Lavrov Interviewed by CBS

Lavrov was interviewed by US BigLie Media outlet CBS at the UN yesterday with the transcript being dated today. Lavrov educates the interviewer while keeping his cool:

Question: Presidential elections will soon be held in Ukraine. Which candidate, President Joe Biden or former President Donald Trump, do you think will find it easier to resolve the situation around Ukraine?

Sergey Lavrov: I don't know that elections are coming up in Ukraine. From time to time I hear that the West and the United States advise the Ukrainians to hold them. President Vladimir Zelensky has said publicly several times that he cannot do this because of the constitution. We do not interfere in the internal affairs of others. It is Big Brother's prerogative to advise someone to hold elections when the constitution does not allow it.

Question: I have a question about the upcoming presidential election in the United States. Donald Trump recently said that if he wins, the conflict in Ukraine will end in 24 hours. Did you have a chance to discuss this with him? Do you think the United States has such a plan?

Sergey Lavrov: We have not discussed anything like this with Donald Trump or anyone else in the United States. We did not have the opportunity to discuss anything with the Americans at all, because the current administration is not interested in dialogue. From time to time, they are ready to talk about detainees, exchanges, the functioning of the embassies in Moscow and Washington and our Permanent Mission to the UN in New York. But not on political topics. I heard that President Vladimir Zelensky reacted to this statement by Donald Trump, who is not talking about 24 hours for the first time. Then he said he could decide before the inauguration.

We are ready to listen to anyone who is genuinely interested in justice, including in relations between Russia and Ukraine. This implies an end to the U.S. policy of using Kyiv as an instrument of war against Moscow.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated that when someone says that we are against negotiations, it is not true. For example, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken recently said this at the Davos forum. It's not true. We have always stressed that we are ready to consider any serious proposal, including a discussion of the situation on the ground, the causes of the conflict, as well as the search for a solution that will guarantee the legitimate interests of Russia and the Ukrainian people. We would be ready to negotiate. In general, two years ago, a few weeks after the start of the special military operation, the Ukrainian side asked for a meeting. We agreed. There were several rounds in Belarus and Turkey. In April 2022, in Istanbul, the parties reached an agreement, which was initialed. As a sign of goodwill, the Ukrainians asked us to withdraw our troops from Kyiv, which we did. Two days later, the agreement, initialed and ready for signing, was torn up.

Question: By whom?

Sergey Lavrov: Ukrainians. Recently, the head of the Ukrainian delegation at the talks in Istanbul, Dmitry Arakhamia (who now heads Vladimir Zelensky's party in the Rada), said in an interview that they were ready to sign the agreement. But then-British Prime Minister Boris Johnson came to Kiev and said that it was necessary to continue military operations.

Question: What does the peace plan look like? You've rejected Ukrainian. What is the ultimate goal? Should Russia win?

Sergey Lavrov: We did not reject the Ukrainian plan. The agreement, initialed by both sides in April 2022, was proposed by the Ukrainian delegation.

In general terms, it read: Ukraine's non-accession to NATO and any military blocs, no military bases and "games" on Ukrainian soil, unless all guarantor countries agreed. These states included the "five", China, Turkey, Germany and all those who wanted to join. The safeguards in the agreement were largely modelled on Articles 4 and 5 of the Washington Treaty.

The main thing is that Kiev itself has explicitly stated that they will not apply to Crimea and eastern Ukraine, and the two countries will continue to discuss any issues related to the agreements.

Everything was ready to be signed. But, as D.G. Arakhamia said, Boris Johnson told them not to sign and to continue fighting.

Question: What is Russia's ultimate goal? This is not a special military operation. It has been going on for almost two years.

Sergey Lavrov: For us, this is a special military operation. But we are facing a real full-scale war that the West is waging against us with the hands and bodies of the Ukrainian people.

The goal is very simple. Over the past few years (since 2008 or even 2007), we have publicly warned that NATO enlargement has gone too far, despite all the promises to Boris Yeltsin and Mikhail Gorbachev not to do so. There were five "waves", and at the end of 2020, the bloc was right on the borders of the Russian Federation. Ukraine was drawn into the North Atlantic Alliance. It was planned to build military bases on Ukrainian soil, including naval bases in the Sea of Azov, not to mention the Black Sea.

The war against eastern Ukraine, which the Zelensky regime waged in violation of the Minsk agreements, was fueled by arms supplies from the United States, Great Britain and Europe. At the beginning of 2022, the hostilities and the bombing of the east of their own country intensified tenfold. At that moment, we realized that the West had rejected our proposals of December 2021 to sign treaties on security guarantees that would ensure the security of all, without any expansion of military blocs. This was rejected. We were told: it's none of your business.

Question: Since the start of the special military operation, NATO has almost doubled.

Sergey Lavrov: I would not say that it has doubled. Finland joined.

Question: But the alliance has become much bigger than it used to be. Most Western countries believe that the "invasion" of Ukraine (both in 2014 and now) is a violation of its sovereignty. [The 2014 “invasion” was the NATO Coup.]

Sergey Lavrov: The West has completely discredited itself. If they believe in something, let them continue to live in these illusions.

We are fighting for our national, legitimate interests. For Russia's security on our own borders. The U.S. once declared Iraq, thousands of miles from U.S. shores, a threat. Yugoslavia is also far away. Libya and Syria have all been officially designated as a direct threat to the security of the United States and its allies.

In this case, the military infrastructure of the alliance was built on the borders of Russia and is aimed at our country. It was on Ukrainian territory that it was planned to deploy weapons prohibited by the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, from which the Americans withdrew. They wanted their hands free to use such weapons.

Question: What is the ultimate goal?

Sergey Lavrov: You did not listen to the answer to the previous question. I understand that this is boring and you want an "end goal".

The second main reason is that in 2014 there was an anti-constitutional bloody coup d'état. Everyone who has ruled Ukraine since 2014 came to power as a result of a bloody coup d'état. Its leaders burned alive about 50 people in Odessa only because the people did not want to accept the results of this coup d'état. The putschists declared war against their own people and territories that did not agree with the new government, such as Crimea, which held a referendum and voted to join Russia, and Donbass. They waged war against the east of the country, populated mainly by ethnic Russians. Yes, they were citizens of Ukraine, but ethnically they were Russians. The ancestors of these people discovered, settled, developed, built up ports and roads in these parts of Ukraine.

First the regime of Petr Poroshenko and then the regime of Viktor Zelensky declared them "subhumans" to be destroyed. Laws were passed banning Russian education and the media. Russian books were thrown out of libraries (as Adolf Hitler did in Germany). They have publicly stated that all Russians will be exterminated physically or legislatively.

Ukrainian ambassadors representing the Zelensky regime abroad, such as former Ukrainian Ambassador to Kazakhstan Pyotr Vrublevsky, say that their task is "to kill as many Russians as possible so that their children have less work to do." There has never been any reaction from the West to the racist laws adopted by Ukraine.

Question: How can you justify the violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and what do you ultimately want to achieve? Ukraine as a satellite state? Restoration of the USSR? [BigLie Media/Establishment Narrative]

Sergey Lavrov: Ukraine's sovereignty was trampled on by the coup d'état, who simply spat in the face of Germany, France and Poland in February 2014, breaking the agreement between the opposition and the president. It was signed and guaranteed by the representatives of the above-mentioned countries. These people organized a bloody coup and began a hunt for the president and representatives of the opposition. Back in February 2014, they announced that the first thing they would do was to abolish the status of the Russian language in the country. Their second task was to send militants to the peninsula to storm the Supreme Soviet of Crimea.

Question: Allow me to interrupt. Why, then, did more than 140 states condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine at a meeting of the UN General Assembly, calling it a violation of Ukraine's sovereignty? It's not just about the West.

Sergey Lavrov: It doesn't matter to us who voted and how. Because it is well known how the United States, Britain and some European countries get these votes. I have a lot of friends in New York. When they voted in favour of those resolutions, I asked them why they were doing so. They replied shyly that they had been working in New York for ten years, and that their children were studying at Stanford. During the voting, the same Americans came up to them and reminded them of the children studying at US universities and the accounts opened in American banks.

Question: Do you think that the United States is putting pressure on most countries?

Sergey Lavrov: Not the majority, but all countries. Whenever you talk to the United States, they mention democracy. We tell them that their democracy is that they dictate to countries what kind of political system they should have.

What about democracy in international relations? They are not interested in it at all. We recall that the Charter of the United Nations states that the UN is based on the sovereign equality of States.

For years, we have warned NATO countries that if they go the same way with regard to Ukraine, it will end badly. President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin repeatedly pointed this out long before the start of the special military operation. On the night before the special military operation, he once again voiced the reasons for our actions.

And then it happened. The whole world knew about it. The next morning, Western countries condemned the start of the special military operation and accused Russia of invading, annexing, violating the Charter of the United Nations, as well as the territorial integrity of Ukraine.

The rest of the world listened to President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin and Western countries. Since all these states are sovereign (and the UN stands for respect for the sovereign equality of states), all of them should be left alone to decide for themselves what to do with President Vladimir Putin's words.

Question: I think you will hear differently from most of these countries when you tell them that they condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine only because of US pressure.

Sergey Lavrov: It is extremely important for us that there is not a single country in the Global South or the global majority (except for the Bahamas) that has joined the anti-Russia sanctions. When they are arm-twisted, they simply vote accordingly in the UN General Assembly. This has no legal significance, because General Assembly resolutions are non-binding in nature.

But I have a more difficult question. Can you imagine Switzerland banning French or German?

Question: Yes, I can. But even if that happens, international law still prohibits invading another state and violating its sovereignty.

Sergey Lavrov: It's not about justifying the invasion, it's about how you feel about yourself and what kind of attitude you expect to be treated. Everything Russian in Ukraine has been infringed upon since the coup d'état in 2014. Would you be willing to live in humiliation for many years?

If Ireland banned English, and London replied that they were angry, but that it did not violate international law, how would you react to this? All this violates international law: human rights, international humanitarian law, conventions on the rights of national minorities.

It's funny that the constitution of Ukraine (taking into account all those laws that abolished everything Russian) still guarantees the linguistic, cultural and religious rights of Russians and other national minorities living in Ukraine.

Question: There are reports that Russia is sharing missile and nuclear technology with North Korea in exchange for ammunition to wage war in Ukraine. It's true?

Sergey Lavrov: We have been hearing about these reports for a long time. We prefer to operate with facts. The facts that no one can hide are that American, British and European weapons are being supplied to Ukraine on a daily basis.

A few months ago, there were reports that Iran was selling missiles to Russia and that they were allegedly being used in Ukraine, and even their wreckage had been "discovered." Iran has officially and publicly requested the Ukrainian side to provide access to the remnants of these missiles. That was a few months ago. No one remembers these accusations anymore.

Question: Photographs have been provided... I would like to ask you to answer my question. You're evading the question because it's Iran.

Sergey Lavrov: There is not a single piece of evidence of the above-mentioned arms deliveries. There were requests from Iran to show them the remains they found. There is not the slightest doubt that such an inability of the West to prove anything has been, is and will be in other cases.

Question: Some of the drones were on display at the US Mission to the UN.

Sergey Lavrov: Are you talking about Iranian drones?

Question: About Iranian drones in Ukraine.

Sergey Lavrov: I don't care if some Iranian drones are exhibited at the US mission to the UN. We are accused of allegedly using these drones to attack Ukraine and that there are fragments of them that "prove" this. This is a lie.

Where, then, were our "friends" from various countries who set themselves the goal of achieving a "strategic defeat" of Russia on the "battlefield" and were so "scrupulous" about the implementation of UN Security Council resolutions, when in 2016 the administration of US President Donald Trump announced its unwillingness to comply with Resolution 2231 on the Iranian nuclear programme? What about the resolutions on the Golan Heights?

Question: Let's move on to Israel.

Sergey Lavrov: We can move on to any issue. Either you defend the law, including the scrupulous implementation of unfulfilled Security Council resolutions, or you start choosing.

Question: Let's get back to our question. Is North Korea sharing weapons with Russia in exchange for technology?

Sergey Lavrov: In our relations with the DPRK, we do not violate any norms of international law. Those who ask such questions must first answer our question. If you have evidence, please provide it. We are not going to defend ourselves when there is no evidence of what we are accused of.

Allegedly, we are destroying the sovereignty of Ukraine, violating UN Security Council resolutions on Korea and Iran, and doing some other terrible things. There have already been versions that we blew up Nord Stream. Terrorist acts are prohibited by many international conventions.

The Nord Stream gas pipeline was blown up a year and a half ago, a few months after US President Joe Biden publicly announced that they would stop the project. At the time, you weren't interested. You're only interested in North Korea.

Q: This was the last technology transfer that we saw. Can you answer the question about North Korea?

Sergey Lavrov: Nord Stream is the destruction of technology. Destruction. If you are interested in technology, then you should be interested in all aspects of modern technology. After the U.S. blew up these pipelines, the European economy went into decline.

Question: Speaking of the non-renewed "deal", in particular, the "Black Sea Grain Initiative", is there any chance of bringing it back?

Sergey Lavrov: Again, we need to be honest. I understand that Western politicians don't give you many chances to use these criteria in your interviews.

Initially, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres' "deal" was a package. Ukrainian grain is flowing to world markets, and the route used to deliver it is safe. At the same time, Russian grain and fertilizers are also freely supplied to countries that need them.

The Ukrainian part of the "deal" functioned perfectly. But the Ukrainians tried to use even this to their advantage. The route, reserved for ships and bulk carriers and declared safe, has been used to attack Russian naval and civilian vessels by naval drones. This is well known. They used the waters that the Ukrainians themselves and the UN declared peaceful.

At the same time, nothing happened with Russian grain exports, including 260 thousand tons of "stuck" fertilizers.

Question: The United States has no sanctions on fertilisers. Some insurance and shipping companies did not want to renew the agreement because Russia attacked ships in the Red Sea.

Sergey Lavrov: In the Red Sea? Did Russia attack the ships?

Question: Excuse me, I was referring to the Black Sea during the implementation of the grain deal.

Sergey Lavrov: Russia has never attacked any Ukrainian ships in the Black Sea. There was an inspection mechanism that included the UN, Russia, Ukraine and Turkey. Each ship was inspected. They climbed aboard the ship, checked where and why it was moving, and returned to the shore.

Question: So why don't you renew the deal?

Sergey Lavrov: Because the Ukrainians used these safe passages to launch naval drones, which attacked, physically attacked and damaged several Russian ships and ports.

Question: Let's check these statements, but let's...

Sergey Lavrov: No, everything has been proven. Unlike Iranian or North Korean drones, there are photos and there is confirmation from independent experts.

The second reason was that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres campaigned for this "deal", saying that otherwise countries in need would find themselves in a catastrophic situation and people would die. But of the total volume of Ukrainian grain that was shipped during the operation of this scheme, only 3% went to countries included in the list of the World Food Program.

Question: The "deal" has always been seen as a commercial one. And so it was. In the first year of its operation, a high harvest of wheat was harvested in Russia.

Sergey Lavrov: You said that it was always supposed to be a commercial "deal." I don't know with whom you discussed this. We talked to its author, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who told us that the "deal" is necessary for the countries most in need. You know very well how rebellious farmers in Europe were after the bulk of Ukrainian grain began to arrive there.

Question: Yes.

Sergey Lavrov: Ukrainian grain undermined competition and their competitive advantages collapsed.

As for the Russian part of the "deal", of course, everyone knew that various companies refused to cooperate with Russia. For example, Lloyd's quadrupled insurance rates, and so on and so forth.

Antonio Guterres was proactive in promoting this package. He asked for help with Ukraine, and then he promised to solve these issues as well. But he couldn't do anything. It is only now that some very unreliable mechanisms are being discussed.

You need to hear my point of view on something that didn't require any effort. 190 thousand tons of Russian fertilizers are stuck in the ports of the European Union. When the Russian company that owns these fertilizers found out about this, it waived its rights and said that it was donating these fertilizers to the needs of poor countries. Let the World Food Programme determine which countries should receive them free of charge. That was more than a year and a half ago. Only half of this fertilizer has managed to reach two or three African countries. The World Food Program was in charge of the organization, but we paid for the shipping. The rest of the grain never makes it to its destination.

Question: Is there any way to get back to the "deal"?

Sergey Lavrov: We insist that it must take place. But those who control the various companies you mentioned are not very eager to help. The owners of these companies, Western countries, and everyone knows about it. Everyone knows about it.

The World Food Program is run by a respected U.S. citizen, an influential American. It either can't or doesn't want to do anything to solve this specific but not very difficult problem.

Question: I would like to talk briefly about the Middle East, as well as to discuss relations between the United States and Russia.

Sergey Lavrov: We do not interfere in the internal affairs of the United States.

Question: Will relations with former President Donald Trump be better than with current President Joe Biden? Do you think there will be a shift if Donald Trump is elected president?

Sergey Lavrov: It is not for me to decide, but for the American people. I think Americans are becoming more and more concerned about this choice.

As for who is more promising for Russia. I don't believe there's any difference. The desire to destroy Russian-American relations, the foundation of these relations, including all agreements on strategic stability, parity, mutual trust, inspections, transparency, and confidence-building – President George W. Bush began to destroy all this.

He informed President Vladimir Putin that he was withdrawing from the ABM Treaty. They say that we need to concentrate on preventing Iran and North Korea from creating nuclear weapons, and that all this is not aimed at our country.

Vladimir Putin said that if this is not directed against us, we still need to analyse what form the US missile defence programme will take. George W. Bush replied that whatever we did in return, he would not see it as directed against the Americans.

It soon became clear that Iran and North Korea had nothing to do with the deployment of the U.S. missile defense system in Europe and even in Asia. This deployment structure was clearly aimed at Russia and China. This has already put this issue in a global context, in the concept of global strategic stability.

Since then, other treaties have been destroyed, including the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. Now it turns out that ground-based intermediate- and shorter-range missiles are allowed, because the Americans have said that they are not bound by this treaty. We said that if they were deployed, we would have to do the same. They started posting them.

The Open Skies Treaty, which involves aircraft inspections over each other's territory, is no longer in force.

The New START Treaty has been suspended. In fact, it expires after two years.

It is incomprehensible that the Americans, calling us enemies, saying that they must inflict a "strategic defeat" on us, and at the same time want to visit our strategic nuclear facilities, because, they say, the treaty provides for inspections. To this, we replied that if they read the agreement, they know that it says that we are no longer enemies, that now there is transparency, confidence-building, indivisibility of security, and mutual respect. So when these principles re-enter American behavior, let them come to us, and we will think about it.

Question: Will there be no return to these treaties until then?

Sergey Lavrov: We have self-respect.

And people are openly saying that they must defeat Russia, humiliate our country, and encourage the Russian people to oppose Vladimir Putin. And then they come and ask to be allowed to visit our nuclear bases. Are they out of their minds?

Question: Do you think this is crazy?

Sergey Lavrov: I think that megalomania and the impunity complex are too deeply rooted in their minds and bodies.

Question: Relations between Russia and the United States are now the most complicated in post-war history. How can they be improved?

Sergey Lavrov: We have never spoiled these relations. We're not going to take the initiative and run to Uncle Sam in Washington, D.C., and apologize and say that we misbehaved. We have nothing to complain about. [A very odd reply, IMO.]

Those who invented the Russian threat, who ignored President Vladimir Putin's goodwill many times during his first two terms, who simply decided that he was a good guy and that they would keep him in their pockets, miscalculated and should think about it.

Instead, we see that the current generation of politicians in the United States has not learned a single lesson from the unacceptable policies that the United States has promoted since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Question: There is now an increase in the number of Russian attacks on civilian targets in Kyiv and throughout Ukraine. How do you explain this?

Sergey Lavrov: We have talked about this many times. From the very beginning of this conflict, this was brought to the attention of the absolutely blind and deaf democratic "community of nations" called NATO and the EU. We drew their attention to the fact that the Ukrainian army, in violation of all norms of international humanitarian law and all rules of war, deployed missile defence in residential areas, near schools, kindergartens, libraries, restaurants and residential buildings. Facts about the consequences of such irresponsible behavior have been presented many times.

The Ukrainian army, armed with American, French, British, and Czech weapons, has been deliberately striking civilian targets, destroying dozens of civilian objects, and killing dozens of civilians, including children and women, over the past few weeks.

From the latter. On December 30, 2023, the center of Belgorod was deliberately attacked. Not a single object of any military significance was located there.

Yesterday there was a missile attack on Donetsk. A farmer's market and a number of shops were attacked. At least 25 people were killed (the search for the dead continues), there are dozens of wounded, including children and women.

Any military expert, an honest observer, has already confirmed that this was a deliberate attack on civilians. I am sure that the objective media, such as CBS, will not simply leave this unnoticed and will ask questions about who used these barbaric methods of warfare and why.

This is similar to February 1945, when the United States and Great Britain bombed Dresden, which had no military installations. The same was done in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For no purpose, they just razed them to the ground to frighten them.

In Syria, the city of Raqqa was also razed to the ground by the British, Americans and French. In Iraq, the same thing happened to the city of Mosul. These barbaric methods of fighting the enemy are now being used in Kyiv. They were well trained.

There's no denying it. There are collected testimonies, eyewitnesses on the ground. The civilian part of the city in Belgrade and the same in Donetsk. Farmer's market and grocery stores. People go shopping on Sunday and they are hit.

Question: We will monitor the situation.

Sergey Lavrov: Please don't forget.

Question: What do you think should happen to the situation around Israel and Hamas?

Sergey Lavrov: We strongly condemned Israel's terrorist attack on October 7 and the attack on civilians. If international humanitarian norms are ignored and collective punishment is used in response to these terrorist attacks, then I am afraid this is an invitation to even more barbaric methods of warfare on both sides. We are convinced of that.

When this terrorist attack took place on October 7, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres condemned it, but noted that it did not happen in a vacuum. Israeli officials immediately rebuked him for supporting terrorists, terrorist methods, and declared that the United Nations was a terrorist organization in general.

But he was right. Seventy-five years ago, the General Assembly promised, or rather decided, to establish two States, one Jewish and one Arab in Palestine.

Question: You and UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres are talking about the context of the situation. But there's no context for such barbarism, is there?

Sergey Lavrov: There is no justification for the terrorist attack on October 7, 2023. But I do not think that this fact is carte blanche for striking with no less barbaric means of struggle.

Question: Do you have any suggestions? Previously, there was a "quartet" consisting of the U.S., EU, UN and Russia.

Sergey Lavrov: The United States has closed it. They didn't like the competition. They liked monopoly. They monopolized and usurped the political process. They were not an "honest broker".

They did not contribute to the establishment of a Palestinian State. Israeli military commanders (some of them, the most radical, in the current government) have been saying since October 7, 2023 that all Palestinians are extremists. And that everyone in Gaza, starting at the age of three, becomes an extremist and a terrorist. They were also called animals.

By the way, Ukrainian government officials also have "nicknames" for people in Ukraine who live in the East and speak Russian.

If we do not insist on the establishment of a Palestinian State on the basis of the decisions of the United Nations, this anger, which has been present in the lives of Palestinians for decades, generation after generation, will reproduce new generations who will feel abandoned and deceived.

This is not a prediction. But I am convinced that if this injustice is not corrected and a Palestinian state is not established, there will be more violence from time to time in Palestine or in other parts of the Arab and Muslim world. The Arab and Muslim "streets" are far more radical than their governments.

Question: Are you concerned that this conflict will spread? We see the situation in the Red Sea and the Houthis.

Sergey Lavrov: Ask the US authorities. It was they who expanded the conflict to the Red Sea and launched aggression against Yemen. We urge the Israelis to cease their attacks on Syria, including the airports of Damascus and Aleppo. This, by the way, interrupts the delivery of humanitarian aid. Stop political assassinations. In Damascus, several offices of Iran's IRGC were hit by a missile. Apparently Israeli.

Of course, we must raise our voices to prevent the Palestinians from being pushed out of their land and to prevent that land from becoming uninhabitable.

Question: Will you meet with Iranian Foreign Minister Khalid Amirabdollahian when he is here?

Sergey Lavrov: We have already met with him.

Question: But will he be here at the UN?

Sergey Lavrov: Yes, we will meet with him. Are you saying that you think it's completely up to Iran?

Question: It seems that there are many Iranian attacks around the world and they are supported.

Sergey Lavrov: I have noticed several Israeli attacks.

Question: What advice would you give to the US president to resolve the crisis in the Middle East?

Sergey Lavrov: Stop the fighting. Do not use your veto when a resolution is proposed to declare a humanitarian ceasefire. You have used your veto twice. There has been no response from the UN Security Council to the demand for a ceasefire.

And, of course, do not delay, as your predecessors have done for decades, the creation of a Palestinian state.

Join others as an honest member. Do not try to monopolize the process by thinking only about how you can guarantee your own interests and not the interests of the Palestinian people. [All Emphasis Mine]

Very nice of Lavrov to use the term Megalomania I’ve been using for the last several years to describe the behavior of the Outlaw US Empire. Rather predictable performance by the CBS presstitute. Lavrov was able to make his points. But how much of the interview will be aired by CBS becomes the question. It was also easy to see the buttressing of the emphasis being placed on propaganda aimed at Iran. IMO, Lavrov could’ve done better with his reply about Outlaw US Empire/Russian relations, although none of what he said will make any difference with Team Biden. While at the UN, Lavrov met with many other diplomats and their teams: Palestine, Jordan, Switzerland, Algeria, Turkey, Iran, Lebanon, and Indonesia. More might occur prior to his departure. Odd, that CBS didn’t enquire about those meetings. /s

*
*
*
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!