Dear ladies and gentlemen,
We held talks with my Kyrgyz colleague and friend R.A.Kazakbayev. The negotiations were friendly, trusting, meaningful, as it should be between allies, strategic partners, which are our states and peoples.
This year is marked by the 30th anniversary of diplomatic relations. The anniversary will be celebrated on March 20th, that is, very soon. We have agreed on what events will be organized in our countries on the occasion of this anniversary. I am sure that they will arouse keen interest among the citizens and peoples of our countries.
We stated that our bilateral cooperation is based on the agreements reached by our presidents in the development of interstate agreements and treaties that define the key areas of our cooperation for years to come.
Intergovernmental commissions are actively working. They determine issues related to the development of our trade, economic and investment cooperation. At the same time, this activity is coordinated with the work of the Eurasian Economic Union. In 2022, Kyrgyzstan is the chairman there. Today we expressed our support for the priorities that were outlined in the recent address of the President of the Kyrgyz Republic S.N.Zhaparov on the occasion of assuming the chairmanship. We believe that this year will allow us to advance integration processes within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union to a new level.
We welcome the intensified parliamentary ties. Last month, the Chairman of the Parliament of Kyrgyzstan visited us, and other contacts are planned through ministries and departments.
We talked about our cooperation in other areas, including the military-technical sphere, cooperation between ministries of emergency situations. We also mentioned the keen interest of our citizens in cultural, humanitarian, and educational interaction, including in the framework of events that took place despite coronavirus restrictions within the framework of the “cross” Year of Russia and Kyrgyzstan. The year is coming to an end and a closing ceremony is expected in Bishkek in the near future.
Speaking about the humanitarian agenda, I will mention that we are looking forward with enthusiasm to the program that will be implemented in Kyrgyzstan due to the fact that this year the ancient city of Karakol received the status of the cultural capital of the Commonwealth of Independent States.
We discussed topical issues on the regional agenda from the same or very close positions, our cooperation in international organizations, including the UN, CIS, CSTO, SCO, and outlined concrete steps to strengthen our coordination in these structures, which is reflected in the cooperation plan of our ministries, which has just been signed.
Much attention was paid to strengthening security and stability in Central Asia, especially in the context of the consequences that are still being observed in this region after the hasty withdrawal of the United States and its allies from Afghanistan. Especially in the context of the experience that was acquired by both our countries and the CSTO as an organization in connection with the events in Kazakhstan in January this year. Then at the request of the President K.-Zh.All members of the CSTO promptly agreed on the deployment of a peacekeeping contingent in order to help stabilize the situation and eliminate the threats caused by attempts of a terrorist attack on this country. This is another reason to continue strengthening our cooperation within the framework of the CSTO, as well as to increase the effectiveness of the SCO in countering new challenges and threats.
We signed a joint statement following the talks and agreed that the implementation of the Program of inter-ministerial Cooperation will contribute to further consolidation of our foreign policy coordination.
Russia welcomed the stabilization of the domestic political situation in the Kyrgyz Republic, including the successful implementation of constitutional reform, the approval of the presidential form of government, the recent parliamentary elections and the formation of executive authorities. I am convinced that a stable Kyrgyzstan, together with us, together with other allies in this region, will promote a positive agenda that will allow all countries, all peoples located here to feel positive changes.
Question: As you know, Russia and Ukraine have agreed on the format of the regime for maintaining humanitarian corridors for the exit of civilians. How does the Russian side support the evacuation of citizens of foreign countries from different cities of Ukraine?
Sergey Lavrov: The issue really has an acute humanitarian character. From the very first days of the special military operation, it was emphasized that our armed forces are carrying out targeted strikes exclusively on the objects of the military infrastructure of Ukraine, which may threaten the Russian Federation in connection with the anti-Russian aggressive militant course that the Kiev authorities have been pursuing all the previous time.
From the very beginning, we indicated our readiness to provide humanitarian corridors, both for civilians of the respective settlements and for foreign citizens who found themselves on the territory of Ukraine at that time. Among these foreign citizens there are also citizens of China, mainly students, India and a number of other countries, including African and Asian. These issues were discussed in recent telephone conversations between the leaders of China, India and the Russian Federation. During these conversations, it was once again emphasized that the Ukrainian authorities are well aware of the proposals that are being made on the ground by our servicemen. They discussed, in particular, the situation in and around Kharkiv, where there were many foreign students. Our military, the services of the Ministry of Emergency Situations were ready, and already had 150 buses – comfortable, with food, drinks, with the necessary warm things. They were ready to accept foreign students as well. However, the Ukrainian authorities holding Kharkiv refused to open this corridor. It seems from this and some similar episodes that the Ukrainian regime is not averse to holding both foreigners and civilians as hostages.
Now this work is being carried out a little more responsibly. The day before yesterday, at the talks between the Russian and Ukrainian delegations in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, it was announced to everyone’s satisfaction that there was agreement on the creation of humanitarian corridors. We expect (at least we expected) that this agreement will be clearly implemented. Our military did all the work that depended on them. The main thing now is that people should be released from cities and settlements through the humanitarian corridors created, within the framework of which our military provides security.
Today, information appears in social networks that the DPR reported that the authorities of Mariupol refuse to give residents the opportunity to leave along the humanitarian corridor created by the Russian military. There is also information from the city of Kherson. When the humanitarian corridor opened, our representatives of the Ministry of Emergency Situations (who went to help civilians evacuate) they wanted to deliver humanitarian aid there. Allegedly (we are now double-checking) the authorities of Kherson refused to accept such humanitarian aid. I repeat: this is a message that needs to be rechecked. This is similar to the manners of the Kiev regime, which, unfortunately, is guided solely by considerations of escalating confrontation in a rude Russophobic way and only in the last place is the fate of civilians, including foreign students.
Question: The Russian and Ukrainian sides held two whole rounds of talks in Belarus. What are the main contradictions at the moment? What does Moscow expect from these negotiations? Is a third round possible, if so, when?
Sergey Lavrov: I won’t even repeat what the main contradictions are. There is no point in covering this topic in detail. It has been repeatedly publicly designated. What conditions we consider absolutely essential for resolving this crisis, for removing the threat that has been created for years by members of the North Atlantic Alliance on the territory of Ukraine against the Russian Federation, we outlined in the speeches of the President and in the speeches of our delegation at these negotiations. This is demilitarization, neutral status, denazification, because the rampant neo-Nazism with the direct connivance of enlightened Europe has acquired an unacceptable, threatening level.
The fact that Crimea has been Russian for a long time is a fact that must be recognized. The independence proclaimed by the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics within the borders of the respective regions must be recognized.
About the prospects of negotiations. While our participants are waiting for at least some information from the Ukrainian side, as well as the first two rounds of negotiations. The situation looks quite strange. It seems that everyone is interested in reaching an early agreement on how to fully resolve everything. On the other hand, it would seem that the most interested party – the Ukrainian one – is constantly coming up with some excuses in order to postpone the start of the next meeting. They are delayed, they postpone the agreed deadlines. We haven’t received any new deadlines yet. We were ready, as our Ukrainian colleagues were already well aware, to move forward for the third round from yesterday evening.
It is difficult to comment on the prospects and rounds of the negotiations themselves. But constant embittered statements by V.A. Zelensky do not add optimism. He launched into invective against the NATO meeting. He was a little rude to his curators, accused them of inaction. I have a question, if he was so upset that NATO did not stand up for him, as he hoped, then he still relies on resolving the conflict by involving NATO in this whole story, and not through negotiations? It turns out that he does not hear the constant statements coming from Washington, Paris, Berlin and other capitals that NATO is not going to interfere in this conflict. And seeks to provoke a conflict between NATO and Russia. If he had such a mood when he woke up yesterday, then maybe it has changed today, I don’t know. His militaristic “frenzy” suggests that he does not need negotiations.
Let’s hope that this mood may change today. He’s a mood person.
Question: What are the prospects for negotiations on the Iranian nuclear program? Is there any hope that the resumption of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) will happen in the near future?
Sergey Lavrov: It depends on how to determine the near future. This concept is extensible. The negotiations went the “lion’s share” of the way. The “arithmetic” questions are overwhelmingly agreed. There are still some topics on which the Iranian colleagues want to achieve greater clarity. We believe that this is a fair demand. I won’t go into that. For our part, if Iran agrees, we can launch these documents into the adoption process.
Recently, there have been problems on the part of the interests of the Russian Federation. The agreements on the resumption of the JCPOA presuppose a mutual set of obligations: on the part of Tehran in terms of the scope and parameters of its peaceful nuclear program, and on the part of the other participants – that projects will be implemented in Iran with the support of Russia, China and other countries to develop peaceful nuclear energy in full compliance with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and under the supervision of the IAEA.
In addition, other, primarily Western, JCPOA participants commit to return to the regime introduced in 2015. He assumed the absence of any obstacles for trade, economic and investment relations with Iran, as well as for the implementation of military-technical cooperation projects with it. Everything would be fine. But the avalanche of aggressive sanctions, which began to “erupt” from the West and, as I understand, has not yet ended, requires reflection, first of all by lawyers.
We want to get a clear answer. We need guarantees that the sanctions will in no way affect the regime of trade, economic and investment relations laid down in the JCPOA on the Iranian nuclear program. We have asked our American colleagues (since they rule the ball here) to give us written guarantees at least at the level of the Secretary of State that the current process launched by the United States will in no way infringe on our rights to free, full-fledged trade, economic, investment, military-technical cooperation with the Islamic Republic of Iran.
