RT: The Western media this week has been frenzied about Russia sending warships and helicopters to Syria. How do you react to that?
Sergey Lavrov: It was part of a campaign and not a very decent campaign, I would say.
We are sending no battleships to Syria. We have been saying publicly that we have been implementing contracts under which we have to supply arms to Syria. Those armaments are entirely defensive and they mostly consist of air defense systems, which cannot be used against the population and can only be used to respond to outside aggression.
The ship which is being discussed these days was indeed carrying air defense systems. It was carrying three helicopters which had been repaired in Russia under contracts signed in 2008. Those are Soviet helicopters. They have been in Syria from Soviet days. In 2008 there was a contract to repair them.
They are still to be assembled after delivery. The entire process will take no less than three months.
So to speak about something we have just sold to Syria and which is being used in action is not true at all.
But this story has another twist with the British insurance company, which decided to withdraw insurance from this particular ship. This is a testimony that the insurance system of Great Britain is not reliable, because they were citing sanctions imposed on Syria unilaterally by the EU.
This means that anyone – any country or any company – who is not violating any international rules, who is not violating any UN Security Council resolutions might be subject to extra-territorial application of somebody else’s unilateral sanctions. This is a very slippery slope.
I do believe we have to discuss the issue of unilateral sanctions in a systematic manner: what they mean and what can be done to make those who faithfully implement international law, including UNSC resolutions, not be subject to application of somebody else’s rules.
Bad examples are contagious. It was until recently the US which was resorting to unilateral sanctions to punish countries every now and then, including sanctions with extra-territorial application. Now unfortunately the EU is taking the cue, beginning to use sanctions in a unilateral manner more and more against Syria, but also against some other cases.
This is a trend which is counter-productive. In principle dealing with any international issue you need to include partners with whom you have difficulties, not isolate them. Isolation never works.
RT: We are hearing reports of a clemency for President Assad from the West if he steps down, some kind of immunity, how would Russia react to that?
SL: I would just repeat what I said: it's for the Syrian people to decide who should rule them, how they should live. The main thing for the external players is to ensure that they all sit down at the negotiating table to discuss their future, where the minority and the majority will feel safe and included into the political system, otherwise the groups that now support president Assad, and there are quite a number who do so, would be in the opposition to the ruling majority and the war and violence would continue, but the positions of the participants would be shifted. This is something that might happen if people insist on one-sided approaches to the crisis and on imposing something on the Syrians.
RT: Some would argue that this was the case in Libya, where a hundred people were killed just this week alone. Obviously this is not what people thought they were fighting for in the previous year’s uprising against Muammar Gaddafi. Is this the same fate that Syria has if there is some kind of an intervention?
SL: It could not be the same, because there would be no resolution of the UN Security Council authorizing outside interference.
RT: In terms of the aftermath of any kind of intervention for the people?
SL: I think intervention in Syria would be disastrous for the region. Syria is a multi-ethnic, multi-confessional country, whose different confessional groups have close relations to sister confessional groups in other countries.
Lebanon has already been influenced by the Syrian developments. Inter-ethnic clashes and strife can take place very fast and can embrace the entire region.
The Kurdish problem: the Kurds live in Syria, Turkey, in Iraq and other countries.
The problem of Christians: Christians in Egypt have been subject to some violence. It is very dangerous. They have been living there for centuries.
To topple this balance would be catastrophic.
RT: British Prime Minister David Cameron says that in Los Cabos at the G20 meeting President Vladimir Putin shifted his view on the situation in Syria. Is that true?
SL: It is not true. The meetings with UK PM David Cameron and US President Barack Obama did discuss Syria. Both our partners said President Bashar Al-Assad must go and external players must develop a transition plan for the Syrians to agree. We expressed our position that we cannot accept a policy which would aim at changing regimes from the outside. This has been our position all along.
We also cannot prejudge for the Syrians what the outcome of the political dialogue would be. We strongly support a political dialogue and efforts to stop the violence. We suggest for this purpose that all external players should lean on the Syrian party on which they have influence and thus persuade them to withdraw from cities – both the government and opposition – to sit down and have a dialogue.
But there should be no prejudging from outside what the substance and result of this dialogue might be. It’s for the Syrians to decide.
I have seen the statement made by PM Cameron that President Putin shifted his position after meetings in Los Cabos. It is not true at all. President Putin was asked in Los Cabos himself at his press conference about his position on Syria. He expressed it exactly the way he did with David Cameron and Barack Obama.
Vladimir Putin met with Secretary General of the Council of Europe Thorbjorn Jagland, who is in Russia on a working visit. The meeting discussed current issues concerning Russia’s relations with the Council of Europe.
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, We have completed the main part of our negotiations with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. He will have a meeting with the President of Russia in a few hours. As always, our conversation was very substantial and honest. We are sincerely interested in the consolidation of the role of the UN. This is one of the main tasks in the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation approved by the President Vladimir Putin on 12 February 2013.
Question: I would like to start our conversation from your last international contacts and, first of all, from your meeting with US Secretary of State in Moscow on 7 May. The day after he left Moscow, John Kerry made a statement in Rome that there is no place for President Bashar al-Assad in the new transitional government. There were also statements that the White House had not made its final decision about armament of the opposition and is waiting for the results of the investigation of the use of chemical weapons in SAR to make this decision. We know about the agreements reached between Russia and the USA in Moscow, however, we would still like to understand why we have heard other statements, which do not fit within the framework of the agreements reached the day before, as soon as the US Secretary of State left Moscow.
Question: The “Partnership for Modernisation” program is a significant element of the Russian-German dialog. What else would you like to decide within the framework of this format? How do you see next stages of its implementation? Sergey Lavrov: First of all, I would like that governments do not interfere with the cooperation of companies dealing with innovations and their industrial deployment within the framework of “Partnership for Modernisation”. Governments should know how this happens, to create a legal framework, a maximally comfortable regime for such cooperation, while professionals should decide each in its sphere. The more contacts we have within the framework of “Partnership for Modernisation”, the more weighty results we achieve in the form of final products, workplaces, additional profits of companies in Russia and Germany. I think that we share these interests, especially on the background of the most magnificent events in the world and European economy.
Dear Mr Minister, dear Guido, Dear Dr von Studnitz, Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, friends, First of all, I would like to join the welcome words addressed to participants of the ceremonial meeting and to congratulate with an anniversary – 20 years of the German-Russian Forum, to wish its leaders, all employees and members success in their further work for the benefit of peoples of our countries.
Question (addressed to US Secretary of State John Kerry and Sergey Lavrov): After your recent discussions, including on Syria and the episode of detention of a US Embassy official in Moscow on a charge of espionage, do you think that your collective work is constructive? Sergey Lavrov (answers after John Kerry): Regarding the incident of the detention of a US Embassy official in Moscow that you have mentioned, everything, that the Russian party wished to say about it, was said yesterday in the comment of the Information and Press Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia. I have nothing to add.
Dear Mr Chairman,Dear colleagues, friends, First of all, I would like to thank our Swedish hosts for their hospitality, good organization of the today’s meeting and to congratulate Mr Carl Bildt with the results that were reached by the Arctic Council under Swedish chairmanship.
Today we sign the second in history legally binding panarctic document – Agreement on Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic. This is another evidence of high responsibility of Arctic countries for the state of affairs in the region. The next is the preparation of the Agreement on Marine Oil Spill Prevention.
Question: Can you provide any specifics based on results of your conversation with US Secretary of State John Kerry regarding deadlines and place of the international conference for Syria? Does Russia consider that SAR President Bashar al-Assad should participate in it?Sergey Lavrov: There is a common understanding that the conference should be held in Geneva, where grounds for the current advancement ahead were laid by adopting the known Communiqué in June 2012.
Tweet Follow @russianembassy