Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s interview with the newspaper Oslobodjenje on the 25th anniversary of diplomatic relations established between the Russian Federation and Bosnia and Herzegovina on December 26, 1996, published on December 24, 2021

Question: In a few days we will mark an important day, the 25th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Russia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. How would you describe the current state of bilateral relations and their outlook for the next 25 years?

Sergey Lavrov: Anniversaries offer an opportunity to look back at past achievements and map out new goals for the future.

It is no secret that we started developing relations in a difficult period for both our countries. The late 1990s was a time when a bloody conflict ended, and Bosnia and Herzegovina started rebuilding peaceful life in a new format under the Dayton Accords. You probably know that Russia, working together with the other international mediators, did a great deal to restore peace. This explains our bilateral interest in developing friendly and mutually beneficial ties. We have achieved this goal within a relatively short period of time through concerted efforts.

Russia appreciates the mutual understanding which has come about in relations with Bosnia and Herzegovina, its ethnic groups and even individual communities. The probable reason for this is our common Slavic roots and numerous historical and spiritual links.

Our countries maintain a regular political dialogue. Several days ago, on December 21, I had a warm and very fruitful meeting in Sochi with my colleague, the Foreign Minister of Bosnia and Herzegovina Bisera Turkovic.

We continue to improve the legal framework of our bilateral cooperation. We are currently discussing the signing of about a dozen new interstate, intergovernmental and interdepartmental documents.

We are satisfied with the efficient operation of the intergovernmental commission on trade and economic cooperation. Its co-chairs met in Kazan in October. We are preparing for the next full-scale meeting.

Major Russian companies are working successfully in Bosnia and Herzegovina, including Sberbank, Gazprom Neft and Zarubezhneft. Gazprom is a long-time supplier of natural gas to your country. We are now discussing several interesting projects aimed at diversifying the spheres of our companies’ operation. I am sure that their implementation will be in the interests of your citizens.

We are working together on plans to open a Russian Culture Centre in Bosnia and Herzegovina. We have done a great deal of groundwork in the fields of culture, humanitarian ties, education and sports.

We have good ties in the common fight against the pandemic. This year, we have delivered 200,000 doses of the Russian Sputnik V vaccine, which has an excellent track record, to Bosnia and Herzegovina. We are ready to consider any future requests from our partners in Bosnia and Herzegovina, including for the delivery of the Sputnik Light single component vaccine.

In other words, we have accomplished a great deal and are working on many projects. I have no doubt that our relations will continue to develop in a busy and fruitful manner in the next 25 years as well.

Question: What are Russia’s interests in the Balkans? Croatia is a European Union member, and your country has economic interests and capital in this country. Russia has a very developed relationship with Serbia. Against this backdrop, what do Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Northern Macedonia, Montenegro, and Albania mean to Russia?

Sergey Lavrov: Peace, security and stability in the Balkans are our main interests. There is no need to search for any hidden meanings behind Russia’s policies. This will not lead you anywhere. We work with everyone on an equal, mutually beneficial, transparent footing, rooted in the international law, primarily the UN Charter.

The myth about Moscow’s “malicious influence” is an outright fabrication. The local Russia-phobes have been persisting in their efforts, worthy of a better cause, to spread this message in order to poison the atmosphere of cooperation in the region. This probably serves the interests of some extra-regional actors who prefer “fishing in muddy water.”

Forcing an artificial choice on the Balkan states to side either with the European Union or with Russia is counterproductive and unfair. This provokes the creation of new dividing lines in the region and stands in the way of cooperation.

Quite often the will of the people from Balkan states is being ignored, and this is being done on purpose. Just look what came out of this in Montenegro – it was literally “dragged into” NATO, contrary to the will of the majority. Why do they have to “bend countries across their knee” to impose the Euro-Atlantic agenda on them? By the way, everyone remembers all too well what NATO has done to this region in the 1990s. Unfortunately, the consequences of depleted uranium shelling will be felt here for many generations to come.

I have already mentioned the state and prospects of Russia’s relations with Bosnia and Herzegovina in my answer to the previous question. Serbia is Russia’s key partner in the Balkans. We value our strategic partnership with Belgrade and strive to promote our ties across the board. We have developed multifaceted relations with Croatia, which is not only an EU member, but also a NATO country. This is a telling example showing that mutually beneficial ties are possible as long as both sides are willing to move in this direction. We are interested in promoting a positive agenda in our relations with Northern Macedonia and Albania.

As for Kosovo, for obvious reasons it presents a separate case, and Russia’s position on this matter is well known. We stand for Belgrade and Pristina achieving a viable and mutually acceptable solution based on UN Security Council Resolution 1244. This solution must be approved by the Security Council since this is a matter of international peace.

Question: Relations between Russia and Bosnia and Herzegovina amount to interstate relations. Consequently, any matters arising should be addressed in line with agreed-upon principles. At the same time, people here, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, are convinced that Russia prioritises contacts with only one part of the country, and this is viewed as support for forces aspiring to secessionism. Of course, I am talking about Republika Srpska in this context, as well as frequent candid statements by Milorad Dodik, Head of the Alliance of Independent Social Democrats and member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina. He claims that there is unambiguous support from Russia behind his calls for secession that threaten peace. Is that true?

Sergey Lavrov: First of all, I cannot agree with an assertion that the initiatives of Milorad Dodik, member of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, are a threat to peace. I do not subscribe to such claims, and I consider them groundless. Russia, as a guarantor state of the Dayton Peace Agreement, addresses its obligations in the most responsible manner and very closely follows the developments in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

I will not conceal the fact that we are concerned with an unprecedented decline in the level of interethnic dialogue and trust in the country that has hit an all-time low during the entire post-conflict period. In our opinion, this is linked with foreign-backed attempts to revise the Dayton ethnic-administrative system in favour of unitarising and centralising Bosnia and Herzegovina to the detriment of the constitutional powers of the basic state-forming peoples and entities. This policy is extremely dangerous for the national and regional situation, as well as for the overall European situation. We are warning partners in Bosnia and Herzegovina and foreign players about this.

Former High Representative and EU Special Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina Dr Valentin Inzko seriously soured the domestic political climate with his completely irresponsible behaviour in connection with amendments to the Criminal Code. It was absolutely baffling to stage such a provocation virtually on the eve of his resignation, to slam the door and force everyone to sort out the consequences of the ensuing chaos. Actually, his conduct shows once again that the foreign protectorate institution in the person of the High Representative has already outlived itself and has become a source of problems. It has long since been time to abolish this institution and to free sovereign Bosnia and Herzegovina from external patronage which is humiliating for its people.

There should be no doubts regarding the specifics of the perception of relations between Russia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. We have adhered, adhere and will continue to adhere to the positions of the Dayton Peace Agreement. We fully support the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the equality of its three constituent peoples and two entities with broad constitutional powers. We consider this concept to be adequate and functional, and we believe that it takes the entire range of interests of the country’s peoples into account.

We proceed from precisely this assumption, while building upon ties with the general institutions of state authority in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as with institutions at the level of entities, cantons and municipalities, in full compliance with the constitutional allocation of spheres of responsibility between them.

Indeed, Republika Srpska is very much interested in expanding practical ties with Russia, and, of course, we reciprocate. However, cooperation with the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina also continues to develop successfully. Twin city relations have been established between Sarajevo and Moscow’s Central Administrative Area, between Sarajevo’s Stari Grad Municipality and Moscow’s Alexeyevsky District. Sarajevo University interacts with nine Russian higher education institutions, and Mostar University cooperates with three of them. Gazprom Neft is expanding the chain of petrol stations in the entity, and Sberbank also maintains a large-scale presence here. By the way, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina is the main consumer of Russian gas.  

Question: The Russian Federation is a member of the Steering Board within the Peace Implementation Council under the Dayton Agreement. Why does Russia oppose with so much vigour the new High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina Christian Schmidt, while calling for consistent advances in the implementation of the Dayton Agreement? After all, the refusal to recognise the High Representative, who derives his mandate from the Dayton Agreement, could create new problems around the Peace Agreement and result in its erosion, don’t you think?

Sergey Lavrov: The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina is an international legal document approved by the UN Security Council. There is no alternative to the UN Security Council when it comes to approving candidates for the position of the High Representative, as set forth in Annex 10 to the Dayton Agreement. The rotation of High Representatives has been going on for a quarter of a century now. Neither the constituent peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina, nor the Steering Board of the Peace Implementation Council approved Christian Schmidt’s candidacy by consensus. Russia and China suggested submitting the appointment to the UN Security Council for approval, in keeping with the existing rules, but this initiative was blocked.

In this case, who does Christian Schmidt represent? Maybe a dozen foreign ambassadors in Sarajevo? He clearly does not represent the international community represented by the Security Council. In keeping with Chapter VII of the UN Charter, this body continues to keep a close eye on the developments in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Considering all this, we cannot recognise Christian Schmidt as the High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina, even if we do respect him as a prominent German politician. Nothing in our approach erodes the Peace Agreement. On the contrary, it is the efforts to support an illegitimate appointee and steps to do away with the consensus rule within the international community that undermine the Dayton Agreement.

Question: Bosnia and Herzegovina was surprised by Russia’s opposition in the UN Security Council to the resolution on Srebrenica. Our country has yet to hear Russia’s explanation on its refusal to support an item considering not only the existence of a clear verdict by the International Tribunal, but also the clear condemnation by the overwhelming majority of the international community?

Sergey Lavrov: I am surprised that you have not paid attention to the remarks by the late Vitaly Churkin, who represented Russia in the UN Security Council during the July 2015 meeting, or his statement after the meeting. He provided a comprehensive and exhaustive explanation of why we voted on the draft resolution the way we did. By the way, it was at Vitaly Churkin’s initiative that the UN Security Council members at that meeting observed a minute of silence in memory of all those who died in Srebrenica.

I can only reiterate that Russia understands the serious consequences of artificially politicising matters which are so sensitive in terms of political stability in the Balkans. We have a responsible approach to decision-making in international structures, primarily, the UN Security Council, and seek to do everything to bring about inclusive reconciliation and honour the memory of all the conflict’s victims.

Question: Bosnia and Herzegovina is a small country, but we often hear it said that it - and not just it - is a victim of Russia-US global confrontation. What are Russia-US relations today?

Sergey Lavrov: With regard to the thesis about Bosnia and Herzegovina as a “victim of Russia-US confrontation,” I have noted this more than once, Russia does not resolve its problems at the expense of anyone's interests. We do not confront our partners with an absolutely false choice of “you are either with us or against us.” Our principled position is well known: regional problems need regional solutions based on an inclusive dialogue and taking into account the positions of all stakeholders.

At the same time, notably, recently Washington has been avoiding discussing with us not only Bosnia and Herzegovina, but the Balkan issue in general. We hope that the Biden administration will muster enough political will and reason not to turn the Balkans into another spot of anti-Russian confrontation; otherwise it will have disastrous consequences for Europe as a whole.

Speaking about Russia-US relations, they are unhealthy. A lot of irritants have piled up. The Americans are pursuing an openly unfriendly policy by imposing sanctions, making unsubstantiated accusations against us, and taking other hostile steps which create a toxic atmosphere and make calm and professional communication impossible.

Nevertheless, we have managed to maintain quite intensive contacts. I held talks with Antony Blinken on the sidelines of the OSCE Ministerial Council in Stockholm on December 2. On December 7, the presidents of Russia and the United States held a video conference, which made it possible to take a kind of inventory of progress in implementing the agreements that had been reached during the Geneva summit.

Of course, the main topic of discussion was the problems associated with the Ukraine crisis and the lack of progress in implementing the Minsk agreements. President Vladimir Putin used specific examples to highlight Kiev's destructive policy aimed at dismantling the Minsk agreements and the agreements reached within the Normandy format, and expressed serious concern about Ukraine's provocative actions against Donbass.

The presidents agreed to direct their respective teams to begin a serious dialogue on developing long-term legally binding security guarantees on Russia's western borders. On December 15, we handed over to the American side our drafts of a Treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on security guarantees and an Agreement on Security Measures for the Russian Federation and Member States of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. We are waiting for them to respond.

We believe that, first of all, it is important to lower the degree of confrontation caused by the way our US colleagues are looking after their Ukrainian protégés. The course on dragging Kiev into NATO with the prospect of deploying attack missile systems near our borders creates unacceptable threats to Russia’s security thus provoking serious military risks for all parties involved, up to a large-scale conflict in Europe.

Of course, Russia-US relations have a positive side to them as well. Thus, in accordance with the Geneva agreements of the leaders, a mechanism for consultations on strategic stability has been launched. The two meetings of the Russian and US interagency delegations took place in a businesslike and professional atmosphere.

In addition, as agreed in Geneva, the Russia-US dialogue on information security resumed. We want cooperation in this area to cover the entire range of problems of malicious use of information and communication technology, and not to be limited to individual issues.

President Putin made clear that Russia and the United States - the largest nuclear powers - have a special responsibility for strategic security on our planet. A full-fledged dialogue between Moscow and Washington would objectively help ensure global stability and settle regional conflicts.

In closing, I would like to wish the staff and readers of Oslobodjenje a happy holiday. I wish you good health, prosperity and all the best in the New Year.