Lavrov's Western Christmas Interview by Russia's 60 Minutes News Show

Our Christmas in the West isn't Russia's as most know. It's just another day in most of the world.

Lavrov is still #1 at Russia’s Foreign Ministry. Some were trying to spin the idea that he was very angry over what transpired in the Tragic Syria Fiasco and had resigned/retired. Clearly untrue, but the Big Picture Conflict is clearly escalating well beyond the SMO Front. It takes a lot to unnerve Lavrov. You judge if he is by what he says in closing. There’s also the 23-minute video that can be seen at this link. Do read Lavrov closely. He’s asked the right questions so he’s able to provide very meaningful answers, and is a must read/seen by the incoming Trump team.

Question: 2024 will not be easy at all and, probably, difficult. It is not a fact that next year will be better. Lately, it has been hard to believe in the future. Nevertheless, let's try to sum up the preliminary results.

Now only the lazy do not talk about the virtually inevitable (if you believe the rhetoric and public statements) negotiations between the Russian side and NATO, the United States, and Ukraine to resolve the Ukrainian conflict.

They talk about an inevitable "deal" that will suit one of the parties and stop the bloodshed. Judging by the statements made by President Vladimir Putin at the Foreign Ministry on June 14, our conditions are clear and clear. And no one is going to fulfill them. What can you say about this? Are we wishful thinking in this rhetoric about negotiations?

Sergey Lavrov: We have not had and do not have any illusions about the prospects. Nor does the settlement of the Ukrainian crisis have them. It has long been clear to all unbiased people that it can be resolved only in the context of agreements on reliable security and stability in Europe, which would take into account the interests of the Russian Federation and the legitimate interests of all other countries.

Everyone associates some changes with the arrival of the new Trump administration. There is a lot of speculation about this.

As I said, we have no illusions. In Washington, there is a fairly strong bipartisan consensus on the issue of supporting the Kyiv regime. In American doctrinal documents, our country is qualified as an adversary that needs to inflict a "strategic defeat." In free speeches, officials of the Biden administration even called us an enemy.

We have never made statements that with the arrival of the Trump administration, the negotiation process on global security, on Ukraine, will definitely begin. This will not be, as many are now trying to hope, an inevitable reality.

We hear about the interest of Donald Trump, who has appointed Special Adviser Keith Kellogg as his special envoy for Ukraine in order to stop this war as soon as possible. We have always advocated that it [the conflict] should not exist. This is confirmed by our support for the document between Viktor Yanukovych and the opposition in February 2014, which was guaranteed by European countries, but the opposition tore it up the next morning.

We also supported the Minsk Agreements, which stopped the Kiev regime's terrorist attack against its citizens in Donbass.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin constantly refers to the fact that we supported the Istanbul Agreements in April 2022.

President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly noted that we never shy away from negotiations. We need to see serious, concrete proposals. When they come to us, we will make a decision on how to respond to them based on our national interests, the goals of the special military operation and President Vladimir Putin's speech at the Russian Foreign Ministry on June 14.

You called this speech "containing conditions." By and large, there are no conditions there. It contains a demand to fulfil what has been repeatedly agreed upon for many years: the militarisation of Ukraine (this is a direct violation of the agreements that NATO will not "swallow" more and more countries to the east and approach directly to the border of the Russian Federation), respect for obligations under the UN Charter, including with regard to human rights, including linguistic and religious rights. Are these conditions? This is the minimum that any normal member of the world community is obliged to do.

Is the expression of the will of the regions in the DPR, LPR, Kherson and Zaporozhye regions a condition? No. The UN Charter directly states that all countries are obliged to respect the territorial value of those states that respect the right of nations to self-determination, as happened during the above-mentioned referendums. Most importantly, the Charter requires respect for the territorial integrity of those states whose governments represent the entire population living in a given territory. Can the population of Crimea, Donbass, Novorossiya say that its interests are represented by the Nazi regime, which has declared the extermination of everything Russian, in fact, its main goal, "playing" to the interests of the West, which must definitely remove such a strong competitor as the Russian Federation from the international arena? The West wants to remove any competitor. In relation to us, Ukraine has been chosen as a tool.

The principles formulated by President Vladimir Putin are not preconditions. This is what follows from international law.

As for the meaning of the conversations (which we are hearing now) taking place both in the West and in Ukraine. We are talking exclusively about a truce. About allowing the Kyiv regime again, with the help of the West, to accumulate strength and start new attempts to carry out the instructions of its masters to inflict a "strategic defeat" on Russia.

President Vladimir Putin has spoken about this more than once, on the Direct Line, at a meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club, and at the Investment Forum "Russia Calling!" A truce will not suit us. We need reliable, legally binding agreements aimed at eliminating the main causes (root causes) of the conflict, including common security in Europe, NATO enlargement, the recent decision of the European Union to simply "lie" under the North Atlantic bloc and, in fact, eliminate all differences between these organizations, and, of course, the rights of people living in the territories and who have spoken in favor of reunification with the Russian Federation. This does not mean that the demands for respect for linguistic and religious rights, which are prohibited by law by Vladimir Zelensky, should not apply to the rest of Ukraine. A huge number of people live there, most of them speak Russian as their native language. The linguistic aggression started by the Kiev regime, of course, will not suit us.

And as for how the Ukrainians and their "masters" see some possible peaceful procedure. Former Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba has emerged from his new incarnation. He said that it is necessary to achieve Ukraine's accession to NATO. They say that even if now the current generation agrees to some agreements and in the next period rebuilds Ukraine, then the next generation will definitely be brought up in the spirit of revenge for the defeat (as they believe) that Ukraine will suffer if it respects the will of its citizens. Dmitry Kuleba emphasises that either they are now accepted into NATO and then Ukraine will have obligations to the North Atlantic Alliance not to attack Russia, or such an attack will be absolutely inevitable.

O.V. Skabeeva, concluding her greeting, said that there is little faith in something good. Faith and hope are our traditional foundational values. There are many proverbs about these concepts, their meanings, including about hope – "Hope dies last". But it is opposed by another one – "Young men have hopes." In order for them not to nourish young men and not to give the elderly joy, it is necessary to work on a final, full-fledged, legally enforced, long-term settlement of problems in Europe, including the Ukrainian crisis.

Question: Let's talk about the future. In your interview with T. Carlson, you said that the world is closer to nuclear war than ever before. To be honest, it became very alarming. What is your mood in this regard? What should we do? In the West, they are already buying bunkers. Should we also prepare?

Sergey Lavrov: We are ready to do everything so that American citizens and citizens of other Western countries do not spend extra money (which they do not have in abundance now) on the construction of bunkers. We would be ready to do everything to help Western taxpayers save on these bunkers.

We have never started discussions about what to do with nuclear weapons and whether they can be used. On the contrary, it was at Russia's initiative in 2021, first at the level of Vladimir Putin and Joe Biden, and then at the level of the leaders of the five nuclear states that are permanent members of the Security Council, that the 1987 formula of Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan was reproduced that there can be no winners in a nuclear war, so it must never be unleashed. It was Russia's initiative.

All other initiatives and similar statements in which nuclear war options were allowed were heard exclusively from Western capitals. The Chief of the General Staff of the German Army said a year ago that Russia should not scare them too much, let them not forget that NATO is a nuclear alliance. Everyone knows the statement of Liz Truss, who, as Prime Minister of Great Britain, said that she would not hesitate to press the nuclear button. French representatives also reminded that they are a nuclear power.

Most recently, Pentagon generals openly discussed that, if necessary, it was possible to exchange, as they put it, "limited nuclear strikes" with the Russian Federation, but to do it in such a way as to emerge victorious from this "exchange". We asked them directly (after all, this was said by the general) what this means. They didn't tell us anything sensible in response. They tried in every possible way to belittle the significance of such statements. They say that they are purely theoretical. In reality, nothing of the kind was meant. But can this be considered a serious statement of the opinion of an official representative of the military department?

Be that as it may, we do not want to "heat up" the issue of the risks of using nuclear weapons. We firmly proceed from the formula I mentioned that there can be no winners in a nuclear war. President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly spoken about this. But I would not advise anyone to test our patience and determination to defend legitimate national interests by all available means. Vladimir Putin spoke about this in detail during the Direct Line and during his previous speeches. We hope that those who have ears will hear, and those who have brains will understand.

Question: There are daily provocations from the Ukrainian side, of course, with the help of NATO countries. One of the latest is drone strikes directly into a residential building in Kazan. Even Western newspapers call it a semblance of what happened in New York on September 11, 2001, a semblance of that terrorist attack. We remember very well how the United States responded then. Is there anything holding us back from such a response?

Sergey Lavrov: First of all, I would not draw direct parallels with the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001.

As for the constant terrorist acts that the Kiev regime resorts to, deliberately striking at purely civilian targets (residential buildings, hospitals, clinics, shops, places where people gather and rest) – this is outrageous. This is a direct violation of all anti-terrorist conventions and UN Security Council resolutions on this topic. We express our condemnation, which, unfortunately, is not supported by almost anyone in the West and none of the heads of international organisations, including the UN, the OSCE, UNESCO and others.

We regularly publish information, show relevant videos about how we destroy facilities directly related to the preparation and implementation of the activities of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. We warn you that the further continuation of this policy will meet with an increasingly decisive response each time. As far as I can understand, as a non-military person, the damage to Kyiv's military machine, not only in response to these terrorist attacks, but in general in the last months of the special military operation, is very significant.

It is not necessary to do something immediately after a bandit attack on Kazan, the Kursk, Bryansk, and Belgorod regions immediately "in the morning". You can wait a little. We are patient people. But sometimes – measure seven times, cut once. You need to measure so that you cut it off to the fullest.

Question: If I may, let's talk about Prime Minister of Slovakia Rodrigo Fico. I understand perfectly well that the talks were held behind closed doors, there are no details, there were no press conferences, no statements. Is there at least something that can be communicated to our viewers, at least some details and nuances? Literally everyone has a glimmer of hope for at least some kind of negotiations. Prime Minister of Slovakia Roman Fico has arrived. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban seems to be a sensible person. How are things going?

Sergey Lavrov: I would not say that no information has been provided. It was given by the Kremlin, and press secretary Dmitry Peskov also commented on it. There are no big secrets here.

Slovak Prime Minister Roman Fico bluntly announced that the immediate reason for his visit was the imminent suspension of Russian gas transit through Ukraine, which Vladimir Zelensky has proudly said more than once.

We discussed options that would allow gas to continue flowing to countries that, like Slovakia and Hungary, like Austria, as far as I understand, are interested in this. This is their economic interest. This has nothing to do with the obligations within the European Union. They are trying to "drive" them into the obligation to follow a common foreign and security policy, but gas supplies have nothing to do with this. I am referring to the normal situation in the country during the winter, so that everything that is needed by citizens, industry and the social sector works.

Vladimir Zelensky's actions create problems for European countries. There are many there who proudly say that this dependence on Russia must be stopped. Remember, the head of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, said that American liquefied natural gas is cheaper for Germany than Russian gas. When the correspondent naturally asked what figures she had in mind, because everything is quite the opposite and this is an additional burden for the economy, she said that, they say, American gas is better and cheaper in a political sense.

This is the willingness and ability to carry out the orders of the "elephant", which has not yet went, there are still "democratic donkeys" in Washington and New York. But soon the "Republican elephants" will come and see how the "gnats" around them will position themselves.

By the way, about gas. Quite recently, Vladimir Zelensky in an interview was rude to Slovakia, Hungary and many other sane figures. He was asked why he did not agree to transit, because Slovakia could buy gas right on the border of Russia with Ukraine, and Slovak or Hungarian gas, or someone else's gas would go through them. Vladimir Zelensky said that he did not, because if they did so, they would still pay Russia for the gas they would receive on our border. And this, they say, is financing the war. If they insisted that they would receive gas at the border, and it would turn from Russian to Slovak, but they would not pay money to Russia until the end of the war, then it would still be possible to think about it.

The brains of this man are incomprehensible to normal people. I proceed from the premise that we do not need to comment on every "sneeze" of Vladimir Zelensky. Moreover, he "sneezes" regularly, and all "sneezes" are different depending on the state of the body.

Of his recent "pearls". A couple of weeks ago, when asked what Russia should do to resolve the crisis, he publicly stated that Russia should go "to three letters." A few questions later, in the same interview, he said that at the second summit after Bürgenstock, when they had already prepared the entire ultimatum, Russia should be summoned and presented with their demands.

If we compare his two statements (what Russia should do to settle the situation, and that Russia should get to the second summit), then in his first phrase he outlined the name and meaning of this very summit.

Question: An exhaustive, brilliant comment on the situation. I would like to ask briefly. We have been without an ambassador to the United States for quite a long time. Is this a technical pause or some kind of demarche on our part?

Sergey Lavrov: No. This is not a demarche. The Americans said that they welcomed the appointment of a professional who had devoted most of his career to Soviet-American/Russian-American relations. The date of departure is planned taking into account the optimal timing of the appearance of the new ambassador in Washington, given that the inauguration of US President-elect Donald Trump is scheduled in just three weeks. There is no politics here.

Question: If I may, I would like to say a few words about personal matters. Did you have time to decorate the Christmas tree? Got in the New Year's mood?

Sergey Lavrov: The mood is combative, because we cannot relax on New Year's Eve. There are serious politicians and analysts who do not rule out that during the New Year holidays, during the period of Orthodox Christmas, anything can be expected from the Kiev Nazis and their Western "instigators". We try to celebrate this holiday in a cheerful state of active observation and analysis of events.

Right after our interview, I will go to the Christmas tree, which stands in the lobby of our Ministry. This is the "Christmas tree of wishes". Both my deputies and I are trying to actively participate in this noble initiative. [My Emphasis]

So, all BigLie Media speculation is just that—saying anything whatsoever except to tell the truth about Russia’s steadfast position and the genuine reasons for it. I don’t see any hint of change coming from the West. Indeed, the recent attacks, particularly the one targeting Azerbaijan just after Aliyev’s interview, hint at further terrorist escalations. Payback is certain to visit North America.

*
*
*
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!