26 April 201711:17

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks at the Sixth Moscow Conference on International Security, Moscow, April 26, 2017

857-26-04-2017

  • de-DE1 en-GB1 es-ES1 ru-RU1 fr-FR1

Mr Shoigu,

Colleagues,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Over the past five years, the Defence Ministry’s Conference on International Security in Moscow has become a major part of the academic and practical events on military-political issues held around the world. The high-level representation of participants, which allows for expert dialogue, and the ambitious agenda covering the current key issues provide the grounds for comprehensively analysing current risks and threats and finding solutions for them.

The global situation has neither become more stable nor predictable. On the contrary, we see tension growing both globally and regionally, the continued erosion of international law and attempts to use force to promote unilateral interests, strengthen one’s security at the expense of others’ security and contain the objective development of a polycentric world order at any cost. These actions are damaging our common objective, which is joining our efforts to deal with real rather than imaginary threats.

The upcoming panel discussions at the conference will focus on the struggle against international terrorism, which has grown to an unprecedented scale. For the first time in human history, terrorists want to create their own state, a caliphate with its own territory, population and man-hating ideology. Much is being said at various levels about the need to redouble efforts against this global evil. The Joint Communique of the G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting says that “international cooperation remains of paramount importance in the fight against terrorism.” It further says, I quote: “Countering  terrorism  and  violent  extremism  and  bringing  perpetrators  to justice   remain   top   priorities   for   the   international   community.”

These fine words have been said before, but they have not been turned into reality. However, joint actions and the creation of a broad counterterrorism front, which President of Russia Vladimir Putin proposed at the UN in September 2015, are still being hindered by political ambitions and double standards.

Russia continues working to rally the international community in the fight against terrorism. We have submitted a draft resolution on combating the terrorist ideology to the UN Security Council. We have urged for the introduction of a comprehensive trade and economic embargo on ISIS-controlled territories in keeping with Article 41 of the UN Charter, with sanctions to be imposed on embargo violators.

Adopting the rules of responsible behaviour for states when utilising information and communication technology (ICT) is another important objective. These rules should make it impossible to use ICT for military purposes or interference in internal affairs. The rules must also prevent international terrorists from using ICT. Within the UN, Russia pushes for devising a universal criminal law convention on countering cybercrime.

We will never succeed in our fight against terrorism unless multiple conflicts are resolved, primarily in the Middle East and North Africa. The ceasefire in Syria that was facilitated by Russia, Turkey and Iran in late 2016 and the launch of the Astana process contribute to the intra-Syrian inclusive dialogue.

On the contrary, the recent missile strike by the US against the Shayrat airbase in Syria was a blatant violation of international law and an act of aggression against a sovereign state, which only aggravated the existing problems, making the prospect of building a broad counterterrorist front even more distant and illusive. This begs a comparison with what happened in 2003 in Iraq with the devastating effect on the country and the emergence of ISIS as a direct consequence. I think that there is no need to explain to this audience once more that a dangerous turn of events, including outside the region, could result in ill-advised steps of this kind.

Provocations like the one that took place in Khan Sheikhoun on April 4 call for a professional investigation under the auspices of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and following a geographically balanced approach. This should be an open and transparent investigation. We are witnessing attempts to block this process, which only confirms our doubts in the good faith of those trying to exploit the April 4 incident in order to shift the agenda, abandon UN Security Council Resolution 2254 and advance with the long-standing idea of regime change in Syria.

Of course, the surge in terrorist activity should not overshadow other dangerous challenges the world is facing today. The deteriorating situation around the Korean Peninsula is a matter of grave concern as Pyongyang continues its nuclear missile programmes, while the US and its regional allies have disproportionately stepped up their military activity under the pretext of the ‘North Korean threat.’ The accelerated deployment of US THAAD complexes in the south of the peninsula as part of the US global missile defence shield has an especially destabilising effect.

Russia is fully aligned with the consolidated position of the international community regarding Pyongyang’s policy, and reaffirms its commitment to all UN Security Council resolutions. However, it is obvious that the recent emergence of the prospect of using force is fraught with catastrophic consequences for the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia in general.

Russia is interested in ensuring security and stability across the Asia-Pacific Region. Having all countries in the region follow the generally accepted rules of behaviour is an essential prerequisite for success, including respecting international law, peaceful settlement of disputes, and non-use of force or threat of force. Russia has proposed to its partners and proactively promotes at East Asia summits concrete measures to build a security and cooperation architecture on a non-bloc and inclusive basis. We see that these efforts are highly relevant. China, India and many ASEAN countries share our approaches. By the way, the fruitful dialogue within the SCO clearly demonstrates that international contacts can be effective, when based on the principles of equality, taking into