The Russian pranksters who specialize in playing "telephone pranks" on Western politicians have struck again. This time ECB chief Lagarde thought she was talking to Ukrainian President Selensky and she was very frank about some things that are always called "Russian propaganda".

855

•

Greece: The EU pays for everything.

In the conversation, Lagarde believes she is talking to Ukrainian President Selensky. "Selensky" asks her about the Russia sanctions and their effect. Lagarde admits that the Russia sanctions are not working too well against Russia, but that the consequences are bad for some European countries. For example, she talks about the risk that Greece could get into more debt as a result of the sanctions, but that this is "not a big risk," "because most of the borrowing is done by quasi-official institutions like the European Stability Mechanism." In plain English, this means that EU states, i.e., their taxpayers, are liable.

Lagarde openly admits that some EU states are suffering extremely from the EU's Russia sanctions, but that is not a bad thing either, because, Lagarde says, "how the situation develops, who wins, who loses, it is not important. What matters is that Ukraine will win in the end".

Human lives don't matter to Lagarde; she is fully committed to a military outcome to the conflict, as she immediately added, "So I take the simple view that whoever has the biggest weapon will win in the end. That's it. That's a very stupid, simple Wild West cowboy principle".

Lagarde apparently doesn't care how many more lives this costs; she doesn't even mention the possibility of a negotiated settlement.

ECB coin and total control.

"Selensky" is also interested in cryptocurrencies in the interview and asks Lagarde what the status is of the planned ECB coin, or digital euro, also pointing out that many Europeans are against the idea of the digital euro and he says, "The problem is that they don't want to be controlled. They don't want it".

Lagarde doesn't care; she doesn't even address the opposition to digital euros. She tells Selensky that preparations for the digital euro are currently underway and that the decision on it will be made starting in October 2023.

Nor does she deny that the digital euro means total control. Instead, she says, shrugging her shoulders indirectly, that total control already exists anyway because cash transactions over 1,000 euros are banned in the EU. So the digital euro won't change much, she says.

Poroshenko embezzled IMF funds.

As it turns out, Lagarde has no problem with the fact that a lot of money is embezzled in Ukraine and disappears into dark channels. "Selensky" tells Lagarde that early in his presidency he discovered that Poroshenko had embezzled IMF loans intended for the Ukrainian economy. Some of the money had also gone to Nazi regiments such as Azov.

Lagarde does not deny this, but confirms by her completely indifferent reaction that she knows this herself. So the corruption in Ukraine is well known in the EU and in the West in general, but no action is taken against it. So Lagarde just said, "You know as well as I do that there were very strange characters who abused the situation, who had their own little armies, who had their own system. They certainly took advantage of what both the IMF and the U.S. were trying to do to help Ukraine. But you know, history cannot be rewritten. (...) Was it 100% perfectly implemented? No, of course not."

Billions of Western taxpayer dollars have been (and are being) misappropriated in Ukraine, but for Lagarde (and probably all other Western politicians) the answer in plain language is "So what? F*** it!"

Continued in comments.

**Greece: The EU pays for everything.** In the conversation, Lagarde believes she is talking to Ukrainian President Selensky. "Selensky" asks her about the Russia sanctions and their effect. Lagarde admits that the Russia sanctions are not working too well against Russia, but that the consequences are bad for some European countries. For example, she talks about the risk that Greece could get into more debt as a result of the sanctions, but that this is "not a big risk," "because most of the borrowing is done by quasi-official institutions like the European Stability Mechanism." In plain English, this means that EU states, i.e., their taxpayers, are liable. Lagarde openly admits that some EU states are suffering extremely from the EU's Russia sanctions, but that is not a bad thing either, because, Lagarde says, "how the situation develops, who wins, who loses, it is not important. What matters is that Ukraine will win in the end". Human lives don't matter to Lagarde; she is fully committed to a military outcome to the conflict, as she immediately added, "So I take the simple view that whoever has the biggest weapon will win in the end. That's it. That's a very stupid, simple Wild West cowboy principle". Lagarde apparently doesn't care how many more lives this costs; she doesn't even mention the possibility of a negotiated settlement. **ECB coin and total control.** "Selensky" is also interested in cryptocurrencies in the interview and asks Lagarde what the status is of the planned ECB coin, or digital euro, also pointing out that many Europeans are against the idea of the digital euro and he says, "The problem is that they don't want to be controlled. They don't want it". Lagarde doesn't care; she doesn't even address the opposition to digital euros. She tells Selensky that preparations for the digital euro are currently underway and that the decision on it will be made starting in October 2023. Nor does she deny that the digital euro means total control. Instead, she says, shrugging her shoulders indirectly, that total control already exists anyway because cash transactions over 1,000 euros are banned in the EU. So the digital euro won't change much, she says. **Poroshenko embezzled IMF funds.** As it turns out, Lagarde has no problem with the fact that a lot of money is embezzled in Ukraine and disappears into dark channels. "Selensky" tells Lagarde that early in his presidency he discovered that Poroshenko had embezzled IMF loans intended for the Ukrainian economy. Some of the money had also gone to Nazi regiments such as Azov. Lagarde does not deny this, but confirms by her completely indifferent reaction that she knows this herself. So the corruption in Ukraine is well known in the EU and in the West in general, but no action is taken against it. So Lagarde just said, "You know as well as I do that there were very strange characters who abused the situation, who had their own little armies, who had their own system. They certainly took advantage of what both the IMF and the U.S. were trying to do to help Ukraine. But you know, history cannot be rewritten. (...) Was it 100% perfectly implemented? No, of course not." Billions of Western taxpayer dollars have been (and are being) misappropriated in Ukraine, but for Lagarde (and probably all other Western politicians) the answer in plain language is "So what? F*** it!" Continued in comments.

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

Here is the link to the complete conversation between "Selensky" and Lagarde.

The complete conversation in text form follows.

Selensky: Hello, hello, can you hear me? Can you hear me?

Lagarde: I can hear you very well.

Selensky: Madam Chair, I am glad to see and hear you.

I am concerned about the economic situation in Europe, because as you know, aid to Ukraine depends on it. And some countries are already openly saying that domestic problems are more important for them than Ukraine. So I wanted to ask you: what is the situation in Europe as a whole? How badly has the crisis hit? What is your vision?

Lagarde: We have problems with inflation, because of the problem areas that we have not yet been able to improve since the end of the Corona pandemic. Prices went up at first just because of energy costs, then gradually because of fertilizer costs, that mainly affected food prices, but now it's almost everywhere.

So inflation, which we had predicted to be temporary, is persisting much longer than expected and at a much higher level than expected. As a result, all central banks, including the ECB, have had to take action to bring inflation down so that people don't suffer from high prices and to ensure a more stable economy.

As a result, we have started to raise interest rates, which were minus 50 basis points about a year ago and are now around 2% for the most commonly used rates. So we are seeing low growth rates. We have prices that are too high, and we need to lower them. That's the situation we have right now.

Selensky: Why do you think Russia could and did overcome the sanctions policy? I've been told that the sanctions are hitting the European economy and the euro harder than expected. So are the sanctions having an effect or is Europe shooting itself in the foot?

Russia's GDP has grown. It is now ninth in the world. How do you assess the policy of the Russian Central Bank and its head, Elvira Nabiullina? They have managed to save the ruble. Why? How did they manage to do that?

Lagarde: I think Elvira, whom I know very well, is a very good central bank chief. She understood the situation very quickly and raised interest rates drastically. And that was the right measure at the time to prevent extremely high inflation.

And to make sure that people who had invested their money in Russia, especially Russians, left their money in Russia. That worked out very well in the early days. As a result, inflation went up, but not very much, and then it went down. So it did a great job.

I don't hesitate to say that. I think the sanctions are not as harsh as we expected. That's the way it is. And I also think that the technological barriers that are now being imposed on Russia will also affect its growth and its business model.

The problem with energy prices, I think, and I am not an energy expert, is that the country still manages to sell a lot of energy, whether it is oil or gas, to the countries that have not imposed sanctions on Russia, and certainly outside the EU, if it sells to India, to China, to the Far East, then it manages to generate foreign exchange revenues.

I don't know if they get yuan, rupees, or other currencies, but they certainly manage to export and provide an inflow of money.

Selensky: And what do you think about the EU's stance on capping the price of Russian oil. Can that really help?

Lagarde: Are you talking about the $60 ceiling?

Selensky: Yes

Lagarde: Yes, I think that will help if it is properly implemented and enforced. I think right now all the big insurance companies, all the brokers, all the shipping companies that operate outside of Europe, the U.K., the U.S., will abide by the cap, will not buy insurance, will not offer shipping if the prices are higher than that cap.

But we both know that the Russians are very good at getting around sanctions, and the fact that they have built up a fleet of ships, oil tankers, and are trying to create some kind of internal insurance mechanism is one way to try to get around the sanctions that we have imposed.

Selensky: I think there is another problem: They have a partner like Turkey. It helps them a lot. And that prevents us from being successful. So I wonder, how can we improve our sanctions policy?

Lagarde: Well, that's something that leaders need to think about. But any pressure that the U.S., the U.K., the EU, the Australians, and of course Canada can put on all the other players will make a difference. Because if there is a way out or a back door through which major sanctions can be circumvented, that obviously weakens the whole system. So I don't know if it is possible to put pressure on Turkey through NATO, but it is a possible way.

Turkey is playing a funny game, because by blocking or announcing that it is going to block the accession of Sweden and Finland, of course, it secures a strong negotiating position, and it is hard to put strong pressure on them if you ask them to vote for Sweden and Finland. But all countries of good will, a coalition of those who want to support Ukraine, should really put pressure on the other countries.

As you know, the G20 meeting of finance ministers and central bankers is coming up in India, and I think it's a good opportunity to remind all the other G20 leaders of their peace and stability commitments, because if they don't follow these rules, stability becomes impossible.

Selensky: And I think this is not a good game for Turkey. And by the way, I would like to ask your opinion. Who is doing the worst among the EU countries right now, who has suffered the most?

Lagarde: If you look at my inflation numbers, which are my barometer, those are the countries that are closest to Russia. "Surprise, surprise!" The Baltic countries, for example, have suffered a huge economic shock because they are trading partners, because they are a political risk. So those are the countries for which the indicators are the worst.

If you look at debt to GDP, a country like Greece is at risk, but it's not a big risk because most of the borrowing is done by quasi-official institutions like the European Stability Mechanism. Another country with a high debt-to-GDP ratio is, of course, Italy.

Selensky: I am indeed concerned. So half of our loans are U.S. loans and half - 50% - are eurozone loans. That also affects the exchange rates. And my question: how high do you think inflation will be in Europe this year?'

Lagarde: You know, all the economic forecasts and inflation have surprised me. So it's hard for me to say. But according to the official forecasts, we have estimated inflation at around 7% for 2023. I have to check the numbers again, because I think I am giving you a number that is a little bit underestimated. Inflation is probably a little bit higher.

Selensky: I think it's quite difficult to make correct predictions at the moment. You know that the situation is becoming unstable. Do you think it is possible that the ECB will raise the interest rate to 4%?

Lagarde: I wish I could tell you exactly. I wish I had a crystal ball to ask. But at this stage, I can't say for sure, because a lot will depend on the outcome of our actions. Will inflation come down to the cost of energy? Food? Probably on services?! We have different ways of measuring inflation. What I do know is that interest rates will inevitably rise. But until when? What will the long term interest rate be? When will we get to the long-term interest rate? I can't tell you that for sure. I don't.

Selensky: My economists have said that ECB interest rates could reach the 4% mark in the worst case.

Lagarde: As I said, I don't know the exact number or when we will reach the long-term interest rate. The only thing I can tell you and the economists who advise you, and I am sure they are as competent and honest as my economists, is that interest rates will rise from current levels because otherwise we will not be able to contain inflation.

Selensky: The question is also, what do you think your colleagues at the Fed think about this? Are you in touch with them?

Lagarde: [We not only talk, but of course exchange a lot of views and visions. And in fact, I'm going to meet Jerome Powell tonight. We're meeting for dinner tonight. We have a Bank for International Settlements meeting in Basel, and I will have dinner with him tonight. Yes, we talk a lot.

But you know, Mr. President, no matter how the situation develops, who wins, who loses, it is not important. What is important is that Ukraine will win in the end. So I take the simple view that whoever has the biggest weapon will win in the end. That's it. That's a very stupid, simple Wild West cowboy principle.

The biggest military power in the world right now is the US. So the U.S. supplies most of the weapons and provides significant funding. And that is the reality that we are dealing with.

And I don't think we should argue about who wins and who loses. They have to win. And we have to do everything we can to support you.

Selensky: Okay, enough of just talking about sad things. I'm very glad to see you. And I'm glad to see a smart woman in this position. And I think you are very nice.

Lagarde: (laughs) Good.

Selensky: I have a question. I am an active user of electronic money. So my question to you is about the introduction of the electronic euro. How would the switch to e-currency help?

Lagarde: Well, there are two points. First, the decision will be made in October. We are preparing the ground now. We want to prepare. We want to do training, but there will not be a decision before October 2023.

The reason I am personally convinced that we need to move forward is because of a situation similar to the one we are in now. We are dependent on gas supplies from a very unfriendly country. I don't want Europe to be dependent on the currency of a very unfriendly country, for example. Whether it's a dependence on Chinese currency, Russian currency, or something else, or on a friendly currency but maybe run by a private company like Facebook or Google or something like that.

Selensky: I also use bitcoins. I bought them when they came on the market, and I hope they will work in a special system as well. And I know that in Europe there are many protests against the electronic euro. What is the reason for that?

Lagarde: You know, that's the beauty of Europe. In northern Europe, for example in the Netherlands, people are very happy about the introduction of the e-euro. If you ask a young German, he will say that he sees no problem with it.

As I said before, I don't want Meta, Google or Amazon to suddenly invent a currency that takes over Europe's sovereignty. I don't want a foreign currency to become the currency of trade in Europe. So we have to be prepared.

Selensky: The problem is that they don't want to be controlled. They don't want it.

Lagarde: Yes, but you know what? We now have a threshold of 1,000 euros in Europe. Anything above that threshold cannot be paid in cash. If you do, you are in the gray market. You run the risk of getting caught, getting fined, or going to jail.

But the digital euro will have limited control. There will be control. You are right, you are absolutely right. We think that for very small amounts, like 300 to 400 euros, we could have a mechanism without controls, but that could be dangerous. The terrorist attacks in France ten years ago were completely financed with these very small anonymous credit cards that can be charged completely anonymously.

Selensky: You know, there was a question. I think it's a joke now. Like the joke that the next currency for Europe will be firewood.

Lagarde: What will that be?

Selensky: Firewood. Firewood for heating.

Lagarde: Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.

Selensky: It's like a joke. It's like a joke from the Russian side.

Lagarde: They exaggerate it sometimes.

Selensky: And my question is, do you think that the policy of the previous government in cooperation with the IMF, I mean Poroshenko, led to the crisis? Because when I became president, I faced a lot of terrible situations in the economy.

I guess he stole some loans for Ukraine and used them to his advantage, so we were forced to increase pensions and prices for electricity and heating for a long time, which led to a critical situation that Russia took advantage of.

Lagarde: Hmmm. You know, I think, first of all, the IMF did everything it could to help and support Ukraine. You know as well as I do that your country was not in perfect shape. You know as well as I do that there were very strange characters who abused the situation, who had their own little armies, who had their own system.

They certainly took advantage of what both the IMF and the U.S. were trying to do to help Ukraine. But, you know, history cannot be rewritten. And I think that the IMF loan, the program that was set up at that time, was necessary, and if it hadn't been, Ukraine's situation would have been catastrophic. Was it implemented 100% perfectly? No, of course not.

Selensky: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you very much.

Lagarde: Thank you.

Selensky: Thank you very much. I wish you a good day!

Lagarde: Same to you.

Selensky: Okay. Thank you.

https://www.anti-spiegel.ru/2023/der-prank-mit-ezb-chefin-christine-lagarde/

Here is the link to the complete conversation between "Selensky" and Lagarde. The complete conversation in text form follows. Selensky: Hello, hello, can you hear me? Can you hear me? Lagarde: I can hear you very well. Selensky: Madam Chair, I am glad to see and hear you. I am concerned about the economic situation in Europe, because as you know, aid to Ukraine depends on it. And some countries are already openly saying that domestic problems are more important for them than Ukraine. So I wanted to ask you: what is the situation in Europe as a whole? How badly has the crisis hit? What is your vision? Lagarde: We have problems with inflation, because of the problem areas that we have not yet been able to improve since the end of the Corona pandemic. Prices went up at first just because of energy costs, then gradually because of fertilizer costs, that mainly affected food prices, but now it's almost everywhere. So inflation, which we had predicted to be temporary, is persisting much longer than expected and at a much higher level than expected. As a result, all central banks, including the ECB, have had to take action to bring inflation down so that people don't suffer from high prices and to ensure a more stable economy. As a result, we have started to raise interest rates, which were minus 50 basis points about a year ago and are now around 2% for the most commonly used rates. So we are seeing low growth rates. We have prices that are too high, and we need to lower them. That's the situation we have right now. Selensky: Why do you think Russia could and did overcome the sanctions policy? I've been told that the sanctions are hitting the European economy and the euro harder than expected. So are the sanctions having an effect or is Europe shooting itself in the foot? Russia's GDP has grown. It is now ninth in the world. How do you assess the policy of the Russian Central Bank and its head, Elvira Nabiullina? They have managed to save the ruble. Why? How did they manage to do that? Lagarde: I think Elvira, whom I know very well, is a very good central bank chief. She understood the situation very quickly and raised interest rates drastically. And that was the right measure at the time to prevent extremely high inflation. And to make sure that people who had invested their money in Russia, especially Russians, left their money in Russia. That worked out very well in the early days. As a result, inflation went up, but not very much, and then it went down. So it did a great job. I don't hesitate to say that. I think the sanctions are not as harsh as we expected. That's the way it is. And I also think that the technological barriers that are now being imposed on Russia will also affect its growth and its business model. The problem with energy prices, I think, and I am not an energy expert, is that the country still manages to sell a lot of energy, whether it is oil or gas, to the countries that have not imposed sanctions on Russia, and certainly outside the EU, if it sells to India, to China, to the Far East, then it manages to generate foreign exchange revenues. I don't know if they get yuan, rupees, or other currencies, but they certainly manage to export and provide an inflow of money. Selensky: And what do you think about the EU's stance on capping the price of Russian oil. Can that really help? Lagarde: Are you talking about the $60 ceiling? Selensky: Yes Lagarde: Yes, I think that will help if it is properly implemented and enforced. I think right now all the big insurance companies, all the brokers, all the shipping companies that operate outside of Europe, the U.K., the U.S., will abide by the cap, will not buy insurance, will not offer shipping if the prices are higher than that cap. But we both know that the Russians are very good at getting around sanctions, and the fact that they have built up a fleet of ships, oil tankers, and are trying to create some kind of internal insurance mechanism is one way to try to get around the sanctions that we have imposed. Selensky: I think there is another problem: They have a partner like Turkey. It helps them a lot. And that prevents us from being successful. So I wonder, how can we improve our sanctions policy? Lagarde: Well, that's something that leaders need to think about. But any pressure that the U.S., the U.K., the EU, the Australians, and of course Canada can put on all the other players will make a difference. Because if there is a way out or a back door through which major sanctions can be circumvented, that obviously weakens the whole system. So I don't know if it is possible to put pressure on Turkey through NATO, but it is a possible way. Turkey is playing a funny game, because by blocking or announcing that it is going to block the accession of Sweden and Finland, of course, it secures a strong negotiating position, and it is hard to put strong pressure on them if you ask them to vote for Sweden and Finland. But all countries of good will, a coalition of those who want to support Ukraine, should really put pressure on the other countries. As you know, the G20 meeting of finance ministers and central bankers is coming up in India, and I think it's a good opportunity to remind all the other G20 leaders of their peace and stability commitments, because if they don't follow these rules, stability becomes impossible. Selensky: And I think this is not a good game for Turkey. And by the way, I would like to ask your opinion. Who is doing the worst among the EU countries right now, who has suffered the most? Lagarde: If you look at my inflation numbers, which are my barometer, those are the countries that are closest to Russia. "Surprise, surprise!" The Baltic countries, for example, have suffered a huge economic shock because they are trading partners, because they are a political risk. So those are the countries for which the indicators are the worst. If you look at debt to GDP, a country like Greece is at risk, but it's not a big risk because most of the borrowing is done by quasi-official institutions like the European Stability Mechanism. Another country with a high debt-to-GDP ratio is, of course, Italy. Selensky: I am indeed concerned. So half of our loans are U.S. loans and half - 50% - are eurozone loans. That also affects the exchange rates. And my question: how high do you think inflation will be in Europe this year?' Lagarde: You know, all the economic forecasts and inflation have surprised me. So it's hard for me to say. But according to the official forecasts, we have estimated inflation at around 7% for 2023. I have to check the numbers again, because I think I am giving you a number that is a little bit underestimated. Inflation is probably a little bit higher. Selensky: I think it's quite difficult to make correct predictions at the moment. You know that the situation is becoming unstable. Do you think it is possible that the ECB will raise the interest rate to 4%? Lagarde: I wish I could tell you exactly. I wish I had a crystal ball to ask. But at this stage, I can't say for sure, because a lot will depend on the outcome of our actions. Will inflation come down to the cost of energy? Food? Probably on services?! We have different ways of measuring inflation. What I do know is that interest rates will inevitably rise. But until when? What will the long term interest rate be? When will we get to the long-term interest rate? I can't tell you that for sure. I don't. Selensky: My economists have said that ECB interest rates could reach the 4% mark in the worst case. Lagarde: As I said, I don't know the exact number or when we will reach the long-term interest rate. The only thing I can tell you and the economists who advise you, and I am sure they are as competent and honest as my economists, is that interest rates will rise from current levels because otherwise we will not be able to contain inflation. Selensky: The question is also, what do you think your colleagues at the Fed think about this? Are you in touch with them? Lagarde: [We not only talk, but of course exchange a lot of views and visions. And in fact, I'm going to meet Jerome Powell tonight. We're meeting for dinner tonight. We have a Bank for International Settlements meeting in Basel, and I will have dinner with him tonight. Yes, we talk a lot. But you know, Mr. President, no matter how the situation develops, who wins, who loses, it is not important. What is important is that Ukraine will win in the end. So I take the simple view that whoever has the biggest weapon will win in the end. That's it. That's a very stupid, simple Wild West cowboy principle. The biggest military power in the world right now is the US. So the U.S. supplies most of the weapons and provides significant funding. And that is the reality that we are dealing with. And I don't think we should argue about who wins and who loses. They have to win. And we have to do everything we can to support you. Selensky: Okay, enough of just talking about sad things. I'm very glad to see you. And I'm glad to see a smart woman in this position. And I think you are very nice. Lagarde: (laughs) Good. Selensky: I have a question. I am an active user of electronic money. So my question to you is about the introduction of the electronic euro. How would the switch to e-currency help? Lagarde: Well, there are two points. First, the decision will be made in October. We are preparing the ground now. We want to prepare. We want to do training, but there will not be a decision before October 2023. The reason I am personally convinced that we need to move forward is because of a situation similar to the one we are in now. We are dependent on gas supplies from a very unfriendly country. I don't want Europe to be dependent on the currency of a very unfriendly country, for example. Whether it's a dependence on Chinese currency, Russian currency, or something else, or on a friendly currency but maybe run by a private company like Facebook or Google or something like that. Selensky: I also use bitcoins. I bought them when they came on the market, and I hope they will work in a special system as well. And I know that in Europe there are many protests against the electronic euro. What is the reason for that? Lagarde: You know, that's the beauty of Europe. In northern Europe, for example in the Netherlands, people are very happy about the introduction of the e-euro. If you ask a young German, he will say that he sees no problem with it. As I said before, I don't want Meta, Google or Amazon to suddenly invent a currency that takes over Europe's sovereignty. I don't want a foreign currency to become the currency of trade in Europe. So we have to be prepared. Selensky: The problem is that they don't want to be controlled. They don't want it. Lagarde: Yes, but you know what? We now have a threshold of 1,000 euros in Europe. Anything above that threshold cannot be paid in cash. If you do, you are in the gray market. You run the risk of getting caught, getting fined, or going to jail. But the digital euro will have limited control. There will be control. You are right, you are absolutely right. We think that for very small amounts, like 300 to 400 euros, we could have a mechanism without controls, but that could be dangerous. The terrorist attacks in France ten years ago were completely financed with these very small anonymous credit cards that can be charged completely anonymously. Selensky: You know, there was a question. I think it's a joke now. Like the joke that the next currency for Europe will be firewood. Lagarde: What will that be? Selensky: Firewood. Firewood for heating. Lagarde: Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. Selensky: It's like a joke. It's like a joke from the Russian side. Lagarde: They exaggerate it sometimes. Selensky: And my question is, do you think that the policy of the previous government in cooperation with the IMF, I mean Poroshenko, led to the crisis? Because when I became president, I faced a lot of terrible situations in the economy. I guess he stole some loans for Ukraine and used them to his advantage, so we were forced to increase pensions and prices for electricity and heating for a long time, which led to a critical situation that Russia took advantage of. Lagarde: Hmmm. You know, I think, first of all, the IMF did everything it could to help and support Ukraine. You know as well as I do that your country was not in perfect shape. You know as well as I do that there were very strange characters who abused the situation, who had their own little armies, who had their own system. They certainly took advantage of what both the IMF and the U.S. were trying to do to help Ukraine. But, you know, history cannot be rewritten. And I think that the IMF loan, the program that was set up at that time, was necessary, and if it hadn't been, Ukraine's situation would have been catastrophic. Was it implemented 100% perfectly? No, of course not. Selensky: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you very much. Lagarde: Thank you. Selensky: Thank you very much. I wish you a good day! Lagarde: Same to you. Selensky: Okay. Thank you. https://www.anti-spiegel.ru/2023/der-prank-mit-ezb-chefin-christine-lagarde/

link

(post is archived)

You can claim this sub in /s/subrequest