TRANSCRIPT: Dmitry Medvedev’s interview with CNN

(Government.ru – January 22, 2014) Dmitry Medvedev sat for an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour.

Christiane Amanpour: Let me start by asking you about the Sochi Olympics. This is a moment of great pride for Russia, great anticipation for the world’s athletes. And yet you have a major security threat and major security alert that your government and security forces have stated. Can you tell me what you know about this threat? How dangerous is it?

Dmitry Medvedev: As you rightly noted, it is truly a big event for Russia as well as for the world. The Olympics is always a major sports festival. We expect a large number of guests to come to Sochi, from Russia and elsewhere, to watch the Games.

In total, 1.2 million tickets have been sold, which is a lot for the Winter Olympics. As many as 3 billion people will be following the Olympics in some way, if we include TV. So it is going to be a great event and we are doing everything we can to make sure it’s a success.  At this stage, all the work has been completed, all the sports venues are ready to open, and everything has gone according to plan, even though it has been a long and painstaking process.

As for the security threats, they are quite common at public events around the world, not just in Russia, though the threats in Russia are of a specific nature. We have certainly taken them into account during the preparations for the Olympics, and we continue to do so. I am referring to the usual police mobilisation, ensuring that the Olympics is monitored by a sizeable police force. Other services will be involved if needed. We also kept a close eye on all the Olympic facilities during the entire construction process ­ this oversight had been planned from the very beginning. We watched who was building what and how.

Finally, events of this scale require general cooperation, because unfortunately, there have been various incidents in the history of such events. So we hope that we will work with our partners during the Olympics, including our American partners, with whom we have corresponding agreements, so as to counter any threat that might emerge.

But on the whole I am confident that everything will be fine and the Sochi Olympics will be excellent. We invite everyone to follow the Olympics, and the ticket holders to travel to Russia to watch it live.

Christiane Amanpour: Let me just ask you to be specific. The Russian security forces, the government has sent out an alert about a specific so-called “black widow,” who may have penetrated even the ring of steel around Sochi already and hotels have been told to look out for this person. Flyers and posters are being sent around. Given the amount of security that you’ve put in place, how is it possible that this could happen so close to the games?

Dmitry Medvedev: Well, it would be wrong to only rely on the security measures that are being taken today. As you know, we are locked in an intense fight against terrorism. Unfortunately, this is the reality we face in our country. So the existing threats, including the threat you just mentioned, occur not in the context of the Games, or not only in the context of the Games. We are constantly battling them. In some cases the measures we take are successful. In other cases, unfortunately, they do not have the expected result.

However, the fight will continue, Games or no Games. I want that to be clear to both our foreign partners and Russian citizens.

Christiane Amanpour: As you know, some international athletes are already expressing some fear, some nervousness. They see the tape, they see the posting online from these jihadists, who said, “We have a present for you at the Sochi Olympics. Wait and see what’s going to happen.” So they are worried about that. Even a US senator told CNN, “US athletes, don’t go to the Sochi Olympic Games!” This must be terribly worrying for you. Are you afraid that some people just might not turn up?

Dmitry Medvedev: Frankly, I don’t think the threat is greater at the Sochi Olympics than at other Olympics in other countries. We live in a global world. We have seen the tragic events that have taken place in other countries, including the United States, at sporting events. So it would be unfair and incorrect to claim that these threats are concentrated around Sochi.

Christiane Amanpour: You’re talking about the Boston Marathon?

Dmitry Medvedev: Yes, precisely. So it’s not true that US athletes will face unique threats. However, every individual, every US senator has the right to their own opinion on the issue. We are absolutely confident that we will be able to protect all the athletes who compete in the Sochi Olympics, and let me repeat that this will be an excellent Olympics.

Christiane Amanpour: Extraordinarily, some athletes have their own private security they’re coming with. The United States, apparently, has warships and planes, a whole evacuation plan if things don’t go according to plan and if there is any danger. The head of the House Intelligence Committee, Congressman Rogers, said to CNN, “They, the Russians, are not giving us the full story about the threat.” Who do we need to worry about? Are these people, terrorist groups who’ve had some success in the past, still plotting? Why is the United States saying that they are not getting full cooperation from Russia? Is that true?

Dmitry Medvedev: I believe that the cooperation between the special services of the United States and Russia is quite good. We have proved this in different situations, including, unfortunately, in the wake of terrorist attacks in our countries, in cooperation in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

However, I believe that these claims are an attempt to divert public attention from the situation in the country. Because I believe that in today’s world, considering that security threats are a global phenomenon, legislative and executive powers should above all deal with internal threats rather than talk about threats in other countries. All countries should do this, including the United States and Russia, and this is what we are doing.

Christiane Amanpour: So are you reassuring the United States that you are cooperating to the fullest?

Dmitry Medvedev: There is always room for improvement. Of course we can do better. But on the whole, we believe that there has been good cooperation between our security services, between the FBI and the FSB, especially with regard to the Olympic Games.

I believe that these ties are instrumental in dealing with a wide range of domestic issues, both in America and in Russia. I am sure that there will be good cooperation during the Olympics.

Is there room for improvement? I’m sure there is, because there are two elements in cooperation between security services which we must always keep in mind. First, each national security service has its own specific tasks, obviously. And second, the more often we work together in this sphere, the higher the level of mutual trust.

This is why large joint operations and efforts to resolve common problems in our countries, or in other countries, strengthen the spirit of mutual trust. I hope that the Olympics will be a case in point, because the Games are definitely a place where our security services can and should cooperate. This is not the Russian Olympics, but an international event that will be attended by people from many countries, including Americans. We eagerly await arrival of all guests.

Christiane Amanpour: The Chechen terrorist, Doku Umarov, there’s some discrepancy about whether he is dead or alive. As far as you know, is he alive? Is he dead?

Dmitry Medvedev: I think that until there’s solid proof that a certain terrorist is dead ­ without mentioning any names ­ the special services ought to list him as alive. Once there’s proof, then that terrorist can be taken off the list.

Christiane Amanpour: I’m going to come back to talk about other elements of the Games, but I want to move on to another major story happening right now, and that is the so-called peace conference, Geneva 2, trying to resolve the Syrian crisis. A hundred thousand plus people have been killed in the last three years in Syria. There is starvation in the land haunting many people. And there just doesn’t seem to be any way out of this. What are your real hopes for this Geneva 2 conference this week? Do you think that there is really going to be some kind of solution?

Dmitry Medvedev: I’m moderately optimistic about the conference. I can tell you that I carefully follow the developments in and around Syria. I actually began doing this when I was president because, according to the Russian Constitution, the president is responsible for foreign policy.

I remember when this issue first surfaced in discussions during the G8 summit in 2011. And I said that in my view there could be no military solution to the Syrian problem. Nor could sanctions help solve it ­ something that had been used on other countries before Syria.

I believe that subsequent events have clearly proved just that. First, this is an internal Syrian problem. This is not Russia’s problem or a US problem. This is not Iran’s or Saudi Arabia’s problem. Strictly speaking, it cannot be even referred to as the Arab world’s problem, although it is certainly related to the larger situation in the Middle East.

In my view, the problem is rooted in Syria and requires an internal settlement ­ but this is the most difficult part. The situation in Syria is sometimes simplified and interpreted as a conflict between the totalitarian, brutal regime of President Assad and an array of civilian forces that have taken him on.

But you and I both know that this is not so, or not exactly. Syria is a complex, multi-faith nation. If we shatter the balance that has taken shape there for decades, Syria will be a nation at war with itself.

We are already seeing some symptoms of this: Sunnis clashing with Shiites in society built on Alawites occupying key positions. There are Christians and the Druze as well. Syria is a huge multi-ethnic and multi-faith melting pot formed over decades which has now started boiling.

It is the international community’s responsibility to help restore national unity and reach a settlement. If we succeed, Geneva 2 will succeed as well. But there is still a long way to go.

And the last point I would like to make while we’re on the topic, this process has to involve all the interested countries ­ partners, neighbours, and other forces that occupy key positions in the Middle East.

I say this because of what happened recently. I am referring to the UN withdrawing Iran’s invitation to the conference, which was totally unacceptable. Does anyone think the Syrian issue can be seriously discussed without considering the Iranian factor? All factors need to be considered. So when the international community, or the United Nations, first sends an invitation and then withdraws it, it’s inconsistent and counterproductive.

Christiane Amanpour: Forgive me, Prime Minister, all of these things that are happening just seem to me to show the international community paralyzed. Nobody quite knows what to do. The West and the other Arab nations have done certain things, but they have not intervened, Secretary Kerry has recently said that Syria is the biggest magnet for terror of any place today – many would say because it’s been left to fester for the last three years. I know President Assad talks always about fighting terrorism, you also are very concerned about the terrorist threat, but would you not concede that there have just been too many people killed by the Assad regime? That this has got to somehow stop? And nobody seems to be doing anything to make it stop.

Dmitry Medvedev: The trouble is that, unfortunately, there is a civil war in Syria. Who is to blame for this? I believe that all the forces in Syria that have been trying to influence this process are to blame. I am not idealising Assad. As President Putin and I have said, Assad is not one of Russia’s strategic partners. It was mostly our European colleagues and partners who were friendly with Assad.

On the other hand, we cannot deny that there are at least several angles to this situation. I remember 2011 and what I said then ­  that we should have convinced all parties to enter into negotiations long ago, to launch a process of national reconciliation, make the necessary amendments to the constitution, start a national dialogue and hold elections.

I remember phoning the president (of Syria) to say this. Unfortunately, none of this has been done. But it would be wrong to put all the blame on the ruling regime, because we understand that a diverse group of forces are opposing the government. Some are ordinary people dissatisfied with their government, which is understandable. But there are also outrightcriminals. I think this is the right name for those who call themselves the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. They are criminals and terrorists. They are al Qaeda. Can you hold talks with them?

So the situation is extremely complicated. I’d like to repeat that the only path to settlement in Syria is national dialogue, while also making use of international instruments such as the meeting in Switzerland.

Christiane Amanpour: I want to show you a picture. This is a pretty shocking picture. It shows an emaciated Syrian. And these are pictures that a defector, who used to be military police in Syria, brought out. There is 55,000 pictures seeming to show that 11,000 people, prisoners, were killed by the Assad regime and an international panel of jurists, very highly respected, have testified to the credibility of this defector. Again, what is your reaction? This is a direct accusation that would stand up in court, according to these jurists, against the Assad regime.

Dmitry Medvedev: You know, when I was still a law student at my alma mater, my professors taught me that a person is innocent until proven guilty. It’s called the presumption of innocence. I believe this principle applies to everyone, both ordinary people and political leaders.

If an international court established by either the United Nations or another institution duly proves that international crimes took place, then both the regime and the specific actors can be held accountable. Otherwise these are just allegations.

I know that there are many victims, which is very tragic. But the fact that deaths have occurred or deaths in a specific place does not prove that these are victims of the regime rather than the criminals operating there or some other force. As you know, the territory in Syria is controlled by several groups and not fully controlled by the ruling regime.

Christiane Amanpour: These come from, according to the defector, and corroborated by international jurists, who were chief prosecutors at UN tribunals, so very respectable, distinguished jurists from Britain and the United States, apparently in a Syrian government detention facility. 11,000 people killed since 2011 by starvation, by strangulation, by heavy, heavy beating. In fact, I’ve got another picture, which I can show you if you want, but I…

Dmitry Medvedev: I’ve seen some as well. I understand. These pictures are very sad. What we see is the sad consequences of the conflict we are talking about. But I want to make sure that we understand each other. So let me repeat: all these crimes ­ and these are definitely crimes ­ have to be recorded and substantiated by evidence. After that, cases can be made against the government or its opponents, but we need proof first.

Furthermore, this all should be done as part of regular criminal proceedings. We cannot pass any judgement on the Syrian regime, on Bashar Assad, or on any party fighting him just because we believe their actions were criminal. Evidence needs to be gathered, organized and recorded, and later used as basis to make a case in court. This would be the right way to proceed, I think.

But, apart from what already happened, it is important to make sure it doesn’t happen in the future.

Christiane Amanpour: The jurists say this would stand up in an international tribunal and would be proof of crimes against humanity and could be proof of war crimes. I understand that the legal process has to play out, but if they did, would you condemn President Assad? I’ve never heard you condemn him. I’ve never heard any Russian official condemn him for 11,000 deaths and these kinds of pictures.

Dmitry Medvedev: This is exactly what I have said ­ that such circumstances should be considered as they come to light. It doesn’t matter where the blame is put: on one person or the regime as a whole. But let’s look to international practice, to the practice of trials that have been held before, for example in Nuremberg. Proof was collected and presented at the trials, and as a result a number of criminals were convicted. This is a normal, civilised path based on international law rather than emotions.

I’d like to say again that we don’t exonerate anyone. We don’t have favourites or those who we immediately labelled criminals, and we believe that this approach should be practised by all parties to the conflict. We cannot simply say that Assad is a criminal. He is the current head of state and cannot be ignored.

The situation in the country is extremely complicated, and so the main task of the international community is to try to help settle this conflict, and only after that decide who is to blame. It is possible that a trial will be held in Syria after the conflict is settled. After all, the Syrian people have the right to do this.

Christiane Amanpour: You said that President Assad is the President of Syria. I don’t know whether you noticed what he said this week on television, that there is a very big chance that because of public opinion in Syria, he would run again for another term in office. What is your reaction to that and do you believe that is a helpful statement right now, when there is meant to be some kind of attempt to resolve this between the regime and the opposition?

Dmitry Medvedev: It is not easy for me to discuss this issue at the moment, because, frankly speaking, I am more involved in domestic policy issues right now: I am busy preparing for the Olympics and managing Russia’s economy. We are trying to deal with a range of complicated issues related to the country’s development. So I am actually far less involved with Syria, because as I already said, the president conducts Russia’s foreign policy.

Nevertheless, since you’ve asked such detailed questions, here is what I can tell you: We are absolutely convinced that to reach a final settlement and stabilize Syria, it is indispensable to bring together at the negotiating table all those who influence the situation in one way or another. It is impossible to ignore the current government. I cannot say what Assad’s political future will be. But I know him. I have been in Syria and met him, unlike many who are now telling the Syrians what they should do, what’s good in their country and what’s bad.

In fact, when I visited Syria it was a stable and fairly tolerant country, but that’s in the past now. In any case, they need to sit down together and negotiate and make decisions about their future, but this is their own business. As for the international community, their business is to help as much as they can, but not disrupt the negotiating process.

We don’t think it’s entirely appropriate for some of Syria’s neighbors to make statements about fighting a war to the bitter end and to say that they will not negotiate with Assad over anything, ever. I think that by doing this, our partners are provoking further conflict and creating an environment that will lead to still more casualties. We need to try and ease tensions, not fuel them. This is our message, so to speak, to all those taking part in the negotiations.

Christiane Amanpour: We’re going to continue our conversation, Mr Prime Minister, about Russia’s economy, which is your main area of responsibility. Obviously for many years Russia’s economy was exploding on the back of high energy prices, high oil and natural resource prices. Over the last year or so, growth has sputtered to about 1.3%. How difficult and challenging is it for you to move the engine of the Russian economy again?

Dmitry Medvedev: We are basically facing two problems. One is external and the other is internal. The external problem is obvious. It is the aftermath of the global financial crisis. The global economy is not in the best state. Most economies are experiencing difficulties. The European economy is in an extremely difficult situation. Europe is our major partner, with trade equalling almost $410 billion. Its depressed economy cannot help but affect the Russian economy.

Unfortunately, ours is still a commodity-based economy that relies largely on energy exports.

So the main problem is the structure of the Russian economy, the structure of production and, of course, the structure of exports. If the structure were different, we would be more independent from global markets. Of course, we would still be dependent on them, all economies are ­ Japan, the US, Europe, China.

However, our main task is to change the current structure and create a new, high-tech economy powered by knowledge and innovation. This goal is hard but achievable considering that Russia is a powerful country with highly educated workforce and a good foundation built in the 20th century. This is what we are currently focused on achieving.

Christiane Amanpour: One news reporter, business magazine, said that you, Prime Minister, are hanging onto your job, clinging onto your job because the president, Putin, is not happy with the state of the economy. Is that true? Is your job in danger?

Dmitry Medvedev: We are all worried about the state of our economies. But the figure you cited is not quite correct. Last year our economy grew by 1.4%. This may not be much, but it’s also not a disaster, considering the situation in Europe or in the American economy. Our growth rates are comparable, in fact.

But we have a low debt to GDP ratio, actually a better one, to be blunt. Our sovereign and domestic debt is only 10.7% of GDP. Compare this to the US or European figures. We also have low inflation by Russian standards. We definitely need to reduce it, but it is quite low for Russia compared to ten years ago: slightly more than 6%. And lastly, we have low unemployment, only approximately 5.5%.

So I’d say that our economic situation is normal. But on the other hand, no one is happy about it: I’m not happy and the President is certainly not happy, and those who deal with the economy are not happy either. Because we must do better, we must make a breakthrough to attain the kind economic growth I’ve been talking about. If we succeed, we will achieve the goals we have set for the country.

Christiane Amanpour: And of course there are many people around the world who want to do business in Russia. You have a huge, as you said, educated population, which would rather stay here than brain drain as they are doing now, fleeing. Now the OECD had a report recently in which they said your problems are not just structural in terms of the economy, but the economy is at a crossroads. It’s being held back by poor governance, they say, and rule of law issues. For instance, this report says only 10% of entrepreneurs have never encountered bribery. In other words, presumably 90% of business people trying to work here have to pay bribes or there’s corruption. Corruption is a huge problem according to business people here. Do you admit that? And what about governance, what about the rule of law that can give investors the trust to able to do the kind of business that you need here?

Dmitry Medvedev: I do not know which OECD report you are referring to exactly, but I recently met with the OECD head at the Gaidar Forum, MrGurria. He said the crisis looks better in Russia than in other countries.

He actually sounded very optimistic about Russia’s economic situation, too ­ although these could have been the polite words of a guest praising our hospitality. But on the whole, I cannot say that the OECD has made any critical assessments. Quite the contrary, most of their comments were rather complimentary of Russia. But these statements should not delude us, of course.

You have cited a whole list of problems, and I certainly admit that they exist. But if we consider the biggest challenges we are facing, the most important would probably be fostering a normal business environment.

This is not only about corruption, although this is certainly an ill. It affects the business climate and irritates our people ­ not just business people, but everyone. But from a broader perspective, this is not simply about corruption ­ it also involves the weakness of our institutions that are responsible for shaping the business climate. It needs to be acknowledged, however, for the sake of objectivity, that corruption exists everywhere around the world. The problem is that in Russia it has reached a far greater scale than in Soviet times, possibly after we transitioned to a free market.

So this problem remains on our agenda. But let me stress that the institutional problem is no less important. I am referring to the court system and executive authorities. I am talking about the need to obtain all the permits quickly enough to start a business and run it without major problems at least as long as the company complies with Russian laws and pays taxes in Russia, that is, if it follows the rules.

This is what we are working on. We have actually created a system of so-called business roadmaps. Each of the roadmaps has to do with a specific problem, such as customs, taxes, incorporating a business, and a range of other factors that affect the business climate. We are moving forward with these roadmaps, while international organizations are assessing our progress, in particular the OECD, which you mentioned. Their assessment is based on a set of special indicators.

So in this sense, I would say we are making good progress, even though it is not as fast as we would like. But even looking at one of the most indicative rankings, Doing Business, we have moved up several dozen spots over the past year. Again, there has been some progress, though probably not as much as we’d like.

Christiane Amanpour: Of course, all of this is in sharp relief again because of Sochi, the Russian government says that the cost of these Olympics is $6.4 billion, but others… Is that correct? What is the cost of the Olympics?  6.4? The reason I ask you is because everybody else is saying that it’s $50 billion.

Dmitry Medvedev: I’ll explain where the numbers come from. Here is the situation. When we launched the Olympic projects, we knew that we would have to hold the Olympic Games in a region where no Olympic facilities existed. This is not central Europe, or some developed city in Russia or the Untied States. This is a seaside resort, and we’re hosting the Winter Olympics in complex mountain conditions. So we understood that spending on the Games would be considerable.

However, I’d like to separate preparations for the Games, such as sport facilities and the Olympic infrastructure, from the development of Sochi. These are two different sets of figures, because the Olympic Games will end, but Sochi will have completely new infrastructure.

Spending on the Olympics is slightly more than 200 billion roubles, or approximately as much as you said in US dollars.

But overall spending on the development of Sochi ­ roads, hotels, the railway, overcoming complicated infrastructure challenges that have been accumulating in Sochi for years… They didn’t have a reliable sewage system, you know, and there were problems with electricity, routine blackouts… So spending on all of this is much larger, but it is money invested in the development of one of our regions. What have we achieved by doing this?

Christiane Amanpour: So is $50 billion a reasonable figure then for developing a region?

Dmitry Medvedev: If we’re talking about developing the region, yes.

Christiane Amanpour: So that figure is accurate, as you say, in terms of, first you’ve got the Olympic figure, then you’ve got the development figure?

Dmitry Medvedev: Yes, that’s absolutely correct. The first figure is the cost of the Olympics and the second figure is the development of the region. Because in preparing for the Olympic Games we were actually making improvements in the region. I will quote some figures on the results up to now. First of all, we have created 500,000 jobs, which is important for local residents. The unemployment rate has basically gone down to zero. Not to mention the newly built infrastructure facilities, projects, roads, bridges, tunnels, railways, water and power supply systems. But in human terms, there are now 500,000 new jobs.

So when we speak about large figures, we should understand that the money has been spent on the development of a major Russian region.

Christiane Amanpour: You’re not concerned that some of that money has gone into people’s pockets, that it’s been skimmed, it’s corrupt?

Dmitry Medvedev: This is similar to the question you asked regarding the international problems. Of course, this requires an investigation. If there is proof that some funds have been stolen or there were incidents of corruption ­ and we have begun inquiries into a number of cases ­ then we will be able to speak about the scale of corruption. Currently, there is no evidence. There is no data on whether the corruption related to the Olympics is much higher than the average level of corruption in the country.

But that’s just impossible. I admit that Russia is not ideal in this respect. But it doesn’t mean that Sochi is its own separate enclave with an entirely different situation. Some of my foreign partners have commented on this issue, and when they do, they should be guided by legal criteria instead of idle speculation or emotion.

There is one more factor that I have to mention. In Sochi and the entire region the environment has improved significantly, which is very important. The quality of water is better. The sea is cleaner because we have installed new water treatment facilities. This aspect, although often overlooked, is very important.

Christiane Amanpour: OK, you’re right. It is important to help improve the environment. Let me get back to some political questions. In an interview that you gave, before you gave this one, a few years ago, you obviously consider yourself a democrat ­ you said once that we are well aware that no non-democratic state has ever become truly prosperous for one simple reason: freedom is better than no freedom. You still believe that? OK.

People looking at Russia are shocked, disappointed, worried, concerned about what looks like a distinct lack of freedom. We see, certainly President Putin, really controlling the opposition to the point that the opposition, the political opposition has no space. It’s irrelevant. What about gay rights here in Russia? I know it’s not illegal in Russia, but we have done so many reports on gay people here who are changing the way they behave, who are scared, gay couples who are afraid because of this new law their children are going to be taken away from them. Things do not look good on the freedom front here in Russia. Surely that must concern you because it’s about your reputation, it’s about your people, your governance, your ability to prosper?

Dmitry Medvedev: It seems to me that the real situation in this country and your interpretation of it exist in two parallel worlds. This is worrying to me, although I agree that we need to understand each other and to speak the same language for us to be able to develop as a member of the community of modern democratic states.

It’s true that I once said that freedom is better than no freedom, and I haven’t changed my opinion. There is no doubt about this. But when I hear people say that the atmosphere, the overall situation in the country has become gloomy, difficult and complicated, that rights are infringed upon…

Christiane Amanpour: No, I’m talking about in terms of human rights, democracy, the ability to challenge politically. That’s a basic democratic right.

Dmitry Medvedev: Yes, this is exactly what I mean. I believe that none of this is true.

Christiane Amanpour: But there’s no opposition parties!

Dmitry Medvedev: Regarding the opposition, we now have four parliamentary parties. Of these, only one party is associated with the ruling government. It is the party I head, which is called United Russia. This is normal, because the party has a parliamentary majority. We have three other political forces represented in parliament. One of them is our predecessor on the political stage, the Communist Party, which ruled the country for a long time. It has a large parliamentary group in the State Duma. Another party is Spravedlivaya Rossiya, which is a social democratic party. And there are also the Liberal Democrats. These three political parties have nearly half of the seats in parliament, and not the party that is associated with me, which President Putin headed only recently. Moreover, when I held the post of president, I initiated a law simplifying the registration of political parties. And now we have about a hundred parties. They represent a wide variety of political forces. Some of them are big and others are small. So it would be wrong to say that there is no place for political opposition in Russia.

Christiane Amanpour: But so many of them are in jail, including journalists who dissent.

Dmitry Medvedev: With all due respect for journalists, I must say, fist, that journalists are human and can make mistakes, and second, there are exaggerations. It is not serious to say that no policy other than the policy of the main political party is tolerated here. We have a rich political life.

Again, there are parliamentary political parties and also young parties that are still trying to break into parliament. Politics here are rather stormy, complicated and very eventful.

Those who are unable to achieve their political goals argue that we interfere with them, and prevent them from winning seats in parliament and achieving their political goals. But this is also what the leaders of some marginal political and sectarian groups say in other countries too. If you put this question to the leaders of small political parties in other countries, they will say that they would be in charge if not for the government. They should work towards their goals, explain their goals and their policies to people, explain why they are doing what they are doing. I’m referring to parties here.

As for civil freedoms and legislation, opinions vary. Everyone has the right to their own opinion, including journalists and analysts, both Russian and foreign. But speaking about the general structure, the constitutional structure, the legislative structure, which ensures the balance of interests and regulates the fundamental rights and freedoms of our people, it has not changed one iota since the adoption of the Constitution in 1993. You have mentioned a number of high profile laws. Frankly speaking, I believe that all these arguments…

Christiane Amanpour: You’re talking about the anti-gay propaganda law?

Dmitry Medvedev: Yes, among others. These arguments are either entirely based on emotion or not connected in any way with the real situation in the country. Note that most of the time, in 95% of cases if not more, these arguments are coming from outside Russia. But no one is talking about this issue in our country.

Christiane Amanpour: Mr Prime Minister, many Russians are telling us they are terrified. Many are leaving. Gay people. People are worried. People are worried about their future. What would you do to reassure them then?

Dmitry Medvedev: If you are referring to the situation surrounding the law on the propaganda of so-called ‘non-traditional values’, I believe that only a negligible part of the Russian population is actually concerned about this. That’s my first point.

Second, so far I have heard virtually nothing about this law actually being applied in practice. There is a lot of talk, but the law has not been applied anywhere.

Third, unlike many countries ­ something I have discussed many times ­ unlike many countries where this kind of sexual relationship is banned, in Russia it isn’t.

Therefore, I think all this talk has little to do with what’s actually happening in Russia or with the rights of sexual minorities in Russia. I haven’t heard of a single representative of Russia’s sexual minorities complaining, not even on the Internet, about their rights being abused.

As you know, Russia fully guarantees freedom of expression: people are free to express their opinions on the Internet about the government, the president, the prime minister or anyone else. I am an active Internet user. I haven’t seen a single instance in which a member of one of these non-traditional sexual communities ­ in Russia I mean ­ complained that their rights are being abused in any way.

And yet this caused an uproar outside Russia. So I think this is an artificial problem. If we find out that the rights of some group are being abused, no matter which group, we will certainly sit down and amend our legislation to stop this. But at this point, there are absolutely no problems with the law you are talking about. The problem is non-existent.

Christiane Amanpour: Prime Minister Medvedev, thank you very much indeed for joining me.

Dmitry Medvedev: Thank you so much.

[featured image is file photo]