"Americans do a disservice to themselves": Lavrov on US sanctions, relations with Georgia and the development of RT

- Cuba was considered a closed country. However, for Russia it opens, and opened like no one. Nevertheless, the RT channel in Spanish is publicly available in many Latin American countries, but not in friendly Cuba. How important is the media presence on the island for Russia, and what can be done for this?

- I would not say that Cuba was a closed country. In Cuba, for a long time, many Europeans and Canadians have loved to rest and continue to rest. And the Americans, strictly speaking, have not yet introduced these completely unreasonable bans; they have been there and enjoyed their holidays with pleasure. However, like many Russians. Regarding the processes that are taking place in Cuba, we believe that these are important reforms. A new constitution came into force, as I understand it. Economic reforms are underway, the private sector is growing. Mobile Internet has appeared. And, as far as I know, the RT representative is in Havana. Maybe there is no daily broadcast, but once a week there are news, documentaries. And, it seems to me, here the company itself already has to negotiate with our Cuban friends.

I am convinced that the more access to information, to high-quality information, information that is not related to the fake news that has now filled the entire media space, the more interesting. The more correct is the people to understand the processes that are developing in the world.

- That is, you are for RT to develop?

- Of course. The more actively our media are present in various countries, the more friendly Cuba will be, the more useful it will be for the development of our relations.

• Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on RT Development

- Sergey Viktorovich, what do you think about the blockade policy being implemented by the USA against Cuba?

- This is absolutely unacceptable behavior. For almost 60 years, in my opinion, these sanctions are in effect. Then they are trying to weaken them a little, then they tighten again. With the involvement of the third chapter of the Helms-Burton Act, of course, once again the United States has shown everyone that they are neglecting international law and are trying to extend their own extraterritorial laws to all others. It is sad. I think that this policy - it has no perspective.

I am convinced that ultimately the United States will realize the deadlock of this line, and it will probably be more useful for them to conduct business in the way that it is necessary to do business with equal states. No one in the world supports this policy at all. The overwhelming majority of states, more than 190, vote for a resolution every year demanding the lifting of the trade embargo against Cuba.

- You will have a dialogue on the situation with Venezuela, how to find a way out of this crisis? As stated by the President of Ecuador, more than a million citizens from Venezuela emigrated to the country.

- We know that many citizens from Venezuela emigrated, and not only to Ecuador, to other countries, too. And we have never stopped the dialogue about the situation in Venezuela. We actively speak with all representatives of the Venezuelan political landscape: with the government and with the opposition. Including, people come to us from Mr. Guayido. We explain to them the unacceptability of attempts to solve their internal problems by provoking outside interference, as we are seeing now. Permanent threats from the United States. All options are on the table.

You know, in principle, in Venezuela, the situation is changing, and changing for the better. Because initially there were several initiatives, the so-called international contact group, which promoted the European Union. This contact group was united on the basis of an ultimatum in fact: we urgently hold presidential elections, and then everything will be fine.

There was also a Montevideo mechanism - this is Bolivia, Mexico, Uruguay, CARICOM (Caribbean Community - RT ) - which advocated for the government and the opposition to enter into dialogue and agree among themselves, without any preconditions. This is a much more promising position, it fits much more into the norms of international law. In the end, after unsuccessful attempts to swoop in from the outside to provoke another “color revolution” there, the situation has now turned into what we call the “Oslo process”. This is a process that is aimed at reaching agreements and compromises between the government and the opposition. That is, common sense gradually begins to prevail. I hope, given the positive comments of President Maduro and the opposition on how this negotiation process is going on, that an agreement can be reached that will suit everyone. This will be in the interests of the Venezuelan people, above all.

- Brazilian President Zhair Bolsonar at the G20 Summit in Japan after meeting with Vladimir Putin said he did not want to engage in polemics with his Russian counterpart on the topic of Venezuela. According to him, nuclear powers make decisions about the future of the world, and he absolutely did not want to argue with the largest of them. How, in general, does the situation in Venezuela affect Russia's relations with the countries of the region, and how can Brazil's antagonistic position on the Venezuelan issue affect the interactions within the BRICS framework?

- I do not think that the position is antagonistic. I don’t think that President Bolsonar meant that it was said that only nuclear powers solve all the problems in the world. It's not like that at all. And the situation around Venezuela is the best confirmation of that. If the nuclear powers had decided everything, then the United States probably would have long since achieved the removal of the legitimate president and the legitimate government. And the situation was much more complicated. Many countries in the region do not want any military solutions. Even those who demand the immediate resignation of President Maduro, categorically do not accept the idea of ​​a force scenario. Therefore, international law still works.

As for BRICS, President Bolsonar immediately after the election declared that he would maintain continuity and continue to participate in BRICS. Now the Brazilians are preparing a summit to be held in the fall. And literally in a few days a BRICS format ministerial meeting will be held - the “five” will meet in Rio de Janeiro. And we will consider the issues that need to be addressed in preparation for the summit. Brazil is very active in its chairmanship. Several dozens of events are held, including many ministerial ones. And I have no reason to believe that Brazil will reconsider its principal approaches not in favor of BRICS being preserved, developed and thereby, in general, reflecting the realities of a multipolar world.

These realities, by the way, they manifest themselves not only in the BRICS format, but also in the “group of twenty” format, which has been a key mechanism for many years where international economic and financial issues are resolved. And the West alone, without BRICS, without other countries that come out from similar positions with us, cannot solve any issues of the world economy and world finances.

What our American colleagues are now trying to do, extending their unilateral sanctions to all participants in international communication, and thus trying to win some short-term advantages for themselves, this cannot last for a long time. In the end, they are doing a disservice to themselves, because the dollar’s ​​position and confidence in the dollar have been dramatically undermined. When a leading country, the leading economy of the world so abuses its position and tries to punish everyone else in order to get competitive advantages, and to receive them in bad faith, this will ultimately play a bad joke with the Americans.

- Russia is fighting to protect a multipolar and fair world. But this goes against US global hegemony. Here, there are examples of the implementation of such a policy, for example, Cuba, Venezuela. What do you think about that?

- We are talking about the fact that the world is still multi-faceted. He, our world, is getting more and more vivid examples of the development of new economies. China, India are booming in economic terms and are creating new centers of economic and financial influence. And with economic and financial influence, of course, political influence also comes. To ignore this reality is short-sighted and hopeless. In the long run, there is no doubt that the United States will be forced to accept the fact that the economic development of the world requires agreements, requires fair decisions and rules that should be the same for everyone. I am sure that both BRICS and the “group of twenty” are working on this historical trend. And we are on the right side of the story, as our American colleagues like to say. But now they are not quite on the other side.

• Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on a unipolar world view from the United States

- Russian President Vladimir Putin said a few days ago that there would be no sanctions for Georgia. Do you think this will serve as an example for the USA?

- You know, about our relations with Georgia, we never tried to worsen these relations. It was the Georgian leadership that previously, under Mikhail Saakashvili, broke off diplomatic relations, tried in every way to limit our economic cooperation, but then the economy took its toll. And those who produce wealth in Georgia, they remember very well how close our trade and investment ties were. Now this trade has resumed. And I do not think that anyone is experiencing any inconvenience.

I repeat once again, this is all due to the fact that our Western colleagues, primarily the United States, are trying in every way to tear our neighbors away from the Russian Federation. Remember, in 2008, when President Mikhail Saakashvili completely lost his brakes, so to speak, and despite repeated warnings, including warnings made by Putin, he decided to use force in order to solve all his problems in South Ossetia and then in Abkhazia. Dozens of American instructors worked there, trained Georgian special forces and, in general, Georgian military personnel. And the orders that were given to seize South Ossetia, they are criminal in themselves, everyone understands this. He attacked his citizens, attacked peacekeepers, among whom were Russian servicemen. The special study ordered by the European Union, the so-called Heidi Tagliavini Commission, clearly concluded that it was Saakashvili who started these hostilities. I repeat once again, we do not have any negative attitude towards the Georgian people, no bias towards the Georgian people here. On the contrary, we have lived together for centuries. And we appreciate the culture, customs of each other.

And it’s difficult for me to judge whether the United States will draw any conclusion from the decision of President Putin not to impose any sanctions on Georgia. Because the United States is a special country. They have their own traditions. Traditions, as a rule, such, you know, great-power. Sorry, I'm talking about this. Because, in fact, if the United States began to pursue a policy of equal and mutually respectful relations with all its partners, be it Russia, be it China, be it the European Union, be it any other country, I am convinced that the problems in the world would be solved much more efficient and reliable. But we are conducting a dialogue with Washington, we are trying to explain our approaches to events that are developing in the international arena. And so, the last meeting between Presidents Putin and Trump in Osaka showed that the President of the United States - he, in general, aims to look for some generally acceptable approaches. Let's see how it will be later implemented at the level of performers.

- Sergey Viktorovich, you said about the great power of the United States. How do you assess the situation around Iran?

- Never pumping military muscles contributed to the stable development of a region. In 2015, an agreement was reached, which everyone praised as the greatest achievement of modern diplomacy. It was approved by a UN Security Council resolution, which is binding on all. And the United States decided that this agreement no longer suits them, because it was reached by the previous administration. There is certainly the influence of internal political tensions and disagreements between Democrats and Republicans. Nevertheless, the resolution of the United States Security Council categorically refused to comply. Moreover, they forbade all other countries to comply with this resolution. This is a paradoxical situation.

And it would, of course, be funny all this, but, unfortunately, the matter is serious, and there are quite a few hot heads in Washington who want to solve the problem with Iran by military means. We did not feel any mood, in this respect, with President Trump. I do not feel that he shares such views. But, unfortunately, many American politicians are still carrying this idea. I believe that this will be an extremely dangerous development of events. This region has already suffered many times from the adventurous policies of Washington. Take, please, Iraq, Libya. Then the so-called coalition wanted to repeat the same thing that was done with Iraq and Libya, in the Syrian Arab Republic. Fortunately, we, together with our Turkish, Iranian colleagues, managed to prevent this, and now we are moving more and more actively along the path of a political settlement.

I am convinced that Iran is a country that should be part of the solution to the problems of the region, and not be exposed as the main culprit of all that is happening there. For a long time, more than ten years, we have been promoting the idea that the Gulf countries, both Arabs and the Islamic Republic of Iran, should begin to negotiate a process of building confidence and transparency in the military field. With the support of the League of Arab States, with the support of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the "five" of the permanent members of the Security Council.

I think that, ultimately, one can’t do without it and that Iran should be the main culprit for all that is happening, whether in Syria, in the Palestinian territories, elsewhere, in Yemen, or in neighboring countries This is a confrontational line; it will not help solve problems. I am convinced that Iran should be involved in the dialogue. We are talking about this with our American colleagues, with our Israeli colleagues also talking about it. We will defend this position more and more effectively. Because more and more countries understand the impasse of any adventurous, aggressive military scenarios.

- If you continue the question about the presence. Is there a danger of expansion of the US military in the Latin American region?

“We were surprised to hear a statement by US officials that the Monroe Doctrine was alive. And when the United States acted from such the most aggressive positions in relation to Venezuela, it also said that the case in Venezuela will not end, the next will be Cuba and Nicaragua. This, you know, very arrogant, defiant position. In today's world, this is rarely heard. But the statement that the Monroe Doctrine is alive is a fact. We heard from Mr. Bolton such statements. I am convinced that this will not bring laurels to American foreign policy. Even those Latin American countries that supported the United States in favor of a change of power in Venezuela, first, they will never agree to a military scenario. And if someone in Washington decides to use force, then I am convinced that all of Latin America will oppose this. The countries of the region have long concluded for themselves that the change of regimes is not unconstitutional. This is one of the principles on which the community of Latin American and Caribbean countries is built - CELAC.

It seems to me that the countries of Latin America have a sense of dignity, there are feelings of justice. And all this allows us to hope that peaceful solutions will be found, peaceful ways out of the crisis, whether in Venezuela or in some other part of the region.