Commentary by Russian military journalist Boris Rozhin in italics
[ColonelCassad] A long interview with Lavrov during a visit to Belarus, where he answered on the position of the Russian Federation regarding the conflict with the West and the prospects for negotiations with Ukraine, indicating the current diplomatic position of the Russian Federation at the moment. It was here that for the first time official statements were made that the negotiating position on Ukraine would now be formed based on the "situation on the ground", which significantly expands the list of Russia's territorial claims, which on February 24 were limited only to the issues of Crimea and Donbass.
Question: The events of recent years, the gradual global escalation were perceived by many as separate fragments. Today, the “puzzle” has taken shape: a failed rebellion in Belarus with the expectation of a permanent transfer to Russia, a Polish-Baltic provocation with refugees, the deployment of NATO troops near our borders, open pumping of weapons and sponsorship of the Nazis and Russophobia in Ukraine, large-scale sanctions pressure. There is a feeling that all this is one big "special operation" of the West, which was being prepared for a long time and very cynically.
Foreign Minister Lavrov: I agree. This can be called differently - "special operation", a strategic course to cancel any country that dares to contradict the West. Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke about this in detail recently at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. His scores are well known. All this is connected with the mood and illusions that “suddenly” appeared in the West.
When the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact disappeared, the West, through the mouth of the famous political scientist F. Fukuyama, announced that “the end of history has come”, “from now on and forever, the liberal democratic order in Western execution and reading will dominate on Earth and it will be a criterion for all other states. HIt must be said frankly that the first years of the existence of the Russian Federation after the collapse of the Soviet Union gave the West reason to believe that this concept would be approved and Russia would come to terms with its new, subordinate position in international relations.
We know the history of recent years well. Since the early 2000s a course was taken to return to national identity, religious, cultural, family traditions and values. Since then, the movement of the West began to mobilize forces and means to suppress dissent. 2007 – President Vladimir Putin's Munich speech. All those who had ears were given the opportunity to hear. Most didn't seem to hear. And those who were able to do this decided that the “recalcitrant” needed to be educated. Further, threats were created on the borders of Russia and Belarus as our closest neighbor and ally. We saw the rest.
It is clear that these calculations are doomed to failure. We will strive for the democratization of international relations. And not on some invented basis (“rules” that the West constantly talks about), but on the basis of international law, above all, the principles of the UN Charter. It says that the Organization is based on respect for the sovereign equality of states. Here's what we're after. We are convinced that we will.
Question: When the events of 2020 took place in Belarus, individuals in Russia sometimes sniped at Minsk. Like, "external intervention", foreign intelligence services, hybrid war - "this is a purely internal agenda." Subsequently, it turned out that a similar scenario began to be used in relation to Moscow, the same elements and resources worked in your direction. Do you notice these parallels? Do you share the point of view that the first “strike” against Moscow was inflicted in 2020, when, fortunately, the “mutiny” failed?
Foreign Minister Lavrov: This is part of the same fierce campaign in which the agony of the unipolar world is manifested. That is why the West has been acting so frenzied over the past couple of years. Especially during the period when a special military operation in Ukraine was launched.
We heard "half-joking" assessments of what is happening in Belarus and the facts presented. These are political scientists who are constantly and everywhere looking for something to express their negative attitude towards the Russian and Belarusian leadership. We know this well.
That unpleasant episode clearly showed that we are real allies. Russian officials had no doubts that we should help the fraternal, allied people and state. The CSTO had no doubts in January of this year, when something similar was undertaken in Kazakhstan, but in a different form and scale.
It was amusing to hear about the equality of large and small peoples in accordance with the UN Charter (remembering the events in Kazakhstan) when the West reacted nervously to the speed with which the CSTO responded to the appeal of the President of Kazakhstan K.-Zh. Tokayev. Then he showed dissatisfaction with the fact that the CSTO was called at all.
I will not reveal a big secret (this was reported in the Western media), emissaries from the EU (I am sure that the Americans do the same), when they travel around Central Asia, they seek explanations from Kazakhstan about what happened and why it took such measures to suppress popular demonstrations. They consider themselves entitled to demand explanations. Although it would be more useful for them to concentrate on solving their own problems, growing like a snowball.
Question: There is an opinion that in 2020 Belarus survived thanks to two factors: the personality of President Alexander Lukashenko and Russia's support.
Foreign Minister Lavrov: I agree. I have already said that Russia immediately provided political and moral support. She was ready to provide any other assistance to prevent a coup d'état.
Question: Today we see that the West has declared war on the whole world. At the same time, he himself is afraid of the truth like fire: the closure of YouTube channels, Belarusian and Russian television satellite channels, popular Telegram resources in Belarus. Zombies of the Western public, reaching the point of absurdity - is this a manifestation of weakness? The values that they tried to teach us all these years, democracy - this "screen" instantly crumbled.
S.V. Lavrov: The West is afraid of fair competition. This is well known to many. Hence the “cancellation of the culture” of any country that speaks from its own, nationally oriented positions, a ban on broadcasting TV channels, deletion of objectionable politicians from social networks and everything that is in one way or another at odds with the neoliberal concept of vision and organization of the world. It's all over the place. The West does not live by the truth.
Russian President Vladimir Putin in one of his recent speeches called the "collective West" an "empire of lies." A sharp statement. Absolutely agree with him.
Question: Provocations and lies, even at the official level, have become a trademark of Ukrainian politics. In a recent interview, P.A. Poroshenko said that Kyiv never thought of resolving the conflict peacefully, and eight years were needed to play for time and build up military power. It turns out that all promises to stop hostilities were empty words. Instead of fulfilling the Minsk agreements, Donbass was systematically bombed.
Foreign Minister Lavrov: I am not at all surprised that lies have become the hallmark of the Ukrainian regime. So it was under P.A. Poroshenko, remains under V.A. Zelensky.
Recently, furrowing his eyebrows, in camouflage, in some kind of T-shirt, he declared the falsehood of reports that the Ukrainian armed forces were bombing the center of Donbass and other settlements. Although even the Western press, in every possible way shielding the Ukrainian neo-Nazis, has already admitted that reports that the Russian Armed Forces are doing this are not true.
Everyone knows very well how Donetsk is being bombed. Any foreign embassy (if it is not shown in Europe and the USA) has the opportunity here in Minsk to watch reports from the scene. It is impossible even to imagine that they do not know the truth. Most of them are honest, professional diplomats. Surely they report this truth to their capitals. But there sounds a completely different assessment of what is happening. What surprises me more is not the lies that we hear every day, every hour from Kyiv, but how the "patrons" of Kyiv began to play this game of lies.
They shield him with or without reason. And it's not just now.
You mentioned the eight-year period after the anti-constitutional coup d'état.This coup was the result of the fact that the opposition simply spat in the face of the European Union, which, in the person of France, Germany and Poland, put its guarantees under the agreement between VF Yanukovych and the three opposition leaders. The next morning they tore it all up, announced as a priority the need to cancel the regional status of the Russian language, and sent armed bandits to the Crimea. Here's how it all started.
But the West, recalling these events, only says that we “annexed” Crimea out of the blue. They cancel the entire prehistory that has been accumulating not only since February 2014, but even the previous ten years, when Ukraine was pulled to a “break”: they had to decide with whom they want to be - with Europe or with Russia. Ministers, officials, members of governments said this directly before every election in Ukraine.
They lied when they guaranteed the agreement with VF Yanukovych (which was broken by the opposition), the Minsk agreements (which Germany and France boasted about). Every year and every month we urged them to look at the disgrace that Kyiv is doing, publicly officially refusing to comply with the Minsk agreements through the mouth of the president. They "went into the shadows", urged us to "enter the position" of the Ukrainian state. Such is the nature of our European partners. We already know her well. She is turned inside out.
Question: As a reporter, I covered the events on the Maidan for reporters. Believe me, I've seen enough of the colors and everything else: revolutionary tinsel and a pink veil before my eyes, and especially what happened next.
Foreign Minister Lavrov: Didn't you get any cookies?
Question: We didn't get cookies. I do not want to repeat this in other countries.
Given this behavior of the Ukrainian partners, should they, in principle, propose a different version of the agreements, the conditional "Minsk-3"? Or does it not matter anymore?
Foreign Minister Lavrov: It makes no sense in the forms in which they have been trying to reach an agreement over the past eight years. First, the agreement that was broken by the Maidan in February 2014, then the Minsk agreements.
Why go far. Just a few days after the start of the special military operation, the Ukrainian side proposed negotiations. We immediately agreed. For several meetings, Ukrainians simply “served their number”: they sat at the table in caps, demonstrating their moral values and the cultural heritage of their ancestors.Then at the end of March of this year. in Istanbul they really put paper on the table. It was taken as our basis. Based on it, they were handed over to the Ukrainian side on April 15 of this year. draft agreement.
But immediately after Istanbul (we know this for sure), the Americans and the British “clicked” on them, because it is the Anglo-Saxons who now rule in Kiev. A day later, a terrible provocation took place in the settlement. Bucha. Then, when the facts of the hypocritical, cynical staging had already been revealed, they immediately hushed up about it. Now few people talk about Bucha.
We are just wondering: have you found out the names of those people whose corpses were discovered with such fanfare, demonstrated to the whole world? Nobody says anything. They are also silent about the fact that even the British newspaper The Guardian reported the first results of pathological and anatomical examinations, which showed that most of these people died from fragments of artillery shells. Immediately, this information again went into the “shadow”.
From April 15 this year. Ukraine does not reach the negotiation level.
V.A. Zelensky either declares that he is ready for negotiations and there will still be peace, then the next day he says that in order to resume negotiations, Russia must withdraw to the line on February 24 of this year. B. Johnson agrees with him, with whom they look quite organically together.
Most importantly, the meeting in Istanbul took place on March 29 this year. It was about the need for Ukraine to be a neutral, non-nuclear, non-bloc country while providing it with security guarantees. These guarantees (it was written there by Ukrainians) will not apply to Crimea and Donbass. We were ready to discuss it. They broke the negotiations. When they deign to turn to us with a proposal to resume the diplomatic process (which, as I understand it, the Europeans strongly ask them, but the Anglo-Saxons do not allow this), we will look at the situation on the ground. There are liberated areas. The majority of the population does not even have the thought of returning again to the control of neo-Nazi authorities or authorities that in every possible way indulge neo-Nazism.
Question: It seems to me that Kyiv has set such a “unique” record in these eight years: it has squandered the sovereignty of its country in such a short time. In fact, virtually nothing remains of an independent state today.
Foreign Minister Lavrov: They decided that sovereignty would be strengthened by abolishing everything Russian and everything non-Ukrainian. So that the heroes were only Ukrainian, and in the reading of neo-Nazis who revere R. Shukhevych, S. Bandera, who destroy monuments to those who liberated Ukraine, not to mention the abolition of the Russian language and education, the media. All this has been cancelled.
Unfortunately, now in Moldova they are trying to undertake the same abolition of everything Russian. The President signed the law that there will be no more news from Russia in Moldova. It is sad. Ukraine tried to build its sovereignty on the abolition of its history. It has no history without the Russian people. Does not exist. They went down this path. The West, rubbing their hands and pushing them along this “slippery” road, encouraged such an approach and a conceptual vision of the Ukrainian state, if only to “hurt”, as they believed, create threats, unbalance the Russian Federation, but also our closest allies also, as it turns out in recent years.
Question: If negotiations suddenly take place and the leaders of Russia and Ukraine sit down at the negotiating table, how do you feel about the initiative of the President of Belarus, who says that there should be a place for Belarus at this table? Since the West considers our country a co-aggressor.
Foreign Minister Lavrov: We will accept with great pleasure the invitation of the President of Belarus to gather on Belarusian territory. But I wouldn't even think about it. Now I do not see an opportunity for the Ukrainian side to offer (but we will not offer anything ourselves. They have already offered everything a long time ago. The ball is on their side). I do not see the possibility that they will be allowed to take advantage of the return to the negotiation procedure.
Question: This is about external control. Another topic that is being discussed today is food. Once "well-fed" Europe today itself thought about banal things: what will we eat, drink, grow on our land? Once upon a time, Belarus was criticized for agrarian biases. Now they themselves understand that this is a rather important direction. We see that Ukrainian grain has already become the subject of bargaining: A. Guterres calls A.G. Lukashenko, they come to Russia from different sides with the theme “help us with logistics”. At the same time, it is paradoxical that the sanctions, which in this case are the main barrier, are not going to be canceled by anyone, they do not even stutter.
Foreign Minister Lavrov: This is in line with distorted reality: Alice in Wonderland, Alice Through the Looking-Glass. In a word, the empire of lies. Yes, indeed, the UN Secretary General A. Guterres is trying to promote some kind of initiative, he sent his representatives here. Russian President Vladimir Putin explained to him in detail that there is an elementary way, which now without any negotiations, memorandums, is the way through Belarus. To do this, it is only necessary, as you said, to provide all the logistics and financial chains. There are other more costly food delivery routes through Romania and Poland. But as for the ports, they are not blocked by us.
Our armed forces since March of this year. declare safe corridors from the mined territorial waters of Ukraine to the Bosporus. Ready to cooperate with the Turks. But for this, the Ukrainians must clear the port of mines. They don't want to do it. At the same time, A. Guterres is trying to resolve issues of grain withdrawal from Ukrainian ports without taking into account the corridors we announce daily. He wants to first agree on Ukrainian grain, then pro-Russian. Nobody is in a hurry to get us anywhere.
This situation creates problems for many developing countries. The UN Secretary General, by his actions, is prolonging the food crisis, making it impossible to quickly send grain there. It's unfortunate. He sent his representative to Russia, Secretary General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) R. Greenspan, who met with First Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation A.R. Belousov.
All proposals formulated by President Vladimir Putin have been put on paper and submitted to New York. We have done everything we can do. The slow response to a seemingly urgent issue is alarming. I do not rule out that the UN Secretariat also experiences the strongest influence from those who wish to exercise external management of the Organization.
Question: The feeling that if the problem of hunger escalates, and there are all the prerequisites for this, then this problem can also be blamed on Minsk and Moscow. They say, "we did offer, but you did not agree."
Foreign Minister Lavrov: This should not worry us, because "our conscience is clear." You and we have laid out everything that can be explained. The hypocrisy of demagogic “howls” that food and fertilizers are not under sanctions is well known.Yes, food as such is not located, but all the necessary actions to ensure that it reaches the buyer are under sanctions.
By the way, the Americans quickly came to their senses and lifted sanctions on fertilizers. Now there are some commodity flows. The European Union remains in irreparable confidence in its own rightness and infallibility. Contrary to common sense, on a daily basis, they are constantly “hollowing at one point”: that they should inflict a “defeat” on Russia and, apparently, Belarus as well.
Question: It is obvious that without fertilizers there will be no harvest. Without logistics, everything will be longer and more expensive. What is the West counting on in this case? Citizens have already more than felt the effect of these sanctions.
Foreign Minister Lavrov: I find it difficult to answer. I think that the West is now in a nervous state. Let them figure it out. Everything that depended on us, we did. We offered and continue to offer honest cooperation in areas of mutual interest. They don't want it.
Question: It is clear that the world cannot stand still. If somewhere the chain breaks, then another point of growth will still arise. Now there is talk of creating a "new G8" without the US, Germany, France, that is, a club that will include states that respect a normal, equal, balanced dialogue. In your opinion, does this idea have a future?
Foreign Minister Lavrov: We don't need a "new G8".We already have structures based on the principles you just mentioned, primarily in the Eurasian space. The EAEU is actively promoting integration processes together with the PRC, harmonizing the Chinese One Belt, One Road project with plans for Eurasian integration. Members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations are closely watching these plans. A number of these countries are concluding an agreement on a free trade zone with the EAEU. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization also "fits" into these processes.
All this is happening both in the CIS space, the CSTO (if we take the military-political aspects), and in the space embracing the Union State of Russia and Belarus. There is another structure that goes beyond the geographical boundaries of Eurasia - this is the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa). This association is increasingly relying not on Western methods of doing business, not on Western rules according to which international monetary, financial and trade institutions should work, but on fairer methods that will not make any processes dependent on, say, the dominant role of the dollar. or some other currency.
The G20 is fully represented by the BRICS and 5 other countries that share the positions of the BRICS, and on the other side of the "barricades" are the "seven" and those who support it. That's a pretty serious balance. The G20 may degenerate if the West uses it to escalate confrontation. The structures that I mentioned (SCO, BRICS, ASEAN, EAEU, CIS) are based not on diktat, not on the requirement to agree with the realities of the “unipolar world”, but on consensus, mutual respect, building a balance of interests.
Question: It is clear that when there is such a global confrontation, you need to be together. Not only Belarus and Russia, but, as you said, the entire Eurasian space. There are obvious problems with unity here. President Vladimir Putin spoke about this at the last CSTO summit. We see that American generals are still coming to the post-Soviet countries. Sometimes not everything is good in terms of voting in international organizations. Not so often there are official statements that would contain a consolidated agenda. In your opinion, is it possible that now the post-Soviet countries themselves are helping the West to undermine the once strong ties.
Foreign Minister Lavrov: We spoke about this at the CSTO Ministerial Council meeting recently held in Yerevan. My speech and the speech of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belarus VV Makei went in the same direction. They emphasized the need to maintain allied obligations and relations.
In NATO, a situation is unthinkable when any country of the alliance suddenly starts to move away from a common position.Now Turkey is trying to achieve respect for its interests in connection with the entry of Sweden and Finland. This is a rare exception, especially since the Turks very clearly and understandably explained what they want. They consider some organizations terrorist. These organizations found shelter in Finland and Sweden. Turkey explained that it wants to eliminate this problem. In the case of other votings in the UN or somewhere else, NATO members absolutely “raise their hands” in solidarity. We know that those who have doubts are under terrible pressure. And it turns out on our allies.
We do not have "stick" discipline in the CSTO. We always try to find a balance of interests. The West, which has lost all decorum, is against observing the UN statutory principle of respect for the sovereign equality of states, in accordance with which we have stated our position with Belarus, with our other allies. The West also stated its position. Let the developing countries compare, analyze and make their own decision regarding the problems that arise between us and the West.
But he does not want to let them make their own decision, sends emissaries, twists their arms, subjecting the relevant figures to direct blackmail, ultimatums, speculating on their financial situation, on where their children study. I know this well. I cannot even imagine that something similar will be applied in our relations within the framework of the same CSTO. There are politicians who are subject to such influence in different countries. It is necessary to continue the conversations started during the CSTO meeting in Moscow, and which were supported in Yerevan by the CSTO foreign ministers. We are allies and comrades. We must honestly discuss all the issues that we have to solve together. As B.Sh. Okudzhava sang, "so as not to disappear one by one, let's join hands, friends." This is great wisdom. I am convinced that all our neighbors understand this very well.
Q: Let's end on a positive note about unity. Belarus and Russia in this sense compare favorably, including from the Eurasian space. Constant meetings, including between the two presidents, always a clear understanding on all issues. We are talking with you on the eve of the 30th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations. It's come a long way. We know that the periods were different, it could not do without disputes and contradictions. Decoupling solutions were always found. How do you assess the level of diplomatic relations today, including future aspects of integration?
Foreign Minister Lavrov: It's just mutual respect and mutual striving in all nuances (there is never a 100% coincidence of positions on all issues in relations between any two countries) in approaches. I see how our presidents set an example of an honest discussion of any problems, finding solutions based on respect for the interests of a partner, ally and on promoting their priorities, i.e. the search for that very balance of interests that makes any agreements sustainable and promising.
Now 28 allied programs are being implemented, coordinated precisely in the logic that I am talking about. We spent a little more time, but we got reliable solutions, which are now being implemented at a fairly fast pace. We are allies. The alliance extends to all spheres of life and activity, starting with military-political security, which we jointly provide on the western flank of the CSTO (here Belarus plays a key role), continuing with the topics of economic cooperation.
The main thing is the alignment of business rules for the enterprises of our two countries and social conditions for the citizens of Russia and Belarus. This is a fundamental point that allows Belarusians in Russia to always feel at home and the same for Russians in Belarus.