Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to questions at a meeting with the students and faculty of MGIMO University and the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Moscow, September 1, 2017
Mr Torkunov,
Mr Bazhanov,
Friends,
I am happy to welcome all of you to our meeting, traditionally held at the beginning of the academic year, including the students, faculty and management of MGIMO University and the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but primarily the first-year students. A new stage has begun in their adult lives. They have joined those who will devote their lives to international relations as diplomats, journalists, business people or other international affairs professionals. There are many professions that depend on the international factor.
I have come here from the opening ceremony at the Primakov School, which has opened today in the Moscow Region. At the first day of the new academic year at the Primakov School, we talked about the importance of the rising generation in Russia. This subject is also of concern to you, because in a relatively short while you will assume responsibility for the further development of our Fatherland and for the protection of its interests on the international stage. Russia can only develop effectively under favourable external conditions, which can be created through the pursuit of a responsible and independent foreign policy aimed at upholding national interests. This has been our consistent policy.
President of Russia Vladimir Putin has said more than once that ongoing confrontation and attempts at isolating oneself or others are not Russia’s choice. We are open to cooperation with everyone who is ready for it but only on the basis of mutual respect, equality and consideration for the interests of each other, as well as compliance with international law in its entirety rather than in the parts that satisfy the short-term aspirations of any of our partners today.
Russia has a unique geostrategic position, substantial military-political and economic potential and the status of permanent member of the UN Security Council. Owing to these factors Russia is a key centre of human civilisation. We have repeatedly proved throughout history that we can successfully resolve the tasks of our domestic development, uphold our sovereignty and, if need be, to protect the rights of our compatriots abroad and support our allies. History has shown that nobody can subordinate us to foreign influence and try to resolve their problems at our expense. I am sure this will not happen in the future, either. Let me repeat that probably not all learn these lessons.
It is no secret that part of what is called the political elite of the West does not like our independent policy. They would like to deal with an obedient Russia that is ready to make concessions to its own detriment. And so they seek to punish us for upholding our lawful place in international affairs and the world. You certainly are familiar with these attempts to punish us. They are using various tools of deterrence, sanctions, and information warfare to distort our principled approach to various international issues and smear our foreign policy.
It is well-known who violated the basic principles of international law in the past few years – sovereign equality of states and commitments not to interfere in their internal affairs and to resolve all disputes by peaceful means. These principles are sealed in the UN Charter. We know who trampled on their obligations in the OSCE, resolutions of the UN Security Council, who bombed Yugoslavia, Iraq and Libya and wreaked havoc in the Middle East and North Africa, and who allowed the emergence of the terrorist international that spawned al-Qaeda, ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra, which are now the main enemies of all humankind.
Russia has always opposed and will oppose lawlessness in the world arena. Quite recently, Russia and China signed a declaration on upgrading the role of international law in interstate relations and disseminated it as an official UN document. We invited other nations to discuss it but our Western partners are not enthusiastic. Be that as it may, we will continue actively working to stabilise the world order.
Importantly, in doing so we are not striving to restore empire or achieve geopolitical or some other form of expansion. All we want is to build our own lives ourselves, without foreign prompting and unwelcome advice, without attempts to incite against us friendly and kindred nations with whom we are bound by many centuries of shared history, culture, traditions and family ties. We are not imposing our views or advice on anyone, but as I have already said, we do not accept anyone’s claims of exceptionalism, or the logic of “Gods may do what cattle may not.”
We see that many Western politicians find it difficult to accept the obvious – the post-bipolar era is over. The hopes of replacing it with hegemony were not realised. Today we are witnessing the development of a new, more just and democratic polycentric arrangement based on the emergence and consolidation of new centres of economic power and related political influence. Guided by their own national interests, countries and emerging power centres are striving to play an active role in the formation of the international agenda to make it reflect their interests and are confidently assuming their share of responsibility for maintaining security and stability at different levels. In effect, a multi-polar system reflects the cultural and civilisational diversity of the modern world, the desire of nations to decide their destinies themselves and a natural striving for justice as envisioned by those who wrote the UN Charter. Having re-read it, we will understand that those who seek more justice in world affairs are not asking for anything extraordinary.
A small group of Western states, which strive to thwart the aspirations of peoples and stoop to diktat and the use of force in circumvention of the UN Security Council, is certainly standing in the way of forming a multipolar world order, but no one can stop this objective and relentless process.
We are convinced that there’s no alternative to reviving the culture of dialogue, searching for compromise solutions, and returning to creative diplomacy as a tool for coordinating generally acceptable solutions in politics, economy, finance, and environment. The countries of the world must join their efforts and maintain a balance of interests if they want to come up with effective solutions, and this must be done without delay.
Recent tensions have come at a cost for international stability. Of particular concern are persistent efforts by NATO to reshape the military-political situation in the Euro-Atlantic area, including the build-up of military presence and infrastructure in the regions bordering on Russia, and, of course, the creation of a European segment of US global missile defence. Probably, those who initiate such unconstructive actions realise that we can reliably ensure our sovereignty and security under any scenario that may come our way. However, being a responsible country, we are firmly committed to the declarations made by the OSCE and the Russia-NATO Council over the past 20 years. We all want to form a security space in the Euro-Atlantic and Eurasia that is equal for all. None of us will try to improve one’s own security at the expense of the security of others. Unfortunately, these declarations remained on paper as political promises. Our attempts to make them legally binding were rejected by Western countries. I’m convinced that if it turned out the other way, and if equal and indivisible security was actually legally binding, then many current conflicts in Europe would have been settled a long time ago. I think this is true of the Transnistrian, Karabakh, and Kosovo conflicts. With legally binding equal security regulations, we could have agreed on the non-use of force in Transcaucasia, which we have long been trying to achieve. The most recent Ukraine crisis probably would not have taken place, if we all respected our OSCE commitments of equal and indivisible security.
Nonetheless, we will continue to seek to unite the efforts of all the countries in the Euro-Atlantic area and throughout the world to repel common terrible threats, primarily, the threat of international terrorism. We are helping the legitimate Syrian government to neutralise terrorists and are contributing to the general political process. We are working with all the parties involved and are not encouraging outside interference, based on the premise that the Syrians themselves should determine the future of their country. We are using the same principles in our dealings with all the parties to the crises in Libya, Iraq, and Yemen as we seek to overcome the challenges faced by these countries. We offer our assistance in resuming the Palestinian-Israeli talks, promote national reconciliation initiatives in Afghanistan and peaceful settlement of the nuclear problem on the Korean Peninsula.
The implementation of President Putin’s initiative to form the Greater Eurasian Partnership, which provides for establishing an open multilateral trade and economic cooperation between the countries participating in the EAEU, the SCO, ASEAN, and, possibly, other Asian and European countries, in the interest of forming a single economic space from the Atlantic to the Pacific, will take time to get implemented. This is a long-standing idea, but, given the lively interest in it on behalf of regional integration groups, it may well become a reality.
We hope that common sense and political wisdom will make it possible to restore our relations with the EU and its members based on genuine neighbourliness, predictability and openness.
With regard to our other neighbour, the United States, as President Putin put it, we are not looking for trouble with that country and have always been friendly with the American people. We are now open to constructive interaction inasmuch as it meets Russian interests. We sincerely want the bilateral political atmosphere to become normal. However, as you know, it takes two to tango. So far it seems like our American partners are more interested in solo break dancing.
We will continue to promote a positive agenda, mutually respectful approaches, and seek and find compromises. This is how we build our cooperation within the EAEU, the CSTO, the CIS, the SCO, BRICS, and, on a bilateral basis, without exaggeration, with the countries of all continents.
Thank you. I’m now ready to take your questions.
Question: In July Russia, the United States and Jordan agreed to create a de-escalation zone in southwest Syria, but their initiative has met with harsh criticism from Israel. Can you explain the reason for that country’s reaction?
Sergey Lavrov: I would not say that this decision disregarded Israel’s security interests. When we considered this decision, we not only held discussions within the Russia-Jordan-USA group but we also informed our Israeli partners on the direction which our work was taking. When we completed the main part of our discussions (we are to coordinate yet the operation modalities of the given de-escalation zone, monitoring of developments within the zone and ceasefire violations, as well as humanitarian deliveries, although the zone has become operational), we were told, including during the Sochi meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Vladimir Putin, that Israel was nevertheless bothered about its security. We can understand its concern. Our talks on the Middle Eastern questions, including Syrian, Lebanese and Palestinian-Israeli questions, are held so as the agreements we reach – regrettably, they have been few so far – do not infringe on the security interests of Israel and any other country. We have assured our Israel colleagues that their worries, if any, about possible infringements on their security were unsubstantiated, because we are firmly committed to preventing such infringements. Evidence of this is the comment issued by Prime Minister Netanyahu after an Israeli newspaper alleged that his meeting with Vladimir Putin was not successful. Mr Netanyahu said that it was not true. I believe this fully answers your question.
Question: Russian Emperor Nicholas I told the French Ambassador that he inherited extremely important tasks from his brother [Emperor Alexander I], and the most important of these was the [Middle] East. Henry Kissinger also pointed out that events in the East, primarily Syria, demonstrated a horrifying trend towards the disintegration of sovereignty, never-ending disputes and wars. The key role in this region is played by Middle Eastern powers, in particular, Qatar. How can the Syrian problem influence Russian-Qatari relations?
Sergey Lavrov: It is not surprising that such fire-breathing regions like the Middle East or the Balkans, which attract a variety of external actors (both neighbouring and distant ones), have been in the focus of global politics for centuries. You have connected this precept with Russian-Qatari relations. We have very good relations with all countries in this region, including the Gulf countries and also Arab countries, such as Iran, with which we are developing trust-based relations while trying to understand our partner’s practical interests in any situation. We do not agree with those who say that some countries in this region must be boxed in and kept within their national borders so that they would be unable to influence anyone or anything. This is impractical. Any country, be it big or small, has its own interests in the modern world, and these interests cannot be restricted to the national territory. There will always be a desire to work with compatriots or co-religionists.
We have recently visited Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. In a few days, we will go to Saudi Arabia and Jordan. We have good relations with all of these countries.
Regarding the Syrian crisis and its influence on our relations with Qatar, when the Obama administration proved unable to honour the agreements that we reached with [US Secretary of State] John Kerry in September 2016 (in other words, the US administration failed to implement its promise to separate the Jabhat al-Nusra terrorists from the real opposition), we saw that we should look for other partners, who would be able to honour agreements. These partners are Turkey and Iran. We worked together to launch the Astana process, which Jordan and the United States (under the Trump administration) joined as observers. This process is underway, as evidenced by the concept of de-escalation zones, which has been approved and is being implemented within its framework. We have mentioned one of them, in southwest Syria. Other such zones have been created in Eastern Ghouta and near Homs. They are developing quite well and are dealing with the questions of patrols, monitoring and humanitarian aid. The Foreign Ministry and the Defence Ministry of Russia have urged international humanitarian organisations not to delay the delivery of humanitarian aid under the pretext of the alleged problems with the government of President al-Assad. There are no problems: humanitarian deliveries reach their destination safely if they are sent by the most effective routes. However, our partners have tried to use the cross-border routes from Turkey and Jordan, which are not monitored by the UN. It is physically impossible to do this there, yet we need to know what these humanitarian convoys are delivering. I am sure that the majority of commodities are of a humanitarian nature, but violations are possible because various groups that are operating in these countries are not controlled by anyone. We want to preclude such violations.
When we started working with Iran and Turkey in the Astana format, we asked our Arab colleagues in the region if they are satisfied with this format. Qatar and Saudi Arabia said that Turkey represented their approaches to a Syrian settlement, but we also maintained bilateral dialogues with Riyadh and Doha nevertheless. My recent visit to Qatar has shown that there are some minor differences in our approaches: we have closer relations with the pro-government forces, while they have close relations with the opposition. However, Qatar and Russia share the desire to stop the war and agree on the importance of using de-escalation zones for this purpose and developing direct dialogue between all non-terrorist armed groups and the Syrian government. Our Qatari colleagues have reaffirmed their focus on the secular nature of Syria where all ethnic and religious groups have equal rights and protection.
As I have said, easy partners are an almost impossible thing, but if you listen to and try to hear your interlocutor, and if he reciprocates, you will find solutions that will allow you to move forward. This is much more difficult but a million times more productive than demanding that everyone do as you say and slapping sanctions without any diplomatic discussions on everyone who disobeys your orders.
To be continued…
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s speech at MGIMO
Russia's foreign policy https://t.co/MRpyP0yhgU pic.twitter.com/RhGkd53qei— Scott's Humor (@ScottsHumor) September 4, 2017
“With regard to our other neighbour, the United States, as President Putin put it, we are not looking for trouble with that country and have always been friendly with the American people. We are now open to constructive interaction inasmuch as it meets Russian interests. We sincerely want the bilateral political atmosphere to become normal. However, as you know, it takes two to tango. So far it seems like our American partners are more interested in solo break dancing.”
In less diplomatic terms, israel has appointed wankers to run their pindo colony’s dept of state.
vot talk … Yes they are indeed “Israel’s appointed wankers”. Exactly. But also these power hungry, money grubbing toadies are not infrequently “serial rapists”, “sodomites” and “pedophiles” too. Something which allows the Messianic Deep State operatives to blackmail and control their minions, be they blue blood sayanim or shabbat goyim …
On 18th September 2017
US to propose abolition of Security Council veto power.
US to propose inclusion of Brazil, Germany, Japan, India, Indonesia, as permanent members of Security Council in support of Global Democracy.
On 19th December Trump will address General Assembly with same proposal.
China tied up with Party issues from 18th September.
A coup is being unleashed on the UN.
Why would Russia china or Britain or France agree to loosing veto power?
Britain after Brexit will need that seat at the UN
And a weak France needs this seat too
Ending Veto powers makes the UN pointless and will go the way of League of Nations
I’ve said this before in another thread
Trump also needs veto to protect Israel
Read the history of the relationship of Russia (USSR) to League of Nations. Suspect the real goal is removing R from security c. ie remove only one veto – Russia’s. Necessary in order to create WW2 for purpose of permanent occupation of USSR and enslavement of peoples.
To make it short, League violated its own charter to toss the Soviets out…get it?
The idea now is to make a big claim, no veto for anybody, then arrive at the “compromise” of tossing Ru out in term of taking veto away from Ru, making the remaining set in control of 100%
Meantime T-Man? check out today’s crosstalk on rt…they say it…
Abolition of veto power is meant to give the US and its current allies dictatorial powers, so that they can outvote Russia.
Abolishing veto power means giving the US and it’s allies dictatorial powers, as that way they can outvote Russia. Simple trick.
Well if they can out vote Russia then why would Russia attend and accept this
And other countries would not be any to accept the UN authority
I can see a scenario where Latin American ASEAN and African countries and some Eastern European countries – stop attending the UN.
As it would in effect become an American dictatorship- that would be the end of the UN and the post WW2 settlement.
Thank God for Russia. With Russian help, Syria has just now lifted the siege of Dei-Es-Zor in a military campaign that will be written down in history along with the siege of Leningrad and the siege of Stalingrad. Down they all go, the Wolves from the West: Sweden’s Gustavus Adolphus, France’s Napoleon, Rothschild’s Hitler – and now the pygmy leaders of Zio-Capitalist FUKZUSA.
“The Road to Life” — Russian video with English subs:
https://youtu.be/9ICfUXw7KqQ
Charles XII invaded Russia, not Gustavus Adolphus
Gustavus Adolphus also fought a war against Russia. Look up Ingrian war and Treaty of Stolbovo. That latter resulted in the exclusion of Russia from the Baltic sea. Something the zionazis/nazis running the west hard at work trying to duplicate.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
D e i r _ E z z o r _ S i e g e _ B r o k e n _ !
/
Sunday 9pm: SAA 6km away from Deir Ezzor. A column of tanks have entered besieged Deir Ezzor. Residents in the streets as Governor of DZ announces end of siege. The show down is on.
/
Helicopter landings at several spots on the outskirts of DZ reported
/
Rapid advances by the SAA on several axis on DZ
/
Madison Ave has redesigned the ISIS flag to better visualize the new phase of ISIS’s philosophy and mission
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DI0_0_MWsAEBV2-.jpg
/
Tiger Forces and Republican Guards cross Euphrates to secure border with Iraq and Syria’s major oil fields
To give better visuals to the history making events of last night’s hour zero in Deir Ezzor here is a quote for you:
“Intense air strike between TF scouts and 137th brigade, 5 kms is all that is left, 15 attack choppers and 25 fighting bombers over the area, massive air support around the clock since Friday, to destroy anything that ISIS places inside the gap, there is no chance ISIS can defend with such incredible show of strength and coordination, there is little doubt among the folks on the ground the link up will happen tonight-Syria time. Soldiers on top of Tal al Sannouf have visual sight of advancing TFs. Exciting times ahead. “
Video is from 2015, not 2017.
The speech seems very downbeat. My Russian is not good enough to completely understand his speech, the way he delivered it. Maybe the original version was more uplifting?
Russia has accomplished a lot and many look to Russia for leadership. Lavrov sounds (and looks) worried and tired. Maybe he knows something about the future…
Excellent speech. Lavrov said it as it is. The US is picking fights universally, while Russia and China are building up the Euro-Asian Economic Zone. Once it stands on its feet, Wall Street is basically finished – Russia and China will introduce gold backed currencies, the dollar will lose its global status and the US will be reduced to a third world state, except the US population is incapable of grasping it.
Have a vomit bag handy.
US Envoy to UN Says North Korea ‘Begging for War’ by Conducting Nuclear Test
https://sputniknews.com/politics/201709041057076300-haley-north-korea-nuclear-test-unsc/
(Note: great photo showing the deranged harpy)
“Kim Jong-un’s abusive use of missiles and his nuclear threats show that he is begging for war.
“The idea that some have suggested as ‘freeze for freeze’ is insulting.”
The ones obviously begging for war are the harpy’s zionazi handlers. She, and all the rest of the quisling tuppence regime along with their backstage zionazi/nazi masters, need to share a public stage with Mr. Rope.
vot tak: “Note: great photo showing the deranged harpy”.
You are right, that photo deserves study by a psychologist / physiognomist:
https://sputniknews.com/politics/201709041057076300-haley-north-korea-nuclear-test-unsc/
Nikki Haley looks even more haunted by demons than Hillary Clinton in her last days. I guess that pressure of defending the indefensible – in the full glare of public failure on both the military, the diplomatic and the economic front – is taking toll on the nerves of this youthful US Ambassador to the United Nations.
PS: thanks for your info re anti-Russian exploits of King Gustav Adolph which his successors seem about to repeat (probably with similar results). I smell something rotten in the state of Scandiwegia – might be a whiff of fish from the NW-passage, or Arctic oil.
Upper house readies bill allowing for expulsion foreign citizens over ‘undesirable behavior’
https://www.rt.com/politics/401961-upper-house-readies-bill-allowing/
“According to Izvestia’s own unnamed sources the new bill would define undesirable behavior as any activities that could compromise national security, such as inciting ethnic and religious hatred, potential interference with elections and attempts to influence educational institutions and the younger generation in general.
“Our partners across the ocean are systematically intervening in our affairs. Now we are monitoring the pre-election situation, and analyzing the methods that they have used to interfere with Russia’s internal affairs. In particular, we want to monitor the movement of money being sent from Washington to maintain the activities of various organizations,” Senator Klimov said.
In subsequent comments to the TASS agency, Klimov added that foreign governments had attempted to circumvent the introduction of a law in Russia limiting the activities of organizations with “foreign agent” status. He said the aim is to change the internal political situation in the country by proxy, using persons with non-Russian citizenship. The new bill could oppose these measures by introducing responsibility for foreigners who are engaged in “destructive activities” or attempting to influence Russian internal politics.
At the same time he emphasized that the planned restrictions could apply only to foreigners, as the Russian constitution expressly forbids restricting citizens’ activities or preventing them from entering the country.”
Be great if they could accelerate the codification and implimentation of that law.
I’ve long said that Russia is not striving to win war, but is striving to build peace. The two are very different things, requiring different actions. Nowhere is this better illustrated than in Lavrov’s words here, especially in his answers to questions. Lavrov’s worldview is powerful and clear, and it accords completely with all that we’re seeing.
The creation of the de-escalation zones as he details the process shows that, no matter what Russia believed, its government played it by the book and chose to try to reach agreement with the US first. When this earlier agreement was abrogated by the US, Russia turned to Turkey and Iran instead. As I first learned here from Saker, these people are slow to saddle but fast to ride. No hesitation once a course is finally chosen, and no additional noise about it either. We on the outside learn after the fact, if we care to pay attention.
I think words are very important things, and it has seemed to me that Russia does too. In Lavrov’s clear and detailed presentation of Russia’s policy here, one could use his words, as they stand, as the core of a memorandum of understanding, as the foundation of a treaty, or as the preamble to a law. They are this precise and clearly constructed. And they are the same words that match Russia’s actions.
When we listen to Russia’s words, we are seeing Russia’s actions. When we see Russia’s actions, we can be sure that clear and precise words belong to these actions, whether or not we get to learn of them at the time.
No riddle, wrapped in no mystery, contained in no enigma, is Russia. Unless our own perceptions are so distorted that we no longer understand plain speaking.
This is on topic, though it may not look it at first glance.
Civics
https://dissidentvoice.org/2017/09/civics/#more-71588
“Yes, it’s just as you suspected, your constitution’s gone. You’re not getting it back. You’re trapped in a sadistic totalitarian state under Argus-eyed surveillance. Your democracy is fake. Your government has one branch, CIA. Sorry! That’s partly my fault.
It’s not entirely my fault, of course – it’s a big job, defiling all your rights and freedoms. It got parceled out in countless bits of piecework. I did not contribute much. I didn’t work that hard. And anyway, I was a dupe.
None of the worker bees knew what the others were doing. None of them saw how the pieces might fit together. Organized crime has gone through an industrial revolution of its own. Compartmented information was the key. The greatest, gravest crimes can be broken down by division of labor and division of guilt until evil’s not merely banal but tedious, like any other sort of work.
National survival, they called it. Or COG, Continuity of Government, COOP, Continuity of Operations. The idea was, before the nuclear war got going, CIA would spread out and hunker down in major population centers, hide behind the skirts of lots of mommies. When Saddam Hussein does it, he’s using human shields. When CIA does it, that’s different. They are raising the threshold of conflict by making counter-force shade into counter-value, in the argot. The Russians can’t decapitate the government, you see? They would have to kill us all.
After the war, so the plan went, CIA would crawl out from under the rubble and take over. The arrangements were quite elaborate, with far-flung hideouts, special grapevines for insiders, experts in post-nuclear stone age skills on call, Soviet-style inter-agency central planning. They made lists of dissenters to put away and elaborate procedures for CIA to choose your rulers. It’s all around you, when you know where to look. Even here in the author’s dispensable backwater there’s a nuclear redoubt, a cut-rate Führer-bunker for the small fry of total war. They dug it into the property of a gentleman farmer of oldest Puritan New England, a thick concrete manhole in a flimsy shed earmarked for minor provincial death merchants, bygone and vain as an Etruscan tomb.
Once at one of the larger mountains they hollowed out to hide in – an impregnable eagle’s nest weirdly reminiscent of a high school cafeteria – inner-party CIA spooks let on what scared them most. It sure wasn’t nuclear war. We pored over the minutiae of nuclear tit-for-tat. The RISOP, they called it – two or three thousand of these aimed at all your favorite things. If you’re in one of the bubbles, that means you will be buried under rubble, or sloughing ash that used to be your flesh.
These duck-and-cover war plans for the home front inevitably seem silly when you think it through. Who decided to pick a fight with the Russians? You think you can scare them? This is a country that nuked themselves with a 50 megaton warhead just to see what would happen. It didn’t set the atmosphere on fire, that was a relief, but once you’ve tried it, nuclear war is not all that exciting. Nuclear winter takes all the fun out of it. It’s one thing to make people grow potatoes and give up coffee for the troops. But if your part is to end up an unscorched shadow on a chunk of concrete or a tottering skeleton shitting blood in a refugee camp, that’s different. It wasn’t just the obvious drawbacks that made the plan implausible. It’s hard to take Armageddon seriously when your enemy loses interest, then ceases to exist.
So by 1991 the idea had proved not merely crazy but pointless. But instead of chucking it when the Soviets quit, they gussied it up with contingency plans for everything else they could think of, even far-fetched things like domestic insurrections. I put it down to bureaucratic inertia and jobs for the boys, and went on to the next thing with relief.
But COG and COOP remained. It never occurred to me they could knock down a couple of buildings and roll it all out. What a dupe, eh?
I should have seen it coming – I browsed the safes like they were bookshops and poked my nose shamelessly into other people’s compartments, especially abroad, where people gossip more. But bureaucracy is boredom. Having gone off to see the world, I had forgotten all about it by the time we learned what it was for.
CIA infiltrated foreign intelligence cutouts into our country, repeatedly rescuing them as they skulked conspicuously into hopeless pickles. In the Riyadh CIA station, John Brennan declined to inquire about these outlandish picaros, lest we hurt some prince’s feelings, as Cofer Black ran around furiously barking up the wrong tree. CIA moles arranged a distracting commotion of exercises and put some befuddled cub scout in charge of the national military command center. Then came a puzzling series of spectacles. Planes crashed and missed the crater or just disappeared. Intact passports and engine nacelles wafted to earth. Israeli mad bombers got caught and sent home with a spanking. Buildings fell down for no reason…”
Putin Slams American Establishment for Lack of Political Culture
https://sputniknews.com/politics/201709051057088514-putin-us-russia-cooperation/
“Putin blamed the American establishment for a lack of political culture regarding the situation with the Russian diplomatic facilities in the US, saying that Moscow has the right to decide whether to cut the US mission by 155 employees for full parity, but will not do so yet.
“It is difficult to have a dialogue with people who confuse Austria with Australia. You can do nothing about it. That seems to be the level of political culture of a certain part of the American establishment,” Putin said at a press conference following the results of his participation at the BRICS summit.
Putin also said that “the American nation, the American people, America is really a great country, a great nation… of such people with such a low level of political culture.”
It seems Putin may be getting fed up with the US’s BS (as many of us are). As always he finds a “diplomatic” way to express it. But I think everyone should be able to understand him:
“Pyongyang will not relinquish its military program under pressure of sanctions and military threats, because the examples of Iraq and Libya have convinced it that nuclear deterrence is the only credible way to ensure its security, President Putin told journalists on Tuesday.”
“Ramping up military hysteria in such conditions is senseless; it’s a dead end,” he added. “It could lead to a global, planetary catastrophe and a huge loss of human life. There is no other way to solve the North Korean nuclear issue, save that of peaceful dialogue.”
“As I told my colleagues yesterday, they will eat grass but will not stop their program as long as they do not feel safe,” Putin said. “What can restore their security? The restoration of international law.”
https://www.rt.com/news/402020-putin-russia-speaks-brics/
“The Americans were in their right to reduce the number of our diplomatic facilities. But they did it in an obviously bullying manner, and that does no credit to our American partners,”
“It’s difficult to have a dialogue with people who confuse Austria and Australia. There is nothing to do about it. Apparently that’s the level of political culture of a certain part of the American establishment.”
The jibe was referring to a gaffe made by then-US President George W. Bush during an APEC summit in Australia in 2007. In a series of blunders, the Republican leader thanked Sydney for “being such a fine host for the OPEC summit,” and later recounted how then-Australian Prime Minister John Howard had gone to visit “Austrian troops” in Iraq.
“America is really a great nation and the Americans are a great people if they can endure so many people [in the government] with such a low level of political culture,”
“We have agreed with our partners that there should be parity of the number of diplomatic staff in Russia and the United States. There were some 1,300 diplomats from the US; we had 455. We corrected this.”
“But among those 455 diplomatic staff working in the United States there are 155 people working at the United Nations. Strictly speaking, they are not part of the diplomatic corps accredited by the US State Department,”
“So true parity would be the US not having 455 diplomats in Russia, but 155 fewer.”
Putin said Moscow reserves the right to have that number of US diplomatic staff moved out of the country. He added that Russia will challenge Washington’s restriction on the use of its property in a court of law.
“Let us see how good the much-lauded American legal system is,” he said.
Having snubbed a former Republican US President, Putin stopped short of criticizing the incumbent one when responding to a question on whether he was disappointed in Donald Trump.
“Your question sounds naive,” he told a journalist. “He is not my bride and I am not his. We are statesmen.”
https://www.rt.com/news/402026-putin-us-relations-brics/
The following comments by Putin with regard to the fake hysterics about North Korea are spot on. Notice he does not refer to the NK government as lunatics or anything remotely resembling that kind of language, nor does he suggest that anyone has “every right” to take their weapons away from them, as some prominent commenters like to do here. Notice he mentions that the examples of what happens to recalcitrant nations without deterrence is too clear for anyone to miss. The only thing I would have liked him to add is the memory of the genocidal destruction that the US inflicted on NK in the 1950s, a memory that is still very much alive in North Koreans and is in great part responsible for their defiance. But this is in a way implied by his statement that they would rather “eat grass” than submit to the wishes of a universal moral leper disguised as world policeman.
“Pyongyang will not relinquish its military program under pressure of sanctions and military threats, because the examples of Iraq and Libya have convinced it that nuclear deterrence is the only credible way to ensure its security, President Putin told journalists on Tuesday.”
“Ramping up military hysteria in such conditions is senseless; it’s a dead end,” he added. “It could lead to a global, planetary catastrophe and a huge loss of human life. There is no other way to solve the North Korean nuclear issue, save that of peaceful dialogue.”
“As I told my colleagues yesterday, they will eat grass but will not stop their program as long as they do not feel safe,” Putin said. “What can restore their security? The restoration of international law.”
https://www.rt.com/news/402020-putin-russia-speaks-brics/