was far from ideal, yet it was sufficient to preserve international peace and to avoid the worst possible temptation – the use of weapons of mass destruction, primarily nuclear weapons. There is no substance behind the popular belief that the Soviet Union’s dissolution signified Western victory in the Cold War. It was the result of our people’s will for change plus an unlucky chain of events.
These developments resulted in a truly tectonic shift in the international landscape. In fact, they changed global politics altogether, considering that the end of the Cold War and related ideological confrontation offered a unique opportunity to change the European architecture on the principles of indivisible and equal security and broad cooperation without dividing lines.
We had a practical chance to mend Europe’s divide and implement the dream of a common European home, which many European thinkers and politicians, including President Charles de Gaulle of France, wholeheartedly embraced. Russia was fully open to this option and advanced many proposals and initiatives in this connection. Logically, we should have created a new foundation for European security by strengthening the military and political components of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Vladimir Putin said in a recent interview with the German newspaper Bild that German politician Egon Bahr proposed similar approaches.
Unfortunately, our Western partners chose differently. They opted to expand NATO eastward and to advance the geopolitical space they controlled closer to the Russian border. This is the essence of the systemic problems that have soured Russia’s relations with the United States and the European Union. It is notable that George Kennan, the architect of the US policy of containment of the Soviet Union, said in his winter years that the ratification of NATO expansion was “a tragic mistake.”
The underlying problem of this Western policy is that it disregarded the global context. The current globalised world is based on an unprecedented interconnection between countries, and so it’s impossible to develop relations between Russia and the EU as if they remained at the core of global politics as during the Cold War. We must take note of the powerful processes that are underway in Asia Pacific, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America.
Rapid changes in all areas of international life is the primary sign of the current stage. Indicatively, they often take an unexpected turn. Thus, the concept of “the end of history” developed by well-known US sociologist and political researcher Francis Fukuyama, that was popular in the 1990s, has become clearly inconsistent today. According to this concept, rapid globalisation signals the ultimate victory of the liberal capitalist model, whereas all other models should adapt to it under the guidance of the wise Western teachers.
In reality, the second wave of globalisation (the first occurred before World War I) led to the dispersal of global economic might and, hence, of political influence, and to the emergence of new and large centres of power, primarily in the Asia-Pacific Region. China’s rapid upsurge is the clearest example. Owing to unprecedented economic growth rates, in just three decades it became the second and, calculated as per purchasing power parity, the first economy in the world. This example illustrates an axiomatic fact – there are many development models– which rules out the monotony of existence within the uniform, Western frame of reference.
Consequently, there has been a relative reduction in the influence of the so-called “historical West” that was used to seeing itself as the master of the human race’s destinies for almost five centuries. The competition on the shaping of the world order in the 21st century has toughened. The transition from the Cold War to a new international system proved to be much longer and more painful than it seemed 20-25 years ago.
Against this backdrop, one of the basic issues in international affairs is the form that is being acquired by this generally natural competition between the world’s leading powers. We see how the United States and the US-led Western alliance are trying to preserve their dominant positions by any available method or, to use the American lexicon, ensure their“global leadership”. Many diverse ways of exerting pressure, economic sanctions and even direct armed intervention are being used. Large-scale information wars are being waged. Technology of unconstitutional change of governments by launching “colour” revolutions has been tried and tested. Importantly, democratic revolutions appear to be destructive for the nations targeted by such actions. Our country that went through a historical period of encouraging artificial transformations abroad, firmly proceeds from the preference of evolutionary changes that should be carried out in the forms and at a speed that conform to the traditions of a society and its level of development.
Western propaganda habitually accuses Russia of “revisionism,” and the alleged desire to destroy the established international system, as if it was us who bombed Yugoslavia in 1999 in violation of the UN Charter and the Helsinki Final Act, as if it was Russia that ignored international law by invading Iraq in 2003 and distorted UN Security Council resolutions by overthrowing Muammar Gaddafi’s regime by force in Libya in 2011. There are many examples.
This discourse about “revisionism” does not hold water. It is based on the simple and even primitive logic that only Washington can set the tune in world affairs. In line with this logic, the principle once formulated by George Orwell and moved to the international level, sounds like the following: all states are equal but some states are more equal than others. However, today international relations are too sophisticated a mechanism to be controlled from one centre. This is obvious given the results of US interference: There is virtually no state in Libya; Iraq is balancing on the brink of disintegration, and so on and so forth.
A reliable solution to the problems of the modern world can only be achieved through serious and honest cooperation between the leading states and their associations in order to address common challenges. Such an interaction should include all the colours of the modern world, and be based on its cultural and civilisational diversity, as well as reflect the interests of the international community’s key components.
We know from experience that when these principles are applied in practice, it is possible to achieve specific and tangible results, such as the agreement on the Iranian nuclear programme, the elimination of Syrian chemical weapons, the agreement on stopping hostilities in Syria, and the development of the basic parameters of the global climate agreement. This shows the need to restore the culture of compromise, the reliance on the diplomatic work, which can be difficult, even exhausting, but which remains, in essence, the only way to ensure a mutually acceptable solution to problems by peaceful means.
Our approaches are shared by most countries of the world, including our Chinese partners, other BRICSand SCO nations, and our friends in the EAEU, the CSTO, and the CIS. In other words, we can say that Russia is fighting not against someone, but for the resolution of all the issues on an equal and mutually respectful basis, which alone can serve as a reliable foundation for a long-term improvement of international relations.
Our most important task is to join our efforts against not some far-fetched, but very real challenges, among which the terrorist aggression is the most pressing one. The extremists from ISIS, Jabhat an-Nusra and the like managed for the first time to establish control over large territories in Syria and Iraq. They are trying to extend their influence to other countries and regions, and are committing acts of terrorism around the world. Underestimating this risk is nothing short of criminal shortsightedness.
The Russian President called for forming a broad-based front in order to defeat the terrorists militarily. The Russian Aerospace Forces make an important contribution to this effort. At the same time, we are working hard to establish collective actions regarding the political settlement of the conflicts in this crisis-ridden region.
Importantly, the long-term success can only be achieved on the basis of movement to the partnership of civilisations based on respectful interaction of diverse cultures and religions. We believe that human solidarity must have a moral basis formed by traditional values ​​that are largely shared by the world's leading religions. In this connection, I would like to draw your attention to the joint statement by Patriarch Kirill and Pope Francis, in which, among other things, they have expressed support for the family as a natural centre of life of individuals and society.
I repeat, we are not seeking confrontation with the United States, or the European Union, or NATO. On the contrary, Russia is open to the widest possible cooperation with its Western partners. We continue to believe that the best way to ensure the interests of the peoples living in Europe is to form a common economic and humanitarian space from the Atlantic to the Pacific, so that the newly formed Eurasian Economic Union could be an integrating link between Europe and Asia Pacific. We strive to do our best to overcome obstacles on that way, including the settlement of the Ukraine crisis caused by the coup in Kiev in February 2014, on the basis of the Minsk Agreements.
I’d like to quote wise and politically experienced Henry Kissinger, who, speaking recently in Moscow, said that “Russia should be perceived as an essential element of any new global equilibrium, not primarily as a threat to the United States... I am here to argue for the possibility of a dialogue that seeks to merge our futures rather than elaborate our conflicts. This requires respect by both sides of the vital values and interest of the other.”  We share such an approach. And we will continue to defend the principles of law and justice in international affairs.
Speaking about Russia's role in the world as a great power, Russian philosopher Ivan Ilyin said that the greatness of a country is not determined by the size of its territory or the number of its inhabitants, but by the capacity of its people and its government to take on the burden of great world problems and to deal with these problems in a creative manner. A great power is the one which, asserting its existence and its interest ... introduces a creative and meaningful legal idea to ​​the entire assembly of the nations, the entire “concert” of the peoples and states. It is difficult to disagree with these words.

SOURCE: https://www.rt.com