Lavrov's ASEAN Presser and More

Before the final events of the overall meeting of the ASEAN, the East Asia Summit (EAS) and the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) remained to occur, Lavrov made his remarks and answered media questions following the Russia-ASEAN meeting. After the other events concluded, the MFA issued a press release summarizing the important results of those two meetings. Lavrov’s forty minutes of details is dense as usual given the importance of the times and the need to be proactive in response.

Good afternoon

This is our second day in the capital of Laos, which this year holds the chairmanship of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

On July 26, we held the annual meeting of Russia-ASEAN foreign ministers. We reviewed all areas of our cooperation in a trust-based, concrete, business-like manner. We adopted a joint statement on the 20th anniversary of Russia's accession to the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (Bali Treaty). The general opinion was that the principles of equality, mutual benefit, taking into account each other's interests and working out their balance fully remain relevant. Especially now, when they [NATO] are trying to introduce a bloc psychology into the Asia-Pacific region, create various closed, non-inclusive mechanisms and promote the physical introduction of NATO infrastructure into this region. This runs counter to the task of strengthening the ASEAN-centric security architecture, which has been developing over decades and met the interests of all participants.

We reviewed the implementation of the Comprehensive Action Plan for the Implementation of the Strategic Partnership between the Russian Federation and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations for 2021-2025, approved by our leaders three years ago. We came to the conclusion that the plan was being implemented satisfactorily. There are still some events that we will definitely organize before the expiration of the document. It was agreed to start preparing a new one for the next "five-year plan". We instructed experts to work closely on this.

We noted the dynamics of trade and economic cooperation. The trade turnover increased significantly in 2023 and reached the pre-pandemic level. We talked about the sectoral areas of cooperation enshrined in the joint programme of work: science, technology and innovation, education, tourism, energy and agriculture.

The final stage is the coordination of documents on digitalization (in 2024, Russia became a digital partner of ASEAN), as well as on countering terrorism and the safe use of information and communication technologies. These are very relevant areas. The agreement to work on them as joint plans between Russia and ASEAN was largely adopted on our initiative.

Training of personnel not only in civilian specialties, but also for law enforcement agencies is always popular in ASEAN countries. The demand for these "services" is growing.

Conceptually, we discussed the need to develop a single indivisible security system on the Eurasian continent that is open to all Eurasian countries and organisations located here. A good example is set by the SCO and the EAEU, which are developing their relations with ASEAN, including by formalizing them through the relevant documents.

The East Asia Summit (EAS) and the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) are taking place today at the level of foreign ministers. These formats are more focused on contrasting the trends that have been developing for decades within the ASEAN-centric architecture and those that the West is trying to bring to this region, accelerating its militarisation, creating narrow military-political bloc structures, deploying new weapons and generally escalating confrontation.

ASEAN-centric architecture implies inclusiveness. The EAS and the ARF are ASEAN plus all the significant partners of these structures (China, Russia, Japan, South Korea and Western countries). The West, on the other hand, is promoting narrower formats with the explicit goal (they do not hide this) of containing China and Russia. Our partners from the Association are well aware of this and have shown interest in the above-mentioned initiative of Russian President Vladimir Putin to form a Eurasian security system that would be indivisible and equal. ASEAN is ready for a substantive discussion on this topic.

We touched upon issues related to the situation in the South China Sea. Russia advocates that territorial disputes should be resolved by the countries concerned without outside interference. We welcomed the ongoing dialogue between ASEAN and China on the formation of a code of conduct in this region.

We and our Chinese friends talked about the situation in the Taiwan Strait. There, the West, although it reaffirms its commitment to the "one China" principle in words, in practice promotes confrontational approaches: it arms Taiwan, organizes various military events, sends high-level delegations, and receives representatives of the Taiwanese "administration." All this contradicts the "one China" principle and is aimed at actually perpetuating the status quo, which means that the West perceives Taiwan as a separate entity from the PRC.

We reviewed the situation in Myanmar. We believe it is important that the votes of the majority of the summit participants were able to encourage dialogue on the implementation of the five-point plan developed by ASEAN. It must be implemented in close cooperation with the Myanmar authorities. Unfortunately, the West is trying to restrain political processes and bring the leadership of Myanmar under new sanctions, while financing and arming the radical opposition. This does not help the matter.

As for the practical areas of work within the EAS and the ARF, I would like to highlight the decision taken on our initiative to promote the formation of regional mechanisms for responding to pandemic threats and ensuring additional economic growth by encouraging cooperation in the tourism sector. These initiatives were supported.

We proposed to consider another topical issue - the problem of supporting remote areas. For Russia, this is one of the national priorities. On our initiative, this topic was included in the APEC agenda. Certain elements of the task of supporting remote areas, creating comfortable living conditions there are also considered in the SCO. ASEAN organizations can make a useful contribution to the development of relevant plans.

Important topics on the ARF agenda are emergency response to natural and man-made disasters, countering transnational crime. One of the elements that traditionally attracts a lot of attention is ensuring maritime security. Our Chinese friends proposed (all supported) the adoption of a ministerial statement on strengthening the safety of ferry traffic. It would seem to be a private issue, but this is an important point in the context of the task of maximizing trust in the seas.

We summed up the results of the co-chairmanship of Russia and Indonesia in the mechanism of the ARF Intersessional Meetings on ICT Security in 2022-2024. We will continue to participate in this work as ordinary members.

Question: The Russia-ASEAN forum discussed the issue of maintaining security and stability in the Asia-Pacific region. What or who threatens this today, destabilizes the situation and what goal is it pursuing? What can we do on our part?

Sergey Lavrov: ASEAN has been forming a circle of its dialogue partners for decades, which eventually created the East Asia Summit together with ASEAN. This mechanism operates at the highest level and at the level of foreign ministers. There is also a Council of Defence Ministers of ASEAN countries and their partners. A broader format was created – the Regional Security Forum.

All these structures are aimed at respecting the principles on which they were created, such as equality, the search for a balance of interests, the adoption of agreements by consensus and the concentration of all efforts on constructive and constructive issues, avoiding (as much as possible) confrontational rhetoric.

For many decades, this functioned to everyone's delight. In the past few years, primarily Washington, together with London and the European Union (to a certain extent), began to promote elements of the bloc infrastructure, including with a nuclear component. The first step was taken when AUKUS (USA, Britain and Australia) was created. This is a project for the construction of nuclear-powered submarines. The topic is risky and requires constant full-fledged control by the IAEA, for which the members of this bloc are not quite ready.

We are trying to ensure that the Atomic Energy Agency uses its powers to the fullest extent, so that there is absolute transparency on this issue. So far, it has not worked out very well. We see the AUKUS troika, which is being expanded to include a number of other countries, and whose practical activities are essentially aimed at inoculating this region with regard to the deployment of nuclear weapons components. The ASEAN agreement on a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Southeast Asia is in force. And these plans work to undermine a zone free of weapons of mass destruction.

There is another element of concern. Most recently, the United States of America concluded a joint nuclear planning agreement with the Republic of Korea. So far, we cannot get an explanation of what this means. We have no doubt that this causes additional concern. Moreover, the Americans are trying to pull Japan into this scheme of joint nuclear planning.

In addition, various "threes" and "fours" are created. For example, the United States, Japan and South Korea are actively escalating the atmosphere around the Korean Peninsula, militarizing their presence there and conducting exercises that are openly aimed at being ready for military action.

In this regard, we stressed the importance of the agreement that was signed during President Vladimir Putin's visit to Pyongyang between Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un. The document provides for the provision of military assistance to each other in the event of (we have emphasised this) aggression against any of the parties to this treaty. I hope that this sent a signal of caution to those who may have hatched such plans.

Also from the sphere related to the penetration of alien structures here. NATO announced and reaffirmed at the last summit in Washington that the security of the alliance members is inextricably linked not only to the Euro-Atlantic, but also to the Indo-Pacific region. This directly contradicts the initial assurances that NATO is exclusively engaged in the defense of the territory of its member states. Elements of this infrastructure are planned to be located in the Asia-Pacific region. Australians, Japanese and South Koreans are assisting in this. We are honest about this. But so far we have not received a clear explanation why they were not satisfied with the inclusive architecture that has developed around ASEAN and allowed them to discuss any concerns.

Until now, all military issues within the framework of ASEAN-centric mechanisms have been discussed exclusively in the context of the development of universal confidence-building measures that would be open to all states. Now the topic of the military aspects of security is shifting to the confrontational side.

You are well aware that the United States withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and began to produce these ground-based missiles (which are prohibited by this document). There has already been information about their plans to deploy such missiles both in Europe and in the Asia-Pacific region. I hope that the ASEAN countries are well aware of the danger posed by Washington's "idea". In other words, there are many signals and signs that confrontation is escalating here.

In fact, if NATO penetrates here, the alliance will bring with it all the "vices" of the Euro-Atlantic security system, which is embodied in NATO itself and the OSCE. Such a Euro-Atlantic security system has long proved that its main goal is to ensure the dominance of the United States and its allies over all others.

The brightest example. The OSCE has repeatedly adopted summit declarations at the highest level that no country of the organization will strengthen its security at the expense of the security of others. But NATO, led by the United States, has been doing this all these years. Ultimately, bringing the situation to the current process in Ukraine. They tried to make a direct military threat to the Russian Federation from this country.

You understand the rest perfectly well. President of Russia Vladimir Putin spoke in detail about the extreme perniciousness of the fact that our repeated warnings over the years were ignored. The member states violated their OSCE commitments. The organization itself, unfortunately, was completely discredited in this situation. We will continue to defend our position.

But today's West is not ready and does not know how to listen and hear. He is not ready and does not know how to negotiate. Diplomacy in the West as a means of doing business between states has given way to ultimatums, demands and punishments of the disobedient through illegitimate, unilateral sanctions.

I would not like all this "legacy" to be transferred to the Asia-Pacific region. In talking to ASEAN countries, we felt that they are aware of the risks involved. In any case, they are supposed to. They have a responsibility to uphold the foundations of the Bali Treaty and the principles that underpin the decades-old architecture. [On the Bali Treaty:

The passage of this law makes Russia, along with ASEAN member countries and Asian powers, such as China, India, Japan and Pakistan, a party to one of the fundamental regional legal acts in the Asia-Pacific region.

The Bali Treaty is a constructive document meeting the goals of ensuring peace, security and stability in South-East Asia and in a broader regional context. It constitutes a sort of code of conduct, a political declaration of the norms and principles of relationships between states in the region, under which the parties commit themselves to refraining from any actions that endanger the political or economic stability of the other contracting parties. Participation in the treaty is fundamentally important to ensuring Russia's national interests in the Asia-Pacific region and to the further promotion of cooperation with ASEAN as the core of regional integration processes.]

Question: How can you comment on the refusal of Western participants to take a "family photo" during a meeting of the foreign ministers of the EAS member states?

Sergey Lavrov: Maybe some of them are afraid for their photogenicity. I attach little importance to such protocol aspects. I have already said that the West has moved away from diplomacy. He no longer needs her. The West needs sanctions. But in addition to diplomacy, he also needs pictures that would reinforce his claims to lead everything and everything.

When the "peace summit" was held in Bürgenstock in Switzerland in June this year, many of the countries that invited did not go. Many of those who went did not sign the final statement. I know that my friends confided how the West and Ukrainians persuaded various capitals to send at least some representative there. In response to doubts expressed by the countries of the Global South that they did not want to go there because they did not consider it in their interests to enter into a confrontation with Russia, they were told, "Let's better resolve everything amicably." You will not need to enter into a confrontation with Russia. They say, you will not sign anything, just come, and we will take a "family photo". That's all.

This once again shows that the West needs such a simple picture without delving into the essence of the matter in order to promote its narrative.

But here I personally was not upset that the photo shoot did not take place.

Question: What do ASEAN countries think about NATO's desire to extend its influence to the Asia-Pacific region?

Sergey Lavrov: I have just spoken about this in detail. It is clear that the ASEAN countries do not want to enter into a direct confrontation with the Americans and their allies. But at the same time, they see the threats associated with this, including their leading position in matters of security and cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region and in Southeast Asia. Knowing how delicate the ASEAN countries are, how subtle their command of diplomatic techniques is, I see their desire to find a diplomatic way out in this situation, to defend their leading role in this region.

Given the pressure with which the West, led by the United States, is acting, this is not an easy matter. Today, both we and China have expressed firm support for ASEAN's policy in defence of its achievements and structures that have been created over decades. But the confrontation is escalating.

Question: The topic of Ukraine has already been raised. You had a meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi. Did you discuss the Chinese peace initiative on Ukraine, the progress of its implementation and the possibilities? How can you comment on Dmitry Kuleba's words that Beijing supports Ukraine's territorial integrity and that it is impossible to put pressure on them and force them to negotiate? How should we treat this?

Sergey Lavrov: As for Dmitry Kuleba. How else to treat this? This is not the first time he has said this. Sometimes he said the exact opposite. Most recently, they talked about negotiations. Vladimir Zelensky mentioned his readiness to eventually sit down at the table with Russian representatives. I don't listen to them, to be honest.

As for Chinese initiatives. We did not need to get acquainted with them. We know them well. We have repeatedly expressed our attitude towards them. Unlike all others, China's initiatives in accordance with the concept of global security put forward earlier by Chinese President Xi Jinping state that the main attention should be paid to understanding and eliminating the root causes of what is happening now.

This is exactly what we are constantly talking about: how it all began, how they wanted to make an "anti-Russia" out of Ukraine, how they pumped it with weapons, dragged it into NATO, brought to power the Nazi regime, which began to abolish all conceivable rights of the Russian-speaking population in violation of the Ukrainian constitution, and much more.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi spoke about his talks with Dmitry Kuleba. We felt that China's position remained unchanged. Again, it is about focusing on root causes.

As for the format. The Chinese position is clearly formulated in the documents. We can talk about the preparation of a conference, a multilateral event only if the parameters and conditions for convening this event are acceptable to all parties. And only if all existing initiatives are put on the agenda. This is a direct refusal to work only on the basis of Vladimir Zelensky's dead-end, utopian and illusory "peace formula." Everyone has already realized that it will never materialize. Although the West, by inertia, is still trying to mention it with an ultimatum.

As for territorial integrity. This is all from the devil. The West says that it demands a settlement of the Ukrainian crisis on the basis of the UN Charter with respect for the territorial integrity of Ukraine and its sovereignty.

The Charter of the world Organization contains much more principles. Among them is the principle of self-determination of peoples, which is mentioned in the Charter much earlier than the principle of territorial integrity. It would seem that there is a contradiction. The UN General Assembly was engaged in it for a long time. In 1970, after lengthy negotiations, it adopted by consensus a detailed declaration on the interpretation of the principles of the UN Charter. It states that everyone must respect the territorial integrity of those states whose governments respect the right of peoples to self-determination and therefore represent the entire population living on the territory of the country concerned.

In February 2014, a clique of Nazis came to power in Ukraine, announced the abolition of the status of the Russian language and sent armed gangs to storm the building of the Supreme Council of Crimea. They could not in any way represent the population of either Crimea or southeastern Ukraine. All this was clear.

International law here clearly states who and how should interpret a particular situation. The West does not listen to this. He lives by his own rules. Crimea held an open, transparent referendum with many international observers. Western countries reject its result, declaring a violation of the principle of territorial integrity. At the same time, when Kosovo seceded without any referendum, the West "applauded" (it itself "orchestrated" this secession) and announced that in this way the Kosovo Albanians had implemented the principle of self-determination of peoples. Russia has no illusions about how the "collective West" will continue its "work".

Question: German Chancellor Olaf Scholz calls on Russia to take the West's word for it and stop the special military operation in Ukraine in exchange for not deploying long-range US missiles in Germany. How to react to such conditions? What is the likelihood that even if the special military operation is stopped, Germany will deploy American long-range missiles on its territory?

Sergey Lavrov: Olaf Scholz is known for such simple-minded statements and is famous for his "simple" ideas. The problem is not that the once banned ground-based INF systems will be deployed.

The special military operation was not organized for this. This is not what forced President of Russia Vladimir Putin to make a corresponding decision. It was necessary to eliminate threats to Russia's security that were created in Ukraine. It was planned to deploy NATO military bases there, including on the Sea of Azov.

At the same time, the special military operation was launched in order to protect the population of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics, which, contrary to Kiev's obligations under the Minsk agreements, were constantly subjected to shelling, which intensified day after day. Russia had no right not to respond to the request for recognition of independence and their appeal to us to invoke Article 51 of the UN Charter on the right to collective self-defence.

As for the intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles that are now planned to be delivered to Germany. No one asked German Chancellor Olaf Scholz whether the Germans wanted this deployment or not. When the news broke, he innocently declared that he welcomed the U.S. decision to deploy missiles in Germany. He did not hide the fact that the decision was American.

In December 2021, President of Russia Vladimir Putin put forward initiatives aimed at defusing the escalating tensions and resolving the problem peacefully. They assumed Ukraine's non-accession to NATO and contained mutual universally acceptable security guarantees. The same initiatives were discussed several times between representatives of Russia and the United States, Russia and NATO.

In January 2022, I discussed this with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken in Geneva. He clearly stated that no one would give Russia any obligations that Ukraine would remain non-aligned and would not join the alliance. He said the most the United States could do was bargain over the introduction of quantitative "ceilings" for the future deployment of intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles around Russia. That's all.

The special military operation has not changed anything. There were and are plans. The goal of the war unleashed against our country by the "hands" of the Kyiv regime is declared as inflicting a "strategic defeat" on Russia on the battlefield. Westerners are already lamenting that if our country wins in Ukraine (and, therefore, the West loses), then it will "seize" the entire territory of NATO, and the United States will weaken its influence and control over some European member countries of the North Atlantic Alliance. They do not hide the fact that it is a question of maintaining global dominance, which is increasingly slipping away, but which they do not want to lose. It made it possible, and still in many respects, allows them to live at the expense of others, using neocolonial methods of coercion.

Question: Former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo outlined a possible "peace plan according to Donald Trump." What can you say about this package of measures?

Sergey Lavrov: I do not think it is necessary to comment on the numerous ideas that have poured out of a cornucopia in the face of the West's realisation of the futility of counting on Russia's "defeat" at a time when Western countries are increasingly aware of the worthlessness of Vladimir Zelensky and his regime. There are many such initiatives. I do not remember what exactly Mike Pompeo was talking about. I heard that Donald Trump proposed to provide Ukraine with $500 billion instead of "just like that" on the terms of Lend-Lease, in order to continue to receive income for many decades from those who will replace each other in the Kiev power structures. A businessman's approach. I cannot comment on the numerous ideas that are not serious.

If something serious is proposed, then, as President of Russia Vladimir Putin said, we are always ready for an honest conversation, taking into account the current realities. They are such that the Constitution of the Russian Federation has been amended. It mentions four regions of the Russian Federation that spoke in favor of this in the referendum. This is one of the main realities that will have to be taken into account. There are others. Including the inadmissibility of maintaining a regime in the center of Europe that exterminates the Russian national minority, its rights, legally and physically banning everything Russian. Another element that must be taken into account is the unacceptability of maintaining a regime with an openly pronounced Nazi character, which legislatively encourages the ideology and practices of Nazism. These are serious things.

Not only in Germany, but also in many other European countries, the Nazi instinct is now being revived. We remember how Hitler gathered almost all of Europe under his banner in order to attack the USSR. As Napoleon did before him, who conquered half of Europe, dressing the population of these countries in military uniform and directing them against the Russian Empire.

Our position has been stated repeatedly. Dmitry Kuleba says that Ukraine is ready for talks, but Russia is not. President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin often answers questions about the possibility of negotiations. In particular, he draws attention to the fact that Vladimir Zelensky, by his decree signed two years ago, forbade himself and all his employees to negotiate with Russia. Our President proposed that Ukraine publicly repeal this decree so that the Westerners would have at least some arguments to reproach us for not wanting to negotiate. Nothing happens. Everyone ignores it and continues to call on us to take a "constructive approach". Now, in their understanding, this means capitulation. This will not happen. All the goals of the special military operation will be achieved. There is no doubt about it.

Question: An unscheduled meeting with the South Korean Foreign Minister has appeared on your schedule today. Who initiated it? What are you planning to discuss?

Sergey Lavrov: The new Foreign Minister of South Korea, Cho Tae-yeol, has asked for this meeting. We exchanged a few words with them yesterday evening reception and today before the meeting of the foreign ministers of the East Asia Summits.

Since he asked for a meeting, then I will listen to him. Probably, he has something to say. For my part, I will frankly state our assessments of the situation, into which Seoul is being dragged deeper and deeper. I am referring to the US manoeuvres around the Korean Peninsula in order to "isolate" and "punish" the DPRK. These are dangerous games. I will mention the agreement between the United States and the Republic of Korea on joint nuclear planning. This is a serious step. I will be honest about this.

By the way, over the past two years, the foreign ministers of South Korea have always asked us to meet at such events. We never refused. This is in contrast to the Western participants of both the G20 and the East Asia Summits. They are hiding from us all the time, they do not want to be photographed with us. Apparently, because of they aren’t "photogenic". [My Emphasis]

There’s a core consistency that wherever Lavrov goes there’s a Q&A song that remains the same. I hope readers took note that the Bali Agreement includes all ASEAN nations plus Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and Japan. To see the various arrangements with other nations and the differing interactive formats, please see this Wiki page. When you view that, you’ll see why the Outlaw US Empire and its vassals are present at these events. ASEAN nations want to continue their peaceful existence but they already have a member working to upset that dynamic, although Lavrov didn’t mention it nor was he asked about it—Philippines—because of another Marcos, “Marcos and his mother, Imelda, are currently facing arrest in the United States for defying a court order to pay US$353 million (₱17,385,250,000 in 2024) in restitution to human rights abuse victims during his father's dictatorship;” so, it’s pretty clear why Marcos can be bent to do the Outlaw US Empire’s bidding, but equally unclear why such a criminal was elected. His term ends in 2028, plenty of time for him to do lots of damage. How ASEAN will prevent him from such acts remains to be seen as he’s currently acting as a thorn in the Dragon’s paw.

We’ll now turn to the press release related to the East Asia Summit and the ASEAN Regional Forum on Security:

On July 27, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov took part in the 14th Ministerial Meeting of the East Asia Summit (EAS) and the 31st session of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in Vientiane.

During discussions on topical issues of the situation in the Asia-Pacific region, the Russian side focused on the importance of forming an open and indivisible Eurasian security architecture as one of the foundations of a multipolar world order, to the strengthening of which associations such as the SCO and the EAEU contribute in addition to ASEAN. The risks to peace and stability that NATO and the bloc mechanisms of selective composition created by the United States bring to the Asian "field" were noted. They reaffirmed Russia's focus on strengthening ASEAN's central role in the regional security system by building up an equal dialogue and practical cooperation.

At the EAS meeting, issues of preparation for the upcoming 19th East Asia Summit in Vientiane in October this year were considered. Our country's assets at this platform include initiatives to create a regional mechanism for anti-epidemic response and ensure economic growth in the Asia-Pacific region by promoting cooperation in the field of tourism. Russia's proposal to consider the development of remote areas as a possible area of joint work in the future was recorded.

The ARF session focused on building the Forum's potential in the areas of counterterrorism, emergency response, and ensuring the security of information and communication technologies (ICTs). Russia emphasised the inadmissibility of reformatting the mandate of this association, restricting access to its activities to individual member states, and blocking mutually beneficial cooperation projects for political reasons.

The ARF Work Plans for Countering Terrorism and Transnational Crime for 2024-2026, for Emergency Response for 2024-2027, as well as a Ministerial Statement on Strengthening Regional Cooperation in the Field of Ferry Safety were adopted.

The results of Russia's co-chairmanship (together with Indonesia) in the mechanism of the ARF Intersessional Meetings on ICT Security in 2022-2024, within the framework of which a number of practical initiatives in the field of combating information crime were implemented, were summed up. [My Emphasis]

Both the EAS and ARF are populated by NATO members making any progress very difficult. For example, Russia’s emphasis of keeping NATO away as far as possible. Very little info of substance was provided in the PR of the chat between Lavrov and South Korea’s Cho Tae-yeol:

The foreign ministers of the two countries exchanged views on bilateral relations, as well as the situation on the Korean Peninsula.

Both sides expressed readiness to continue contacts on issues of mutual interest.

It doesn’t get much thinner than that.

Most ASEAN nations have announced their intent to join BRICS, Malaysia and Indonesia being the most significant, although Vietnam and Thailand also rate. How these desires to join the other multilateral organizations pan-out will get be clearer when the BRICS Summit arrives in October. Hudson has recently opined that BRICS ought to become a shadow UN with a mind to replace the original since weeding out the Outlaw US Empire and its vassals may prove more trouble than it’s worth. But that’s an article for another day.

*
*
*
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!