23 October 2018
Moscow: 10:42
London: 08:42

Consular queries:  
+44 (0) 203 668 7474  




Interview by the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, given to the programme “Postkriptum” Moscow, 14 June 2014

Question: To all who are following the news around Ukraine closely, it seems that the West simply does not hear us. In your opinion, as a participant of the negotiation process, has anything changed?

Sergey Lavrov: Of course, it does change. You have made an absolutely correct observation – it is not that they do not hear us, they pretend that everything is happening in a different way. They still attempt to present the situation as one which needs settling between Russia and Ukraine, turning a blind eye that the cause of the problems being the refusal of the Kiev authorities to set up a respectful dialogue with the nationals residing in the South-East, who rejected the coup d’etat viewing it as unacceptable and who are categorically outraged by the attempts to impose laws against the use of Russian language, depriving the rights of the Russian-speaking and Russian population. Now it is the reality in Ukraine, we cannot get rid of it.

Instead of giving assistance to these people, inviting them to the negotiation table and agreeing about further life in the country for all those who live there, the military operation is continuing. The elected President Petro Poroshenko stated that he would stop it, and would support dialogue and de-escalation. Such contacts started in Kiev with the participation of OSCE representatives. It is not sufficient. It is important that these contacts are established directly with those people, who want to defend their rights in the South-East of Ukraine. Of course, such a dialogue is not possible, when there is the thunder of cannon, artillery shooting and strikes from military aviation.

Task number one is to stop the punitive operation. The President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, after he was elected, confirmed that he was interested in setting up a dialogue. We will see. There is foundation for this – the Geneva Statement of the 17 April and the “roadmap” of the Swiss presidency of the OSCE, which was presented by the President of the Organisation, the President of Switzerland, Didier Burkhalter, after his visit to Moscow in the first week of May. We must concentrate on the implementation of these documents. The main point there is to stop of any violence. Of course, the first step should be an end to the use of the army against civilians and then setting up a dialogue between all the Ukrainian regions to reach a consent about ways of decentralisation of power and what should be done to allow nationals in all regions to elect their own governors, work, live and raise children in the language they want, retaining a known portion of taxes for themselves. These are details. You can call it– federalisation, decentralisation. The main thing is the nature rather than the name. However, the first step unconditionally and straight forwardly is the end to the military operation.

Question: Do you feel that the Kiev authorities are attempting to make, if not a step, then some movement in this direction?

Sergey Lavrov: As I have said, the elected President, Petro Poroshenko, made such a statement, although he had made other statements contrary to his disposition for a dialogue, namely, that the military operation should end with the victory over separatists, terrorists and so on, that there will be no talking to them. This is evil. How can you say that people who protect their homes and populated areas from armed people – the army, the National Guard, which was mainly formed of the Right Sector and criminals, are terrorists? Only a few people noted that a law was adopted by the Verkhovna Rada on the 6 May, without making a fuss about it. It lists many serious criminal offences, which are subject to amnesty, including those, which are still ongoing. According to some data, about 15,000 people could use such an amnesty, and when they were released this was substantiated by the fact that they joined the National Guard. The people, who are protecting their homes from sufficiently radical and aggressive armed people, who violate all the rules of humanitarian law, are called terrorists and separatists. This is unfair; this is not the way that will lead to the achievement of consent in Ukraine.

If we are discussing whether it is possible to negotiate with terrorists, then the current Kiev authorities have this in common with the United States. The United States make agreements with the Taliban without any hesitation, while the Taliban are not only accused of terrorism, they are unanimously called terrorists in the UNSC. Five persons from the Taliban list were exchanged for a military person from the United States, when the Americans needed this. To say that the people protecting their rights in Ukraine can be compared to terrorists in any way is on the brink of the good and evil.

Question: Russia has always had good relations with Finland. At the same time, the press started to write that Finland is as close to NATO as never. Have our relations been aggravated at all because of Ukraine?

Sergey Lavrov: I have not heard this during my recent meeting with the President of Finland, Sauli Niinistö. He said that there was a conference in the region of Turku at his initiative with participation of the leading state actors of Finland, political analysts and the community. This year this conference was devoted to the security issues. The President made a speech at it, and he told me about this. The Finnish mass media wrote about this as well. Sauli Niinistö made himself absolutely clear that Finland feels safe and does not want additional aggravation in this region of Europe. The President of Finland postulated that his country became a NATO member, in which case the border between NATO with Russia will double at once. He added that if Switzerland takes this path, the Baltic Sea will actually largely become an internal NATO sea. Do northern Europeans need this and how will Russia respond to this – the President Sauli Niinistö asked this question with quite an evident pretext that he knows the answer to them, and this answer is negative – nobody needs it.

We talked about this during our talk. He admitted that some politicians, including those who are interested in promoting their popularity, use this topic, and make parallels with Ukraine affirming that nobody can be secure, when Russia is so aggressive. These are cheap arguments, serious people understand this, and our talk with the President of Finland, Sauli Niinistö, confirmed this, he knows well that the Ukrainian events (the cause of almost all of its current misfortunes) are impossible in Finland by definition.

An unconstitutional coup, and the overthrowing of a legitimately elected president simply because he hesitated in making a signature on one or another document is unimaginable there. This does not fit into the Finnish mentality. Even more so that they do not allow any violations towards minorities. As it is known, only 6.5% of the population in the current Finland are ethnic Swedish, but Swedish is an official language. Between one third to half of the population in Ukraine are ethnic Russian, over a half talk and think in Russian, and in this situation it is impossible to take a decision to make Russian the second official language.

And the Finnish cannot imagine that there can be a situation, when people attempting to protect their rights, receive an act of force from the army in response. The leaders of the Finnish Republic are fully aware that the situation in Ukraine is not possible in their country by definition. We should look at the Finnish as an example, when deciding how to live in a country, resolve the problems of minorities and set up relations between civilians.

Question: You are certainly familiar with the interview by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Poland, Radoslaw Sikorski, who announced that “Russia would be a better ally of the West than a dependant of China” etc. Not a good statement. What do they want from us?

Sergey Lavrov: It is hard to understand this. Radoslaw Sikorski quoted Zbigniew Brzezinski having said that “Russia would be a better ally of the West rather than a dependant of China”. It is one thing when a political analyst, who is quite old, with no official position, can allow himself to make different irresponsible statements – but it is something else when a foreign minister of a large European country quotes this political analyst, emphasising that he agrees with him completely. These are improper statements for any serious politician. Radoslaw Sikorski also stated that Russia would lose in a confrontation with NATO, because the power balance is 1 to 16. Who is going to fight with NATO and who in NATO is going to fight with Russia, I do not know.

Radoslaw Sikorski is a good acquaintance of mine. During our talk I will ask him for the reason of his еpatage statements, although he is famous for exotic statements. Probably this is his aspiration to participate in some race for a European position. His name was mentioned in connection with the potential future rearrangements in the EU and NATO. I do not exclude that this is his aspiration to use such statements to attract attention to himself. I will ask him, and let us see what he answers.


27.09.2018 - Remarks by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at the UN Security Council meeting, September 26, 2018

Mr President, Colleagues, In the modern world, an efficient fight against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is becoming increasingly important for global and regional stability and the reliable security of all states without exception. Constructive cooperation in this area is an important component of the efforts to shape a positive international agenda. I think everybody agrees that the UN Security Council resolutions that outline specific measures against violations of non-proliferation must be strictly observed. Resolution 1540 remains the basis for this and contains obligations for the member states to take specific measures to prevent non-government agents from accessing weapons of mass destruction and their components. The UNSC decisions taken in pursuance of this resolution are particularly important as they include sanctions for handing over any types of weapons to terrorists. There have been incidents of such handovers and they must be thoroughly investigated.

07.09.2018 - Remarks by Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia, Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, following the UNSC meeting on the incident in Salisbury

Q: Do you expect British sanctions on Russia soon? A: We are not expecting or afraid of anything. Taking to the account how things have been developing during the recent years we do not exclude anything. This discussion and yesterday’s speech by the British Prime-Minister in the British Parliament are not coincidental. I think that’s looks like a prelude to a new political season. Q: So, Ambassador it’s really coming from the highest level in the UK. A: It always comes from the highest level. Last time when the incident took place it also came from the highest level. Q: But it seems that you are not taking it seriously. A: We are taking it very seriously. We were saying it all the time. Why we’ve been asking for cooperation with the UK from day one. Only few minutes ago Ambassador Pierce was referring to an ultimatum that Boris Johnson made in his letter to the Russian Ambassador in London when the incident took place presented as a request by the British site to cooperate while in fact it was a demand to to accept the gilt. At the same time our requests which we sent to British authorities constantly through OPCW and bilaterally were ignored.

06.09.2018 - Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks at Bolshaya Igra (Great Game) talk show on Channel One, Moscow, September 4, 2018

Question: Today we have a special guest in our studio, one of the main participants in the “great game”, someone the future of the world really depends on in many ways: Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. We are happy to welcome you in the Great Game studio. Sergey Lavrov: Thanks for inviting me.

22.08.2018 - Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's comment on UK Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt's anti-Russian claims

At a joint news conference following talks with Foreign Minister of Serbia Ivica Dacic Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented on UK Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt's urges to European partners to slap their own sanctions on Russia in connection with the Salisbury incident.

16.08.2018 - Ambassador Alexander Yakovenko's interview for "Salisbury Journal"

The Russian Ambassador said he stands together with the people of Salisbury in a meeting with the Journal last week, as the United States announced new sanctions against the country. Speaking at his official residence in Kensington Palace Gardens on Thursday, Alexander Yakovenko said: “We are together with the people of Salisbury.”

24.06.2018 - Greeting by Ambassador Alexander Yakovenko for the Znaniye school Family Day (Ealing, 24 June 2018)

Dear friends and guests, I am delighted to welcome you at a Family Day celebrating Russia and the World Cup. Today, Russia is the place to be for the whole world. It is a great pleasure to hear fans from all continents appreciating Russia’s hospitality, friendliness and openness to everyone. Right now, people from virtually every country see the 11 host cities, from the Baltic Sea to the Urals on the border of Europe and Asia, and realize how diverse and beautiful our country is. We’d like to bring a bit of Russia and the excitement of the World Cup to Ealing, for those who couldn’t make it to the tournament. By the way, so far both our teams are doing very well, and let us hope they keep up this good work. We cheer for both Russia and England but I’m afraid this can change if both teams meet at the semi-finals.

20.06.2018 - Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to questions at the Primakov Readings international forum, Moscow, May 30, 2018

Mr Dynkin, Colleagues and friends, Ladies and gentlemen, I am grateful for a new opportunity to speak at the international forum named after Academician Evgeny Primakov, an outstanding Russian statesman, academic and public figure. It is indeed a great honour for me. I consider Mr Primakov, with whom I worked at the Foreign Ministry in the latter half of the 1990s, my senior comrade and teacher, as probably do the majority of those who crossed paths with him at one point. Holding this representative conference under the aegis of one of Russia’s leading academic institutes – National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO) that also bears Primakov’s name – has become a good tradition. The Primakov Readings have earned a reputation as a venue for serious dialogue of authoritative specialists on the most pressing issues of international politics and the global economy. Today, there is no lack of buzzwords used by politicians, experts and scientists to capture the current moment in international relations. They talk about the crisis of the “liberal world order” and the advent of the post-Western era, “hot peace” and the “new cold war”. The abundance of terms itself shows that there is probably no common understanding of what is happening. It also points to the fairly dynamic and contradictory state of the system of international relations that is hard to characterise, at least at the present stage, with one resounding phrase. The authors of the overarching theme of the current Primakov Readings probably handled the challenge better than others. In its title “Risks of an unstable world order’ they provocatively, and unacademically, combine the words “unstable” and “order”.

21.04.2018 - Ambassador Alexander Yakovenko's talking points at the Press Conference, 20 April 2018

Since we met last time a lot of events took place: - Military strikes of the United States, UK and France against Syria in violation of the international law - Mission by OPCW inspectors to Douma - Speech of Prime Minister May in Parliament in support of the British aggression against Syria - Special meeting of the OPCW Executive Council (18 April 2018) - New developments in the classified case of Salisbury poisoning of Skripal family - No meaningful developments on the Glushkov case - and Cyber security threats I plan to comment all these issues. And I will be happy to answer all our questions, if you have any.

17.03.2018 - Ambassador Alexander Yakovenko's interview for "Mail on Sunday" (full text)

Q: Bearing in mind that the US, France and Germany have said they agree with Britain that all the evidence suggests the attacks in Salisbury were the responsibility of the Russian state, what credibility can be placed on the denials issued by the Russian Government? A:We don't know if UK presented any evidence to US, France and Germany - highly likely none - but if they did, why not present it through the channels outlined in the Chemical Weapons Convention? Universal legal principle is presumption of innocence, and the burden of proof lies with the British Government. Its record includes the Iraq WMD dossier - you will remember that at some point doubting US and UK claims was considered a wild conspiracy theory. It is not any more.

26.01.2018 - Main foreign policy outcomes of 2017

In 2017, Russian diplomacy addressed multidimensional tasks to ensure national security and create a favourable external environment for our country's progressive development. Russia maintained an independent foreign policy, promoted a unifying agenda, and proposed constructive solutions to international problems and conflicts. It developed mutually beneficial relations with all interested states, and played an active role in the work of the UN, multilateral organisations and forums, including the G20, BRICS, the SCO, the OSCE, and the CSTO. Among other things, Russian policy has sought to prevent the destabilisation of international relations, and this responsible policy has met with broad understanding in the international community.

all messages