Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks at a meeting with directors of Russian non-profit organisations, Moscow, July 23, 2024

Colleagues,

Friends,

We have been holding regular meetings in this format since 2004 (we skipped a few meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic) to discuss issues of concern for the non-governmental organisations that are interested in and are implementing projects in the sphere of people-to-people diplomacy.

The role of public diplomacy has grown compared to the earlier period, primarily when it comes to maintaining a healthy atmosphere of confidence in relations with our foreign partners and explaining problems created by the West, including in relations with the countries which we regard as unfriendly. I believe that we should use this term for governments, whereas the mood in the countries is largely determined by people’s lives and aspirations. I do not see any nation on the planet that would be unfriendly to our people in the first place.

But there are unfriendly governments. More than that, there are hostile governments. Look at how the European Union is treating Viktor Orban, the Prime Minister of Hungary which holds the rotating EU Presidency as of July, only because he said that everyone should be looking for compromises rather than resolving issues by military force. This was enough to try to make him a rogue politician. Indeed, we are living in interesting times.

I’m aware that pubic organisations in Western countries somehow manage to maintain ties with some of their partners in Russia. This interaction is extremely important for keeping up relations at the level of civil societies and trying to understand each other. In light of the frenzied Western propaganda, this is also important for us, so that we use your foreign colleagues, including in Western countries, to help foreigners have a better understanding of the current situation.

We see a rapid development (rapid by historical standards, even though the process will take long) of an international infrastructure that will be fairer and based on several centres of power, which will not be designated by anyone but be based on the objective factors of economic growth, financial might and political influence. We stand together with the overwhelming majority of the countries for an equal, democratic and polycentric world order built on the UN Charter principles, which were coordinated in 1945 and are based on respect for the diversity of the current world and for the sovereign equality of all states, large or small.

It is a matter of principle to us. The West has always disregarded it. In all international situations, whenever a crisis broke out anywhere in the world, the West never, not in a single conflict - I made a point of checking it out - took a position of respect for the sovereign equality of all states. Instead, it has always pushed for its own “recipes” on the assumption that it is the “master.”

We are beginning to see the outlines of a new multipolar world order. Nations around the world want to see their right to rule their destinies respected, and are searching for new ways of addressing various issues as alternatives to Western solutions. What they want is a system that would serve the global economy, while freeing itself from any dependence on the current issuers of the so-called reserve currencies and their dictate.

New centres of power are emerging as the Global South and the Global East are reinforcing their positions. The global minority, which calls itself the golden billion, has seen its positions weaken, while still trying to hold on to what remains of the uncontested global dominance it had for many centuries. This effort to preserve this standing and to prevent anyone from challenging their hegemony explains why the West has been so keen to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia, while also teaching a lesson to those who prioritise their national interests.

The West has been openly saying that it views Russia as a competitor which challenges the “rules-based order,” as well as a rival in military and political affairs, technological capabilities, and soft power, especially in terms of culture, traditions and lifestyle. All the foreigners visiting our country for the first time have noted this fact. I have talked to many of them, including during the World Youth Festival. We are proud of the fact that they get this impression the moment they come to Russia, enchanted as they are by the openness of our people.

The West is not ready to engage in mutually beneficial and equal cooperation. It has been seeking to hold on to its erstwhile standing which follows the path of irreversible, albeit slow, degradation. The NATO Summit in Washington provided yet another example of this process by adopting a declaration which once again emphasised the West’s unilateral approaches.

When President Vladimir Putin delivered remarks in front of senior Foreign Ministry officials on June 14, 2024, he made the following point: “If Europe wants to continue being an independent centre of global development and a cultural and civilisational pole on our planet, it should definitely maintain good and friendly relations with Russia. Most importantly, we are ready for this.” However, it is clear to us that this is not the way the Western elites see this. Quite the opposite, in fact. Let me point out to the way the United States has been treating Europe, since the US views Europe as a competitor, much like Russia and China.

Today, Europe has been reduced to acting as Washington’s subject. Germany, for example, is the cornerstone of European politics and economy, but it still had to stomach the terrorist attacks against the Nord Stream pipelines which undermined its economic and social wellbeing. It had to pretend that this is the way it had to be.

The fact that Europe is currently in the grips of a deindustrialisation process means that Washington achieved its long-standing objective articulated in his own time by Zbigniew Brzezinski who had this idea of preventing Russia and Germany from forging closer ties. The United States viewed this as a threat, since both Europe and Russia are part of Eurasia – a single continent with its natural competitive edge and a potential to move forward on its own and to achieve rapid growth by relying on the abundant resources it has in the east and cutting-edge technology in the west. There was no way the West could let this happen and, so far, it has succeeded in its efforts to prevent this from happening.

The Western countries, in particular, Washington’s untoward response to our actions did not go unnoticed by the international community. Everybody understands that in the long run, no one is immune to illegitimate actions by the West if they show a bit of independence. The global majority is taking practical steps to reduce its dependence on the US dollar, as it creates new transport, logistics, and supply chains.

This process is making swift strides within the SCO and other regional associations such as the African Union and CELAC. On the global level, everyone wants to cooperate closely with BRICS that has now grown from a regional organisation into a global association.

A rather interesting interaction framework is emerging where Washington, London and their allies have destroyed all principles of globalisation that they have touted for years on end and which were eventually accepted by the international community. I’m talking about free competition, market principles, inviolability of property and presumption of innocence which have been the globalisation model pillars that the world adopted as the basis for developing their economies and social systems in the early 1990s after the collapse of the Soviet Union. These pillars were discarded without hesitation as soon as it became imperative to punish Russia.

The process of eradicating the centralised dictatorial model that America’s globalisation has morphed into will go hand in hand with regionalisation of economic processes. Preferably, in view of their interdependence with the global economy, the developments in Eurasia, Africa and Latin America ought to be coordinated and harmonised to a certain extent. BRICS is quite capable of doing that not because this association seeks to substitute centralised structures. This is a natural manifestation of the Global South and Global East’s interests.

A forum against modern practices of neocolonialism, For the Freedom of Nations, that took place on February 15-16, is an example of the push for autonomy and abandonment of the neocolonial legacy. More than 50 countries are represented in this movement through their parties, ruling and the opposition parties alike. The Foreign Ministry is doing its utmost to help it develop and grow.

In view of what I have said about the regionalisation of global processes, we certainly believe that the United Nations remains a unique platform for universal cooperation that has no alternative. The UN Charter principles are relevant as never before. The cause of all misfortunes, problems and crises is not in the UN’s incompetence, as some claim, but in failure to comply with the UN Charter. Its principles have not been implemented.

The West exercises these principles one-sidedly as if choosing from a “menu.” Sometimes, it will opt for the principle of upholding sovereignty, which was the case when the West refused to recognise the completely transparent referendum in Crimea. Sometimes, it will opt for the principle of the nations’ right to self-determination, which happened when Kosovo unilaterally declared independence without a referendum, and the West contended it was indeed the right of nations stipulated by the UN Charter.

Back in 1970, the UN General Assembly approved by consensus the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security which explained the relation between a country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and the right of nations to self-determination. It says everyone must respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of states whose respective governments respect the right of nations to self-determination and by this virtue represent the entire population living within the borders of a particular territory.  Whom did the putschists represent in February 2014? Did they represent the people of Crimea, Donbass, or southeastern Ukraine? However, the West is refusing to abide by these principles in their entirety and is doing so on a case-by-case basis. Of course, we are not against the sovereign equality of states, but only the states with stable governments that respect the entire set of norms of international law.

In conjunction with our like-minded partners, we continue our efforts to reform the UN in a belief that we need to consolidate the UN Charter rather than revise it, and insist that all countries should comply with its principles in their entirety and interconnection.

I said earlier that Eurasia is emerging as an independent part of the multipolar and polycentric world. We are moving forward towards creating a Greater Eurasian Partnership, something that President Vladimir Putin mentioned 10 years back.  Since then, this process has led to stronger ties between the EAEU, the SCO, and ASEAN. We will ask other organisations that handle the material aspect of interaction within this space, including the Gulf Cooperation Council, to step up.  They are part of Eurasia as well.

In addition to that, there’s China’s Belt and Road Initiative and an agreement between the EAEU and the PRC on aligning the integration processes afoot in the Eurasian Economic Union with concrete actions undertaken to implement the Belt and Road Initiative.  International transport corridors, such as North-South, are being created which connect Indian ports to Vladivostok in Russia.  The Northern Sea Route is being developed. All of that represents Eurasia’s enormous competitive advantages.

It is critically important to note that whenever President Vladimir Putin discusses this initiative, he points out that we are not slamming our doors shut to Eurasian countries. When and if our European colleagues come to their senses and realise that they are being used by the United States seeking to strengthen its position by weakening Europe’s position, they will find the doors open. However, they will become part of these processes on the basis of equality and full respect for the interests of those who began to interact earlier. This material foundation should underlie the Eurasian security system. Clearly, the Euro-Atlantic security, which relies on the North America-Europe combo and is embodied in organisations such as NATO and the OSCE, has lost credibility. Its every variety has been reduced to the United States seeking to bring everyone else to its heel. Considering this, Eurasian security has been a long time coming. In this case, just like with economic cooperation and the development of the military and political security system, we are convinced that the doors to the western part of our continent should remain open.

We trust that non-governmental and non-profit organisations will actively participate in these processes and continue to contribute to the overall efforts seeking to strengthen Russia’s position on the continent and around the world, including the promotion of the Russian language and our multiethnic culture. I heard someone talk about an initiative to create an international platform to protect traditional values. This is our strength. Many people in the West are not willing to embrace neoliberal values. For example, Elon Musk moved from California to Texas because these values are over the top. And he is not alone. Many people, including in Europe, are willing to escape the LGBT community’s “offensive” and total disregard for natural historical processes and things that were given to us by God. Many are thinking of leaving for Russia. Some already have. I’m sure there will be more. There will be more of them.

The International Russophile Movement was created to pursue the same agenda. We deeply respect the activities of this non-profit organisation. Bulgaria, which is home to the president of this entity, Nikolai Malinov, and its other members, has unleashed a harassment campaign against these people just because they use the international arena to advocate good  relations with Russia. More and more people are resisting the West’s unbridled attempts to “cancel” everything, including our culture and history, and to rewrite the outcomes of World War II and the Great Patriotic War, and are rejecting the language of blackmail, hatred and diktat.

We believe it is important to systematically reform the international election monitoring. Many organisations represented here participated in these processes in one way or another, including through the OSCE which degraded completely. However, when our CIS neighbours turn to us and want to send their observers as part of the OSCE monitoring missions, we agree at least in order to be able to highlight in a more meaningful way the manipulations that are so typical of the monitoring conducted by the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe.  

We need to build our own, including public, mechanisms in this area. The CIS Interparliamentary Assembly and the CIS as an intergovernmental organisation have gained extensive experience in this department. We will welcome the involvement of non-governmental organisations in this work, just as we will continue to support your every effort aimed at diversifying international cultural, humanitarian, scientific and youth exchanges.

We are interested in aligning our plans and your projects. Daily contacts through the Ministry’s divisions help us do this, but there is no limit to perfection. I’m certain we will hear more proposals in this regard today.

I would like to highlight the importance of the work done by non-governmental organisations and non-profit entities to promote integration of Crimea, Donbass and Novorossiya into the legal, socioeconomic and public space of the country. All Crimea-related issued have been settled. The four constituent entities (they are not “new constituent entities,” but “historical constituent entities”) of our homeland need daily support at all levels and across all areas. Many of you are sharing the truth about the causes, the course, and the goals of the special military operation which consisted in the putschists’ push to annihilate everything about Russia both legislatively, which they have succeeded doing, and physically.

Recently, I read a statement by Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine Olga Stefanishina: “The Ukrainian authorities do not consider it necessary to respect the  Russian-speaking citizens’ language rights.” That’s all she had to say. There were lots of statements of that kind. But as soon as you show “it” to a Western interlocutor in those rare cases when we bump into each other in the UN, they (using plain Russian) tend to “hide under a snag” meaning they refuse to talk.

Many of you are contributing greatly to this work. Without offending anyone, I would like to single out Maxim Grigoryev and the Democracy Research Foundation that he heads. We use its work and materials at the UN Security Council frequently and quite effectively.