Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks at the 11th Moscow Conference on International Security, Moscow, August 15, 2023

Ladies and gentlemen,

Friends,

I am honoured to be invited once again to address the Moscow Conference on International Security. It is also gratifying that participants from many states are attending despite persistent attempts by well-known Western circles to prevent their engagement with us.

Today, it is highly relevant to combine intellectual and practical efforts to improve the international situation and work out effective responses to the numerous threats and challenges. We are all witnessing large-scale and truly epoch-making shifts. A fairer and more stable world order, based on cultural and civilisational diversity and a balance of interests of the members of the international community, is fighting to emerge before our very eyes.

It is a long process with a variety of manifestations. Suffice it to mention the efforts by the global majority countries to assert their interests outside of Western mechanisms. The gradual de-dollarisation of the global economy and trade is also becoming a sign of the times – an increasing number of states are consistently reducing their dependence on the dollar and the euro, switching to national currencies and alternative payment systems in mutual transactions.

The very possibility of the dominance of one country or even a group of states is disappearing into oblivion. When EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell tries to present Europe as a blooming “garden,” with nothing but a wild “jungle” around it that needs to be improved to become “civilised,” this only shows once again that this mentality, which allowed the West to rule the world for centuries, has led to a dead end. Today, it is of the essence to build a truly democratic multipolar world order based on generally recognised international legal norms, primarily the principles of the UN Charter, starting with the main one – respect for the sovereign equality of states, i.e. the natural and inalienable right of every nation to decide on its own future.

However, objective global trends seem to meet with an almost reflexive rejection on the part of the collective West led by Washington. In an effort to maintain the dominance they are about to lose, Western ruling elites are using a wide range of dirty tools, from forceful pressure and unilateral economic sanctions to demonising any dissidents in the global information landscape. The “cancel culture” runs rampant, suppressing anything that stands out or does not fit into the Western vision of history or modernity.

In violation of the UN Charter, the Americans and their NATO satellites are trying to tell other countries which allies to choose or avoid. This policy infringes on the right of those countries to pursue their national interests or an independent foreign policy. Westerners demonstrate blatant intolerance towards dissent, seeking to usurp the prerogative to shape the global agenda in all its aspects.

Western geopolitical engineers are directly provoking crises in various parts of the world. They are following the controlled chaos concept in order to fish in troubled waters. There is a lot of evidence of this. It is enough to mention the campaigns on the destruction of Iraq and Libya, attempts to impose separatism in Syria and many other cases, including the February 2014 bloody state coup in Kiev, which was orchestrated by Washington and Brussels. This is a crude violation of the UN Charter principle on non-interference in internal affairs.

Look how unanimously the West is reacting to the state coup in Niger, demanding restoration of democracy by virtually any means.

Meanwhile, in February 2014, the overthrow of the legitimate president via a bloody coup, a day after the EU-guaranteed settlement agreement was reached, did not evoke any negative reaction in the West. I recall that a few days after the state coup, the then US Secretary of State John Kerry said that indeed there was a legitimate president but the people had withdrawn their support for him, so this was a “manifestation of democracy.” There are endless examples of hypocrisy and double standards like this.

To provide a political and ideological cover-up for their neocolonialist, racist line and enhance their own hegemony, the Western capitals are stubbornly trying to replace international law, which they violate every hour, with the “rules-based order.” President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly expressed his opinion on these actions. Thus, at a recent plenary session of the Second Russia-Africa Summit on July 28 of this year, he said: “Overall, it is not clear what these rules are and who formulated them. But it is clear that certain countries are using them for their own mercenary interests and adjusting them to the political situation.” I will add that they are trying to use these rules in their favour, as they see fit when this meets their interests in world trade, the global financial system, international security commitments and many other areas of interstate communication. There is also another obvious trend – the stubborn attempts of the Western minority to privatise secretariats of international organisations, including the UN, Breton-Woods institutions, the WTO and the OPCW. We are seeing a similar trend in the activities of international sports organisations.

Typically, Washington and its allies are not embarrassed by the fact that through their actions they are threatening global stability, creating new risks, and undermining supply chains, as well as food and energy security.

Building up their military presence near the Russian borders, the NATO members ignored for many years their promises to the Soviet leaders on the non-expansion of the alliance. They were crudely violating their commitments, assumed at the top level in the OSCE, to observe the principle of equal and indivisible security, not to enhance their own security at the expense of others and to prevent the domination of any party or organisation in Europe. The OSCE signed these commitments in Istanbul in 1999 and in Astana in 2010.

The United States has ditched a number of key arms control and non-proliferation agreements. It is also feared that now it is ready to impinge upon the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, one of the core elements of the global security architecture. These risks are being created by the open attempts to exempt from this Treaty’s procedure the Anglo-Saxon nuclear “project” incorporated into AUKUS, a new military bloc where the Anglo-Saxons are now involving Japan and South Korea.

Another case in point is the Americans and NATO refusing to discuss in an honest manner President Vladimir Putin’s December 2021 initiatives on legally binding security guarantees. This “list” could be continued ad infinitum.

Today, the “collective West,” allegedly to “save” the neo-Nazi Kiev regime, has launched a hybrid aggression against Russia, one pursued in the military, political, legal, economic, and humanitarian spheres. There are numerous facts which unequivocally confirm that the Anglo-Saxons and their underlings spent years preparing the Kiev regime for war by pouring weapons into Ukraine and sabotaging the unanimously approved UN Security Council resolution on a peaceful settlement that took into consideration the legitimate interests of the residents of Donbass. On the contrary, the West tacitly and even approvingly looked on as the putschist-founded Kiev regime passed laws banning Russian in the fields of education and culture, media and everyday life. Ukrainian officials publicly threatened to kill Russian-speaking citizens, whom they called “non-humans.” Just take Vladimir Zelensky’s statement in an interview he granted in the autumn of 2021. He said that if someone in Ukraine felt an affinity with Russian culture, they should get out and go to Russia for the sake of their children’s future.  In parallel, the regime, with active support from its Western patrons, was getting ready to seize the territories in question by force, territories that should have received a special status under the abovementioned UN Security Council resolution, primarily the right to their native language. Under the circumstances (as stressed by President Vladimir Putin), recognising the independence of Donbass in full conformity with the right of nations to self-determination and launching the special military operation based on Article 51 of the UN Charter was a forced step, to which, however, there was no alternative. This step is aimed at removing NATO-created threats to Russia’s security and protecting Russians and Russian speakers from extermination in their historical lands.

Kiev and its Western sponsors are using all means at their disposal to bring other countries to support Zelensky's peace formula which, in fact, comes down to an ultimatum to bring Ukraine back to the borders as they were in 1991. I urge everyone who is being lured into this game to remember that the Kiev regime has openly declared its goal of destroying everything Russian in the territories that are currently beyond its control. This is what the demand to return Ukraine to its 1991 borders means to these people.

We appreciate China, Brazil, South Africa, Egypt, India and other Global South countries’ sincere interest in promoting the quest for fair and realistic settlement avenues. President Putin and our country’s leadership have repeatedly spoken about this. It is critically important that the proposals coming from our friends in the developing world are based on a clear understanding of the true causes and nature of ongoing developments as fallout from the West's efforts to undermine the principle of indivisibility and security.

In order to save their geopolitical project to “contain Russia” and to split the Russian world, the United States, NATO and the EU are flooding Ukraine with increasing amounts of modern weapons, thus stoking the conflict and provoking the unchecked spread of weapons around the world. Much evidence to this effect has been substantiated. Their reckless and irresponsible policy significantly increases the threat of a direct military clash between nuclear powers. Our signals seeking to sober them up are ignored or grossly distorted for propaganda purposes.

Clearly, the attempt to shatter Russia using Ukrainian neo-Nazis is an element of their strategic course to reanimate the unipolar order. They are pursuing the same goal in other regions as well, where dissenters fall prey to threats and blackmail seeking to remove an obstacle on the way to Washington's hegemonic plans. The US-promoted Indo-Pacific strategy with its openly declared anti-China slant is a case in point.

Having declared the indivisible security of the Euro-Atlantic and the Indo-Pacific regions, NATO members have gone back on all their previous mantras about the purely defensive nature of the alliance and officially said that from now on they would not only defend their own territory, but also promote their dominance in the Asia-Pacific region.

The current policy seeks to destroy the inclusive and consensus-based ASEAN-centred security architecture in the Asia-Pacific region and to create military blocs and to build NATO infrastructure there. The West's position on Taiwan is a case of utter cynicism. They blatantly declare their commitment to the concept of one China, but at the same time are adamant about not violating the status quo which means (as we see from their practical actions) treating Taiwan as an independent country and flooding it with modern weapons the way it is being done with the Kiev regime.

Other detrimental consequences of the US policy in that region include the ongoing escalation of tension on the Korean Peninsula; attempts to get Japan and South Korea to join their tough, negative and aggressive approach; and the rejection of an equal dialogue involving the DPRK, something Russia and China are ready to support.

Along the lines of the notorious Monroe Doctrine, the US is trying to dictate to Latin America what it needs to do and what standards it needs to use. At the same time, one gets the impression that today’s American elites see not only Latin America but the whole world as their own “backyard.” The US allies are taking this for granted and trying their best to help their “big brother.” This trend manifests itself in the growing pressure on many post-Soviet countries. The Belarusian Defence Minister also mentioned this today.

It is unlikely that the Western ruling circles will abandon their destructive policy in the foreseeable future. However, they will clearly not be able to reverse the course of history. The world has changed dramatically and needs alternative methods of ensuring global stability by creating security mechanisms that are beyond the control of Washington and its satellites, as well as zones of pragmatic cooperation and development in various regions.

Relying on multilateral platforms that work on an equal footing and promote a constructive agenda can accelerate this process. We see good prospects in using the potentials of Eurasian associations, including the Union State of Russia and Belarus, the CSTO, the EAEU, the CIS, the SCO, ASEAN and the GCC. Linking their programmes, a process that is already underway, will certainly contribute to building the Greater Eurasian Partnership, and will help to find ways of ensuring security throughout Eurasia without the interference of extra-regional powers.

In the global context, I would especially like to note the rapid growth of the prestige and attractiveness of BRICS, a framework where countries with different political systems and distinctive value platforms are setting an example of multipolar diplomacy aimed at agreeing on effective formats of trade, economic, investment and humanitarian interaction. These formats are implemented on equal terms and are protected from outside dictates.

Foreign policy coordination is also growing. One of the key items on the agenda of the forthcoming Johannesburg summit this month will be BRICS expansion, which will significantly strengthen this association and increase its weight in global affairs.

Colleagues,

The geopolitical situation makes it difficult for us to pool efforts to neutralise the threats that are common to humanity, including fighting international terrorism, especially jihadist organisations like ISIS, Al-Qaeda and their offshoots that (we should keep in mind) have emerged in recent decades as a result of reckless military moves by the United States and its allies.

We must put an end to using terrorists for geopolitical purposes, be it in Afghanistan, Syria or elsewhere. The ever present threat to security in the Sahara-Sahel region was a direct consequence of NATO's aggression against Libya, which led to the destruction of its statehood and turned the country into a transit zone for terrorists, which they continue to actively exploit.

Everyone should learn their lessons from the tragic consequences of the wars unleashed by the United States and its allies.

We believe it is important that the UN, which has of late been fairly quiet in this regard, should act proactively and step up its efforts in fighting terrorism without relying on double standards.

Biological security has become particularly important, primarily in light of the facts of unchecked military biological activities by the United States and a number of its allies in various regions around the world, about which our Defence Ministry issues detailed updates. These activities run counter to the obligations under the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention and it is important to be more active in urgently strengthening that convention by establishing within its framework a legally binding and transparent mechanism for verifying the programmes that are implemented by the participating countries.

Preventing militarisation of outer space is a matter of special attention. Russia has consistently advocated the preservation of outer space for exclusively peaceful activities by all countries on an equal footing, and the development of a legal instrument that would be comprehensive in nature and be aimed at preventing an arms race in space, including guarantees against launching attack weapons systems into orbit around the Earth. The Russian-Chinese draft treaty provides a good basis for this work. We encourage everyone to support it.

ICT challenges are mounting. As you may be aware, Russia has submitted to the UN a concept for a future treaty on ensuring international information security and a draft convention on combating cybercrime. We call on everyone to support and sponsor our initiatives.

Colleagues,

Russia will continue to consolidate the efforts of the international community to counter global and regional challenges and threats, to promote a positive agenda, to contribute to strengthening international security and stability, to the peaceful settlement of conflicts, to ensure that the UN Charter principles are applied in practice, and importantly, in full, rather than selectively.

The Group of Friends in Defence of the Charter of the United Nations established two years ago at the initiative of Venezuela has become a workable platform in this regard. It now includes 20 countries, and interest in it is growing. We will continue to strengthen this association of like-minded partners and other structures that are working to democratise international relations. To this end, as President Putin noted at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum in June: “We will definitely continue to strengthen our sovereignty in all areas. In this work, we are certainly open to equal partnership with all countries – with all those who, like Russia, value their national interests and are ready to determine their own future.”