On 2 and 10 May, the US president held two landmark meetings: the first with the Russian Foreign Minister, the second with the head of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry. Both in the first and in the second case, the theme of Russia's aggression against Ukraine. Does this mean that Donald Trump, despite his pre-election promises not to interfere with problems that are not directly related to the States, still decided to intervene? What will be his intervention, given the president's obvious sympathy for Vladimir Putin?.

Presidential elections in France won by Emmanuel Macron. This means that a new player joins the "Norman" four. Is he able to radically change the discourse, to make real progress in the negotiations? Is it ready to adhere to the same pro-Ukrainian position that was demonstrated during the election campaign?.

The Russian opposition politician Konstantin Borovoi shared his answers to these questions with the "Observer". He also answered a number of other questions about the new "ideological orientation" in Russia and the main task of Vladimir Putin on the way to victory in the presidential elections.

- Is it possible to consider Trump's meetings with foreign ministers as an indication that the US administration began to pay attention to the problem of Ukraine?.

- I think yes. Efforts, absolutely incredible efforts that Lavrov undertook, Putin at the beginning of some talks, contacts, negotiations gave the result. First, Lavrov conducted an entire operation to arrange a telephone conversation between Trump and Putin, and then Putin directly during a telephone conversation asked Trump to accept Lavrov.

What is today is an unstable equilibrium, which is very unhappy with Russia. As far as I understand, Putin has something to offer for future negotiations - Ukraine, Syria, North Korea, and cyberattacks ... Many things. The main goal of Putin is simply to preserve power. These foreign policy adventures have ceased to play the role of stabilizer in domestic politics, and its power is very strongly and significantly weakened. We need some new approaches. Moreover, these foreign policy adventures inflicted a completely irreparable blow to the economic situation in Russia. It is no longer necessary to speak about the ineffectiveness of sanctions: it is a question of a possible urgent need for the organization of humanitarian aid to Russia.

So Putin is very interested in the negotiations, Trump is less interested. But, in essence, Ukraine is a problem for Europeans, not for the United States. Syria and North Korea - this is really Trump interested. Although, of course, not as Putin. In Putin, figuratively speaking, the earth burns under his feet. Trump is not so critical. But why not hold these talks? Moreover, for Putin, the negotiations themselves are more important than the result, and for Trump, of course, the result.

- Maybe, on the contrary: is Putin more important than the result?.

- No. For Putin, the most difficult - and I think that they have long understood this - is a terrible image of Russia, which actually leads to all signs of political and economic blockade. Putin finally realized that the image he achieved does not actually allow the country to develop - to develop the economy. And leads to isolation. The sanctions themselves are symbols. And the lack of investment, the lack of economic contacts with the West, certainly produces a devastating impact on Russia. The reason is not sanctions, the reason is the image. Nobody wants to invest, realizing that tomorrow these resources will simply be lost.

- Do you assume that Putin can exchange the war in Ukraine, the war in Syria, North Korea's support for the lifting of sanctions?.

- We accidentally happened with Kushnar (editor-in-chief of Newsader Alexander Kushnar. - Red. ) Came to the conclusion that it was only to exchange the photo for international negotiations in Reykjavik - roughly speaking. But the problem is that if these international negotiations, just like, say, Minsk agreements, end in nothing or deception, then this can actually translate the state of relations from this unstable equilibrium into direct confrontation, which will, of course, have an even more serious negative Impact on the political and economic system of Russia. And it's dangerous. I hope that this danger, first of all, is understood by Americans.

And non-compliance with the Minsk agreements, and non-compliance with the Helsinki agreements on the inviolability of borders shows that Putin allows his own interpretations of international agreements. Do not comply with international agreements for him - a common practice. Unfortunately.

- New French President Emmanuel Macron will join the "Norman" format. How do you assess his role in this format? Will he be able to bring something new, revolutionary, constructive?.

- It seems to me that yes. This is a young politician, ambitious, who today is not interested in bureaucratic procedures, what traditional politicians are interested in, for which the process is more important than the result. Macron is interested in the result.

Incidentally, this is one of the reasons why Putin and Lavrov are now taking such incredible efforts. They understand that this young blood - Macron - can create a very dangerous situation for them, a more radical, more pragmatic attitude towards Russia. And this can cause serious damage.

If earlier, relatively speaking, the sanctioning activity proceeded from the United States and was supported by Europe, now the initiative can go to Europe. The mood is very radical. The mere statement of Macron that he is going to take revenge on Putin for cyberattacks is worth it. It is very serious. In some cases, such a statement can be regarded as a declaration of war.

- Can Macron take revenge on Putin through Ukraine?.

- Can. France has the most modern weapons, high-tech. And this is what Ukraine lacks today for, let's say, the completion of the process. Macron may well take such steps, seeing inconclusive bureaucratic games that lasted for many years, starting with the completely empty Medvedev-Sarkozy agreement on Georgia. Macron can take radical steps. I think that Peter Alekseevich should think about meeting with the new president of France.

- During the speech on May 9, Vladimir Putin said: "If our country suffered a terrible tragedy and we, like many European countries, would be defeated, we would have a completely different fate than the enslaved countries of the European continent. It was not just about the existence of our country, it was about the existence of our people as an ethnos ". How do you evaluate this phrase?.

- The first time I found this on "Echo of Moscow", when there was a speech. This is one of the latest propaganda installations. In fact, fascism was defeated, as Putin said during this speech, "the Russian people of Russia". This is a serious attitude, certainly an isolationist and unconditional hint that all the others had little or no relation to the victory over fascism.

Like any propaganda setting, it is not based on logic, not on historical facts, but on stereotypes. This is a Soviet stereotype. The Soviet Union celebrated Victory Day not on May 8, like the rest of the world, but on May 9, when an additional act of surrender was signed. All Soviet propaganda was built precisely on this attitude - that the Soviet Union won this war, and no one else.

Putin relies on Soviet stereotypes in the propaganda campaign. It is known. They do not need proofs - they are information blocks that are not perceived by logic, but are valuable only by the fact of approval. "Russia defeated fascism," "The Russian people defeated fascism". Sounds absurd, of course. Sounds very strange. And to this kind of has nothing to do either Georgia or Ukraine.

This is a new modern ideological setup.

- As you know, recently Vladimir Putin in the "Legends of Hockey" team scored in the opponent's goal 7 goals. Why only 7, why not more? And what do these events mean with the participation of the President of the Russian Federation?.

"They mean that the not-so-young president needs the moral support that the participants in this idea give him. They do not call this propaganda campaign, but it is known that for him this is a very important factor - to be "macho". Above him, the whole world is mocked, portraying him nude to the waist. For him it is important.

- Does a Russian voter like such "macho"?.

- In any case, this made a strong impression on voters. If you remember, there was a whole propaganda campaign "I want a child from Putin" - very similar to what happened to Hitler. Then I had a feeling that it was stopped precisely because there were too close associations with Hitler, from which all the Germans wanted to have a child. But then there was no cloning technology, otherwise they would have achieved this.

- There is not much time left before the presidential elections in Russia. What, in your opinion, is the main factor in the victory of Vladimir Putin? Or is the result simply drawn without much effort on his part?.

- The result is drawn for a long time, nobody cares about the actual results of voting. But there is one factor that is controlled and which can be seen, the factor associated with loyalty is the turnout.

At one time in the Soviet Union this was a very serious parameter. Policemen bypassed the so-called voters. Behavior of those who did not want to vote, who did not appear at the polling station, was considered at party, trade union meetings.

Today, this is the only factor, a sad parameter, because the number of voters decreases all the time. People become smarter, they begin to understand that nothing depends on them. I do not think that the authorities will decide to use repression, but some kind of forceful efforts to mobilize the population will traditionally be undertaken.

Boycott. I have spoken about this more than once - the boycott of power, the boycott of elections. Today this is the only way to oppose the authorities. Boycott active, boycott with protests, boycott with single pickets.

All these proposals to vote for anyone other than "United Russia" or anyone except Putin - it's a fiction. What is there - the whole story with Navalny, which is broadcast through all the state-owned media, has only one single role: mobilization. This is a kind of carrot in front of the donkey's nose. As in the lottery: "you have a chance to win a car or a million rubles, buy lottery tickets". There are many people who buy it.

This is a very serious propaganda action - mobilization of the population. Very serious, very expensive. I think that more close to the election will come up with several more options.

Join the groups "Observer" on Facebook and VKontakte, stay tuned!.