Lavrov's Post-Summit Presser at Kuala Lumpur

Fresh from Rio to Kuala Lumpur after a trio of meetings/summits, Sergei Lavrov met with media to give his impressions and answer questions. It’s unusual for Lavrov to praise a questioner; he said this to the last Q: “Good question.” Now, Lavrov:

Good afternoon!

Here in Kuala Lumpur, we hold ASEAN events. They are annual. Now they are held at the ministerial level, and summits will be held in the fall. There are three main formats:

Russia-ASEAN Dialogue Partnership. Yesterday, the annual meeting at the level of foreign ministers was held.

The second format is the East Asia Summit, which is attended by a wide range of countries, primarily those that are developing a dialogue partnership with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. It was conceived that the East Asia Summit would consider projects of practical cooperation, connectivity in the economic, trade, transport and cultural fields.

The third format is the ASEAN Regional Security Forum. In addition to the members of the Association, the circle of participants is even wider.

All this together makes up the annual ASEAN events held here in Malaysia. It is symbolic that it was in this country that the Russian Federation took part in such meetings for the first time. Here, for the first time, the foundation was laid for the Russia-ASEAN dialogue partnership, which has since reached the level of strategic partnership. This is enshrined in our joint documents.

This year, we assessed the implementation of the commitments that were made on a reciprocal basis during previous meetings, including at the Russia-ASEAN summit in 2016. It continues to be a forum that has laid the strategic direction for our cooperation.

We are preparing an assessment of the implementation of the Strategic Partnership Plan for 2021-2025. In fact, it is executed in all its components. Today we noted that our special representatives located at the ASEAN headquarters in Jakarta are actively working on the 4th strategic plan. We hope to have time to adopt it before the end of 2025, ideally at the Russia-ASEAN summit scheduled for October 2025 in the capital of Malaysia.

As for the meeting of the countries participating in the East Asia Summit, which took place today. It was devoted primarily to the development of practical cooperation projects in various fields. We believe that this should be the basis for the activities of the East Asia Summits.

Regrettably, our Western colleagues who take part in these events are increasingly straying towards politicisation, ideologisation and Ukrainisation, which has also manifested itself in today's discussions, to the detriment of the potential laid down in the East Asia Summit to achieve practical results that are important for our countries and citizens.

It is not the first year that we have been promoting initiatives to promptly respond to epidemic threats. It would seem that the topic is much more relevant. We put it forward back in 2021 and it was approved. But due to the fact that the West has "struck a pose", this interaction is practically not moving anywhere. In 2023, we proposed developing cooperation in the field of tourism, promoting tourist exchanges as much as possible so that the connectivity of our countries is transmitted at the level of societies and citizens. Tourism is developing in any case, and the incentives we have proposed have been approved to be implemented in everyday activities. But so far little has been done.

We proposed developing cooperation in the development of remote areas (this was also agreed). In large countries, such as Russia, Indonesia, Malaysia, China and other countries, there are remote territories where civilization has already reached, but benefits are not distributed as actively as usual in megacities. This is an urgent task for everyone. We hope that practical results will be achieved on it.

Another of our initiatives in the field of humanitarian cooperation is to ensure the cultural ties between our countries. Eurasia is a huge continent. It is the cradle of several great civilizations. The cultural heritage of each of these civilizations deserves to be mutually enriched. I hope that our initiative will also be implemented.

At the meetings of the East Asia Summit and the ASEAN Regional Security Forum, it is not complete without an exchange of views on political problems and issues. Today, all ASEAN members and most partner countries, including Russia, spoke with great concern about the ongoing and even worsening tragedy in the Palestinian territories, where the humanitarian catastrophe artificially created in the Gaza Strip is followed by similar situations in another part of the Palestinian territories. I am referring to the West Bank, where Israel continues its aggressive policy of creating new settlements in ever increasing, record volumes. There will soon be nothing left of the territories where the Palestinian National Authority operates.

Today I was surprised to read that there is already a project to create the "Emirate of Hebron". This is seen as the first step towards promoting the concept of forming a "United Palestinian Emirates" on Palestinian lands. It sounds like science fiction at this stage, but the fact that such ideas are increasingly "popping up" in the public space speaks to the emerging risks that continue to escalate with regard to the prospects for the creation of a Palestinian state, as decided by the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council. This is a great challenge for the international community.

We talked about the problems created by Israel's unprovoked attack on the Islamic Republic of Iran, followed by United States missile and bomb strikes. This violates international law, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and the principles of the IAEA, under whose safeguards were the nuclear facilities that were attacked.

We called for the declared truce to continue without any interruptions, so that, despite the damage and damage caused to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the IAEA's assurances to the facilities under their control, we can try to remedy the situation, put it on a political track and resolve all problems exclusively through negotiations. This is important in order to prevent the recurrence of disregard for the fundamental documents designed to ensure access to the peaceful use of nuclear energy without any attempts or temptations to possess nuclear weapons production technologies.

We also talked about the situation in Myanmar, where there are signs of normalisation. We support the process being carried out by the Myanmar leadership and ASEAN's desire to help this normalization and fully restore Myanmar's full participation in the work of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

We outlined the need to avoid any provocative actions on the Korean Peninsula, which, unfortunately, continue with regard to the DPRK, including by strengthening the military alliances of the United States, South Korea and Japan. More and more large-scale military exercises are being conducted, and even with a nuclear component. There is a (also serious) conflict potential here. We will do everything we can to ensure the legitimate rights of our North Korean allies and prevent provocations that could end badly.

Our Chinese friends have identified disputes over the South China Sea among the problems that they consider a priority for themselves in this region. We firmly believe that this problem should be resolved on the basis of the Code of Conduct concluded between Beijing and the ASEAN member states. On this basis, their negotiations continue. We consider it unacceptable for a non-regional power to interfere in this process.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi also mentioned the situation around Taiwan in sufficient detail, firmly stressing the immutability of the final settlement of the Taiwan problem based on the concept of a single Chinese state.

We have taken note of the words of some of our Western colleagues, which have been said before, that they respect the "one China" principle, but that the status quo cannot be changed. This is hypocrisy, obvious to anyone who is more or less familiar with this problem and with how the West is now acting in relation to Taiwan. The "status quo" for the West is relations with Taiwan as an independent state. Therefore, we once again confirmed the immutability of our approach in support of Beijing's position and Russia's readiness to assist in every possible way in the implementation of this position.

Question: Last year, at a meeting with the leadership of the Russian Foreign Ministry, President Vladimir Putin spoke about the need for a new Eurasian security architecture, which would focus on the principle that "the security of some states cannot be ensured at the expense of the security of others." What is the attitude of Asia in general and ASEAN in particular to this idea, given NATO's ongoing policy of militarization?

Sergey Lavrov: In fact, the initiative to form a Eurasian security architecture is a development of President Vladimir Putin's previous initiative, which he put forward at the first Russia-ASEAN summit, on the formation of a Greater Eurasian Partnership through the establishment of ties, deepening joint activities, joint projects and programmes between the existing integration structures on the Eurasian continent. Links have already been established between the executive heads and secretariats of the EAEU and the CIS, between these organizations and the SCO, and between all of them and the ASEAN countries. This is a useful process that allows you to harmonize integration plans and projects, combine efforts, and avoid duplication. Moreover, the membership of these integration formations intersects and intertwines.

We promote the concept of the Greater Eurasian Partnership with the understanding that discussions on this matter and negotiations on practical activities are open to all countries and integration structures on the Eurasian continent. In particular, there are good prospects for establishing ties between the EAEU, the SCO, the CIS, ASEAN and the GCC. In South Asia, there are integration associations on the South Asian Peninsula. So there are many structures here that can usefully improve connectivity.

This process (as various ideas are translated into practical actions) creates a material foundation for discussions and for ensuring security on the entire Eurasian continent. I have repeatedly touched on this topic as a follow-up to President Vladimir Putin's initiative. There are also many sub-regional integration associations in Africa and Latin America. But there are continent-wide structures there, such as the African Union and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States. And in Eurasia, the largest, most powerful, richest and fastest growing region in the world, there is no such continent-wide structure in the form of a dialogue platform (it is not necessary to create an organisation).

We are well aware that this is not a quick process. All countries of the continent invited to participate in these discussions must first "mature". Most of our European neighbours are not yet "mature" and clearly dream of spreading their influence through the North Atlantic Alliance and its infrastructure to the entire Eurasian continent in a "neo-colonial" way. They say directly, without hesitation, that in the current conditions this is a defensive alliance, and its main task is to protect the territory of member countries. They say that in the current conditions, the threat to the territorial integrity and security of NATO countries comes from the "Indo-Pacific region" (as they call it), that is, directly from the Pacific Ocean. I am referring to the South China Sea, the Taiwan Strait and many other things.

In our concept of Eurasian security and the Greater Eurasian Partnership, one of the main principles is respect for the structures created in various sub-regions, including ASEAN, its central role played by the Association as a result of the work that has been going on for almost 60 years to unite countries interested in cooperation on the principles of equality, openness and inclusiveness. Our concept respects the role of ASEAN and other similar formations. And the one promoted by NATO proceeds from the fact that the alliance will dictate to everyone how they should behave, whether ASEAN is needed. Formally, yes. All Western countries today participated in the meeting of the East Asia Summit and the ASEAN Regional Forum on Security.

But while pronouncing beautiful words, in parallel (you know this) "troikas", "fours", "quartets" are being created - AUKUS, the USA-Britain-Australia to implement the project to create nuclear submarines. I have already mentioned attempts to introduce nuclear elements into military exercises in the south of the Korean Peninsula. There are the "Indo-Pacific Four" - Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand. As well as a number of other similar "troikas" (QUAD-1, QUAD-2). They are trying to involve ASEAN members in these formations, "tearing" them away from the Association. We are talking frankly with our friends about this. They are well aware of the difference between the approach when everyone is invited to the table for an equal dialogue and the development of consensus positions that meet the interests of all states and reflect the balance of these interests, and the approach when the North Atlanticists come to this region and begin to "call the tune" and bring their own rules here. I believe that this is not good for the cause.

We are interested in ensuring that these formats and forums held here annually contribute to a better understanding of each other's positions, so that everyone acts openly and does not have any "stones" or any hidden plans against anyone in their bosom. But so far, the process is proceeding on different planes. I am convinced that our approach is more promising.

Question: The Rio summit a few days ago showed that against the backdrop of Washington's increasingly tough sanctions, BRICS is becoming a reliable alternative to the lawlessness of sanctions. Have the ASEAN countries "matured" to the point of readiness to start more active cooperation with Russia in particular and BRICS in general, not in words, but in deeds?

Sergey Lavrov: I think that the ASEAN countries are interested in cooperation with Russia, regardless of what is happening in the West and what the United States or its allies are doing with regard to them.

They do not have such a thing that "if the West did not put pressure on us, we would not be friends with Russia." Not at all. Friendship with Russia began long before the current US administration began to impose sanctions in the form of tariffs (these are also sanctions). I do not see any direct response in the way our relations with ASEAN are developing and how cooperation within BRICS is developing.

But if you have a choice either to trade in the context of an association, where no unscrupulous methods of suppressing competitors are used, on the one hand, and on the other hand, to trade with those who will blackmail you, then the conclusion suggests itself.

Question: Based on the meetings held within the framework of the forum, what conclusions could you draw? Are the ASEAN countries ready to actively resist NATO's advance and the bloc's attempts to gain a foothold in the region? Do the ASEAN countries have the necessary resources to remain a guarantor of security in the region today, especially given the serious duties imposed by US President Donald Trump on many of the ASEAN member countries?

Sergey Lavrov: I have just spoken in detail about our vision of the actions that NATO is taking here, trying to penetrate here, to introduce its infrastructure and gain a foothold. I have no doubt that the ASEAN countries understand what I am talking about and realise that they are invited to formally remain members of ASEAN in parallel and at the same time join non-inclusive bloc-based structures, which are largely aimed at creating a kind of "political and diplomatic front" to contain China (this is not hidden) and the Russian Federation at the same time.

I don't want to decide for them, it's their sovereign choice. We will perceive it as such. But I have no doubt that preserving ASEAN's unity and its central role in determining the mechanisms, formats and architecture of cooperation in Southeast Asia is in everyone's interests to the best extent. We will proceed from this.

Question: Yesterday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said following talks with you that a new "plan for Ukraine" was discussed. Which of the parties proposed these new approaches, what are they, what is their fundamental difference from the previous ones? Are the supply of American weapons also included in the plans? Was it discussed?

Sergey Lavrov: I would like to respond with the words of US President Donald Trump: "I will tell you so. Expect big surprises."

I don't know about the "big surprises". But you understand yourself, you are familiar with diplomatic activities, and you often accompany us, that there are things that are not commented on. Yes, we discussed Ukraine and reaffirmed the position expressed by President Vladimir Putin, including once again on July 3 in a conversation with President Donald Trump.

As for this "dialogue", "leak", "recording" (whether it is a neural network or not, I don't know) about the bombing of Moscow and Beijing, we discussed serious things.

Question: Did you discuss the issue of strategic offensive arms at your meeting with Marco Rubio? Is there an understanding of the future of START-3, which expires next year?

Sergey Lavrov: This was not discussed.

Question: Recently, German Chancellor Frank Merz said that diplomatic ways to resolve the conflict in Ukraine have been exhausted. On the one hand, I would like to ask you, as the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry, for an official reaction. And on the other hand, as an experienced professional diplomat, ask whether such actions by Germany fit into the diplomatic "arsenal"? Does this apply to the diplomatic sphere of work?

Sergey Lavrov: Good question.

It worries us. Because the latest statements and actions of Berlin, Paris and London show that the current class of politicians who have come to power in these and a number of other countries have forgotten the lessons of history, the conclusions that all of humanity has drawn from them, and, by and large, are trying to "raise" Europe again for a war (not a hybrid one) against Russia.

We showed a news conference by French Foreign Minister Jean-Nuel Barrault, who was sitting on the stage with other participants at a political science event, and a Frenchman from the audience, who often visited Donbass, asked him why Paris is actively supporting the Nazi regime, which has already been revived in Ukraine. You saw how Minister Jean-Nicolas-Barrault broke down, shouting in a hysterical tone that they were defending Ukraine's territorial integrity and international law. He won the applause of some part of the hall. But after everything that is known about the actions of the Kyiv regime, about why it needs territorial integrity... And it is needed in order to suppress all the rights of the Russian, Russian-speaking population, and to physically destroy those who do not agree with the position of Kiev after the coup d'état.

Yesterday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio handed over a small summary of quotes from Vladimir Zelensky, Prime Minister of Ukraine Dmitry Shmyhal, Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Andriy Yermak and Yury Podolyaka, which directly state the need to legally destroy the Russians, or better yet, physically. When Mr Jean-Nicolas Barrault and others like him say that they do not want to see anything but the territorial integrity of Ukraine, this is self-exposure.

As for German Chancellor Merz. He said "funny" things more than once. Including the fact that his main goal is to make Germany the leading military power in Europe again. At the word "again" he did not even choke. He also said things that let Israel "work" in Iran, it does the "dirty work" for us. This is a quote from the "owners" of the concentration camps. When they preferred to use collaborators to exterminate Jews, so as not to get their hands dirty, realizing that this was a "dirty business".

If Chancellor Merz believes that the peaceful possibilities have been used and exhausted, then he has finally decided to devote himself to the complete militarization of Germany at the expense of his people, just to prance again under Nazi slogans to repel the "threats emanating from Russia." This is complete nonsense. I hope that any sensible politician understands this.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said that this nonsense is being used to keep the people in obedience and prevent protests from breaking through, which inevitably lead to a deterioration in the socioeconomic situation and stagnation observed in Europe. All this is due to the fact that hundreds of billions have been sent and are being sent to Ukraine again.

I came across a quote. It was interesting to see how Europe perceived Germany at the time. There was a quote from the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet of June 22, 1941. In other words, they glorified the Nazis as a symbol of freedom. If Europe is moving towards this again... What can I say? Mournfully.

We will fully take this into account in all areas of our planning. [My Emphasis]

While the BRICS Summit and all the ASEAN meetings were happening, China was preparing for a similar yet different event, The Global Civilizations Dialogue Ministerial Meeting, which seeks to begin the implementation of China’s Global Civilization Initiative. As Lavrov noted, Eurasia is host to many great civilizations, but it is also host to a group of “immature” nations who are clearly not ready to become civilized. Lavrov’s somewhat cryptic closing comment IMO gives us a look into what’s stewing in the back of his mind as I’m sure he’s aware of Mr. Trenin’s op/ed and its thesis. And as Lavrov also said, “there are things that are not commented on.” For many years now, Lavrov has said directly the EU/NATO doesn’t want peace as its stated aim is to defeat Russia. I’ll now remind readers of the Outlaw US Empire’s #1 policy objective that has yet to be renounced—Full Spectrum Dominance. That’s why NATO wants to expand to the Western Pacific Ocean. That’s why the Taiwan “hypocrisy.” That’s why the Zionists were planted in Palestine. Yes, the imperial project to establish total dominance is just over 200 years old, which is when the Zionist project was formulated in Europe. My intent isn’t to retell those 200+ years of history. Rather, it’s to declare Western Civilization as Uncivilized. 87.5% at minimum of the global population is all ready for China’s several global initiatives, and fundamentally they mean the establishment of peace and harmony so global civilization can continue to develop. Only the hegemonic nations and some of their populous are against that aspiration, and the obvious question is why?

Lavrov IMO and many of us are sick and tired of the SOSDD—Same Old Shit Different Day. We know enough of the past to understand how we reached this moment in time, but we haven’t discovered an exit from the mess that past has caused. Well, let me rewrite that. We haven’t discovered a way to convince that 12.5% of humanity that it must change its ways so humanity can evolve and progress—that they are not exceptional or chosen but human like all other humans. Yes, I know some believe that’s an impossible task and humanity is doomed to failure and extinction all for A Few Dollars More. How to reconcile those wanting to be civilized with those who don’t? Currently, the Outlaw US Empire’s leadership is busy slowly isolating itself from the Global Majority while still trying to attain its #1 policy goal. I often wonder how Uncle Remus would tell that story.

*
*
*
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!