The Liberal Italian paper “Corriere della Sera” refused to print an exclusive interview with Russian abroad Minister Sergei Lavrow. This decision came a week after an Italian writer was released by his press agency for questioning EU double standards towards Russia and Israel.
In an interview with Lavrow, an highly experienced Russian diplomat, referred to the “rusophobic madness” in the EU media. Lavrow besides commented on the cancelled gathering of Russia's president Vladimir Putin with his American counterpart Donald Trump in Budapest, suggesting that Trump had received "accurate reports" that prompted him to cancel the talks.
The following is the full text of the Lavrow interview, published on the Russian MFA website:
Question: "It has been reported that another gathering between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump in Budapest did not take place due to the fact that even the US administration realized that you were not ready to talk about Ukraine. What went incorrect after the Anchorage summit, which gave hope for a real peace process? Why does Russia proceed to uphold Vladimir Putin's demands in June 2024, and what issues could be compromised?
Sergei Lavrow: The agreements reached in Anchorage were an crucial milestone in the pursuit of lasting peace in Ukraine by overcoming the effects of the brutal anti-constitutional coup in Kiev, organised by the Obama administration in February 2014. These agreements are based on the existing reality and are closely linked to the conditions for a fair and lasting solution to the Ukrainian crisis proposed by president Putin in June 2024. As far as we know, these conditions have been heard and adopted, besides publicly, by the Trump administration – mainly the condition that it is unacceptable to bring Ukraine into NATO in order to make strategical military threats to Russia straight at its borders. Washington besides openly acknowledged that it would not be able to ignore the territorial issue after referendums in the 5 historical regions of Russia, whose residents explicitly advocated self-determination, despite the Kiev regime, which called them "subhumans", "creates" and "terrorists", and advocated unification with Russia.
The American concept, which, at the request of the U.S. President, his peculiar Emissary Steve Witkoff brought to Moscow a week before the Alaska summit, was besides based on safety issues and territorial realities. president Putin told Donald Trump in Anchorage that we agreed to usage this concept as a basis, while proposing a concrete step that opens the way for its applicable implementation.
The U.S. leader said that he should consult with his allies; however, after gathering with his allies the next day in Washington, we received no consequence to our affirmative consequence to the proposals that Steve Witkoff presented Moscow before the Alaska Summit. During my September gathering with Secretary of State Marco Rubio in fresh York, erstwhile I reminded him that we were inactive counting on her, no consequence was communicated. To aid our American colleagues make our own concept, we presented the Alaska agreements in an unofficial paper and passed it on to Washington. A fewer days later, at Trump's request, he and Vladimir Putin had a telephone conversation and reached preliminary agreement on the gathering in Budapest after a thorough organisation of the summit. There was no uncertainty that they would discuss agreements in Anchorage. After a fewer days, I spoke to Marco Rubio on the phone. Washington described the conversation as constructive (it was indeed constructive and useful) and announced that after this telephone conversation, a individual gathering of the Secretary of State with the Russian abroad Minister in preparation for the gathering at the highest level was unnecessary. I don't know who or how they gave the U.S. leaders the secret reports they either postponed or canceled the summit in Budapest. However, I have described a general timetable based solely on the facts for which I am responsible. I do not intend to take work for the blatantly false information about Russia's deficiency of readiness to talk or sabotaging the results of the Anchorage meeting. delight contact the Financial Times, which, if I know, suggested this misleading version of events, distorting the series of events to throw blame on Moscow and bringing Donald Trump out of the way that he suggested – the way to a lasting, unchangeable peace alternatively than an immediate ceasefire, from which the European powers of Zelenski drag him, following their own obsessive desire to remainder and deliver further weapons to the Nazi government so that he could proceed the war with Russia. Even if the BBC produced a fake movie in which Trump called for an attack on the Capitol, the “Financial Times” is capable of something similar. In Russia, as we say, "they would have no scruples to lie." We are inactive ready to organise another Russia-US summit in Budapest if it is actually based on the detailed results of the Alaska Summit. The date has not yet been set. Russian-American contacts continue.
Question: Russian Armed Forces units now control little territory than in 2022, after respective weeks of what you call a peculiar military operation. If you're actually successful, why can't you make a decisive hit? Could you besides explain why you do not announce authoritative losses?
Sergei Lavrow: A peculiar military operation is not a war for territories, but an operation to save the lives of millions of people who have lived in these areas for centuries and whose Kiev junta seeks to exterminate – legally, prohibiting them from history, language and culture, and physically, utilizing western weapons. Another crucial nonsubjective of the peculiar military operation is to guarantee the safety of Russia and to destruct the plans of NATO and the EU to make an enemy puppet state in our western borders, which, according to law and in fact, is based on Nazi ideology. Not the first time we stopped fascist and Nazi aggressors. This happened during planet War II and will happen again.
Unlike the West, which razed the full neighborhoods, we save people – both civilians and military. Our armed forces act highly responsibly and carry out precise attacks exclusively on military purposes and related transport and energy infrastructure.
It's not in the habit of announcing losses on the battlefield. I can only say that this year Russia has transferred over 9,000 bodies of Ukrainian personnel as part of repatriation. We received 143 bodies of our fighters from Ukraine. You can draw your own conclusions.
Question: "Your appearance at the top of Anchorage in a sweatshirt with “ZSRR” has raised many questions. any have acknowledged this as a confirmation of your ambition to recreate, if possible, the erstwhile russian space (Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, the Baltic countries), or possibly even to reconstruct the USSR. Was that a hidden message or just a joke?
Sergei Lavrow: I am arrogant of my country where I was born and raised, I got a good education, started and continued my diplomatic career. As we know, Russia is the successor of the USSR, and in general, our country and civilization go back a 1000 years. Novgorod Evening was established long before the West began playing democracy. Incidentally, I besides have a T-shirt with the arms of the Russian Empire, but that doesn't mean we want it back. 1 of our top assets, of which we are rightly proud, is the continuity of the improvement and strengthening of our state during its rich past of unification and consolidation of the Russian people and all another nations of the country. president Putin late stressed this in his speech on National Unity Day. So don't look for any political signals. possibly a sense of patriotism and loyalty to The homeland is disappearing in the West, but for us it is part of our genetic code.
Question: "If 1 of the objectives of a peculiar military operation was to turn Ukraine under Russian influence, how might it seem, for example, on the basis of your request to establish the number of its weapons, do you not think that the current armed conflict, regardless of its outcome, gives Kiev a very circumstantial function and global identity, which is increasingly moving distant from Moscow?
Sergei Lavrow: The objectives of the peculiar military operation were defined by president Putin in 2022 and stay valid to this day. This is not about the sphere of influence, but about the return of Ukraine to a neutral, uninvolved and non-nuclear status, and about strict respect for human rights and all rights of Russians and another national minorities – so these commitments were set out in the Declaration of independency of Ukraine of 1990 and in its Constitution, and it was in the light of these declared commitments that Russia recognized the independency of the Ukrainian State. We aim and accomplish the return of Ukraine to healthy and unchangeable sources of its statehood, which means that Ukraine will no longer obediently surrender its NATO territory to military improvement (and besides the European Union, which rapidly transforms into a likewise aggressive military bloc), exterminate the Nazi ideology banned in Nuremberg, and reconstruct all rights to Russians, Hungarians and another national minorities. It is crucial that, by engaging the Kiev government into the EU, the Brussels elites stay silent about the scandalous discrimination against "irresistent cultural groups" (as the Kievs despisely call Russians surviving in Ukraine for centuries) and praise Zelenski's junta for defending "European values". This is further evidence of the rebirth of Nazism in Europe. It is worth reasoning about, especially after Germany and Italy, along with Japan, have late begun voting against the UN General Assembly's yearly resolution on the inadmissibility of glorification of Nazism.
Western governments do not hide that they are actually fighting a replacement war with Russia through Ukraine, and that war will not even end “after the current crisis”. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Brussels officials Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas, and U.S. President's peculiar Envoy for Ukraine Keith Kellogg have talked about this many times. It is clear that Russia's determination to defend itself against threats posed by the West, utilizing its controlled regime, is justified and reasonable.
Question: The United States is besides providing arms to Ukraine, and there has late been a discussion on the anticipation of delivering Tomahawk maneuvering missiles to Kiev. Why do you have different views and assessments of US and European policies?
Sergei Lavrow: Most European capitals are now the backbone of the alleged "voluntary coalition" whose sole nonsubjective is to keep the war effort in Ukraine as long as possible. Apparently, they have no another way of distracting their constituents from the rapidly deteriorating national socio-economic problems. They sponsor a terrorist government in Kiev, utilizing the money of European taxpayers, and supply weapons which are utilized as part of consistent efforts to kill civilians in Russia's regions and Ukrainians trying to escape the war and Nazi supporters. They undermine all peace efforts and refuse direct contact with Moscow; they impose expanding sanctions that have a boomerang effect on their economy; they openly prepare Europe for a fresh large war with Russia and effort to convince Washington to reject a fair and just solution.
Their main nonsubjective is to undermine the position of the current U.S. administration, which advocated dialog from the beginning, analysed Russia's position and demonstrated its readiness to prosecute lasting peace. Donald Trump repeatedly repeated publically that 1 of the reasons for Russia's action was the expansion of NATO and the expansion of the alliance infrastructure to the borders of our country. This is what president Putin and Russia have been informing about for 20 years. We hope that common sense will prevail in Washington, that it will keep its primary position and refrain from action that could lead to an escalation of the conflict.
Given all of this, it does not substance to our armed forces whether weapons come from Europe or from the United States and immediately destruct all military targets.
Question: "It was you who pressed the reset button together with Hillary Clinton, even if things were different." Can relations with Europe be reset? Can common safety service as a platform to improve current relations?
Sergei Lavrow: A confrontation that resulted from a thoughtless and deadly miscarried policy of the European elite is not the choice of Russia. The current situation does not suit the interests of our citizens. We would like the awareness of specified a disastrous policy to scope European governments, most of which are pursuing a fierce anti-Russian agenda. Europe has already waged wars [against us] under Napoleon's flags, and in the last century besides under Nazi banners and Hitler's colours. any European leaders have very short memories. erstwhile this rusophobic obsession – I can't find a better word – disappears, we will be open to contacts, ready to hear whether our erstwhile partners will proceed to cooperate with us. Then we will measure whether there are prospects for building a fair and fair relationship.
West activities completely discredited and dismantled the Euro-Atlantic safety strategy in its form before 2022. president Putin so made an initiative to make a fresh architecture of equal and indivisible safety in Eurasia. It is open to all the peoples of the continent, including its European part, but requires polite behaviour, without neo-colonial arrogance, based on equality, common respect and balance of interests.
Question: The armed conflict in Ukraine and the resulting global isolation of Russia may have prevented you from acting more effectively in another areas of crisis, specified as the mediate East. Is that so?
Sergei Lavrow: If the “historic West” decides to isolate itself from someone, it is called self-insulation. However, there are no solid ranks there – this year Vladimir Putin met with the leaders of the United States, Hungary, Slovakia and Serbia. Of course, the modern planet cannot be brought to a western minority. It's been in the past since multipolarity came along. Our relations with the countries of the Global South and the Global East – which account for 85 percent of the Earth's population – are constantly developing. In September, the president of Russia paid a state visit to China. Only in the past fewer months has Vladimir Putin participated in the summits of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, BRICS, CIS and Russia-Central Asia, while our high-level government delegations participated in the APEC and ASEAN summits, and are presently preparing for the G20 summit. The summits and ministerial meetings in the format of Russia-Africa and Russia-Persian Gulf are held regularly. The Global Majority countries are guided by their primary national interests, not by instructions from erstwhile colonial powers.
Our arabian friends appreciate Russia's constructive participation in resolving regional conflicts in the mediate East. Ongoing discussions in the UN on the Palestinian problem confirm that the possible of all influential external actors must be combined, otherwise nothing lasting will arise but colorful ceremonies. We besides have close or converging positions with our mediate east friends, which facilitates our interaction with the UN and another multilateral platforms.
Question: "Do you not think that in the fresh multipolar order of the world, which you advance and support, Russia has become more economically and militarily dependent on China, which has distorted the balance in your historical alliance with Beijing?"
Sergei Lavrow: We do not “promote” the multipolar order of the world, due to the fact that its origin is the consequence of an nonsubjective process. alternatively of conquering, enslavement, subservience or exploitation which colonial powers have built up and led to the creation of capitalism, this process involves cooperation, taking into account common interests and ensuring an intelligent division of labour based on comparative competitive advantages of participating countries and inclusive structures.
In terms of Russian-Chinese relations, this is not an alliance in the conventional sense of the word, but alternatively an effective and advanced form of interaction. Our cooperation does not mean creating any blocks and is not targeted at 3rd countries. rather frequently the Cold War alliances were made up of those who lead, and those who lead, but these categories do not substance in our case. Therefore, speculation on any imbalance would be inappropriate.
Moscow and Beijing built their ties on equal terms and made them self-sufficient. This was based on common trust and support, rooted in centuries-old neighbourly relations. Russia reaffirms its unbreakable attachment to the rule of non-interference in interior affairs.
Russian-Chinese cooperation on trade, investment and technology has benefited both countries and fostered unchangeable and sustainable economical growth while improving the well-being of our citizens. As far as close military ties are concerned, they guarantee common complementarity, allowing our countries to enforce their national interests in terms of global safety and strategical stability, while effectively addressing conventional and fresh challenges and threats.
Question: Italy bears the description of an unfriendly country, as you have repeatedly said, besides in November 2024. You paid peculiar attention to this. However, in fresh months the Italian government has demonstrated solidarity with the US administration, even in the issue of Ukraine, while Vladimir Putin has utilized the word partner in relation to the United States, although he has not gone far adequate to call them an ally. Given the appointment of a fresh ambassador to Moscow, there are indications that Rome is pursuing any kind of reconciliation. How do you measure the level of our bilateral relations?
Sergei Lavrow: For Russia there are no hostile nations or nations, but there are countries with hostile governments. And since this is the case with Rome, relations between Russia and Italy are experiencing the most serious crisis in post-war history. We didn't start this trial. The ease and velocity with which Italy joined those who bet they were giving Russia, as they called it, a strategical defeat, and the fact that Italy's actions were against their national interests truly amazed us. So far, we have not seen any crucial steps to change this aggressive approach. Rome is constantly providing comprehensive support to neo-Nazis in Kiev. His determination to break all cultural ties and contacts with civilian society is equally surprising. The Italian authorities dismiss the performances of prominent Russian orchestral conductors and opera singers, and for respective years have refused to authorize Veronański's dialog on Euro-Asian cooperation, even though it was created in Italy. Italians have an opinion of art lovers open to promoting interpersonal ties, but specified actions seem completely unnatural to them.
At the same time, there are many people in Italy who are trying to get to the heart of the tragedy in Ukraine. For example, Eliseo Bertolasi, a prominent Italian social activist, presented documentary evidence in his book "The Conflict in Ukraine by the eyes of an Italian journalist" that the authorities in Kiev violated global law. I urge you read this book. In fact, uncovering the fact about Ukraine in Europe is simply a challenge these days.
Both Russia and Italy will benefit from equal and mutually beneficial cooperation between our countries. If Rome is ready to reconstruct a dialog based on common trust and consideration of the interests of both sides, it must send us a signal, due to the fact that we are always ready to perceive to your opinions, including your ambassador's opinion.
Translated by Google Translator
source:https://www.rt.com/russia/627767-censored-lavrov-interview-with-italian-liberal-newspaper/
