• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's remarks and answers to questions at a meeting with students and faculty of MGIMO University on the occasion of the start of the new academic year, Moscow, September 1, 2023

1 September 2023 13:38
1673-01-09-2023

Mr Torkunov,

Mr Yakovenko,

Your Excellency Ambassador of the UAE to Russia Mohammed Ahmed Al Jaber, colleagues, friends.

Tradition is tradition. We have many "new year"-related holidays. Today is a special day for everyone who has studied at MGIMO University and is currently working at the Foreign Ministry, other branches of government, in academia, journalism, or business. We always try to mark September 1 with an open discussion about the issues that the Foreign Ministry is in charge of. Naturally, the university students are interested in it. Today, I want our conversation to be as interactive as possible. I will keep my opening remarks short.

If you have enrolled in this university, you are interested in international relations and foreign policy. Global affairs are in a complex state. The reason is well known. It is the desire of the United States and its allies, whom they have "brought to heel," to rule the world, to impose the unipolar order and, as President Putin underscored, to continue to levy a tribute from humanity, i.e., to live in a neocolonial paradigm where the West exploited other nations in order to exist. They seek to eliminate anyone who disagrees with this approach, the West's diktat, and advocates for fair cooperation, equal interaction, and mutual respect.

Russia is currently in this particular situation. We are the target of aggressive Western policies aimed at restraining us and our constructive development. To this end, threats are created on the borders of our country. The Ukrainian regime has been picked as a tool to achieve this goal. As long as it performs the suicidal function it has been assigned, all is forgiven, including neo-Nazi behaviour, theory and practices, such as the openly declared policy of destroying all things Russian. Members of Vladimir Zelensky's regime are saying that extermination can be both legal and physical.

All of this goes unnoticed in the West, because the Ukrainian regime serves the purpose of containing Russia as an independent player that refuses to submit to the paradigm of a unipolar world. We are not alone in this. The special military operation has given powerful impetus to the movement (already maturing in the international community) towards justice and multipolarity. Countries of the Global South, the Global Majority, no longer want to live by the rules made up and imposed on all countries by the US-led golden billion.

After the recent BRICS Summit in August 2023, French President Emmanuel Macron acknowledged at a meeting with French ambassadors abroad that the Global South no longer wants to rely solely on the West and is becoming more independent. Better late than never to acknowledge it. This is still not the dominant trend in Western political thought and practice. They continue to threaten to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia "on the battlefield."

Speaking of diplomacy today, many (including a number of our political analysts) lament that the profession of the diplomat has lost its relevance because in the past, there were Brussels, Geneva, Washington, New York, Vienna, and other capitals, but now Russia is isolated and cut off from all major trends in global discussions. They say they are sorry for the diplomats, because they will have to languish in their offices reading newspapers." This is said by those who follow the old principle "when the guns speak, diplomacy goes silent." Diplomacy is silent only with those who want to talk to us with "guns." We have our own "guns" for such cases. Others communicate with us respectfully on an equal and mutually beneficial basis. We expand our relations and look for concrete and constructive projects.

When some argue that Russia has become isolated, the countries that are home to 85 percent of the global population cannot but take offense since they did not impose any sanctions on us and have maintained their relations with Russia. President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky recently said that the civilised world in its entirety condemned and isolated Russia. If by civilised world he means the Golden Billion, this implies that the Asian, African, and Latin American countries do not belong to the civilised world. The garden versus jungle mindset of the EU's High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, that separates Europe from the rest of the world, has penetrated Kiev's thinking. We have great plans, and everyone sees that Russia's foreign policy is following an upward trajectory whenever someone is willing to meet us halfway.

We held the Russia-Africa Summit and it produced positive outcomes. We are now working to make them reality, and the effort to draft specific Presidential instructions is underway. We will also organise several business missions to the African continent from Moscow and other regions in order to outline promising avenues for promoting practical cooperation. Let me mention the BRICS Summit as an example of stronger multipolarity. Six new countries joined the group following the summit, including the UAE – I would like to convey my heartfelt congratulations to His Excellency Ambassador Mohammed Ahmed Al Jaber on this occasion. Before the expansion, the aggregate GDP in purchasing power parity for the five BRICS countries was between 5 and 7 percent above the same indicator for the G7, but with the new countries, BRICS will increase this by about 7 trillion. This makes the gap between BRICS in its new form and the G7 even bigger.

This trend will gain momentum as an objective process. Economists recognise the importance of harmonising various interests that exist within the global community. But instead of heeding these new trends by seeking to expand mutually beneficial contacts, as well as balance interests in all spheres, including the economy and finance, the United States and its allies are seeking to undermine regional processes and so initiatives to create alternative transaction mechanisms and ensure that we do not depend on the whims of those who imitate the status of a reserve currency are underway.

We are witnessing an onslaught against constructive processes rooted in international law and primarily the principles set forth in the UN Charter in their entirety and complementarity, especially its core provision stipulating the sovereign equality of states. The West has never recognised this principle and has never complied with it in any of its undertakings. They always seek to dominate international processes. We are preparing for a protracted clash between those seeking justice based on the principle of the sovereign equality of states rather than their far-fetched aspirations, on the one side, and those who want to live by their own, unwritten, as they say, rules, on the other.

The formation of a multipolar world order may take a while. It may be a relatively long historical era, but this process is objective and unstoppable. The West's policies aimed at trying to slow down the course of history will only give rise to more confrontational situations and challenges for the international community. Diplomats will have to unravel all of that.

There is economic diplomacy, inter-parliamentary diplomacy, academic diplomacy (which is gaining particular importance today), and diplomacy through civil society organisations. We strive to reflect all of this in our work. Special mechanisms for interaction between the ministry and various segments of our political class, scientific experts, and international economics practitioners have been established in all areas. We are not directing our policies against the United States or the West. President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated that we do not want to "bury" the dollar; rather, Washington has ceased to ensure the role of the currency that everyone found acceptable. We will develop relationships with the countries that are willing to do so on the basis of equality and the quest for a fair balance of interests.

Organisations such as the CSTO, the CIS, the EAEU, BRICS, and the SCO are operating in this vein based on consensus, without leaders or followers, teachers or disciples. Just like BRICS, the SCO has become increasingly attractive to developing countries due to the principles underlying its work and the economic, humanitarian, financial, and many other matters, including logistics and transport connectivity, that it coordinates through consensus.

The SCO is the cornerstone of the Greater Eurasian Partnership mentioned by President Vladimir Putin. The EAEU, the SCO, ASEAN, and other associations and countries located on our common and vast Eurasian continent are encouraged to participate. These competitive advantages have been bestowed on us by God and history at a time when the centre of global economic and financial development is shifting to Asia. Failing to utilise the natural and obvious opportunities offered by the Eurasian continent would mean missing an opportunity for the sake of some obscure political expediency. We are in favour of alternative forms of interaction.

I hope that this excellent institute, our alma mater, will help you meet all your needs in acquiring new knowledge and encourage independent thinking in each of you as its students. We look forward to welcoming MGIMO graduates who decide to seek employment with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia. We are not promising any special advantage for you, but we will evaluate your qualities and abilities fairly.

Question: You mentioned earlier that the Russia-Africa Summit held in St Petersburg in July was one of the most important and significant political events. Declarations of joint cooperation in various areas, including information security and the non-placement of weapons in space, were signed there. Could you please tell us if there are any partnership programmes with African countries that have already been signed or are being developed?

Sergey Lavrov: You have largely answered your own question by listing the final documents. They are indeed important, and not only declare intentions to work together in various fields but also involve specific actions. In terms of economic issues, several business missions to the region are being prepared.

Regarding food security, practical work is underway to implement free supplies of up to 50,000 tonnes of Russian grain to each of the six neediest African countries, as President Putin announced at the Russia-Africa Summit. Moreover, we will cover the overheads and the delivery costs.

We will continue to develop our relations through the ongoing Russia-Africa Forum. Additionally, in Russia, under our Ministry, we have a Forum Secretariat, the Association of Economic Cooperation with African States which engages in practical projects. Many contacts between our business representatives, state corporations, and private companies and their African partners took place on the sidelines of the summit. Concrete plans have been outlined and will be implemented. We will provide detailed information about them.

I would also like to mention a topic that didn't receive much attention. African countries sent a delegation of seven presidents to Russia back in June, a month before the Russia-Africa Summit. They came to share their views on how the situation around Ukraine is developing and how to contribute to its fair resolution. President Putin held a special meeting with them in St Petersburg. They agreed to promote joint approaches that are not unilateral by nature, but rather take into account the security interests of all countries, not just one country or one military-political bloc. To follow up on this agreement, one more meeting between President Putin and his colleagues from the African Union's core group took place on the sidelines of the Russia-Africa Summit. As a result, a statement was issued. It has been published but received little attention. In it, we highlighted the need to address humanitarian issues that were of particular interest to our African friends. This includes support for the ongoing process of prisoner exchange and consideration of the interests of children during the conflict (something we have long been engaged in). The statement also mentioned the need to "unblock" the situation with the Black Sea initiative which was suspended on July 17 due to the fact that Russia's part of the deal was not implemented. Along with African leaders, we called for all the promises made to Russia to be fulfilled. As President Putin said, we will be willing to resume the Ukrainian part of this grain package on the same day it happens.

Without a doubt, we have an Action Plan between the Government of the Russian Federation and the African Union Commission. We have diversified relations and mechanisms with the African Union on political matters, including a dialogue on facilitating the resolution of various conflicts on the African continent. Russia is involved in several of these mechanisms. I would like to mention the Great Lakes region, where we participate in an ad hoc conference. I can discuss this at length. We have provided a detailed statement on the Foreign Ministry's website, and I am confident you will find more details there.

Question: You mentioned the EAEU. A logical question has arisen. As you know, in 2023 Russia will chair the Eurasian Economic Union. Vladimir Putin outlined the country's main tasks within its framework back in December 2022. Among them, achieving economic and technological independence from the West plays a special role. What do you see as the main challenges for the EAEU, and which areas of cooperation within the organisation seem to be the most promising and important in the coming years?

Sergey Lavrov: These areas are defined in the decisions of the Eurasian Economic Union, the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council and the Heads of Government Council. They are aimed at implementing mutually beneficial projects in the most important areas for our countries. And in such a way that these projects do not depend on the mechanisms for servicing international economic ties controlled by the United States and its allies, including the reserve currencies, the dollar, the euro and the yen. These are not reliable currencies. In 2022, 76 percent of mutual settlements and trade between EAEU member countries was not in dollars, but in national and friendly currencies. This year, we aim for 90 percent.

When the Eurasian Economic Union was created, the process of dedollarisation was not put forward as an independent goal. But the actions of the United States have violated all the principles of a functioning market economy that had been promoted for many decades. In this situation, we must protect ourselves from arbitrariness and caprice. Everyone understands what will happen tomorrow. Today Russia is the main target of American and Western sanctions, as it behaves quite independently. And tomorrow it will be someone else. It is not clear what "punishment" will be announced. Everyone realises this. The transition to alternative payment systems and settlement methods is inevitable.

At the BRICS summit, Brazilian President Lula da Silva actively promoted the idea of creating a separate independent currency for member countries. Earlier, when he was elected, he proposed to do the same for the entire Community of Latin American and Caribbean Countries region. Everyone assumes that at this stage it is quite problematic to move immediately to this process, because there is no experience of working outside the dollar system. But it will be accumulated as national currencies are used in mutual settlements. This is almost 90 percent in the EAEU. The share in trade with China, Iran, India and our other partners, who do not want to follow the West's instructions and interrupt cooperation with us, is growing significantly and rapidly. And in fact, cooperation with these countries is growing. If we take all EAEU members in absolute terms, the figures are gaining momentum quite steadily.

The priorities of the Russian presidency of the EAEU have been outlined. They concern the digitalisation of the economy, technological sovereignty, the development of cooperation in information and communication technologies, food and energy security. All of this has been approved and is being implemented. I hope that by the end of this year we will be able to summarise the results, which will reflect the successful resolution of the issues raised in this context in the interests of all countries that are members of the EAEU. Some of our other neighbours remain interested in the Union. We actively support that.

Question: In accordance with the second Johannesburg Declaration issued at the BRICS Summit, the United Arab Emirates was invited to join the grouping from January 1, 2024. What impact will this decision made by the permanent five have on BRICS in general and on bilateral relations between the UAE and Russia in particular?

Sergey Lavrov: The answer is simple. It will be a very positive influence both on our bilateral relations and on the relations between the United Arab Emirates and the rest of the BRICS family. Last year, the Emirates became Russia's number one trade partner in the entire Arab world and the Arab League. Trade amounted to around nine billion dollars a year in 2022 and it is still growing. And the reason for this successful cooperation is that both the United Arab Emirates and the Russian Federation proceed from their national interests and would not tolerate any pressure that would have a detrimental effect on our national and economic interests and the interests of our people. So, the future is very bright.

And as I understand it, today we are going to attend another ceremony, where the UAE Ambassador to Russia together with the rector and myself will open a UAE centre at MGIMO. This represents a new avenue in our partnership.

Question: Russia has been the target of Western sanctions for some time now. How is Russia handling this situation? Which of our foreign partners have been assisting us in this?

Sergey Lavrov: We have already touched on this topic to a certain extent. As you handle this situation, you need to become self-reliant.

The expectations of those who are bemoaning the breakup of our relations with our Western colleagues that someday everything will return to normal are built on sand. The policy of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia promulgated by the West will not vanish into thin air in the foreseeable future. We are well aware of this.

Anyway, if suddenly, by some obscure quirk of fate, the West suggests that we return to more or less normal relations, then we will start considering whether such proposal is worthwhile. If it makes sense to accept it, then we will need to identify the areas where we can do this. We will not cooperate with the West in the areas on which our security depends in every sense of the word, including defence policy, the economy and the technological sector. We have the experience of the past 30 years to go upon. At any moment, the West will not hesitate to misuse any agreement reached when they wish to contain the development of anyone and that is precisely the objective – to rein in rivals. Not a single principled agreement signed with the West after 1991 has been put into practice. That is why it is not possible to take anything on trust. One should know better than to trust signatures that the West put to numerous documents.

We are overcoming the difficulties. Of course, they do exist and they are obvious. No one can argue with this. They are serious and they will continue to get worse, judging by the statistics. The Russian Government led by President Vladimir Putin, who regularly holds meetings on various issues related to different sectors of the economy that affect the country's economic development, are doing their utmost. These efforts have produced positive results.

The unemployment rate in Russia is down, there is no shortage of goods and quite robust economic growth is expected, given the circumstances in which it is being achieved. We see that new investment and transport projects are being implemented. These projects will help us establish closer ties with countries whose integrity and ability to honour their obligations under treaties we do not doubt. These are primarily our eastern and southern neighbours.

Over and over again, we have seen evidence of the West's "ability to honour their obligations under the treaties" and their "integrity". Our conclusion is unambiguous. When they wish to [normalise our relations], we will consider it and decide if it is worthwhile, and if it is, we will think of the appropriate areas and the scope [of contacts].

The plans, complete with accurate figures, for the development of cooperation with China, India, the United Arab Emirates, Iran and Saudi Arabia, as well as many African countries, particularly in North Africa – I will not name all of them for fear of missing and offending anyone – are concrete and realistic and have already started to yield impressive results if we look at trade growth, the increasing amount of investment and the expansion of contacts in other areas, including culture, education, healthcare and sport.

What they are doing now at the International Olympic Committee is making a mockery of common sense and the Olympic Charter. President Vladimir Putin also spoke about this. This compels us to look for other formats to develop independent, depoliticised and truly competitive sport. When you set an objective and achieve it, you are successful. MGIMO students are taught precisely this approach to life.

Question: Not long ago, on May 10, a four-party meeting of the foreign ministers of Türkiye, Russia, Iran, and Syria was held to discuss the normalisation of Turkish-Syrian relations. In June, Russia proposed a roadmap for normalising relations between the two countries. What are the prospects for restoring diplomatic relations between Türkiye and Syria? Is it realistic to reach, in the near future, an agreement, or a consensus on withdrawing Turkish troops from Syrian territory?

Sergey Lavrov: The process of normalising Türkiye-Syria relations began last year. Both sides expressed their willingness to establish contacts. It was decided to start these contacts with meetings involving defence ministers and intelligence agencies. These meetings took place in December 2022. Initially, it was agreed that these meetings would prepare the ground for foreign ministers' meetings with an eye towards preparing a summit. Türkiye, Syria, and Russia were involved in these processes. Since Iran is involved in the Astana format for Syrian settlement alongside us and the Turks, the Iranians also expressed an interest in joining the format dealing with the normalisation of relations between Damascus and Tehran.

In April, a meeting at the level of deputy foreign ministers took place with the participation of the four countries, paving the way for a foreign ministers' meeting that was held in Moscow, where we issued a statement expressing our interest in developing a roadmap for normalising relations between Syria and Türkiye. In June, we provided our colleagues with a draft document, which is currently being reviewed, and contacts are ongoing to reach a universally acceptable wording which could be approved.

There are challenges, though. You mentioned the presence of Turkish troops in northern Syria. It's a fact. However, I would like to note that all documents issued by the Astana troika, which includes Iran, Türkiye, and Russia, emphasise respect for Syria's sovereignty and territorial integrity and oppose any attempts to encourage separatist sentiment in that country. Türkiye consistently signs these documents.

On the other hand, the Turks justify their presence by citing the continuing terrorist threat in northern Syria and argue that their military presence there prevents the spread of this threat from Syria to southern Türkiye.

We have been working on this issue for a long time now. Even before the consultations in the above format began, we proposed, during informal contacts, a return to the philosophy of the 1998 Adana Agreement between Türkiye and Syria. It assumed the presence of a terrorist threat. To cut it short, Türkiye would be entitled, in coordination with Damascus, to deploy its counterterrorism entities to a certain depth within Syrian territory. This agreement is still in effect, and no one has denounced it. The details of such operations, their depth, beginning, conduct, and conclusion must be negotiated. The ideological foundation for this is in place, and all participants in this process – Russia, Syria, Türkiye, and Iran agree on this.

Another reason that cannot be ignored when discussing this issue is the illegal activities of the United States in northeastern Syria. It is the United States that predominantly fuels the separatism of radical Kurdish organisations, which the Turks consider a threat to their security. These processes are interconnected.

The United States has occupied a significant portion of northeastern Syria. Importantly, these are the main oil-producing and grain-producing regions. The energy and food security of an independent UN member state has been directly undermined for many years now by the United States, which exports oil from there through Iraq. The revenue from these exports is used to develop these territories, where they encourage the creation of a quasi-state of Kurds. They have not only taken traditionally historical Kurdish lands but also parts of the territory where Arab tribes have always lived. This is a dangerous situation, a time bomb. Especially so since the Kurdish issue is relevant not only for Syria and Türkiye, but for Iran and other countries as well.

We keep calling on all our partners who maintain channels of dialogue with the United States to draw attention to this issue.

They have exempted this portion of Syria that is occupied by the United States from sanctions, treating this occupation zone as an independent state. I am confident that our Arab friends see and understand the associated risks and threats. I hope this issue is not forgotten in the League of Arab States and the GCC's contacts with their Western counterparts.

Question: Today we see how the issues of energy geopolitics, diplomacy, and energy supplies are becoming more and more important both for our country and for the entire world community.

Recently, Russia has been restructuring its energy supply routes. Kazakhstan, having free capacity to transit Russian gas to Central Asian countries, including Uzbekistan, can contribute to the expansion of exports to the East. Are there any prospects for cooperation in the gas sector with Kazakhstan to further develop exports to Asian countries? If yes, what are they?

Sergey Lavrov: We have a very close, practical dialogue with Kazakhstan and many of our other allies, as well as joint projects in this area. As for Uzbekistan, it faces a shortage of natural gas. We are coming to an agreement. There have been a number of contacts at the level of the presidents of Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan to use Kazakhstan's transit system to meet Uzbekistan's needs. This requires some technical work on the ground. This is quite achievable and will not take a long time.

When people talk about energy policy, they often mention the problem of gas infrastructure development in the gas-producing country itself. We are far from having solved everything in this sphere. There are relevant plans. In the north and east of Kazakhstan the problem of gas supply infrastructure is also quite serious. All this is fully taken into account when developing further cooperation and agreeing on plans. The EAEU and its nearest neighbours are a priority for us.

We have our own transport system for gas exports to China. We do not create problems for anyone. China's needs are such that no one will be left out of the game – neither Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, or any other country.

Within the framework of Russia-Central Asia cooperation in the energy sector, there is full understanding and a whole series of specific projects that are promising and long-lasting. They will ensure the sustainability of our economies.

Question: Speaking at the Moscow Conference on International Security, you referred to the process of establishing a fairer and more sustainable international order, and to the gradual dedollarisation of the world economy and trade. How much time might it take for these trends to spread around the world? What might obstruct them?

Sergey Lavrov: This is a question for a doctorate. It is impossible to predict how these processes will evolve. This is not about the Earth's rotation that obeys the laws of astronomy, nor about other processes falling within the domain of the exact sciences. Much depends on the role of the individual in history. Say, a certain personality, bright or grey, is at the helm of a country. Every day, you watch TV reports or see on the internet how many individuals – leaders of their countries – take decisions aimed exclusively at perpetuating what they regard as their dominance.

There are also individuals who recognise the need to work together because of the numerous risks and threats facing humankind that can only be handled together, by developing remedial action that is in everyone's interests, so as to avoid what happened to the green deal, which the European Union declared to be the main objective of the day. They [in the EU] started to cut down on investment in hydrocarbon production and even to phase out nuclear power production. What happened next: winds did not blow as expected, tides were not strong enough and there was little sunshine. Now they are sorting out the mess. At the same time, they are bringing pressure to bear on African countries – as well as other third world countries, but Africa comes first – to fast-track the switch to the green economy, although they themselves have long since exceeded their previous figures for coal consumption. The African countries respond by saying that, yes, something has to be done about it and climate change needs to be factored in, although nothing has been proved one hundred percent so far. However, they remind the West that if they want them to engage in the green transition now, they should get back to the promises given at a conference some eight years ago. Back then, the West undertook to allocate $100 billion a year to developing countries to assist them in carrying out the green transition. Nothing has been done.

When we met recently in the BRICS format, many of my colleagues remembered this and compared those promises of $100 billion a year, which have simply been forgotten, to figures pointing to how much the West has spent in aid to Ukraine over the past 18 months. I believe everyone understands what I am talking about. Today, sensible voices can be heard in Western countries – gradually, and they are not too loud but there are more and more of them – calling for efforts to seek compromises and agreements that take account of the security and economic interests of all countries, without exception, and for an end to [the policy of] diktat, which has never led to anything good.

They say they will support Ukraine for as long as is necessary. We discussed this with our colleagues during informal talks at the BRICS Summit. They asked me how long I thought the West would be able to defend Ukraine to secure its victory on the battlefield? I said I did not want to guess but history offered some examples. Look how much time it took them in Iraq and Afghanistan to achieve their goals. I believe the answer is clear.

To shape foreign policy on the basis of slogans, and such aggressive slogans at that, is the road to nowhere. To be exact, this paves the way to war, something we see today in various regions of the world. But there is no stopping the process. This is the objective course of history. It is difficult to say how long it will last.

It seemed the era of Western world dominance would go on forever but it lasted approximately 500 years. Now it is drawing to a close. This process has deep historical roots in terms of the "old" mentality. Today, it reflects the objective reality following the emergence of new centres of power that are unwilling to play the role of an object of international cooperation and that do not want to be subjected to the old principle of the colonisers – to live at the expense of others.

For example, in Africa the issue of processing natural resources, of which it has plenty thanks to God and nature, is gaining in importance. Loud voices were heard at the Russia-Africa Summit and the BRICS Summit about Africa's unwillingness to simply supply mineral resources for processing somewhere in Europe or other Western countries, with all the profits or added value going to non-African people. We will facilitate these processes. Again, it cannot be ruled out that someone will take power somewhere with intentions that completely fail to agree with historical trends.

Question: Recently, Saudi Arabia hosted a summit purporting to settle the Ukraine crisis. Why did its participants meet? What did the outcome of the summit indicate and what should Russia expect in this regard?

Sergey Lavrov: This is a good and quite timely question. It reflects one of the aspects of what we are talking about when mentioning the West's attempts to resist in every way any fair settlement and generally the problems related to the international order and certain conflict situations.

Vladimir Zelensky's "plan," which they call a "peace formula," was first introduced to the international public in 2022. The West immediately supported it. The "plan" consists of ten points, including that Russia should get out of Ukraine, withdraw to the 1991 borders and pay Ukraine war damages, with the Russian leadership to be brought to trial. There were some other related things. Wedged in between these absolutely crazy, unrealistic and inadequate points are observations that it is necessary to strengthen energy and food security and promote humanitarian ties.

All these ten points are packed into the "Zelensky formula," which the West has proclaimed to be the only basis for a Ukraine crisis settlement. Few people take this seriously. But the West's obsession with containing and defeating us has manifested itself in that this absolutely inadequate slip of paper became part of the West's official position. The West is beginning to promote it by using absolutely thimble-rigger, dirty, underhand methods. What do I mean? They convened a meeting in Copenhagen in June, inviting G7, certain BRICS countries, and, naturally, Ukraine itself, and launched a discussion on how to implement the "Zelensky formula."

Our BRICS colleagues, who were in attendance, later told us that they were just listening. There were no proposals on taking any further steps. Neither were there any practical decisions on how this "formula" would be put into practice.

Our Saudi friends later told us that they wanted to hold the next meeting in this format in Jeddah and that their only intention in this context was to bring across to the Western participants and Ukraine itself the idea that any discussions without the Russian Federation's participation lacked all prospects. And they did exactly that at the event which took place in Saudi Arabia.

But our Western colleagues did not rest on their oars. We were informed that several online "meetings" on each of the ten points of the "Zelensky formula" were held on August 17. So, it was an absolutely elementary single-move affair. Their arguments were as follows: they understand the Saudis are against punishing or condemning Russia, or making agreements without Moscow. The participants were told they did not need to support those items of the "Zelensky formula." But, they said, there are other subjects. Look: food security – why not sponsor this point? – or energy security, or humanitarian issues… It's a dirty game, of course. And everyone is aware of this.

What is particularly disconcerting is that we learned afterwards that they had urged the UN Secretary-General to send his representatives to those virtual working group meetings and that such representatives did attend them. I met with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on the sidelines of the BRICS Summit in Johannesburg and I told him frankly that this violated all the operational principles of the Secretariat which, under the UN Charter, should be impartial and accept no orders from any government. In this case, we know what government appealed to Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who promptly acted upon this appeal by sending his representatives. Mr Guterres was profuse in explanations, saying that they had been present there as advisers on related issues under discussion, such as food, energy, and environment. I told him honestly – and I don't want to conceal this – that the very act of their participation in no matter what capacity ran counter to the Secretariat's duties: when this invitation took place, we, as a party to many aspects of the proceedings, were not even notified.

This confirms the fears that we have had for many years that the West wants to privatise the secretariats of international organisations. It has an overwhelming advantage (in the personnel aspect) in these secretariats either directly or through extending dual nationality to representatives of other countries, who joined this or that secretariat on the quota of their homeland and later obtained dual nationality.

This is a process that causes concern and calls for a separate discussion. We will raise this issue at the UN. But now let us go back to the processes related to the "peace formula" and "Zelensky formula." We sent relevant assessments and questions to all invitees, including the UN representatives. We shall not let it rest at that. People must work in a proper and honest way.

It is not accidental that no media outlets have reported about the August 17 working group meetings. We learned this through our own channels. This is an acute question. Thank you for asking it.

Question: In early September, India will host the G20 summit, which Russia was invited to attend. What does the Russian leadership expect from the summit? What objectives will we pursue?

Sergey Lavrov: We are working under the Indian Presidency programme, One Land, One Family, One Future. It is an absolutely sound philosophy, which stresses the need to follow the principles of equality envisaged in the UN Charter.

The G20 was created to address problems in the global economy and global finance. It worked quite effectively all these years, until the West decided to "ukrainianise" everything, including the work of the G20, though there are no foreign policy and security issues in its mandate.

In 2022, we met as part of the G20 in Indonesia. We spent a lot of time there. I think it was wasted. A paragraph was agreed upon that gives nothing to anyone and could not give anything, because the G20 is not engaged in settling conflict situations.

It said that some countries condemned the Ukrainian crisis and some had a different point of view and drew attention to the causes of the conflict and the problem of sanctions. Next, it was said that everyone agreed that the G20 was not the place to discuss global security. It would seem the discussion is over. But no.

The Indian presidency is holding about two hundred highly useful events in various sectors of the world economy, environment, investment, payment mechanisms, and finance. At each of them, the West raised the topic of Ukraine. We frankly said that the discussion is over for us. If they decide to rewrite the G20 mandate and want it to deal with international crises, then we will provide our own document with a list of current conflicts rooted in the wars unleashed by the West. We will need to discuss everything, but then it will duplicate the work of the UN and undermine the G20's original role in making decisions aimed at stabilising global economic and financial processes. That would not be our choice.

At any rate, there will be no joint declaration of all G20 members that would neglect to reflect our position. Sometimes, due to irreconcilable differences (in this case, the whims of the West), the chairmanship issues a communiqué that does not bind any country to anything written there. That is not good, but it is not our choice. Another option is to adopt a document on specific decisions in the area of G20 competence. Everything else will be said by everyone on their own behalf. Let us end on this.

The West is heavily undermining the institutions of global governance. This is one of the reasons why more and more people want to join BRICS or the SCO and look for ways to address emerging economic and financial problems bypassing any structures where the West is present. This process is not fast, but reflections on this matter are growing in the world community.

Question: I am a future specialist on Japan's policy. How do you see relations with Tokyo over the next four years? Will the Foreign Ministry need specialists on oriental studies and Japan?

Sergey Lavrov: Are you afraid of being left without a job? There is no doubt as to specialists on oriental studies. This profession is getting a second wind. MGIMO University is doing a lot to train oriental scholars and expand the range of oriental and rare languages. The prospects are good.

Japan is one of the few countries that does not fit in into the general picture of Russia building up its strategic interaction with others, because it has decided to follow, blindly and stupidly (excuse me for saying so), in the wake of the US policies. And this is not even about containing Russia: Japan is aggressively attacking our country in all areas. This is sad.

Our attitude to our Japanese neighbours has always been good. President of Russia Vladimir Putin personally focused on having informal, trust-based relations with all Japanese prime ministers he worked with. I regularly met with my counterparts, including Fumio Kishida, who served as a foreign minister for a while and visited Moscow. It was during his spell as foreign minister that we coordinated, and our leaders approved, the approach to organising joint economic activities on the South Kuril Islands. This approach was based on Russian laws under which the Japanese enjoyed certain privileges. We coordinated five options, but later (long before the current developments) all of that sunk into oblivion.

The important thing for the Japanese was always a far from pragmatic approach to cooperation. Every year, they denounced [our takeover] of the "northern territories" and urged us to "give them back." This is engrained in their mentality. They put forward various arguments, alleging, for example, that Russia had not been present in San Francisco and therefore had no part in this. The UN Charter is above all San Franciscos. Its Article 107 says that everything done by the victor powers is immutable and sacrosanct. Hands off! Nevertheless, we were ready for compromises. But now the matter is definitively closed. This adds to what we were saying earlier. I mean that we cannot get into any sort of agreements with the West. Japan is part of the collective West.

Today, reforming the UN Security Council is a talking point. Japan and Germany are candidates for permanent membership. The United States is supporting them. But this cannot happen by definition. Neither Russia, nor other sober-minded nations can support a decision that will enhance injustice. Six out of the current 15 permanent members of the UN Security Council represent the West. Shall we add another two? Neither Japan, nor Germany will contribute any additional value to the main UN body's activities. They have no position of their own. They blindly follow Washington's directives. It is futile to expect any change in the foreseeable future.

And yet, do study things Japanese. Japan is still our neighbour. In any case, we maintain diplomatic relations and will preserve them (we, at least, are in favour of doing so). We are open to dialogue, but we will not run after them and propose anything. They must make up their own minds. When the morning after arrives, we will watch them act and work. Japan is a neighbouring country. We will have to live next to each other.