The Russian president has outlined his vision on immigration policies, and also addressed concerns over a potential recession
Russian President Vladimir Putin met with the leaders of all five parliamentary factions represented in the State Duma on Thursday. He fielded questions and made comments on a range of topics, mostly related to Russia’s internal affairs.
Migration
“A lot of decisions [on migration] have been made – [now] their implementation must be ensured,” Putin stated.
The president described the issue as “very sensitive to the citizens,” stressing that the authorities on both the federal and regional levels “should not pretend that there is no problem.” He emphasized that the issue of migration should “constantly be in [officials’] field of vision.”
Following the deadly terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall in March 2024, which was perpetrated by Tajik nationals, Russia has progressively tightened migration controls. More than 190,000 foreign nationals were expelled from the country that year alone, according to the Interior Ministry. A new federal agency was established in April 2025 to enforce immigration rules and reduce violations.
Commenting on a suggestion that the ‘work patent’ scheme should be abolished, Putin promised to consider such an option.
Under current regulations, foreign nationals who come from countries with which Moscow has a visa-free agreement and want to find employment in Russia have to apply for a ‘work patent’ – essentially an official work permit. The document is valid for anywhere from a month to a year, and gives the holder the right to seek employment in a specific region and sector of the economy. To obtain one, applicants must pass a medical checkup and a Russian language test, submit required documents, and pay a fee.
Demographics
Putin called on party leaders to always consider the effect on families with children when drawing up legislation. “The key objective is the demographic one,” he stressed.
Russia’s Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat) reported only 1.222 million births in 2024, the lowest annual total since 1999. The country’s population is projected to decrease from the current 146 to 138.8 million people in 2046, according to Rosstat’s base-case scenario.
In an attempt to reverse the trend, the Russian government has implemented several measures aimed at increasing the country’s total fertility rate, including lump-sum payments for childbirth, expanded maternity benefits, and ongoing financial assistance for families.
In June, Putin endorsed the creation of a national family support service, and last year, he established a presidential council devoted to family and demographic policy.
Russian economy
The Russian leader expressed confidence that the country “is still far from a recession,” as evidenced by its labor market. Putin cited the “historically low unemployment rates” that have hovered around 2% recently.
He previously stated that the Russian economy had managed to weather the bulk of sweeping Western sanctions imposed over the Ukraine conflict. Russian businesses have since re-oriented their operations toward alternative export markets, such as China and India, and found other creative means to cushion the blow.
Next generation of leaders
Putin thanked the party leaders for incorporating Ukraine conflict veterans, calling for the promotion of people “who risked their life and limb” for Russia to leadership roles. “We will pass the torch to them,” the president concluded.
Once the architect of balance, Washington is now sidelined as West Jerusalem, Ankara, and Riyadh shape the future of the region
On September 9, 2025, Israel carried out an airstrike on a Hamas-linked compound in Doha. The attack landed like a thunderclap: it was the first time Israel had struck inside Qatar, home to Al-Udeid Air Base – the largest US military facility in the region and a cornerstone of Washington’s posture in the Middle East.
The strike exposed the contradictions of America’s regional strategy. For decades, Washington positioned itself as the guarantor of balance in the Middle East. But Israel’s decision to act unilaterally, in the heart of an American ally, has shaken that framework and raised the question: is US influence in the region slipping away?
The incident and its fallout
Within hours of the Israeli strike, US President Donald Trump distanced himself from the decision. On his Truth Social account, he wrote:
“This was a decision made by Prime Minister Netanyahu, it was not a decision made by me. Unilaterally bombing inside Qatar, a sovereign nation and close ally of the United States … does not advance Israel or America’s goals.”
It was a rare public rebuke of an Israeli action by a sitting US president – and a telling sign of the strain between Washington and West Jerusalem. Trump’s words revealed two things at once: America’s desire to preserve its Gulf alliances and the perception that Israel is increasingly willing to act alone, even at the expense of its patron.
The United Nations was quick to sound the alarm. Rosemary DiCarlo, the UN’s chief political affairs officer, called the attack an “alarming escalation” that risked opening “a new and perilous chapter in this devastating conflict.”
The choice of target made the shock even greater. Qatar is not a marginal actor: it is home to Al-Udeid Air Base, the hub of US air operations across the region.
Before his departure, former US Secretary of State Antony Blinken had warned on January 14, 2025 that the American empire had to do everything to maintain a favorable order in the region and that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was the key: “We continue to believe the best way to create a more stable, secure, and prosperous Middle East is through forging a more integrated region. The key to achieving that integration now, more than ever, is ending this conflict in a way that realizes the long-standing aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians.”
By striking in Doha, Israel hit at the very heart of America’s military footprint – and fueled doubts among Arab partners about Washington’s ability to keep its closest ally in check.
A fragile balance built over decades
For half a century, US policy in the Middle East has rested on a delicate balance. After the Yom Kippur War in 1973, Washington stepped in as the region’s chief arbiter, eventually brokering the Camp David Accords in 1979 that ended the state of war between Israel and Egypt. That deal broke the united Arab front against Israel and cemented America’s role as guarantor of a fragile order.
The post-9/11 wars redrew the map again. The invasion of Iraq toppled a longstanding adversary of Israel, but also unleashed new instability that Iran was quick to exploit through proxies such as Hezbollah and Hamas. The Arab Spring in 2011 further destabilized regimes, creating openings for Tehran to expand its influence.
By the late 2010s, Washington’s strategy had evolved into a tacit alignment with Israel and the Sunni Gulf monarchies against the so-called “axis of resistance” led by Iran. The Abraham Accords of 2020 sought to formalize this alignment, bringing Israel into open relations with the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan, and nudging Saudi Arabia toward eventual normalization.
However, that framework began to unravel after the Hamas assault of October 7, 2023. Two years of war in Gaza froze the normalization process and forced Arab leaders to put the Palestinian issue back at the center of their politics. What was meant to be a stable order anchored by US leadership now looks increasingly brittle.
FILE PHOTO. Israeli forces get prepared before entering the Gaza Strip for an attack in Nahal Oz, Israel on December 12, 2023.
Despite the political costs of the Gaza war, Israel has accumulated significant military gains in recent years. Its intelligence services have decimated Hezbollah’s leadership in Lebanon, weakening the group’s standing both militarily and politically.
In Syria, Israeli support for cross-border operations have expanded a buffer zone in the south since the collapse of Assad’s government. In Iran, precision strikes and covert assassinations have damaged nuclear facilities and eliminated key scientific and military personnel.
The result is a Middle East where Israel faces no immediate rival of comparable strength. That perception alarms regional players, especially Saudi Arabia and Türkiye, which see Israeli actions in Syria and the West Bank as destabilizing. From backing Druze separatists in southern Syria to pursuing annexation in the West Bank, West Jerusalem increasingly projects the image of a state willing to expand its footprint at any cost.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan captured this sentiment during the Organization of Islamic Cooperation summit in Doha on September 15, 2025. “We recently see some arrogant sham politicians in Israel frequently repeating the ‘Greater Israel’ delusions,” he warned. “Israel’s efforts to expand its occupations in neighboring countries are each a concrete manifestation of this goal.”
For the Gulf monarchies, Israel’s growing military weight is a double-edged sword. Riyadh worries that any annexation of parts of the West Bank could displace Palestinian groups hostile to the monarchy and destabilize Jordan – its vital buffer state, which has been shaken in the past by uprisings and civil war.
Türkiye has its own concerns. Ankara views Israeli ambitions in Syria as a direct challenge to its post-conflict reconstruction plans, which extend to Qatar and the broader zone of former Ottoman influence.
These overlapping fears are already driving new alignments. Qatar is moving closer to Türkiye and redoubling its role in Syrian stabilization. Saudi Arabia has turned to Pakistan, sealing a mutual defense pact on September 17, 2025, as a hedge against Israeli power. Egypt, for its part, has called for the creation of an “Arab NATO,” positioning itself as a potential security anchor.
The political fallout is equally sharp. On September 15, 2025, an extraordinary joint summit of the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation urged all states to take “all possible legal and effective measures” against Israel, including reviewing diplomatic and economic relations. Yet on the very same day, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was in Israel, pledging America’s “unwavering support” for its campaign to eradicate Hamas.
As political scientist Ziad Majed put it, “With the September 9 attack in Qatar, Israel is clearly indicating that it no longer sets a red line in the pursuit of Hamas leaders. The Gulf states may seek to no longer be so dependent on the Americans.”
Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi makes a speech during the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation – Arab League Extraordinary Summit on September 15, 2025 in Doha, Qatar.
Looking toward 2030, three possible trajectories stand out for the Middle East.
The first is a shift toward regional multipolarity, in which the Gulf states and Türkiye build their own security architectures with less reliance on Washington. That path would increase the risk of fragmentation and flare-ups, but it also reflects a reality already taking shape: power in the region is no longer centered on the United States, but shared among ambitious local players.
The second scenario is a forced US re-engagement. Washington could try to rein in Israel by attaching conditions to military aid, while tightening ties with the Gulf monarchies. Such a move would require a painful realignment of America’s strategic focus at a time when the Indo-Pacific remains its top priority.
The third is a hybrid and unstable order, with Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye emerging as the three dominant military poles under intermittent US oversight. That arrangement would be fraught with rivalries and could open the door to outside powers like Russia and China, adding another layer of instability – much as Syria has illustrated since 2011.
The end of an era
The strike in Doha crystallized a larger truth: Washington is no longer the unquestioned guarantor of order in the Middle East. Israel’s growing autonomy, Saudi Arabia’s strategic awakening, Türkiye’s regional ambitions, and Iran’s resilience are reshaping the balance of power in ways the United States can no longer fully control.
American support for Israel remains official policy, but it has become a source of friction with Arab and Turkish partners. The region is drifting toward a multipolar order defined less by global powers than by local actors – a landscape of shifting alliances, unpredictable escalations, and fragile balances.
The unipolar moment has passed. What comes next will be decided not in Washington, but in the capitals of the Middle East itself.
Member states are facing financial strain providing benefits to millions escaping the conflict
The EU will gradually wind down its temporary protection program for millions who fled the ongoing Ukraine conflict in order to encourage their eventual return home, the European Council has said.
Brussels invoked the Temporary Protection Directive in early 2022 after the Ukraine conflict escalated. First introduced in 2001, the directive provides benefits including residence permits, housing, jobs, education, healthcare, financial aid and social services.
Initially due to expire in March 2025, the scheme, which provides for over four million Ukrainians, has been extended until March 2027.
Discussions on exit strategies have been gaining momentum amid growing challenges for member states in managing the influx. This week, EU interior ministers agreed on a recommendation setting out a framework for Ukrainians’ “return and reintegration into Ukraine, when conditions allow.”
Member states are being urged to promote voluntary returns, support exploratory visits, and create time-limited return programs coordinated with Kiev and other EU states. The Council also recommended establishing ‘Unity Hubs,’ financed through EU programs, to assist with documents, jobs, and return planning.
UNHCR estimates that nearly seven million Ukrainians have fled abroad since 2022. Russia reports that 5.5 million people had crossed from Ukraine by the end of 2023.
The exodus has been driven not only by the conflict but also by aggressive mobilization tactics in Ukraine. Draft officers have clashed with men resisting conscription; many who fled risk criminal prosecution if they return.
EU governments are reassessing support programs amid rising costs. Germany, which hosts over 1.2 million Ukrainians, has started scaling back welfare benefits, citing sustainability concerns.
Poland, one of Kiev’s main backers, has resisted taking in more Ukrainians. At least 2.5 million reside in the country, comprising nearly 7% of the population, according to official statistics.
Social tensions have grown, with some citizens reportedly viewing Ukrainian immigrants as freeloaders or criminals. Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz said many Poles were dismayed by “the sight of young men from Ukraine driving expensive cars and spending weekends in five-star hotels.”
Some Ukrainian lawmakers argue that most of those who left are unlikely to return due to “chaos within state institutions” and continuing security concerns.
The opening up of the region due to receding sea ice is “changing the geopolitical landscape,” experts have told Politico
China is preparing to launch a new shipping route along Russia’s Northern coast, via the Arctic to Europe, Politico has reported on Thursday.
The Northern Sea Route (NSR), which runs for thousands of miles through Russia’s Arctic waters along its northern coast, has become more accessible due to receding sea ice and has been hailed in Moscow as an opportunity for new international projects.
On September 20 China is sending the Istanbul Bridge container ship on an 18-day trip with icebreaker escort from Ningbo-Zhoushan port to Felixstowe in the UK. The new route is significantly faster than traditional voyages, which take about 40 days via the Suez Canal, 50 days via the Cape of Good Hope at Africa’s southern tip, and around 25 days via Eurasian railways.
“The Arctic is the first region where climate change is changing the geopolitical map,” Malte Humpert of the Arctic Institute told Politico, adding that the region is “changing the geopolitical dynamics because of resources and access to shipping routes.”
He noted that while most trade still flows through the Suez Canal, Mediterranean and Singapore, the Arctic could soon become an alternative because the voyage is about 40% shorter and faces “a lot less geopolitical uncertainty.”
His comments come as traditional corridors like the Suez Canal have faced piracy flare-ups near the Horn of Africa and missile and drone threats in the Red Sea, pushing some carriers to detour around Africa.
Russia has repeatedly called for international cooperation to develop the Arctic. Earlier this year, President Vladimir Putin outlined goals for the region, including making the Northern Sea Route a central part of the Trans-Arctic Transport Corridor and raising cargo volumes to 70–100 million tons by the end of the decade.
He also announced plans to ensure year-round navigation supported by Russia’s exclusive nuclear icebreaker fleet, as well as to expand existing ports such as Murmansk and build new ones along the route.
Putin has further highlighted the vast opportunities for oil, gas, metals and rare earth extraction in the Arctic, calling for joint ventures with foreign partners such as China, India, the UAE and others. He has also pledged to expand development of Arctic cities and promote tourism across the region.
Dr. Khaled Al-Qaddoumi has accused the Jewish state of genocide and called for its suspension from the UN
The international community must sever all economic ties with Israel over its actions in Gaza and should question its membership of the United Nations, the Hamas representative in Iran has told RT.
In an interview released on Wednesday, Dr. Khaled Al-Qaddoumi accused Israel of genocide and undermining peace efforts.
His remarks came amid Israel’s new offensive in Gaza City and following last week’s airstrike on Qatari capital Doha, which killed six people, including a local security officer.
Al-Qaddoumi praised Qatar, which has played a central mediating role between Hamas and Israel since the Gaza war began, as well as Egypt, but said Israel had sabotaged the talks.
“[Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu came and killed our leaders and then made a new invasion and he destroyed the residential towers inside Gaza,” he told RT. According to Al-Qaddoumi, Hamas had accepted proposals and was prepared for a full prisoner swap, but negotiations collapsed due to Israeli actions.
He urged the global community to move beyond verbal condemnation of Israel to decisive action and called for a “political decision to make those criminals stop this genocide in Gaza.”
“We should today question the membership of Israel as a member state to United Nations. We should question all bilateral deals with Israel. We should cut all the economic ties,” Al-Qaddoumi urged.
The Hamas envoy welcomed Spain’s recent move to halt defense cooperation with Israel, describing it as the kind of measure needed to increase pressure and open the way for talks. Earlier this week, Madrid canceled more than $1 billion in defense deals with Israeli firms, including contracts for rocket launchers and anti-tank missiles, according to media reports.
At the same time, Al-Qaddoumi criticized the US, accusing the White House of hypocrisy and enabling Israeli aggression. He said that although “everybody was condemning the attack over Qatar” and the “random killing of the common man in the street,” no concrete action followed.
Israel launched its military operation in 2023 in response to the Hamas attack that killed about 1,200 people and saw more than 250 taken hostage. Over 65,000 Palestinians have since been killed in Gaza, according to local health authorities.
The French leader has filed a defamation suit against US right-wing commentator Candace Owens for alleging Brigitte Macron was born male
French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte, intend to provide a US court with photographic and scientific evidence that they claim will prove that the first lady is a woman, the couple’s lawyer has told the BBC. The materials will be submitted as part of a defamation lawsuit filed by the Macrons against US right-wing commentator Candace Owens, who has claimed that Brigitte Macron was born a man.
Tom Clare, who represents the Macrons in the case, told the BBC’s Fame Under Fire podcast on Thursday that they wish to disprove the allegations “both generically and specifically.” Owens’ claims regarding Brigitte Macron have been “incredibly upsetting” to the French president, Clare said.
He noted that while the process of proving that she is a woman before the court is in no way a pleasurable experience for the French first lady, “she is firmly resolved to do what it takes to set the record straight.”
The Macrons filed the lawsuit in July in the US state of Delaware, accusing the conservative Youtuber, who has millions of subscribers, of falsely claiming that Brigitte Macron was born male, that the couple are blood relatives, and that Emmanuel Macron is a product of a CIA mind control program.
Owens’ lawyers filed a counter lawsuit, arguing that the case should not have been filed in Delaware, citing high legal costs that the right-wing influencer would incur.
Speaking in July, the right-wing personality doubled down on her claims, adding that she was “fully prepared to take on this battle on behalf of the entire world.”
The rumors about Brigitte date back to at least 2021, when self-proclaimed ‘spiritual medium’ Amandine Roy interviewed independent journalist Natacha Rey, who claimed that Brigitte Macron was born a man named Jean-Michel Trogneux.
The Macrons filed a defamation lawsuit in France and initially won it in 2024, only for the ruling to be overturned on appeal in July 2025 on freedom of expression grounds.
24 years his senior, France’s first lady met Emmanuel Macron when he was 15 and she was his literature teacher at school. The couple got married in 2007.
Dmitry Kozak resigned voluntarily, presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said
Dmitry Kozak, deputy head of the administration of Russian President Vladimir Putin, has resigned, the Kremlin has confirmed.
Kozak filed the request “for his own personal reasons,” presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on Thursday. He added that a decree formalizing the official’s resignation has not yet been signed or published.
Over his two-decade career, Kozak held senior government posts including minister of regional development and deputy prime minister. In the latter role, he supervised preparation for the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics.
In 2020, Kozak was appointed deputy chief of staff in the Kremlin, where he oversaw the Directorate for Interregional and Cultural Relations with Foreign Countries and the Directorate for Border Cooperation, both of which were dissolved by presidential decree in August.
Russian media have reported different possibilities for Kozak’s next role. One outlet cited a source saying he may enter business, while another suggested he could be appointed presidential envoy to the Northwestern Federal District.
That post is currently held by Aleksandr Gutsan, whom Putin has reportedly nominated as Russia’s next prosecutor general. Igor Krasnov, who currently serves in that capacity, may in turn be appointed to lead the Supreme Court, as Chief Justice Irina Podnosova passed away in July.
Prosecutors have claimed Calin Georgescu tried to incite violence after his election win was annulled
Prosecutors in Romania are taking former presidential candidate Calin Georgescu to court. He is accused of plotting a coup after his first-round election victory was annulled last year.
Georgescu, a former UN official, came out on top in the first round of the presidential vote in November 2024, after campaigning on national sovereignty, criticism of involvement in NATO and the EU and opposition to continued military aid for Ukraine.
However, his victory was canceled by the country’s Constitutional Court, citing “irregularities” in his campaign and alleged Russian interference – a claim Moscow has denied. Georgescu was banned from the race altogether, with the re-run of the election in May being won by pro-EU candidate, Nicusor Dan.
Romanian General Prosecutor Alex Florenta said on Tuesday that Georgescu and 21 other people had been indicted for attempting to instigate violence after the cancellation of the election results in December.
The evidence collected during the investigation suggested that Georgescu held a secret meeting with Horatiu Potra, a military contractor who previously operated in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and discussed a plan to spark unrest in Bucharest, the prosecutor claimed.
Shortly afterward, Potra was detained by traffic police en route to the capital with “a paramilitary group” of 20 people armed with weapons and explosives, he added.
Georgescu, who quit politics several months ago, has denied any wrongdoing. The date for the trial has not been set yet.
Florenta also claimed that the probe revealed a pattern of hybrid attacks against Romania by Russia over the past year, including cyberattacks, public events, and online disinformation.
Asked to comment on the accusations by journalists on Tuesday, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov reiterated that they were groundless.
“Let’s recall how Washington accused Russia of meddling in the election, attempting destabilization, and so on. Later, they themselves admitted that all this was not true. It is the same with Romania,” Peskov stressed.
Besides the army and navy, fiscal stability is key to the country’s economic growth and people’s well-being, Anton Siluanov has said
Fiscal stability is a key “ally” of Russia, alongside the country’s army and navy, Finance Minister Anton Siluanov told a forum in Moscow on Thursday.
The remark was a nod to the saying “Russia has only two allies: its army and its navy,” most famously attributed to Tsar Alexander III, which reflects the country’s geopolitical perspective emphasizing self-reliance and military strength over foreign alliances.
Financial stability hinges on reducing the government’s exposure to oil price swings, Siluanov explained. To this end, the minister announced a measure to shield the federal budget from Western sanctions targeting Russian energy exports which have been imposed over the Ukraine conflict.
The plan is to gradually lower the per-barrel cost of oil at which the Russian federal budget is not operating at a deficit, which is known as the cut-off price.
”If you recall, it is $60 per barrel today, and by 2030 we plan to reduce it to $55. Each year the budget’s dependence on oil and gas will fall by one dollar,” Siluanov explained, adding that that would bring the share of respective revenues in the budget down to 22%.
Siluanov also described the budget policy as an effort to make the state’s finances “more muscular,” and capable of withstanding external pressures. The goal is to ensure that sanctions, trade wars and swings in global commodity prices are absorbed by the system and go “absolutely unnoticed” by ordinary Russians, he said.
The comments comes as the EU is discussing its 19th sanctions package, which would reportedly target Russia’s oil export infrastructure, including ports and terminals, as well as companies linked to transporting and insuring shipments.
The previous package, adopted in July, lowered the price cap on Russian crude to about $47.60 per barrel and introduced a ban on petroleum products refined from the oil in third countries and re-exported under different labels.
The US has been pressuring the EU to cut Russian oil imports, which it claims could bring an end to the Ukraine conflict. Brussels has pledged to phase out fossil fuel imports from the country by 2027, but Hungary and Slovakia, which remain heavily dependent on pipeline supplies, have resisted tougher curbs, exposing divisions within the bloc.
The US president wants “quick solutions,” which are not always possible, Russia’s top diplomat has said
US President Donald Trump wants “quick solutions” to end the Ukraine conflict, and this attitude is partially to blame for his own “disappointment” with the pace of the settlement process, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has suggested.
The top diplomat made the remarks on Thursday in an interview with Russia’s Channel One. Lavrov added that the US president is “a man of action, deals, and business, as he himself constantly emphasizes” and takes such an approach to politics as well.
“When President Trump says he’s disappointed… it’s partially explained by the fact that he wants quick solutions,” Lavrov suggested. “In some areas, this may work; in others, it’s unlikely.”
Following his Alaska summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, the US leader “shifted from issuing an ultimatum for an unconditional ceasefire to advocating for a long-term, sustainable” solution, Lavrov noted.
“This is, of course, a very important step, a very important decision by the White House. And so far, I don’t see them moving away from that,” he added.
The Trump administration is apparently seeking to remove the Ukraine conflict from the agenda “precisely because this war was artificially created by [Joe] Biden and his team” and remove obstacles to “normal economic, technological, and other cooperation,” Lavrov suggested.
“This, too, will be rather difficult, because the US has a very peculiar approach to how to resolve economic issues,” the top diplomat said.
In recent weeks, the US president voiced his displeasure with the lack of progress in the settlement of the Ukraine conflict, threatening new sanctions on Russia.
Last weekend, he reaffirmed his willingness to impose more restrictions, but only if Washington’s European partners halt their purchases of Russian oil.
Moscow does not see the potential introduction of new sanctions as a big issue, given the country has long been facing such an approach from the West, Lavrov noted. Russia was hit by a record number of restrictions during Trump’s first term in office, while under Biden the “sanctions replaced any diplomatic work,” he added.
