Lavrov's Presser in the Lion's Den

Photo of Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's meeting with Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of North Macedonia and OSCE Chairperson-in-Office Benjamin Osmani and Minister of Foreign and European Affairs and Trade of Malta and future OSCE Chairman-in-Office Igor Borch.

In reporting on Lavrov’s speech at the OSCE in Skopje, several unhealthy trends were noted. Now on the day after, Lavrov is able to talk about some of those in his brutally frank manner at today’s presser. However, not everything was ugly as the above photo attests. There are some OSCE nations who’ve retained their independence from the diktat of the Outlaw US Empire. Lavrov’s opening remarks are short as he preferred to stand by yesterday’s statement, although he did add a few points. Those who recall yesterday’s report will see Lavrov echoing the analysis it provided. It will be best to read what he says for yourselves. The event lasted over an hour, so be prepared for a long read:

Good afternoon!

I do not want to make a lengthy introduction. If you follow the meetings of the OSCE Ministerial Council, you may have read my remarks. I will not repeat myself.

I regret that we have come to the 30th meeting of the OSCE Ministerial Council in a situation where it is not possible to celebrate this anniversary. We are witnessing the complete degradation of everything that was created in the Organisation (before that, within the framework of the Conference) in all three dimensions of security (military-political, economic-environmental and humanitarian). I won't give you any examples.

We have seen that our Western colleagues have not learned any lessons from their failed policy of destroying the OSCE. They continue to "finish it off" with a tenacity that deserves better use. Yesterday, 95 percent of our Western colleagues' speeches were devoted to this. Only a few sober voices reminded us that the Organization was created to cooperate and ensure mutual security. A lot has been done along the way.

In the military and political sphere, everything was destroyed, including the refusal to ratify the adapted Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe and many other agreements that helped maintain a security balance and ensured real arms control and arms reduction in the European theater. Everything has been destroyed in the economic sphere as well. The second "basket" has been destroyed by the unprecedented sanctions that the European Union and the United States have imposed on the Russian Federation in huge numbers.

There is nothing to say about human rights. When, after the coup d'état in Ukraine in February 2014, the "anti-terrorist operation" of the Kiev Nazi regime began to suppress Donbass, whose residents refused to accept the criminal coup and the authorities, for many years there were no problems with the deaths of children, women, civilians in general, with a complete trade and economic blockade of Donbass, and with the cessation of water supplies to the Russian Crimea. The discrediting is obvious. It's sad.

What the West is "occupied" is well illustrated by what is happening now, while we are communicating: some minor "squabbles" – whether or not to extend (or not) all these persons who head the OSCE institutions. They have evaded their direct responsibilities, in direct violation of the principles on which the Organization is founded, where they were appointed to ensure the various directions of its activities. Now they are fighting to extend each other (all the commissioners for media and other affairs) for nine months, for one year. Because of this, there is a petty "fuss" that has nothing to do with the deepest crisis of the OSCE. But that's all they care about.

The Macedonian presidency has put forward the right motto – "It's about people". Yesterday, during a working lunch, I drew the attention of my colleagues to the fact that I proceeded from the fact that when we say "this is about people", we mean all citizens of the OSCE member states and even "non-citizens" who remain in this shameful capacity in Latvia and Estonia. In fact, it turns out that all the "fuss" and concern about people is about the four who head various OSCE departments. At least, I can't draw any other conclusion from the nervous "activism" of our Western colleagues.

I don't care how these "get-togethers" and attempts to bargain for an extra day/week will end, so that the heads of the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, the "controller" of the media and people who deal with the rights of national minorities will continue to grossly violate all OSCE principles. On this not-quite-optimistic note, I conclude my remarks.

Question: On the eve of the ministerial meeting, the US representative to the OSCE said that Russia would be isolated in Skopje. Did you feel it?

Sergey Lavrov: My colleague, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, has fled. I didn't run away.

Today, Maria Zakharova showed two different photographs published in Macedonian newspapers. The first one was made on November 29 this year in the evening. Everyone came to dinner and took pictures. Now I understand why – for the newspaper to publish it and say that everyone has arrived, but "Sergey Lavrov is isolated." This "internecine" was the day before. Just arrive, drink good Macedonian wine, have a snack. The opening was in the morning. The photo from there was published by other newspapers. All the countries are represented behind their plates, including the Russian Federation, which my colleagues and I represented. But at the event on November 29 of this year, there was neither a Ukrainian minister, nor a Polish one, nor a Baltic minister. As far as I understand, Antony Blinken and EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell have also left.

Why is this happening? They probably believe that by doing so they are underlining their intention to "isolate" Russia. And I think they're just cowards. They are afraid of any honest conversation with facts in hand. The same fear explains the "twists" with the denial of visas to our diplomats, both to events at the UN in New York, and at the sessions of various UNESCO bodies in Paris. This is basic cowardice.

Over the two years of the West's hysterical hybrid war against Russia, it has been seen that it has no clear and sane arguments. Yesterday we presented ours in detail. No one objected.

Question: What is Russia's position on Bulgaria's claims to Macedonian identity?

Sergey Lavrov: I am a little bit of an expert on the specifics of Macedonian-Bulgarian relations. I can say that the Macedonian people have every right to participate on an equal footing in all the life of our continent.

If we give a general assessment, not only and not so much of Macedonian-Bulgarian relations, but also of the problems that persist in the Balkans in general, then their roots lie in the actions of the West to destroy the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Montenegrins, Slovenes, Slovaks, Serbs, and Macedonians lived and coexisted within its framework. They did not have the difficulties that we are now mentioning.

I remember very well how for years Macedonia was called the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM in English). It's humiliating. Now they have invented North Macedonia. Everyone understands what I am talking about. Macedonia does not claim any land, either in Greece or anywhere else. We know that. But it's up to the Macedonians to decide. A few years ago, the speaker of the Macedonian parliament, T. Xhaferi, was proudly photographed in his office, and the Albanian flag was on the table. There is a problem, everyone understands it.

Our Western colleagues are encouraging some "ethnic groups" in the Balkans, while taking an aggressive, dictatorial stance towards others, demanding that they agree to join the sanctions against Russia "before it is too late." It was in the West's interest to break up Yugoslavia. They do not need such a unifying force in the Balkans. They have always wanted to play one nation against another. They continue to do this with success. But I am convinced that the peoples of the Balkan countries have developed a genetic code over their long, difficult but glorious history and will not allow themselves to be offended in the end. They will not allow our Western colleagues to constantly play one country against another, one nation against another.

Look at what's happening in Bosnia. We have agreed that the three state-forming peoples will coexist. Now they want to destroy them to the ground. We can talk about this for a long time, but I can assure you that we have good feelings for the Macedonian people.

Having been here for only two days, I see your citizens on the street, in the hotel, and I feel the warmth that they radiate towards us. It's mutual.

Question: Why has the security situation in Europe become the way it is today? Does Russia expect the OSCE to play an important role, given that some European countries entrust their security to the United States?

What distinguishes other organizations such as the SCO and ASEAN from the OSCE?

Sergey Lavrov: We have been preparing for this conversation. I was sure that our foreign journalists would seek to be interested in the essence of what was happening.

And some of your colleagues met me here yesterday morning. They stood in a crowd and just shouted: "when will you liberate Ukraine", "when will you stop the war in Ukraine". But you don't have to be a journalist to do that, you just have to be an active participant in the propaganda campaign. Real journalists are interested in the essence, they want to understand it.

With my colleagues in the delegation, similar questions were expected. Here are some quotes:

1. "The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe was born to preserve a place where East and West could meet each other, because nowhere else had it been possible."

2. This Organization is "a narrow but reliable bridge that allows the participants of the Cold War not to fall into a "hot" war.

3. "It is impossible to create the impression that the West will succumb to the desire to recreate its very powerful bloc, the essence of which is domination and which step by step is shrinking its international borders around Russia, the borders of large alliances."

4. "NATO enlargement will mean for the Russians, and not without reason, that the military border is approaching their own. This is indisputable. And we don't want to give the impression that we are looking for conflict or a reason to divide Europe, especially with Russia, which does not deserve it. It will be very difficult for us to prevent this country (Russia) from feeling that it is surrounded. It is important to provide guarantees to Russia, to envisage and think over an even stronger agreement aimed at resolving issues of the future between Russia and Western countries. There's nothing worse than making it feel like we're recreating blocks."

Guess what year it is? 1994. The author of the statements was the then President of France Francois Mitterrand. He warned back in 1994, but no one heard him. Or rather, at first, they tried. They adopted and signed the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces of Europe, and then its adapted version. When the Warsaw Pact disappeared, the Forum for Security Cooperation, the Open Skies Treaty, the Agreement on the Limitation of the Size of Conventional Armed Forces, on Small Arms and Light Weapons, on Ammunition, and so on were established. All of this collapsed because, in parallel with this useful work, which resulted in concrete consensus results (as it should be in the OSCE), the West persistently led NATO to the East, right to our borders.

I mentioned this in my statement yesterday. In 1999, in 2010, it was written that no one should strengthen his security at the expense of the security of others. Your presidents and prime ministers at OSCE summits have signed that no organization has the right to claim dominance in the military-political sphere. I was asked how they expected to fulfill these obligations if they were expanding NATO at the same time. No how. No one said anything. They said that these were political statements and declarations. They don't mean anything. They say that legal security guarantees are only in the North Atlantic Alliance.

The Permanent Council is currently in session, where our representatives to the OSCE are discussing what to do with these four "characters" who still (until the day after tomorrow) head the Organisation's secretariat structures. There is a bargaining to extend it for a year or nine months. I believe that three months is quite enough to announce a competition and hire normal managers who will not look like a doll on the fingers of thimble makers. I am indifferent to the outcome of this meeting, where the fate of these four people, rather than the citizens of all of Europe, is being decided. It's sad.

Question: In your opinion, what will be the geopolitical outcome of the work against Kosovo and Serbia?

Sergey Lavrov: What is happening around Serbia and Kosovo organically fits into the trend observed within the OSCE: first to agree on something, to celebrate the achievement of results, and then to watch as first petty and then major sabotage begins. He cited the fate of many agreements that were reached "under the umbrella" of the Organization, and then the West methodically destroyed them.

I remember how the European Union, "the great mediator in many situations", wanted the UN General Assembly to specifically appeal to the EU to help build bridges between Belgrade and Pristina. In 2013, it was solemnly announced that an agreement had been reached on the creation of the Community of Serb Municipalities in Kosovo. Nothing happened. The people appointed in Pristina to lead this Serbian province categorically refused and continue to refuse to implement this agreement. What is the European Union doing? Do you think he somehow requires them to behave decently? No. He demands that Serbia change its position. The EU has already drafted a new document on the Community of Serb Municipalities in Kosovo, which is strikingly different from what Belgrade and Pristina signed 10 years ago. This is similar to many situations with OSCE agreements and documents.

At the same time, the Serbs are told that they want to join the European Union, they have been standing in line for a long time. But, they say, they will not open new "chapters" for negotiations until Belgrade joins all EU foreign policy decisions, including sanctions against the Russian Federation. Such is the power of persuasion in Europe. They will not accept it until they recognize Kosovo, or at least support its admission to international organizations. This is serious. Approximately the same thing that is happening now behind the wall, where they bargain, for how many months and who to extend in these positions.

I am very worried about the Serbian people. When I worked in New York, as a representative of the UN Security Council, I had the opportunity to visit Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and Serbian Krajina. There was also Belgrade. I saw what people did to the city, who are now shouting that a war has been unleashed in Europe for the first time (meaning in Ukraine). And in 1999, it "didn't exist". At that time, the covers of American and British magazines featured slogans that Serbia's repentance would purify the Serbian people.

I see that this line continues. Not only to Serbia, but also to the Republika Srpska and to those who think about the interests of their own people and want to preserve their human dignity as a politician. Unfortunately, there are fewer and fewer of them. Others are moving in the direction that was once proclaimed as the "end of history," a liberal world order, all "under the same brush," "one commander, and all the rest at the cross."

We do not impose anything on anyone. It is up to every nation to decide what to do next. Obviously, the European Union has been "reborn." It was created as an association of countries that, together, wanted to improve the well-being of their citizens more effectively than apart. Look at what the funds from the European Peace Fund are being spent on. Listen to what the "great diplomats" of the EU say, what the leadership of the European Commission proclaims, which, by and large, usurps power. There are many examples when member states begin to wonder on the basis of what powers the European Commission decides for them.

I am not calling for the collapse of the European Union. There is no need for these calls. I am simply stating the behaviour of countries that have declared themselves a model and the crown of democracy. There is no democracy in the European Union. There is stick discipline, drill. Even worse than in NATO. Or rather, better than in NATO.

Question: At the Primakov Readings on November 27, you said that the chances of saving the OSCE were slim. Now, after the conclusion of the OSCE Ministerial Council in Skopje, do you think these chances have increased or decreased?

Sergey Lavrov: The chances have increased, but not for the OSCE to be preserved.

A lot of different feelings arose yesterday during the meeting, working lunch, when we talked in the corridors. Today, they are strengthening. The most important feeling is indifference. The organization has turned itself into something that makes me indifferent to what will happen to it next.

Maria Zakharova: Unlike the German authorities, we respect media representatives of all countries. A word to the German press, Deutsche Welle, please.

Question (retranslated from English): Today you clearly said that you do not believe in the bright future of the OSCE. You are talking about the collapse of the Organization, about the fact that it no longer plays its key role. Do you plan to leave the Organization in this case?

Sergey Lavrov: Quote correctly. I said that I did not care how the current OSCE meeting ended.

I don't know where you got your education as a journalist. You asked whether we were planning to withdraw from the Organization, and I told you to quote me correctly. The quote was that I don't care how the current OSCE meeting ends.

I know that in Germany it is customary for members of the government to tell journalists what they should write. We respect our journalists and leave it to their imagination how they will present the results of the press conference.

Question: Does your visit to Skopje mean that the West is beginning to realise the need to talk to Russia? Can we say that there has been a shift in this sense?

Sergey Lavrov: It is good that you asked this question. I was amused to read in various media outlets, including ours, that the Poles did not invite Sergey Lavrov, but the Macedonians did. This is a substitution of concepts.

When the OSCE Ministerial Council is held, no one should invite anyone anywhere. The host country of the event, following the results of the annual chairmanship, is obliged to ensure the participation of all ministers and their entourage, including journalists (which did not happen here). Even in this presentation of the topic (in the fact that Poland did not invite, but Macedonia did) the perverted nature of the activities of the Organization, which used to be called "security and cooperation in Europe," is revealed.

They are slowly, as on various other issues, hammering into public opinion that they may or may not invite Sergey Lavrov. They have no right not to invite someone. You don't need an invitation there. The participating country announces that it is flying on such and such a date, on such a route, on such a flight, please provide your hostile functions. That's it.

Question: Is there a possibility of an agreement with Ukraine? What do you need for it?

Sergey Lavrov: We have discussed this issue many times for several years. There is not a single major speech by President Vladimir Putin where he has not been asked this question or given an exhaustive answer.

I would like to reiterate that an agreement was reached in Istanbul at the end of March 2022 after several rounds of talks. Three rounds of meetings were held in Belarus and the final round in Istanbul. The fact that this was the case, that an agreement was reached, was confirmed by a direct participant in these talks, who now heads Vladimir Zelensky's faction in parliament, Dmitry Arakhamia. In Istanbul, he was one of the members of the Ukrainian delegation. In one of the last interviews, he said that they were ready to sign, which we agreed. Now he has confirmed that in retrospect he understood that there was a lot of winning for them. But Boris Johnson came and said: no, let's fight again. Everyone knows that. We have talked about this many times. Now the Ukrainians themselves have confessed to it. So far, we have not seen any signals from either Kiev or its masters that they are ready to move to a political process. Moreover, a year and a half ago, Vladimir Zelensky signed a special decree prohibiting negotiations with Vladimir Putin's government. This is a court case. He is not going to cancel it.

Listen to what the leaders of NATO and the European Union are saying: they have an obligation to support Ukraine, because if Ukraine is defeated, it will be a defeat for the entire West. Recently, it has been added that after Ukraine, Vladimir Putin will go to the Baltic States, Poland and other neighbouring countries. This was said not by some marginal politician, but by the head of the Pentagon, Lloyd Austin. He said that Russia will not stop in Ukraine, so they have no right to lose in Ukraine. They're going to win or they're going to win. They do not hide the fact that they are the ones who are waging the war.

In order to start a political process, you need two, as in tango. The guys on the other side are not dancing tango, but breakdancing. You have to be a soloist there.

We want to hear answers to the questions that have been repeatedly asked of our Western colleagues. Yesterday, in my speech, I quoted the Constitution of Ukraine, which is still in force, on which, when taking the oath, first Petr Poroshenko and then Viktor Zelensky put their right hand. It contains a description of the obligations that the state of Ukraine guarantees to "Russians and other national minorities": it contributes to the consolidation and development of the Ukrainian nation, its historical consciousness, traditions and culture, cultural, ethnic, linguistic, and religious identity. It is not allowed to narrow the content and scope of existing rights and freedoms. There can be no privileges on ethnic, linguistic or other grounds. The right to study in one's mother tongue is guaranteed. Can anyone compare these existing obligations and guarantees of the Ukrainian state with what they are doing with regard to the Russian language and ethnic Russian citizens of Ukraine? I don't know why no one is doing this. None of the honest journalists, in particular our German colleagues, have ever thought about this topic. Maybe they thought about it, but they didn't say a word, they didn't type.

For example, since February 2014, as soon as the coup d'état took place, the first thing they did was to announce their intention to abolish the status of the Russian language in Ukraine. This was the first thing they said in 2014, when they seized power, spitting on Germany, France and Poland, whose ministers put their guarantees under the settlement agreement between the opposition and the president. The opposition spat on guarantees and seized power. Then we asked our German and French colleagues why they did not call the Ukrainian opposition to order. We were not given any intelligible answers, only hinted that democratic processes sometimes take on "unusual zigzags." Something like that.

Also in 2014, there was an attempted coup d'état in the Gambia (there is such a country in Africa). The attempt was unsuccessful, but the U.S. State Department made a strong statement that the U.S. would never agree to the authorities in any country where it came to power by unconstitutional means. In 2015, there was a coup in Yemen. Yemeni President Abd Rabbo Mansour Hadi fled to Saudi Arabia. For many years, the entire progressive Western community demanded his return and "hoisting" him to the presidency so that he could continue to rule Yemen. For seven years, they have been trying to achieve this. Then it was decided to create a "transitional presidential council". When we asked why the President of Yemen enjoys such support, and President Viktor Yanukovych, who was overthrown and is also an absolutely legitimate head of a UN member state, why is he not demanded to be returned in order to start the political process again? We were told that he had left Kyiv. He left Kiev for Kharkov (everyone knows this very well), where there was a congress of his party. This still does not justify our Western "friends" with their double standards. It was just that this anti-Russian, neo-Nazi coup was needed in Ukraine, and in Yemen it was necessary to fight for the existing regime there. That's it.

I have already quoted the Ukrainian Constitution. Adviser to the head of Zelensky's office, Mykhailo Podolyak, said in May 2022: "I am in favour of forgetting the word 'Russians' in the Kharkiv, Luhansk and Donetsk regions. Ukraine's ambassador to Kazakhstan, Pyotr Vrublevsky, officially said in an interview: "We are trying to kill as many Russians as possible. The more Russians we kill now, the less our children will have to kill." Has any of the influential media in the West paid attention to this? No one. Vladimir Zelensky: "Those who are there in the Kremlin, they will end badly. I don't know how, but I'd like it to be faster. They're definitely not going to end up dying." Interesting? I could go on. Secretary of the Security Council of Ukraine Alexander Danilov: "Everything will burn and burn until all of Moscow burns down." Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Oleksandr Yermak: "Russians, these non-humans, have no right to be among the civilised citizens of Western countries." In one sentence, he labeled everyone else, except the West, as "uncivilized." The West has said at least something, based on its historical achievements, how does it present itself as the leader of the whole world? The West did not react in any way.

Vladimir Zelensky was asked what he thinks about the people who ended up in eastern Ukraine, where they refused to accept the results of the coup d'état, and with whom the Minsk Agreements were signed. He asked, "Are they called people?" There are representatives of people, not all of them are people, there are "individuals". How's that for such a racist charge? No one paid any attention to it. The crowning glory of Vladimir Zelensky's position. August 2021 There is no special military operation. Quote: "I believe that for the future of your children and grandchildren, if you love Russia and have been on the territory of Ukraine all your life, but felt that this is Russia, then you should understand that for the sake of your children and grandchildren you already need to go and look for your place in Russia." Fail. Here is a man whom the Western political elite calls "the hope of democracy" and a man who fights against Russia for "European values." The values of Nazism and fascism, which are now being revived through the Ukrainian elite with the active encouragement of a number of NATO and EU countries.

Maria Zakharova: It is surprising that the issue of Ukraine was not the first, not the second, but the seventh. Vladimir Zelensky is very afraid that he will be forgotten. We will not allow this to happen.

Question: Vladimir Zelensky said that Ukraine is starting to build defensive structures along the entire front line. What do you think this means? Has the Kiev regime actually admitted its defeat and abandoned its aggressive plans?

Sergey Lavrov: I have read the news about this. I proceed from the fact that the leadership of our special military operation knows what goals it is pursuing. The Supreme Commander-in-Chief exercises control over it on a permanent basis. We do not see any reason why our goals should be revised.

At least for the sake of returning these people to the implementation of their own constitution. So that, finally, the Western press raises some kind of fuss about this. How so? The "solution" that lies at the heart of the Ukrainian state has been trampled on many times in practice. And all the free media are somehow silent. In fact, those who are responsible for freedom of the media, national minorities, human rights and democratic institutions in the OSCE are also silent.

Question: You spoke about security and stability in the Balkans. In September 2022, Serbia signed a foreign policy agreement with Russia. Serbia has been a source of inter-ethnic clashes and serious instability, at least for the Balkan countries, including Kosovo. Recently, there has been armed aggression against Serbs in northern Kosovo. Does Russia give instructions to Serbia? Do you instruct them on the destabilization of the Balkans?

Sergey Lavrov: You said Russia signed an agreement with Serbia?

Question: Yes.

Sergey Lavrov: On what issue?

Question (retranslated from English): Regarding consultations on foreign policy actions in September 2022 with Foreign Minister Nikolayev Selakovic.

Sergey Lavrov: This is a profound misconception. In New York, Minister N. Selakovic and I signed a plan for consultations between the foreign ministries. Where, for example, it is written that the heads of departments dealing with European cooperation meet in January. In March, the leaders who deal with the Mediterranean meet. And so on. This is not policy alignment.

No one was hiding anything. There were Russian and Serbian journalists filming footage of the signing of the plan. And Washington immediately shouted how the Serbs dared to sign a plan for consultations with Russia, which is the aggressor. And it has settled in your head that this is policy alignment. I beg you, if you represent a mass media that you yourself consider respectable, do not let your owners down.

Question: There have been reports that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has met with the Israeli National Security Council. How can you comment on the facts of such meetings and the unconditional support of the United States for Israel? I think that's an example of "policy coordination."

Sergey Lavrov: In fact, what is happening in the Gaza Strip and around it is a difficult situation. The statistics announced by the heads of the United Nations and its various branches working in the Middle East are appalling. The number of dead children has already exceeded 6,000 and more than 4,000 women.

We have spoken on this issue more than once. We categorically condemned the terrorist attack on Israel on October 7, but we also categorically cannot agree that terrorism can be fought by any means, including gross violations of international humanitarian law. Our Israeli colleagues are well aware of this. This is the position of almost all other countries that are not indifferent to this region.

I have heard statements by US representatives, including Antony Blinken. In the morning I watched the news on Al Jazeera. They emphasize that the Americans call on the Israeli leadership to minimize the consequences for the civilian population. Probably, this is the minimum that can be done. We tried to go a little further. Immediately after the beginning of this situation, when the terrorist attack was followed by a military operation, we proposed in the Security Council that a humanitarian ceasefire be declared. We were not allowed to do this. The U.S. was against it. Then Brazil put forward a similar resolution. The U.S. vetoed it. At that time, the countries of the region (primarily Arab and Muslim countries) submitted a draft resolution to the UN General Assembly. It was weaker than the resolutions that the Americans did not pass in the Security Council. It did not call for a ceasefire, but for a humanitarian truce. The resolution was adopted.

The next resolution in the UN Security Council was again proposed by Brazil. We had to abstain because it was weaker than the position of the General Assembly. This did not do credit to the UN Security Council.

We hear statements by the Israeli leadership that they will not stop until they destroy Hamas. I will not go into details about how the experts met it and how the professional military commented. The laws of warfare have not been abolished. This is something to keep in mind.

We have always had an interest in ensuring the security of Israel, which is in a very vulnerable situation. The root of the vulnerability lies in the fact that the UN Security Council's decision to create a Palestinian state is not being implemented – a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, must live in peace and security with Israel and all other neighbors.

The Arab Peace Initiative, launched in 2002 by Saudi King Fahd bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, assumes that once a Palestinian state is established, all Arab (and Muslim) countries will establish normal relations with Israel. It would seem that this is the real way to a stable and sustainable situation in this long-suffering land. But so far, we have not succeeded.

There was Israeli Foreign Minister Yasser Lapid. At one time, he was in a coalition with Prime Minister Nikolae Bennett. They won the election and divided the posts. Bennett was Prime Minister and Lapid was Foreign Minister. He came to visit us. We talked to him.

When the special military operation began, Yasson Lapid made several statements: "There is no justification for the violation of Ukraine's sovereignty and the killing of civilians." Just like that, "bluntly" – there are no excuses. On his Twitter, he wrote: "I am extremely concerned about the bombing of Mariupol and the dire humanitarian situation. We call on Moscow to stop the bombing and allow residents to evacuate." He condemned the "massacre in Bucha". Although it has long been clear to everyone that this is not a massacre, but a pure staging.

You write about Bucha. I urge journalists who are professionally interested in international affairs to do the same. In early April 2022, two days after Russian servicemen left, they showed the bodies of people on the main street of the city. They showed and said that it was "Russian butchers who killed civilians." A package of sanctions was announced. This was also one of the pretexts for the Ukrainians to refuse to sign an agreement on the cessation of hostilities.

Since then, at press conferences, in appeals to the Secretary-General, at meetings of the UN Security Council, I have asked only one thing. A year and a half has passed. No one is investigating anything. No one tells anyone anything. Is it possible to at least get a list of the names of those people whose bodies were shown in Bucha as "tortured and killed"? Complete silence.

I appeal to the journalistic community. You're interested in getting to the truth, aren't you? Do a "small" journalistic investigation. Ask for the names of those shown on British television in the Ukrainian city of Bucha on April 4, 2022.

At that time, Lapid condemned the massacre in Bucha and added: "Intentionally causing harm to the civilian population is a war crime. I strongly condemn it."

On the other hand, when asked about Gaza, about thousands and thousands of civilians, one soldier (not the most senior military official) said that it was a "tragedy of war." Remember?

US National Security Adviser John Sullivan said: "Our weapons to Israel are subject to the laws of war and the requirement to take measures to protect innocent lives. We make such demands to everyone to whom we hand over weapons." The same John Sullivan, but not about Israel, but about Ukraine: "We did not impose restrictions on Ukraine's strikes on territory within its borders." There are restrictions for Israel, but not for Ukraine. Even here, Ukraine "surpassed" all the others.

Rear Admiral John Kirby, Coordinator for Strategic Communications at the US National Security Council, when asked whether the United States was aware that the Ukrainians had committed a terrorist attack by blowing up the Crimean Bridge, replied: "We do not tell the Ukrainians what is and what is not a legitimate target. They set their own goals." As the saying goes, feel the difference.

Question: Yesterday during your speech and this morning during your opening remarks, you accused Western countries and Western diplomats of undermining the fundamental principles of the OSCE. You've talked about a lot of hypocrisy about the situation in Ukraine, etc. You've said that there are two people involved in the dance, just like in the dialogue. You need two participants. And in the event of an armed clash, there are always two of them. When it comes to Russian aggression in Ukraine, who is more hypocritical: the Western countries, Russia, or both? When will you, as a country, admit your responsibility for the OSCE, the undermining of international institutions designed to guarantee peace in Europe, and the undermining of peace and stability in Europe in general?

Sergey Lavrov: You can publish your question. This will already be welcomed by your leaders.

Our Western colleagues are very fond of cancel culture. Those who have recently begun to be included in the "civilized world" in the form of the European Union and the North Atlantic Alliance are actively learning from them.

I have already given examples of how everything Russian was taken and "canceled" in Ukraine. They even began to exterminate everything Russian in violation of the Constitution and physically. Priests of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church are being killed there. What the West doesn't like doesn't exist. This "cancel culture" is also applied to the construction of political positions.

In February 2014, a bloody coup d'état took place in Ukraine. I would like to stress once again that at that time they did not care about Germany, France and Poland, which with their signatures the day before the coup d'état guaranteed an agreement between the opposition and the government. The first act of the "putschists" who came to power and were supported by the United States and Britain was to declare that they were abolishing the status of the Russian language.

After that, people in Crimea expressed their categorical disagreement. And in the east of Ukraine (in part of Donbass) they announced that they would not be under the control of this illegal government. Armed militants were sent to Crimea. They tried to storm the building of the Supreme Council of Crimea. They were kicked out of there. The Russian military, who were at our naval base in Sevastopol, helped. And the Crimeans held a referendum. For the West and, apparently, for your editorial board, the whole story begins with this referendum. Immediately there were loud shouts: "Russia has annexed Crimea." And what preceded the vote (referendum) does not exist at all. Allegedly, there was no such stage in history.

Just as there have not been seven years (even more) when Ukraine has publicly refused to implement the UN Security Council resolution on the Minsk agreements. By the way, they were also concluded by Germany, France, Russia and Ukraine. The Germans and the French have constantly stressed that they are the mediators, and the dispute is between Russia and Ukraine. Although the Minsk agreements were between Donbass (two self-proclaimed republics) and the Ukrainian authorities.

Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and former French President Francois Hollande proudly and publicly admitted in 2022 that no one was going to implement the Minsk Agreements and the UN Security Council resolution. It was necessary to buy time to arm Ukraine. Does anyone think of this when they pretend that the whole story began on February 24, 2022? No. You're clearly interested in history, but you also have a slight gap in that knowledge.

Back to the Balkans. As in the case of the Minsk Agreements, when France and Germany declared themselves mediators on behalf of the European Union, the European Union was also a mediator between Belgrade and Pristina to agree on the decision to create the Community of Serb Municipalities of Kosovo. That was in 2013, and the Minsk Agreements were signed in 2015. In both cases, the European Union "mediated." In both cases, the mediation came to nothing. In these situations, helplessness was revealed.

By the way, it was about the same thing - that the two republics should have the right to speak Russian language, to educate their children in it, to have the media in Russian language, to have their own local police and law enforcement agencies, so that they would be consulted when appointing judges and prosecutors.

This is almost identical to the rights that Serbs should have received within the framework of the Community of Serb Municipalities of Kosovo. In both cases, the European Union has loudly "struck the kettledrums" that it has played a decisive role, and has proved its helplessness and complete inability to negotiate.

The root causes of a situation should not be cut off in any topic. We have been talking about the causes of the crisis in Ukraine for years, warning about the inadmissibility of NATO expansion (no one listened to us) and that the neo-Nazi regime that came to power as a result of a coup d'état should not be condoned, and that it should be forced to comply with the Minsk agreements. No one listened to us.

The propaganda campaign is actively put on stream. You've got the idea that Russia "woke up in the morning and decided to start." For years, we have been talking about the harmfulness of "sucking" Ukraine into NATO, creating direct military threats to the Russian Federation right on the territory of Ukraine. It was planned to build an American military base on the Black Sea, and a British one on the Sea of Azov. If you are presenting a card, it is unacceptable under any circumstances. I have already quoted former French President Francois Mitterrand, who warned about this 30 years ago. No one was listening.

As for the fact that no one was going to implement the Minsk Agreements because the unitary foundations of the Ukrainian state, which our Western colleagues want to preserve, would have been undermined. Recently, French President Emmanuel Macron visited Corsica and spoke in favour of granting the island an autonomous status, reflecting it in the French Constitution. Among other things, this status implies the use of the Corsican language and the transfer of some administrative functions to the local Corsican assembly.

The Minsk Agreements demanded almost the same with regard to the eastern part of Ukraine. That is, ideas "float", but no one draws conclusions.

We are ready to polemicize and defend our truth. It is useless to talk to those who have been shy away and have limited themselves to trying to Ukrainize the entire armband of the day in the OSCE. They have made a decision that Russia must suffer a "strategic defeat" "on the battlefield." So that's what we're "doing" about.

Question: What is your position on the unification of all Serbs in the Balkans? Do you support the idea of uniting Serbs not only within Serbia, but also in neighbouring countries such as Kosovo, Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina?

Sergey Lavrov: This should be decided by the Serbs themselves in the interests of both Serbian and other peoples living in the Balkans. The Balkan history was too hard. Unfortunately, it is not going smoothly either. We are following the discussions on this topic, including in the Republika Srpska.

Not so long ago, options for the "exchange" of territories between southern Serbia and Kosovo were seriously discussed. If we are talking about reaching some agreements that will suit both the Serbs and their neighbours, then not only we, but all states in our region will be happy and support this. Maybe not all countries. In general, the European Union believes that when someone else appears in the Balkans, it means an invasion of the European Union's area of responsibility. Before Josep Borrell, the post of High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy was held by Federica Mogherini. She has publicly stated that when the EU deals with the Balkans, there is nothing else to do. That's how it is "masterly". Serbia wants to join the European Union, doesn't it? It is up to the peoples themselves to decide.

Question: President Putin said that you were close to concluding a peace agreement with Ukraine in Turkey. What interrupted these treaties and agreements?

Sergey Lavrov: Have you just arrived?

I have already spoken in detail about the situation that has developed since Istanbul. Repeat. A participant in the talks from the Ukrainian side, which took place in Istanbul at the end of March 2022 and ended with an agreement on the main principles of the settlement, admitted a week ago that they were ready to sign the document, but at that time British Prime Minister Boris Johnson arrived and forbade them to do so. He said that we still had to fight. They say that if Vladimir Putin agrees, then it is necessary to exhaust him even more.

Question (retranslated from English): The Russian Federation has called Macedonia an unfriendly state. Do you feel this unfriendliness in this country?

Sergey Lavrov: As for the list of unfriendly states. The state is identified with the government. We do not have unfriendly countries and peoples. There are governments that make decisions on behalf of the state that we regard as unfriendly. And we put these governments on the appropriate list.

I started by saying that I feel very comfortable in Macedonia. The first time I was here was a long time ago. He spent most of his time in Ohrid. Fantastic city.

Russian Ambassador to Macedonia Sergey Bazdnikin told me that churches there have to be closed due to a lack of parishioners. It's sad. A very beautiful city where you feel closer to God. [My Emphasis]

I often wonder what it’s like to be a Western presstitute at these functions when Lavrov so totally destroys the West’s lies and exposes its double standards. Generally, getting caught in a lie or some other type of falsification elicits shame or similar moral reflections within people that have morals, values. IMO, Lavrov doesn’t relish sparring with BigLie Media’s representatives, but he’s not going to backdown either. And of course, it’s very easy to understand why Lavrov is censored by that same media. It should also be clear that Lavrov likes to convict people with their own words, as with the example of Lapid. IMO, Lavrov’s correct that the OSCE will die because NATO/EU want it to die. When is the only remaining question, although Russia will continue its participation as Lavrov announced.

*
*
*
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!