[

The United States and its European partners are pursuing a policy aimed at creating more distance between Russia and the Central Asian nations. This approach was highlighted by Valentina Matvienko, the chairwoman of Russia’s Federation Council. She argues that Western efforts to wedge Moscow away from Central Asia are unlikely to succeed, noting the enduring interests and historical connections that bind these countries. In her view, regional cooperation and shared interests form a sturdy foundation capable of withstanding external pressure and maintaining stability across the region.

Matvienko added that attempts to wage political or ideological confrontation between the Russian Federation and Central Asia would fail. She pointed to a long history of collaboration across security, economic development, and cultural exchange. The speaker suggested that these commonalities create a durable basis for constructive dialogue and sustained partnership, regardless of shifts in international diplomacy. This stance conveys a belief in resilience and a shared destiny within the region, even amid broader geopolitical tensions.

Regarding Russia’s approach to international agreements, Matvienko noted that the Russian Constitution offers stronger protections for its citizens than some international conventions. She asserted that Russian citizens would not bear the consequences of withdrawing from certain commitments, emphasizing the domestic framework that prioritizes welfare and rights at home. This line of reasoning reflects a broader argument about sovereignty, national jurisdiction, and the ways constitutional provisions can safeguard domestic interests more effectively than external obligations in certain contexts.

She reminded audiences that Russia has, at times, chosen to withdraw from specific international commitments to preserve sovereignty against perceived encroachments. Matvienko emphasized that even when Russia participates in international agreements, domestic law remains the guide for action, more responsive to domestic needs, and focused on social welfare. This stance is presented as a safeguard ensuring that political and legal processes at home remain the ultimate authority for protecting citizens and shaping policy outcomes, irrespective of external pressures or treaty obligations.

According to Matvienko, there is no basis for isolationist policies to negatively impact Russian citizens. She argued that the nation’s legal framework and constitutional guarantees are designed to shield people from adverse effects arising from international decisions or shifts in alliance structures. In her view, the strength of the national legal order lies in its ability to align government action with the core interests of the population, ensuring everyday life, rights, and security remain stable even in a complex international environment.

Earlier, Matvienko offered commentary on the public discussion surrounding the creation of a so-called Ministry of Happiness. The remarks were placed within a broader view of how state structures influence social well-being, the distribution of resources, and the overall climate of trust between the state and society. The discussion linked happiness to practical policy measures, accountability, and the enduring responsibility of government to protect and uplift people, especially amid geopolitical flux and domestic transition. This perspective ties the concept of happiness to tangible policy outcomes and to governance that remains attentive to citizens’ daily lives, resources, and security. [Source: official statements and parliamentary discussions cited by the Federation Council]