Question: Will it be difficult to drive and talk all at once? Self-control and all that... you will be inevitably distracted.

Vladimir Putin: No, let’s do it. Matter of fact, I’m having a break right now. Probably the first break in a decade or so.

Question: What is more difficult to handle — political issues or economic matters?

Vladimir Putin: Everything is difficult as long as you are trying to do it the way it should be done. As difficult as it is interesting, for that matter. The more specific the task, the more difficult it is to accomplish... Generally speaking, political decisions appear to be more global. Meaning that they have an effect on absolutely all aspects of life. On everything, in other words. It requires considerably more responsibility therefore when one makes political decisions. On the other hand, there is always or nearly always a chance to correct something in economic matters when the initial decision failed to live up to the expectations. Corrections in politics are much more difficult to carry through.

Question: Are there any decisions you would like to correct?

Vladimir Putin: No.

Question: How is that possible? In «a decade or so»?

Vladimir Putin: I mean it. There are no decisions I wish I never made or wish I made differently.

Well, there are probably things I could have done somewhat differently, with more in terms of wisdom put into decision- making. Generally speaking, however, ... mistakes from the standpoint of choice... What I mean is that they used to castigate us every now and then, and mercilessly at that, for what they called greed. We were blamed for transacting too much into the reserves. Gold and hard currency reserves, reserves of the Central Bank... and the government’s reserves to boot. «Why stash it away?» our critics demanded to know. «We ought to be developing infrastructure, real economy, financial system... Give this money to the people.» Well, we did. I mean we did give away what we thought necessary — as subsidies, allotments, and so on. We poured money into national projects. And yet, we always knew that there would be crises to weather, global crises, when we would need everything we would have saved up. Besides, it is common knowledge I believe that you do not pour into economy the money this economy did not earn in the first place.

I’m talking about oil and gas export revenues, of course. You do not pour them into economy however pressing the reason to do so is. Do so, and it will but advance export-oriented industries and not the ones that meet and encourage the domestic demand. The Central Bank and economic ministries of the government did what they could to prevent it from happening. Unfortunately, they appear to have failed.

Question: Meaning that some mistakes were made after all.

Vladimir Putin: And the moment our domestic market dwindled, our makers of steel, fertilizers, and metals... they found themselves with products they could not sell because there was nobody available to sell them to. Their products were too expensive for the domestic market and absolutely unwanted elsewhere. It became a double blow — one at the price and the other at the output. Had we been able to impede the processes we’ve already mentioned, it would have been different. Economic development would have been better balanced. Shall we reproach the government for it? Yes, we probably shall.

Question: Considering how long you are in the corridors of power already, would you say that there are things that you alone are capable of accomplishing?

Vladimir Putin: No, I do not think so. What I think... what I believe, rather, is that we need a stable mechanism of Russian statehood. Our statehood ought to develop immunity to domestic problems and external pressures. We must be able to rely on its stability and sturdiness. We need a well-balanced relationship within the powers-that-be and between the powers-that-be and civil society. We need genuine division of powers. Each branch of the government ought to be self-sufficient and competent. And each should be supreme in its own bailiwick.

Question: Do you perhaps see the light where nobody else is seeing it?

Vladimir Putin: I do. What we are doing convinces me that we are on the right track.

Surely, we could not help taking hard facts of life into account. Disintegration of the U.S.S.R. brought with it collapse of the financial system and social framework as well. Economy started going apart because it had been oriented on the domestic market alone. It had been an economic Iron Curtain when consumption was restricted only to the domestic produce of whatever quality.

What we have these days is a transition period economy, one serviced by political system of a transition period. Development of economy will inevitably be accompanied by betterment in politics because more a mature economy will require different ways and means of political regulation.

Question: The impression is that you perceive and bear in mind too many dangers that do not really exist. The episode with [rock singer] Yuri Shevchuk at your charity meeting recently. It is said nowadays that this was a meeting with the singer exactly and nothing more.

Vladimir Putin: So what? I was told that he was a singer.

Question: Was that why you asked him to identify himself? Could it be that you only knew him for a singer without knowing anything else about who he was?

Vladimir Putin: I did not know his name if that’s what you mean.

Question: How could you live in St.Petersburg and not know Shevchuk?

Vladimir Putin: Stranger things happened. There are lots of gifted people in St.Petersburg, and Shevchuk is but one of them. I remember as well that I was told later on that he was quite opposition-minded. Well, that’s fine by me. Thank God, we live in a country where people can say whatever is on their minds. As for me, I did not even want to argue with him.

Question: But you did. And the conversation turned out to be just great. What the doctor ordered, as they say.

Vladimir Putin: I’m not at liberty to pass judgements.

Question: I am, then. It was great. Shevchuk said what he had come to say. You did, too. No casualties.

Vladimir Putin: Well, I do not think that this whole episode was anything earthshaking. Just a routine meeting. There were lots of questions there as I recall, and they were supposed to be sharply-worded and critical but they were not. All they appeared interested in was whether or not the police would keep dispersing...

Question: Dissenters?

Vladimir Putin: Right. Look, all our opponents stand for a law-governed state. What is a law-governed state? A state where the law is abided by. What does acting legislation say about protests and demonstrations and whatever else? That their organizers need official permit from the authorities. You have the permit, you are welcome to protest or whatever until you are blue in the face. You lack the permit, stay at home. If you do not, you run the risk of getting into trouble with the police. It’s as simple as that.

Question: Is that? In a law-governed state? The authorities made Triumfalnaya Square unavailable allegedly for reconstruction — and that without a plan, blueprints, or any documents at all.

Vladimir Putin: Believe me, I do not know what you are talking about. I mean, I do not know the particulars. You have my word that I do not. I do not handle this sort of matters. I did not know Shevchuk any more than I knew that they used to meet on Triumfalnaya Square regularly. Yes, I was told every now and then that some people rallying there had been dispersed. «Why disperse them?» — «Because they had a permit to meet elsewhere but they obstinately went to Triumfalnaya Square all the same.» — «And why would they do it?»

I’m telling you, I do not know what it all is about. If they have something to say and want to say it, there are better ways of doing it. They ought to invite journalists with and without TV cameras — domestic, Western, I don’t care — unfold their flag with skull or whatever it is that they have there, and say that «Hey, guys, we’ve seen you all in. .. » (here they say where exactly) and that «We will keep criticizing you unless we get what we demand.»

That’s how things ought to be done. But they... they were after something altogether different here. Their objective was different. They were out to defy the acting legislation, to show that they demanded a law-governed state for everyone else but themselves, to keep provoking the police into mistreating them. All of that in order to be able to say, after pouring some fake blood all over themselves, that this anti-people’s regime was mistreating them and encroaching on human rights and civil liberties.

When provocations are all one is interested in, provocations it will be. When the objective is sending a message to general public domestically and abroad, there is then no need to break the law, is there?

I know where you are leading. If the objective is forcing concessions on the powers-that-be, and if the powers-that-be do buckle under, then provocations will become endless. They will be staged again and again.

Question: There is a person you would like to meet with and talk to... Without provocations.

Vladimir Putin: And who might it be?

Question: Dmitry Medvedev.

Vladimir Putin: Come on. I did not mean it like that.

Question: Didn’t you? You said that you would sit down, talk it over, and make the decision together. Very many decided that you were talking about who was going to be the next president. But you probably meant which one of you would be designated, right?

Vladimir Putin: That’s how things are done worldwide. U.S. presidents normally designate a successor when they are about to step down. And what’s wrong with having the leaving president suggest a person he knows as integral, competent, and decent?

Question: Nothing wrong, but that’s when political wars begin in all earnest and this man loses.

Vladimir Putin: Sometimes he does, indeed. Albert Gore did lose in his days. Well, it happens. Bush’s candidate lost too, later on. It’s life. The president designated someone, voters turned the man down. So what? Another person will come up and, when about to leave, designate someone else. That’s how things are done all over the world. What’s wrong with adopting it in Russia?

Question: When it is practiced in the West, there is at least a fighting chance for other candidates to defeat the designated person. In Russia, they have no chance at all. Whatever individual the departing president designated, this individual becomes the president. It will be interesting who Medvedev will designate. He might designate himself or you. And your words that you will meet and talks it over and thrash it out merely extended the suspense.

Vladimir Putin: They did nothing of the sort. Come on. Had I never said it, you’d have invented something else. Not you personally, but...

Question: Pollsters reported a fall of your and the president’s rating. Are you aware of it, on the personal level?

Vladimir Putin: No, I’m not. Besides, I’m kind of busy to keep track of ratings. Ratings go up and own. Life is not easy, particularly considering the crisis. We are doing what we can but not all of that reaches out to everybody out there.

And when something fails to reach out, then the assumption is that I’ve been underperforming. Well, there might be something to this assumption.

Question: The impression is that Russia is immune to changes altogether. Whatever major project is launched, it will inevitably get stuck somewhere, at some level, where some state officials or others will decide that they are better off the way things are. Do you ever get this impression? And what feelings does it generate, if you do? Despair? Frustration?

Vladimir Putin: I’ll be on the level with you: I always consider things from the standpoint of their importance. Whenever I believe that a problem is sufficiently important, I stop thinking in terms of political or administrative costs. Actually, I do not even think about personal consequences. As long as I’m convinced that something is really needed, that Russia needs this, then I mobilize myself. Sure, there are problems that take decades to solve. Say, the problem of tenements.

I’m going to try and formulate an idea. The more a politician cares about his rating, the more certain its eventual loss. Because he starts thinking in terms of effect on the rating and not in terms of effectiveness. It tells on the final results, you know.

Question: What do you think about journalists? Are they inevitable evil?

Vladimir Putin: There are journalists and journalists. Generally speaking, it is like pain. Nothing to look forward to but sometimes necessary all the same.

Question: There was an episode in your book «Straight From» where you recalled how, when a kid or teenager, you had cornered a rat...

Vladimir Putin: Yeah, I remember. Once it realized that it had been cornered, it turned on me. I barely got away.

Question: And that taught you to never corner an opponent?

Vladimir Putin: It did.

Question: Why did you corner Mikhail Khodorkovsky then?

Vladimir Putin: I didn’t. Khodorkovsky is serving his time, that’s something he brought on himself. Sorry, I did not do it.

Question: Are you keeping an eye on the trial under way?

Vladimir Putin: To tell you the truth, I did not even know that there was another trial under way. After all, he was already serving his time. Well, all I can say is that if a trial is under way, then the investigation must have uncovered something serious enough to warrant it.

Question: It’s like you are absolutely unconcerned in connection with the so called problem’2012. You appear uninterested as if you already decided everything.

Vladimir Putin: I’m not as uninterested as I might look. It’s just that I have other things, more important things, to think about. Generally speaking, development of the country is quite stable. I do not perceive any serious problems looming close. Sure, the crisis did throw some sand into machinery... On the other hand, it highlighted priorities for us to concentrate on. The way I see it, what really counts at this point is preventing undue concentration on 2012. Of course, there will be political wars yet — there are always political wars in periods like that — and these political wars will distract society and the state from economic matters but that’s the price we ought to pay to retain competitiveness of the state as such and society.

Question: Your famous Munich speech. Would you say that its theses retain significance nowadays?

Vladimir Putin: All I can say is that I never wished I had never made this speech. I told the audience the truth, after all.

Question: Grasping this truth certainly took long, didn’t it?

Vladimir Putin: It did. It took me years to grasp it in all its complexity. As it turned out, it all was simple. We were deceived. We were promised one thing and we got something altogether different. When we were pulling out of East Europe, NATO formally told us that we could rest assured that there would be no expansion of the Alliance beyond the then borders. That’s essentially what I asked the Western community in Munich. And they did not even have anything to reply. It had been banal deception. Unfortunately, deception is one of the most frequently used instruments in politics even now, and we cannot help bearing it in mind.

Consider the latest episode with a Russian national who was bagged in Africa allegedly for drugs and extradited to the United States. His American lawyer formulated it perfectly, I think. He said: here is a Russian suspected to be a drug-dealer by the authorities of some African country. What does the United States have to do with it? Perfectly said. Again, the prosecution could not answer the question. They had a foreign citizen arrested and extradited to the United States. Is that a way to behave?

From this standpoint, yes, I do believe that theses of the Munich speech retain importance nowadays.

Question: Here is a question then. Do you have faith in the so called «reload»?

Vladimir Putin: I sincerely want to. Second, I want the «reload» because I happen to think that we all need it. Third, I do see that the U.S. Administration seeks to improve the relations with Russia. All of that is great but there are other nuances as well. Georgia is being rearmed all over again. Why? What for? One such rearmament several years ago resulted in bloodshed. Do they want another war or what?

Next, the European ballistic missile defense framework. We seem to have reached an agreement that there will be no missile killers in Poland and keep working on the matter of a radar in the Czech Republic. And hey presto, we are told that Washington intends to install all these elements in other East European countries. Where is this vaunted «reload» then?

The impression I got is that Obama is sincere. I do not know what he can accomplish and what is beyond him, but I’d like to see where he succeeds and where he fails. What counts is that he wants to accomplish it. That’s great.

Question: A few words about another president. President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko. Moscow appears to be through with him... The information campaign in Russian media, the documentary...

Vladimir Putin: I didn’t see it, by the way.

Question: Really? You should. That’s some persuasive footage indeed. I suspect that a great deal of the Russians changed their opinion of Lukashenko after this documentary. What Lukashenko said about you personally, were you insulted perhaps?

Vladimir Putin: I do not even remember whatever he said, believe it or not.

"Kommersant"