Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s opening remarks at the 28th Assembly of the Council on Foreign and Defence Policy, Moscow, December 10, 2020
Colleagues, friends,
Fyodor Lukyanov spoke about the role of the Council on Foreign and Defence Policy. Who would have thought at the time when the Council was created, and I was invited to join in as a co-founder, that the Council would live to this day. The experience gained over the decades of its functioning is instrumental in our work and makes it possible to bounce ideas off the expert community, which is deeply versed in international matters and is keenly interested in them. This is important.
This year was truly challenging and pivotal. Humanity was unprepared for the differences and mixed trends that had been piling up on the agenda over years and exacerbated confusion in international affairs. The habitual way of life of hundreds of millions of people and states, as well as ordinary citizens, has been upended, many sectors of the economy found themselves on the verge of collapse, business activity has significantly decreased, global cooperation chains were disrupted and the unemployment rates went up. Closed borders abruptly reduced the chances for maintaining multifaceted contacts between the countries and the people.
The scale and inertia of the events that we are witnessing in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic make it impossible to say when life will get back to normal. I hope Mr Lukyanov was right when he confidently stated, albeit with reservations, that we will be able to meet in person in the spring. So far, humanity and its best representatives in the person of healthcare professionals are just trying to understand where we are and when this might end. Many people are saying that this will never end, and we will have to live with it just like the annual flu, but with much more severe consequences. One of the key lessons of the pandemic is that no one can secure themselves against these cross-border threats.
The pandemic affected literally everyone. Clearly, this kind of global cataclysm can only be overcome by uniting and rising above fleeting differences. President Putin has repeatedly stated this firm position adopted by Russia. Unfortunately, a number of countries, primarily the United States and its allies, are trying to take advantage of this situation in their geopolitical interests and ignore the needs that are common to humanity.
The term “common to humanity” does not at all mean an average, consensus-based or accommodating understanding of how the inter-civilisational diversity should be respected. This manifests itself in way too many areas of modern international life, including the interpretation of multilateralism energetically promoted and propagated by our Western colleagues. This is also happening in connection with the coronavirus pandemic, despite the fact that people in America and Europe are suffering from COVID-19 as badly as people in other countries.
The need for conducting a mutually respectful dialogue and rejecting artificially created confrontational schemes is nowhere to be seen. Just think of the indiscriminate accusations against China regarding the spread of the disease. There was an attempt to blame the PRC for everything that happened. This undermined the efforts to achieve unity, including of the research capacities, in order to come up with effective responses. In addition to healthcare aspects, we must take a closer look at the international bodies in charge of the health and well-being of the people. The WHO-related developments are quite telling in his regard. Ideas are being put forward to create some non-governmental institutions mandated to determine the international community’s policy. This is a clear attempt to sideline the World Health Organisation. These developments are reminiscent of neo-colonial approaches and habits and show the attempts to restrain the formation of new global centres and to punish those who pursue an independent foreign policy. This can also be seen in the “vaccine race.” We are well aware of attempts to oppose the new concept of the so-called rules-based international order to everything that has been created after establishing the UN and forming a large block of universal international legal instruments.
Russia believes it is imperative to look for ways to unite countries and governments, to look for a constructive agenda relying on the principles of collegiality and equality, which should contribute to de-escalating international tensions and ensuring the predictability of global processes. Later, we will discuss the initiatives that Russia has been promoting to this end. A CSTO summit and a Collective Security Council meeting took place on December 2. Among other decisions, the participants adopted a statement by the heads of state on forming a just and sustainable international order. Among other initiatives, this document proposes setting up a meeting of authorised representatives of the CSTO, the CIS, the SCO, the OSCE, NATO and the EU and seeing if these organisations can sit down and form a common agenda, jointly identify problems and, ideally, outline ways to overcome them. This is not something radically revolutionary. In 1999, the Platform for Co-operative Security was adopted at the OSCE Summit in Istanbul. It proclaimed the unification of the efforts of the OSCE and other sub-regional organisations in the Euro-Atlantic space. Some time ago, before the pandemic, we told our Western partners that it would be nice to take advantage of that consensus and try to build bridges between these organisations, instead of watching them build up confrontational potential, but our Western colleagues chose to step aside. Cooperative security and engagement of the bodies created in the post-Soviet space were important in the 1990s (in this case, in 1999), when the West still hoped that we would follow the path charted by the winners of the Cold War. Now, we have officially submitted a proposal on behalf of the CSTO heads of state. Let’s see how the West will respond to it.
Our goal is clear. We seek stability, fair opportunities for all states, including, of course, Russia. Gunboat diplomacy or democratic or any other sort of messianism is hardly an option if we want to accomplish this. I mentioned the rules which the West wants to base the international order on. There’s an “effective multilateralism” initiative which is openly opposed to multilateralism within the UN. There’s a tendency to interpret it as the need to return to Euro-Atlantic solidarity without exemptions. We are seeing this. I believe that more positive and sustainable results can be achieved through joining efforts based on the observance of the norms and principles of the UN Charter. We are upholding this consistently. President Putin’s initiative to hold a summit of the UN Security Council’s permanent members is part of our policy. It is imperative that they realise their responsibility under the UN Charter and act upon this responsibility. We must do our best to defuse this tension acting together. Heads of all UN Security Council permanent member states gave their consent. The coronavirus pandemic thwarted our efforts to agree on specific dates. However, we are working on it and agreeing on the concept and the potential outcomes of this summit.
We realise that the UN is not a static structure. It needs reform, including the reform of the UN Security Council. Our position is absolutely clear and consistent. It is necessary to increase the representation of the developing countries of Asia, Latin America and Africa if we want to make this body more representative. Only this approach will add value to reforming the UN Security Council. Everything else is up for discussion, but it is unlikely that an increase in Western representation on the Security Council will add diversity of opinions to this central body, which is in charge of peace and security on the planet. In any case, it is necessary to strive for the broadest possible agreement between the member states, so everything will depend on compromises. We are ready to discuss these compromises based on a balance of interests. In principle, this is the key to what needs to be accomplished if we want to ensure stability and harmony in the world inasmuch as this harmony is possible.
We believe that respect for the cultural and civilisational specifics of the modern world and refusal to impose one development model and values on everyone is an absolutely necessary step if we want to calm down the current situation. We see that this approach is shared by the overwhelming majority of participants in international communication. We disagree with the Western attempts to portray Russia as a country in isolation or a geopolitical loner. The viewpoint of our Western colleagues whereby everyone who disagrees with them is a lonely state probably has the right to exist.
However, we can see how the positions that we share are promoted within BRICS, the SCO, the CSTO and the CIS. The EAEU is actively working to align its plans with China’s Belt and Road Initiative. There is the G20. It has been in existence for quite a while, but was brought to the highest level and its meetings were made regular after the 2008 crisis. At first they met twice a year, then once a year. The G20 is the recognition of the fact that the G7 (and even the G8 in its old format) is not capable of resolving all international problems. The G20 includes the G7, the BRICS countries and a number of other like-minded states. The recognition that the G20 is necessary in order to develop generally acceptable approaches based on the balance of interests is a highly symptomatic trend.
Reviewing peace problems should not be driven by ideology, but rather be approached on the basis of equality. President Putin’s initiative to form a Greater Eurasian Partnership is going in the same vein. The partnership is supposed to unite continental efforts with the participation of the EAEU, the SCO and ASEAN and be open to all countries of our vast continent, including the EU states in the long run. This is a long process, but it is crucial to set this goal.
Russia’s proposals regarding strategic stability, arms control and European security are indicative of our constant readiness to achieve mutual understanding. You are aware of our position on renewing the Strategic Offensive Arms Treaty (START), a moratorium on deploying ground-based intermediate and shorter-range missiles and de-escalating tensions along the Russia-NATO contact line. We came up with a proposal to agree on an arrangement that the exercises on both sides are conducted at a distance from the contact line, and also agree on the minimum distances that may not be violated by military aircraft and warships of Russia or NATO.
Conceptually, we came up with a proposal a long time ago (and failed to see any reciprocity on the part of the United States) to confirm, in the statement made by our countries, and perhaps in the Russia-NATO format, the unacceptability of nuclear war. Many of you have probably seen the recent remarks by US Special Presidential Envoy for Arms Control Marshall Billingslea, where he almost ridiculed our proposal and called on any future US Administration to never agree with the statement on the unacceptability of nuclear war.
We believe that implementing these initiatives or, at least, a professional straight-to-the-point and substantive discussion of the subject, possibly along with other steps, would help improve the overall atmosphere in Russia-West relations. Dialogue itself on these matters would improve it. But so far these ideas have been hanging in the air.
Leaving behind almost everything that has been achieved so far, including our proposals, Mr Billingslea puts forward confrontational ideas, including sanctions against all buyers of military products from Russia and China. This is a fairly telling philosophy, which, unfortunately, has not met any serious opposition in Washington so far.
If we take a close look at what we have heard from the North Atlantic camp so far, we can come to a conclusion that it has consciously opted for not just a policy of containment, but confrontation. Perhaps this approach underlies its unwillingness to admit that the world must change. We are now witnessing two opposite trends in Europe. French President Emmanuel Macron is strongly promoting the EU’s strategic autonomy. The trend embodied by Germany is based on the assumption that defending Europe without the United States is impossible. We have already asked about whom they want to defend it from, but haven’t received a clear answer yet. Given this, multipolarity, which Yevgeny Primakov foresaw many years ago, has shown its objective nature. In an effort to stop it, they are doing whatever it takes in order to minimise the number of potential poles that have the strength and courage to uphold national interests.
One of Washington’s primary goals is to make the EU lose its strategic independence and return to the fold of Euro-Atlantic unity, where everyone is aware of who pays the piper and calls the tune.
Despite the above, we are open to an equal dialogue. Most importantly, our counterparts must be willing to engage. We will keep the communication channels open until they are. Our proposals and initiatives remain on the negotiating table. They have been reiterated many times. It is enough for our partners to know that they remain valid. However, in order to move ahead, we need our Western colleagues to respond to them.
Keeping open the channels for a dialogue on all matters, we will continue to work on the newly available opportunities in the economy, culture, science and people-to-people contacts. We do not fence ourselves off from this. Those who want to impose their agenda on us and ignore our status of a subject in international affairs must understand that we are not going to either make excuses or seek approval for our actions. Threats, sanctions or attempts to come up with other punishments are absolutely pointless and counterproductive. It is strange that the West has not realised this so far.
We do not need interaction with the West any more than the West needs Russia and what it has to offer. If our Western colleagues prefer to stick to certain rules and concepts that they themselves invented when they talk with each other, this is up to them. They can build a dialogue with other participants in international life, including Russia, solely on the basis of a generally accepted code of conduct. You can call it the rules enshrined in the UN Charter, namely, respect for the sovereign equality of states, the principle of non-interference in each other’s internal affairs and the peaceful settlement of disputes.
We are pursuing our own foreign policy, which has taken shape over the past two decades. It is aimed at ensuring the country’s security and creating the most favourable external environment for achieving our internal development goals. We are aware that the goal of the West is to prevent us from creating this particular external environment that is beneficial for our internal development. Everything that is being done to contain Russia is clearly done to this end. Attempts to destroy external opportunities that can be used to promote Russia’s growth continue unabated, but, in any case, there’s more to the world than the West. In the 1990s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, we wanted to become part of something, but we now realise that there isn’t much we can become part of. At least, the West is not building anything of its own. Indeed, President Macron has come up with a proposal to conduct an analytical and philosophical dialogue about whether modern capitalism can meet the needs of the people and resolve related problems.
If we take Western development models, we have no place to fit in. The coronavirus, as if everything else wasn’t enough, showed it very convincingly. We need to build something ourselves. This is a fairly ambitious and complex goal, but it calls for immediate action.
Photo : File Photo
Everyting this man says screams ‘sanity, sanity’ and all the failed state of ‘our partners’ scream is let us find an opponent for our war machine. It is as simple as that and everyone with an IQ above the temperature of warm beer knows it.
Lavrov is the master of understatement that appeals to whosoever is slightly more conigsant that a basic primate. The sum total of US superority is currently epitomised by the bumbling incoherence of their leaders. Such is Lavrovs sad task. That the US has reached its societal nadir is obvious to all. Its system is broken, its common people are in despair, its liberalism in seeking a profit from every social program is in tatters.
The nuclear option is on the table yet when Moscow and Beijing disappears at the same time as New York, the Pentagon, Hollywood and Washington the remainder of the US population might take a deep breath and reconsider their options. Please bear in mind Russia and China have been invaded and destroyed many times in history while the US has never experienced such devestation within its own shores.
“Everyting this man says screams”
“Such is Lavrovs sad task.”
Avoiding projection is always wise.
” Please bear in mind Russia and China have been invaded and destroyed many times in history”
Avoiding “absolutes” is always wise.
Avoiding resort to “belief” is always wise.
Avoiding “certainties” is always wise.
Conflating a moment in a lateral process with a lateral process is always unwise.
Using the “absolutes”, “beliefs”, “certainties” and “projections” of opponents is often wise, as is not using the “absolutes”, “beliefs”, “certainties” and “projections” of opponents, thereby minimising “sadness”. .
Dear OlyaPola,
A contributer I really admire for comments that are always pertinent. I do sometimes get a little forthright in my assumptions. Your sentence “Conflating a moment in a lateral process with a lateral process is always unwise” is much to the point where I may have stepped over the starting line a little prematurely. Perhaps I was a little annoyed that the reasonableness of Lavrov is so alien to the ‘west’ that my language became a ltttle too strident. Something that Lavrov does not do. As a diplomat I therefor am found wanting. I expect that is why I am a painter. For your consideration here is my painting of eight famous 18th century artists considering the modernist Picasso. It is somewhat how I consider Lavrov may be considering the ‘west’.
http://ablindeye.com/advanced/paintings/tptchfull.jpg
regards, John
“sometimes get a little forthright in my assumptions.”
Assumptions and emotions are “lands of opportunity”; and considerations are always to be encouraged.
As you are aware cultures vary and perhaps a consideration you may find useful is to assign culturally appropriate designations such as Mr. Lavrov, since communication is aided by register.
“As a diplomat I therefor am found wanting. I expect that is why I am a painter.”
As a painter you will likely also understand that register includes images not restricted to words, characters, or their interpretations, and hence register also facilitates “lands of opportunity”, given consideration and “reasonableness … is in some assay alien to the “west”” – a relative position in relation to what/where being not defined – (possibly by default in an almost spherical environment to infer the “west” goes on for ever ?), and possibly meriting consideration in analyses of “Why “we” lost China in 1949″?, or since “destroyed many times in history” may better change its designation to “Land of the phoenix” to aid others not getting lost ?
Self-knowledge can be an advantage as you illustrate.
Enjoy your journey.
My journey usually involves a large doses of satire. Many thanks.
For those who use the past and need a glimpse into the future I have a little treat in store. Perhaps OlyaPola could helpfully critique the short video except it uses minimum text only and Strauss as background.
Will Kamala become the next Madam President of the United States? If so who are her supporters. Please excuse the nudity as I am appealing to a wider audience that may appreciate the true nature of humans without surveying them with jeans that have tears at the knees.
https://youtu.be/avgkuTTwfLg
“Perhaps OlyaPola could helpfully critique..”
“Will Kamala become the next Madam President of the United States?”
Thank you for your illustration of immersion in social relations where one does the work whilst another seeks to “reap” the benefit by attempting to wear the clothes of “co-operation”.
Such is not “appropriate” for this portal or elsewhere, although popular.
Enjoy your journey.
My partner occasionally chides me on the use of absolutes in language when talking about people. It’s easy to get carried away by making a statement like ‘always’ instead of ‘often’.
” It’s easy to get carried away”
Perhaps you have noticed Mr. Trump’s resort to absolutes – fantastic, wonderful – partly in emulation of Mr. Roy Cohn.
Such practices form part of “socialisation” – a less obtrusive word than manipulation – to facilitate coercive social relations with varying assay/spectra in different coercive social relations – the self-designated “United States of America” resorting to high assays/wide spectra in that regard – partly because some require added dosage in laterally changing contexts.
This also extends into and facilitates “binary thinking” – although to posit such might seem paradoxical given the prevalence of “binary thinking” – an example of trying to transcend social relations by emulating them.
These are designed in part to “carry away” and maintain their population (possessive case) whom the designers/”elites” understand are food sources and human shields, in wonderlands – in the vernacular a tactic of attempts to “divide and rule”.
Your resort to absolutes is in part emulating the contempt the “elites” have for you and others by attempting to exercise contempt on others through denying their potential for variance – such is also the purpose of “statistical analysis” and much “intellectual endeavour” in some social relations where “output” is a function in significant assay of framing.
In emulation of the hopes of Mr. Rove, some may react to the above as an opportunity to assign “blame” to Mr. Bernays by not understanding that Mr. Bernays was a member of the rubbing sticks school of thermodynamics and/or attempting to “blame” Mr. Gottlieb ; in some assay of attempt to deny their own complicity in the interactive process by resort to “absolutes” which can never exist in lateral processes, thereby obfuscating being “carried away” to a place you/they presently inhabit – (virtual journeying) sometimes known as “reform”, in the hope that such state of affairs can continue until being “carried away” in a box, to be replaced by other food sources and human shields proceeding through the production line facilitated by belief in and practices of reliance on absolutes.
You are not alone in being in some assay the output of this production line.
Larchmonter445 on December 14, 2020 · at 1:57 pm EST/EDT
Decoupling is on.
Determining “beginnings” of lateral processes is often precluded – the assay of preclusion increasing if immersed in methodologies predicated upon absolutes, including “binary thinking”, and conflation of existence of phenomena and perception of phenomena.
When resort to absolutes are simultaneously practiced, it facilitates a greater level of “deception/”misrepresentation”/opacity of beginnings – for example causal factors and moments/outcomes in/of the lateral process of transcendence of “The Soviet Union” by the Russian Federation during the period from 1969 until today, although Mr. Suslov would likely suggest the varying assays between 1922 until today.
Apparently your partner is more astute in this matter than you are, but neither omniscient nor “perfect”, illustrating the advantage of co-operation which happens whether you perceive it or not – Mr. Schroedinger refers,since unlike Mr. Gogol he did not contend that “animals” wrote letters, although Mr. Gogol did issue warnings against holding on tightly to flying troikas.
Enjoy your journey.
” the production line facilitated ”
Mr. Chomsky’s observations on manufacturing consent like all phenomena are in lateral process, and Mr. Chomsky does not purport to be omniscient in any manufacturing processes and designs.
Partly as a consequence of some social relations’ being predicated upon specific “divisions of labour”,some social relations tend to obfuscate that manufacturing processes are functions of design, and simultaneously that design is a function of manufacturing process, the interactions of which particularly in increased volumes, undermine both designs and manufacturing processes. – a limited illustration of this is the “Boeing” 737 max which is represented as being the product of sole agency of Boeing.
Consequently the notions of “intellectual property” and sole agency are attempts to “stabilise” decay facilitated by lateral process within an imagined linear process – akin to protecting some bridges from the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune by continual application of paint.
Lavrov’s point of the urgent need for UN reform strikes a note with me.
the increase to quality and expansion of the inclusion of all so-called developing nations seems crucial
in mitigating us power relative to such as sanctions against nations in the world who look after themselves independently, opposed to what the USA claims otherwise be whatever opposed to their interests
also such UN reform would continue the reduction of american power in the world to the equality of status it deserves which equality that is the interest of all of all the rest of the world
i will play devil’s advocate here and advise the US and other nations not
to fall for this.
The Russians are only opening a new front – struggle for a seat at the UN big boys table.
But it will all devolve into greedy countries wrestling for political power,
but the UN is a dud now and will be a dud in the new multipolar world too,
so this is all to waste time and energy on lesser goals.
Erdogan just showed everybody, that only military strength matters,
so i advise countries that want to matter in the world, to pursue exactly that.
“The Russians are only opening a new front – struggle for a seat at the UN big boys table”
I dont get your comment. Russia is a founding member of the Security Council with a veto and a strong player in the G7 Economic Forum. Russia does not need to open a ‘new front’ in the form of a struggle for a seat. It was precisely the G8 formula which included Russia, which made Russia realize that it was pointless to be part of a “big boys club” and rather to work with a more multilateral G20 venue….and it is THIS experience which shows to Russia that the Security Council big 5 format is also out of date and needs participation of more of the big players of today.
I neither get you comment that Erdogans methodology of playing geopolitics is a winner. He has only created upset around the whole periphery of Turkey. His policies are also creating deep fractures within Turkish society…
Whilst what Lavrov is offering, is a method of creating multilateral dialogue which reduces tensions and aims to look for common ground. Lavrov is far more open now than ever before, in criticising the US methodology of international relations, so this shows that Russia rejects the US method more strongly now, and that Russia is moving towards cooperating with more like-minded players across Asia….not as a dominant player but as a participant willing to seek dialogue and negotiate compromise when it suits their national interests.
So for you to conclude that “only military strength matters” is precisely the issue which creates tensions in the first place.
I am guessing here but you may be referring to NK as proof of Erdogans military posturing. My understanding of NK is that the Armenians overstepped their role there. They are on Azerbaijan sovereign territory and should always respect that they are invaders / guests there. If Turkey had not interfered and encouraged a military solution as a pushback, a diplomatic solution was still always available. I am not convinced that the number of deaths in this conflict have been worth the territorial gains, even as i agree that in such “small state” acts the Azerbaijanis did indeed achieve their main goal rather more quickly than through diplomatic process. I would however hesitate before suggesting that big players such as Russia should confront the USA directly when it is very likely to turn nuclear…Russias defensive posture is ethical: Have the weapons ready if attacked but aim to defuse tensions…whilst the US offensive messianic posture is unethical as it only leads to confrontation…and the latters self-immolation.
” which made Russia realize”
Can it really be so?
or would you prefer
“You may very well think that, but I couldn’t possibly comment?
Lavrov on interview with Iranian TV IRIB on saturday after this one here cleared some air regarding Nagorno-Karabakh too.
He said the settlement of the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh within the Azerbaijan-Armenia-Russia format was not reached with disregard for Iran’s interests. The parties to the conflict themselves expressed their interest in Russia’s mediation. “There is no ‘back’ thought in that, Now it is necessary to think not about who and when has had or has not had the time to help the settlement. Let me stress again, it was the choice of Azerbaijan and Armenia to decide on the format. The structure of the participants in the [trilateral] statement [on the complete ceasefire in Nagorno-Karabakh] was prompted precisely by that and not by anything else. There were no and could have been no attempts to do this at the expense of Iran or Turkey,”
Moreover, the trilateral statement by the leaders of Azerbaijan, Armenia and Russia on Nagorno-Karabakh is consonant with the Iranian initiative announced amidst the conflict and offering a regional approach, Russia’s foreign minister said.
In Lavrov’s opinion, a similar vision geared towards regional cooperation was outlined by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan who mentioned the possibility of developing cooperation between the three Trans-Caucasian states (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia) and their three neighbors: Iran, Turkey and Russia.
“This is an observation that lies on the surface. We all live nearby and now that the problems between the Trans-Caucasian countries are being overcome, we, as neighbors, need to help this process,” Russia’s top diplomat pointed out.
Att the same time I think yesterday Russian President Putin says the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) has approved to launch talks with Iran on a free trade agreement.
The issue of Erdogan’s speech has been in both Iran and Turkey’s parlament, condemning each other. In Iran they say Erdogan should be thankful we save him from coupe and In Turkey they say Iran should be thankful for trade they have done with Iran during sanctions.
My undrestanding based on interview is that peace on NK is similar to Iran’s initiativ, and Turkey’s initiativ is studied for continueing cooperation in region in future or am on wrong track?
“Azerbaijan, Armenia and Russia on Nagorno-Karabakh is consonant with…”
Mr. Lavrov, like any wise host, considers what is for afters.
By watching a bit more TV than usual, just noticed that private channels are broadcasting a film where Russians get in a bad light almost daily, since a week or so…..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuEPq0wxVME
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liCPH1Z3mjY
“By watching a bit more TV than usual, just noticed that private channels are broadcasting a film where Russians get in a bad light almost daily, since a week or so…..”
Not a new phenomenon but an increasing one, always to be welcomed.
“Russians get in a bad light almost daily”
Polish people used to have that problem and sought to explain it as a consequence of burning of “brown coal”.
Then in the newspapers they were reminded that throughout Silesia including Katowice mining was a source of many jobs and places including Nova Huta, Sosnowiec, and used to be known as Monowitz, as well as extensive respiratory diseases.
It was a case of accepting-goodness-and-badness.
But, the Poles are not the only ones to be fooled…sometimes, in certain associations, you are “convinced” ( i.e presured to be accepted into such associations…) to destroy your “source of many jobs” on polution grounds, which is indeed the source of respiratory diseases, to then discover, in some years, that those who presured you to do that, not only did not destoy their “sources of jobs”, but built even more…, while you put all your eggs in the promising baskets of tourism and real state for their elders to retire and that way you got desindustralized and now ruined through the “covid-19 pandemic”….Nos manejan mal…
https://twitter.com/errordesconocid/status/1339188218403688450
https://twitter.com/andrei_kononov/status/1337547431060398082
“But, the Poles are not the only ones to be fooled”
Like data-streams all fools are useful, and given words are catalysts of connotations, register and its interpretation facilitates opportunities of interaction with diverse audiences simultaneously.
The social relations in facilitation are not restricted to geo-political constructs although attempts are made to represent them as being so..
The “Polish” example was chosen for many reasons including the facilitation of “ethnic nationalism” as a tool of “divide and rule”, and its use by others in perceived furtherance of their purposes, including but not restricted to export of sources of “pollution” , with the connotations to some of the period from 1793 via the treaty of Versailles of 1919 (including the treatment/protection of minorities) until today, without restriction to geo-political constructs.
To some the register is deemed to be “gibberish” – a practice akin to the Roman Empire deeming those who did not imbue “Roman culture” including the “Latin language” to be barbarians, in attempts to deny them agency through attempts to present them as fools.
“sometimes, in certain associations, you are “convinced” ( i.e presured to be accepted into such associations…)”
This is an example of a successful attempt at denial of agency through the complicity of the potential agent who seeks acceptance in hope of “communing” with others – its “always” the others faultness facilitating the denial – Mr. Putin once making oblique reference to this popular practice in a remark that “They are blaming it on the Jews again”
Your contribution also illustrates other aspects/consequences/outcomes/prrocesses alluded to in
“OlyaPola on December 16, 2020 · at 1:50 pm EST/EDT
“China, Russia and Iran are the top three existential “threats” to the U.S., according to the National Security Strategy.”
An illustration of misrepresenting hope with “strategy” by conflating hope with “strategy”, since from “We the people hold these truths to be self-evident”, “The United States of America” has been/ is an existential threat to “The United States of America”, given “The United States of America” are social relations not restricted to a political geographical construct north of Mexico, south of Canada plus Alaska and Hawaii.
Since the “west” is posed in an almost spherical context, getting lost through never arriving is continually achieved, with or without the accompanyment of – Beyond the blue horizon.
Thank you for your co-operation.
Enjoy your journey.
Mr.Lavrov says that Russia is following their own foreign policy as they have no place to fit into western development models. That confirms the movement away from the EU and from the west as a whole. Pres.Putin has said this and I don’t know exactly which speech this comes from:
Russian Embassy, UK
@RussianEmbassy
Russia government account
President Putin: We need to combine the activities of the Eurasian Union with the implementation of the Chinese initiative One Belt One Road to create a large Eurasian partnership in the field of security, economic and humanitarian interaction throughout common Eurasian continent
https://twitter.com/RussianEmbassy/status/1338424635843633153
They’ve all but given up on the west.
Lavrov’s approach to politics is highly spiritual. His foundation for human relationships including relations to other countries is Respect. Not wanting to dominate, not wanting to cut down the “other” but simply love yourself as you love your neighbor. Great human being!
Thanks. Mr Lavrov is an amazing politician of international repute. He deserves Nobel Peace prize for trying to broker peace deals in so many countries that were destabilized by the Cabal of international bankers.
Well, “we need to build something ourselves:” is the key phrase for the next phase. I look forward to the next
reports on this–bullet trains to Vladivostok? Regional airports with road building projects to link the countryside?
Joint space projects ( but keep control tight) with India? Iran?
I am very happy to see Minister Lavrov slowly manoeuvring the giant ship of Russian state away from the ruinous pro-western course and towards independence and co-operation with (numerous) friendly nations. The genocidal West has lost its attraction and will gradually fade into insignificance as the symbiotic Russo-Chinese vision of the future kicks in. I wish everybody involved lots of luck and success. A couple of suggestions:
– The German Euro Reich remains the only enemy standing – handle with care, neutralise as soon as possible.
– Shed the legacy of perceived inferiority and awe for the West – ridicule them, poke fun at them until they are shown for what they are – a cantankerous old codger long on words and short on muscle.
Decoupling is on. We thought it was China and the US, focused mainly on Trade via tariffs and sanctions.
Now we have the formal statements from FM Lavrov:
“We do not need interaction with the West any more than the West needs Russia and what it has to offer. If our Western colleagues prefer to stick to certain rules and concepts that they themselves invented when they talk with each other, this is up to them.”
“If we take Western development models, we have no place to fit in. The coronavirus, as if everything else wasn’t enough, showed it very convincingly. We need to build something ourselves. This is a fairly ambitious and complex goal, but it calls for immediate action.”
“We are pursuing our own foreign policy, which has taken shape over the past two decades. It is aimed at ensuring the country’s security and creating the most favourable external environment for achieving our internal development goals. We are aware that the goal of the West is to prevent us from creating this particular external environment that is beneficial for our internal development. Everything that is being done to contain Russia is clearly done to this end. Attempts to destroy external opportunities that can be used to promote Russia’s growth continue unabated, but, in any case, there’s more to the world than the West.”
How many times and ways can you say goodbye?
Lavrov made it very clear: До свидания.
Yeah, I got the same vibe from Lavrov’s “Last call” speech.
In a way, it reminded me on Douglas Adams “Hitchhiker’s guide through the galaxy” when Dolphins tried to warn humans that the planet Earth is about to be destroyed. Message wasn’t understood at all and Dolphins left the Earth with last message: “Farewell and thanks for all the fish!”
“До свидания” doesn’t actually mean “goodbye”. It literally means “until (I) see (you) again”.
Im going to copy OlyaPolas analytical skills to suggest that Larchmonter got it right:
– an “Auf Wiedersehen” as a goodbye, is better for humanity than a “Verecke Dich.”
Remember too: the Art of Diplomacy is to send your opponent to Hell but do it in such a way that he enjoys the journey….
When an opponent stumbles i always wish him a nice trip.
“When an opponent stumbles i always wish him a nice trip.”
Schadenfreude is a type of emotionalism best left to opponents.
It it also an indicator of the half-lives of, and continued integration within, the opponents’ social relations.
The question posed by some in 1969 after Tet was “How to drown a drowning man with the minimum of blowback?”, whilst the question posed simultaneously by the lover of medals and his associates was “How to emulate the opponent to facilitate detente on bases of spheres of influence.”
The responses to the latter question facilitated in varying assay fiat currency, the petro-dollar, delay of networks akin to the present OBOR with other associates, neo-liberalism and concommitant “colour revolutions” – Chile, Argentina etc., iteration in modified form of the social relations self-designated as “The United States of America” with linear extension of their half-lives, and the ongoing process of the transcendence of “The Soviet Union” by the Russian Federation.
When an opponent stumbles, facilitate additional space/time within which further stumbling with ensuing “collateral damage” can occur, including not enjoying the journey, and subsequently resorting to belief and emotionalism in attempts at “rectification”.
Haha …”its a typical British Pun…Trip as in “fall” indeed means schadenfreude …it can also mean “travel” which is a very nice way of speaking…
“it can also mean “travel”
Words are catalysts of connotations which some aid in lateral process by interactions of register and interpretations, and attempts to deny Mr. Schroedinger’s “observations”, thereby “addressing” various audiences simultaneously.
Although of the rubbing sticks school of thermo-dynamics, even Mr. Rove understood/practiced this in some assay.
Enjoy your journey.
When the empires fall, sometimes a new one is about to rise. It has been – and it still is – an ongoing and invisible coup d’état in US. For everybody else it’s a “coup du monde”, if one may say so.
It seems everything is in place, decision has been taken and there will be no turning back. Concern for health can now, yet again, be the reason for tiers, curfews and lockdowns. Nothing less than the purity of the human race is at stake. Once again.
Next the beaches will be forbidden for the sake of the climate change, as they were this spring and summer. Fresh air of the mountains, forests and seas shall only be available for the highest bidders. Wildlife concentrated into camps for the occasional safaries.
For awhile, China and Russia will be given free pass. Everything else will be subjected as never before, the sanctity of the the human body, the final frontier of human autonomy will be trespassed both ba the state and corporations.
Here, in his blog The Saker has stated and shown the fall of AngloZionist Empire – yet something is slowly rising and beginning to show its face.
How should we call it, will there be a way to … like it? To undo it?
So what will Russia do next year when USA and Europe and Japan and Australia make a world type meeting where they denounce evil Russia and then announce they are cutting Russia from the SWIFT?
They(USA/EU) might even announce more serious sanctions such as closing EU ports to Russian ships and closing train depots to Russian trains.
Also, the most expected thing is for them to create some type of military incident around Crimea and/or Asov sea where they will try to go inside Asov sea and when Russia stops them, they will imeddiatly heap severe sanctions on Russia. With biden as a president, expect the attacks on Russia to increase 10 fold. The recent lie about Russia hacking the US Treasury is just the beginning and will be used by Biden, when he make a speech how “Russia has to be confronted” and “dealt with”.
What will Russia do then?
Issue more speeches as usual? Cutting Russia from the SWIFT will devastate Russia’s already fragile economy; they wont be able to get any money for the gas they are selling Europe. It will most certainly plunge Russia into severe recession. How will Putin cope?
Come on, deal with realities here. Speeches are fine and dandy, but they don’t accomplish much. Deeds and actions do.
my predictions for 2021: Russia will be cut off from the SWIFT. USA will create a military incident in Azov sea
and use that to put severe economic sanctions on Russia. Even the Iranians have have seen all this before are warning Russia that Russia WILL be cut off from the SWIFT. All Russia is doing is absolutely nothing, thinking Euopr will not agree to cut Russia fro the SWIFT since Europe buys Russian gas.
I am absolutely NOT trolling, I really want people to answer me. Gimme answers. Waiting for them.
If Russia is not capable of crippling its enemies to the extent that they leave it alone, it is probably not capable of surviving. Thus, Russia must ensure that for every blow it receives from the enemies of humanity, it retaliates in kind and to the extent that the economy of the attacker is damaged beyond immediate repair. This can involve blockades, obstructions, takeovers, banning transit over Russia and other countries, threat of immediate armed response and many others. The question is not whether Russia can do it but whether the current “peace-loving” political set has the will to go against its partnyors.
In addition, Russia must make it clear to its enemies that any further provocations will result in military responses. There.
Russia already has SPFS, a proprietary Swift-type system. They are in the process of integrating with Chinese CIPS (Cross-border Interbank Payment System and currently 1/5 of their transactions uses SPFS.
I suspect that is why Russia has not been cut off from SWIFT, because the West knows they a back-up plan.
Eventually Iran and the Eurasian Union will join this system.
You have no knowledge of naval operations in the Azov sea. To pass a ship under the bridge is not like open sea navigation. Any incident will be fatal to the instigators. The Ukies tried this schtick and were thoroughly ass-kicked. Take a look at the video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wg1tk608Gnk
SWIFT is already replaced. Research SPFS.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPFS
Then research CIPS, the Chinese alternative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-Border_Inter-Bank_Payments_System
Russia, China and Iran have alternative, and it has been in existence for several years. Thus SWIFT is no longer the choke point for financial transactions.
When facts elude a commenter, I point to the most general of sources. Dig deeper into the reality that Putin is 1000x smarter than the West, especially the US officials who are severely handicapped by ideology and ignorance.
So, in the holiday spirit, I present Facts. The gift that never stops giving.
С Рождеством, and Happy New Year.
It would be far more of a problem for Europe if Russia shut off their gas supply, then they would have to pay at least double for US gas.
Doubling the price for Europe using US gas would make the situation worse for Russia, at least they seem to honour their contracts, especially with Europe, they do share the same land mass and hold the odd World War there every now and again……………..ecconomicly all Russia has to do is open the taps, flood the market (they have the capacity) and drive the price of oil/gas down, been there, done that. Thank you Mr Putin. Russia still makes money at a fair price and the over leveraged bandits are out of business.
Cheers, M
Re “a CSTO summit and a Collective Security Council meeting took place on December 2. Among other decisions, the participants adopted a statement by the heads of state on forming a just and sustainable international order. Among other initiatives, this document proposes setting up a meeting of authorised representatives of the CSTO, the CIS, the SCO, the OSCE, NATO and the EU and seeing if these organisations can sit down and form a common agenda, jointly identify problems and, ideally, outline ways to overcome them. This is not something radically revolutionary. In 1999, the Platform for Co-operative Security was adopted at the OSCE Summit in Istanbul. It proclaimed the unification of the efforts of the OSCE and other sub-regional organisations in the Euro-Atlantic space. …..”
I don’t know why there is such faith in such multitides of organisations…always good intentions but unless there is a pressurising and demanding situation requiring actions…this could go on for decades. Myself am sceptical about the OSCE over Donbass and Armenia situations. The former one eg Minsk seems to be deteriorating with already proven abandonment by France and Germany and Ukaine undermining it….perhaps getting more support from its buddy Turkey
I do hope there is continued progress more speedy re the Astana Process re Syria too….as well as resolving re the miltants….Kurds seeking protection but not committing to Syrian inclusivity… Turkish support for various protected groups eg NSA etc…Golan heights. One wonders whether Iran is tempted to participate much more and make “bold statements” to Israel and Turkey….and follow them up?
A reminder
https://southfront.org/ukraine-to-produce-warships-and-uavs-under-turkish-supervision/
Congratulations are in order to the Russian engineers and machinists – they have created a fully Russian civilian aircraft powered by Russian engines. This detail means more than all the poisonous slander coming from the West. Well done!
“Resort to useful foolery is not only more productive than “decapitation” but also is deemed to illustrate better manners, although not all agree when food sources and human shields become less productive, as “co-operators” such as Mr. Guaido and Mr. Navalny may experience, since wonderland queens have demonstrated proclivities in respect of “Off with their heads”.
https://www.rt.com/russia/509944-putin-claims-opposition-figure-cia/
Whatever happened to Mr. Mitrone and Mr. Bandera?
890 / 5000
Resultados de tradução
For sure. The final paragraph is crystal clear. Building something by itself means, I understand, two things: a) the urgent narrowing of the strategic alliance with China in all fields (the Russian economy itself depends on inputs produced in China for its self-sufficiency); b) Russia needs to organize a union of states with the republics of the former USSR, in order to build again a larger internal market for its products, and to develop a policy seeking self-sufficiency and supremacy in the scientific and technological field for its economic and autonomous and independent social system of western capitalism.
On the other hand, it is necessary to start to act with more energy and resolve in the political-military field against the NATO offensive in the regions close to the Russian border and in the former Soviet republics and make it clear that there will be no tolerance for provocation.