Ed Note: This is an important document and answers most of the confused questions that I see come up in the comments still. A careful read and even study is recommended – Amarynth
Dear friends,
I would like to greet you and express my gratitude for your continuing to invite me even though I chair the Supervisory Board. It is important for me to see you, listen to your questions and understand what worries you in this uneasy period.
This meeting takes place against the backdrop of events now occurring in Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly spoken at length about the origins of this crisis. I would like to briefly reiterate: this is not about Ukraine. This is the end-result of a policy that the West has carried out since the early 1990s. It was clear back then that Russia was not going to be docile and that it was going to have a say in international matters. This is not because Russia wants to be a bully. Russia has its history, its tradition, its own understanding of the history of its peoples and a vision on how it can ensure its security and interests in this world.
This became clear in the late 1990s-early 2000s. The West has repeatedly attempted to stall the independent and autonomous development of Russia. This is rather unfortunate. From the start of President Vladimir Putin’s “rule” in the early 2000s, we were open to the idea of working with the West in various ways, even in a form similar to that of an alliance, as the President has said. Sadly, we were unable to do this. We repeatedly suggested that we should conclude treaties and base our security on equal rights, rejecting the idea of strengthening one’s security at the expense of another.
Neither were we able to promote economic cooperation. The European Union, which back then showed some signs of independent decision-making, has now devolved toward being completely dependent on the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the US. The story of Nord Stream 2 was the highlight of this change. Even Germany, which defended its interests in the project to the very end, was persuaded that the “project was not in its interests.” Germany and its people were told what their interests were by people on the other side of the Atlantic. Many other international areas were blocked despite our commitment to close cooperation on an equal basis.
The West did not want equal cooperation and, as we can now see, has kept true to the “will and testament” of Zbigniew Brzezinski who said that Ukraine should not be allowed to side with Russia. With Ukraine, Russia is a great power, while without Ukraine, it is a regional player. We understand that this is a mere exaggeration. But it fits nevertheless the philosophy and the mentality of western leaders. No effort was spared to turn Ukraine into an instrument to contain Russia. Into an “anti-Russia,” as President Putin said. This is neither a metaphor nor an exaggeration.
What has been happening all these years is the significant accumulation of physical, military, ideological, and philosophical threats to the security of the Russian Federation. The militarisation of Ukraine, which was injected with weapons (including assault weapons) worth many billions of dollars over these years, was accompanied by the Nazification of all spheres of society and the eradication of the Russian language. You know the laws that were passed there concerning education, the state language, and the indigenous peoples of Ukraine that made no mention of Russians. It was not only the language that was being edited out, but simply everything Russian. They banned the mass media, which broadcast from Russia and transmitted in Ukraine. Three Ukrainian television channels that were considered disloyal to the current government were shut down. Neo-Nazi battalions with insignia of Hitler’s SS divisions held marches; torchlight processions took place with a presidential regiment assigned as an official escort; fighters were trained in camps by instructor programmes from the US and other Western countries. All this was done with the connivance of civilised Europe and with the support of the Ukrainian government.
To my great regret and shame, President Zelensky has been asking how he could be a Nazi if he has Jewish roots. He said this on the exact day when Ukraine demonstratively withdrew from the Agreement on Perpetuating the Memory of the Courage and Heroism of the Peoples of the CIS Countries During the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945. When he personally patronises the tendencies I have mentioned, it is difficult to take the policy of the Ukrainian leadership seriously. Just as in the early stages of his presidency, and even earlier, when he was a stage and soap opera star, he assured me in every possible way that it was unthinkable for him that the Russian language could be infringed upon. So here we are: life demonstrates what a person’s word is worth.
These accumulated tendencies took on a new form following the coup d’etat in February 2014. Despite the guarantees of the EU countries — France, Germany and Poland — that were part of the agreement between the opposition and the then-President of Ukraine, they tore up that agreement the morning after, disregarded the guarantees, humiliated the nations above, and the EU as a whole, before announcing their new regime. In our conversations with our western partners, including the Germans and the French, we have been asking them how they could allow this to happen. We kept reiterating, you provided guarantees to this agreement. They say this happened because Yanukovich left Kiev. Yes he did, but he left for Kharkov to take part in his party’s congress. Yes, he faced a number of issues and did not enjoy broad support, but he never fled. Still, this is not about Yanukovich.
The first point of the Agreement read that the Government of National Accord was to be established as an interim stage for early presidential elections. Most likely, the then president would not have won, and everyone knew this. All the opposition had to do was to wait and fulfil what it agreed to. Instead, they immediately ran back to “Maidan.” They seized the government building and said, “congratulate us, we have created a government of winners.” And this is how their instincts were immediately manifested. Winners. First of all, they demanded that the Verkhovna Rada abolish any privileges granted to the Russian language. This, despite the fact that the Russian language was and is still enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine, which declares that the state must guarantee the rights of Russians and other ethnic minorities. They demanded that Russians get out of Crimea because they would never think like Ukrainians, speak Ukrainian or honour Ukraine’s heroes Bandera and Shukhevich. They sent combat battalions and “friendship trains” to that peninsula to storm the Supreme Council building. At this point, Crimea rebelled, and Donbass refused to accept the coup d’état and instead asked to be left alone. But they were not left alone. Donbass didn’t attack anyone. But they were declared terrorists and an anti-terrorist operation was launched, with troops being sent in, with nearly all of the West applauding the move. That’s when it became evident exactly what plans were in store for the future role of Ukraine.
The massacre was stopped with enormous effort and through Russia’s active participation. The Minsk agreements were signed. You know what happened to them next. For seven long years, we tried to appeal to the conscience of those who signed the agreements, above all, to France and Germany. The end was tragic.
We held several summits and meetings at other levels, and Ukraine, either under Poroshenko or under Zelensky, just did not want to comply with the agreements. First of all, they refused to open a direct dialogue with Donetsk and Lugansk. We asked the Germans and the French why they would not make their proteges at least sit down at the negotiation table. The answer was that they did not think that the republics were independent, and that it was all Russia’s fault. End of conversation. Contrary to its commitments under the Minsk agreements, late last year and early this year, Kiev began to build up its forces along the line of contact up to 120,000 troops. Contrary to the ceasefire agreements that had been signed and violated many times prior, they dramatically increased their heavy shelling, always targeting residential areas. The same has been happening for all these eight years, with varying degrees of intensity, amid complete silence from all the international “human rights” organisatons and Western “civilised democracies.”
Shelling intensified at the start of this year. We received information that Ukraine wanted to implement their Plan B, which they had long threatened, to take the regions by force. This was made worse by the West’s stonewalling of Russia’s initiative to reach an agreement on an equal and indivisible security architecture in Europe. President Vladimir Putin put forward this initiative in November 2021, we drafted the necessary documents and relayed them to the US and NATO in December 2021. They responded that they were willing to negotiate certain issues, including where missiles could not be deployed, but that Ukraine and NATO was none of our business. Ukraine was said to have reserved its right to appeal to join NATO, which would then deliberate whether to admit it, and all this without asking anyone else (likely ending up granting Ukraine’s membership). This was the essence of what they told us.
This is why when Ukraine commenced its shelling, signifying a clear sign of preparations to launch a military offensive in Donbass, we had no other choice but to protect Russian people in Ukraine. We recognised the Donetsk and Lugansk people’s republics. President Vladimir Putin responded to their request by ordering the launch of a special military operation. I am certain that you are following the events and know that the operation has brought to light our worst fears about Ukraine’s military plans and has helped us derail them.
You know that facts have been uncovered of a dangerous bioweapons programme that the Pentagon has been carrying out in many cities of Ukraine. Now that Russia’s armed forces have acquired access to these documents, the US has been trying to cover its tracks. We will be fighting for the truth to come out. This bioweapons research is not limited to Ukraine and is being conducted in over 300 laboratories in various countries, most of them located in former Soviet Union nations along the borders of Russia and the People’s Republic of China.
This was not our choice. We saw how the West’s attitude was communicating one simple truth – if you were a Russophobe; if you were set on eradicating Katsaps and Moskals (a quote from statements made by Ukrainian politicians); if you were to say that anyone who considers themselves Russian and is a citizen of Ukraine should get out for the sake of their future and their children, (as President Vladimir Zelensky said in September 2021); if you obediently fulfill Western bidding so as to constantly irritate, unnerve and unbalance Russia, then you have the universal green light to do anything.
The unprecedentedly hysterical reaction in the West to our military operation, the way they are encouraging and indulging everything anti-Russia and anti-Russian is sad news indeed. I regularly read about the ill treatment that Russian people face in other countries, including citizens of those countries who are of Russian origin. It appears anyone can demand that these people be persecuted in the West now, even on social media. I cannot wrap my mind around this.
But this all proves one thing: the anti-Russia project has failed. President Vladimir Putin has listed the goals of the operation, and the first on the list is to ensure the safety of people in Donbass, and the second one, to eliminate the growing threats to the Russian Federation from the militarisation and Nazification of Ukraine. When they realised that our policy line had helped to thwart their plans, they literally went ballistic.
And yet, we have always supported diplomatic solutions to any problems. Over the course of hostilities, President Vladimir Zelensky proposed negotiations. President Vladimir Putin agreed. The talks are underway, although the Ukrainian delegation did start by, as we say, simply going through the motions. Then dialogue actually began. Even so, there is always the feeling that the Ukrainian delegation is manipulated by the West (most likely, the Americans), and is not allowed to agree to our demands, which are bare minimum, in my opinion. The process is underway.
We continue to be open to cooperation with any countries, including Western ones. However, given how the West has behaved, we are not going to propose any initiatives. Let’s see how they will get themselves out of this self-imposed impasse. They have got themselves into this impasse along with their “values,” “free market principles,” rights to private property and the presumption of innocence. They have trampled on all of this.
Many countries are already beginning to rack their brains in search of ways to slowly “creep away” from the dollar in international settlements. Look what has happened. What if they do not like something else tomorrow? The United States is sending its diplomats around the world, its ambassadors in every country have orders to demand that these countries end cooperation with Russia under the threat of sanctions. We would understand if they did this with small countries. But when such ultimatums and demands are given to China, India, Egypt, or Turkey, it looks like our American colleagues have totally lost touch with reality, or their superhuman complex has overwhelmed their sense of normalcy. We have seen such complexes in human history, and we do know about this.
I do not want to be the only speaker, though. I would like to hear from you. What questions do you have, what are you interested in?
Question: For those who do not know, Riga was part of the Russian Empire longer than Sevastopol was. How long will Russian people need a visa to travel to Russia? Is it possible to issue maybe a card or something for compatriots from the Baltics and European countries, so that they could travel or work in Russia? There is a residence permit, but if you leave for more than six months you lose your residency. In the current situation, when Russophobia is on the rise, this would be especially relevant.
The mistakes made by the public, the “soft power,” then have to be corrected by the army (as we see in Ukraine). Perhaps in countries where Russia faces direct opposition it would make sense to work not through Russian Community Councils (which quickly find themselves under the control of local authorities), but rather to decentralise work. For example, Americans have 20 different funds. You can be anything – green, blue, light blue, whatever, but if you are anti-Russia, this opens all the necessary doors.
Sergey Lavrov: I agree with you about visas. This is an old problem. We have a complicated bureaucracy. This discussion between liberals and conservatives has been going on since the late 1990s and early 2000s. The liberals believed we needed to remove as many barriers as possible so that people with Russian roots, who speak Russian and are involved in cultural and humanitarian events, enjoyed a preferential entry regime. The debate was quite lively when the law on compatriots was adopted, and they discussed the “compatriot card” option. This was one of the most important matters discussed. However, no agreement was reached, including for legal reasons – because it is not a passport or a half-passport. For example, Poland issues Pole’s Cards. These can essentially be used as passports. There are other instruments to liaise with their diasporas in Western countries (with ethnic Hungarians, Romanians, Bulgarians), and in the Middle East, too. Even in Syria, there is an entire ministry (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates). We are currently working on additional steps that we can take in this direction.
President of Russia Vladimir Putin has appointed me to head the Commission for International Cooperation and Support for Compatriots Abroad. The commission will meet at the end of March. This question will be one of the main ones on the agenda. We will discuss it in the context of a broader approach called repatriation. I believe that repatriation must be legally formalised with all the necessary formalities and the with all legal norms observed. This must be done in order to dramatically facilitate the procedure for those who identify as Russians to relocate or come to stay in Russia. We will try to consider your question as well as part of this approach.
As for the soft power, the Russian Community Councils and the American method – there must be some school of thought that prompts such action. As we promoted the movement of compatriots, we sought to make their actions transparent, so that they did not arouse any suspicion of being involved in underground activities. Unfortunately, that was all in vain. All this transparency backfired. What they are doing with the management of the Russian Community Council in the United States is pure McCarthyism. Its leaders had to return to Russia, otherwise the FBI threatened to imprison them for a long time because they promoted projects between compatriots who maintained cultural and humanitarian ties with Russia. Recall how the Americans treated Maria Butina. She worked openly and completely freely in the United States, promoting joint projects. In the US, all NGOs for the most part explicitly declare they are supported and funded by the Agency for International Development. Other Western countries have many projects that prefer to keep this information to themselves. I wouldn’t want us to act like this. First, it would be dangerous for the people concerned. Secondly, these are the methods of the intelligence services, not soft power methods. On the other hand, American soft power relies heavily on the CIA and other special services.
We will think of ways to support our compatriots in situations where a true witch hunt has been unleashed against them. I think more flexible forms of support could be implemented, including the Foundation for Supporting and Protecting the Rights of Compatriots Living Abroad. The essence of this is the provision of legal assistance to those who find themselves in a difficult situation. There is also the Alexander Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund. We will think about some additional formats, naturally, fully legitimate ones.
Russia needs to toughen its policy with regard to shadow agencies engaged in things that do not coincide with their charter and other documents. Thank you for showing such an interest. We will certainly try to take this into account.
Question: What contribution do you think representatives of other states can make to the development of international relations with the Russian Federation?
Sergey Lavrov: We will support any public initiatives aimed at developing cooperation in the post-Soviet space. There are many forms for interaction in the CIS, in the CSTO, and in the EAEU, which are of interest to public movements and organisations and that can be used to organise events.
I sincerely would not want to give you any specific ideas here. You know better. You have a feel for what life is like in your country, and how it is affected by relations with Russia on the official, investment, and trade tracks.
As for the Russian Community Councils, in some countries our compatriots are beginning to create alternative councils. It is possible that people are just being competitive, which is only natural, but if you have an interest in doing something on the ground, we will only welcome this. If you need some advice, I am available to listen to your ideas and see how we can support them together with our Kazakhstani colleagues.
Question: I have a proposal, not a question. We have set up a pressure group on this track, and we have already drafted our own proposals. We are ready to help promote Russian culture and the Russian language in Germany, the Baltics and other countries. We would like to become independent analysts and experts and to develop culture, the Russian language and to support compatriots and foreigners who love the Russian language, and who aspire to culture. We would be happy to take part in this process.
Sergey Lavrov: That’s wonderful. Could you please leave your proposals and contacts with the organisers? The Foreign Ministry exercises various functions within the framework of the Government Commission for Compatriots Abroad, and I head this Commission. Our Ministry is also the main body responsible for the implementation of a new federal targeted programme to promote international cooperation. This is what soft power is all about. We also have a programme for supporting the Russian language abroad. In effect, opportunities still exist for the kind of projects you mentioned. I look forward to reading your letter.
Question: As of late, many Western activists, including Arnold Schwarzenegger, have addressed the people of Russia. If you were able to address all the peoples of the world in the West, the East and in Latin America, what would you tell them to make sure they hear you?
Sergey Lavrov: I would tell them that all peoples should be true to themselves, and that they should not abandon their traditions, history, aspirations and world outlook.
Getting back to Ukraine, the Americans are gloating over this situation and rubbing their hands with glee. In all, 140 countries voted against Russia at the UN General Assembly. We know how these countries reached this decision: US ambassadors have been shuttling from capital to capital and demanding that even the great powers comply with their demands, and they don’t shy away from speaking about it in public. They either want to offend others, or they have completely lost all sense of proportion, while comprehending their own superiority. However, out these 140 countries voting on US orders, not one imposed any sanctions except the West. An overwhelming majority of countries did not impose any sanctions on Russia. It appears that, by voting, some of them wanted to minimise damage, but they don’t want to shoot themselves in the foot, and they will continue to develop their economy. Many independent leaders are saying openly that they don’t want to fulfil US instructions to their own detriment.
So, people of the world, be true to yourselves.
Question: What should the West do now that events have dramatically escalated to move things back towards a realm of peace, tranquility, kindness and cooperation?
Sergey Lavrov: The West should start minding its own business and stop lecturing others. Because right now, all we hear is “Russia must..” Why must we do anything, and how have we so upset the West? I really do not understand. They’ve dragged out our security guarantees initiatives. They told us not to worry about NATO expansion because it does not threaten our security. Why do they get to decide what we need for our security? This is our business. They do not allow us anywhere near discussions of their own security. We are constantly reminded that NATO is a defensive organisation. First, this defensive alliance bombed Yugoslavia. We only recently recalled how in 1998 Joe Biden was so proud that he personally contributed to the decision to bomb Belgrade, and bridges over the Drina River. It was fascinating to hear this from someone who claims Russia is led by war criminals.
NATO also acted in Iraq without a UN Security Council resolution. In Libya, it did have a resolution, but it only covered establishing a no-fly zone, so that Muammar Gadaffi’s aircraft could not take off from their airfields. They didn’t. On the other hand, NATO bombed all the army positions from the air, which the UN Security Council did not warrant, and brutally killed Muammar Gadaffi without trial or investigation. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went live on air to celebrate the event.
Strategically speaking, there was indeed a collective defence alliance when the Berlin Wall and the Warsaw Pact existed. It was clear where the line of defence was then. When the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact ceased to exist, NATO foreswore not to expand to the East, but began to do just that. We have seen five waves of expansion by now, contrary to its assurances. And each time, the imaginary Berlin Wall was moved further east. The alliance assumed the right to determine the boundary of its line of defence. Now Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has declared that NATO must bear global responsibility and is obliged to ensure security in the Indo-Pacific region. It is their name for the Asia-Pacific region. So, NATO is ready to “defend itself” in the South China Sea now. They are building defence lines against China now, so China, too, needs to be on the alert for that. A really unusual type of defence.
As for the Indo-Pacific region, which we have always called the Asia-Pacific region, there is the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) there, as well as mechanisms created around the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). ASEAN has a dozen partners. We participate in holding the East Asia Summit, the ASEAN Security Forum, and the ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting Plus, a platform for ASEAN and its twelve partners which include China, Russia, the West (including Australia) and India – all the key players. Those formats work on the basis of consensus. This does not suit the Americans though, because to pursue their policy to contain China, they need an anti-China mechanism. But no platform where China is a member can produce such a result. They proclaimed the Indo-Pacific strategies and created Quad – a group of four nations including the United States, Australia, Japan, and they also lured India into this group. Our Indian friends are well aware of what we are talking about. They said they would participate in this only in the context of economic and infrastructure projects, but not military ones. So, because they needed to build up the military component, they created a parallel format, AUKUS, which included Australia, the UK and the United States. Now they want to expand it by adding Japan and South Korea, and even some ASEAN countries. This will lead to the collapse of the ASEAN ten.
When the Indo-Pacific concept was announced, we asked what was wrong with the Asia-Pacific label. We were told it mixed two different things because Asia did not refer to an ocean, but the Pacific did. Hence the Indian Ocean and Asia. We asked, if this includes the Indian Ocean, does this mean the whole of East Africa will be involved in this cooperation? They said no. That region had too many problems they did not want to deal with as they had enough on their plate. Is the Persian Gulf also part of the Indian Ocean? They said no to that too, disowning it. This makes it clear that the Indo part has been included with the sole purpose of cozying up to India and trying even harder to turn it into an anti-China player.
Russian President Vladimir Putin visited India in early February 2022. I spoke frankly with them. Our Indian friends understand everything perfectly and will never be open to such “cooperation” or play someone else’s games. India is a great country. Making such provocations against great powers is simply disrespectful.
Back to our discussion – we tried to negotiate with the West up to the last minute. But relations with the EU were destroyed back in 2014. All mechanisms, and there were plenty of them: biannual summits, annual meetings of the Russian Government and the European Commission, four common spaces being developed under four roadmaps, 20 industry-based dialogues – all that was derailed simply because the people in Crimea, faced with a radical neo-Nazi threat, voted for reunification with Russia.
Our Western colleagues do have this curious approach towards politics – when considering any problem in international politics, they cut off periods of time that are not favourable to them. When we discussed Ukraine with them, they said that we “annexed” Crimea. Wait, but what happened before that? They failed to make the opposition do what they themselves had signed on to. The opposition violated all guarantees and, contrary to the agreements, carried out a coup d’état and proclaimed an openly anti-Russia policy line. They began trying to suppress everything Russian. But Westerners called it “the price one has to pay for democratic processes.” They could not even say the word coup.
Last autumn, I asked the Germans and the French, how is this so? It is the Minsk Agreements we are talking about. Why are you so stubborn about this annexation part? It all started then. “This is the price one has to pay for democratic processes.” You see, this is their approach – they ignore what is unfavourable to them. They just single out one of the symptoms and begin to build their entire policy on it.
Question: Politics is about forestalling. I would like to take a look into the future. How do you, as an absolute professional in this area, see the future of the Slavic peoples’ coexistence in this space? I am sure that everything will be well. However, the forms of such coexistence may differ. What is your opinion of its stability and preferred forms?
Sergey Lavrov: We should follow the lines dictated by life itself. We have reached an extremely important milestone. I am referring to the 28 union programmes. They are described as roadmaps. These programmes are being actively and efficiently transformed into normative acts. We need to have many of them. The majority have already been drafted, and the rest are at the advanced stage of preparation. They will ensure not just our rapprochement but the creation of a common economic foundation, which is necessary to level out rights in absolutely all spheres, including trade, investment, the implementation of economic projects, access to state orders and more.
As for the political superstructure, we have the union parliament, the union cabinet of ministers, and the Supreme State Council chaired by our presidents. These bodies will deal with economic business development to see if our political bodies should be additionally adjusted to our superstructure. I am sure that we will rely on the opinion of our peoples, who regard each other as fraternal and truly close peoples.
Question: I have a question about soft power. School education concerns not only the external but also the internal contours. For the past seven years, I have been closely monitoring developments in children’s culture, which can be described as extremely pro-liberal. Today we need to overhaul the cultural space here and to quickly launch the introduction of our cultural codes abroad. Here is a simple example: the animated television series Masha and the Bear has done more in the external contour to improve Russia’s image abroad than many official programmes. Are there any programmes, or plans to launch programmes to change the cultural code both in the internal and the external contours? I have a proposal, which I would like to formulate and to submit through this event’s organisers tomorrow, if I may.
Sergey Lavrov: Yes, of course. I would like to urge everyone, including those who don’t have formulated proposals, to share their ideas with us. We will discuss all of them.
You have touched upon a very important issue. I am not directly involved in these efforts, but we have always been speaking about the need to start promoting our culture from the cradle, primarily in Russia. There is too much external influence now, and internal influence is not always effective in shaping the right worldview in our children. I am not talking about brainwashing people. But we need to prevent the brainwashing of our children by other forces. This is the issue. Children’s access to information must not be limited to one source. Do please submit your ideas. We will look at them together with the Culture Ministry.
Question: A colleague has mentioned the issue of visas. The lady from Kazakhstan has said what we should do abroad and how we should do it. Can you say what Russia’s priority is: to collect as many compatriots as possible in Russia, or to form a cordon or a barrier of compatriots outside the country?
Sergey Lavrov: I know that some political analysts are pondering this idea. I believe that people have a free choice. We must create the right conditions for those who want to return. I have already mentioned repatriation today. We will certainly deal with this matter at the United Russia’s Commission [on International Cooperation and Support for Compatriots Living Abroad]. I will do my best to help draft a law on this matter.
As for the interests of those who want to live where they are living, we must work with the authorities of their countries of residence to prevent discrimination against Russians, Russian education, [Russian] media outlets, etc. It will be more difficult to do this now, because our Western colleagues are encouraging Russophobia in all areas. Regrettably, they are trying to set the Georgian people on this track. When they recklessly adopted these horrible, inhuman sanctions, leaving 200,000 people outside the national territory, preventing them from using national airlinesand prohibiting Western air carriers from bringing these people home, the Prime Minister of Georgia announced that they were ready, in view of that humanitarian situation, to allow Georgian airlines to bring Russians from Europe and the EU closer to their home country. You remember how fiercely he was attacked for this. It was an elementary human desire to help people in difficult circumstances. If you have any complaints about your authorities, please write to us.
Question: There are no complaints. We will submit the proposals regarding possible support for our compatriots in foreign countries.
Sergey Lavrov: We have a channel for communication. We are interested in normal relations with our Georgian colleagues.
Question: All states are playing the same game: the author has trump cards and a support team in case there are dissenters. I am referring to the UK and the United States. This will go on until one of the parties ceases to exist. Is it not high time Russia started its own game within the framework of the Eurasian continent and friendly countries to promote peace, justice and security? Given its nuclear arsenal, Russia could guarantee the security of states (where it has been confirmed – Syria, Ukraine) for countries that currently depend to some or other extent on big, major players so that they can feel they are also involved.
Sergey Lavrov: I wouldn’t call it a game in the sense implied by Zbigniew Brzezinski’s terms “great Game” and “grand chessboard”. We proceed from the premise that our friends are people, states, and political parties which are our equals. Unlike the Western organisations, where there is little democracy. They invented consensus, but in NATO and the EU this consensus is a sham.
They adopted sanctions in instalments even before the current stage in the development of our geopolitical space (there has been a series of sanctions for no reason at all since 2014). Everything seems to have happened – Crimea, Donbass, the Minsk agreements… But every six months, they imposed new sanctions. Many of my European counterparts tell me confidentially: we understand that this is stupidity and a dead end, but we have consensus. I told one of them: a consensus means that a decision is not taken if there is even one “nay” vote. If you object, say so! This is a case of collective responsibility. Everyone says: I am against it, but all of them want a consensus. This consensus is shaped by an aggressive, Russophobic minority, primarily by the Baltic states (to my great regret), Poland, and recently Denmark.
Today, it is a sign of good manners for them to demonstrate that you are more of a Russophobe than your neighbours. In NATO, it is the United States that rules the roost. The EU is being dominated by the alliance. The neutral countries, which are not NATO members – Sweden, Finland, and Austria – are being drawn into cooperation under the cloak of “collective mobility.” This means that the neutral countries will allow NATO to use their roads and territories when it needs to move its military infrastructure east. This is being palmed off as NATO-EU partnership. I have mentioned Nord Stream 2 as an example. There is no longer any independence in Europe. They were just told: Stop taking care of your energy security on the terms that are beneficial to you; we will guarantee your security at a much higher price, but we will be in chips. President of France Emmanuel Macron is the only politician who continues to focus on strategic autonomy. Germany has resigned itself to the fact that they will have no such autonomy. There is no diktat of this sort in our country.
The difficulties arising in the work of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) are contingent on and explained by the democratic nature of these organisations rather than their weakness. They decide all matters by consensus and nothing can be imposed on them from outside. We have allied relations with Syria and good relations with Iran. I don’t think it will be a good idea to “knock together” a bloc. This will tie everyone’s hands, if we look at the situation pragmatically. It is better to have allied relations or an unprecedentedly close relationship of the kind we have with China. Our leaders said in one of the [bilateral] documents: relations have reached an unprecedentedly high level that in some respects even exceeds the traditional allied relations. That is absolutely true and hence we have multivariance.
The Russian Empire was created as follows. There was no melting-pot like in the United States. They have melted everyone into Americans. Generally, all Americans favour human rights. Practically all the states have an equal balance of rights. In the Russian Empire, as ethnic groups joined, Moscow and St Petersburg always sought to have regard for their unique identities and made efforts to preserve their cultures and religions. Multivariance in relations with foreign partners seems more effective and enables greater freedom of action in cases where such actions will be necessary.
Question: I am a citizen of the People’s Republic of China. I was born and grew up there. For many years, I have been involved in humanitarian cooperation (education) between China and Russia. I believe that Russia and China are two great powers that enjoy historical and cultural affinity. What areas of cooperation between China and Russia have best prospects?
Sergey Lavrov: It would be impossible to list the promising areas of cooperation between Russia and China. It would need an entire session of its own. Through Moscow and Beijing, we disseminate detailed information on what our two countries are working on together. Currently, this cooperation will be growing stronger. At a time when the West is most flagrantly eroding the entire bedrock that the international system stands on, we as two great powers have to think about our future in this world.
For the first time in many years, China has been declared the main target, previously it was Russia. Now we are targets on rotation. At this stage, their proclaimed goal is to deal with Russia and then go after China. When we communicated with the Western countries during less turbulent times, we asked them why they were allowing the American course against China to be built up and why was everyone being dragged into it? What did China do? “China is a threat.” What makes China a threat? “They are starting to defeat everybody economically.”
If you look at the beginning of China’s economic elevation, China started by simply accepting the rules of the game, which had been essentially created by the West, led by Americans. These rules included the international monetary system, the international trade system, the Bretton Woods System and the World Trade Organisation (WTO). China started playing by their rules and is now outplaying them on their home field by their rules. Is it a reason for changing the rules? It appears so. Who is proposing to reform the WTO? The West. Because the World Trade Organisation in its current form is providing rules that are fair. Therefore, if we just forget about the situation in Ukraine and the sanctions for a minute, the actions of the West confirm it is not reliable, either as a part of the world that generated the major reserve currencies, or as economic partners or as countries to store gold and currency reserves. We have things to work on. Our leaders and other members of the Government, foreign affairs agencies are working on this extensively as part of our traditionally regular dialogue.
Question: Russia is conducting an operation in Ukraine. It is not a secret that Russia is building a Greater Eurasia. Can you clue us in a little: is Sergey Shoigu going to stop at the border with Poland? Or are we going into Transnistria and Moldova? What is the plan? Are we going to unite further?
Sergey Lavrov: We declared our goals. They are fully legitimate and clear: to protect the people of Donbass (with which we are now allies) that are subject to blatant aggression. For these purposes and based on our treaties, we applied Article 51 of the UN Charter on collective self-defence. Another goal is to eliminate any threats to Russian security posed by the militarisation of Ukraine that is carried out by the West. There must be no strike weapons in the country or threats in the form of Ukraine’s nazification, for obvious reasons. The aggressive spirit of the Ukrainian elite has been consciously created to be like this by Western instructors throughout these decades. They trained neo-Nazi battalions, showing them how to conduct aggressive combat operations, etc. We have no other goals beyond these.
Alternatively, the other side may come up with some curious goals. For example, Prime Minister of Poland Mateusz Morawiecki has proposed an idea that will be discussed soon, which is to send NATO peacekeeping forces to Ukraine. It is possible that, should this decision be made all of a sudden, it will entail that Polish personnel will make up the core of these peacekeeping forces and they will take control over Western Ukraine, including the major city of Lvov, to remain there for a prolonged period of time. It appears to me that this is the plan.
I believe this initiative is doublespeak. NATO will realise they should be reasonable and realistic.
Question: It is now clear to everyone that the world will never be the same again. There is much talk these days about the new global architecture and the fact that its foundations are now being laid. I do agree with the notion that we have no need of a world without Russia. But what kind of a world do we want to build? What place will Russia and the Union State have in the new international order?
Sergey Lavrov: What we want is an equitable world, free from war, aggressive projects or attempts to pitch one country against another. Equitable is also the way we see Russia’s place in the world. Similarly, the Union State must enjoy all the benefits of this ideal world as you have described it.
What we want is to discuss how to live on this planet in the future. Too many problems have been piling up, and the existing institutions have been unable to resolve them. This is the gist of the initiative President of Russia Vladimir Putin put forward two years ago to convene a summit of UN Security Council permanent members. Almost everyone supported it but the West will now drag its feet. There is a preliminary agenda. We have coordinated it with our Chinese friends, while the others are reviewing it. But now everything will be put on hold. This is not about the P5 reimagining a “new Yalta,” as some claim. Under the UN Charter, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council have primary responsibility for maintaining international peace.
When we express the need for more democracy in international relations, this does not mean cancelling the UN Charter. It means stopping violations of the UN Charter. The sovereign equality of states and the requirement to respect territorial integrity and the right of nations to self-determination – it is all in the Charter. Had all its provisions been respected, this would have ensured peace and cooperation in good faith among all countries. However, the West manipulates them for its own benefit.
For example, we stand accused of violating Ukraine’s territorial integrity, starting with Crimea and Donbass. Crimea held a referendum. Everyone knew that this was an open, honest process when people expressed their will. The Americans know this too. Let me share a secret with you (I hope that no one will get cross at me). In April 2014, after the Crimea referendum then US Secretary of State John Kerry told me that they understood that this was an honest vote. However, he noted that we fast-tracked it by announcing the referendum and holding the vote in a matter of just one week. I explained to him that the Ukrainian radicals posed a direct threat at the time. All the formalities had to be completed in order to protect this territory. He suggested that we hold another referendum in the summer or autumn, announce it about two months in advance and invite foreign observers. The result would be all the same but they would be there to “bless” and verify it. This was not a matter of substance, since everyone understood where it was all heading, but about creating a favourable image for the outside world in order to be able to report that the people of Crimea cast their ballots in a referendum, while the Western “comrades” verified the results.
As for sovereignty and territorial integrity, ever since the founding of the UN in 1945, it has been debating whether sovereignty takes priority over the right to self-determination or vice-versa. A negotiating process was put into motion, paving the way for the adoption by consensus in 1970 of a Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States under the UN Charter. This is a lengthy document with an entire section on the relationship between sovereignty, territorial integrity and the right to self-determination. It says that everyone must respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states whose governments ensure the right to self-determination and represent the people living in their territory. Has the Ukrainian leadership ensured Crimea’s right to self-determination? All they did was curtail Crimea’s rights within Ukraine. Did the Petr Poroshenko regime or the current leadership represent all the people of Ukraine, including Crimea, as they pretend? No. They did not represent Donbass either. They have been ignoring all these principles.
According to the principle of indivisible security, everyone is free to choose alliances but no one can reinforce their security at the expense of others. They say that only alliances matter and nothing else. However, when it suits their interests, the principle of self-determination comes to the fore, relegating Yugoslavia’s territorial integrity into the background, as happened with Kosovo. Its self-determination took place without a referendum. They engineered the creation of a parliamentary structure of sorts, and it voted on the matter. Serbia took the case to the International Court, which issued a curious ruling, saying that consent from the central government was not required for a declaration of independence. President of Russia Vladimir Putin has quoted this landmark ruling by the International Court on multiple occasions.
Question: The West is planning to replace Russian oil and gas in the coming years. What is Russia’s interest in participating in the Iran-US nuclear deal? Iran will have an opportunity to increase oil production and replace the Russian market in Europe. How ready are our Venezuelan partners for a deal with the Americans to replace Russian oil?
Sergey Lavrov: We never betray our friends in politics. Venezuela is our friend. Iran is a close state. Unlike the Americans, we do not act only out of selfish interests. If they need to “teach the Russians a lesson,” then it’s okay to agree with the regime in Caracas (as they called it). The United States would rather restore the programme with Iran, just to punish Russia. This reflects problems not so much with international institutions as with “liberal democracy.” As it turns out, it is not “liberal” at all, and it is not “democracy” at all.
When the leading country of the world (which the United States is) solves the problem of global, planetary importance, primarily on the basis of its own domestic interests, which are determined by two-year electoral cycles, then the biggest problems are sacrificed to these electoral cycles. What we can see now in US actions is a desire to prove that a Democratic president and administration are doing well and feel strong enough ahead of the November congressional elections. China does not understand this. What is two years? Nothing. Although the Chinese say that “a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step,” they see the horizon of that great journey. Here, in addition to the US desire to command everything, there are no more horizons. They will act the way they need to today.
It has been noted that the Americans are running around with the issue of oil and gas, turning to Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar. All these countries, like Venezuela and Iran, have made it clear that when they consider new entrants to the oil market, they are committed to the OPEC+ format, where quotas for each participant are discussed and agreed upon by consensus. So far, I see no reason to believe that this mechanism will be broken in any way. No one is interested in that.
Question: What formats do you see for post-crisis settlement and intra-Ukrainian dialogue? What role might the DPR and LPR play? Ukraine’s governance and education system are permeated with Ukrainian nationalism. Several generations have grown up with this discourse. War criminals will be held accountable under criminal law. What about cultural aspects?
Sergey Lavrov: We have announced the goals we are working to achieve. As for the intra-Ukrainian dialogue, this will be up to the Ukrainians after the special operation ends – I hope, with the signing of comprehensive documents on security issues, Ukraine’s neutral status with guarantees of its security.
Russian President Vladimir Putin, commenting on our initiatives on the non-expansion of NATO, said: we understand that every country needs security guarantees. We are ready to negotiate and work them out for ourselves, for Ukrainians and Europeans outside the framework of NATO expansion. Therefore, a neutral status, security guarantees and bringing the legal framework to a civilised level with regard to the Russian language, education, the media, and laws that encourage the country’s nazification, as well as the adoption of a law prohibiting this. Most European countries have such laws, including Germany.
As for the DPR and LPR’s involvement in the all-Ukrainian dialogue, it should be a sovereign decision of the people’s republics.
Question: Why was the military operation launched now and not eight years ago? At that time, a pro-Russian “anti-Maidan” movement emerged in Odessa and Kharkov, which installed the Russian flag on top of the Kharkov regional administration without firing a shot. The city supported Russia. Now these people are hiding from shelling.
Sergey Lavrov: A lot of factors influence developments at each specific historical moment. Back then, it was a shock, primarily because the West turned out to be an absolutely unreliable guarantor of the things that we supported. US President Barack Obama, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and the French leaders called Russian President Vladimir Putin and asked him not to interfere with the agreement between Viktor Yanukovych and the opposition. Vladimir Putin said that if the incumbent president was signing something, it was his right, and he had the authority to negotiate with the opposition. But the West dumped us and immediately began to support the new government because they announced an anti-Russian policy line.
People got burned alive in the House of Trade Unions in Odessa; combat aircraft fired at the centre of Lugansk. You must remember the Novorossiya movement better than anyone else. We also had a public movement for support.
We certainly relied too much on what remained of our Western colleagues’ conscience. France initiated the Normandy format; we were asked not to state categorically that we refused to recognise Petr Poroshenko’s election at the end of May 2014. The West assured us they would do everything to normalise the situation, so that Russians could live normally.
We must have trusted them because of some naivety and kindness of heart, which is something Russians are known for.
I have no doubt that lessons will be learned.
Just a friendly suggestion, since you invested so much time in reading Lavrov’s comments (kudos for that), please add your own summary in the beginning. I counted 10’s of thousands of words in the transcript. Telling people to read it in its entirety is a lot to ask for.
What? I did not tell you to do anything.
I made a recommendation: “A careful read and even study is recommended.”
A friendly answer. What in these heavens leads you to think that I am your personal homework slave?. I won’t cut it up in small pieces and feed it to you with a baby spoon because you will remain a baby with a bird brain.
Sometimes the pace, context, word choices, flow and senses, the nuances of something, is necessary for understanding. My own reading of the comments section over the past few days leads me to believe that this may be a great lack in the commentariat. Hence my recommendation is that this be carefully read and even studied.
Agreed – the entirety is worth close reading. It speaks volumes
Thank you for posting all of it.
Seconded! Lavrov is a remarkably dignified statesman, reeking of credibility. I’m consistently impressed by his remarks and, as others have said here, appalled at the substanceless. pseudo-pious parroting of our US officials.
(I read the whole thing, and a ‘synopsis’ would never have cut it.)
Q: How can you tell that a US official is lying?
A: You can see their lips moving.
@ Amarynth
Good to start the morning with a laugh.
Thanks Amarynth, for the transcript and the response to the “10’s of thousands of words” post, it would be funny if it weren’t offensive to come here to demand a “summary” of the “10’s of thousands of words.” Such nerve.
There is everything in the vineyard of the Lord.
Lone Wolf
Oh man, I lost it, didn’t I – 😤 – in public, in front of everyone!
Thing is, I worked with this yesterday. Tried to find the quotes to put them in bold blocks – easy to remember. It would not work because this is holistic. Then, I tried to highlight or bold certain sections .. did not flow. Then I tried to identify most important paragraphs by red marking them – hopeless cause.
Well, then, I guess I lost it lol. Glad it was worth a laugh.
lol
Okay I love reading and listening to FM Lavrov. The man is articulate and well educated as well as being an extremely patient man yet he does not appear to suffer fools gladly. Although I have found some of his cuts and thrusts to go over the heads of many. One of the reasons I have considered learning Russian is because I have been informed that some nuances do not translate well.
Regarding “Cliff Notes/Summaries” (a bane on education imho) for anything I’m going to leave this here for those who want a more simple understanding of current geo-political events.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oEBM_IPwa8
Hopefully it will give some people a midweek smile.
Kind regards
Some things shouldn’t be condensed! Romeo and Juliet condensed down to “A couple mixed up kids fall in love and end up dead”** just misses the mark, lol.
Seriously, American politicians and so called statesmen are unwatchable. The cringeworthyness and mendacity of every single sentence is deplorable. It’s gotten worse over the decades. Embarrassingly so.
Reading/ listening to Lavrov & Putin is interesting, educational. Almost lyrical. They always deliver. You can add Maria Zakharova to that list as well.
** that line was (iirc) written by Carl Reiner around 1960 for the Dick Van Dyke show
Yes, you knee-jerked! But I sympathize 100%!! The commentator is accustomed to soundbite news, not deeply detailed and nuanced news that demands critical thought and reasoning. In other words, a very typical Western response I encounter all the time. Lavrov never delivers pablum; he provides a very hearty meal that must be attacked with knife and fork.
I’m on the ADD end of the Autism spectrum. I still made it to the end with only one break. I’d quibble only one thing. I don’t think the Russian are especially known for their “kindness and naivete” any more than my People the British.
Some of us think that our basic “kindness and naivete” has lead to us being replaced with foreign types over the last 70 years. Yet few people on this site (or even in Russia) I’d dare to say, view the British people as “kind and naive…
8903 words, if anyone cares. This is a very thoughtful presentation, thank you.
Thanks for that, Lavrov is always such a great speaker.
excellent Amarynth! the baby-spoon feeding is exactly what the short attention span people want.
Its b/c you are not telling me everything!
Chuba – I will summarize for you.
The “west” has lied and broken all promises and international agreements for the last time. We will no longer listen to or accept the lies and promises of the “west” and instead will act with good will and moral conscience in our dealings with our friends and partners around the world.
I just went to the original English-language site that you linked to and did a print-out of the speech and the Q&A session. Now I can read and study at leisure! Thanks for the link.
Thanks to EVERYBODY who contributes to this site. I have read all of Mr Lavrovs interview and am a richer man for it!. The quiet, firm logic and passion in these words brings me to tears. Not because Sergei Lavrov is a poet but because when his words (over the past, many years) are compared with the childish insults and idealogical brain farts that pass for Team USA diplomat messaging, I am truly feeling the world lurch.
As a passionate observer from deep within the empire I offer my heartfelt thanks and best wishes to the Russian people and their amazing leaders.
My technique (used for skimming scientific papers): jump to the end.
My experience of skimming scientific papers (I probably read 5000 -10000 in my career as a scientist) is that you are merely digesting what the scientist is telling you, not what the data is telling you.
1. Read the title to obtain the official Party Line.
2. Read the summary to decide whether the Party Line was a simplification.
3. Read the results section to see if the Party Line is propaganda or science.
4. Check the materials and methods to see if there is anything unexpected or untoward in the methodology (usually there is not).
5. Conclude what there is to conclude.
6. File the Party Line under ‘reasonable representation’, ‘overegging propaganda’ or ‘questionable b***ocks’.
The time it took you to count the “10’s of thousands of words” in the article would have been more profitably spent actually reading those words.
But maybe not for you, in which case here’s the briefest summary:
Lavrov spoke about the misbegotten state’s invention, its self-inflicted present tragedy aggravated by its foreign midwives, and the necessary correction being implemented by Russia to defend the safety of all those threatened by it, including even the refractory blind, deaf and deaf Ukrainians.
Short enough? Details in the article.
Why don’t you contribute and prepare your own summary. I read the whole thing, and i am impressed with Lavrov’s ability in a few paragraphs express complex, and not so complex issues, without lecture or condensation. Moreover, I am also impressed with the audience to pose questions in a brief and curious way, much unlike typical western televised audiences that occupy the floor with pamphlets, indignation, moralisation and emotional lecturing. Kudos.
When the west cant defend its ideology w/words, they defend it w/weapons.
It’s quite possible that all the questions were selected in advance, so that Lavrov could answer them having prepared so to do.
I’m not saying they were, merely saying that it is a common thing to happen in public discourse all over the world.
That there are a great many valuable and highly intelligent comments on this site is well known, that others are occasionally very funny, is perhaps less known, could the many times confused statements of the recommender advising the study of the highly esteemed and easy to understand Sergey Lavrov fall into the latter category ?
Honestly if you took the time to count the tens of thousands of words in the transcript, you had the time to read Lavrov’s piece in its entirety. LOL.
It amazes me how thorough the prime minister is–the same with President Putin. These are skilled orators. They speak at length and with depth and facility. Putin didn’t need notes in February when he spoke about history–because its seared in his conscience. The same with the intolerable situation Russia faces today, with an implacable foe–the United States, who even now starts remind of their nuclear options.
There is nothing that Lavrov and Putin make up. Their assessments of their opponent is accurate and enraged…like Rabbi Abraham Heschel’s uncompromising prophets.
I really hope that “among the lessons to be learned” may be also the one “of never, never, trust the West again”!
Russia should live with China, working with the rest of the world , and always on guard towards US/EU/UK.
As a westerner I too am appalled at the hate, jealousy, racism, Russophobia of the world in which I live. And be aware of the Vatican, it will never be a friend of the Russian people, it is with the American capitalists, and with Europe.
yes, I stand with you on this one. What the west has become (or maybe the masks have just fallen away?) is an appalling travesty of the very things it says it stands for. It is only 12% of the global population the other 6.5 billion can make a fine world to be a part of, the West can fade into oblivion of its own accord, lost in its own idiotic ramblings and degenerate ideologies, I see hope in the fact that the rest of the world seems to be slowly coalescing around each other seeking to find ways to detach from the West which can only be a positive thing, it is very possible that a more benign and cooperative world can create a new order, less invasive, with mutual respect for cultural differences and a real willingness to trade far and wide to create a a healthier, wealthier world for everyone willing to take the risk. Russia is a core and central tenet to this new order so it is vital that it now pursues its own long term self interests with countries that are willing to share this new vision.
Thank you, Amarynth for your translation.
Mr. Lavrov mentioned, “NATO also acted in Iraq without a UN Security Council resolution. In Libya, it did have a resolution, but it only covered establishing a no-fly zone, so that Muammar Gadaffi’s aircraft could not take off from their airfields. They didn’t. On the other hand, NATO bombed all the army positions from the air, which the UN Security Council did not warrant, and brutally killed Muammar Gadaffi without trial or investigation.”
I’m puzzeled by the role of the UN, especially the UN Security Council, which is very doubtful, both in the past and today. So far supportive, without consequences for NATO / Zone A.
The somehow stoic adherence of Zone B to international eroded law of Zone A is difficult to comprehend.
Will Zone B establish its own (UNO) organization in the future?
The whole of the UN organisation and structure was designed post WWII when the dominant global power was the USA. It was hosted in the USA to make sure that the host could not be ostracised, even when they ought to be.
I’m not saying that Russia or China would be any better behaved if they got to shape the constitution and organisation of a 21st century global forum.
But the UN, the ICC, the OPCW etc etc are now just tools of the US Imperium.
The tragedy is there are so many people in the US that want free trade with the rest of the world, the great antidote to the inherent corruption in all states who only know how to steal and call it ”taxes”.
Fear the neighbors you have robbed even when they bring gifts…
“Prime Minister of Poland Mateusz Morawiecki has proposed an idea that will be discussed soon, which is to send NATO peacekeeping forces to Ukraine. It is possible that, should this decision be made all of a sudden, it will entail that Polish personnel will make up the core of these peacekeeping forces and they will take control over Western Ukraine, including the major city of Lvov, to remain there for a prolonged period of time. It appears to me that this is the plan.”
A very long “period of time”… One of Ukraine’s great ‘helpers’, Poland, sees the opportunity to grab a chunk that used to belong to it… ha, ha, ha.
“You poor little piggy, the big bad bear mauled you and you’re limping. Let me help you. Let me unburden you of that hind leg, you’ll feel better.”
Maybe Slovakia and Romania would also like to “help” the Ukies similarly. Hungary will wait until all have been served… Then the Rump will be more peaceful.
David Stockman has a very good article on history and development of this area with great maps showing, for instance, language influences in the different areas. He makes a strong case:
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/stockman-slams-zelenskyys-hyperbole-pearl-harbor-my-eye
It should be hard to censor Stockman, and should (I hope!) make a difference in the political scene (can’t count on that, though).
That is really very good Anemm. I question the issue of the ‘holodomor’, but for this purpose, that is detail. Besides that, I don’t see much wrong there. Excellent for a western audience. Thanks!
Might someone have the time to explain a little bit about the Holodomor? I hadn’t heard even the name until recently. Thanks!
@Anemm
The so-called Holodomor is a hoax which is of profound importance to Ukronazis. Robert Conquest’s fiction novel Harvest of sorrow was based on accounts from Ukrainian fascist migrant communities. According to this black legend of Holodomor, Stalin deliberately created a horrendous famine in Ukraine in 1932/33 to push forward the collectivization of Soviet agriculture. It has all the hallmarks of anti-Soviet demagoguery with insanely inflated numbers of fatalities, rampant cannibalism and what-have-you. What actually happened was a crop failure which wasn’t limited to Ukraine. And the USSR government took resolute action to ameliorate the situation by sending aid and volunteers.
There are quite a few forgeries among the pictures which are said to prove the Holodomor. Ukraine was indeed struck by a war-time famine courtesy of Imperial Germany in the wake of WW1. But that shouldn’t be a problem to Ukronazis, proud of their ‘Europeanness’, lol.
I congratulate you for the simple and to-the-point explanation for one of the most ingrained virulent hoaxes doing the rounds in the “western” narrative, almost rivalling the “six million” as the most quotable hoaxes.
Think you, Parfois.
And with regard to your concluding remark:
A few years ago, a commenter on the forum astutely linked the two hoaxes, suggesting that the Ukronazis in all likelihood chose the name ’Holodomor’ as a typical marketing ploy to make sure it would be ”stumbled upon” by people searching for holocaust in indexes and reference lists. I believe this is a very credible proposition.
Ma I suggest that readers to do their own research on the events of the collectivisation and famine of the Ukraine 1929-33, and that were widely ignored by the western press at the time.
In connection, Harvest of Sorrow by Robert Conquest cannot really be legitimately classified as fiction novel, as the book is an historical, exacting work and has an extensive bibliography with separate headings including : Testimonies and Documents, Accounts by Former Party Activists, and lastly, extensive Index notes.
Sorry Voluntus about trashing the pornographic masterpiece which is ’Harvest of Sorrow’. It has about as much ”historical, exacting work” as Jean Raspail’s ’Le Camp des Saints’ (a sick, racist dystopia where Europe is being flooded by The Great Unwashed from the Global South).
As recent developments pertaining to Ukraine show, Ukronazi Russophobia is very much a matter of national identity in Ukraine’s most backward region, Galicia. Robert Conquest knew what communities would tell him horror stories about filthy Moskals raping and starving people en masse, and today’s MSM keep up the reputation of the Ukronazis as national resistance forces even as they terrorize the civilian population while Russia ends their grotesque misrule.
Conquest and other promoters in zone A of disinfo agitprop against the USSR ”proved” their statistics by totally unscientific guesswork based on arbitrary demographic prognostications. Essentially, whatever ”deficits” in the actual population numbers could be construed based on these prognostications were defined as ”killed by Soviet communism”. Suffice it to say that Conquest’s presentday soulmates are no better in the meaning ’more professional’. And that judgment applies both to the Ukronazis and their hagiographers in zone A without exception.
Maybe we’re at a turning point as far as the public is concerned? Here’s Joe Rogan today (huge audience):
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/watch-rogan-exposes-how-west-has-done-complete-180-corrupt-ukraine
A comment from the linked ZroHedge article: “tis why, if you are Putin, the LAST city you want to target is DC. Our own imperial palaces on the Potomac are doing a stellar job suppressing the former republic – far better than anything Putin could hope to achieve.”
True.
Thanks, Anemm… a very good article!
I think Oliver Stones’ film ‘Ukraine On Fire’ gives a very good historical background of the situation. This is a more recent history and it begins with the formation of the OUN [Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists] which was formed in 1929. It shows how this group’s different elements morphed into the present-day neo-Nazis and how parts of this collective have continually terrorised Ukraine now for 93 years.
The name is very apt as Ukraine is once again a bonfire. Same old same old… a bankers war that never ended and began the year after the FED was incorporated.
This is now the real battle between humanity and the Mr Global collective who are hell-bent on eliminating the vast majority of the population of the world and entrapping the remainder in gulags where we will have zero property or human rights.
What a truly sad indictment on our species when the vast majority of the West is so moronic that they can’t for the life of them see that Putin and the RF are the trump cards that Mainstreet holds in this mother of all wars.
Warm regards
Col
https://greatreject.org/ukraine-on-fire-full-documentary/?fbclid=IwAR1Bkge-RvhCspeKbaO27CR3siOaE7vOGwxIOXSFFm_D-K_MqfwOFv9pmSo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCx9y6CIoQw
All kinds of scenarios are possible:
• Maybe his handlers are telling Zelensky to accept Putin’s demands, and then letting the Azov thugs—furious with him already — stage a coup and liquidate him. That would throw the chaos into bigger chaos.
• Maybe Biden is going to Poland to push for Poland’s involvement, possibly under the guise of a NATO peace-keeping/humanitarian force. Poland is raring to take charge of western Ukraine (which it considers Polish territory, with some justification). The US would give Poland that because that would place a NATO member directly in Russia’s side.
• Belarus claims some Ukrainian rockets/drones flew into their territory and may use that as a pretext to invade Ukraine and help Russia split it neatly down the middle with Odessa in Russia’s cake slice.
If even one of these things happens then the war becomes a lot hotter!
Poland is one of the prime pushers for the economic destruction of Germany. It takes true malignancy to be the single biggest beneficiary nation of the EU (primarily funded by the German taxpayer) and then become the USA’s prostitute to try and destroy both Germany AND Russia.
If I ever met a Polish politician, I would spit in their face.
Russia has too much integrity to ever work with the Americans, certainly in the long term, in any form of alliance. The US cares nothing for rules or laws (unless they are favoured by them) I think we are where we are for very definite reasons, things like justice, legality, egalitarianism, fairness are simply words to the US, which is itself, some kind of rogue pseudo state that takes zero responsibility for its actions. We can all wish a lot of things about the past, how things could have been but honestly we were always going to end up in a place similar to today, the US lacks the maturity to share or consider others needs, it has always been about ‘winning’ at any price and dominating in order to make itself feel safe in some way or other. Frankly, geopolitics will always become existential for one nation or another and when there is no compromise on the other side then it has to be a civilisational choice.When America lacks such basic abilities in the way it deals with other Nations and its inability to make win/win situations it can never have been otherwise.
We now have a choice between the reality of things and creating a way for humanity to go forward (Eurasian/global South) or this delusional cognitively dissonant ‘unreality’ of the West, there can only be one choice and that is not business as usual. Either America learns its new place in the world or it will end, if it lacks the sense to negotiate its decline then I think now it is obvious it will be a spectacular demise – it already seems to be upon us – somehow that would be a fitting end for a Country and a set of ‘ideals’ the have wrought such horror and cruelty on the World.
Please don’t forget Canadian _people_ (not the current governing elite). Remember the ties between Trudeau (the father) and Fidel Castro. Souvenez-vous du général de Gaulle acclamé au Québec… We, Canadians, are agreement-capable… friendships can be rebuilt.
Case in point: a courageous Canadian activist disrupted yesterday our foreign minister during a conference to challenge Canada’s escalation of violence in Ukraine, weapons deliveries & NATO:
https://mobile.twitter.com/EnglerYves/status/1506071941232353284
> a courageous Canadian
one swallow don’t make spring. I find Canadians to be the most passive aggressive on the planet and more condescending than the USA’ns. Atleast with the USA’ns you can find out where they stand. So, no
@proflutz
When you talk about the ties between Trudeau and Castro…let me ask you..do you mean that as a a critic of Castro ?
If… the husband is aware that the child is not his in the biological sense,
he could be less emotionally averse to acts of manipulation, grooming
or even inflicting trauma on such a child.
Purely speculation on my part, and not an answer to your question.
But still, this path Canadian pres Trudie is on is grim, dark and twisted IMO.
If… prince Harry wearing an SS uniform to a party is connected to his nazi heritage,
we might reasonably accept Trudeau wearing blackface as expressing his wish
to be acknowledged by his alleged biological father generalissimo Castreau.
Eternally grateful to The Saker… knowledge is power and in this day and age they have implemented a never before imagined system of propaganda to deny us access to truth…. rock on…
The America agenda is called Full Spectrum Dominance.
This doctrine was advanced by the Pentagon a generation ago and is a primary (though often denied) driver of American behavior today.
Full Spectrum Dominance calls for American military domination of land, air, sea, outerspace, and even cyberspace.
This Full Spectrum Dominance doctrine should be coupled with the Wolfowitz Doctrine, which asserts that America’s raison d’etre is to prevent the rise of any country or group of countries that can challenge American world domination.
All other pretexts for American behavior–Weapons of Mass Destruction, Counter-Terrorism, or Defending Liberty, Democracy, Human Rights, and a Rules-Based World Order–are lies and worth a steaming pile of horsesh!t.
U.S. STRATEGY PLAN CALLS FOR INSURING NO RIVALS DEVELOP
https://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/08/world/us-strategy-plan-calls-for-insuring-no-rivals-develop.html
The Wolfowitz Doctrine: Why the US and Russia will never see eye to eye
https://qrius.com/wolfowitz-doctrine-us-russia/
The Pentagon’s Strategy for World Domination: Full Spectrum Dominance, from Asia to Africa
https://cubasi.cu/en/specials/item/1132-the-pentagon-s-strategy-for-world-domination-full-spectrum-dominance-from-asia-to-africa
All the morons/criminals in the US can have and plan all the strategies they want and think they are “Masters of the Universe and all the Galaxies around”.
Reality is that the US is going to hell in a handbasket.Before 2030 they are not going to have full spectrum dominant even Inside the US itself.
Thanks for posting this very interesting and important content. What I know is that ‘my government’ is NOT representing ‘me’. I’m Dutch living in The Netherlands and we don’t have a true democracy nor a representing government. Sure, we have elections and people vote, but in fact it’s all illusion what’s taken place. I’m sure this is the case in all western countries where the elites control the flock of unconscious sheep through massive propaganda. I hope ‘the Russians’ understand that the ‘normal people’ are in fact the same as normal Russians. It’s the elites who are either ‘good’ or ‘bad’, acting in the interested of ‘their people’ or themselves. The western elites are not trustable and the ‘normal people’ are powerless to do anything about it, that is until they waken up in masses and quit playing along.
I totally agree with your vision. I am a Spanish living in Germany and I know well that democracy in both countries is pure theatre.
I was very involved in politics since I was very young and all my experience is that in the things that matters people don’t have any election.
When the moment of truth arrives decisions are taken without taking into consideration the wish and interest is the people.
It is just a system that allows the elites to distribute the responsibility of decisión among the people, blaming them for the consequences so the elites itself can continue their plans.
It is really easy to influence people to vote this or that when all the media is controlled and when all big companies are in the same ship. The power of all the statements working together is huge…
Democracy only exists in Rathaus level…
French living in France, same feeling.
After all what the west has done to Russia and the Russian people and the hatred the west has displayed toward Russia and the Russian people, i wonder why Lavrov keeps calling western politicians “his colleges” and even “western partners”.
Lavrov is a master communicator; it is well worth the effort to both read and study every word that emanates from him. He is a polished and competent statesman.
Well said Nebula : He is a true GIANT of a statesman. Compare him to western so called leaders who can only trot out well rehearsed and spoon fed soundbites and never ever answer the questions asked. In fact in the UK they never agree to answer questions unless the question and journalist is pre approved.
Over the past few days the Russians seem to have advanced ≤ 10 km.
Does anyone know why the advances have slowed substantially?
Why have the advances slowed ?
Because the peacekeepers are going about the demilitarization in a careful and steady fashion. Note, the goal isn’t conquest; it’s elimination of the Ukie military.
Using that measure, success is accelerating. It appears that the Ukie’s in large part are only fighting small scale rearguard actions. (If at all)
From Newsweek. Not your usual US MSM analysis. In law, it constitutes a “statement against interest,” and therefore is admissible into evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule. (Hearsay evidence, in a legal forum, is testimony from an under-oath witness who is reciting an out-of-court statement, the content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.) I.e., if the speaker says something that contradicted what the speaker’s true interests are (e.g., a US apologist), it suggests he is making a statement that may actually be truthful because he’s unlikely to say such a thing if he truly doesn’t believe it. Why would he?
Putin’s Bombers Could Devastate Ukraine But He’s Holding Back. Here’s Why
BY WILLIAM M. ARKIN
3/22/22
They have created Cauldrons (pockets) and until they have “digested” the cauldrons they have to face in two directions.
Interesting show on French TV with main guest stating categorically that the US is at war with Europe in that the sanctions regime will kill European industry.
https://youtu.be/L4fvsFnzg4A
Very mature and informed speech by Lavrov, backed by effective historical facts and international law. Pretty experienced diplomat.
Russia should strengthen it’s ties with the Gulf countries in specific and Muslim countries in general. The United States Of Adultery has caused untold misery and injustice to the Muslim world and once the Middle East dictators are thrown out by the people, there would be a better and peaceful world
I found the first comment and amarynth’s reply very insightful. Has the world really come to the point where for most people it is too difficult to spend the time required to read and reflect on long and thoughtful dialog and discussion by 1 of the top people on the Russian side. Long nowadays is more than 5 minutes? For me anyway, it took maybe 20 minutes, but that is because English is my native language. If it had been in Japanese though it would have probably taken me more than 4 hours of hard work to read it. So I do understand the difference between reading in your native language and a 2nd one.
Anyhow, I much prefer to read and think about the considered thoughts of someone who is intelligent and informed in his or her field’s rather than listen to an hour of unscripted video.
agreed! I do not think it’s unreasonable to read the whole thing, therefore having first hand knowledge of what was said. Rather than someone else’s opinion/interpterion. This way i get to form my own opinion/interpterion.
On the being forced in to the current situation, that has been the right (in my opinion) stance of Russia since long before the start of the special military operation, these words by Biden, go a long way to make it clear and perhaps an insight as to where this is headed.
https://mobile.twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1506037459687198732
It interesting that these remarks and a ramping up of the ‘chemical weapons use’, the ‘Russia is killing civilians’ narratives in the western media seem to come just days before NATO emergency meeting to discuss options (and perhaps Article 4?) takes place.
In addition if these reports are true where any such discussion/vote may be headed, it seems we are entering a particularly dangerous period, expect the much anticipated false flag…..
https://www.farsnews.ir/en/news/14010102000435/US-Navy-Deplys-Carrier-Srike-Grp-in-Med-Implemen-Ukraine-N-Fly-Zne-If
https://www.arabnews24.ca/en/World_news/194499.html
“Has the world really come to the point where for most people it is too difficult to spend the time required to read and reflect on long and thoughtful dialog and discussion by 1 of the top people on the Russian side. Long nowadays is more than 5 minutes? ”
That is one of the purposes of perception management in the coercive social relations self-misrepresented as “The United States of America”.
It is partly informed by Mr. Stangl and associates restucturing of Treblinka in 1942, which in turn was informed by Scientific Management/Taylorism – Mr. Stangl being a certificated master previously engaged in textile production – in respect of the utilities of the interactions of time and tempos to gain obfuscation of matters which are subsequently deemed to be peripheral, thereby increasing concentration on the momentary task in process : in Mr. Stangl’s example facilitating the “processing” of circa 900,00 deaths in circa 10 months in 1942 and 1943.
Americans no longer read anymore they listen to podcasts and sound bites. I live in a University town and professors have had to change how they teach because American kids have a 2 second attention span. Of course the powers that be like this because propaganda easily comes in this form! Just look at the useful idiots in my country
Other guests and commenters have noted this, but its worth repeating until its commonly understood – Fascism, nazism is not, anti-semitism, and it is not Russophobia, it is anti communism. It is the marshaling of certain ultra chauvinistic tendencies (which include anti semitism and Russophobia) of a people against their own material interests. That is obvious now. Russia is the historic enemy of European Nazism and the PRC,Russias ally is a communist society. Mr. Lavrov himself acknowledged that the ultimate goal of western fascism is the subjugation of China. China cannot be subjugated unless Russia is broken
I think many might accept your definition but the original nazism wasnt even about that.
Its main aim was to stand in the way for Germany’s legitimate and peaceoriented trade to expand the network of nations which undisturbed by the british navy could develop in the interest of the continental people.
And therefore it should come as no surprise that Britain was the real originator of nazism.
Trouble is Britain has gone to great lengths to control what is disseminated as History to the public.
Thus Houston Steward Chamberlain (HSC) doesnt ring familiar to most of us.
He has been omitted from court historians and most authors accounts when they have attempted to explain the rise of nazism.
And yet he was the most important figure behind nazism in Germany and significantly influenced the Kaiser as well as the later emerging nazis.
And it looks like he and Edward VII did a great teamwork in the effort to prevent the Germans and the financiers from joining in Germany’s promising development.
One account from 1907 claims that Edward even implied that he might expell the Rothschilds if they didnt fulfill his demands.
Those who see nazism and fascism as intended to fight communism may have a point but communism didnt grow powerful until well after the British began to encourage differences between the continental gentiles and the jews with the highly plausible motive that this happened because Britain wanted to control the bankers.
To discourage any cooperation between Germany and those financiers.
….
Actually there are signs that the British began to work the Germans against the jews about the time when Friedrich List arrived attempting to influence a modern form of nationbuilding which did not comply with british liberalism.
This may have alarmed the leading circles in Britain which had not long before been defeated by the US from which List got his inspiration.
….
The fact that, later, Bismarck didnt mind such cooperation and that the first draft of the protocols of Sion happended to turn up just when he consulted the Rothschilds, should be kept in mind.
It is also to be noted that Edward VII when he was the Prince of Wales, managed to convince the young inexperienced Kaiser Willhelm II to get Bismarck out of the way.
Bismarck who united Germany collaborating with the financiers and thus didnt fit in the scheme of antisemitism that HSC was attempting to encourage in Germany.
HSC in his teaching of the Germans lamented Bismarck’s attitude.
Bismarck apparently didnt see who was the enemy Germany ought to be concerned with.
In 1923-24 HSC virtually anointed Hitler as the chosen one, the saviour of the germans.
He really encouraged Hitler to feel that way about himself.
HSC stressed that his enthusiasm about Hitler was that he was determined to go into action.
Meaning the ultimate solution , since HSC had stressed in his bestseller Grundlagen der Neuntzehnt Jahrhundert, that the Romans had done the right thing when they exterminated the semitic Phoenicians in Carthage.
There are other accounts claiming that HSC directly applied the same reasoning to the case of the Germans and the Jews.
And HSC expressely adviced the Germans not to allow jewish assimilation there.
He said that would make them (the Jews) even worse.
There is in my view no chance that this british monarchist and agent of influence would devote his life to pit Germans against the Jews simply out of racist motives.
It was all about the bankers not to ally with Germany!
It was all about preventing investments in a rising economic competitor!
It was all about saving the British empires moneypower from the competition with Germany’s more industrious culture.
Edward devoted the last decades of his life in recruiting enemies against Germany. The secretive Round Table Group played a significant role but Edward may be seen as the main originator of WWI.
The fanatical character of many sects and of nazism enables them to be programmed and to stay put like robots. Like they are in Ukraine now.
In Persian we have a proverb – to give someone the task knowing beforehand he/she could never fulfill. In that same vain I like how the Russian FM, always very politely and diplomatically places two large watermelons under his American colleagues’ underarms. He understands the Americans in no way could be sincere in dealing with others, nevertheless he never gives up the idea. Have you ever tried holding two watermelons under your arms?
“I have no doubt that lessons will be learned.”
I am not so sure they have.
> So here we are: life demonstrates what a person’s word is worth.
Sadly Russia and russians look for the good in a person. Please be cautious from now on… the actors have gotten better and better and more slinky as well
time to recalibrate your bullshit meter
Gerade stellt sich der ganzen Welt, nicht nur Russland die Frage, was Nazismus und was Faschismus eigentlich genau und tatsächlich ist. Man verwechselt es oft, aber es ist weder gleichbedeutend noch jemals wirklich begriffen worden!
Faschisten waren neben Hitler auch andere, vor allem Mussolini. Der war nicht im mindesten rassistisch, und in seinem engeren Kreis waren auch Juden. Er hat die einzige gültige Definition für Faschismus ge-nennt: autoritärer Korporatismus – nicht mehr, nicht weniger, vor allem: kein Rassismus. Das deutsche Wikipedia definiert ihn so: „Der autoritäre Korporatismus ist eine von staatlicher oder institutio-neller Seite aufgezwungene Form des Korporatismus. Seine Merkmale sind eine begrenzte Anzahl gebildeter Zwangsverbände mit verbundener Zwangsmitgliedschaft. Die Arbeit der Verbände ist bereits auf ein fest vordefiniertes „Gemeinwohl“ der Gesellschaft ausgerich-tet.“.Interessanterweise ist das die zutreffende Bezeichnung für die – EU und ihre Mitglieds-statten. Hitlers Nazismus hatte darüber hinaus (!) zwei Besonderheiten: 1. Seine Begeisterung für die kalifornische Eugenik und der intensive Austausch mit amerikanischen Eugenikern, an der Spitze Charles Davenport von der Rockefeller Foundation und dem Carnegie Institute ge-fördert und finanziert. Nach dem 2. WK half er seinen deutschen Partner von Verschuer vor den Nürnberger Prozessen zu retten. Von Verschuer war der Chef von Mengele, der wie be-kannt ausführte, was ihm an „wissenschaftlicher“ Forschung aufgetragen worden war. Die Ro-ckefeller-Stiftung und IBM haben eine wesentliche Rolle bei der deutschen Verfolgung und Bewertung (!) sog. Minderwertiger Rassen gehabt: sie haben eng zusammengearbeitet bis 1941 und sich erst danach bedeckter gehalten, also: im Hintergrund. Weitere Geschäftspartner von Rockefeller waren die IG Farben, die nach Kriegsende folgerichtig auch erst einmal in de-ren Besitz übergingen. Man hat aufzudecken – und was ich schreibe, sind keine Geheimnisse: es wurde offen untersucht, aber eben nicht publik gemacht -, dass Hitler der Mann des anglo-amerikanischen Imperiums war, in Stellung gebracht (buchstäblich durch die Finanzierung seiner Wahlkampagnen) in Deutschland gegen die Russen. Die 2. Besonderheit war sein fan-antischer Hass auf die Juden und deren umgehende Verfolgung ab 1933. Hier sahen England und die Amerikaner schlicht weg: es war ihnen nicht angenehm, weil in hohen Rängen dort auch Juden waren, aber sie haben sich auch nicht engagiert sondern es anderen überlassen, sich mit den durchaus weltweit bekannten Grausamkeiten zu beschäftigen. Es gab damals weltweit Boykottbewegungen gegen deutsche Waren, und die waren eine reale Gefahr für Deutschland, denn Hitler hatte den Deutschen damals zwei Dinge versprochen: Selbstachtung und Arbeit. Letzteres aber wäre mit einem Boykott abzuwenden gewesen: die Deutschen hät-ten ihn nach Hause geschickt, wenn er die nach der Weltwirtschaftskrise notleidende Wirt-schaft nicht in Gang gebracht hätte. Also verhandelte er mit weltweiten Zionistenverbänden. Das Ergebnis war das Ha’avara-Abkommen, das sowohl dem heutigen Israel als auch den notleidenden Nazismus auf die Beine half. Wer das nachlesen will: Edwin Black, selbst Nach-fahre von Holocaustüberlebenden, hat das in seinem Buch „The Transfer Agreement sorgfältig recherchiert und dargestellt. Dass er aus seiner Herkunft und als großer Freund Israels die Ehrlichkeit besaß, die Vorgänge so aufzuarbeiten und auch öffentlich zu machen, macht ihn in meinen Augen zu einem bewundernswerten Mann von großer Ehrlichkeit.
Daher zusammengefasst:
1. Faschismus und Nazismus sind nicht gleichbedeutend.
2. Faschismus ist nicht rassistisch, sondern eine autoritäre Staatform, bei der Oligarchie und Re-gierungen gemeinsame Sache machen.
3. Nazismus kombiniert den Faschismus mit Eugenik und betrachtet sich selbst als höhere Rasse. Der Ursprung der Eugenik ist England und die Förderung der Eugenik erfolgte durch die Rocke-feller-Stiftung auch in Deutschland. Beim Erfassen der Merkmale „minderwertiger“ half IBM, Deutschland war nach den USA der zweitgrößte Kunde von Watson.
4. Zionismus und Nazismus fanden 1933 eine gemeinsame Schnittmenge der Interessen: Hitler wollte Juden loswerden, während die Zionisten Eretz Israel gründen wollten. Das taten sie auch – mit dem Geld deutscher Juden. Dafür bewahrten sie Hitler vor einem Boykott, der ihm die weitere Regierung unmöglich gemacht hätte.
+++
Right now the whole world, not only Russia, is confronted with the question what Nazism and what fascism actually and exactly is. It is often confused, but it is neither synonymous nor ever really understood!
Fascists were besides Hitler also others, above all Mussolini. He was not in the least racist, and his inner circle included Jews. He gave the only valid definition for fascism: authoritarian corporatism – no more, no less, above all: no racism. The German Wikipedia defines it like this: “Authoritarian corporatism is a form of corporatism imposed by the state or institutio-nal side. Its characteristics are a limited number of formed compulsory associations with associated compulsory membership. The work of the associations is already directed towards a firmly predefined “common good” of society.”.Interestingly, this is the accurate term for the – EU and its member states. Hitler’s Nazism had two special features: 1. his enthusiasm for the Californian eugenics and the intensive exchange with American eugenicists, at the top Charles Davenport promoted and financed by the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Institute. After WW2, he helped save his German partner von Verschuer from the Nuremberg trials. Von Verschuer was Mengele’s boss, who, as is well known, carried out what “scientific” research he had been ordered to do. The Rockefeller Foundation and IBM had an essential role in the German persecution and evaluation (!) of so-called inferior races: they cooperated closely until 1941 and only afterwards kept a lower profile, i.e.: in the background. Other business partners of Rockefeller were IG Farben, which consequently became their property after the end of the war. It has been revealed – and what I write are not secrets: it was openly investigated, but just not made public – that Hitler was the man of the Anglo-American Empire, put in position (literally by financing his election campaigns) in Germany against the Russians. The 2nd peculiarity was his fan-antic hatred of the Jews and their immediate persecution from 1933 on. Here England and the Americans simply looked the other way: it was not pleasant for them because in high ranks there were also Jews, but they also did not get involved but left it to others to deal with the quite worldwide known atrocities. There were boycott movements against German goods all over the world at that time, and they were a real danger to Germany, because Hitler had promised the Germans two things at that time: self-respect and work. But the latter would have been averted with a boycott: the Germans would have sent him home if he had not got the economy, which was suffering after the Great Depression, going. So he negotiated with worldwide Zionist associations. The result was the Ha’avara Agreement, which helped both today’s Israel and the ailing Nazis get on their feet. If you want to read about it, Edwin Black, himself a descendant of Holocaust survivors, has carefully researched and presented this in his book, The Transfer Agreement. The fact that he, from his background and as a great friend of Israel, had the honesty to come to terms with the events in this way and also to make them public, makes him in my eyes an admirable man of great honesty.
Therefore, in summary:
1. fascism and nazism are not synonymous.
2. fascism is not racist, but an authoritarian form of government, in which oligarchy and governments make common cause.
3. nazism combines fascism with eugenics and considers itself a superior race. The origin of eugenics is England and the promotion of eugenics also took place in Germany through the Rocke-feller Foundation. IBM helped in the registration of the characteristics of “inferior”, Germany was the second largest customer of Watson after the USA.
4. zionism and nazism found a common intersection of interests in 1933: Hitler wanted to get rid of Jews, while the Zionists wanted to establish Eretz Israel and needed money and Jews willing to transfer. So they did – with the money of German Jews. In return, they saved Hitler from a boycott that would have made it impossible for him to continue governing.
Probably a very good post but unless you use “Paragraphs” it’s just an unappetising mass & not at all easy or pleasurable to read. Just a friendly suggestion.
Maybe you should read this.
It has better structure and contains the questions, my comment was trying to explain:
https://www.voltairenet.org/article215891.html
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/03/may-want-step-back-reevaluate-israel-arming-neo-nazi-group-ukraine/
If this should be true, you should inform about Ha’avara!
currently scrutinizing this excellent document. the russtrat.ru comment in the inset ” Under Biden, the United States set itself the task of subjugating Europe and achieved its unquestioning adherence to the American course” is intriguing, essentially conciliatory by focusing blame on the current administration, leaving the door open to those not supporting Democrat policy.
Back to the document, thank you for the post.
Lavrov: “We are constantly reminded that NATO is a defensive organisation. First, this defensive alliance bombed Yugoslavia. We only recently recalled how in 1998 Joe Biden was so proud that he personally contributed to the decision to bomb Belgrade, and bridges over the Drina River. It was fascinating to hear this from someone who claims Russia is led by war criminals.”
bwa ha ha ha. Sergei Lavrov is not only a great diplomat but he is also quite an amusing satirist. I must confess that sometimes i’m more interested in such golden nuggets than in some of the longer, but necessary, explanations of foreign policy, etc.. A battle of satirists between Zelensky and Lavrov would be worth watching. Maybe when this is all over such a performance can be arranged. ha ha.
Lavrov: “To my great regret and shame, President Zelensky has been asking how he could be a Nazi if he has Jewish roots. He said this on the exact day when Ukraine demonstratively withdrew from the Agreement on Perpetuating the Memory of the Courage and Heroism of the Peoples of the CIS Countries During the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945. When he personally patronises the tendencies I have mentioned, it is difficult to take the policy of the Ukrainian leadership seriously. Just as in the early stages of his presidency, and even earlier, when he was a stage and soap opera star, he assured me in every possible way that it was unthinkable for him that the Russian language could be infringed upon. So here we are: life demonstrates what a person’s word is worth.”
Lavrov 1 Zelensky 0.
This is the first time, e.g., that I have actually read from a public figure about the balance between sovereignty of states and the right to self-determination. I didn’t know such things were considered and/or codified into international agreements and such. Nice to see Lavrov throw that sort of imponderable in here for free.
What a contrast! On the one hand, we have the belligerent disdain of learning from history; e.g., Gore Vidal once wrote, “We live in the United States of Forget. Nobody remembers anything.” On the other hand, we have civilizations whose age is measured in hundreds, even thousands, of years.
It’s a mis-match, really. However, it is nice to see the RF represented by such an able statesman.
Ditto for Russian President Putin. Just consider the lengthy and extemporaneous press conferences that last for hours. Sleepy Joe would be “sawing lumber” by then.
Sadly, we are not represented nearly so well in the west. Instead we get gangsters, clowns, chihuahuas, poodles and other sorts of barking dogs, seals and so on. It’s a circus and, as P.T. Barnum once noted, “there’s a sucker born every minute”.
Ay, caramba ! You have to laugh to avoid crying.
Thank you amarynth. Greatly appreciate your efforts.
“NATO Peacekeepers” is an oxymoron.
Thank you. This is the sort of thing I most appreciate about the saker blog. There wasn’t all that much in this presentation that he and Putin haven’t articulated in many speeches of late but very helpful to have such a comprehensive presentation with substantive Q&A.
As always with Lavrov, I can’t help thinking how few Western politicians I’ve known in my almost 70 year lifetime would be either willing or able to make such a presentation and handle so many probing, detailed questions. Boris has the intellect but not the character, Clinton also who would have given far too many overly lengthy answers and way more fluff generally. Thatcher couldn’t have handled such length, breadth and depth. Kennedy, on the other hand, would have enjoyed it though in his day such detailed discussions in public were extremely rare – though come to think of it so are they today.
I remain deeply impressed by the Russian leadership even though I suspect that the Ukraine operation – though fully justified within the frame of reference given – is part of a much larger geopolitical strategy one of whose aims is the collapse of the post-war world order along with the representative republic in North America. Maybe the New Eurasians have nothing to do with the self-destructive orgy America has entered into of late, but I can’t help suspecting that they are playing more of a role in that whole dynamic that is apparent on the surface.
In any case, thank you again for publishing this.
excellent Amarynth! the baby-spoon feeding is exactly what the short attention span people want.
Pale fact: nobody in west read and care what Lavrov is saying. I think that’s the reason why many more than just Paul Craig Roberts are getting angry to Russia wasting its time to make the west “listening”. And I do understand in many ways frustration of growing numbers of people like PCR.
Pale fact: Lavrov and Russia are not “wasting time” as can readily be gauged by the deployment of the Russian military to 404 with appreciable success and absolutely zero consent of zone A.
As is well known: Those who won’t listen to Lavrov will have to deal with Mr. Shoygu. Or, better still: Ramzan Kadyrov.
Sergey Lavrov has no equal anywhere in the diplomatic realm, possibly with the exception of UN Secretary General Dag Hammarskjöld who was assassinated by a Belgian fascist mercenary shooting down the UN aircraft over the Congo back in 1961.
Here is what I appreciated the most in this very impressive submission:
Sergey Lavrov:
Indeed, zone A is most flagrantly eroding the entire bedrock. Given the leaderships in place in zone A and zone B respectively — is it any wonder? Malevolent incompetence and indifference won’t improve things, especially not when the rotten garbage seems to believe that no one feels the suffocating stench.
A very great piece. It should be read in its entirety. Many nuances of the history of the last 10 years. Many people will need supplemental texts, such as detailing the Ultranationalists (Nazis) atrocities of the last 10 years. Germany and France have really let the side down as their diplomatic efforts have been so dupliticious and cowardly
Thank you very much amarynth for this beautiful work. It was a long read but it was worth every second. I could not get off my seat in spite of the beautiful sun shining outside…
I will get back to some elements later, because Lavrov has this talent to remember everything, summarize complex situations magnificently, and communicate elegantly. It is worth revisiting some of his statements.
Russia is damn lucky to be led by these extremely honest and talented people. And we are lucky to have people like you who are entirely devoted to disseminating the truth.
Indeed, very important document. Thank you very much @Amarynth for this.
I am not a friend of politicians. But I would like to speak to Lavrov in person. This man has a calmness and patience that I’ve never seen anywhere. Even after these tragedies, he is not offended, or upset, or at least I do not notice it.
I read it all with great appreciation of Mr Lavrov as always. Thanks to amarynth for all her contribution to our understanding.
From: Victor, vicktop55 🇷🇺 Z
Poland is preparing to enter the Ukrainian conflict
Russian original: https://t.me/vicktop55/2235
English translation: https://t.me/vicktop55/2234
Under the auspices of the United States, Poland is preparing to enter the Ukrainian conflict.
This plan dramatically increases the risks of the Ukrainian conflict escalating into a NATO war against Russia.
Until the end of April, Poland will send its troops to four western regions of Ukraine.
Preparations are underway for the entry of NATO forces into the Ukrainian conflict.
According to a number of data, the headquarters of the US European military command has already been deployed in Romania.
As part of the upcoming operation, it is planned to invade the Polish armed forces in the Volyn, Lvov, Rivne and Ternopil regions.
Poland’s intention is to annex these territories.
The intention of the United States is to involve NATO in a conflict with Russia – unleashing a large-scale war on the European continent.
For these purposes, it is planned to involve the maximum forces of other Central European countries, most likely Romania, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, the Baltic countries, to form an “allied” contingent for the implementation of Article 5 of the NATO Charter.
Poland’s actions may create a precedent that will lead to the dismantling of the Ukrainian state.
The Polish plan can also be repeated by Hungary and Romania.
The Ukrainian leadership is likely to accept the Polish demands in return for participating in the conflict against Russia.
An extremely alarming situation is emerging for Russia, when there is a real threat of entering into an armed confrontation with a country, or a group of NATO member countries.
What consequences this can lead to – it’s scary to think.
Also, let’s not forget that on the southern flank – in the South Caucasus, the Black Sea coast – Turkey is strengthening itself – also a member of NATO.
It is necessary to take into account the non-illusory chance of Turkey entering the war, in the form of a landing on the Black Sea coast, for example, in Georgia.
And, you need to take a sober look at things – there is a risk of direct armed confrontation with the United States.
The tuning fork window is expanding every day.
The situation is extremely worrying. @genshab
At least we are getting closer to the reason behind the questionable nato reactions.
And let me add that by destroying the countryside and its infrastructure, you are also destroying the dreams.
We’ll call it the dreamers disease.
They want to preserve their future ideology in the Ukraine, but they don’t want to account for that same ideologies questionable past behaviors.
Ergo, war.
Lavrov speaks more eloquently in English than most Western politicians for whom its their first language.
Right at the end he says “We must have trusted them because of some naivety and kindness of heart, which is something Russians are known for.”
Seriously, these are seasoned, deep thinking guys, how could they have been so naive? I’ve read on here that Putin stopped the DPR/LPR forces from destroying a large part of the Ukrainian army, taking Mariupol and advancing to the Dnieper. How much must he regret that now?
I think a truer answer would be “our defences weren’t ready for the blowback from the military operation” viz. the deployment of various weapons since then.
Whilst the West has been busy promoting ‘equality’ and trans agendas in its militaries for the last 8 years, Russia has been carefully preparing.
Lavrov is every bit the gentleman and statesman. Noone else comes near him
Amarynth, thanks very much for posting this “event”. In it, Lavrov once again states Russia’s IMO iron-clad “case” for why the SMO had to happen for pure self-defense and defense of the people of the Donbass.
For my own self-protection, I must say that I read the entire transcript very slowly.
I’m confused about some things.
First, I clicked on the link you proided above Lavrov’s opening statement and subsequent question and answer session. I was taken to a website entitled “ The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation”. Below that title is what has been transferred, word for word, it seems, to The Saker web site. Are you the person who translated to English what appears on the Ministry’s web page, or did someone else at the Ministry do that?
Second, what is the age of the people who put the questions to Mr. Lavrov?
Third, just exactly what is the “International Track” and what is “the Leaders of Russia management competition”?
FWIW, if I were asked to boil down everything Lavrov said to something that can be read in under 60 seconds, I would put it the following way.
The US conducted an illegal coup in Ukraine in 2014. Russia very reluctantly “turned the other cheek” for 8 years while 14,000 people died in the Donbass by premeditated murder. In order to protect the people of the Donbass and Russia itself, Russia started the SMO as soon as it felt that it was capable of both rapidly neutralizing the US (“Ukrainian”) military in Ukraine and successfully dealing with the inevitable all-out western economic war against Russia during and long after that operation. Russia’s foundational justification for the SMO? Be it an individual or a nation, fighting for your life is not the same as premeditated, first-degree murder. Goal? The nations of the world have to become much more peaceful and allow no single nation to “live by the sword” at the expense of all the rest.
While I’m typing, I read a very alarming article on RT today. Because many commenters no longer have access to RT, I’m going to present it in its entirety.
Liz Cheney suggests ‘red line’ for US intervention in Ukraine
The lawmaker said the use of chemical weapons would “alter our calculations” for direct involvement in the conflict
https://www.rt.com/news/552432-liz-cheney-ukraine-intervention/
Republican Representative Liz Cheney has proposed a “red line” for intervention in Ukraine, arguing that the use of chemical weapons should trigger a response from US forces and the NATO alliance.
Speaking with NBC’s Chuck Todd, the Wyoming congresswoman agreed that Washington should lay down a chemical weapons “red line” for Ukraine, despite efforts by the Biden administration to avoid direct involvement in the conflict over concerns it could spark a third world war.
“I think that we in the West, the United States and NATO – we need to stop telling the Russians what we won’t do,” she said. “We need to be very clear that we are considering all options, that the use of chemical weapons is certainly something that would alter our calculations.”
Washington’s United Nations envoy, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, also declared that the US would “respond aggressively” to any use of chemical weapons during a recent sit-down with CNN, though stopped short of threatening armed intervention.
Pressed on the issue during a separate NBC interview, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg declined to adopt the more hawkish stance, instead warning that Western involvement could escalate the conflict into a larger and deadlier war.
While Stoltenberg argued that “any use of chemical weapons would be a blatant and brutal violation of international law,” he added: “we need to act in a way that prevents this conflict” from becoming “a full fledged war between NATO and Russia in Europe, and also potentially involving, of course, the United States directly.”
Moscow has accused the Ukrainian government of harboring a biological weapons program backed by the Pentagon, charges rejected by both Kiev and US officials. While the Russian military has released a trove of documents purporting to outline the weapons program, Thomas-Greenfield told the UN Security Council that Washington does not support any foreign bioweapon initiatives.
The White House has instead accused Russia of planning a “false flag” attack using chemical or biological weapons, after fielding similar allegations in early February that Moscow would release a “fake video” of a Ukrainian attack in order to justify military action.
The video never materialized, though Russia did send troops into Ukraine late last month on a mission to “denazify” and “demilitarize” the country. Russia demanded that Ukraine officially declare itself a neutral country that will never join NATO. Kiev insists the Russian offensive was completely unprovoked and has denied claims it was planning to retake the two republics by force.
People in USA are retarded. They want to die in nuclear war or something. Maybe they think Putin is bluffing.
Many thanks, the saker and group, for making this available in English. It’s a collector’s item. Sergey Lavrov is a diplomat par excellence. I’m not sure we have his equal in the West.
Russia must be aware that the Western ‘elite’ is trying to create a food crisis with their sanctions – these amount to an attempt to destroy the global economy. Lavrov seems to have said this: ‘We were not prepared for the West trying to blow up the global economic system’.
And they must not allow it.
Otherwise they will be blamed for it.
The ‘elite’ will try to use this to cover up a decline that was coming anyway, and retain their (strangle)hold over at least part of the world.
The way I see it is that there is no going back to the way it was in the world. There is no going back to a dente like a cold war 2.0 in which new borders and lines will be drawn, and from which the US/Nato Imperium will continue its hostile actions such as economic sanctions; using proxies to terrorize other nation states and basically weaponizing everything for their imperialistic ambitions. Hell, they are even weaponizing space.
In this sense the honourable Mr. Lavrov is absolutely correct in stating that it is not really about The Ukraine as they have foolishly allowed themselves to be used as a proxy to undermine and attack Russia instead of pursuing their independence and fostering beneficial relations with their neighbours. It is US/Nato and assorted vassals like Canada that are responsible for what is happenning in The Ukraine and they must stop or be stopped in the new Era that is dawning.
An example that highlights this for me is the announced threat of deploying Nato troops to Europe, I think the number one hundred and forty thousand was mentioned in the lying corporate media. The ‘intelligencia’ at another site discounted this as insignificant claiming it would take five hundred thousand troops to be a real threat. Does it matter what number it is? These are but many of hostile provocations against a Sovereign Nation. This too must stop or be stopped if the human collective is to mature out into a more peaceful and prosperous civilization that has finally learned that cooperation and consultation are much more rewarding than aggressive acts of war.
This may be anathema to the western elite mind that has rendered all strata of western life into a competitive, dog eat dog, winner-loser, deserving/underserving daily grind based on lies and divisive politics. They have even weaponized medicine and health. They see virtue in covering the human face perhaps considered by them as a sign of fealty.
Thank you Saker for your tireless efforts to bring us the truth about Russia. This speech by the eminent Lavrov is in a class of its own.
The US citizens don’t care about the Ukraine because they have to face a high inflation rate right now. If the yanks don’t want nukes in Latin America pointing to US cities, then they have to remove their troops and weapon supplies to that fascist East European failed state.
Lavrov: “We must have trusted them because of some naivety and kindness of heart, which is something Russians are known for… I have no doubt that lessons will be learned.”
I have already mentioned many times – starting in 2014 – that Russia missed the boat then to make a significant contribution to its own security and international peace and I am certifiably vindicated – but not pleased – that the minister for Foreign Affairs recognized that mistakes were made. Diplomatically, he used “naivety and kindness of heart” as an exculpatory euphemism for a blatant error of judgement and inability to read the criminal “Western” mind and its purpose. I should not harp on it so often and openly; yet, even I, a common observer and student of historical evens, could “see” further back, in 1990, that “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century” (VV Putin) would bring dire days for Russia and the world.
Many millions of people around the world were the victims and silent witnesses of the orgy of bloody barbarity unleashed everywhere as the proclaimed US “peace dividend”. I don’t blame Russia for ceasing to act as the “defender” of the weaker nations which suffered the depravity of US aggression – its duty is to protect the Russian people – but in 2014 it failed that duty and neglected its own security too.
The candid remarks by Lavrov reveal that endearing humility of admitting the collective guilt and also show there is a guiding conscience in the Russian government actions and that now is amending the appalling inaction of 2014. May the “spirit of 1941′ galvanize the nation again to victory for its sake and the world’s.
I don’t think that what you stated concerning no action from Russian side in the last eight years is solely the basis for “not acting earlier”and it was neither a soft heart nor some other soft way of thinking.
I think it should always considered (when acting with USA and its poodles) that there has to be an edge in military machinery/equipments etc. in order to take action. This has been achieved by Russia. Russia is much more advantaged than USA at the present. However, this could change in a few years if Russia doesn’t take care and neglect future developments. I.e. develops again much more advanced military equipments etc.
Hopefully it will also achieve much more in economic developments as this is very important for a stable country.
You are correct and I should have qualified “inaction” as lack of action to suppress the cancer that infected Ukraine after the Maidan coup d’etat. There were positive actions by the “polite people” who secured Crimea and the “green men” who helped to defend Novorossyia, but there were also reports that VV Putin personally intervened to prevent the destruction of the ATO forces by the Donbass militias in two crucial battles, Ilovaisk and Debaltsevo, while negotiations were taking place in Minsk – probably the velvet glove to obtain signatures for the useless Minsk Agreements.
I agree that in the years since 2014 Russia has improved its military posture and hardware in preparation for the inevitable showdown, but the Ukrainian forces were easy pickings back then considering that the Donbass civilians – with a little help – easily defeated them. Besides, the justification for intervention now was also available then, plus the fact that it was justifiable to restore order and the legitimate elected government.
When Mr Lavrov says the obvious, that mistakes were made, I admire his moral courage and candour. I somehow get the feeling that he was blameless (that he was in favour of a vigorous response) but was loyal to his colleagues in the Security Council and in carrying on his duties regardless.
“easily defeated them.”
A contributory reason for not destroying the cauldrons in 2014/15 was the contextual risks of US intervention in various forms world-wide, since some understood and continue to understand that “The Soviet Union” and the subsequent Russian Federation had been at war with the coercive social relations self-misrepresented as “The United States of America” since at least 1922 in various forms, and hence parallel with securing Crimea, preparation should be made for an existential war through multi-vectors over extended periods with the co-operation of others, predicated on avoidance of practices of assigning blame which is a derivative of the hubris of certainty and simultaneous denial precluding co-operation.
A question of quelle foix, not parfoix.
Action was taken, but it was ignored and replaced w/the status quo, which is today feeling the consequences of retaining the status quo.
May the system put itself through the washer, just b/c it can, and deserves to be.
Amazing speech, brilliantly articulated, and without the aid of a teleprompter, as is usual from Mr Lavrov.
I read every word because they are so reasonable and compelling. Mr. Lavrov is surely the world’s foremost diplomat, and this report of his comments shows why.
Excellent. Thank you Russia for standing up to the Western bullies. They believe they’re God. Have they a rude awakening coming to them!!! Russia will be the nation glorifying God and will lead the world back to normality. I pray for President Putin and the Russian people. Have such deep respect for your people. May God bless you. Love from Australia.
Video link won’t work
Sergey Lavrov is the best diplomat the world has , bar none .Many good comments on this article and richly deserved .The Saker is usually very good and didn’t disappoint again.
The Man. Has spoken. I took my time, that is, I took the time to read, to listen, to savour and heed his words. He deserves that kind of respect, the foremost world diplomat of not only these times, but of my already-long life.
Mr Gromyko was the standard for so much of my life, and as he was the Man for his times, so is Mr Lavrov of his own pinnacle and acme in a world grown into this current wretched state. We are so very fortunate to have him—that is the entire world is so very fortunate he has the helm in Russian Federation foreign policy.
A female friend who is Palestinian has had a long career at the UN and recounts how unfailingly polite and charming is Mr Lavrov in her not infrequent interactions with him over the years. As she herself has the same qualities in abundance, I’ll most certainly take her word for his graciousness even among those of a lesser stature in the rarefied world of highest echelon diplomacy. .
“ if you were to say that anyone who considers themselves Russian and is a citizen of Ukraine should get out for the sake of their future and their children, (as President Vladimir Zelensky said in September 2021)”
Where did Zelensky say this? Having trouble finding anything
Thank you for providing and publishing this. I agree with the author’s view that it cannot be condensed – summarized – and is worthy of a full read.
I haven’t, through the years, heard or read much, if anything, from Russia that wasn’t rational and intellectually informed.
Foreign Minister Lavrov’s address is lucid, honest, thorough and truthful. I only wish that our own U.S. government had such qualities. Instead, it is rife with sickening liars and dissemblers of all sorts. The State Department and its “civilian” counterpart, the Council on Foreign Relations, are full of demonic megalomaniacs obsessed with seizing control of the entire earth as a kind of new Imperium Romanum.
Europe and its economic center, Germany, is merely a serf-like conglomerate used as a tool toward this end of world subjugation.
As Minister Lavrov has pointed out, the Ukraine operation is merely a U.S.-generated proxy war against Russia. If the military situation there does not develop as the “indispensable nation” wishes, the genocidists in Washington will invent some excuse to turning their failure into a cause for World War III. I hope that the Russian analysts understand that this is the true strategy and trajectory for the declining regime in an increasingly desperate America.
Long Live Lavrov!
Lavrov: “Russia should live with China, working with the rest of the world , and always on guard towards US/EU/UK”; aka the (You Suck) bloc.
All the answers, explanation,theories are great. Hope there will be balance of love, balance of power to keep the world to peace. God Bless.