KEY POINTS FROM V. PUTIN’S SPEECH AT VALDAI (2023)

On 5 October 2023, Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered a speech at Valdai on the topic ‘Fair Multipolarity: How to Ensure Security and Development for All’. The study shows that this speech presents a coherent and fairly clearly structured model of the Russian Federation’s foreign policy strategy, in which public rhetoric (“6 principles”, “a just world”, “equality”) is not an ideology in its own right, but rather a tool for solving a specific problem — mitigating the consequences of isolation and restoring Russia’s position within the international system.

At the level of the world order, the Russian Federation is effectively rejecting the model of universal rules and competition, as it cannot withstand its conditions. Instead, a model is being promoted:

• exceptionalism (“civilisation”) → withdrawal from competition,

• collective decision-making → a mechanism for blocking/bargaining,

• expansion of the UN Security Council through “friendly countries” → a shift in the balance of power

This is not the creation of a new system, but the reformatting of the existing one to suit its own limitations.

At the level of undermining consolidation, the Russian Federation’s key objective is not victory over the West, but:

• severing the link between the West and the Global South,

• weakening the West’s internal unity,

• shifting responsibility for the conflict onto the West.

To this end, classic information inversion is employed:

• Russian aggression → ‘defence’,

• sanctions → ‘injustice’,

• rules → ‘colonialism’.

At the level of the Ukrainian narrative, a key integration is evident:

• the war is presented not as a territorial conflict, but as part of negotiations on a new world order,

• Russia’s security guarantees = a redistribution of spheres of influence,

• Ukraine is used as a tool to change the rules of the system, rather than as an independent object of policy.

The most significant transformation occurs at the level of the “6 principles”:

• each principle (barrier-free access, diversity, equality, etc.)
  → in practical terms, this means dismantling specific instruments of Western influence:

  • sanctions

  • coalitions

  • universal rules

  • accountability mechanisms

In other words, this is not a normative model, but a deconstruction of the existing system through alternative rhetoric.

The model presented here is not about building a ‘new world order’, but about the Russian Federation adapting to conditions of strategic weakness by changing the rules of the game.

Its essence lies in the fact that:

• the Russian Federation cannot operate effectively within a system of universal rules and competition,

• and therefore seeks to replace them with a system of negotiated spheres of influence, ad hoc coalitions and bargaining,

• using the Global South as a resource to destabilise the West.

In this logic, the Ukrainian conflict is a central instrument through which the Russian Federation:

• raises the issue of revising the world order,

• imposes the theme of ‘security guarantees’ as a cover for spheres of influence,

• and tests the possibility of shifting from rules to bargaining.

The key point is that this is not a strategy of expansion, but of breaking out of isolation by dismantling the system that created that isolation.

WORLD ORDER.
• The world order.
• The issue of dismantling consolidation.
• The Ukrainian conflict.
• Six principles.
CONCLUSION.

Note: it is worth noting that some of the messages from V. Putin’s speech were broadcast via official Russian media – signals for the external audience: the West and the Global South; some messages were broadcast only on alternative channels, such as Telegram or local Russian media: signals for the domestic audience.

Broadly speaking, the messages broadcast to the external audience on the topic of the WORLD ORDER can be broken down into thematic blocks, which we will examine in more detail:

• The world order.

• The issue of undermining consolidation.

• The Ukrainian conflict.

• Six principles.

World order

Key points from the speech:

The speech emphasised that Russia rejects the principles of fair competition within a single space governed by common rules and values, considering itself an exception and demanding that all other players in the international arena recognise its exceptional status, threatening military conflict if they do not. Russia is not competitive on the world stage and therefore proposes a model in which it can remain at the global level without competition, designating itself as a ‘civilisation’ (previously it was an ‘empire’). Russia has begun to avoid any mention of the status of ‘empire’ (‘Russian Empire’) in its discourse, as it actively promotes the narrative of ‘Western colonialism’. And whereas previously Russia spoke of its own sovereignty and colonies that could be subjugated – including Ukraine, due to the latter’s refusal to recognise Russia’s influence as dominant – the narrative has now shifted towards preserving its ‘civilisation’ and ‘defending its civilisational choice’, characterised as self-sufficiency.

Russia is promoting the idea of admitting to the UN Security Council (permanent members: the US, the UK, France, China and the Russian Federation) as new permanent members only those countries it considers ‘friendly’ towards itself: India, Brazil and South Africa. Thus, a situation may arise in the UN Security Council in which the West (developed democracies) will be in the minority (the US, the UK, France), but the full original composition of BRICS (autocracies and developing countries) will be represented – autocracies: China, the Russian Federation; and developing countries: India, Brazil, South Africa. Thus, Russia hopes to create, if not a coalition of partners around itself at the global level, then at least to declare that all decisions must be taken collegially, that is, by majority vote, which will be represented precisely by the leading countries of the BRICS economic bloc. In this way, the Russian Federation is attempting to create optimal conditions for itself – to maintain and strengthen its position at the global level within the UN Security Council (political influence) and to maintain/consolidate its position at the regional level within BRICS (economic influence).

Russia is also emphasising to the international community not global humanitarian issues (human rights, climate, migration, hunger, etc.), but issues of global security (strategic stability), in order to increase pressure on the US from partners/allies and the UN as a whole, and to remind them of its involvement and significance in this arena. It was thus stated that Russia may withdraw its ratification of the document banning nuclear weapons testing. Russia insists that the US also ratify this document, fearing a ‘nuclear arms race’ as well — this is an attempt to deter the US. At this year’s NATO summit, the start of a ‘conventional arms race’ and a ‘technology race’ was already noted. In the ‘technology race’, China and Russia may face significant difficulties due to the development of relevant strategies towards Russia (‘containment strategy’) and China (‘competition strategy’), which restrict their access to new technologies.

Russia also opposes globalisation due to its limited integration into the global economy and restrictions in the form of sanctions, as a result of which the Russian Federation is gradually being replaced in the global economic system by other players, thereby intensifying its partial isolation. Although, in words, Russia continues to assert that self-sufficiency is precisely what it strives for.

As Russia is subject to sanctions and deprived of access to international financial systems, it is seeking ways to circumvent sanctions, including by advocating for de-dollarisation (settlements in national currencies), the creation of an alternative to SWIFT, the establishment of development banks independent of international control, and other tools to circumvent sanctions. Due to secondary sanctions from the US and the EU, developing countries (the Global South) are wary of participating in such Russian projects. Russia’s toxicity within international organisations is further exacerbated by the influence of Western countries, which raise issues regarding Ukraine, Russian aggression and demands to comply with sanctions in these forums. Russia therefore categorically opposes the ‘politicisation’ of a forum such as the G20, whilst also attempting to discredit the global financial system in the eyes of the Global South and proposing the creation of an alternative parallel financial system through BRICS to circumvent sanctions.

Quotes from V. Putin’s speech:

• The world order. Russia faces the task of building a new world. The US and its satellites have set a course for hegemony – military, political, economic, cultural and even moral; no one intended to listen to Russia. Such an approach leads not merely to a dead end; it threatens to heighten the risk of military conflict. Russia’s readiness for constructive engagement was interpreted as submission, as a willingness to accept that the new order would be built by those who had proclaimed themselves the victors of the Cold War.

• Western colonialism. The West’s prosperity has largely been achieved through the plundering of colonies and the entire planet, and the history of the West is a chronicle of endless expansion.

• Russian civilisation. For Russia, civilisation is a multifaceted phenomenon; none of them is worse or better than the others; they are all equal. The key qualities of a state-civilisation’s development are diversity and self-sufficiency. Russian civilisation cannot be reduced to a single common denominator, nor can it be divided. One must never betray one’s own civilisation; it is unnatural, repugnant and leads to chaos. Defending one’s civilisational choice is a huge responsibility. This applies to responding to external encroachment, establishing close and constructive ties with other civilisational communities, and, most importantly, maintaining internal stability and harmony. Awareness of national values will grow, and balance will be achieved through compromise.

• UN. The UN Security Council should include countries that ‘carry significant weight in international affairs’ and are capable of influencing the resolution of international issues: India, Brazil and South Africa.

• The global problems facing humanity require joint action and the search for collective solutions, whilst selfishness, arrogance and disregard for real challenges will inevitably lead to a dead end. Humanity is not moving towards fragmentation into competing segments, nor towards a new bloc confrontation, however it may be justified, nor towards the soulless universalism of a new globalisation; on the contrary, the world is on the path to synergy.

• Strategic stability. Russia could mirror the US, which has not ratified the document banning nuclear weapons testing. The US signed but did not ratify. Theoretically, we could withdraw our ratification; if we do so, that will be quite sufficient.

• G20. The politicisation of the ‘G20’ is a path to its self-destruction.

• The global economy. The global financial system is not ideal, balanced, or in the interests of all countries. BRICS does not need a single currency; it needs to establish a system of settlements in national currencies and financial logistics.

The issue of undermining consolidation

Key points from the speech:

The issue of overcoming the consolidation of the international community against the Russian Federation — undermining internal consolidation among Western countries and preventing the consolidation of the West and the countries of the Global South — is the most urgent and priority issue for Russia at the current stage of its intensifying isolation (political, economic, military). Therefore, a significant part of the speech was devoted to the issue of weakening/undermining this consolidation at various levels by means of Russia’s distortion of the cause-and-effect relationships of current events.

Firstly, it was claimed that the West’s grievances against Russia are allegedly unfounded, unsubstantiated and subjective in nature, and are not linked to Russia’s illegal aggressive actions, destructive behaviour and malicious violations. Allegedly, the West itself is engaged in constant expansion, in particular through NATO, which the Russian side defines as an instrument of US foreign policy.

Secondly, it was claimed that the West allegedly treats representatives of the Global South in the same way, placing these countries in the same (equal) position as Russia, which is supposedly ‘forced’ to defend itself. Russia possesses the greatest/most powerful military potential among developing countries, which is intended to lead non-Western nations to believe that only Russia can protect them and repel the West, and that this is precisely what it is engaged in at this stage, rather than committing unfounded aggression against Ukraine in violation of the UN Charter, and is therefore being repelled by the West through the provision of support and assistance to Ukraine’s defence.

Thirdly, Russia is doing its utmost to highlight, emphasise and exacerbate the difficulties and disagreements arising within the Western coalition itself (such as between the US and the EU, and between EU countries themselves), whilst emphasising/asserting that such disagreements are allegedly linked precisely to the ‘unfair’ treatment of Russia over Ukraine, which is supposed to prove the correctness/rightness of Russia’s actions.

Quotes from V. Putin’s speech:

• Relations between Russia and the West.

• The problem with the West’s attitude towards Russia lies in its geopolitical interests, its haughty attitude towards others and its self-confidence.

• The concept of sovereignty in today’s world is being denied, thrown ‘into the dustbin’; the world has been driven into an ‘us versus them’ confrontation, a vicious legacy of the 20th century.

• A certain section of the Western elite always needs an enemy, the struggle against whom can justify the need for military action and expansion, but it is also needed to maintain internal control within the hegemonic system.

• The history of the West is a ‘chronicle of endless expansion’. Western influence in the world is a vast military-financial pyramid, constantly in need of fresh fuel to sustain itself.

• The West has relentlessly sought to expand NATO’s borders towards Russia, and they are doing the same now with China in the East. NATO is an instrument of US foreign policy.

• The West’s relations with non-Western countries.

• It seems that for decades now, a pushy line has been pursued in Europe regarding NATO expansion, as well as in the Asia-Pacific region and South Asia. In these regions, attempts are being made to undermine the open and inclusive architecture of cooperation.

• The West is also trying to mould the Arab world into an image of the enemy. They are trying to create some kind of hostile environment out of Muslims in general.

• Western counterparts dictate who should behave how in the economy, and this is done in a boorish manner — this is a manifestation of colonial thinking. All of this is a manifestation of colonial thinking.

• Relations within the Western coalition.

• The West imposes artificial geopolitical constructs on the world and creates a ‘closed bloc format’; such an approach constitutes a restriction of states’ rights and freedoms.

• The US is imposing its economic agenda on Europe, attempting to replace laws with arbitrary rules; this is ‘utter nonsense’ and ‘nonsense’. In many Western countries, the ruling elites are forcing the adoption of norms and rules that the majority of the population does not want to accept, but are being compelled to do so.

• Many manufacturing businesses are relocating from Europe to the US due to cheaper energy costs; the standard of living in the EU is falling, having dropped by 1.5% in recent months.

• Many Europeans themselves say that Europe has lost its sovereignty. Europe imposed sanctions against Russia because it was forced to follow its American master.

The Ukrainian conflict

Key points from the speech:

On the one hand, Russia demonstrates an understanding that Western support for Ukraine will be long-lasting.

On the other hand, Russia’s main argument is based on the premise that Ukraine’s economy is completely unviable and ruined (due to Russia’s prolonged aggression), and that in this state, Ukraine will become an unbearable burden for the European Union, to which Russia allegedly has no objection, believing that the EU itself will refuse to accept such a devastated country because, in Russia’s view, the European economy is deteriorating in the run-up to the 2024 elections due to support for Ukraine. In Russia, it is emphasised that the Russian Federation is economically prepared to continue conducting the special military operation. Arguments have also been put forward justifying the build-up of the Russian Federation’s military capabilities in the Black Sea, allegedly due to threats from Ukraine’s security to the ‘Turkish Stream’.

The main stated objectives of the special military operation are the denazification of Ukraine and preventing Ukraine’s accession to NATO. In Russia, the establishment of a lasting peace (resolution of the Ukrainian conflict) is linked to the acceptance of security guarantees on Russian terms (the division of the world, including Ukraine, into zones and spheres of influence among global players). It has been publicly stated that in Russia, the issue of Ukraine’s territorial integrity has been directly linked to the implementation of the principles on which the new world order will be based.

Quotes from V. Putin’s speech:

• Aid to Ukraine

• The war, launched by the Kyiv regime with the active, direct support of the West, has been going on for ten years now. And the special military operation is aimed at bringing it to an end.

• In the US, there is a delay in providing support to Ukraine; this is linked to budgetary issues, but ultimately they will find the money – they will simply print more.

• Putin, speaking about the West’s support for Kyiv, stated that Russia is waiting for signs of common sense to emerge. Of course, they will manage; I see no problems. The problem lies in expanding production to increase the amount of money going towards the war and prolonging this conflict.

• Europe can only help Ukraine at the expense of further damaging its own economy and the situation of its citizens.

• Ukraine’s development

• Ukraine’s economy cannot survive without external support; if the external injections were to stop, it would collapse within a week. Ukraine is still trying to do something, but it is achieving very little.

• If the European Union is prepared to accept an economy such as Ukraine’s, then so be it. Russia has never objected to or spoken out against Ukraine’s accession to the European Economic Community, as the Russian Federation sees no military threat to itself in economic cooperation between any countries.

• SVO

• The Russian Armed Forces feel confident on the front line in Ukraine.

• Russia’s budget is coping and will continue to cope with the conduct of the special military operation.

• When asked ‘where can we stop during the SVO’, Putin stated that the issue is not about territories, but about guarantees for people’s security.

• Russia is calmly moving towards achieving its objectives during the special military operation.

• Our common goal is to achieve the denazification of Ukraine.

• Russia opposes Ukraine’s membership of NATO.

• Ukrainians are intent on damaging the ‘Turkish Stream’ and are attempting to attack it. Russian ships are guarding the pipeline systems laid along the seabed of the Black Sea. But they are constantly being targeted by drones, which are being prepared, in particular, with the direct involvement of English-speaking specialists and advisers.

• Lasting peace – guarantees of security

• Lasting peace will only be established when everyone feels safe, understands that their opinion is respected, and that there is balance in the world.

• It is impossible to ensure the security of some countries at the expense of others; harmony in this sphere is possible, but to achieve this, we must cast aside arrogance and not view our partners as savages. Russia advocates ‘common security and a lasting peace built on respect for all interests’ of both large and small states.

• The Ukrainian crisis is not a territorial conflict; Russia has no interest in reclaiming any territories. The issue is not even about establishing a regional geopolitical balance; the question is much broader and more fundamental — it concerns the principles on which the new world order will be based.

Six principles.

Indeed, Vladimir Putin has outlined six principles that Russia is striving for.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has outlined six principles that Russia is striving for and invites all friends and colleagues to join in upholding.

• ‘We must be aware of what we are striving for, what we want to achieve. And such an understanding exists in Russia. First — we want to live in an open, interconnected world, in which no one will ever attempt to erect artificial barriers to communication, to people’s creative fulfilment and prosperity. There must be a barrier-free environment,” said the president.

• Putin named the diversity of the world as the second principle, which must not simply be preserved but serve as the foundation for universal development. “Imposing on any country or people how they should live or feel must be prohibited,” he explained.

• Thirdly, according to the President, is maximum representation. “No one has the right or the ability to rule the world for others or on behalf of others. The world of the future is a world of collective decisions,” he explained. Decisions, according to Putin, must be taken at the level where they are most effective, and by those participants capable of making a significant contribution to resolving a specific problem. “No one decides for everyone, and not everyone decides on everything; rather, those directly affected by a particular issue agree on what to do and how to do it,” said the president.

• The fourth principle is common security and lasting peace, built on the interests of all – from major powers to small countries. Putin noted that the main thing is to free international relations from a bloc-based approach, from the legacy of the colonial era and the Cold War. “Harmony in this sphere is achievable; we simply need to cast aside pride and arrogance and stop viewing others as second-class partners or as outcasts or savages,” he added.

• “Fifth. We stand for justice for all. The era of exploiting anyone, as I have already said twice, is in the past. Countries and peoples are clearly aware of their interests and capabilities and are ready to rely on themselves, and this multiplies their strength. Access to the benefits of modern development must be ensured,” said the president. Attempts to restrict access, he said, should be regarded as an act of aggression.

• The sixth principle, the President emphasised, is equality. In his words, no one is prepared to submit any longer, or to make their interests and needs dependent on those who are richer or stronger. “This is the essence of all of humanity’s historical experience,” said the Head of State. The President stated that these are the principles Russia wishes to adhere to and invites all friends and colleagues to join in upholding.

This presentation of the theses can be viewed as:

• as an attempt by Russia to minimise the consequences of the G20 and the UN General Assembly – the recognition of common rules (the UN Charter) within a single space and the formation, on this basis, of the concept of shared values between the West and the Global South (partial consolidation), which run counter to Russia’s interests in imposing its own exceptionalism on the world, which may exacerbate its partial isolation;

• how Russia’s proposal for consolidation with the countries of the Global South – as an alternative model to the existing model of competition on fair terms within a single space governed by common rules – is being challenged by Russia, which has found itself in a state of partial isolation due to its violations and aggression against Ukraine.

Exploring the underlying meanings.

It can be assumed that this model of ‘principles of the world order’, linked in this way to the resolution of the Ukrainian conflict, will be adopted by Russia as a basis both in negotiations with mediators in the conflict (countries of the Global South, including China, India, South Africa and Brazil), and in negotiations directly with the West (the US, the EU and its partners/allies), and that it will push for progress on every point.

Such a model is aimed not so much at a qualitative change in the world order (as previously – from unipolarity to polycentricity), but rather at weakening the West’s influence within the single international space, at weakening consolidation within the Western coalition itself, at weakening or preventing the consolidation of the West and the countries of the Global South, at countering the ‘containment strategy’ (against Russia), the ‘competition strategy’ (against China) and the gradual strengthening of the influence of non-Western countries, which, as a result, should change international rules and standards to ones that are advantageous and acceptable to Russia and minimise its losses.