Lavrov: The U.S., under any Administration, will contain Russia's interests!
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov gave an interview. In particular, Lavrov answered about relations between Russia and the United States, as well as about the crisis around Ukraine.
Please subscribe, like, leave a comment and share this video on your social networks. Thanks!
Russian News on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Russian_News_Ch
Russian News in Telegram: https://t.me/Russian_News_Ch
Support the channel (Bitcoin BTC): 1P85W41S85gEbNCYdb6uazxVDQtM67W779
#Lavrov#SergeiLavrov#Russia#Ukraine#UnitedStates#LavrovInterview#InterviewLavrov#NATO#2024#ukraina#ukrain
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov gave an interview. In particular, Lavrov answered about relations between Russia and the United States, as well as about the crisis around Ukraine.
Please subscribe, like, leave a comment and share this video on your social networks. Thanks!
Russian News on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Russian_News_Ch
Russian News in Telegram: https://t.me/Russian_News_Ch
Support the channel (Bitcoin BTC): 1P85W41S85gEbNCYdb6uazxVDQtM67W779
#Lavrov#SergeiLavrov#Russia#Ukraine#UnitedStates#LavrovInterview#InterviewLavrov#NATO#2024#ukraina#ukrain
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00There is less than a month left until the US presidential elections. In your opinion,
00:05can their results somehow influence the American policy towards Ukraine?
00:09Or is their policy already so defined and ironclad that it does not matter who is in the White House?
00:16Now our political talk shows constantly hold discussions on this topic.
00:25They delve into details, monitor the percentage gap between candidates,
00:35the differences in various public opinion polls. You know, regardless of the outcome of the elections,
00:45we will remain for the United States, if not an enemy, then certainly an opponent.
00:52We will remain for them a competitor in any case.
00:55The United States considers any international problem, any of its international interlocutors,
01:01first of all, from the point of view of the inadmissibility of the fact that,
01:06as written in their doctrinal documents, anyone on this planet should become stronger than the United States.
01:12It is clear that this is a utopia.
01:18If we look at the evolution of the share of the gross domestic product of various countries in the world GDP,
01:24the share of the United States is steadily declining, while the share of China, India,
01:31and the share of the BRICS countries as a whole is steadily growing.
01:34This share already exceeds the combined GDP of the G7 countries by about 5 percentage points.
01:42The United States does not want to give up the reigns of power
01:49that they generally had after World War II through the Bretton Woods institutions, through the role
01:55that was assigned to the dollar in the international monetary system,
02:00even after the system of free exchange of the dollar for gold was abolished.
02:04In many ways, the leading position of this currency is artificially maintained.
02:08By the way, judging by the statistics, by the volume of GDP,
02:13by other indicators that determine the share of votes of the member countries of the International Monetary Fund,
02:21then the United States, if these statistics were reflected in real decisions,
02:28would have long ago lost the right to veto decisions
02:33that are applied by the Board of Directors of the International Monetary Fund.
02:38They are holding up this reform, which BRICS is advocating,
02:43just as they are holding up the reform of the World Trade Organization,
02:48where the Americans have been blocking the work of the dispute settlement body for many years,
02:53and all the numerous just complaints, lawsuits, whatever you call them, that come to this body,
02:59including from the People's Republic of China,
03:02whose goods are beginning to be increasingly grossly discriminated against not only in the American,
03:08but also in the European market, all these complaints are simply piled up,
03:12and nothing happens to them.
03:14All this reflects the main goal of the American ruling class.
03:20To prevent anyone from undermining their dominance.
03:25I have already said that this goal is illusory.
03:27In any case, the historical process is objectively moving in a different direction,
03:32and they will have to take this into account.
03:34But at this stage, of course, returning to the question of
03:40which of the candidates or parties in the United States is more preferable to us,
03:44I can only say that we must prepare for the fact
03:49that the attack on our interests,
03:54the actions to restrain our development will continue under any administration.
03:58On the other hand,
04:01we are ready to work with any administration
04:05that the American people ultimately choose, but, of course,
04:11only if such work and such a conversation are exclusively mutually respectful and equal,
04:19and if it is based on listening to and hearing each other.
04:22For now, we are watching the election campaign in the United States,
04:28and frankly speaking, we do not see any signs
04:31that we will return to such a conversation.
04:37Trump and his vice president are talking about the need to resume dialogue
04:41in order to solve one problem in 24 hours,
04:44another problem in 78 hours.
04:46We will understand
04:50what they are talking about only when the new administration officially takes office
04:54and formulates its position.
04:56But, I repeat, we have never abandoned dialogue,
04:59and it was not we who interrupted this dialogue,
05:02and it is very important
05:05that our embassy in the United States continues to operate.
05:10The Americans create difficulties for the functioning of our diplomatic mission in Washington,
05:15and we are forced to reciprocate, but, I repeat,
05:21dialogue is the essence of diplomacy.
05:25We are ready for dialogue on terms
05:29that correspond to the purpose of diplomacy.
05:31That is, it is impossible to say
05:34who is worse for us, Trump or Harris.
05:37Well, I said
05:43that we will wait for the will of the American people.
05:47I will continue to ask about America.
05:49Now we see the Biden administration.
05:51We see that against the backdrop of NATO nuclear exercises in Europe,
05:56Biden has made a statement
05:58that he proposes to talk about reducing nuclear weapons without any conditions.
06:02He is proposing this to Russia, China, and North Korea.
06:05How should this be understood?
06:07Is this really an invitation to dialogue?
06:09Or can it be interpreted differently?
06:11I think
06:14that this is a desire to somehow earn election points for the Democratic candidate.
06:18This is all from the evil one.
06:20Do you understand?
06:21The call to talk about strategic stability,
06:24about nuclear arms control without preconditions is a deception.
06:27What does it mean without preconditions?
06:29This means
06:32that the Americans reserve the right to declare us an enemy in their doctrinal documents,
06:36to officially declare
06:39that their goal is to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia on the battlefield.
06:43And, judging by what Biden said,
06:46we must accept this, not demand
06:49that they abandon such a policy,
06:53but sit down with them and negotiate arms reductions.
06:59Now the Americans are proposing the same to China and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
07:07But arms control negotiations are conducted on the basis of mutual respect,
07:14on the basis of recognition by both parties to the negotiations,
07:19that there should be no war.
07:21When they tell you,
07:23let's start negotiations without any conditions,
07:26but my goal is to destroy you on the battlefield.
07:28Well, is that smart?
07:30I don't think so.
07:32And even in better times,
07:34long before the Ukrainian events,
07:37which were prepared for many years by the Americans and the British,
07:42and which then led to the coup d'état,
07:44and everything that followed,
07:46long before
07:48that we proposed to the United States,
07:51when the Nuclear Five were conducting a strategic dialogue,
07:55to conduct such a conversation,
07:57the Americans wanted to involve the People's Republic of China,
08:02that it would also enter into a conversation about limiting its weapons.
08:06But China, for obvious reasons, refused to do this,
08:12since its potential is not yet comparable with either the American potential or ours.
08:16Moreover,
08:18we are not in any military alliance with China,
08:21and we are not bound by the obligations
08:24that NATO members are bound by.
08:27NATO is an alliance of three nuclear powers,
08:30the USA, France and Britain.
08:34That is why we then proposed to conduct the conversation
08:37taking into account the combined potential of the USA,
08:40Great Britain and France,
08:44which is ultimately aimed geopolitically
08:46and practically at the territory of the Russian Federation.
08:48The USA said no.
08:50They say that England and France make their own decisions,
08:52and the Americans do not want to interfere in their affairs.
08:55Well, in general, of course, all this sounds funny.
08:58Their goal is to promote, for self-promotion, if you like,
09:02to manipulate public opinion,
09:05the idea of limiting arms between Russia and the United States,
09:10without touching the reserves of Paris and London,
09:15and without touching the issues of non-nuclear weapons,
09:19which are inextricably linked with strategic stability,
09:22in which, of course,
09:24NATO significantly surpasses us.
09:27All these are components of the very strategic stability
09:30that we would all like to see.
09:34But we need to talk about this taking into account all the factors,
09:38including those I mentioned,
09:40and not slyly throw in a beautiful slogan,
09:42BEHIND,
09:44which lies the desire to gain unilateral advantages.
09:48It's about the same as when a couple of months ago
09:50the Americans started accusing us of planning
09:52to launch nuclear weapons into space,
09:54and they pushed through a resolution
09:56in the UN Security Council prohibiting this.
09:58We told them
10:01that back in 1967,
10:03the Outer Space Treaty,
10:07which all nuclear countries are members,
10:09stated
10:13that no weapons of mass destruction
10:15could be launched into outer space.
10:17This is a legal obligation.
10:20When the Americans decided
10:22to repeat this treaty for some reason,
10:24we asked about non-nuclear weapons,
10:28why not supplement the Outer Space Treaty
10:30with the initiative
10:33that Russia and the People's Republic of China
10:35are promoting
10:38and conclude another treaty
10:40on preventing any arms race in outer space.
10:42The only one blocking this treaty
10:44is the United States.
10:46Therefore,
10:48we pushed through a resolution
10:50to confirm
10:52that nuclear weapons
10:54and other weapons of mass destruction
10:56cannot be launched into space.
10:58In essence,
11:00this meant
11:02that they wanted to get permission
11:04to launch conventional weapons there.
11:08They refused to impose a ban
11:10on any militarization in space.
11:14These are the kind of partners we have,
11:16but we have known them for a long time.
11:18Therefore, we have already gotten used to it.
11:20A question about our northern neighbors.
11:22Until 2022,
11:24Russia had fairly good relations with Finland,
11:26to the point that residents of the border regions
11:28of Finland and Russia visited each other,
11:30went shopping, and so on.
11:32Everything changed dramatically in 2022
11:34after the start of the special operation.
11:36As we know, Finland and Sweden
11:38became members of NATO.
11:40But changes occurred not only in this,
11:42but also in everyday life.
11:44Owning houses.
11:46The Finnish authorities promised to confiscate cars.
11:48Basically, the rhetoric has become the same
11:50as that introduced by our Baltic neighbors,
11:52who have long been known
11:54for constantly blaming the Russians for everything.
11:56If we look at it more broadly,
11:58then in principle the northern countries,
12:00not only Finland, not only Sweden,
12:02but also Denmark and Norway,
12:04are active suppliers of weapons to Ukraine.
12:06Moreover, these are small countries,
12:08but they make a significant contribution
12:10to arming Ukraine.
12:12It is clear that we have not done anything bad
12:14to these northern countries.
12:16In your opinion,
12:18why do they have such a hostile policy?
12:20Well, you know.
12:22At first many were surprised by this.
12:24Then,
12:26as they rushed headlong into NATO
12:28and after the leaders of these countries,
12:30including the president of Finland,
12:32whom I know very well,
12:34he was the minister of foreign affairs
12:36for a long time,
12:38and we worked with him
12:40openly and professionally,
12:42began to make statements
12:44in Sweden and Finland
12:46that were the most aggressive
12:48towards Russia.
12:50Well, you know.
12:52We didn't want to think about it,
12:54but it's better for scientists
12:56to look for the reasons.
12:58But from the point of view of diplomats,
13:00it's better to look for the reasons.
13:02But from the point of view of diplomats,
13:04it's better to look for the reasons.
13:06But from the point of view of diplomats,
13:08it's impossible to get rid
13:10of historical digressions
13:12in looking for the reasons for this.
13:14Hitler,
13:16like Napoleon,
13:18put most of the European countries,
13:20whose battalions,
13:22divisions
13:28and regiments fought
13:30on the fronts of World War II
13:32and the Great Patriotic War
13:34under arms against our country
13:36and, in general,
13:40they didn't do it
13:42entirely under duress,
13:44I'd say.
13:46Well, you probably know
13:48that our allies,
13:50as is now becoming
13:52completely obvious from the documents
13:54that are being declassified
13:56by Russian archival services,
13:58our allies were thinking about
14:00which side to take
14:02when World War II began
14:04but when the Soviet Union
14:06was not yet drawn into this war.
14:08Not to mention
14:10that in 1940
14:16France and England
14:18were ready to arm Finland
14:20in order to try to attack Leningrad.
14:22In 1945,
14:24judging by the latest declassified documents,
14:26the Anglo-Saxons
14:28were thinking about
14:30a situation unthinkable.
14:32Forgive me for the tautology,
14:34it is unthinkable.
14:36But they were thinking
14:38which concerned the infliction
14:40of massive bombing strikes,
14:42including nuclear ones,
14:44on the Soviet Union,
14:46to dismember the Soviet Union.
14:48That is,
14:50I do not want to belittle
14:52one iota the role
14:54that the Allies played
14:56in World War II
14:58but the duality
15:00of their positions
15:02has already been proven
15:04by numerous historical facts
15:06and this cannot be ignored.
15:08And it seems
15:10that just as Hitler
15:12put most of Europe,
15:14including the French,
15:16the Spanish
15:18and the Scandinavians
15:20under the Nazi banner,
15:22so now
15:24now the United States
15:26is uniting Europe so
15:30that it will bear
15:32the brunt of the war
15:34with Russia
15:36still with elements
15:38of a hybrid war
15:40but increasingly
15:42turning into a real war,
15:44into a direct war
15:46against Russia
15:48and also under the Nazi banner.
15:50Only this time the standard-bearer
15:52is not Hitler but Zelensky.
15:54And I was frankly surprised
15:56by
16:00how easily these instincts
16:02seem to return to the Finns
16:04and Swedes
16:06or rather to their ruling class.
16:10But this is also a signal
16:12that Nazism
16:14has not disappeared,
16:16that the threat of Nazism
16:18is alive and well
16:20in many European countries
16:22and this zeal with
16:26which the Finns and Swedes
16:28advocate for victory over Russia and NATO.
16:32Perhaps this is explained
16:34not only by their historical instincts
16:38but also by their desire
16:40to show their senior comrades in NATO
16:42that, in general,
16:44they have brought added value
16:48in order to somehow
16:50raise the importance
16:52of their governments.
16:54Maybe, but we see it
16:56and I am convinced
16:58that the healthy forces in Europe
17:00who have learned the lessons of history,
17:02they also see it,
17:04including in Finland and Sweden.
17:20Thank you for watching!