Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to questions during a meeting with employees of the Foreign Ministry of Turkmenistan and faculty and students of the Institute of International Relations, Ashgabat, June 25, 2025
Mr Meredov,
Colleagues,
Friends,
It is a pleasure to have an opportunity to speak before active and future fellow diplomats, faculty, and students of international relations here in hospitable Ashgabat. Each time I visit Turkmenistan, I know I am among friends. Our relations have reached the level of deep strategic partnership.
Before I get to my remarks, I would like to express my particular gratitude to the leadership of Turkmenistan, National Leader of the Turkmen people, Chairman of the Halk Maslahaty of Turkmenistan Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov, and President of Turkmenistan Serdar Berdimuhamedov for their priority attention to cooperation with the Russian Federation. This stance was reiterated today during my meeting with the President of Turkmenistan. We reviewed the tasks set by the leadership of our two countries, which our respective governments and, undoubtedly, our foreign ministries, are working to implement.
Russia-Turkmenistan cooperation can serve as a compelling example of relations between countries in a multipolar world, where the global balance continues to shift due to the strengthening of power centres beyond the historical West.
These centres include China, India, other BRICS members, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, Türkiye, as well as other sovereign-minded nations of Eurasia, the Asia-Pacific region, and the Middle East. The African continent is making its voice heard ever more prominently, and the role of the countries and integration associations in Latin America and the Caribbean is growing.
Representing diverse civilisations, cultures, and religions, the countries of the Global South and Global East have achieved impressive successes in various fields relying on national traditions and international cooperation. They not only contribute to addressing regional challenges in line with the “regional solutions to regional problems” concept, but also engage in addressing key global issues. The consolidation of multipolar principles in international affairs is having a direct impact on multilateral diplomacy.
I would like to highlight the positive role of associations such as the SCO and BRICS, which have established themselves as key components of the polycentric architecture. The Group of Friends in Defence of the UN Charter in New York has its feet firmly on the ground. I should also note that the G20, which includes BRICS countries and their like-minded partners and members of the Western G7, holds significant positive potential.
In the Eurasian space, alongside the SCO, there are multilateral frameworks such as the CIS, the EAEU, the CSTO, CICA, ASEAN, the GCC, and - not the least - the Central Asian Five, the 3+3 mechanism for the South Caucasus, and the format of the five Caspian states.
Their continued strengthening serves the interests of global peace and stability, while the alignment of their potentials in the spirit of integration philosophy contributes to the formation of a Greater Eurasian Partnership, which is a unified integration framework open to all Eurasian countries and associations.
To ensure sustainable progress, Eurasia and the entire international community rely on a solid legal foundation, primarily, the UN Charter. This document is ideally suited for a polycentric world.
The principle of sovereign equality of states enshrined in this code of international conduct implies equal rights for all countries without exception and regardless of the size of the territory, population, military or economic might, or political system.
Strict adherence to this code will allow all countries, including medium and small ones, to feel secure.
We regard it as absolutely essential that the provisions of the UN Charter be implemented in their entirety, in a cohesive and interdependent manner. Certain countries, however, permit themselves to interpret this fundamental UN document selectively, extracting only those passages that serve their immediate interests. For example, when it aligns with their geopolitical objectives, they emphasise the principle of territorial integrity, overlooking the equally vital right of nations to self-determination. Conversely, in other instances, they call for the recognition of self-determination for territories they wish to detach from sovereign states.
Let me once again refer to the 1970 UN Declaration on the Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the UN Charter, which was adopted by consensus.
It explicitly states that the principle of territorial integrity applies solely to states that uphold the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and which possess governments that represent the entire population of a specific territory, without distinction as to race, creed, or colour.
Russia urges those who apply double standards in their policies to bear this in mind. Equally critical is the requirement enshrined in Article 1 of the UN Charter to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction based on race, sex, language, or religion. Many so-called defenders of human rights blatantly disregard this obligation when it suits their purposes to protect a despotic yet compliant regime.
Another key principle aimed at safeguarding peace and stability is that of equal and indivisible security, which precludes the enhancement of one state’s or group of states’ security at the expense of others. This principle is enshrined in numerous consensus-based international documents adopted at the highest level, including those within the OSCE framework.
One of the root causes of the current European security crisis has been the flagrant violation of this principle through NATO’s aggressive eastward expansion, the deployment of Alliance infrastructure along Russia’s borders, and plans to establish NATO military bases in Crimea and the Sea of Azov. Their objective, clearly stated, was to transform Ukraine into an anti-Russian stronghold for Washington and Brussels.
It was only after exhausting all peaceful political means to resolve the Ukrainian crisis that we were compelled to adopt military and military-technical measures to ensure the security of our state, protect our citizens, and defend our compatriots, whose rights have been systematically eradicated by the regime that seized power in Kiev following the 2014 anti-constitutional coup, orchestrated with Western support.
Nevertheless, even now, we remain committed to prioritising diplomatic solutions. As President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly emphasised, a lasting resolution to the Ukrainian conflict can only be achieved through negotiations. This requires addressing the root causes of the crisis – namely, the military threats posed by Ukraine’s integration into NATO, as well as the suppression of the linguistic, cultural, and religious rights of Ukraine’s Russian and Russian-speaking population.
The Middle East remains volatile today. The growing military escalation surrounding Iran, which poses a serious threat not only to regional but also to global security, is of particular concern.
Russia has resolutely condemned the US’s missile and aerial strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities, that followed Israel’s unprovoked attack on the Islamic Republic. Such actions represent a blatant disregard for international law, the United Nations Charter, and relevant Security Council resolutions, and they inflict severe damage on the non-proliferation regime governing weapons of mass destruction.
In this regard, we consistently call to put an immediate end to aggression and urge all parties to take necessary steps to steer the situation back onto a political and diplomatic track.
Now, we can see signs that this self-evident truth is beginning to be recognised by other countries, including those directly involved in the current tensions. Russia has conveyed in advance its proposals to the United States, Israel, and Iran tailored specifically to ensure genuine de-escalation and a lasting settlement. We remain fully open to substantive discussion of these ideas, and to dialogue with all relevant parties on this and other pressing issues.
Despite the overall complexity of the current international situation, particularly in Eurasia, it is not too late to correct course. To rectify the situation for the long term, we believe that political leaders and diplomats need a willingness to think strategically and to look beyond the immediate horizon.
In this regard, I would like to highlight President of Russia Vladimir Putin’s initiative to create a common continental architecture of equal and indivisible security in Eurasia. It would be completely open for all the countries in this space that are ready for equal and constructive cooperation.
Its aim is to overcome the persistent challenges we face, and to stabilise the military and political situation across the entire Eurasian continent, including, importantly, its Western European part.
Turkmenistan, with its permanent neutral status and its active role within the Central Asian Five group of nations, is well placed to play a substantive part. We welcome the interest of our Turkmen partners in offering their unique and, without exaggeration, valuable potential to assist in the search for peaceful resolutions to enduring regional conflicts.
Turkmenistan is the only country whose neutrality has been fully and unanimously recognised by the UN General Assembly on three separate occasions, a distinction which lends additional credibility to its mediation efforts.
In conjunction with our Belarusian colleagues, we propose drafting a Eurasian Charter of Diversity and Multipolarity in the 21st Century, which could eventually be adopted at a pan-continental summit. We see this Charter as a policy document outlining the framework for security architecture in Eurasia and, more broadly, the parameters of cooperation between countries in a multipolar world firmly grounded in the principles of the UN Charter, in their - importantly - full scope and interconnection.
We welcome the participation of Turkmenistan and other concerned countries in this work. Strengthening comprehensive partnership, alliance, and cooperation with our Central Asian friends based on respect for sovereignty, equality, and mutual consideration of each other’s interests is one of the top priorities of Russian diplomacy.
Unlike certain states that view Central Asia as an arena for geopolitical rivalry, Russia does not impose anything on anyone, does not lecture others, does not pit anyone against anyone, does not politicise practical cooperation, and, above all, does not interfere in internal affairs or instigate colour revolutions.
Allow me to specifically address Russian-Turkmen bilateral relations, which are rooted in a shared glorious history.
This May, we jointly marked the 80th anniversary of the Great Victory. We highly appreciate the careful efforts of our Turkmen colleagues to preserve the memory of those heroic events. During the Great Patriotic War, our fathers, grandfathers, and great-grandfathers fought side by side against Nazism saving the world from the horrors of the Nazi scourge. In the first days of the war, 3,000 Turkmen volunteers joined the Red Army, and hundreds of thousands of soldiers from the Turkmen SSR fought on the frontlines. More than 78,000 were awarded orders and medals, including the great-grandfather of President of Turkmenistan Serdar Berdimuhamedov, Berdymukhammed Annayev.
Russia deeply valued the participation of President Serdar Berdimuhamedov in this year’s Victory Parade in Moscow on May 9. In honour of our wartime brotherhood, an honour unit from the Armed Forces of Turkmenistan marched across Red Square. That same day, with the support of Turkmenistan’s leadership, flowers were laid at the Eternal Flame of the People’s Memory Memorial Complex in Ashgabat, and an Immortal Regiment procession was held with people carrying portraits of their relatives who fought during the war. Near the Russian Embassy, an Alley of Memory was unveiled to mark the anniversary of Victory.
Today, our delegation also laid flowers at the majestic People’s Memory monument. By preserving the glorious chapters of our shared past, we look to the future with confidence.
Today, Russia and Turkmenistan are advancing bilateral dialogue on the principles of neighbourliness, respect, and mutual consideration of interests. The Declaration on Enhanced Strategic Partnership signed by our respective presidents in Moscow in 2022 serves as a cornerstone for deepening ties across a broad range of areas including trade, energy, transport, digital technologies, education, culture, and information and biological security.
Parliamentary diplomacy has become an integral part of our relations. Legislators from both countries maintain contact, and thanks to their proactive stance, the Ashgabat Format was created. In 2022, the first Russia-Central Asia Interparliamentary Forum was held.
Today, we discussed preparations for its second session. We are also keen to institutionalise women parliamentarians’ conferences under the Inter-Parliamentary Union.
Humanitarian cooperation holds a special place in our partnership. We highly value Turkmenistan’s respectful and enthusiastic attitude towards the Russian language, literature, and culture. The Russian Drama Theatre in Ashgabat enjoys great popularity, and the joint Russian-Turkmen Alexander Pushkin School operates successfully. The Russian language is widely taught in your country’s educational institutions.
In Russia, the Turkmen language is taught in universities and a specialised school in the Astrakhan Region, which is home to a compact Turkmen diaspora. In the near future, we plan to implement a major project to establish a Russian-Turkmen University.
Today, my colleague and friend, Vice President and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan Rashid Meredov and I discussed progress in preparing an intergovernmental agreement on this issue. We pay much attention to youth exchanges. We suggest expanding the productive interaction between the Institute of International Relations under Turkmenistan’ Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the MGIMO University under the Russian Foreign Ministry and developing ties between budding diplomats of the both countries with the assistance of our Council of Young Diplomats.
We are working on further tapping into our large trade and economic potential. Russia remains one of Turkmenistan’s major partners. Over the first three months of this year alone our trade grew by more than 21 percent. This is not the limit, seeing the potential of our countries’ economies.
I want to note that new large joint projects are being discussed by the Intergovernmental Russia-Turkmenistan Commission on Economic Cooperation. The attendance of the 28th St Petersburg International Economic Forum by Deputy Prime Minister of Turkmenistan Nokerguly Atagulyev was useful and productive. Nokerguly Atagulyev will chair the Turkmen part of the Intergovernmental Commission. Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Marat Khusnullin will co-chair the Commission on the Russian part. We have agreed that they will meet soon to prepare a comprehensive regular meeting of the Intergovernmental Commission.
Our countries’ unique geographical position creates good opportunities for building transport corridors. In this context we are working hand in glove for raising the efficiency of the Eastern route of the North-South International Transport Corridor, which is connecting Russia and Iran via Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan and is strategically important for developing transport arteries in that part of Eurasia.
Russia holds in high regard Turkmenistan’s wise decision to maintain a status of permanent neutrality. I would like to once again extend our heartfelt congratulations to our Turkmen friends on the 30th anniversary of this landmark in Turkmen statehood.
Thanks to Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov’s personal efforts and vision, the concept of positive neutrality has taken on a new meaning and depth. The country’s unifying international initiatives – promoting dialogue as a guarantor of peace, creating a zone of peace, trust, and cooperation in Central Asia, and declaring this year the International Year of Peace and Trust – continue to make an invaluable contribution to regional and global stability.
Turkmenistan’s advocacy for an equal international dialogue based on respect for the rights and interests of all parties fully aligns with Russia’s approach. This shared vision of today’s key challenges underpins our effective cooperation across numerous multilateral formats, including the Russia–Central Asia mechanism. Though still relatively new, this platform has already established itself as a relevant and in-demand venue for open and substantive discussion on a wide spectrum of regional and international matters.
The first Russia–Central Asia Summit was held in Astana in 2022. The second summit is scheduled to take place later this year, where a short-term Joint Action Plan between Russia and the Central Asian states will be submitted for consideration. This roadmap will serve to consolidate our cooperation in priority areas and launch specialised sectoral mechanisms among the six participating nations.
We also attach great importance to our cooperation with Turkmenistan within the Commonwealth of Independent States. As an associate member, Turkmenistan makes a meaningful contribution to the work of the CIS. The Programme to Intensify Cooperation between the CIS Foreign Ministries was launched at Turkmenistan’s initiative and has been a great success.
Next year, which will mark the 35th anniversary of the Commonwealth, Turkmenistan will assume the chairmanship of the CIS. We are confident that Ashgabat will carry out this important role with distinction. Russia stands ready to offer full support to our Turkmen colleagues in implementing their chairmanship agenda.
We can see strong potential for deepening cooperation between Turkmenistan and the Eurasian Economic Union. Broader involvement in the EAEU in its various formats would open up new opportunities for implementing mutually beneficial initiatives.
We are successfully cooperating on the Caspian Sea, which we extensively discussed during today’s talks. We share a special responsibility for its preservation and rational use. Clearly, maintaining peace, stability and security in the Caspian region, its sustainable development based on the principles of neighbourliness, trust and cooperation among littoral states, realising the economic, including transit, potential of the Caspian for the benefit of littoral states, and ensuring proper environmental conditions of this crucial water body fully correspond to the primary interests of all five Caspian states.
Our agenda includes the formation of a regional Caspian community for the benefit of our countries and peoples. In this vein, Russia has proposed establishing a Caspian Council. We stand ready to work closely with our Turkmen friends to achieve these goals.
We face ambitious goals in bilateral and international affairs. I am confident that the younger generations of Turkmen diplomats, including those present here, will uphold the traditions of respect for our shared history, build upon today’s achievements in foreign policy, and contribute to strengthening Turkmenistan’s neutral course, as well as help further expand friendly ties and strategic cooperation between our countries.
Question: Today, Turkmenistan is putting forward innovative initiatives to develop international solutions aimed at ensuring peace and security. Recent events have clearly demonstrated that maintaining peace and strengthening security and stability have been and remain priorities of international politics. In this context, during the 78th session of the UN General Assembly, President of Turkmenistan Serdar Berdimuhamedov proposed starting discussions on developing a UN-sponsored global security strategy. Three key areas of this strategy include principles of preventive diplomacy as a tool to prevent and neutralise challenges and threats, as well as their root causes; leveraging the potential of positive neutrality; and restoring the culture of a trust-based dialogue. What’s your take on this idea?
Sergey Lavrov: I believe the assessments you’ve just outlined regarding President Berdimuhamedov’s initiative fully align with our analysis of the situation and with the steps that Russian leadership is taking and initiating in the international arena.
Global security remains the paramount concern, particularly at this juncture, when the notorious Doomsday Clock continues to tick ever closer to midnight. It is imperative that we prevent such an outcome. We are resolutely engaged in efforts to avert catastrophe. The very possibility of a third world war has now become almost routine in discourse. This is particularly tragic in a context where revanchist, aggressive, and belligerent sentiments are once again rearing their heads in full force across Europe. As though two world wars – let alone the numerous lesser conflicts of previous centuries – were insufficient for the current leadership of the European Union.
Nevertheless, there are positive developments, including the realism and pragmatism espoused by the Donald Trump administration as the cornerstone of its foreign policy, alongside its emphasis on the national interests of the United States while duly recognising the national interests of other states. This is an important distinction, one which fundamentally sets apart the conceptual vision of the Donald Trump administration from that of its predecessor, the Joe Biden administration, which was entirely consumed by its neoliberal hegemonic ambitions. Global security is far from a settled issue. Additional efforts are undoubtedly required to bring it to fruition. Responsible nations are taking significant strides in this direction.
You referred to the global security initiative advanced by Serdar Berdimuhamedov. Chinese President Xi Jinping also put forward an initiative in February 2023, addressing global security. This initiative encompasses a set of principles applicable to resolving any crisis. The most pivotal of these principles stresses the necessity of addressing the root causes of any conflict before attempting to resolve it.
With regard to the situation in Ukraine: The ongoing crisis there left us with no viable option but to initiate the special military operation in order to safeguard our security and the rights of Russian and Russian-speaking residents of what was then Ukraine. This provides a pertinent example. Without addressing the root causes, no resolution can be achieved. Take, for instance, Ukraine’s legislation banning and eradicating Russian-language education at all levels – beginning with higher education and extending down to primary schools. The prohibition of Russian-language media and the suppression of Russian culture – today, you will find no Russian books in libraries. These books were discarded, echoing the fascist fervour in Germany. In Germany, books were burned, yet Ukrainians, a people of unique character, recycle them as scrap paper – and even profit from it. They have even demolished monuments, including the memorial to Catherine the Great, the founder of Odessa.
The emphasis within President Xi Jinping’s concept on the imperative to eliminate the root causes of any conflict, should we wish to resolve it, is more relevant than ever. These two initiatives (from President of Turkmenistan Serdar Berdimuhamedov and Chinese President Xi Jinping) are aligned in their direction. Likewise, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s initiative to establish a Eurasian security architecture follows the same path. There is – and will be – no competition between such proposals. They share a common conceptual foundation, and the crucial task is to mobilise the international community through practical measures involving politicians, diplomats, scholars, and civil society to consider these initiatives and work towards formulating concrete recommendations for adoption at the interstate level.
In this regard, I would like to highlight the International Conference on Eurasian Security (1, 2), which is hosted annually by the Republic of Belarus. The third such event is set to take place this autumn. We are fully prepared to participate in similar forums organised by Turkmenistan in furtherance of Serdar Berdimuhamedov’s initiative. As the saying goes, you can never have too much of a good thing. We wholeheartedly welcome all constructive efforts aimed at bridging differences and preventing them from escalating into confrontation.
Question: Turkmenistan and the Russian Federation have pledged to implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. How would you assess its implementation? What should be done to accelerate this process?
Sergey Lavrov: We actively supported the efforts to coordinate the Sustainable Development Goals, which have been approved. The UN Secretariat and its relevant bodies regularly publish reports on the implementation of these goals. This process is not rapid enough. The implementation of less than half of the Sustainable Development Goals can be assessed as satisfactory. There are many reasons for that, but the main reason is that our Western “colleagues” continue to think and act based on their neo-colonial instincts. The analysis of these issues say that the West lived off others for the 500 years of the colonial era, slavery and exploitation, taking advantage of the natural wealth of Africa, Asia and Latin America.
Now that the Global Majority is waking up and new centres of economic growth, financial power and political influence have appeared, the West has found itself in a situation when the globalisation model it created is not just beginning to crumble but is already falling apart. The basic principles of globalisation, which the West actively promoted and which have eventually been accepted by everyone, included fair competition, unconditional respect for ownership rights, the unacceptability of unilateral actions, and the presumption of innocence.
Relevant mechanisms have been created to ensure the implementation of these principles, namely the IMF, the WTO and various other structures, such as the SWIFT system for comfortable financial transactions. I remember that at the peak of that globalisation model the US authorities told everyone that the US dollar was not the property of the United States but a global asset serving the interests of all countries without exception. When the global market, with additional arrangements made within the framework of the WTO and the IMF, was flourishing, the global economy grew. Its shortcomings, which I will speak about later, were not as obvious as they are now. Eventually, the West adopted dictatorial methods, punishing those who did not comply with its demands, resorting to the open theft – let’s not beat about the bush – of others’ assets, and adopting unilateral sanctions. This disrupted the smooth operation of the global economy and revealed the shortcoming of the system, in particular, the main goal of the West, which is to continue to live off others. Frankly, the West started losing to the new centres of economic growth and financial might, primarily China and a number of other countries, in the framework of the principle of fair competition, which the West itself promoted.
To avoid responsibility for using protectionist measures and violating the principles of free competition and free trade, the West blocked the operation of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body. The People’s Republic of China, against which illegal discriminatory measures have been applied, and the other countries against which the Werst acted likewise, have been unsuccessfully fighting for justice for years, because the WTO does not have a body that could address their concerns. The United States has simply blocked the work of this mechanism.
There are two root causes behind these problems. The first is that the West has objectively lost its competitiveness against the new economic growth centres. The second is the reckless use of unilateral restrictions against those who can rival the West in trade and the economy or on the global political stage. Taken together, this has had a negative effect on the implementation of Sustainable Development Goals.
I would like to remind that climate change is a central focus of the Sustainable Development Goals. Trying to convince developing countries to restrict their economic growth in the name of protecting the environment, the West acted egoistically. It has created a developed economy primarily by relying on the use of fossil fuels, and is now trying to prevent a logical stage of industrialisation in the developing world.
Seeking to convince developing countries to accept its logic, the West promised to allocate substantial funds to cover the cost of the “green transition.” When the climate conference was held in Paris in 2015, the West pledged to allocate $100 billion to developing countries annually for 10 years to reimburse their green transition costs. Nothing much has come of it. Some loans and grants have been allocated, but they were ten times less than the promised sum. The third world and Global Majority countries are now analysing this situation in order to draw lessons from it.
Speaking about Africa, it is experiencing a second wave of liberation after the era of decolonisation that brought political freedom to the former colonies. African countries have seen that they were taken advantage of when they supplied raw materials but the added value created during their transformation into products remained in the West. The difference is huge. Africa now calls for creating its own industries and processing capacity. It is a challenging process, which must be taken into account when speaking about the future of the global economy. That is why we all want global development to be sustainable and environmentally and climate-friendly. However, this implies searching for a realistic balance, so that this does not benefit one group of countries but all countries, and also takes into account the socioeconomic development goals of the Global South and Global East countries.
Question: As you noted in your remarks, the Middle East currently faces complex challenges. As the region’s immediate neighbour, Turkmenistan, adhering to its consistent positive neutrality, has been actively engaged since the outset in pursuing political and diplomatic solutions to the conflict, alongside addressing humanitarian issues. In particular, Turkmenistan has opened a humanitarian corridor for foreign nationals seeking to leave the neighbouring state. Additionally, Turkmenistan has implemented prompt measures to facilitate the landing and maintenance of foreign airlines’ aircraft while also arranging accommodation for foreign nationals. How would you evaluate Turkmenistan’s response in this situation?
Sergey Lavrov: We regard this as humanitarian generosity and neighbourly assistance — values held sacred to all normal civilisations, cultures, nations, and peoples.
We commend Turkmenistan for not only creating opportunities for those fleeing the conflict zone but also for doing it promptly and efficiently. We express our special gratitude for these efforts, especially given that there were Russian nationals among those assisted. This is the only proper response for any responsible nation, and a universally human value.
Another dimension concerns Turkmenistan’s capacity and willingness to assist with finding solutions to halt violence, to de-escalate tensions, and to move to diplomatic actions. As I previously said in my remarks, Turkmenistan has its own foreign policy principles that offer universal applicability and could provide a substantive foundation for talks between the opponents. I hope I am not overstepping our host’s position, but Turkmenistan can serve as a negotiation platform, considering its unique status of permanent neutrality that has been unanimously affirmed by the UN three times. Earlier today, Deputy Chairman of the Cabinet of Ministers and Foreign Minister of Turkmenistan Rashid Meredov and I discussed the specifics of the current assistance measures. We exchanged updates on telephone conversations and in-person meetings with major stakeholders — the conflict parties, their neighbours and primarily the Arab states in the Persian Gulf. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi visited Moscow and then immediately flew to Ashgabat. We also maintain contact with both US and Israeli leadership. We have made actionable proposals for tension reduction.
Yesterday, we heard promising statements from Washington, Tehran and Israel. I am being cautiously optimistic because those promising statements were later followed by contradictory remarks from various parties. However, should these positive prospects translate into progress (and we are ready to assist with such efforts), everybody would feel relieved. Violence and destruction do nothing to facilitate normal development of the nations in that part of the world, especially since the border of the Islamic Republic of Iran lies just over 30 km from here.
We stand prepared to uphold Turkmenistan’s initiatives. It is possible that at a certain stage (I am speculating out loud), we may formulate a joint proposal, contingent upon the conflicting parties’ readiness.
Question: Over recent years, Turkmen-Russian scientific and academic contacts have become more intense. Both countries’ higher educational institutions promote their cooperation. In 2017, a Cooperation Agreement was signed between the Institute of International Relations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan and MGIMO University. What is your opinion on efforts to draw up exchange training programmes between these universities? Will they be able to start implementing these programmes as early as next academic year?
Sergey Lavrov: It is I who should ask you this question. Do you feel that these programmes are of interest to you as a student and person? If students show an interest, then the programmes will certainly be implemented.
Please do not doubt that our ministries – I do not hesitate to say this on behalf of Foreign Minister of Turkmenistan Rashid Meredov – have a vested interest in this being. The areas that we regard as promising include student exchanges, cooperation between the two institutes of international relations, and reciprocal probation training. We welcome the expansion of this practice. Each time the ministers visit one another, there is an opportunity to organise meetings of this kind. Mr Rashid Meredov knows his alma mater well and is always welcome at MGIMO.
I think there is no need to make a formal plan. We should use the available opportunities. We support exchanges, reciprocal probation training, and regular meetings. If you invite me again, I promise to continue with this practice. I also hope that Mr Meredov will generously share his rich experience with Russian students.