Lavrov's Geopolitical Review for the Heads of Russian Non-Profits & NGOs

Today, Sergei Lavrov spoke for 26-minutes before an audience consisting of the heads of Russian non-profits and non-governmental organizations that are often one and the same, some Russian focused and based and others international having broader bases. Lavrov’s remarks review the current general geopolitical situation to demonstrate how the organizations present can interact with the Russian government and find areas where mutual support is possible. For us, the review is useful because it clearly says how Russia views the role and status of the UN and how Russia separates governments from nationals. Here’s Lavrov:

Dear Colleagues,

Friends

We have been meeting regularly in this format since 2004 (there was a short break during the COVID-19 pandemic) and we talk about the concerns of representatives of non-governmental organisations that are passionate about and implementing projects in the field of public diplomacy.

Today, the role of public diplomacy is increasing compared to the previous period. First of all, with regard to maintaining a healthy, trusting and friendly atmosphere with foreign partners and explaining the problems created by the West. This also applies to those countries that we call unfriendly. I am in favour of calling governments so, and states are largely determined by the lives and aspirations of citizens. I do not see a single nation on Earth that would a priori be unfriendly to our people.

But there are unfriendly governments. I would use an even harsher term – hostile. Look at how the European Union treats Prime Minister of Hungary and President of the EU this half year Viktor Orban just because he said that we should all be in favour of finding compromises rather than resolving problems through war. For this, they are trying to make him an outcast. Yes, we are going through interesting times.

I know that public organisations from Western countries are in touch with some partners in the Russian Federation in one way or another. This communication is important for maintaining relations at the level of civil society and ensuring understanding of each other. Given the frenzied fervor of Western propaganda, it is important for us to have a better understanding of what is happening through your colleagues abroad (including in the West).

We see a rapid formation by historical standards (although the period will be long) of an international architecture that will be fairer and based on several centers of power, not appointed by anyone, but formed thanks to objective factors: economic growth, financial power and political influence. Together with the overwhelming majority of countries, we are in favour of this world order being equal, democratic, polycentric and based on the principles of the UN Charter proclaimed in 1945, which make it possible to take into account the diversity of the modern world, as well as the sovereign equality of all states, large and small.

This is a matter of principle. Westerners always ignore it. In any international situation, when a crisis arose in a region in the post-war period, the West has never, in any conflict (it specifically tested itself), taken a position that would respect the sovereign equality of all states. He always promoted his "recipes" based on the fact that he was the "master".

The contours of a new multipolar world order are now emerging. The peoples want their right to control their own destiny to be respected, they are looking for new alternative ways to the West to solve various problems and opportunities to create a system that would serve the world economy without depending on the dictates of those who currently issue "reserve" currencies.

Alternative centers of power are emerging, and the positions of the Global South and East are strengthening. Accordingly, the position of the world minority, which calls itself the "golden billion", is weakening. They are trying to hold on to what is left of their seemingly unchallenged global dominance for centuries. The desire to preserve this and not allow any objections to its hegemonic position also explains the desire of the West to inflict a "strategic defeat" on Russia. And at the same time, "teach a lesson" to those who put their national interests at the forefront.

Westerners do not hesitate to say that Russia has come to be viewed as a competitor that questions the foundations of the "rules-based world order," as well as a rival in the areas of military-political potential, technological capabilities, and in the humanitarian field, especially in terms of the attractiveness of culture, traditions, and way of life. This is noted by all foreigners who come to our country for the first time. I talked to many of them, including during the World Youth Festival. We are proud that Russia immediately makes such an impression and captivates its guests with its openness.

The West is not ready for mutually beneficial, equal cooperation. He clings to his former positions, albeit slowly but steadily slipping away. All this was once again confirmed by the NATO summit in Washington, where a declaration was adopted, which again set out the unilateral approaches of the West.

On June 14, President of Russia Vladimir Putin spoke to the Foreign Ministry and stressed: "If Europe wants to preserve itself as one of the independent centres of world development and the cultural and civilisational poles of the planet, it certainly needs to be on good terms with Russia, and most importantly, we are ready for this." But, as we can see, Western elites have a completely opposite vision of the situation. Here it is necessary to highlight the actions of the United States in Europe, because it is considered as a competitor, just like Russia and China.

Today we are witnessing the subordination of Europe to Washington. For example, Germany, the backbone of European politics and economics, silently "swallowed" the terrorist attack on the Nord Streams, which undermined the foundation of its economic and social well-being. As if this is how it should be.

The fact that Europe is now undergoing deindustrialisation reflects Washington's implementation of a long-standing task (it was put forward by Zbigniew Brzezinski) that Russia and Germany should not be allowed to draw closer. The United States saw this as a threat that Europe and Russia are Eurasia, a single continent with natural comparative advantages, will grow independently, rapidly, relying on innumerable resources in the eastern part of the continent, on modern technologies in the western part. The West did not want and could not allow this. So far, at this stage, he has succeeded.

The inadequate reaction to our actions from the West, primarily Washington, does not go unnoticed in the international community. Everyone understands that in the end, no one is immune from the illegitimate actions of the West if they show even the slightest degree of independence. The world majority is taking practical steps to reduce dependence on the dollar, creating new transport, logistics and production and supply chains.

The process is underway and is rapidly developing within the framework of the SCO and in other regional structures, such as the African Union and CELAC. At the global level, everyone wants to work closely with the BRICS association, which is no longer regional, but global.

A rather interesting scheme of interaction is emerging, when Washington, London and their allies brought down all the principles of globalization that they themselves had been preaching for many years and which were eventually accepted by the world community. I am referring to free competition, market principles, inviolability of property and the presumption of innocence. All this was the basis of the model of globalization, which in the early 1990s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, was essentially accepted by the whole world as the basis for the development of its economies and social systems. All this was "scrapped" without any doubt, as soon as the task arose to punish Russia.

The process of getting rid of the centralized, dictatorial model into which American globalization has resulted will be accompanied by the regionalization of economic processes. It is desirable that what is happening in Eurasia, Africa, and Latin America, given the interdependence with the world economy, be coordinated and harmonized at some level. BRICS is quite suitable for this role. Not because this association wants to replace some centralized structures. This is a natural manifestation of the interests of the countries of the Global South and East.

An example of the trend towards independence and rejection of neocolonial legacies was the Forum of Supporters of the Struggle against Modern Practices of Neocolonialism – the Movement "For the Freedom of Nations!" held on February 15-16 of this year. More than 50 countries of the world are represented in this movement through their parties, not only the ruling but also the opposition. Our Ministry is actively promoting its formation and development.

With all that I have said about the regionalisation of global processes, we certainly believe that the United Nations remains the only platform for universal cooperation. The principles laid down in its Charter are more relevant than ever. All the troubles, problems and crises are not due to the fact that the UN is failing, as some say, but to the fact that the UN Charter is not being implemented. Its principles are not put into practice.

If the West does this, it does so one-sidedly, choosing both from the "menu" in one case the principle of protecting sovereignty (as it did by refusing to recognize the absolutely transparent referendum in Crimea), and in the other case it is guided by the principle of the right of nations to self-determination (as was the case when Kosovo unilaterally declared independence without any referendum, and the West said that this is the right of peoples, recorded in the UN Charter).

Back in 1970, the General Assembly, by consensus, in the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security, clarified the relationship between the principle of sovereignty and territorial integrity of a country and the right of a nation to self-determination. It states that everyone is obliged to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states whose governments respect the right of peoples to self-determination and therefore represent the entire population living in a given territory. Who did the putschists represent in February 2014? Did they represent the population of Crimea, Donbass, southeastern Ukraine? But the West refuses to apply these principles in their entirety, doing so on an ad hoc basis. Of course, we are not at all opposed to the sovereign equality of States. But those that have a stable government that respects the entire "set" of norms of international law.

Together with our like-minded countries, we continue to work on reforming the UN, relying on the need not to revise, but to strengthen the UN Charter and insist that all countries comply with all the principles of the Charter in their entirety and interconnection.

I have already said that Eurasia is being formed as an independent part of a multipolar polycentric world. Movement is underway in favour of creating a Greater Eurasian Partnership, which President Vladimir Putin spoke about 10 years ago. Since then, this process has been characterized by the strengthening of ties between the EAEU, the SCO and ASEAN. We will also involve other organisations that deal with the material part of cooperation in this space, including the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf. This is also Eurasia.

In addition, there is the Chinese project "One Belt, One Road", there is an agreement between the EAEU and China that integration processes in the Eurasian Economic Union will be coupled with specific actions within the framework of the implementation of the "One Belt, One Road". On the basis of the material foundation, which is formed naturally, international transport corridors like the North-South are being created, from the ports of India to Vladivostok, and the development of the Northern Sea Route is also taking place. All these are colossal competitive advantages of Eurasia.

It is of fundamental importance that when President Vladimir Putin develops this initiative, he always stresses that we do not close the door to any country located on the Eurasian continent. When and if our European colleagues come to their senses and realise that they are being used to strengthen the position of the United States by weakening Europe's position – you are welcome, the doors are open. But they will "enter" these processes on the basis of equality and full respect for the interests of those who began to interact earlier. It is necessary to build a system of Eurasian security on this material foundation. It is clear that Euro-Atlantic security, which consists in the "coupling" of North America and Europe and is embodied in such structures as NATO and the OSCE, has discredited itself. All its variations boiled down to the fact that the United States sought to "crush" everyone else. Therefore, Eurasian security is an urgent issue. In this case, as with regard to economic cooperation and the development of the military-political security system, we are convinced that the doors for the western part of our continent should be left open.

We hope that non-governmental and non-profit organisations will take an active part in these processes, continuing to contribute to the common efforts to strengthen Russia's position on the continent and in the world, including the promotion of the Russian language and our multi-ethnic culture. I heard that there is an initiative to create an international platform for the protection of traditional values. This is our strength. Many in the West are not ready to share neoliberal values. For example, I. Musk from California is moving to Texas because these values are already off the charts. And he is not alone. Many people, including in Europe, want to escape from this "offensive" of the LGBT community, from the complete disregard for natural historical processes, from what God has given us. Many are thinking about leaving for Russia. There are already such examples. I am sure that there will be more of them. They will multiply.

The International Russophile Movement was formed in the same vein. We have deep respect for the activities of this non-profit organization. In Bulgaria, where President of this organisation Nikolai Malinov and other members live, they have been subjected to a real campaign of harassment just for promoting the issue of normal relations with Russia in the international arena. More and more people are resisting such frenzied attempts by the West to "abolish" everything, including our culture and history, to rewrite the results of World War II and the Great Patriotic War, and to reject the language of blackmail, hatred and diktat.

We believe it is important to systematically reform work in such an area as international election monitoring. Many of the organisations represented here have participated in these processes in one way or another, including through the OSCE. It has degraded completely. But when our CIS neighbours turn to us and want to send their observers as part of the OSCE monitoring missions, we agree. At least in order to highlight the manipulations for which the monitoring of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe is "famous".

We need to build our own mechanisms in this area, including public ones. The CIS Interparliamentary Assembly and the CIS as an intergovernmental organisation have extensive experience. We will welcome the involvement of non-governmental organisations in this work. We will continue to support any of your activities aimed at diversifying international cultural, humanitarian, scientific and youth exchanges.

We are interested in harmonizing our plans and your projects. Daily contact between the Ministry's divisions helps to do this. But there is no limit to perfection. I am sure that today we will hear some additional wishes.

I would like to emphasize the importance of the work of non-governmental organisations and non-profit organisations to promote the integration of Crimea, Donbass and Novorossiya into the legal, socioeconomic and public space of the country. Almost all issues regarding Crimea have been resolved. And the four subjects (they are not "new subjects", but "historical subjects") of our Motherland need daily support at all levels and in all directions. Many of you tell the truth about the causes, course, and tasks of the special military operation. They consisted in the desire of the putschists who came to power to exterminate everything Russian: both legislatively, in which they had already succeeded, and physically.

Recently, I read a statement by Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine Olga Stefashina: "The Ukrainian authorities do not consider it necessary to respect the language rights of Russian-speaking citizens." All. There were many such statements. But as soon as you show "this" to a Western interlocutor, on those rare occasions when we "clash" somewhere at the UN, they simply (speaking in Russian) "go under the snag."

Many of you are making a huge contribution to this work. I would like to single out, without offending anyone, Mikhail Grigoriev and the Foundation for the Study of Democracy, which he heads. We often and very effectively use his work and materials in the UN Security Council.

It would’ve been good for more NGOs to be listed aside from the few mentioned. Also, the term “The West” has become too wide a brush that’s painting all Westerners as the same when Lavrov’s own examples say that’s not so. IMO, a more accurate term would be NATO/EU or the Washington/London/Brussels Axis, or unfriendly Western governments, although they are harder to say than The West. Or perhaps merely referring to The Hegemon is enough as most understand that’s the Outlaw US Empire. As I wrote, Lavrov’s review was very general. I agree with his formulation that the UN isn’t working as designed because too many nations are violating the UN Charter instead of working together to uphold and enforce International Law. In other words, there’re more UN Charter violators than the USA, all of them being outlaws, while some also remain empires controlling other peoples in colonial fashion. And regarding the UN, its undergoing a rather longstanding problem that’s now a very serious crisis—the inability to enforce UNSC Resolutions on Palestine primarily because of two impediments: the Outlaw US Empire and its Zionist allies. The greater mass of the Global Majority agrees on what the solution ought to be but have so far failed to force its implementation. I know Lavrov didn’t mention this crisis, but the other two superpowers need to face the reality of their responsibilities and force the issue; otherwise, global security will forever remain a pipe dream.

*
*
*
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!