Lavrov's Presser in Pyongyang

Lavrov had a short hop from Beijing to Pyongyang for a meeting arranged during Kim Jong-un’s recent visit to Russia. Amongst all the other global developments, this one merits some heightened scrutiny as contacts seem destined to increase between China, Russia and DPRK. Lavrov gets a wide array of questions. His answers to several are important. Lavrov’s presser:

Good afternoon

We are visiting the DPRK in accordance with the agreement reached by President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin and Chairman of the DPRK State Affairs Kim Jong-un at the Vostochny Cosmodrome on September 13. This anniversary was celebrated on October 75 of this year, and during this trip we have a constructive discussion of the implementation of the agreements reached at the Vostochny Cosmodrome.

The DPRK is a close neighbour and long-standing partner of our country. We are unanimous in the opinion that the progressive development of bilateral relations meets the interests of our states and contributes to the strengthening of peace and security in Northeast Asia. The development of our relations with China serves the same purpose.

Comrade Minister and I discussed the prospects for intensifying political dialogue and resuming full-fledged contacts, including between the foreign ministries, as the consequences of the pandemic are overcome and the relevant restrictions are lifted. We proceed from the premise that the Plan of Foreign Exchanges for 2024-2025, which has just been signed, will contribute to the solution of this task.

We talked a lot about the prospects for trade and economic cooperation. In accordance with the decision of our leaders, specific aspects of practical cooperation will be intensified. To this end, it is planned to convene the tenth meeting of the Intergovernmental Commission on Trade, Economic, Scientific and Technical Cooperation in November.

We discussed key issues on the regional and global agendas. At the same time, we focused on the situation on the Korean Peninsula. We, as well as our North Korean friends, are seriously concerned about the increased military activity of the United States, Japan and South Korea, as well as Washington's policy of transferring elements of its strategic infrastructure, including nuclear aspects, to the region. We oppose this unconstructive and dangerous policy to the policy of ensuring de-escalation and the inadmissibility of escalating tensions. We are pursuing this policy together with the DPRK and the PRC.

We are trying to constructively propose alternatives to escalating tensions here. We are in favour of establishing a regular negotiation process on security issues on the Korean Peninsula without any preconditions. It is our common interest to ensure peace and stability in Northeast Asia on the basis of respect for each other's security interests and equal agreements.

We also talked about the problems of the Asia-Pacific region, where the United States and its allies are promoting bloc forms and trying to promote NATO infrastructure in this region under the slogan of "Indo-Pacific strategies." All of this is also a matter of serious concern. Like our friends from the DPRK, we are in favour of creating reliable mechanisms to ensure equal and indivisible security based on non-aligned approaches. This is very important. The principle of mutual respect and consideration of each other's interests is fundamental. We agreed to continue coordinating our actions at the UN and other multilateral venues.

We reaffirmed our high assessment of Pyongyang's position on what is happening in and around Ukraine. We have reaffirmed our principled support for the actions of the Russian Federation to repel the aggression unleashed against us by the Western "group" led by the United States, using Ukraine as a tool.

I think that the exchange of views was useful. We will continue to coordinate our actions in all areas, including, above all, the economy. There is great interest in significantly increasing trade and economic exchanges, including our political coordination on the basis of the Plan that has just been signed.

Question: Did you discuss the schedule of bilateral contacts at the highest and high levels in Pyongyang?

Sergey Lavrov: A month ago, we had a high-level contact, and today we have a high-level contact. I am sure that they will continue.

Question: An attempt to organise talks between the Israeli and Palestinian sides failed in Oman. In your opinion, are there any real mechanisms that can stop the bloodshed in a short time?

Sergey Lavrov: A real mechanism could be a UN Security Council decision calling on all parties to immediately cease all hostilities and violence and ensure the resolution of humanitarian problems, taking into account the catastrophe that threatens the Gaza Strip and millions of people living there. Regrettably, the resolution was not adopted. I am not sure that if it had passed, there would have been a pause and humanitarian problems would have been resolved. But the call didn't work out either. The U.S. blocked its adoption by vetoing it.

What are the prospects? I proceed from the assumption that consultations between the countries concerned will continue. Egypt is taking the initiative. We would all like to see a de-escalation in the Gaza Strip. In the coming days, there will be contacts, during which it will become clear how realistic it is to count on this.

Question: A month ago, President of Russia Vladimir Putin met with North Korean President Kim Jong-un in Russia. The whole world, especially the West, was closely following this meeting. Vladimir Putin agreed to come to the DPRK. Why is the West so afraid of our friendship?

Sergey Lavrov: Why do I have to answer this question?

I can only express a general opinion about the actions of the West, not only in relation to our relations with North Korea, but in any region of the world. The West believes that it has the right, first of all the United States (the Americans have long subjugated the rest of the West) to decide for everyone: who and with whom to meet, who should agree on something, and who should comply with the prohibitions. The U.S. constantly puts them forward: "you must and you must." President of Russia Vladimir Putin has spoken about this more than once. Who owes whom and what is owed?

There is only one Charter in the world, the UN Charter, which states that the Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of states. Not once since the entry into force of this most important international legal document has the United States observed this immutable fundamental rule in any conflict or crisis.

Instead, they require everyone to abide by their "rules" that no one has ever posted or seen anywhere. The instinctive craving for hegemonism is present and does not help to solve problems, but only drives them into a dead end.

If you look at the history of the adventures that the United States has undertaken in various parts of the world – in Southeast Asia, in Afghanistan, in the Middle East – none of them has been successful and has not led to normalization of the situation. On the contrary, seeds were sown there, which are still yielding their sad and dangerous shoots.

Question: The rocket attack on a hospital in the Gaza Strip sparked a wave of anti-Israel demonstrations in the Islamic world. To what extent is the situation around the Palestinian-Israeli conflict still under control? How do you assess the risks of this conflict escalating into a global confrontation involving the United States and Iran? Were these threats discussed during your meetings in Beijing and Pyongyang?

Sergey Lavrov: As for the Gaza Strip, the risk of this crisis escalating into a regional conflict is quite serious.

I have already mentioned that the United States vetoed a resolution calling for a halt to any hostilities and to start resolving humanitarian issues. Thus, the United States has shown that it is not ready to call for a truce, for a ceasefire. If this is the case, then they can probably assume that the conflict may be escalating.

It's hard for me to judge what goals are being pursued. We are again witnessing attempts to blame everything on Iran. We consider them quite provocative. All the more so since the Iranian leadership is taking a responsible, balanced position and is calling for preventing this conflict from spreading to the entire region and neighbouring countries. We will achieve this in our contacts with the Palestinians, other Arab colleagues, and Israelis.

Question: Seoul predicts an increase in bloc confrontation in the region, which may be even more significant than during the Cold War. Do you agree with this statement? What is the chance that the conflict will turn into a "hot phase"? What is Russia doing to prevent this?

Sergey Lavrov: As for Seoul's statements, it is one of the factors that is escalating tensions here. I have already mentioned the formation of a tripartite alliance between the United States, South Korea and Japan in order to build up military potential here, including its nuclear components. This is what creates tension.

Instead of sounding the alarm about this, our South Korean colleagues should have changed these plans and taken a different position, including on the resumption of talks on peace and security in Northeast Asia. Such negotiations were conducted. They were interrupted not on our initiative, not on China's initiative, not on the initiative of the DPRK. In the course of the talks, they continued to put forward unacceptable conditions, demanding unilateral concessions from the DPRK, which was clearly unrealistic. Now we are witnessing a situation that is becoming more and more alarming. But (as we discussed with the Comrade Minister today), Russia and the DPRK, as well as the PRC, are in favour of dialogue and the resumption of negotiations without any preconditions. I think that this policy will find broad support in the Southeast Asian region as a whole.

Question: This is not your first visit to Pyongyang. What will you remember about this trip to the DPRK? Would you recommend our tourists to have a vacation in North Korea?

Sergey Lavrov: I would.

Question: Did you discuss the development of economic cooperation between Moscow and Pyongyang? In what areas can our countries and will implement joint projects?

Sergey Lavrov: I have already mentioned that the next tenth meeting of the Intergovernmental Commission on Trade, Economic, Scientific and Technical Cooperation is scheduled for next month. It will consider all the areas that were discussed in principle by our leaders at the Vostochny Cosmodrome.

After this summit, the co-chairs of the Intergovernmental Commission met in Moscow and outlined specific areas on which the plenary session of this commission will work. There is geological exploration and plans for the supply of energy resources and other goods needed by our friends from the DPRK. I think that based on the results of this meeting, it will be clear in which direction our economic cooperation will move.

Question: Turkey has put forward an initiative to create a system of guarantor countries for the parties to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for a peaceful settlement.

How do you assess its effectiveness? Do you plan to contact Ankara on this issue in the near future? Is Russia ready to act as one of the guarantors within the framework of the proposed initiative and under what conditions?

Sergey Lavrov: We are ready to discuss any constructive proposals. This initiative, which I heard about the other day, is clearly dictated by the desire to achieve de-escalation and normalise the situation.

We would like to hear what exactly they mean from our Turkish friends, with whom we are in contact, among other things, on this issue. Let me remind you that there was a mechanism that ensured a stable negotiation process. It was a "quartet" of international mediators (Russia, the United States, the United Nations, and the EU).

In recent years, the Americans (as President Vladimir Putin has said more than once) have shut down the Quartet and stopped cooperating within it, trying to monopolise the entire negotiation process and reduce it to the provision of insignificant economic services and assistance to the Palestinian population in exchange for refusing to create a Palestinian state, as required by the UN Security Council decision. It's a sad experience that we don't want to repeat.

We advocate that any approaches should be based on a balance of interests between the parties, and not on imposing someone's interests at the expense of others. It seems to me that the Turkish initiative is dictated by the desire to ensure such a balance. We will be ready to cooperate in its consideration. [My Emphasis]

The Brazilian UNSC effort was also vetoed by the Outlaw US Empire. So, will the Turks effort have a different result? Meanwhile, President Putin sticks to his calendar of events while continuing to be updated.

*
*
*
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!