My position is that the rate should align with the level of economic development. Because it is always about a balance, a balance of interests, and it should reflect this balance. A balance between those who sell something across the border and those who benefit from a low rate, as well as a balance between the interests of those who buy, who need the rate to be higher. A balance between national producers, for example, agricultural producers who are interested in it.

We see that leaders in Western Europe [there are some debates of course, we also see that and analyse it all] stick to, I cannot say right or wrong ones, it always depends on someone's view, but I think, very pragmatic approaches in addressing economic issues.

Some Western politicians are already threatening us with not just sanctions, but also the prospect of increasingly serious problems on the domestic front. I would like to know what it is they have in mind exactly: action by a fifth column, this disparate bunch of 'national traitors', or are they hoping to put us in a worsening social and economic situation so as to provoke public discontent? We consider such statements irresponsible and clearly aggressive in tone, and we will respond to them accordingly.

However, personally, I see this as not having the right to abuse this trust [among the citizens of Russia and Japan], and any decision we reach should correspond to the national interests of the Russian Federation.

The Russian people chose democracy at the beginning of the 1990s and this was their final choice.

We have made mistakes! We were too late. If we had presented our national interests more clearly from the beginning, the world would still be in balance today.

It is well known that homosexuality is a criminal offense in the United States, in four US states. If it is good or bad, we know the decision of the Constitutional Court, but this problem has not been dealt with yet, it is still being addressed by the legislation of the United States. This is not the case in Russia.