Lavrov's Government Hour Q&A Session

Following his speech, FM Lavrov answered questions from the Parliamentarians.

Question: Do you think it may be time to take more serious measures after Sergei Hersh's publication, after the NATO leader's confessions? We had the Treaty of Nystad, according to which Peter I paid the budget of the Kingdom of Sweden for the entire Baltic States at that time. Today they call us human garbage. Maybe it is time to denounce a number of treaties with Norway, the United States and Finland?

Sergey Lavrov: Now we are carrying out a radical revision of all our obligations to international organisations. Organizations that have shown a blatantly discriminatory attitude, grossly violated their statutory principles of equality of participants, violate the rules of procedure on a daily basis, if only to undermine the existing consensus in the adoption of Russian resolutions.

The Council of Europe is one of the organisations in which Russia has ceased to participate. They also left the European Court of Human Rights. At a meeting with judges yesterday, President of Russia Vladimir Putin confirmed that we are taking all measures to ensure that our citizens do not in any way lose the human rights function of the state. Until recently, this function was performed by the ECHR, but not so effectively. We will do it more efficiently.

We wanted to stay in the Council of Europe in those conventions that are open to countries that do not participate in this organization. But even there they began to make claims against us, trying already in those conventions to infringe on our rights belonging to all countries participating in these documents. We are withdrawing from the international Criminal Law Convention on Corruption (the so-called GRECO group of states against corruption) for this reason. A number of other treaties, under which they are trying to infringe on our rights, belong to the same category. They are under consideration by the government within the framework of the law on international treaties, where the Ministry of Foreign Affairs acts as a coordinator.

Now we are conducting an appropriate inventory. We are also withdrawing from some conventions and agreements that have already lost their relevance, there is no policy here. There was the 1992 Agreement on Guarantees of the Rights of Citizens of the Member States of the Commonwealth of Independent States in the Field of Pension Provision. All these issues have long been resolved in other legislative frameworks.

Work is underway across the full range of our international obligations. In this regard, the topic of contributions to organizations where our interests are infringed upon is considered. We are delaying the payment of contributions. This happened, for example, in the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, where an illegitimate mechanism has been introduced, contrary to the convention. And in a number of other structures. Work is in full swing. We have several hundred such treaties and conventions.

Question: There are assessments that our country is allegedly preparing a coup of power in Moldova, that a sabotage group will seize the media, and so on. How do you assess that? Is this an attempt by Kiev to draw Moldova into the conflict, including due to the fact that the Transnistrian issue has not been resolved? Or is it an attempt to shift the vector of the problems under discussion due to the fact that prices for housing and communal services have increased very much, the degree of social tension has increased, people are dissatisfied, unable to pay and have simply identified an external enemy?

Sergey Lavrov: There is a combination of factors that you mentioned. There is, of course, a maniacal desire of Kiev and those who "puppetize" them from, first of all, the European Union, to undermine Russia's position in the "5 + 2" mechanism, which is engaged in the Transnistrian settlement, to weaken our ties with Gagauzia, to declare the Russian Federation guilty of all the troubles of Moldova and to demand the withdrawal of our peacekeepers, a group of servicemen guarding the huge ammunition depots in Kolbasna. By increasing this rhetoric, which is being warmed up as much as possible by Kiev, which has transmitted some confidential information about the provocations and coups we are planning, the government of M.G. Sandu (in which, along with it, almost all are also Romanian citizens) wants to deflect accusations for the failure of the socio-economic policy, which causes increasing indignation in society.

Although they continue to say that they must solve the problems of Transnistria, the withdrawal of Russian troops exclusively by diplomatic methods, they are pushed to a completely different position. To ensure that legitimate, legitimate public processes are suppressed as harshly as possible in order to provoke reasons for Western interference in this country, in much more material forms than before.

We made a statement to the Foreign Ministry. We said that this is not in our interests, we want to have good relations with friendly, multinational Moldova. But it's a two-way street. We hope that the politicians who took power in this country and, by and large, declared their desire to join the European Union, almost reunite with Romania, or even ask NATO to ensure their security, do not reflect the interests of their people. There are calls for early elections. This is an internal affair of Moldova. But we have absolutely no pleasure in using this friendly country for anti-Russian purposes.

Question: The Russian Federation is doing a lot of work to build Russian schools abroad. There are five in Tajikistan, it is planned to build in Kyrgyzstan, but this option is long, expensive. Our competitors are building private schools. It's fast and efficient, but requires business involvement. This requires an impulse from the state, it is it that must form the ideology. Can the Foreign Ministry, represented by the newly created department, become an ideologist and methodologist for the formation of a network of Russian schools abroad with the participation of business?

Communicating with colleagues from the CIS countries, I see that there is a catastrophic lack of books in Russian language. We supply literature, but it is not enough. For comparison, foreigners supply up to a million textbooks a year to one country. But the main thing is that we do not always grade the request, how much literature is needed, what textbooks. In practice, it happens that there are several textbooks and several fairy tales. As a result, it is not always possible to close all the needs. Maybe we should use this experience as in new territories?

Sergey Lavrov: I think this experience should be used in all the territories belonging to our allies, partners in the CIS, the CSTO, the EAEU, our bilateral partners, such as Azerbaijan, where the craving for the Russian language is very high.

In the CIS countries, a couple of dozen branches of Russian universities have been created. There are 11 in Uzbekistan alone, many in Kazakhstan, several in Azerbaijan. Russian-national Slavic universities have been established in Armenia, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Azerbaijan. A lot of work is being done.

In the field of school education, there are special programs for Tajikistan on the initiative of President E.Sh. Rahmon, expressed during the visit of V.I. Matvienko some time ago. Now the work program has already been drawn up, there will be state funding. We are deploying the same work in Uzbekistan and in other countries. Not on such a scale, but we are creating one or two schools at a time. There is a school named after A.S. Pushkin in Ashgabat. One of the most popular is the Russian school on the basis of our military in Tajikistan, the main attraction for local youth. Of course, I would like to allocate more money.

You mentioned the new Department of International Humanitarian and Cultural Cooperation. He will act as the operator of the new state comprehensive program "Support and promotion of the Russian language abroad" from the Ministry. It is finally approved. Unfortunately, there is no money for it for this year, but legally it exists. We are promised to establish funding starting in 2024. If we manage to get something in a difficult financial situation at least for priority educational programmes this year, we are ready to work on this together with the State Duma and the Federation Council.

The main meaning of this program is to unite together everything related to the Russian language. These are Rossotrudnichestvo, the Russkiy Mir Foundation, the Pushkin State Institute of the Russian Language and the Program for the Support of the Russian Language Abroad, which was not unified until recently. Now the task is to coordinate all this.

Question: In your January news conference, you noted the blatant manifestations of Russophobia by Western countries in relation to everything Russian, to our culture. They stressed that the scale of this Russophobia has increased since the Second World War. Do you see any possible countermeasures of our state, the Foreign Ministry? Is it necessary to somehow activate soft power (Russian culture, art)? Or is it necessary to do nothing and you can live in the feeling that A.P. Chekhov is one of the most staged playwrights, F.M. Dostoevsky is one of the most widely read writers, and K.S. Stanislavsky is studied in all theater and film schools?

Sergey Lavrov: No, in no case should we let all this run its course. I think that it would be a betrayal of our culture, of participation in the development of the world. Russia makes one of the most significant contributions to the humanitarian development of the world: the richest classics (musical, theatrical works), science, education, culture in the broadest sense.

We have an amazing and unsurpassed experience in developing intercultural and inter-civilizational harmony and educating young people to understand the peculiarities of the civilizations of other peoples, including those living in the Russian Federation. This is precisely what in our altruistic position, which is not limited to some cultural events that can then be recorded as an asset of the Russian Federation, but promotes inter-civilizational harmony, recognition of the richness of the civilizational diversity of the world, which has a global character, is highly appreciated in different countries, especially in Muslim states and those that profess other religious beliefs. As for Africa, Latin America and Asia, we feel that this factor sometimes plays a more important role than the allocations of not so large sums that these countries are trying to supply to their Western partners.

I do not think that anyone will be able to break our humanitarian influence, to belittle it. Of course, it needs to be continued. We are increasing the number of events in this area within brics and the SCO. The Games of "Children of Asia" are prepared and regularly held. Now an initiative has been put forward, supported by the President of Russia, to form a new project called the Games of the Future, in which physical sports and cyber competitions will be combined. Moreover, it is assumed that the same people will have to perform in both disciplines, which will make "nerds" physically strong, and physically strong - more sophisticated in the natural sciences and humanities.

I wouldn't downplay the tremendous work of trying to undermine our efforts. But in these conditions, we have an additional desire to increase these efforts and necessarily bring them to a result, like everything we do.

Question: In your speech, you said that the number of countries that are friends and partners of Russia significantly exceeds the number of unfriendly countries, but nevertheless, we must strive to build good relations with the peoples of those states whose governments pursue an openly anti-Russian policy. Now, when interaction with them through official diplomatic channels is understandably complicated, the role of parliamentary diplomacy is increasing.

The leadership of the State Duma and the parties represented in the Russian parliament actively interact with their foreign counterparts, including through inter-party channels and through friendship groups. How do you assess this activity and what, from your point of view, should the deputy corps additionally do to strengthen the international authority of our country?

Sergey Lavrov: I fully agree with this approach. Of course, many ruling circles of the governments of unfriendly states act not at all of their own will or desire, but exclusively out of bloc solidarity, "stick discipline", established in NATO and the European Union, and at the initiative of an aggressive minority.

Most do not perceive it with enthusiasm, but they are forced to keep the brand and follow the mainstream, defined in Europe exclusively by those on whom the United States relies. These are the Baltic States, Poland, the Czech Republic and, of course, great Britain, which is not disappearing anywhere and is the main initiator of subversive activities to stop any contacts with the Russian Federation, to spread everyday Russophobia in continental Europe.

Objectively, the volume of public relations in Western countries has fallen. People are intimidated, difficult to communicate with purely logistical methods (there is no direct message) and much more. For these reasons, last year the main volume was in asia, Africa and Latin America.

I absolutely agree that those who want to maintain and deepen ties with us from among the citizens of unfriendly states (and there are many of them) should receive such an opportunity. They need to be invited, to meet with them at other venues, when transport opportunities arise, although, now they are very complicated.

In addition to those who are well known to us from the parliamentary corps and from representatives of European parties, the European Parliament, who speak with isolated but principled assessments, there is a silent majority who also do not like all this. When they hear how yesterday in the European Parliament from Ireland a colorful man spoke about the genesis of the Ukrainian crisis, many people remember this and even doubts are planted in the heads of those who voted without thinking for the all-party condemnation.

Now it is impossible to get to the "big screens" in the West. We spoke with chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation Vladimir Volodin and his deputy Pyotr Tolstoy that when we cover Ukraine and what is happening in NATO and the EU, it is not easy for us to let our announcer, the presenter, who will "condemn" them. In the West, they do just that. Before giving an assessment from the screen or in social networks, we must cite the position of our opponents, with which we then argue. But we will definitely show what we are commenting on. In the West, this is practically not done. Isolated voices that break through: former Pentagon adviser David McGregor and Sergei Ritter, whom I know well, he is a military specialist, worked in Iraq when I was Russia's Permanent Representative to the UN. S. Hersh with his courageous performance, which he daily reinforces with new assessments. Someone perceives them as "one in the field warrior". Carlson is "good", he also wants to show objectively. These people are not all pro-Russian or anti-American. They just want their country to be honest and up to the lofty principles enshrined in its own Constitution. Among these principles is the prohibition of lying to one's own people. I think this truth will make its way.

In the previous question, there was a reference (then he did not react to it) to the explosions of Nord Stream-1 and Nord Stream-2. We appealed to the UN and raised this issue there. We are preparing a special meeting of the Security Council. We will demand to find a form of investigation. True, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, through his official representative, has already said that the UN does not have the authority and mandate to carry out such investigations.

With all due respect, we disagree with this position. Because somewhere in the non-government-controlled Syrian Idlib, there were some actions in which the government could be involved, which caused damage to the population, the Secretary-General does not ask anyone, even without journalists' questions he was going to investigate something there. He announced that he had created an investigation team that went and returned, presenting ambiguous conclusions. There is no need for A. Guterres (he is an experienced diplomat) to be embarrassed to study the facts. Let's not call it an investigation. To do this, you need to dive too deep. To study the facts that are now presented to the whole world and which are difficult to refute. I think that it will be difficult for the UN Secretary-General to move away from this function.

Question: You said in your speech that you want to know how you are treated in the State Duma. The short answer is good.

However, so far an independent foreign policy has not been supported by decisive measures in the economy. Unfortunately, our economic and financial policies are still guided by the rules imposed on us at one time to restrain economic growth and artificially create technological, debt and other dependence. In this regard, do you see negative diplomatic consequences from the decisive rupture or actual non-fulfillment of the agreement on Russia's accession to the WTO or the denunciation of numerous agreements in order to avoid double taxation, including with unfriendly countries and with offshore companies?

Sergey Lavrov: This is a systemic issue. It concerns not only and not so much the situation in the WTO. Although it is one of the pillars of the system of globalization invented by the West, primarily the Americans, and undermined by them. The misuse of the mechanisms established within the WTO and the Bretton Woods institutions has reached a limit. The same goes for other structures that serve the globalization created by the West many years ago. They invited everyone there, proclaiming "the end of history." This is the ideal of the organization of human life at the international level. Everyone must follow the rules and then there will be everything: comfort, McDonald's, trips abroad to the resort, the opportunity to travel around the world in the most convenient way. The main thing is to follow the rules. The Americans and their main satellites in Europe did not like the fact that Russia refused to follow Tolstoy's principle of non-resistance to evil by violence and decided not to turn the other cheek in Ukraine. After the rudeness, when the coup d'état was committed and the Nazi authorities were supported, which came to Ukraine at that time. After the rudeness with the Minsk agreements, when they falsely stated that they had no alternative, and then it turned out that it was an "imitation of diplomacy", as Boris Johnson (without combing his hair in the morning) recently said. It became clear that the West neglects all decency. He violated the inviolability of property rights, the law of fair competition, the presumption of innocence and much more with regard to agreements on the protection of investments. They, too, were consigned to oblivion. Arrests of our state reserves, private money. And private property, they said, is sacred. To this day, they can't figure out what to do about it. A year has passed. And they are all scratching their heads, how to steal in such a way as to bring under some law. I believe that this is shameful for people who present themselves as an example of the civilized development of interpersonal relations.

There is a big crisis in the WTO. In this Organization, as in a number of other areas, in particular in the field of international investment and finance, the PRC worked strictly on the basis of all the rules that were laid down in these instruments of globalization after the Second World War, without violating these rules. When doubts arose, China gave all the explanations to the Dispute Settlement Body, that is, it complied with all the norms, playing on the "field" created by the United States, where the "markup" was made by them, according to their own rules, it began to play. And in terms of purchasing power parity, China came out on top. In terms of GDP per capita, I think it will be during this decade (even according to all the most cautious forecasts). The WTO has one paragraph that is streamlined and allows countries to impose sanctions in the event of existential threats to the security of states. Anything can be summed up under this.

The second problem is the complete paralysis of the work of the very body for the settlement of disputes in the WTO. The Americans do not want to respond to the fair treatment addressed to them, which is directed by many countries, primarily the PRC. Because it is precisely the discrimination of Chinese goods on the American market that is now Washington's main task in its desire to weaken everyone: Europe, which it has put on the verge of industrialization and China (as they say in the doctrinal documents, the main challenge that we must accept and prevent China from turning into the number one power). Compete fairly. Don't let it go. But here are all the forbidden techniques (below the belt).

A dispute resolution body may not work. The United States artificially blocks the appointment of the required number of quorum participants. So "simple". Just like a party meeting that needs to be held according to the script. Because we have to fight it.

In our Foreign Policy Concept, the main goal of diplomacy is written: to create the most favorable conditions for the internal and socio-economic development of the country, ensuring its security, and improving the well-being of citizens. There are some critical voices, also heard at home, but mostly abroad, where the "leadership" of the non-systemic opposition has gone, saying that they set a goal to create favorable external conditions. And they also destroyed these conditions and created the most unfavorable for our development. This is from their point of view of the comfort of Western civilizational goods in the form of Starbucks, McDonald's, etc. From this point of view, their life has become less carefree.

But the overwhelming majority of our citizens, I know that this is the unanimous opinion of the State Duma and the Federation Council, does not want to rejoice in external conditions that deprive us of independence and at any time, as happened with our special military operation in Ukraine, which was inevitable after seven years of preparation by the West for a hybrid war against Russia, which we are now trying to stop. In such situations, how can we rely on the West to create external conditions for our development?

Until recently, we lived in the paradigm that you just mentioned. In the first years after the disappearance of the Soviet Union, all these rules of globalization were perceived as something that needed to be improved and their internal tasks should be solved. They wanted to "put us in our place" so that we would not stop the war unleashed against us, immediately abolished all the rules that allowed us to import comfortably and not think about import substitution, about creating our own base of technological sovereignty. Now all this is fully understood.

We must still strive to create the most favorable external conditions for our development, but we must decipher these "favorable conditions". This is not what it used to be, when all these external factors were led by the West and the system it created, which it could at any time manipulate solely to its advantage. New external conditions should be formed together with the World Majority within the framework of BRICS, the SCO, our integration associations in the post-Soviet space, ASEAN, CELAC. It is not for nothing that in this community recently the presidents of Brazil and Argentina officially proposed to think about starting to create a unit of account (still an inferior currency) that will allow not to rely on the dollar, which the Americans abuse. The POSSIBILITY of such a thing is being discussed in BRICS. The New Development Bank has been created, similar structures are being created in the SCO. The process began, as they once said about slightly different trends. But in this case, the process is correct and healthy.

We will make these processes our priority, because it is through them that the external conditions that we really need for our development and for improving the well-being of the people will be created.

Question: You said that 2023 is the Year of the Russian Language as a Language of Interethnic Communication in the CIS countries. When adopting the budget in 2023, the State Duma Committee on CIS Affairs insisted that the necessary amount of funds was allocated in the country's budget under the program to support the Russian language abroad. The capabilities of this program are limited. Unfortunately, this programme does not provide for the purchase of school textbooks. Today there is an acute problem of lack of textbooks not only for teaching Russian, but also other disciplines in Russian language in schools of the CIS countries. Only in Armenia it is necessary to have at least two hundred thousand. In general, in the CIS we are talking about several million textbooks. You've already replied in part. What do you think needs to be done to solve the current problem?

Sergey Lavrov: This area of our humanitarian presence and its expansion abroad is now one of the priorities in the Foreign Ministry's activities.

A new Department has been created that will coordinate the activities of federal executive bodies, and there is also a new state program "Support and Promotion of the Russian Language Abroad". Now we are at the stage of harmonizing all the fairly numerous projects launched in recent years dealing with similar issues: the Pushkin Institute of the Russian Language and the old program to support the Russian language abroad, the issues that Rossotrudnichestvo solves in the field of education, the Ministry of Education has its own external contour, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education has the same, the Russian Academy of Sciences has the same is available too. Just recently, in connection with the creation of our new Department, we met at the Ministry at the level of heads of federal executive bodies. There was a new President of the Russian Academy of Sciences, director of our new Department. We got to know each other. A road map has been drawn up that will make it possible to prepare proposals for the coordination of all these areas quite quickly. Some of them for greater efficiency are subject to clarification, for example, the list of founders. Work is underway.

As for textbooks specifically, the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Education and Science, Rossotrudnichestvo are also engaged in this. There is another state programme of the Russian Federation, The Development of Education. It is subordinate to the Ministry of Education, which, together with Rossotrudnichestvo, is supposed to deal with it. But this is also a dispersion of our efforts.

Something is done under one roof, something under another. Often we don't see the full picture. One of the main challenges is to first understand who is doing what.

In a previous question on a similar topic, the need to attract business was voiced. He wants to participate in this work. He understands that if he has economic interests in a particular country, he is interested in training guys who will then work at his enterprises.

Combining the efforts of the state and stimulating the interest of the business community will be at the center of our efforts. The state comprehensive program for the support and promotion of the Russian language abroad has just been born. I hope that by the end of the year, when we will be given funding for it, we will be able to report concretely.

Question: The confrontational situation creates problems at the global level, but now we need to think in advance about the most important geopolitical points of the world's development. For example, Antarctica, where we are actively present, is far from political and military conflicts. Everything goes to the fact that the topic of the region will be raised because of the geography, large reserves of oil, ore raw materials, precious metals and fresh water. It is possible to revise the Antarctic Treaty and the Madrid Protocol ahead of schedule. How do we defend our interests in this crucial region and resist the forbidden practices of unfriendly countries that are trying to squeeze us out of this continent?

Sergey Lavrov: So far, we have not seen such attempts. There are always people trying to artificially create problems. They also exist in the Arctic, where for many years the work process has been going on, despite attempts to confuse it, by agreement between the five coastal Arctic powers of the limits of the continental shelf. Our arguments are treated with full respect there.

In Antarctica, there is no such process yet. Maybe it won't be. Unlike the Arctic region, which in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea was designated as subject to delimitation of both territorial waters and adjacent zones of the continental shelf. In Antarctica, this is not provided. The Antarctic Treaty of 1959, in the development of which the USSR took an active part, presupposes exclusively the peaceful use of Antarctica and freedom of scientific research. Until now, we have not had difficulties with the operation of Antarctic stations. There, scientists cooperate with their foreign colleagues working there.

One of the hot topics discussed at the special conference, the fifth session of which will be held soon, is the concept of Marine Protected Areas. It is promoted by non-governmental organizations that have put forward the radical idea that at least 30% of the coastal waters around Antarctica should receive the status of marine protected areas. All this is taking place under the auspices of initiatives that until recently were promoted by G. Thunberg. Then she took up other practical activities. These marine protected areas are intended to define areas within which there will be a total ban on navigation, fishing and other mining activities. That is, scientists can travel, but nothing that is required to study and use the resources of Antarctica will be prohibited.

According to our estimates, 30% of the water area is quite a radical thing. As well as many of the "revolutionary" initiatives in the field of implementing the principles of the green economy. Given how all this has now collapsed and been discredited by the policy of the West, which imposed sanctions. Before that, he had long ignored the risks associated with the green economy. I am sure that the countries of the world will pay attention to this. So far, we have not seen any aggressive actions.

Question: You have provided a clear, tough picture of what is happening, the lawlessness and degradation of international relations due to our Western partners. In general terms, you have outlined the image of the future. We see the degradation of international judicial bodies, there are practically no arbitrators who can be guided by the law, everything comes down to the method of force. In this regard, what, in your opinion, is the prospect of creating a new architecture to replace the outdated one?

Dependence on allies can also be dangerous. Now many say that they chose the wrong allies, they believed the wrong ones. Someone believes that it is necessary to turn to the East. What are your thoughts on this?

Sergey Lavrov: Today we have repeatedly talked about the configuration of the world – first of all, multipolarity. We are frightened that if multipolarity suddenly becomes a reality, it will be chaos, while with the Americans at the head of the order will be restored by them.

US President Barack Obama said that America is an "exceptional" nation. It must play a major role and address all issues. President Donald Trump and George W. Bush before that repeated the same thing. Current President Joe Biden has repeatedly stated that Americans are an exceptional people, and they have special rights. His national security adviser J. Sullivan, even before taking this position, wrote a large program article in 2019, where he said that in order to assert one's exceptionalism, it is necessary to suppress any manifestations of ethnic and historical identity in the world.

This is the "end of history" and they are exceptional, so everyone should build themselves under the banner of liberal democracy and live as they tell you. That philosophy. We do not need such a world order. Now the Americans are beginning to play the games of returning to a bipolar world, but with China. They say that they want to compete with China, but not to oppose each other, without military escalations.

We have planned a series of high-level contacts with the People's Republic of China in the very near future. We will continue to discuss these topics, taking into account the documents that have been signed in recent years, including the documents on new relations in the new era, signed a year ago, when President of Russia Vladimir Putin visited Beijing for talks with Xi Jinping.

I'm not one to be afraid of multipolarity because there will be a lot of players. Of course, when you are the only one in charge of everything, you "woke up", decided what to do, ordered, and everyone was built. Yes, the more agreeable, the more difficult it is to agree. Just like when seeking consensus in any organization. You can vote, two more people and go ahead. But what is achieved by consensus is much more sustainable and long-term than imposed decisions that leave someone dissatisfied.

Currently, in a multipolar system, objective leaders in each region are determined. These are China, India, Brazil, Egypt, South Africa, Mexico, Argentina – several large countries in each region. It seems to me that such a system will be sustainable. These countries are already beginning to work within brics, the SCO, and other associations, strictly respecting the principle of consensus and not imposing anything.

As for friends and allies. We have never had allies in the West. Although we were ready for this when the Cold War ended and the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact disappeared. We proposed to unite without dividing lines and make the OSCE a truly collective Euro-Atlantic security structure. It didn't work. At that time, as President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly reminded, we proposed using NATO with our equal participation on the same principles. First, US President Bill Clinton nodded his head, and then his aides said that there was no need and they did not need it. The subtext was as follows. They will be NATO against Russia. Since the Soviet Union disappeared, why not Russia?

The day before yesterday, at the Hudson Institute, with the participation of American experts and some professor from Ukraine, the topic of preparing the West for action after the "disintegration" of Russia was seriously discussed. Like, Russia will do it itself. And they should be ready to pick up whatever is left. The argument was given that the collapse of the USSR was a surprise and the West did not have time to do everything, but that it had time, then they began to "postpone".

They are not friends or allies at all. Let me stress once again that all the gloss, friendliness and trust in the conversations that Western diplomats showed to all of us immediately after the disappearance of the Soviet Union and by inertia persisted even after the Munich conference in 2007, when they still had hopes that we would play by their "rules", instantly flew away after the start of a special military operation. . The Western elite has laid bare its essence, which has long been hidden under these guises. This is not a return to Soviet terminology. This is a conviction confirmed by many facts. Again, they want to gather everyone to wage war against Russia. Already assembled.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that they began to prepare for war since 2014. He admitted that it was they who brought Russophobes, neo-Nazis to power, trained and now support them in the war against Russia.

I have repeatedly said that the formation of a multipolar world is a long process. It's not just that there will be an election in the U.S. and they will admit that they were wrong and agree to a multipolar world. No. Every time we need to prove that we can do without them (not what we prefer, but we can) if they do not "want" to be with us. China is imposing sanctions on chips/semiconductors, wanting to prevent it from getting ahead. They are trying to "raise" Taiwan (two or three producers) in order to "belittle" China in this economic competition. This process is a historical epoch. Not to "shut down" in one day what is happening between China and the United States, China and the EU. That's a trillion-dollar investment. To cut them off overnight is to create huge hardships for the people. The West is going for it. They don't give a damn.

When German Foreign Minister A. Berbok was reproached for refusing Russian energy, she said that yes, her voters would suffer, but they should help Ukraine. This is a nationally oriented policy. Or rather, imperialistically oriented – to suppress and contain the Russian Federation. This is not an "eyesore", but an alternative to Western civilization, which has a sad colonial history.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said that everyone has become convinced that westerners want to continue to live by colonial methods in order to ensure their interests at the expense of everyone else. It's going to be long, hard. I do not exclude that it is no longer during the lifetime of our generation. But, in a good way, the process "went.

Question: The global foreign policy of the entire Western world is aimed at "denigrating" the image of Russia. At the same time, as seen during the World Cup in 2018, tourism is one of the industries that can show people the real Russia. Do you think the introduction of a simplified visa regime will help attract the tourist flow, which has recently been falling, for citizens of states friendly to Russia? Is the Foreign Ministry taking steps to resolve the situation with payments in the Russian Federation for foreigners, due to the fact that many payment systems have disconnected our banks from popular payment systems?

Sergey Lavrov: As for the volume of inbound tourism, it is not about visas. We are working to facilitate the visa regime. With eleven countries it is planned to sign completely visa-free travel, six (including India, Indonesia) - easier conditions (very simple). Let's not forget that we are in the process of lifting restrictions on the issuance of electronic visas to a large number of countries - about 70 states, with the exception of unfriendly ones, which have stopped issuing visas to Russians in a simplified manner.

E-visas were approved in 2020, and then the Covid-19 coronavirus intervened. Last summer, we lifted Covid restrictions, but given the unfriendly actions of the West, including in the field of issuing visas to Russians, the Russian Government was instructed to report by June 1 of this year on the beginning of the implementation of previously adopted decisions on issuing electronic visas. I think that there will be no questions for friendly countries. But for the volume of inbound tourism, visas are not the main thing. In our country, almost no consular office experiences problems with queues for visas. They are afraid to come somehow, but most tourists, even from unfriendly countries, want to visit us. Now logistics is complicated due to decisions to stop direct air traffic. You have to go "on the crossbars". It is one thing when on business trips on some business trips, which are on the official government line or through business negotiations, there can be transfers. But not every tourist will go for it, because he does not leave for a long period and is dear to him every day. And then you fly through Istanbul, the UAE or Qatar, and if somewhere there was no connecting flight. That's life.

As for payment systems, this is not a matter for the Foreign Ministry. We don't participate here at all. But I am sure that these issues are solvable. The "Mir" card began to be accepted quite vigorously. Then the United States began to "beat on the hands" of all those independent countries that make independent decisions, and threaten with some kind of punishment. You know how the Americans force it.

Russia explained why we launched a special military operation. For years, we warned that they were playing with fire. They were forced to stop the hybrid war they started against Russia, and the hot war in the Donbass. The West has expressed its condemnation. Here are two points of view – our truth and their reaction to our truth. If you are Democrats who respect the sovereign equality of states as a fundamental principle of the UN Charter, let everyone else look at the facts, listen to the parties and decide. We really instruct our ambassadors to talk about our assessments. They're doing it. The West does not talk about its assessments. I spoke with many colleagues from Asia, Africa and Latin America. The West simply sends emissaries who come to the ministry of foreign affairs or trade of the respective country and say that they should stop cooperating with Russia: do not accept delegations, do not buy weapons, even if they have a contract, break agreements in other areas. Is this a democracy? This is the imposition of the very concept of the "end of history", when nothing more than Western liberalism was to remain, everyone had to listen to it.

The funny thing. I talk to my colleagues. They told me in confidence that if they did not stop what the Americans demanded of them to do with Russia, they would be punished. And in return for what? It's not something that "good for good" should be exchanged. They already have "for the good" that they use the dollar system, the IMF gives loans due to many unpopular reforms. In general, they look after their domestic political life. It's from the Americans.

In fact, this is from the global system created by the Americans, but which they manually manage. And if they don't listen to the demands, they will "excommunicate" them from what they have had for decades. That's it. This is neocolonialism in its purest form. Blackmail, threats.

They say, like, we don't have many true allies. We have Belarus and members of the CSTO, where there is not always agreement among the allies. It really is. But that's because we work on the basis of respect for each other's interests. We have no dictate, no stick discipline. In NATO or in the EU, the decision is made. A number of countries, for example, Hungary says that they do not agree, but they have nowhere to go, they are forced to go, she is alone. But in fact, consensus is when everyone agrees and no one objects. Therefore, the consensus in the European Union and in NATO is very specific – "stick". It's a long process. Maybe a whole historical epoch. But he's coming. It's unstoppable.

Question: The importance and relevance of interaction with the countries of the Islamic world is growing. Russia has been building relations with these countries for many years. There are interesting specific projects, but I would like to hear the Ministry's position on what work is being done to strengthen our interaction with the countries of the Islamic world and what is the role of participation in this process, including the subjects of the Russian Federation.

Sergey Lavrov: This is one of the priority areas at this stage. Our partnership began long before the current events. For more than a decade, we have been observers in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. It unites 57 Islamic countries. In November 2022. Secretary General H.B. Taha came on a visit. We discussed our joint work in detail. We have the same positions on most of the current global problems in the energy sector, food security, healthcare, the fight against infectious diseases, regional conflicts, intercultural and inter-civilizational dialogue. At the beginning of our cooperation with the OIC, under Yevgeny Primakov, the Russia-Islamic World Strategic Vision Group was established on his initiative. For our part, it is now headed by the head of Tatarstan R.N. Minnikhanov. Most recently, it held a meeting. They meet almost annually, attracting theologians from both sides, prominent politicians. A very promising structure, which is now leading in what we call under the auspices of the UN a dialogue of civilizations.

I have already mentioned that Tatarstan plays a coordinating role on our part. The Kazan Forum economic summit was established in Kazan and has been held for several years, which, at the suggestion of R.N. Minnikhanov, has been given the status of a federal project since last year. There is a youth forum of the OIC, in which observer countries (including us) participate. Last year, as part of the activities of the youth forum, Kazan was declared the youth capital of the OIC. We have good prospects here. They take a principled position on everything that is now connected with the crisis in European global security, in which the West wants to make Ukraine the main strike force against the Russian Federation. Of course, there is a mockery of Christian shrines, as is happening in Kosovo, when Kosovo Muslims are already violating the norms of their religion. And in Scandinavia, neo-Nazis burn the Koran. All this reminds of similar episodes and long history, when the Nazis were engaged in the destruction of books in Germany and conquered countries, and the events of very recent history, when in Ukraine books in Russian language, Russian authors were dragged out of libraries on the square and there bonfires were arranged from them. These analogies are understandable to ordinary people. This is also one of the directions of our work with the Islamic world. Here we only need to move forward. Oncoming traffic is already guaranteed.

***

I do not want to resume the assessments made here today. They coincided. Representatives of all factions spoke. This will help us to bring to a specific format the plans we have and are implementing. This is the attraction of tourists, despite logistical difficulties, increasing efforts to protect the Russian language.

There is a decision by the Russian Government to harmonise all our approaches so that we "do not hit the top five" and all the funds allocated for this are spent transparently, with an understanding of where there is a shortage and where there is too much. I heard V.A. Nikonov's proposal about our new "terminological" century. I agree that developing countries are developing, and developed, Western countries can be called "pre-developed".

Thanks for the meeting. As it is now fashionable to say, it was interactive. In Russian, it is mutual communication, enrichment. We will continue our work not only at such major meetings, but also on a daily basis at all levels: we are with the leadership of the State Duma and the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, and my deputies are with the heads of committees and factions. That's helpful to everyone. Thank you so much.