May 27, 2021
By Alexander Mercouris
Video
US-Russia Summit. Russia’s Red Lines on Ukraine. Warns ‘Political-Military Union’ with China https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9G6ytnwJdc&ab_channel=AlexanderMercouris
Article I
PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA
Presidents of Russia and the United States will meet in Geneva on June 16 http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/65655
In accordance with the agreement, President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin will hold talks with President of the United States Joseph Biden in Geneva on June 16. The two presidents will discuss the current status of and prospects for bilateral relations, strategic stability problems, as well as current issues on the international agenda, including cooperation in countering the coronavirus pandemic and settlement of regional conflicts.
Article II
Interview with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s newspaper Argumenty i Fakty, Moscow, May 24, 2021-News
Source: https://worldakkam.com/interview-with-foreign-minister-sergey-lavrovs-newspaper-argumenty-i-fakty-moscow-may-24-2021-news/48434/
Question: Immediately after President Joe Biden called President Vladimir Putin and proposed to hold a meeting, Washington adopted new sanctions against Russia. In addition, Joe Biden has not apologized for calling President Putin a “murderer” in a television interview. Is it possible to hold a personal meeting in this situation? Or do we need to wipe out such crimes under the table in the name of more important interests, such as maintaining global strategic stability?
Sergey Lavrov: Over the past few years, unhealthy conditions have occurred in relations between Russia and the United States. There are some major concerns. Americans are now openly implementing unfriendly policies against Russia, adopting sanctions and not being required to make unfounded accusations or public acts like you just mentioned. Has other hostile movements, including. Taken together, this creates a highly toxic environment and hinders the development of a calm and professional dialogue between the two countries.
On our part, we have always sought to develop constructive and mutually beneficial cooperation with Washington and remove obstacles that impede progress. History shows that even the most dramatic differences can be resolved when working together for this.
Russia and the United States, the world’s largest nuclear powers, have special responsibilities for strategic stability and international security. Without a full-fledged Russian-US dialogue, it would be difficult for the international community to address cross-border threats and challenges and resolve regional conflicts. By the way, our international partners regularly point this out to us and Americans. Recognizing this, we are analyzing Washington’s proposal to hold a presidential meeting in a European country this summer. At a meeting with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken in Reykjavik on May 19, the US side was generally constructive, which was encouraging.
Question: If so, what is the agenda for the June Summit?
Sergey Lavrov: Agenda preparation is part of an analysis of the US initiative to hold a summit. Ultimately, the leader himself decides on the issues to discuss at the meeting.
Overall, as President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly pointed out, we are discussing and coordinating solutions to all topics of the bilateral agenda to resolve global issues and regional conflicts and crises. We can say that we are ready to cooperate. .. The main thing is that our dialogue is based on the principles of equality, mutual respect and a balance of interests.
Question: In fact, there is no Russian ambassador in the United States and no American ambassador in Russia. Has such a thing happened before? Can this fact be seen as a new Cold War between our nations? What is Antonov Antonov doing in Moscow, and will he return to Washington in the near future?
Sergei Lavrov: Recalling the ambassador for consultation is a common diplomatic move. This shows dissatisfaction with existing relationships and a desire to thoroughly analyze those relationships and possible scenarios of future development. This does not mean that the relationship has been broken, but that there is a problem with the relationship. You need to analyze this and reboot.
Anatoly Antonov is meeting not only with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but also with the Cheong Wa Dae, the House of Representatives and other Russian institutions. So far, our ambassadors believe that they will work in their capital for some time, like John Sullivan, the head of the US diplomatic mission in Moscow.
Question: In an interview with Facty and his rationale last year, he said he hopes that the summit of the five nuclear powers will be held as soon as possible. Is this suggestion still at the table? By the way, does the extension of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty mean that the nuclear arms control system will not collapse in the end and that it will be possible to deal with the Biden administration in this field?
Sergei Lavrov: Our proposal to convene a summit of five permanent members of the UN Security Council is valid. The coronavirus pandemic prevented us from gathering last year, but that doesn’t break the general idea and we continue to prepare for this conference. We hope that the summit will be held as soon as the epidemiological situation returns to normal around the world.
We see Joe Biden’s team’s agreement to extend the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty without preconditions or coordination as an encouraging sign. The fact that we finally extended the treaty is in full agreement with the security interests of both countries and the international community as a whole.
I don’t try to guess in what direction development will go. In today’s complex situation, it is clear that there is a tremendous need for joint action to improve the situation in the area of strategic stability.
We welcome the US agreement to see the extension of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty as a starting point for starting a new phase of bilateral dialogue on strategic weapons. We are practically ready for work and are fully aware of the complexity and anomalous nature of the problems accumulated in this area.
Question: Experts interpret the military buildup around Donbas in April as a new and dangerous risk of escalation, comparing the situation to the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Can the conflict between Russia and Ukraine (another exacerbation is possible at any time) really explode World War III?
Sergey Lavrov: First of all, I would like to point out that the conflict in Donbas is an armed conflict within Ukraine. It is the result of a coup that led a radical nationalist army in Kiev to power.
Ukrainian militants and nationalists have rejected them, including residents of Donbas, who enforced their rules and simply protected their freedom, national and cultural identities, and their right to speak their native language. Has begun to crack down.
Ukrainian authorities refuse to acknowledge their legitimate interests or give Donbas a special status, as provided in the Minsk Agreement. Instead, Kiev is trying to hold Russia accountable, present it as a party to the dispute, and demand the adoption of stricter anti-Russian sanctions.
Planned military exercises of the Russian Army are held annually, ending the winter-spring period of combat training. They are held in Russian territory, well away from Donbas. It is these exercises that have already been completed that Kiev, supported by the Western nations, sought to present as an exacerbation of tensions.
I would like to take this opportunity to point out the military buildup of the United States and its NATO allies in Ukraine and the Black Sea. They send weapons, provide financial and physical assistance to the Ukrainian army, and teach the Ukrainian army how to fight NATO. Seven joint military exercises with NATO countries will be held in Ukraine in 2021 alone. In other words, military exercises are held there every 6-8 weeks. The Ukrainian army is participating in a large NATO exercise, Defender Europe 2021. Russia needs to take all of this into account in its military program. And finally, needless to say, the militarization of Ukraine has not facilitated the resolution of the conflict in Donbas.
Emma Olive 