Lavrov in Ankara: Normal Relations Review

Short Q&A provides further details

Turkiye’s FM Hassan Fidan hosted Sergey Lavrov and his Russian delegation in a normally scheduled meeting to discuss relations at Ankara, which Lavrov reviews in his opening remarks prior to fielding some media questions. The deeper integration of relations into the parliamentary level is happening smoothly and ought to strengthen relations as they evolve. The Q&A offers more details to Lavrov’s remarks as well as an update on the state of relations with the Outlaw US Empire:

Dear members of the press,

On behalf of our delegation, I would like to express our sincere gratitude to Foreign Minister of the Republic of Turkey Hassan Fidan for the fact that today we were able to meet and discuss a wide range of issues on both the bilateral and international agenda. I would like to thank my colleague and friend for the traditionally warm welcome and the high level of organisation of the working visit of the Russian delegation.

We noted with satisfaction that, despite the tense international situation, the Russian-Turkish political dialogue remains intense and dynamic at all levels. Our Presidents Vladimir Putin and Recep Tayyip Erdogan are in regular contact. In addition to telephone contacts (1, 2 and 3), our leaders held two face-to-face meetings in 2024: on July 3, 2024. on the sidelines of the meeting of the SCO Council of Heads of State in Astana and on October 23, 2024. – as part of the BRICS summit in Kazan.

The rhythm of effective communication set by the heads of state is supported by representatives of the diplomatic departments, defence ministries and intelligence services of the two countries. In 2024, H. Fidan and I regularly compared notes on topical issues of our bilateral relations and on the international agenda. Our last contact took place just a few days ago in Johannesburg on the sidelines of the G20 Council of Foreign Ministers.

We welcome the intensification of inter-parliamentary exchanges. On September 24-25, 2024, Speaker of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey Nikos Kurtulmuş paid an official visit to Moscow. He was received by President Vladimir Putin, held talks with the leadership of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, and spoke at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Foreign Ministry. This week (February 26-27), Speaker of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation Valentina Matviyenko will pay an official visit to Ankara.

We discussed ways to build up bilateral trade and economic ties, including our large-scale cooperation in the energy sector. We noted our mutual interest and solid potential for cooperation in the financial and banking sector, in transport, logistics and industrial cooperation, and tourism.

Of course, we could not help but talk in detail about various aspects of joint work on such a strategic project as the construction of the Akkuyu NPP. Russian and Turkish specialists, working side by side, are making efforts to ensure the physical start-up of Unit 1 of this nuclear power plant. All four power units of the plant are being built simultaneously around the clock without exaggeration. There is a serious reserve for new initiatives in this area.

Speaking about energy, we touched upon the operation and security of the Turkish Stream and Blue Stream gas pipelines. This is necessary in the context of continuous provocations by the Kiev regime, which seeks to undermine the normal functioning of energy facilities, including pipelines, with terrorist acts. It is important that they work smoothly. Turkey is a major importer and transit country of Russian "blue fuel", so any destabilisation of energy flows for any reason is fraught not only with a weakening of the Turkish gas industry, but also with an increase in inflation in the energy market as a whole, which, ultimately, will hit the average consumer.

We informed our Turkish friends in detail about the Russian-American talks held on February 18 in Riyadh, which received a very positive assessment from the point of view of the opportunities that have finally appeared to have a normal dialogue, despite the numerous contradictions that remain. But without such a dialogue, it will not be clear whether we will be able to smooth over these contradictions or not. We will continue contacts with our American partners. There is a corresponding agreement on this.

We discussed in detail a number of international and regional issues, including the processes currently underway around the situation in Ukraine. We are not changing our position. We are pleased to note that there is much more realism in the position of many countries, which understand that without a long-term, sustainable agreement that would eliminate the root causes of this situation, it will be impossible to agree on anything.

We conducted a thorough analysis of the situation in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict zone. We exchanged views on the measures necessary to ensure an immediate and sustainable ceasefire, the release of hostages and the resumption of the negotiation process based on UN Security Council resolutions that provide for the right of the Palestinian people to create their own independent state, which would coexist side by side with Israel in peace and security.

We expressed satisfaction with the level of cooperation between Russia and Turkey on the Syrian issue. We reaffirmed our mutual interest in giving impetus to joint work to resolve the situation in that country, taking into account the new realities.

We reviewed the prospects for deepening cooperation in the South Caucasus. We paid special attention to the task of building trust between the parties, restoring infrastructure and transport communications, and stepping up economic activity, including on the basis of multilateral agreements within the framework of the 3+3 International Consultative Platform (the three South Caucasus countries and their three neighbours – Russia, Turkey and Iran).

On the whole, I believe that the contact was useful. We will continue to work in Ankara. I am sure that this meeting will make a significant contribution to the further development of multifaceted cooperation between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Turkey.

Question: There have been some contacts between the United States and Russia. How can they contribute? And based on Turkey's mediating role, can Turkey again become the host or provide a platform for negotiations? On the other hand, Vladimir Zelensky spoke about international security and security guarantees. What do you think about this? He also said that both Turkey and European countries should be included in this process. What do you think about this process, Mr Minister?

Sergey Lavrov: I can only reiterate our position. It has not changed, unlike the position of the "character" you mentioned. He changes it much more often than the green T-shirts. The position of European countries is also difficult to understand, because it is quite unstable and changes depending on what "ideas" arise from whom.

Against this background, the position of the United States stands out. It has been stated consistently, it does not call for simply "reconciling" immediately, leaving the line of contact, and then thinking about what to do. We have always emphasised that this option will not suit us.

This option was already tried in April 2022, when an agreement was reached in Istanbul based on the principles that the Ukrainians themselves proposed to us. They asked us to stop the advance of our troops as a gesture of goodwill and even to retreat. And this is what we did. The only result was that the West, represented by then British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, forbade Ukraine to sign the document that had already been initiated, saying that Ukraine should continue to further weaken Russia and would receive weapons, mobilise and fight for as long as Russia suffers a "strategic defeat" on the battlefield.

Therefore, we no longer accept options using "some advice" from the "other" side. President of Russia Vladimir Putin has clearly said that we are ready to negotiate with Ukraine, with Europe, and with any representatives who, in the spirit of goodwill, would like to help achieve peace. But we will stop hostilities only when these negotiations produce a firm and sustainable result that suits the Russian Federation. Of course, the realities on the ground should be taken into account in the context that the Nazi regime in Kiev adopted a series of laws banning the Russian language in all spheres of life in 2019: education at all levels, the media and culture.

The same regime recently banned the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church by law. This forced the residents not only of Crimea (who made their choice in 2014 in the face of the Nazi coup in Kiev), but also of the Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson and Zaporozhye regions to make their choice. They did not want to remain under the rule of a regime that was exterminating everything Russian in the lands that had been developed by the Russians for centuries, where cities were created, plants, factories and ports were built.

They have made their choice now in accordance with the Russian Constitution. This choice has acquired international legal status. Respect for all these realities is mandatory, as is Ukraine's categorical non-accession to NATO. There must be a clear, ironclad agreement on this.

At a meeting in Riyadh with our American colleagues, we welcomed the fact that US President Donald Trump publicly and repeatedly called the policy of "dragging" Ukraine into NATO a mistake. He said that if he had been president in those years, he would never have allowed such a line to prevail. And thus, according to him, there would have been no crisis.

But there is no doubt that Ukraine's "drawing" into NATO is one of the key root causes of what is happening. One of D. Trump's advisers said that it is clear that the war was provoked, and it was not necessarily provoked by the Russian Federation. This war has been prepared for a long time by Washington under the Democrats, Brussels, as well as the Brussels bureaucracy.

The second root cause is the genocide of all Russians and Russian-speaking residents of southeastern Ukraine, who made their legitimate choice in favor of returning to the Russian Federation.

What security guarantees? Here, in Istanbul, in April 2022, security guarantees were discussed on behalf of the five permanent members of the Security Council, as well as on behalf of Turkey and Germany, but on the condition of refusing to join NATO. It described in detail what it should look like.

There were security guarantees on the table. The Ukrainian delegation formulated them itself: a non-aligned policy without joining any military alliances. The West banned it. Therefore, now we need to see who will finally decide this. I do not think that the Ukrainian leadership is capable of anything other than the desire to make money, including in "bargaining" with the United States on the issue of how to pay with the aid with which the Biden administration has pumped up the Ukrainian space without any supporting documents.

Question: Steve Witkoff, one of the participants in the Russian-US talks in Riyadh, said that the draft Istanbul agreements could again form the basis for resolving the Ukrainian crisis. Can you confirm or deny this information? What consultations between Russia and the United States did Donald Trump talk about on February 25?

Sergey Lavrov: As for Stephen Witkoff's statement that the draft Istanbul Agreements of April 2022 can be taken as a basis for resolving the Ukrainian conflict. I have not heard this.

I can only confirm one thing. President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin has repeatedly made this statement, recalling that in Istanbul we were literally "one hour" away from signing a full-fledged agreement based on the principles proposed by the Ukrainians, but Boris Johnson forbade this. The head of the Ukrainian delegation at those talks, Dmitry Arakhamia, who heads the Servant of the People faction in the Verkhovna Rada, publicly confirmed this fact in his interview that 3 years ago they were ready to sign, but they were banned by the leaders of the regimes who are in London, Brussels and were then in Washington.

The principles of the Istanbul agreements are, first of all, the refusal to join NATO, the deployment of military bases, military exercises with the participation of foreign troops, non-aligned status and the receipt of security guarantees from the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, as well as Turkey, Germany and others. All this was "broken" and decided to "wait" and see in which direction the situation on the battlefield would lean. So we waited.

As for the meeting with the Americans during the Russian-American talks in Riyadh, we agreed to restore channels of communication on all issues in various fields and on international affairs, including Ukraine. The Americans must appoint their special representative for this purpose.

The easiest thing to do is to organize, as we have proposed, the normal operation of the embassies-–the Russian one in Washington and the American one in Moscow. For this purpose, two technical preliminary contacts have already taken place last week. Full consultations will take place this week. I hope that they will remove the artificial obstacles that have been piled up by the democratic administrations of the United States in recent years.

Question: How do you assess future relations with Damascus? What do you think about the continued US military presence in Syria after the change of power in the country?

Sergey Lavrov: As for the US military presence in Syria and how to treat it, you should not ask me, but the Syrian leadership. I would even say the Syrian people.

In the period before the change of power, the US military presence played a negative role. First, it was a presence without an official invitation from the legitimate authorities. Second, its essence was to "sit" on the most fertile lands in terms of food and hydrocarbons, to use the proceeds from the illegal sale of these wealth of the Syrian people in order to finance quasi-state structures that were actively created by the Americans in northeastern Syria in order to fuel Kurdish separatism. It is difficult to assess this role positively.

Now we need to see how the Syrian leadership feels about this and how it will fit into the preparation and holding of a major event–-the All-Syrian National Assembly. It should lay the foundation for an inclusive process of working out an agreement on the future of the country with the participation of all political, ethnic and religious groups.

If we see movement along this path, it will play a positive role for Damascus' relations with the Russian Federation and with all other countries that, as Turkish Foreign Minister Hassan Fidan emphasised in his opening remarks, are interested in ensuring a sovereign, independent and territorially integral Syria that lives in peace and harmony with all its neighbours. [My Emphasis]

Roots. It’s the Problem Tree which is where you must get to the roots as pruning a branch here and there doesn’t get to the root of the matter. And that process must be assigned to all current conflicts, most of which have roots in Western manipulation. That’s even true of Palestine’s roots where French and British Imperial plans are at the root of today’s conflict—without their promotion of Zionism, there would be no problems there. What the conflict has spurred is an intensive investigation into its roots that’s produced some excellent scholarship that can be used as a basis for a settlement, although it’s clear the Zionists like their Nazi cousins aim to eliminate all Others so their “purified” selves are the only occupants.

As for Syria, we’ll see how successful the National Assembly is and what’s planned to occur next. Of course, the Outlaw’s theft of vital resources must cease, and reparations paid to the Syrian people.

On Ukraine, the rhetorical battle continues, with perhaps a shift occurring once the New German government’s formed. One of the more amazing things I’ve seen over these three years is this short video provided by Martyanov at his blog. The latest desperate move by Zelensky is his offer to resign in exchange for Ukraine being granted NATO membership.

*
*
*
Like what you’ve been reading at Karlof1’s Substack? Then please consider subscribing and choosing to make a monthly/yearly pledge to enable my efforts in this challenging realm. Thank You!