A good sub-title for this interview could be “Lavrov Unplugged”.
A quote from the transcript (which incidentally was available faster than any other transcript from the The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation ):
“… when it became clear that Russia did not want to live in the house of “a self-appointed boss,” all these complications began to emerge.
All this started when this signal was not perceived (to be more precise, Russia was seen again as a “hoodlum” in the world arena and they were again going to teach it “good manners”). In any event, the West began its ideological preparations, for its current actions, at that time.”
Video in Russian without subtitles or English voiceover as yet.
Question: There is a feeling that the West is very annoyed by the appearance of the Russian Sputnik V vaccine. At first, they were very aggressive and wouldn’t let it go. When I talked with Minister of Trade and Industry Dmitry Manturov, he called it “the vaccine war.” Now the opinion has changed. Is this about the quality of the vaccine or is politics involved in this?
Sergey Lavrov: I think it is possible to use the logic of the Russian proverb that can be translated into English as “love it so but mother says no.” Western experts know that the Sputnik V vaccine is definitely one of the best, if not the very best. Otherwise, there would not be such a stream of requests for it, which is growing geometrically.
On the other hand, they realise that the spread of Sputnik V and other Russian vaccines that will soon enter the international market, will enhance our authority and status in the world. They do not want this to happen. But they have come to realise that their first response was simply outrageous in the context of the facts and medical science. When President Vladimir Putin announced the development of the vaccine in August 2020, the offensive was completely undiplomatic. Their response just betrayed their irritation, you are perfectly right.
And now many countries (the Czech Republic and others) are saying they can’t wait for the certification of the vaccine by the European Medicines Agency. In Hungary, they believe they are ready to start vaccination and supplies are now underway. The number of requests from Europe is steadily on the rise. Just the other day, Prince Albert II of Monaco sent a request for the vaccine for the entire population of his principality.
After independent agencies published their scientific evaluations, the West had to admit that the vaccine was good. Yet, attempts to discredit it continue.
Just yesterday I read a somewhat ambiguous statement by President of France Emmanuel Macron. He put us and the Chinese into the category of those who are trying to gain advantages in the world arena at the expense of their medical achievements. The day before yesterday, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen spoke with an emphatically negative connotation about the supplies of the Russian vaccines to foreign countries.
We must follow the correct position of principle, first voiced by President of Russia Vladimir Putin, notably, that we were the first to develop the vaccine, and we will continue to increase its production. This is not easy, we do not have enough capacities, and this is why we are negotiating with India, South Korea and other countries. At the same time, he said we are open to the broadest possible cooperation.
There is one more important point. When this issue was discussed at the UN the other day, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres urged the countries that have this vaccine or have the money to buy it, not to forget about the poor. In the meantime, attempts are being made to accuse us of trying to gain geopolitical favour by supplying it abroad. This is an obvious discrepancy. It is clear that the West is poorly prepared for this discussion.
Question: So, it’s about the same as when President Putin said at the Davos Forum that the world cannot continue creating an economy that will only benefit the “golden billion,” and we are actually accused of supplying the vaccine for the benefit of the “golden billion.” Still, are they talking about the vaccine like this just because it was made in Russia?
Sergey Lavrov: I don’t see any other reason, because no one even tried to conduct a medical or a scientific test. They just said right away that it was impossible just because it’s impossible, meaning that “no one can do this that quickly.” It was only in October 2020, when the West said they would be able to report on their achievements. President Putin announced in August that the Russian-made vaccine was ready for rollout.
Unfortunately, I often see that the response to everything we do, say or offer is, at best, questioned right off the bat. Usually, they say that “the Russians are playing their geopolitical games again.”
Question: EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell, who was here recently and met with you, said that Russia is distancing itself from the West. At the same time, Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov said we are open to cooperation with Europe. You said we are ready to break up, but we are not breaking off our relations. What really stands in the way of normal relations between the EU and Russia?
Sergey Lavrov: A biased attitude, by and large. I worked with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell, a good colleague of mine, when he was Spanish Foreign Minister. Now many, in an attempt to give a controversial dimension to the High Representative’s visit to Russia, forget how it all began. In May 2019, Mr Borrell said: “Our old enemy, Russia, says again ‘here I am,’ and it is again a threat.” We then asked his protocol service to confirm what he said. We were told that it was a figure of speech and that he was misunderstood. However, this attitude shows.
We are seen as a stranger. In my interview with Vladimir Solovyov, replying to his question as to whether we are ready to break off with the EU, I gave an affirmative answer because there are no relations to talk about. As former US President Barack Obama once said (although he said it about the Russian economy), relations have been “torn to shreds.”
Indeed, the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement [between the EU and Russia] entered into force in 1997. It contained a number of declarative goals for moving towards common economic, humanitarian and cultural spaces. For many years, we used a mechanism of summits, which were held every six months in Russia and in the EU alternately. In fact, our entire Government held annual meetings with the European Commission to discuss the participants’ responsibilities in the context of over 20 sector-specific dialogues. We were building four common spaces and roadmaps for each of them. These were 100 percent substantive and specific projects. It was all destroyed, just like the Partnership and Cooperation Council, within which the Russian Foreign Minister and the High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy reviewed the entire range of relations. This disappeared long before the Ukraine crisis.
Many in our country are just waiting for a chance to pounce on the Russian Government’s foreign policy. We are being asked how we can say that we are ready to break off with the EU when it is our largest trade and economic partner. If we take the EU as a collective partner, it is our largest partner in terms of gross trade. For example, in 2013 (before the Ukraine events) Russia became a WTO member. From that moment, our trade relations were built on the principles advocated by that organisation rather than the EU’s principles. As a single trade bloc, the EU also participated in the WTO. We traded with member countries based on WTO guidelines. If you think the EU is a valuable trade and economic partner, here are some statistics for you: in 2013, the United States was the EU’s biggest trading partner with about $480 billion, followed by China with $428 billion and Russia with $417 billion. That is, these numbers are of the same order of magnitude. Where do we stand now? In 2019, EU’s trade with the United States stood at $750 billion, with China $650 billion, and with Russia at about $280 billion. In 2020, it was $218 billion, if counting with Great Britain, and $191 billion without it.
The reason? It’s the sanctions imposed by our “valued” and largest economic partner for reasons that have never relied on any facts whatsoever. At least, no facts have ever been presented to us. We understand Crimea. We understand Donbass as well. It’s just that the EU admitted its inability, or perhaps, unwillingness, to prevent the anti-constitutional coup with an open Russophobic slant and chose to turn things upside down. Brussels shifted the blame to us and imposed sanctions on Russia rather than the putschists, who, by and large, spat on the guarantees of the European Union, which signed the corresponding agreements, totally ignoring, as I said, the fact that the actions of the government, which they supported, were openly and violently anti-Russian.
Question: Without the events in Ukraine, would our relations with the West have sunk to where they are now?
Sergey Lavrov: It is difficult for me to talk about this. After all, later there were other events linked with the accusations of “the poisoning in Salisbury.” No facts were presented. We were not allowed to meet with our citizens. No evidence was offered. Everything was similar to what is happening now with the alleged poisoning of Alexey Navalny.
Question: It seems the West is looking for a pretext to spoil our relations.
Sergey Lavrov: They are looking but there are many pretexts: it’s always possible to use something as an excuse to put the relationship on the required track. But it’s not that they want to spoil relations. I don’t think this is their main goal. They want to bolster their self-esteem. Now they are starting to act like the US, revealing the mentality of an exclusive group of states. I quoted German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas. When asked why they continue discussing sanctions against Russia and what goals they had achieved by imposing sanctions, he replied that he didn’t believe sanctions should be used for any purpose. What matters is that they don’t leave any action by the Russian Federation unpunished.
The concealment of facts that could somehow confirm accusations against us started long before the crisis in Ukraine. We can recall 2007 – the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko in the hospital. There was a coroner’s inquest. Later this trial was declared “public.” In George Orwell’s logic, in Britain this means a “secret trial” during which no inquisitorial procedures of the secret services may be presented. You know, these are system-wide problems.
I listed what we used to have in our relations with the European Union. Nothing is left now, not even sporadic contacts on some international issues. As regards the Iran nuclear programme, we are taking part in the work of the collective group of countries, which are trying to somehow put this programme back on track. This is not part of our relations with the EU proper. In the Middle East, we have a Quartet of mediators consisting of Russia, the US, the EU and the UN. In other words, this is multilateral cooperation rather than our relations with just the EU.
With regard to who is taking steps to prevent our relations from further decline, at least a little, we were thinking about that when Josep Borrell, High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, was getting ready to visit Moscow. He suggested cooperating in healthcare and vaccines. We have already discussed this here. As a Brussels institution, the EU will hardly be allowed to contact Russian agencies or companies independently regarding the vaccines. We would sooner cooperate directly with the producers of AstraZeneca, as this is already taking place.
On the eve of Mr Borrell’s visit, we invited his experts to make a joint statement on the Middle East by the Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. Our positions are nearly identical on the matter and we thought it would be appropriate to urge the Quartet to resume its activities and call for direct Palestinian-Israeli talks, respect for the relevant UN resolutions, and so on.
We gave them a page and a half text that was easy to approve after the first reading. Several days prior to his arrival, we were told that “it did not work out.” I will reveal a secret because this is a blatant example. I asked Mr Borrell at the negotiating table: “What about this statement? Why didn’t it work out?” He started turning his head all around. It was clear from his reaction, and he confirmed this later, that nobody had even told him about it. These are the people that deal with what some of our liberals call “relations with the EU.”
Question: Concluding this theme, I’d like to say that as a man born in the USSR, I understand that during the Soviet-Western confrontation we had different ideologies, economies and so on. Later, I thought that everything was the same on both sides. They were for democracy and we were for democracy; they had a market economy and we had a market economy. So what are the differences? Why do we fail to find a common language to this day? I thought we found it in the 1990s? Why did we find it then?
Sergey Lavrov: We found it at that time because nobody in the Russian Federation disputed the answer to the question of who was ruling the show. President of Russia Vladimir Putin has talked about this many times. We decided that was it – the end of history. Francis Fukuyama announced that from now on liberal thought would rule the world. Now there are attempts to push this liberal thought to the fore again in a bid to gain international influence. But when it became clear that Russia did not want to live in the house of “a self-appointed boss,” all these complications began to emerge.
Initially, having become President, Vladimir Putin and his team tried to convey this message through diplomatic signals that educated and smart people would be bound to understand. But nobody listened. Then the explanations had to be made politely but openly in the Munich speech. All this started when this signal was not perceived (to be more precise, Russia was seen again as a “hoodlum” in the world arena and they were again going to teach it “good manners”). In any event, the West began its ideological preparations, for its current actions, at that time.
Question: Regarding the sanctions. Bloomberg posted a news item today that new sanctions against Russia are planned concerning the Nord Stream 2, however, they are not going to be tough but rather “soft.” On the other hand, they report that the Americans want to thwart the Nord Stream project but without irritating Germany. Where are we in this situation?
Sergey Lavrov: We are a country that completely complies with the contractual obligations undertaken by our companies that are part of the project, along with the EU companies that joined it. The current situation is largely due to a decision taken by what we call the European Union, a decision that proves beyond doubt what sort of alliance it is. A few years ago, when the Poles, and others sharing their attitude, attempted to impede the Nord Stream project, the Legal Service of the European Commission was asked for legal advice, official opinion. The service presented a document which stated in no uncertain terms that the investment project had been launched long before amendments were made to the EU’s gas directive, the Third Energy Package. That’s it. Period. This issue should be closed for any person who has respect for the law. But no, the European Commission took this opinion and launched its own quasi-legal procedure which resulted in the conclusion that the project had indeed been launched much earlier, yet it fell under this third energy package and the gas directive. That’s what kind of a partner we have in this “relationship.”
This is about how we can “pounce” on them and express readiness to break relations with them when they are our main economic partner – that’s what kind of a partner they are. Meanwhile, now Germany alone is fighting for the project.
And in fact, Joe Biden’s administration will not cancel anything which was done by Donald Trump except for leaving the World Health Organisation (WHO). The Democrats are returning there now.
The NATO defence ministers meeting has just ended. But there was no let-up in US demands to pay 2 percent of a country’s GDP for defence needs, i.e. for purchasing US weaponry. There was no backing off the demands on Europe regarding Nord Stream 2 – to stop participating in some matters that undermine European security. They see it better from across the ocean, right? This is about who is the boss. Europe also wants to run the house but it was taken down a peg. The situation around Nord Stream 2 is straightforward.
For now they are saying publicly that bargaining is underway and possible agreements between Washington and Berlin are being discussed, including that the Nord Stream 2 pipeline may be allowed to be completed and even start operating. However, if at the same time gas transiting via Ukraine is going to be falling, then Nord Stream 2 must be shut off. I cannot decide for Germany, however, it is obvious to me that this proposal is humiliating. As Russian President Vladimir Putin said at his meeting with parliamentary party leaders, this is yet further evidence that they want Russia to pay for their Ukraine geopolitical venture.
Question: Do we have to pay for this geopolitical project? Why do they think we have to pay for it?
Sergey Lavrov: Because they don’t feel like lashing out on it. They need the Ukrainian regime for the sole purpose of constantly irritating Russia and finding new reasons to support their Russophobic policy. They want to weaken anything around us – Belarus, Central Asia, and now also the South Caucasus, as they got nervous after Russian President Vladimir Putin’s successful mediation mission between Armenia and Azerbaijan: why was this done without them? They are now trying to infiltrate this region and step up their activities there. All of that has nothing to do with the Cold War-era ideology of a showdown between the two systems you talked about a few minutes ago. It has to do with the fact that our Western partners are unwilling, unprepared and unable to speak on an equal footing, whether with Russia, China, or whoever. They need to create a system where they will be the boss regardless. This is why they are taking an increasing dislike to the United Nations since they cannot have total control of it.
Question: Do you see the EU as a monolith, or as something more loose, with certain processes unfolding inside and some countries, no matter what, starting to talk about their willingness to be friends with Russia? In the case of the sanctions, the key figures behind them are, strange as it may seem, the Baltic States, which do not play a prominent role in the EU but, for some reason, everyone is listening to them.
Sergy Lavrov: It sounds inappropriate to refer to the EU as a monolith a mere couple of months after Brexit. This “monolith” is not the same as before. If you mean a monolith in a figurative sense, my answer is no. Quite a few countries are maintaining relations with Russia. The visit of Josep Borrell was the first trip by an EU official of this level to Russia in three years. In the same three years, about two dozen ministers from European Union member countries have visited Russia. We are having a great dialogue, without wasting too much time on confrontation and moralising. Indeed, all of them do have their assignments – a couple of sheets of paper from which they read a script approved by the “party committee” in Brussels.
Question: Do you mean they bring a notebook with instructions with them?
Sergey Lavrov: Certainly. They do not dare to veer off course. This, for example, goes for Alexey Navalny, or the Skripals as in the previous case, or human rights. Now scientist Yury Dmitriyev from Karelia is in the spotlight. They flatly refuse to accept evidence of his involvement in crimes, like pedophilia. They read from their notebook and I would adduce my arguments to the contrary and describe our vision of this or that situation and wonder why we cannot obtain evidence on the Navalny case or the Skripal case. In response they simply read again from their notebook. Apart from this discipline induced by the bloc member states’ solidarity, we discuss things normally. Yes, the EU sets the terms on which [its member countries] participate in the World Trade Organisation (WTO), while we are trading with these countries in the WTO on the terms that were agreed on for Russia to join this organisation. But the EU has nothing to do with this cooperation in trade and investment activity, except for its attempts to restrict trade and economic ties with the sanctions.
You mentioned the Baltic States. Indeed, they run the show in this respect to a great extent. I have talked to your colleagues about this on more than one occasion. When in 2004 there were hectic activities to drag them into the EU, Russia and Brussels maintained a very frank dialogue. The President of the European Commission at the time was Romano Prodi. In 2005, the objective was set to move to visa-free travel.
Question: Nobody has any memories of this today.
Sergey Lavrov: We remember this when we reply to those who ask how we dare say that we are ready to break relations with the EU. You mentioned the Baltic States. We had long been negotiating an updated version of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between Russia and the EU, which the EU terminated in 2014. It was expected to go a bit beyond the boundaries of the WTO rules and allow us to negotiate additional trade preferences. At one time there was an objective to establish a free trade zone, but this has long since fallen into oblivion. However, there were plans to update the agreement in order to liberalise trade even more, in addition to the WTO rules. In 2014, they ceased to exist – another example of breaking down our relations.
A visa-free travel agreement was also finalised back in 2013. We had met all of the EU requirements: we agreed that only people with biometric passports would be eligible for visa-free travel and that those who violated EU entry rules or any other EU rules while in an EU country during a visa-free period would be subject to readmission. We signed the relevant agreement. Everything they asked for, and that suited us, was done. Later, when it was time to sign the agreement and then ratify it, the EU said: “Let’s wait.” It did not take us long to learn why they had said this, all the more so as they did not try to conceal their motives. This Brussels team decided that it was politically incorrect to approve a visa-free travel agreement with Russia prior to offering it to Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova.
Question: In other words, Russia was made dependent on other countries?
Sergey Lavrov: It sure was, at the Baltic States’ initiative. This is also important for understanding the nature of our relations. This is an attitude from people who decided that they were European, which is not at all the case. Russia sees Europe in all its diversity. If the “party committee” in Brussels does not like it, we cannot force them to.
Question: Europe stretches at least to the Urals.
Sergey Lavrov: Correct. In 2009, when Jose Manuel Barroso was President of the European Commission, we held a Russia-EU summit in Khabarovsk. Our European colleagues arrived later in the day. We went out for a walk along the embankment. We were showing them around the city and Mr Barroso said: “It’s amazing. It took us 13 hours to get here from Brussels, and it’s still Europe.” This is the key message behind the slogan “Europe from the Atlantic to the Pacific.”
Question: I’m going to ask you about one other country, Belarus. There will be a presidential summit on February 22. President Lukashenko will come to Russia. Recently, Foreign Minister of Belarus Vladimir Makei gave an interview to the RBC media holding and mentioned Belarus’ multi-directional foreign policy. Do you think we have managed to work well with Minsk on integration? What should we expect from these talks?
Sergey Lavrov: The term “multi-directional” should not be used as a profanity. Most normal states want it. Russia, too, has used a multi-directional approach as the basis of its foreign policy since 2002. In our understanding, a multi-directional approach is possible only if based of equality, respect and a balance of interests, as well as mutual benefit. This is the only way it can work.
First, they threaten us with sanctions, and then the same people are saying that we “had it coming” and impose unilateral restrictions on us, and then say that we are “bad” because “we are looking to the East.” Everything has been turned upside down.
Russia is a Eurasian country. We have close contacts with Europe, which have been cultivated for centuries, before anyone even thought of a European Union, and the Europeans fought and competed against each other. By the way, we often helped them achieve peace and fair outcomes in wars.
Question: We even saved the monarchies?
Sergey Lavrov: Yes, and they are aware of it. The republic in the United States, too, to a certain extent.
However, our European neighbours have severed almost all of our ties and left only sporadic contacts on international crises that are of interest to the EU in order to keep a profile on the international arena. In many ways, the EU is driven by a desire to be seen as an important operator in Syrian and other matters. If we are not welcome here, we will simply continue to work with our other neighbours who are not prone to whims like that.
Objectively, our trade with the EU is almost half of what it was in 2013. Our trade with China has doubled over the same period.
Question: Back to Minsk. What can we expect from talks between President Putin and President Lukashenko on February 22?
Sergey Lavrov: There are some who want to interpret Minsk’s words about the multi-directional nature of its foreign policy as proof of its “unreliability” as a partner and ally. I do not think so.
In the Council of Europe, of which Belarus is not a member yet, we advocate the CoE establishing relations with Minsk. We supported the accession of Minsk to a number of Council of Europe conventions. We have always been in favour of Belarus enjoying normal relations with its western neighbours. I’m not sure what the CoE will do next. Russophobia has swept over most of the EU countries, and the most “violent” ones are in charge of the agenda.
I read the remarks by President Lukashenko (not all his interviews, but they were cited) to the effect that he sees no obstacles to deepening integration. Progress will depend on how President Vladimir Putin and President Lukashenko agree on things.
There are two more days to go before the talks. I don’t think we should be speculating on the outcome of the summit. We will know everything soon.
Question: Recently, US President Joseph Biden said the United States will no longer be “rolling over in the face of Russia’s aggressive actions” (ostensibly, Donald Trump did this). How can we build our relations now? Are there subjects we can discuss with Washington? Are they ready to talk with us?
Sergey Lavrov: These comments on who is rolling over or will be rolling over in the face of someone’s actions illustrate a very deep split in US society. It reached a level of personal enmity that is aggressive and contrary to American political culture. The politicians did not particularly mince their words during previous presidential campaigns or prior to elections to Congress, but I don’t remember anything comparable to what is being said now.
Our liberal media promote a tough pro-Western line. In looking for objects of criticism in Russia, they are infringing on the threshold of decency and getting personal. They are very crude, and behave not like journalists but like inveterate propagandists, accusing others of propaganda.
The fact that the New Start Treaty was extended in time is a very positive step. This shouldn’t be overrated, but it shouldn’t be underrated, either. In his election speeches Joseph Biden mentioned his willingness to extend it, but these were election speeches after all. His promise could be interpreted differently later, but he extended this important document for five years without any conditions, like we suggested. If this had not happened, there would not have been a single instrument of international law, not only in Russian-US relations but in the entire range of multilateral ties, that contained any restrictions in the sphere of disarmament, arms control and nuclear weapons non-proliferation.
It is very important that just a few days prior to February 5, 2021, the date the treaty was extended for five years, President of Russia Vladimir Putin and US President Joseph Biden reaffirmed their intention to promote talks on strategic stability in these new conditions, in their first telephone conversation after the US presidential election. The situation has changed substantially since 2010: We and the Americans have acquired new weapons some of which are covered by the treaty. We announced this last year. We said that they must be taken into account. Some other weapons are not covered by the treaty – they are basically very different because of their physical characteristics.
Question: Are you talking about hypersonic weapons?
Sergey Lavrov: Yes, the United States also has such weapons. Hypersonic weapons are partly covered by the New START Treaty, if these are ballistic missiles.
The New START Treaty already covers some weapons systems, so we now have to include these weapons systems in the Treaty for the next five years and see how all this will be verified. But it does not cover some weapons.
The United States has developed a new system called the Prompt Global Strike (PGS). By the way, this system implies a non-nuclear strike. We have suggested negotiating all issues without exception that have an impact on strategic stability and the legitimate interests of the contracting parties.
Question: Did they agree to this? Are they ready?
Sergey Lavrov: In October 2020, we submitted draft joint understandings to the Trump administration. This rough outline shows how we can sit down and start negotiating the agenda. We have received no reply from them. Instead of addressing this matter, Marshall Billingslea, the Special Presidential Envoy for Arms Control, mostly made vocal statements that the United States was all for it but that the Russians did not want to do this.
When I spoke with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, I reminded him that Russia had submitted its proposals to the Trump administration, which dealt with this matter and many other issues, including cybersecurity and concerns over interference in each other’s domestic affairs. We would like to get back to them, and to hear the Biden administration’s opinions in this regard. We realise that they now need some time to settle down in the White House and the Department of State. I hope that this will not take too long.
There are still some questions on disarmament, for example, the lineup of participants in the disarmament process. The US position on China, approved by Donald Trump, remains unchanged; the same concerns a number of other matters.
Regarding multilateral talks, first of all, this should not annul Russian-US agreements because we have several times more nuclear weapons than other nuclear countries. Second, if we make this a multilateral process, then all prospective participants, primarily the five nuclear powers, should reach a voluntary agreement. We will never try to persuade China. We respect the position of Beijing, which either wants to catch up with us or proposes that we first reduce our arsenals to China’s levels and then start on the talks. All circumstances considered, if this is a multilateral process, then we will get nowhere without the United Kingdom and France. The Trump administration insisted that China should take part and at the same time said about its allies that they were the good guys, literally. This sounds funny. Apart from the complicated and lengthy disarmament process, we do not have so many promising spheres where we can cooperate constructively.
Question: Does this mean that their vision of the issue is entirely different or that they are reluctant to negotiate?
Sergey Lavrov: They think that they are the boss, and this mentality is still here and it determines the perception of their enemies. So far, they have not designated China as an enemy, but they have called us an enemy a couple of times. Democrats have an additional motivation for expanding this policy. Their position is that, supposedly unlike with Donald Trump, they will be “no Russian tail wagging the dog.”
Question: Don’t you think that Democrats have come to power with the intention of taking revenge against Russia, and that they will implement Donald Trump’s anti-Russia plans that he failed to accomplish in four years.
Sergey Lavrov: They made such statements during the election campaign. Joe Biden and his supporters said openly that the Trump administration had gone soft, that it was constantly making advances and working for the Russian intelligence. Donald Trump said that he was conducting the toughest policy with regard to Russia. He said that he liked Vladimir Putin, but he introduced more sanctions than all of his predecessors taken together.
We are also witnessing a cowboy-style showdown there. But this is normal for US politics, especially today. Disagreements between liberals who considered liberalism an irreversible trend have become aggravated to the greatest possible extent. Donald Trump, who did not like liberal principles and approaches, suddenly took over. He tried to think more about the basic interests of the American founders, the people who moved there (and it has always been a nation of immigrants), and who accepted its laws. So, the big question is whether people should remain loyal to the country that has accepted them, or do they want to erode its principles?
Question: Should they try to fit in?
Sergey Lavrov: Yes, and they want to be the boss. Everything boils down to this once again.
Question: Karabakh, the subject of that. Fortunately, the war is over and a peace agreement has been inked. We covered extensively the role Russia and Azerbaijan played. I have a question to do with Turkey. I was in Azerbaijan during the war and heard many people say that the Azerbaijanis are supportive of the Great Turan idea (a state that covered the territory from Turkey to Central Asia). Is Moscow concerned by Turkey becoming a stronger state?
Sergey Lavrov: This opinion is entertained by a portion of the society. I’m not going to give a percentage of how many people support this idea. I’m not sure many of those who informed you about this really know what “Great Turan” is all about.
The relations between Turkic-speaking peoples have become an integral part of cooperation between Turkey and the corresponding countries, including Azerbaijan and a number of Central Asian states.
There is the Cooperation Council of the Turkic-Speaking States, in which we participate as observers. A number of our republics are interested in contacts with it and are promoting their specific projects.
There is TURKSOY ̵ the International Organisation of Turkic Culture. There’s also the Parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-Speaking Countries. All of them have been functioning for a long time now. They draft their own plans and hold functions. Their cooperation is mainly based on cultural, linguistic and educational traditions.
Speaking about the Great Turan as a supranational entity in a historical sense, I don’t think that this is what Turkey is after. I don’t see how former Soviet and now independent countries can be supportive of this idea in any form. On the contrary, their foreign policies and practices focus on strengthening their national states.
Turkey has its interests which include its fellow tribesmen who speak the same language. We also want the Russian World to communicate. We have created an extensive network of organisations of our compatriots living abroad; we are opening Russian World centres at universities in different countries with purely linguistic, educational and scientific goals.
The Centre for the Russian Language and Culture created by the Russkiy Mir Foundation was recently closed in Krakow. This is an obvious step for Poland, as well as for the Baltic States, which are fighting everything that is Russian. Ukraine followed in their footsteps and shut down several media outlets and imposed a language ban. We are well aware of all this. We will keep raising this matter at the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the corresponding UN agencies. One cannot pretend that this comes with the “growth” and the “coming of age” of the Ukrainian nation, which, as they say, is an “ill-fated” one. The Ukrainians claim that they are the descendants of Alexander the Great. In that case, they should be responsible for the orders they introduce. The EU, and Germany and France as the Normandy format participants, avoid performing their duties when it comes to “educating” Ukraine in terms of making it comply with the Minsk agreements, and this has become a chronic behaviour pattern which does not reflect well on Germany or France.
Question: It was announced that Ukraine was recognised an unfriendly state. How will this affect relations between us?
Sergey Lavrov: This is just a descriptive attribute. What’s friendly about it? Russian schools are being closed, customers and shop assistants are not allowed to speak their native language, and the Nazis are burning Russian flags.
Question: This is reminiscent of the Baltic States 20 to 30 years ago.
Sergey Lavrov: Back when the Baltic States were about to be admitted to the EU, we asked the Brussels bureaucrats, the Eurogrands, whether they were sure they were doing the right thing. The problems that are at odds with the membership criteria persist, including non-observance of the rights of the Russian-speaking minorities in Latvia and Estonia. We were told that the Baltic States are phobic of Russia (war, the so-called occupation, etc.), the EU will bring it into its fold, it will calm down and ethnic minorities will be happy and contented. Things turned out the other way round. The Russians were not granted any rights, and statelessness is still there.
Question: Let’s go back to Turkey: Ankara’s stronger position, its active role in the Nagorno-Karabakh war, President Erdogan’s visit to Northern Cyprus (which a Turkish leader has not done for quite a while). What does Moscow think about it?
Sergey Lavrov: As far as Turkey and Northern Cyprus are concerned, we see it as Ankara’s relations with its “fellow countrymen.” I have not heard about Turkey refusing to honour the UN obligations accepted by the conflicting parties. These obligations include seeking a mutually acceptable solution and creating a bicommunal bizonal federation. There is a discussion of whether the federation will be strong or weak. But there is no disagreement about the fact that it must be one state. Although not so very long ago, it was the common opinion that the entire project would fail and they would have to create two states. We understand that Ankara is interested in Cypriot Turks living in equality and their rights being observed. We support the idea that the same motives with which Turkey explains its actions in the Eastern Mediterranean, including with respect to hydrocarbons, should determine its dialogue with Greece and Turkey.
On February 17, 2021, I spoke with Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Dendias who told me that on January 25, 2021, he had had a probing conversation with Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu. They did not iron out all issues. But it is good news that a dialogue was established. They agreed to continue it. On February 18, 2021, I spoke with Mevlut Cavusoglu. We continued sharing opinions following the telephone conversations between President Putin and President Erdogan on Syria, Libya, Nagorno-Karabakh and our bilateral relations. New power units of a nuclear power station are under construction; the TurkStream project is ongoing. There is much common ground between our countries when it comes to energy.
In October 2019, the first Russia-Africa Summit in history was held in Sochi. A record number of heads of state and heads of government attended. In the course of the preparations for the summit, we reviewed the development of our relations with African countries and the current state of affairs, including from the perspective of expanding our presence on the continent which political scientists consider to be the most promising in the long term. We reviewed other countries’ presence in Africa. Since 2002, the number of Turkish embassies in Africa has increased from 12 to 42. Turkey’s trade with the region is estimated at around 20 billion dollars a year and Russia’s trade is around 15 billion dollars. This is to say that Turkey has an eye for potential.
Question: Perhaps Turkey is disappointed with the EU because nobody accepted it?
Sergey Lavrov: I believe it could partially be the case. In its contacts with the EU, Ankara continues to insist that the EU promised it accession. Turkey is spreading its wings and gaining weight despite the existing economic problems at home. Turkey mainly goes on by accumulating its national debt but this model is widely common around the world.
Question: 2020 is the year of the pandemic. During such times, countries should join forces and help each other. Do you think that this was the case? Or did the world fail to put aside disagreements and rally together even when it came to the COVID-19 infection?
Sergey Lavrov: Now this conversation is back to square one. There are no ideologies anymore. But this ideology-based, politicised perception of the Russian vaccine was not a very good signal. The Sputnik V vaccine was announced in August 2020, many months after the G20 summit (March 2020) where Vladimir Putin strongly advocated cooperation in vaccine production. Even then, we were ready to create joint scientific teams. But Western countries and their companies, unwilling to help competitors, did not respond to that proposal. So much for unification in this purely medical field.
There is also the humanitarian sphere. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, and UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet made calls during the pandemic to suspend all unilateral sanctions in fields directly affecting food, the supply of medicine and medical equipment, in order to alleviate the suffering of the population in countries that were under unilateral sanctions (regardless of their reasons). There was no reaction from the initiators of those sanctions (primarily the US and the EU). Also, there was no response to President Vladimir Putin’s proposal, at the G20 summit, to create ‘green corridors’ for the period of the pandemic, to move goods under the most relaxed rules – without tax, duties, tariffs, delays, or special customs inspections.
We are all in the same boat, and it’s not so big. Some forecasts say this situation will continue for a long time, and the coronavirus will be a seasonal infection, and it is not at all the same as the flu or other diseases, so we will have to use precautions permanently, use PPE. This realisation should somehow prod countries to more open cooperation, especially those that up until recently had some doubts.
True, there have been some good shifts. One of them is the United States’ return to the World Health Organisation (WHO). Some hotheads in Washington believe that, now that they have returned, they will make others do their bidding. There are fewer than 50 Chinese people in the WHO Secretariat, 25 Russians, over 200 Americans, and more than 2,000 NATO representatives. The past US administration said China was manipulating the WHO. That is not true. Otherwise, we are admitting the complete helplessness of 2,000 NATO members who should be the majority in the WHO Secretariat.
Nevertheless, there are some positive results though. This problem has been recently considered at the UN General Assembly and the Security Council. It is important now to focus on equitable collaboration within the WHO. Besides the attempts at carrying out “soft coups” and establishing their own rules in the organisation, hardly based on consensus, an idea has been suggested to move the main decision-making on global health policies outside the universal organisation. We have been pointing out this tendency for some time now – the one to replace international law with a rules-based world order. As it turns out in reality, those rules boil down to working out all decisions in a circle of those who agree with you rather than in a group with universal representation where you have to argue your case and search for balances and compromises. And then you just present the decision as ‘the ultimate truth’ and demand that everyone respect it.
This underlies the Franco-German initiative for a new multilateralism and some limited partnerships in the West. For example, Paris has launched an International Partnership Against Impunity for the Use of Chemical Weapons. Under this non-universal, non-UN partnership, the EU creates the so-called ‘horizontal’ regime of sanctions to be imposed on anyone that France-initiated partnership points at. A similar sanctions regime is being created for cybersecurity. Instead of any open-ended discussion, the French are promoting some partnership to defend freedom in cyberspace. This is another example of rules on which ‘order’ will be based.
There are attempts to start similar groups outside the WHO. But people’s health is not a field where one can play geopolitics. Unless there is a conspiracy behind this to reduce the population of the Earth. Many are now starting to develop such theories and concepts.
…..I think it is possible to use the logic of the Russian proverb that can be translated into English as “love it so but mother says no.”……..
There is a proverb among Serbs …please hold me back from beating him.
These statements are used for internal use in order for the black-red puppet regime under the patronage of Kudrin-Sreder’s atlantists to show the attitude before the Russian people who are being robbed and lied to so many years. While they are in power the bear is anesthetized.We are waiting for bear to move out of cave where the Kudrin-Sreder internationalists (covered with fake nationalism) have pushed him. Death to black-red international, freedom to Russia
The Medved only pretends to be in the cave, and only pretends to be asleep. Keeping all those liberals, where they are, offers quite an insight into what is going on. Tactically it is called maskirovka. Strategically, it is one of the Sun Tzu prescriptions how to win with a minimal loss. Notice also perfectly polite speech, with deliberate avoidance of using names, and putdown adjectives. The real war we are witnessing is also an ethical one. And RF intends to win it. And, it seems to me, is doing it patiently rather well.
Essential part of it is also a “vaccine war”, which they are about to win, as even some of the British companies are now starting to produce Russian vaccine Sputnik V, with a minor variation (adenovirus, instead of rhinovirus). As I recall, RF was the first to come with an effective ebola treatment.
An old Russian antiviral drug called arbitol has been shown to be quite good, even for the so called
covid-19, and I wouldn’t be too surprised if they come to the world market with a jazzed-up variation on arbitol, something like the pharmaceutical equivalent of AK-47. The real clincher would be wide spectrum, immune bousting, prophylactic pill, or pills, based on the traditional Russian and modern probiotic
medicine. I have seen their stores In Belgrade selling many such organic supplements.
All the best, Spiral
….Strategically, it is one of the Sun Tzu prescriptions how to win with a minimal loss…
Did you see that in the statistics? To show it to me and others on the site. They can play camouflage(maskirovku) with their wives. Not with the people. And the enemy is not so stupid. Only naive voters who believe to certain actors that play role of patriots.
I think that you should consider candidating in Russia’s upcoming parliamentary elections, djole. Consider yourself a failure if your popularity with the Russian voters doesn’t even beat Navalny’s.
It’s plain to see that sincere, intelligent observations made by Russia’s government backed up by actions don’t resonate with you. Are you going to propose sanctions on aforesaid government?
One of the techniques of defeatist propaganda is to spread rumors that your leaders are ‘abetting the enemy’, i,e. they are traitors who lie to the ‘true patriots’.
“But people’s health is not a field where one can play geopolitics. Unless there is a conspiracy behind this to reduce the population of the Earth. Many are now starting to develop such theories and concepts.”
Are Russian political figures now starting to understand the goals of the globalists? Or have they understood the goals in the past and are now starting to express them to lend legitimacy and develop more support against the globalists? Putin’s speech at the Davos conference makes me think the latter.
It is too late for Putin. He went along with the con-vid, can’t paddle back anymore. Trust is lost. Russian big pharma same as western big pharma – they want to get your money.
You are so right. The Sky is Falling!!
Yep, that’s about right. But President Putin can only maneuver on so many fronts at one time. For him to try to speak truth about covid to the the panic-mongers would be used in the west to stoke passions against Russia.
Putin can’t spare resources for an issue that can be finessed, like vaccines and the flu.
putin some months, could have a year or more, before covid descended upon us…said that the US had been taking samples of russian’s blood. i felt then he was telegraphing to russia as well as the world something was amiss. russia was prepared. working iows on a vaccine.
What an astonishingly marvelous interview! Lavrov’s wearing to hats: one as minister of foreign affairs of the RF, the other as the most sagacious political analyst ever.
It’s like the Russian are saying look, guys, we’ve known for quite a while what kindda game you’re playing but, outta politeness, we refrained from saying so. Things are definitely taking a new turn. And it was about time they did!
We can only hope that peace might become realized. The world knows the USG is an illegitimate facade.
Farcism is collapsing under the weight of its own contradictions.
Do people even see the absolute bombs that Lavrov dropped here in the end.
The WHO I’ve maintained had a bad rap. “Some hotheads in Washington believe that, now that they have returned, they will make others do their bidding. There are fewer than 50 Chinese people in the WHO Secretariat, 25 Russians, over 200 Americans, and more than 2,000 NATO representatives. The past US administration said China was manipulating the WHO. That is not true. Otherwise, we are admitting the complete helplessness of 2,000 NATO members who should be the majority in the WHO Secretariat.”
But this is the bomb!
“But people’s health is not a field where one can play geopolitics. Unless there is a conspiracy behind this to reduce the population of the Earth. Many are now starting to develop such theories and concepts.”
Did he say this because he is a comedian? Or is he pointing a valid finger at western thought? At things like the vaunted and doomed to fail Great Reset?
Putin + Lavrov x2 or x3 in recent weeks have hit the Great Reset very hard.
And what nation is more likely to be subject to having its population “reduced” than Russia?
The Globalists have indicated no more than 1 billion on the planet, and the real number they used for several decades is 300 million. I think that will be a high number.
They mainly want organs from the “remainders”, and probably a sufficient supply of children for their sexual depravities. 100 million would be about 100 for each 1 (They will cull their own at one million).
Quite the plan.
But look at the elites, watch them act, listen to them speak, read what they write. It’s all in plain sight.
I’m sure Lavrov has seen real raw Intel on the inner workings of these global freaks. Imagine what he knows about them.
Interesting numbers Larchmonter, where did you find them?
I saw some really disturbing stuff on twitter esp re paedophilia and child ritual sacrifice. (Epstein Island was well-equipped for that apparently). I read about population reduction but it didn’t actually mention who will be reduced or by how much.
On every continent, except Africa, the birth rate is decreasing so this has fuelled the replacement theory.
That last statement was really was astonishing, and makes the whole interview worth sharing with people normally not interested in Russian affairs, but concerned about the level of corruption they are seeing among international authoritative institutions. I wondered from the start if Sputnik V was either an intentional fly in the ointment or just seen as such among…well jeez they look like conspirators, and the amount of consternation it seemed to cause them was revelatory. I would be chicken to try even this vaccine (over possible dangerous enhancement of immune response to wild viruses), but surmise that it was in development for considerably longer than a few months because Russia had intelligence that something like this might show up.
Meanwhile, the Japanese media cheerlead non-stop unilaterally for Pfizer’s vaccine, admitting only to anaphylactic shock as a possible (but rare) dangerous side effect.
I don`t know if many people realize how important the last paragraph of this interview is:
“There are attempts to start similar groups outside the WHO. But people’s health is not a field where one can play geopolitics. Unless there is a conspiracy behind this to reduce the population of the Earth. Many are now starting to develop such theories and concepts.”
So Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov acknowledges that this “conspiracy theory” about the West`s policies in reaction to the “pandemic” exists.
That could mean that the Russian government has understood what most people still do not get: That the West is in a war not only against Russia and China, but also against their own people and against the global population as a whole!
Dont try and give credit where it is not due, the west is about control on their terms, with their incompetence they would be more likely to loose their own people first rather than depopulate the globe as a means to some end.
God on the different hand i’m not so sure about, either way they are both bound to fail and the global population boom shall be back on track shortly.
He did not say it was a conspiracy “theory”.
He said it was a conspiracy.
Lavrov chooses his words with immaculate precision.
The population of planet earth is going to crater sooner or later. The reasons will be collapse of financial systems (except for trade in the Sino-Russian zone), new disease or adaptation of an old disease (H5N8 comes to mind), collapse of food production (when insufficient petroleum is extracted for factory farms and insufficient methane for Haber process ammonium nitrate fertilizer), civilizational collapse when a sudden collapse of ice in the Antarctic is enough to flood low-lying cities in high tides on a daily basis and mass migration displaces hundreds of millions, … the list goes on and on. Some will happen sooner, other will happen later but will prevent a rebuilding of society to current population levels.
Collapse is a given. We are observing the elite’s attempt to control the timing and to make sure subservient peoples are in place in sufficient numbers to serve them. The list of suitable subservient peoples probably excludes Europeans – unless they are recent immigrants.
When do you think this will start? Petroleum and Methane.
I’m not an expert on medical science, but I do know that major policy decisions of the AMA are contrary to science. The AMA uses fake science in order to ensure that the American masses get sick, stay sick, get worse, and require expensive interventions to save their lives. For example, diabetes and obesity. These related diseases were engineered by the demonization of fat in the diet, which science has shown that there is no correlation between fat and heart disease, yet the AMA insists that there is. Since the mid-70’s, when the federal government pronounced dietary guidelines contrary to scientific evidence, obesity and diabetes have become an epidemic in the US. Now it is normal diabetic progression to amputate legs, do kidney transplants, and more. This is the capitalist model of medicine.
I wonder if Russia follows this model, making people sick in order to treat them, with the treatment making them even sicker. I hope not.
most diabetics not type 1 and even some type 1’s can enormously REDUCE the severity of their diabetes and insulin usage by simply losing enough weight to return their body mass to normal or thin levels.
the advent of corn syrup as a sweetener in foods starting in the 70’s was the advent of fat becoming a problem in the west. humans are not evolved to handle carbs and calories from liquids in large quantities (soft drinks or any drink loaded with carbs) our bodies are simply designed to process that kind of uptake. fatness ensues
or even fasting
there is a doctor at Uni of Toronto who cures diabetics with fasting
It is true if you are fasting long enough to fullfill the above, lose enough weight. The important part is to reduce enough fat on inner organs. It doesn’t matter if it’s done by fasting or just reducing food intake, you need to loose weight.
”Now the opinion has changed. Is this about the quality of the vaccine or is politics involved in this?”
Both, evidently. Russia is, once again, outperforming the West. This time, the latter’s ”vaccines” produced for greed, profit, and outright evil have to be defended against the corrupting influences from the hoodlums in the gas station masquerading as a country, LOL. Even though Lavrov doesn’t use the vocabulary, he clearly sees the EU antagonists for what they are: Plain, utter Euro-trash — totally worthless all along the line.
Lavrov makes excellent points throughout this interview. Predictably, this drives some in the readership here nuts, making all kinds of funny noises about Lavrov’s and Russia’s alleged insincerity/dishonesty plus their usual Earth-is-flat reactionary soundbites. Terribly sorry: Russia is winning — deal with it.
“Russia is winning — deal with it.”
Russian big money winning against Western big money.
Humanity as a whole at a loss.
“Secretary-General Antonio Guterres urged the countries that have this vaccine or have the money to buy it, not to forget about the poor.”
I predicted months ago that the Russian Orthodox vaccine would be safer because made by tried and tested methods. A further benefits of this orthodox method is now seen to be simpler production hence shorter time to market, hence Market Lead.
I now stick my neck out and predict a final attractive feature of the Orthodox vaccine (attractive to the customer but not to the competition): Lower price. Has anyone got prices?
I remember that during the U$ invasion of Vietnam, the U$ conscripts were landed with expensive submachine guns that didn’t work; any poor U$ grunt who was lucky enough to come across a Kalashnikov threw away his own overpriced gun from Uncle $cam and picked up the Kalashnikov. He knew it was simple and it worked.
As the man says, Remember the Poor.
Well…we are on kind of tenterhooks….there are EU strateic meetings coming up soonish…we await analysis and responses. However we remember the virtually complete lack of action by EU over JCPOA that they promised to do….no effective action on sorting a paymemt system. We remember the failures of France and Germany re Ukraine over Minsk….but they kept funding small businesses and anti corruption actions…but hey not much success .EU does not seem concerned about USA and UK supplying arms and training ukrops for continuing and developing shelling against Donbass and will never admit the truth of Maidan…the snipers..Crimea…Odessa massacre despite their own failed investigations but invent falsehoods and excuses to justify their feelings towards it all. EU permits russophobia because they are part of it.
Has Lavrov been reviewing and ensuring the compilation of case records and making assessments and preparations for potential successors is up to date..indicating they and appropiate departments must know all the histories and situations….work out all possible strategies policies and plans cohesively in line with Russian developing policies…..are they ready and prepared for whatever might happen next?
Poor Lavrov. He operates in a sphere where there isn’t even one peer.
He has so many mediocrities to deal with.
a patient man! as is putin but so it must be when ignorant spoiled children are you political peers.
”Just yesterday I read a somewhat ambiguous statement by President of France Emmanuel Macron. He put us and the Chinese into the category of those who are trying to gain advantages in the world arena at the expense of their medical achievements. The day before yesterday, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen spoke with an emphatically negative connotation about the supplies of the Russian vaccines to foreign countries.”
I found the pronunciamento by the idiot Macron ’somewhat ambiguous’ too, at least as per the above English translation where the pronoun ’their’ could refer either to the Euro-trash or to Russia/China. Most likely, Macron was referring to Russia/China, in which case he was spouting nonsense. He has exactly zero knowledge of Russia’s and China’s medical achievements although (if the above interpretation of the English transcript is correct) he is rightly worried about the impact of successful vaccines from enemy states upon their standing in the eyes of world public opinion. In the less likely case he was referring to whatever achievements — medical or otherwise — that could be attributed to the Euro-trash, he gives the game away: Russia and China have rendered the EU’s efforts a silly joke. In either case, it would be interesting to know what ’advantages’ he is hinting at.
As for UvdL, she reveals the imperialist mindset of the God-awful EU with its anger at Russia’s cooperation with the world’s downtrodden and oppressed countries and peoples. In the words of Vladimir Putin at Davos:
“But people’s health is not a field where one can play geopolitics. Unless there is a conspiracy behind this to reduce the population of the Earth. Many are now starting to develop such theories and concepts.”
There isn’t even one Русский мир center in Canada, where Russophobia is rampant – some on, Russia, open one here.
Think not. Canada’s Ukronazi infestation would ”take care” of any such initiative, including arson / explosives. For the staff, it would mean having to live in a state of perpetual fear for their lives, further reinforced by blackmail.
For Lavrov to even mention this speaks volumes. Certainly Emperor Gates openly states that Earth’s population must decrease and -Oh! look, Gates is in the ‘vaccine’ business. Not much of a dot to join.
Ни шагу назад !
“Not a step back!”
Slogan from 1942.
Enough is enough !
“Now scientist Yury Dmitriyev from Karelia is in the spotlight. They flatly refuse to accept evidence of his involvement in crimes”
Apparently the Russian state is hunting this person. I don’t know anything about him, I simply read the wiki on him.
Why would someone looking into the slaughter of people during the Soviet era cause the Russian government any discomfort? Anyone have some insight into this?
Russia isn’t hunting Dmitriyev, He is already convicted & sentenced, 10 years I believe, for molesting his daughter and kiddie porn..
Sorry, no links.. Colonel Cassad’s Live Journal
What a fantastic read. I would definitely read Lavrov’s tell-all memoirs if he ever writes them.
I love the shade he throws at the liberal opposition in Russia: [Rabid incoherent Russophobia] is what some of our liberals call “relations with the EU.” lol!
On liberal Russian media: “They are very crude, and behave not like journalists but like inveterate propagandists, accusing others of propaganda.”
Most of his exasperation is aimed at the EU.
He stresses that “Russia is a Eurasian nation” and adds: “Objectively, our trade with the EU is almost half of what it was in 2013. Our trade with China has doubled over the same period.”
In spite of the candid tone, clever digs, I do feel a sense of underlying sadness and openly-stated regret at how things turned out with the EU .
At least with Lavrov at the diplomatic helm, Russia can safely say they did their utmost with their best diplomat. If it does come to a complete breakdown with EU, Russia can cut them off without second thoughts.
I love this guy, best diplomat in the world for the last decade.
There is also a sadness & regret that Russia wasted so much time trying to reason with the lying hounds of the EU & US..
Russia can feel optimistic that it is still possible to hook-up with the Asian Century, where 1/4 of the world’s population have a mostly positive view of Russia, and will be reliable “partners” when treated as equals..
Cheers from Yunnan Province
Better late than never, Eddie…
Btw, while the EU countries were busy stealing masks and respirators from each other, during the pandemic, China showed true leadership.
We are really grateful for what China did for us! On Serbian Statehood day on Feb. 15th, several Chinese physicians and insitutions were given the highest national honours and gold medals of merit.
Vucic is handing out medals like a pedophile hands out candy.
The Chinese completely deserve the recognition. They built entire labs and hospitals, sent doctors and supplies for us.
China is not to blame for Vucic and the other creatures in our government.
I don’t think they wasted time, they bought time to prepare for what they knew was coming. Russia is more ready now, and can speak openly as Lavrov does. I agree with those who say Lavrov is in a league of his own…
….”.. I do feel a sense of underlying sadness and openly-stated regret at how things turned out with the EU …”
I agree, and had the feeling also that Lavrov´s mood in this interview showed a tiny bit of desperation, as if he could foresee that the world is entering ” a street which nobody come back ” (Schubert´s song “Die Strasse die ich gehe, die niemand geht zurück” ). His mood may be prophetic in retrospect, – if there is a big war; as if he tries to appeal to the other side to be reasonable.
“We are seen as a stranger”. This, for me, is Sergey’s Lavrov’s most troubling remark. I know it is not true, for me at least, since I can read Leskov’s or Platanov’s stories whenever I wish. And I was in Russia a couple of years ago, on buses in St Petersberg, traveling the Metro in Moscow and the tramlines of Irkutsk. None of the many Russians I met were in any way strangers to me.
I would be interested to hear from those here who are more knowledgeable than me if there are people who can stand on Sergey Lavrov’s broad shoulders when he decides to call it a day. Any parent will tell you that patience, when stretched, can be very tiring. Sergey Lavrov sometimes seems a bit stretched to me. Hardly surprising, given the idiocies that he has had to accommodate in his polite Russian way over so many years. So, if he decides that he would rather bounce grandchildren on his knee than bounce Brussels diplomats back home across the steppes, who will replace him?
This is the language of a divorce lawyer, not a marriage guidance counsellor, isn’t it?!
At the very least, the tone of the conversation suggests that a trial separation has already been agreed, the only bones of contention are whether full divorce will follow or whether a longer time period will be used to come closer together again.
Let us be clear, a huge percentage of both the British People and the European electorate fundamentally have zero issues to do with either Russia or the Russian people. We do not have any respect for Washington-based geopolitics and have now developed complete contempt for our national politicians who prostitute themselves at the expense of those who, at least in the past, elected them. We are currently wondering if we will ever have elections again because the popularity of any significant political party in the UK is now down in the basement.
Our politicians have been utterly corrupt in their handling the ‘coronavirus’ ‘pandemic’, breaching every basic concept of government contractual probity to issue billions of pounds worth of no-bid contracts, often to those with no basic qualifications nor experience to deliver the requirements of the tender. Not surprisingly, the recipients of those Government hand-outs (all secured through yet more money printing), are those whose donations to party funds are less than 0.01% of the traditional taxation take of the UK nation. To say that such behaviour is consistent with remaining in office is simply impossible. They are unfit to govern, unfit to represent us and Mr Lavrov, Mr Putin and any other number of Russians should have no qualms about telling them so face to face.
Take Mr Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson. This blustering oaf, who was born in New York City, educated at Eton and Oxford, then spent a decade fomenting mischief in European relations, considered the extent of responsibility as an MP to ‘be told by the Americans that Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons and would threaten the UK in 45 minutes’ and then meekly walk through a division lobby to vote to murder 1 million entirely innocent people, only to then bluster later about having been ‘duped’.
To say that such behaviour is consistent with the responsibilities supposed to be held by our top 650 representatives is simply ridiculous. He proved there and then that he was unfit for any form of responsibility, yet seemed to believe that callously voting for the death of 1 million people made him fit for senior office. It tells anyone of sane mental faculties that the whole media charade surrounding political office in the UK is run by the security service murderers for the security service murderers. Just go an read what the salivating journalists were having printed against their byline. Murderers too cowardly to pick up a gun and actually pull the trigger.
We all know that the whole Skripal shebang was absolute nonsense. I do not know what actually happened, what I do know is that the evidence is ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ that the Government propaganda was lies, followed by more lies followed by more lies. There was no chemical weapon used, the NHS broke the hippocratic oath when suppressing the medical truth enunciated by an A&E consultant at Salisbury Hospital and the outcome was a huge increase in funding for Porton Down, the UK centre for development of chemical and biological weapons. My assumption is that Johnson and May were threatened with the truth coming out, which would destroy both of their careers, so they handed over the cash.
The only credibility Johnson had to become Prime Minister was to ‘get Brexit done’. The UK people wanted Brexit done, yet they have once again been deliberately betrayed by planned incompetence and overt treason by UK Civil Servants, UK politicians and Uk ‘celebrities’ like the odious Tony Blair.
He has no credibility for foreign ‘adventure’ in the Chinese sphere of influence. He has no credibility for Russophobic posturing. He has no credibility for being a Conservative after the past 12 months of fiscal armageddon.
And as for Covid19, well, that is about destroying human life as we know it for a disease not more serious than flu. It is not the Black Death, it is not the Irish Potato Famine, it is a nasty virus causing excess deaths.
For that, sex is abolished, flirting is abolished, non-verbal communication is abolished, society and culture are desecrated.
And for what?
Bill Gates becoming a global dictator??
A global cabal of the rich and powerful turning 6 billion other people into slaves??
May authorised 100 million additional to defence budget to be spent against Russians after Skripal….we know where the money should have been spent after several reports earlier saying we were not prepared for a pandemic….and huge huge numbers of medical and social care staff vanquished by the virus let alone those that caught it in hospital….those that died in care homes. So much societal damage has been done.
You mentioned the Irish potato famine.
This episode was a genocide as proven by Chris Forgarty in his book
“Ireland 1845 to 1850,The perfect Holocaust,and who kept it perfect”
Not a pleasant read.
Sergei Lavrov’s last sentence points to a distinct possibility that in our times,now,we are facing another Holocaust this time of truly epic proportions, brought on by the descendants of the same thieving murdering class who perpetrated the genocide of the Irish famine.
Mr Johnson is but one of the descendants of this odious type of human who considers himself “chosen”
Today on Sunday 21 February on lunchtime news on the Irish state broadcaster RTE was given the greater part of the program to an item about Israel and its vaccination program.
This indeed says that the ones who “kept it perfect” as in The official government narrative on the Irish Fammine are still in the business of keeping their lies and deception perfect today.
The propaganda outlet RTE, funded by the taxpayer and controlled by the so called Neo liberal elite.
Indeed many here in Ireland see through this and openly talk of the Zionist project in an informed manner.
History is deep and we are witnessing a brazen attempt at global take over by big capital exactly as foretold in the “Protocols of the learned elders of Zion “ more than a hundred years ago.
This contentious publication is an invaluable tool to bring clarity to current affairs and challenges facing us all.
It is irrelevant whether or not the “Protocols “is a forgery because it’s content is in our faces every day.
Ignore these matters at our own peril.
God bless all here ,including the trolls,poor mind controlled fools.
The M.O. of the Khazarian Mafia going back to the old silk road days is: murder, plunder, take on your victims’ identities, go back to their societies, infiltrate, plunder, conquer or destroy. They hijacked the Jewish religion, committed atrocities, and directed the blame towards regular Jewish people which created anti-Semitism. They are masters of deception. They are masters at manipulating language. These skills come from learning to read and write Hebrew. They have special scholars who rewrite history for their own advantage, mostly covering up the blame for their atrocities. The Anglos are their partners in this. That is how they created the British Empire and later the American Empire.
The best example of this is how they rewrote the history books regarding the causes of WW1 with Herbert Hoover’s help in the 1920s. See Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War by Gerry Docherty (Author), Jim MacGregor (Author). The 9ll Commission Report was sloppy work at lying, but the public has been sufficiently brain-washed to accept it. They have now directed the blame for terrorism to the Islamic Religion.
They made great profits off of the black race, but now in America and Europe, they are directing the blame towards the white race in preparation for the Great Reset, a one-world government with dictatorial powers.
Lavrov words echoe the following speech. The following being, by the way, much better served formulated.
The Islamic Republic has faced superpowers’ hostility since day 1. What’s the reason for this hostility?
It’s because the Islamic system refuted domineering order’s norms – i.e. dominating & giving in to domination – that ruled the world & were the domineering order’s lifeblood.”
“The domineering order has always looked for excuses against the #IslamicRevolution. One day it’s human rights, once vilifying theocracy, once the nuclear issue & once regional issues. They’re all excuses. The key concern is that #Iran Drapeau de l’Iran won’t give in to their domination.”
Nothing new under the sun…
Lavrov is still too much of a diplomat.
His last words regarding: ‘conspiracy behind this to reduce the population of the Earth. Many are now starting to develop such theories and concepts.’ are really disturbing. For me it’s not even possible to understand that there are people with so much hate and evil in them. How can someone be so sick in his head is really … How frustrating must be to deal with this morons and sick persons
“They [the Con-19 experts] just said right away that it was impossible just because it’s impossible, meaning that “no one can do this that quickly.”
History repeats itself, sometimes so closely that it rhymes. Here is poor old Adolf making excuses after the battle of Kursk:
“Our experts assured me that it was impossible for any country to produce so many tanks that quickly”
All these Western nations from the Anglosphere to Europe are throwing the geopolitical equivalent of a toddler’s tantrum, as they are flying into a rage that West’s jealously guarded global hegemony is ending.
And the one country that leads the world in throwing a diaper-soiling tantrum is the United States of America.
Here is a video that explains Western and American geopolitics and foreign policy in their essence:
It is more insightful than the barrage of “news” articles or analysis that you will find in the Free Press.
Excellent. A truly great diplomat. The subtle yet noticeable change of Mr Lavrov”s incisive analysis of Western perfidy is refreshing and illustrates Russia’s readiness to defend her reputation and interests. One thing that caught my attention, but not mentioned here, is Lavrov’s tone becomes conciliatory when the topic shifts to Turkey’s interests. Lavrov acknowledged Turkey’s role in the region and expressed suppport for its genuine interests and conduct I. E. The natural strengthening of its relationship with the stans and its approach towards the Cyprus issue as well as with Greece. Lavrov who chooses his words concisely displayed a rather benign tone. Many readers may or may not be surprised to see this but it stood out nonetheless.
Good observation. I had not noticed that initially.
Turkey is trying to play both sides so as to end up on the ‘winning’ side and Russia wants to keep it that way until the U.S. pissed Turkey off enough that Turkey ends up on the Russian side.
I agree. You summed it up quite well. It’s a dangerous game to some degree . It might end up being too late to choose the right side. However, under Erdogan, it’s NATO relationship has been shaken and he is brave enough to stand his ground, hence, the coup attempt. He has taken some bold initiatives to show a working relationship with the Russians in potentially explosive areas such as Syria, Ĺibya and NK. This is no small feat considering their historical relations. Russia on its part has played it diligently. It’s economic development with the nuclear plants and Turksteam has given Turkey positive benefits. The S400 purchase and collaboration in regional hotpots has resulted in stability. Thus Russia has certainly given Turkey much to ponder over. It should be clearer for Turkey the perfidious nature of its Western alliance who have balked at letting it join the EU. This really took a sharp turn when NATO made the deal with the SDF ignoring Turkey’s genuine security concerns despite being a NATO member.
Ultimately, Turkey needs to at least maintain an independent position working with its neighbours as well as its interests . Russia will certainly help and Turkey for the long term should pivot in that direction. It HAS to realise the west is only a partner not a friend.
Hhmmm….kiss and make up? What is he up to….feelng the pressure? Making some kinda peace cos Kurds are standing firm as USA is not giving up north east Syria?
A Handmaids Tale is a western freak show compliments of NATO Canada. God Save the Queen is all you need to know about subservient Canada.
Very ominous interview.
Russia has given up on diplomacy and is waiting for the Empire to collapse or for it to attack its opponents to maintain its hegemony.
Does not look good.
EU will announce sanctions in a few days due to N situation.
An inspirational interview with Lavrov, one is so unused to reading anything so lengthy of political concern, the effect is shattering in a way.
A monumental diplomat, meaning ‘spirit greatness’ that is unconcerned with self as being superior, but yet is so, through intelligence, wisdom and as world citizen Profound honesty came through, a quality that one or two other’s clearly could feel, and interpreted in their own way, that is troublesome for the future.
I don’t think he has given up on diplomatic relations though, that is something he will never do, but how will things unfold for Russia, that is the question…