Ladies and gentlemen,
We had very good talks. As is customary, they were held in a friendly atmosphere. The exchange of views was candid and based on mutual trust.
We discussed preparations for events to mark the 30th anniversary of diplomatic relations which were established on May 25, 1992.
We expressed hope that after a certain decline last year, trade will resume its upward trend. We stressed the importance of the meetings for the intergovernmental commission on trade, economic, and scientific and technical cooperation, which took place in Zagreb last month.
We noted business cooperation, including Lukoil, Sber, VTB Bank and Zarubezhneft. We support the reinvigoration of business contacts, including the upcoming creation of a Russian-Croatian business council.
We spoke in favour of further building up cultural, personal, scientific, education and sports ties. We discussed the progress on an agreement to open a Russian cultural centre in Croatia.
Both countries are interested in promoting cooperation in tourism which was facilitated by the resumption of air traffic in June 2021 and its rapid expansion.
We assessed our interaction at the UN, including on mutual support of our candidates for elections to UN bodies.
As always, we exchanged views on regional issues focusing on the situation in the Balkans, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue.
We gave our Croatian friends the necessary explanations regarding Russia-EU and Russia-NATO relations and emphasised that we invariably appreciate Croatia’s balanced and constructive position on resolving the backlog of Russia-EU and Russia-NATO issues.
I am grateful to the Minister and his delegation for this meeting. I look forward to the outcome of the talks benefitting continued development of our political dialogue and interaction in the international arena.
Question (translated from Croatian): How do you assess the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republika Srpska?
Sergey Lavrov: Russia, like our Croatian colleagues, insists on abiding by the Dayton Accords. We are seeing growing attempts to turn Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), a country with two federal entities and three ethnic groups with equal rights, into a unitary state. With encouragement from some Western countries, primarily the United States, Republika Srpska and its leaders are being demonised for these unseemly purposes. We can see obvious discrimination against Bosnian Croats. The recently launched electoral reform is intended to correct this situation. It needs to be completed as soon as possible, strongly relying on the Dayton principle of equality of the three constituent peoples and the two entities.
For all their calls for non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs, the United States has appointed a special envoy for electoral reform in BiH. Talk about spheres of influence. We consider this very revealing about the US approach to the Western Balkans problems. Any problems concerning the electoral reform, like all other problems in BiH, must be resolved in accordance with the Dayton Agreement, using the Parliamentary Assembly, the Presidium and other bodies of that state. We hope that the European Union will support going back to the basics – the Dayton principles – and will stop treating the Western Balkans as a zone of its influence.
A few years ago, Federica Mogherini, then head of the EU’s diplomacy, said the European Union would take care of all problems in the Western Balkans, while others had better not get involved there. These examples are quite revealing in the context of the current negotiations on security guarantees, initiated by the Russian Federation.
Question: Should a negative scenario develop in Russia's dialogue with the United States and NATO on security guarantees, if we fail to reach an agreement, will we be ready to confront the West alone? Will this require additional, deeper cooperation with China, our strategic partner, to be able to counter the military threat and the “sanctions from hell” promised by the Europeans and Americans?
Sergey Lavrov: We do not draw up policies based on what-ifs. This is rather something our Western colleagues would do, threatening the Russian Federation with sanctions almost daily, with or without reason. We firmly count on concrete responses promised to us with regard to the draft documents that Russia has handed over to the US and NATO members. There is reason to believe that some contacts on this track will take place in the next few days.
The gist of our questions is how exactly the West intends to fulfil its obligations enshrined in the documents of the OSCE summits in Istanbul in 1999 and in Astana in 2010. These documents state that the OSCE members will not strengthen their own security at the expense of others. No state, no group of countries or organisation in the OSCE space can be vested with primary responsibility for maintaining peace and stability across the region. This is an integral part of the compromises and decisions made at the highest level in the OSCE. We want this question answered: how is the West planning to implement what it has signed on to? Once again, I would like to assure you that our leadership is able to reliably protect Russia’s interests, both in terms of security and in terms of upholding our citizens’ rights.
As for our relations with China, they do not depend on any current context and progress regardless of what our Western colleagues think about it. We are not friends with China against anyone.
Question (translated form Croatian): At a recent news conference, you said Russia has never threatened Ukraine or the Ukrainians. You said it was the other way round – Ukraine has threatened Russia and the Russian people. What did you mean?
Sergey Lavrov: We discussed this issue briefly today. Talking about its willingness to discuss the experience of reintegrating national minorities with Ukraine, Croatia referred to resolving humanitarian issues and creating the conditions necessary for respect of cultural, educational and linguistic rights of the minorities. Meanwhile, some Ukrainian officials are looking at this issue in the context of an opportunity to use the experience of hostilities that took place in this region in the mid-1990s.
They may have such intentions, but I hope they will not translate them into reality. These intentions are dangerous against the backdrop of statements by President Vladimir Zelensky who has urged Ukrainian citizens who identify themselves as Russians to just clear off to Russia.
Today’s conversation with the minister showed that Zagreb is aware of the risks of these attempts by the Ukrainian regime to interpret any Kiev-Zagreb agreement in terms of its intentions and try to resolve the problems of eastern Ukraine by force.
There can be no backup plan for Ukraine. There are only the Minsk Agreements that Kiev must meticulously fulfil, as the minister emphasised in his opening remarks.
Question: Can you comment on the words by US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland to the effect that the United States has 18 various scenarios for Russia’s potential invasion of Ukraine?
Sergey Lavrov: Dmitry Peskov has already explained our position on this. I can only supplement his comment with some assumptions. The US has about 17 secret and intelligence services plus one at the State Department. So, 18 scenarios in all. Maybe they announce internal tenders.
Let’s not forget what US officials said about Russia supposedly “invading” Ukraine. They spread complete disinformation to the effect that we are allegedly preparing a provocation to attack the Russian-speaking population in Donbass with a view to receiving a pretext for this “invasion.” Indicatively, Jen Psaki said that this already took place in 2014.
The current tragedy of Ukraine broke out in 2014 but not because of some provocation by Russia but due to the state coup that was supported and largely engineered by the US.
It is abundantly clear that Ukraine is now under US governance. Washington could certainly compel the Kiev regime to abide by the Minsk Agreements.
President Vladimir Putin and President Joseph Biden discussed this issue at their Geneva summit in June 2021 as well. It was there that we heard how the US understands the gist of the Minsk Agreements: the questions primarily revolve around Donbass’ special status. I hope our American colleagues will deal with this.
