The media started talking about the trip of the Russian president to Paris. Not in a romantic trip, but in an important matter: to open an exhibition in Versailles, dedicated to Peter I. Will Vladimir Vladimirovich take advantage of the opportunity to meet personally with the new French President Emmanuel Macron, who until quite recently the Kremlin propaganda put sticks in the wheel during the election campaign?.

The well-known Italian Federica Mogherini, the highest representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, allowed herself to pronounce a truly blasphemous thing: that Russia is not a superpower. Say, GDP per capita is not enough ... Meanwhile, in Ukraine, battles continue around two "church" bills. Against the documents in which the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate has never been mentioned, a whole front has emerged - beginning with the head of the ROC, Patriarch Cyril and ending with Orthodox Ukrainian grandmothers, confident that the Ukrainian "junta" intends to take their churches from them.

His opinion on all three topics with the "Observer" was shared by the Russian politician, the president of the All-Russian public movement "Union of Right Forces" Leonid Gozman.

- Why does Putin really go to France? Does he plan to meet with Macron? Will he meet? And if so, will it be able to bargain for themselves?.

"I do not know if his meeting with the French president is planned, but it is clear that Putin wants to break through international isolation, which is becoming increasingly difficult and increasingly painful for Russia.

In addition, I think there is a special task - to give a positive signal to President Macron, because during the election campaign, those who are in charge of propaganda, of course, made a very big mistake and stupidity, openly side with Marin Le Pen and conducting very A tough campaign against Macron.

In any case, it was stupid - whoever Le Pen was and whoever Macron was. It's just stupid just to interfere in other people's affairs. But it was done.

And now Macron is the president, we must somehow agree with him.

Therefore, even if the meeting is not planned, he will still say some words to France, French culture, traditional ties - something like that. This, of course, will fall into the French press.

- Federica Moherini said that it is difficult to call Russia a superpower for the simple reason that the state of the Russian economy is very sad. In particular, she recalled that GDP will be lower in Russia than in most EU countries. In your opinion, is the economic criterion really the main one here?.

- I would not attach such importance to the terminology - who is a superpower, and who is not a superpower. For the neighbors of the Russian Federation, it seems to me, two criteria are important: the first - to what extent the armed forces of the Russian Federation and other structures can be dangerous for them, the second - what kind of foreign policy the country is pursuing. And as our population lives, I think that nobody, except our population, really cares anymore.

By these criteria, unfortunately, Ukraine is better than anyone else knows that Russia is a serious factor. Unfortunately, I can not say that to date, a positive.

- You know about the conflict on the basis of "church" bills. These documents were faced with colossal resistance from the ROC and its Ukrainian structure - the UOC-MP, despite the fact that none of them mentions the Moscow Patriarchate. With what, in your opinion, is this resistance connected, and how will the story end?.

- I do not know how this story ends, but it is quite obvious that the Russian Orthodox Church in the form in which it exists is not only and not so much a religious organization as the state - it is a state structure. And this is the state structure, of course, of the Russian Federation.

At one time there were rumors that all metropolitans were employees of the KGB. I can not confirm this.. But the fact that the metropolitans were the nomenklatura of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee - it was quite obvious. In a sense, such a bundle remains today.

Therefore, the resistance of the Russian Orthodox Church is resistance, first of all, to the Russian state, which, of course, does not want to lose such an influence channel.

And, it seems to me, the bill, in which the church is obliged not to carry out anti-Ukrainian activities - I think this is a little or poorly verified words. Suppose, such a law will be adopted. Then the ROC will do something. You will say that this is an anti-Ukrainian activity. They will say that this is not an anti-Ukrainian activity. But, maybe, such a law is also needed for something. I can not judge.

But the change of jurisdiction of the parish - this thing is not specifically against the Russian Orthodox Church. It is for the rights of believers.

If I am a believer, if I go to church, and there are several denominations close to me in spirit, then why can not I and other parishioners of this parish decide: we do not like this patriarch, we do not trust him, but with the mouths of these people , It seems to us, says God. Why not? It's important, it's freedom..

It seems to me that this should be the right of every parish - to solve this issue democratically, but we understand that with the adoption of such a decision there are some consequences. For example, if the church that belonged to the parish had financed something, now it will not finance. People should make an informed decision.

Freedom must extend to believing people, too, but it turns out that believing people - like serfs. Believe in the Lord - here's a church for you, here's a bishop, here's a metropolitan, here with them and live. And for what reason? People after all are not serfs, but normal, free.

By the way, for the Russian Orthodox Church this is really a very painful topic, because they are always talking about protecting the canonical territory. I do not know how the church of the Kyiv Patriarchate behaves in this sense ... - No, they do not allow themselves such statements.

- Well, well done.. But Patriarch Cyril tries to protect "canonical territory," and faith is not about territory, it's about people. What canonical territory is a church? In my opinion, there is no. The church has traditions, there is a moral authority. Or there is no moral authority.

I think that the ROC has very big problems with moral authority. Remember the scandal with a guy who was convicted of catching Pokemon in the temple, for denying Jesus Christ. It would seem that if the church had a moral authority, you left Patriarch Kirill: "Brothers and sisters, see what's going on! Write all of you by letter to this scumbag Sokolovsky". And Sokolovsky would receive 10 million letters.

That would really be an indicator of the attitude of society, it would be understandable that the guy was doing something not that one should not do this. And he would have understood this, and society would understand that in fact there are things that are not in the law prescribed, but some moral norms that should not be violated.

But Patriarch Cyril did not do this. Why? Because he understands: no one would have written anything.

Join the "Observer" group on Facebook, stay tuned!.