Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and CIS Secretary-General Sergey Lebedev make remarks and reply to questions at a joint news conference following the CIS Council of Foreign Ministers, Minsk, April 12, 2024

Colleagues,

We have completed the session of the CIS Foreign Ministers Council. This is the first event of the CIS charter bodies, scheduled for this year. By tradition, we worked in a trust-based, sincere and friendly atmosphere. Our session was substantive and productive.

I would like to thank once again our Belarusian friends and personally Foreign Minister of Belarus Sergei Aleinik for their hospitality and excellent organisation of our meeting. At the same time, we would like to note (everyone spoke about this) the work by the Executive Committee headed by Sergey Lebedev. As always, it did a very good job on drafting documents.

Russia chairs the CIS this year. Our top priority is to ensure furthering integration ties in all areas, including the economy, security, law and order and the cultural and humanitarian area. To reach this goal, experts compiled a large-scale plan to implement the Concept of Russia’s CIS Chairmanship, which includes over 150 items.

The current meeting gave us an excellent opportunity to exchange views on current international issues. We focused on interaction in enhancing security in the CIS and the rest of Eurasia, including joint efforts to counter various threats and challenges. In this context, we reviewed individual aspects of migration cooperation. Taking the floor, all our colleagues confirmed their solidarity with Russia and its people in the face of the terrorist threat, including a heinous terrorist attack at the City Crocus Hall.

We summed up the implementation of the Plan of multilevel inter-ministerial consultations between CIS countries and the Programme of Action to Promote Closer Partnerships between CIS Foreign Ministries.

By tradition, we paid special attention to the cultural and humanitarian component of our cooperation. We endorsed a draft decision of the heads of state to institute a medal in honour of the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War. We also approved a decision to declare Ganja, Republic of Azerbaijan, the CIS sports capital in 2025, and Almaty, Republic of Kazakhstan in 2026.

We hope for further productive cooperation with our CIS co-chairs – the Kyrgyz Republic and the Republic of Tajikistan, as well as with all other partners in fulfilling the agreements and ambitious goals facing the CIS this year. We share the conviction that the development of versatile cooperation in the CIS meets the interests of all its participants.

We will be happy to host our friends at the next session of the CIS Council of Foreign Ministers on October 7. It is important to note that today we adopted two joint documents reflecting our common approaches – on ensuring safe conditions for the professional activities of journalists and on CIS-UN interaction.

We told our friends that this year Russia will host many large international events in addition to the CIS schedule. I would like to mention the recent Games of the Future in Kazan that were attended by all CIS countries and other delegations, and the World Youth Festival in Sochi. In June, Kazan will host the BRICS Sports Games to which all CIS countries have been invited. In September, the World Friendship Games will take place in Moscow and Yekaterinburg. We are ready to host in Russia the first Intervision international song contest.

Russia plans to host the following large political and economic events in 2024: the EAEU summit, the summit of BRICS that is also chaired by Russia this year, the St Petersburg International Economic Forum, the Eastern Economic Forum and the Russian Energy Week, to name a few.

We will be glad to see our CIS friends at these events. We will work to turn all current agreements into practical draft documents for approval by the heads of state.

Question: Recently, politicians dubbed the CIS as “a club for civilised divorce.” How would you describe the Commonwealth today?

Sergey Lavrov: If we apply this analogy, it is like in real life when people part ways, they often start to appreciate the value of their past connections and recognise the importance of mutual support more deeply than when they were together. I believe that the situation where former partners maintain amicable relations and, importantly, begin to cherish them more, resembles this scenario.

Nearly every CIS member country emphasised the significance of this unity, highlighting the novel character, level, and quality of our relations, no longer as part of a single state but within the framework of the Commonwealth. This sentiment is not mere rhetoric; it genuinely encapsulates the essence of our association.

Question: Yesterday, our presidents discussed matters concerning the peaceful resolution of the conflict in Ukraine. President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko suggested revisiting the Istanbul Agreements draft. It’s worth noting that three rounds, which yielded some progress, were held on Belarusian soil. Given Ukraine’s initial readiness, is it feasible to reignite the negotiation process at this juncture? And what precisely did the Istanbul Agreements entail?

Sergey Lavrov: The focus was not on a specific document to serve as the foundation for potential agreements. The draft agreement which was prepared and initialed in Istanbul reflected entirely different circumstances.

It revolved around the principles guiding the dialogue. At that juncture, the Kiev delegation remained amenable to negotiation. The principle involved a realistic assessment of the situation, recognition of each other’s legitimate interests, a comprehensive approach to security, and reaching agreements based on these considerations.

Regrettably, the principle of direct engagement between the parties seeking mutually agreeable solutions without external interference was compromised in Istanbul. Following the initialing of the document, which mirrored the prevailing realities, Western intervention ensued (including from then British Prime Minister Boris Johnson), prohibiting Vladimir Zelensky from ultimately signing the agreement. This interference dictated that the war must persist.

If the ongoing inability to engage in meaningful negotiation, which is now a defining feature of the Kiev regime, persists, it is hard to envision any progress. Instead of fostering direct dialogue devoid of ultimatums, the West is pushing forward with the Copenhagen process, preparing for a conference in Switzerland. Here - and they openly said it - they aim to refine and present the infamous ten points of Vladimir Zelensky's “peace formula” to the Russian Federation. It is evident to any astute political observer that this approach is a dead end, to say the least.

President Vladimir Putin reiterated our position clearly during a conversation with President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko. There is nothing more to add to it. It is obvious that neither Kiev nor its handlers show any inclination to engage in sincere negotiations.

Question: How feasible is China’s peace plan in current conditions? We know that a discussion aiming to allow China to take part in this conference is now underway in Switzerland. If China sets a condition that its peace plan will be discussed together with Vladimir Zelensky’s “formula,” will we accept an invitation to join the conference in Switzerland, provided that such an invitation is forthcoming?

Sergey Lavrov: They are not planning to invite us. They have openly said that, first, it is necessary to present Russia with a “collective ultimatum.” However, this eliminates any chances for success of this Swiss “project.” 

China’s 12-point plan and Switzerland’s formula are incompatible. As I have already said, Switzerland’s formula aims to persuade as many countries as possible (by hook or by crook) to join the ultimatum with regard to Russia. 

China’s idea implies that, at first, it is necessary to resolve systemic security issues in our common region and to deal with the root causes of the current situation in Ukraine. The latter reflects a hybrid war against Russia that has prepared for a long time now and was eventually unleashed by the West. Ukrainian men, and now women, are fighting this war. According to China’s approach, it would only be possible to seriously discuss an agreement (that would, I repeat, heed legitimate security interests of all parties)after eliminating these root causes. We voiced nearly the same proposals in December 2021, and we suggested agreeing on indivisible security, and how it would be embodied in the form of practical measures, including the non-expansion of NATO, essential guarantees and all the rest.

We have been advancing our well-known initiatives since 2007 when the President Vladimir Putin addressed delegates of the Munich Security Conference and warned the West against a temptation to conquer additional geopolitical space using an openly anti-Russia approach. We repeated this in 2008 and 2010. We agreed on indivisible security within the OSCE framework. The West solemnly pledged at the top level that not a single country or organisation in the OSCE region would strive to aspire to domination. In fact, what NATO engaged in was none other than domination.

China and Switzerland voice incompatible approaches. Switzerland’s “initiatives” merely fulfil the “order” of the United States and its allies. I do not see any way we can “hitch the restive steed and the timid deer into one cart.” This is hard to imagine.China’s approach completely meets our common philosophy, including in the context of a more active current discussion on how to facilitate Eurasian security on our entire continent, in its European section, in Central Asia, in the Caucasus and in other regions of the continent where the situation is unstable, and where conflicts are flaring up.

Question: The British Foreign Office advised its citizens to refrain from travelling to Belarus. Could you comment on this?

Sergey Lavrov: They are insecure.

They are afraid that His Majesty’s subjects will see how Belarus really lives, what wonderful people Belarusians are, and after seeing this, they will become aware of all the lies spread by Western propaganda.

Question: The United States is trying to hinder integration processes in the post-Soviet countries. Has the Council of Foreign Ministers discussed external interference in the affairs of the CIS member states?

Sergey Lavrov: It was discussed at a restricted attendance meeting. Everyone understands everything perfectly.

The United States and its satellites are trying to impose their presence on every region where Russia is present, too; they are trying to undermine the agreements on stabilising the Caucasus, in particular the South Caucasus. They are determined to hinder any progress on the agreements between Armenia and Azerbaijan, which have been reached with Russia’s assistance. They are seeking to penetrate Central Asia. They are creating various formats to counteract the Russian Federation. They have publicly stated their goal of ensuring the post-Soviet countries ‘real sovereignty and the need for them to come out of Russia’s shadow. This is the policy pursued in relation to Moldova and many others. Our allies and strategic partners, who remain committed to all the basic principles of cooperation within the CIS, the CSTO, the EAEU and the SCO, are under great pressure now. I am sure that strategically the West’s policy is doomed to failure. True, they can use blackmail, ultimatums and threats to make our partners do things that are less than helpful for cooperation within the CIS. But these are one-off cases and cannot influence the general movement towards getting rid of Western diktat. It is a historical process, which is changing the global situation, not only the post-Soviet countries.