“Our country has been a very big backer, not only of Syria, but also of Iraq, Libya, and Lebanon – Sergey Lavrov

Question: Sergey Lavrov, Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, thank you for talking to Al Jazeera at the 2024 Doha Forum.  

There is so much to talk to you about but I’d like to start with Syria. Those dramatic developments that seem to be reshaping the political map of Syria. I would like your reaction to the things which had happened for the last ten days.

Sergey Lavrov: The reaction has been public. Repeatedly stated. It’s inadmissible to allow the terrorist groups to take control of the lands in violation of agreements which exist starting with the UN Security Council Resolution 2254 which strongly reiterated the sovereignty, territorial integrity and unity of the Syrian Arab Republic, which condemned any attempts by terrorists to disturb the life of Syrians, and which called for the direct dialogue between the government and the opposition. And the opposition groups listed in that Resolution.

If we speak about Hayat Tahrir al-Sham specifically, in 2018 and 2020 in the framework of the Astana format two agreements were signed clearly solidifying the common resolve not to allow Hayat Tahrir al-Sham to rule in Idlib to be thrown out of Idlib. And this agreements have not been implemented. And now they are grossly violated. I watched your channel this morning and the coverage is very specific I would say.  The anchorman was saying that opposition groups were taking new and new towns. Opposition groups, this is the way Al Jazeera calls Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, which is, I would say, not very journalistically clean.

Question: Well, there are more than one groups, and clearly Hayat Tahrir al-Sham is an opposition group in opposition to the government in Damascus, it seems a pretty clear description of what they do. You’ve been having meetings…

Sergey Lavrov: One second, one second. I understand that you defend your bosses who call the shots in Al Jazeera, but could an honest journalist provide for a statement like Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, listed as a terrorist group by the United Nations Security Council and the United States, by the way, and opposition groups who are not listed?

Question: And I have been reporting on this for the last couple of weeks and we are saying that very repeatedly.

But let me get back to what has been going on in terms of the diplomacy. I understand that you have had a meeting with your Turkish and Iranian colleagues here in Doha. Have you reached any agreements?

Sergey Lavrov: Yeah, we strongly reiterated territorial integrity, sovereignty and unity of the Syrian Arab Republic. We called for immediate end of hostile activities. We stated, all of us, that we want the Resolution 2254 to be fully implemented and for this purpose called for the dialogue between the government and legitimate opposition, as provided in that Resolution.

The main thing is not to say something new. The main thing is implement everything to which you sign up.

Question:  But that Resolution 2254, which you… It was a Security Council Resolution at Foreign Minister level, I remember, in 2015, and you were there in Russia’s seat. That talks about a new constitution and free and fair elections, and yet the whole process has got bogged down and has gone absolutely nowhere.

Sergey Lavrov: Well, it’s still a bit less time passed after the adoption of this resolution since the resolutions promising Palestinian state were adopted. So everything is relative, if you can understand.

Nobody is perfect, as the old American movie says, and everything is relative. This doesn’t mean that we should not keep trying.

Question: Have you spoken to your Syrian counterpart in recent hours, or any other senior Syrian official. How worried are they about the situation? They’ve lost a lot of territory.

Sergey Lavrov: Well, we are not in the business of checking who is worried and to what extent. We’re in the business to try to help, as diplomatic means, to stop bloodshed and to make justice prevail. In this particular case, justice is Resolution 2254.

The other authors of this resolution, including the United States, confirmed to us that they continue supporting this process as described in that resolution, and we hope that these promises and assurances would materialize soon.

Question: How much of a blow is it to Russia that so much territory has been lost in such a short period of time? Because Russia and the Soviet Union before it has been such a big backer of Syria. How much of a blow is it, and will you intervene further militarily, not just diplomatically?

Sergey Lavrov: Our country has been a very big backer, not only of Syria, but also of Iraq, of Libya, of Lebanon. And it is not our fault that all the resolutions which were adopted on the Middle East issues (some of them were not adopted, for example, Iraq was bombed out of the statehood without any discussion in the Security Council) that the biggest trend of the modern world, namely the fight against those who want to keep hegemony, and on the other hand, those who would like to live in a free world where the United Nations demand to respect sovereign equality of states, is really implemented, be it BRICS, be it Shanghai Cooperation Organization, be it Gulf Cooperation Council, ASEAN and many others.

So the fight of these two worlds, one phasing out and another one emerging, is not going without clashes. And the conflicts which were adventures, aggressive adventures which were launched by the U.S. and its allies in Iraq, Libya, Palestine, because the behavior of the United States on what is going on in Palestine is absolutely unacceptable, invading Syria. All this is the repetition of the old, very old habit to create some havoc, some mess, and then to fish in the muddy waters. And the Middle East and Europe is not enough already.

The NATO, under the United States command, pronounced last year at the summit that the security in Euro-Atlantic is indivisible from the security in Indo-Pacific region. So they already eye the entire Eurasian continent, including South China Sea, Strait of Taiwan, the Korean Peninsula.

They are creating NATO-like military blocks. NATO infrastructure is being promoted to the region. This is a reflection of attempts not to allow the hegemony to phase out. But this is a fight against history.

So yes, we are very much sorry for the Syrian people who became a subject of another geopolitical experiment. We are absolutely convinced of inadmissibility to use terrorists like Hayat Tahrir al-Sham to achieve geopolitical purposes, as it is being done now with the organization of this offensive from the Idlib de-escalation area. But, you know, what we do in the world… Maybe the mentality is different. The Americans, I know them very well. For them, what is important, how they are perceived. And they always want to be perceived number one. When they tell something, everybody must say, yes, sir, whatever Uncle Sam decides. In our case, it’s not about being concerned with the impression we make on the people. We do things in which we believe.

And if we could help since 2015, could help to keep the Syrian state apart, if we could organize the process with Iranian and Turkish colleagues, which is called Astana process, and we met today, as you mentioned. This in itself was a very helpful process. Nothing goes smoothly in world diplomacy, but the events which we are witnessing today, they are clearly geared to undermine everything we have been doing during those years.

And we are sorry not for the image which people see in the face of the Russian Federation, or me personally, but we are very concerned with the fate of the Syrian people. We don’t want them to follow the fate of Iraqis, of Libyans and of other nations who were disturbed by the people desiring to keep their domination.

Question: The Russian embassy in Damascus is now urging Russian nationals to leave Syria. Does that mean that you believe that Assad may not be able to cling on to power? And if that is the case, are you going to try and save him this time?

Sergey Lavrov: Well, the Western embassies in Kiev some time ago suggested for the nationals to leave. The embassies in South Korea are doing the same. It’s a diplomatic job.

I understand that you need some sensation in your interview. It’s a diplomatic job. You have, as journalists, to care about facts. I have, among other things, to care about my compatriots.

Question: Understood. But the sensation, surely, is the fact that so much of the territory of Syria has been lost in such a short period of time. Do you think Assad can hold on, and what is Russia going to do militarily?

Sergey Lavrov: Militarily, Russia helps the Syrian army with the air force, which is based at Khmeimim. And we help the Syrian army to counter the attacks of terrorists. What is the forecast? I cannot guess. We are not in the business of guessing.

We agreed today with Iran and Türkiye to issue a strong call, which I described. And we would be doing some specific steps to make sure that this call is heeded.

Question: You say that Russia has been helping the Syrian military. It clearly has. Are you not frustrated, then, that it seems in many cases the Syrian military just ran away? It’s a bit like when the Taliban took over Afghanistan in 2021, is it not?

Sergey Lavrov: Well, the Americans have been leaving Afghanistan even more hastily, I think.

You know, if you want me to try to give my assessment of who behaves how and how this is perceived outside, then this is your right. You are interviewing me, and I think I gave my advice. It seems, however, that you are doing everything to avoid coming to Ukraine.

Question: I will come to Ukraine, but I definitely want to talk about the issues in the Middle East first. And I want to come back to Hayat Tehrir al-Sham, which, as you say, was formed from the al-Nusra Front, remains on the UN blacklist, but their leader, Jelani, is now projecting a different tone. He’s sending a message to Alawites that they are welcome. Do you think that at least someone should be talking to him to see if he’s telling the truth?

Sergey Lavrov: Well, first of all, he’s projecting this position, as far as I understand, on CNN. And we checked with the Americans whether he’s still on the U.S. terrorist list, and they said, yes, he is, in addition to the Security Council terrorist list.

So giving him the audience of CNN is already something. As for the promises he’s spreading, I never challenged the English proverb, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Question: But there are other cases, and there’s one obvious one. The Taliban were on a blacklist. They were allied to al-Qaeda. And now, in Afghanistan, Russia deals with the Taliban. Things change.

Sergey Lavrov: We never withdrew our embassy from Kabul. The embassy was staying there throughout the American and coalition occupation, throughout their shameful departure. We never withdrew the embassy.

The Taliban, by the way, they are not, as an organization, on the UN terrorist list. Several leaders of the Taliban are on the personal terrorist list.

But I understand what you mean. You are basically saying that life is more interesting and more complicated than resolutions and statements and claims and promises. We’ll see how it works. If the opposition, which was mentioned in the resolution 2254, is a responsible opposition, if they care about their country, then they would not allow for this operation to continue. They participate in hostilities as well. And today’s call from Iran, Türkiye and Russia should be heard by everybody who is on the ground in Syria.

Question: And on the ground in Syria right now, the focus is the battle for Homs. If Homs is taken, then the territory controlled by Assad will be divided in two.

And on one side of that will be your big naval base that you were given for 49 years, your sovereign naval base, and also your large air base in Latakia. Is Russia worried about those? Apparently, some analysts say there have been satellite images of Russian vessels already leaving your Tartus naval base.

Sergey Lavrov: Well, there is a naval exercise in the Mediterranean. Maybe your satellite images took this for something different.

But, once again. If you want me to say, yes, we lost in Syria, we are so desperate, if this is what you need, let’s continue.

But my point is I am not in the business of guessing what is going to happen. We are trying to do everything not to allow terrorists to prevail, even if they say that they are no longer terrorists.

Question: What about the role of Türkiye in this? You met with Turkish foreign minister here in Doha.

Do you think they are controlling the situation or just want to keep on top of the situation?

Sergey Lavrov: They are a very influential actor in Syria, and I think you know this. They are concerned with the security of their border with Syria. We discussed it in Astana format and in the context of Astana plus Syria discussions on normalizing relations between Türkiye and Damascus.

And there is a series of ideas which we want to put into practice to keep Syria territorially integral and united while ensuring security of the border, which has been porous for terrorist attacks on the territory of Türkiye.

Adan Agreement of 1986, I think, is an example of how this can be addressed. I have no slightest doubt that the relations between Syria and Türkiye must be normalized and we will be doing anything to be helpful.

Question: To finish on Syria, please, Mr. Foreign Minister, you keep mentioning Resolution 2254. If ever it got to the stage of the ultimate part of that resolution, free and fair elections, hand on heart, you cannot believe, can you, that the Assad family, the Assad dynasty that has run this country for 54 years, has run it throughout this war when half a million people have died, that they would be elected in free and fair elections, do you?

Sergey Lavrov: To get to this point, you said yourself that this is a crowning paragraph of the resolution. Before that, you need to implement what comes before it, including sovereignty and territorial integrity to be respected.

The Americans’ invasion and occupation of the east of Syria, supporting Kurdish separatists, including on the lands which historically belonged to Arab tribes, exploiting oil and food resources, selling them in the world market and financing the quasi-state they are building there, do you think it is not an inhibition for free and fair elections throughout Syria?

Question: Let’s move to Gaza. Over 45,000 people have been killed since October 7th last year. And as you know, back in June, the 10th of June, 14 members of the Security Council voted for a ceasefire. The US abstained. There should now be a ceasefire. Is there any valid reason in Russia’s view, almost six months later, why there is no ceasefire in place now?

Sergey Lavrov: Because this was a resolution of the quality which we could not support. We did not veto it only because all our Arab friends, including Palestinians, did not want us to. They wanted to give it a try. It mentioned a Biden plan, and the Americans were persuading us during the meeting of the Security Council that this Biden’s plan is supported by Netanyahu.

We asked to circulate the Biden’s plan. They said, no, it’s not necessary, trust us, trust me, like Schwarzenegger used to say. And so we abstained.

And it turned out that the plan does not exist, that Israelis are not committed by anything. So this plan turned out to be one of the rules on which the world order must be based. Rules based world order. Nothing specific.

So with a resolution intended not to be implemented, how can we expect that it would?

Question: Israel has now killed…

Sergey Lavrov: No applause?

Question: Israel has now killed many of Hamas’s commanders. Do you think it has any real reason to continue fighting, or is it just causing carnage, death and destruction deliberately of Palestinians?

Sergey Lavrov: Well, we strongly condemned the terrorist attack on the 7th of October last year. But at the same time, we strongly condemned the way Israel reacted, basically by starting a collective punishment of the Palestinians.

I discussed with some Israeli colleagues this issue, and, well, I think publicly, either the Minister of Defense or some other official from the Cabinet, when asked why don’t you take measures so that you prevent the damage to civilians, peaceful citizens, he said there are no peaceful citizens there in Gaza. As of the age of three, they are all terrorists. And with this philosophy…

And when Antonio Guterres condemned the terrorist attack and then added but it did not happen in a vacuum. You remember what Israel’s reaction was? The former ambassador demanded that Guterres resigns. Eventually, he was declared persona non grata. Unbelievable.

And I don’t think Israelis are doing good for their own interests because this notion that they are terrorists when they reach the age of three years. Well, this is, of course, the figure of speech. But for almost 80 years, generation after generation is growing in the situation of occupation and the situation of blockade. And, of course, the parents and the teachers at school, they explain the history of the Palestinian people and what happened in 1948.

So unless Palestinian state is created (which was, by the way, a precondition for the creation of Israeli state), extremism would be breeding and breeding and breeding in the region, there is no doubt.

And just to say that we will exterminate all Hamas members, I don’t think it’s a serious pledge.

Question: Let’s move to Ukraine. And some are suggesting we might be reaching the endgame of the war. And certainly there are lots and lots of proposals emerging. Can I put to you President Zelensky’s latest proposal? Because it seems to have changed.

He now seems to be hinting that he might be prepared to freeze the conflict while still claiming all of the territory that he had before, but with a security guarantee rather like the East Germany-West Germany situation, with Western Ukraine being brought under a NATO umbrella. What do you make of that? Is that in any way acceptable to Russia?

Sergey Lavrov: Some time ago I stopped following what Zelensky says. He can change his position from A to Z overnight, depending on how he feels at this particular moment.

But it is not about Korean option, German option or any other option which he calls must be, which he says must be based without any alternative on the Ukrainian terms. Fine, then he should draw a map and see how he can accommodate himself and his fantasies.

Many initiatives have been put forward, including this infamous and stupid «peace formula» by Zelensky, which says Russia must withdraw to 1991 borders. President Putin and myself, by the way, must go to the tribunal. Russia must pay compensation. Russia must reduce the size of its weaponry close to Ukrainian border, and so on and so forth.

But there are plans not coming from somebody who is inadequate, but from people who would like to help and who are motivated by goodwill, like China and Brazil moved a plan which was subject to discussion in the margins of the General Assembly last September. South Africans were circulating some ideas. League of Arab States visited Moscow a couple of times. Members of the contact group they created on Ukraine. None of the initiatives, they’re all dictated by goodwill, no doubt. We don’t dispute that.

But none of them mentions what President Xi Jinping of China proclaimed in his global security initiative, which he made public, I think, in February 2023. Not about Ukraine. It’s a generic initiative on the principles which you must apply when you address any conflict.

And one of the principles says – address and eliminate root causes of a conflict. This is key to any situation, be it lack of Palestinian state and what is going on in the Middle East, or be it Ukraine. The root causes of the Ukrainian crisis are not mentioned in any initiative.

And I met recently with ambassadors accredited to Russia in Moscow, talk about this to them. And whenever I speak to journalists or to political scientists, I always raise this issue. Because to my amazement, what I’m going to say is not reported by anybody.

The root causes. 2014, February. Because Ukraine asked the European Union to give it more time to understand how the association with the European Union would affect its economic relations with Russia. Just some additional thinking, additional consultations to understand how this would affect your economy. Because they didn’t have any tariffs with Russia, and they wanted to have no tariffs with the European Union.

And we have a lot of protection with the European Union for many industries of ours. So we told them, guys, if you open up, we have to close the border with Ukraine, because we would be flooded by the European goods, which are more competitive. And that’s why Ukrainians asked for some more time to think.

Actually, we suggested to EU and to Ukrainians to have a trilateral meeting and to discuss it. European Union head of the commission, Mr. Barozo, at that time, he said, none of your business. We don’t discuss with you our relations with Canada. Anyway, very arrogant.

So the request to postpone the consultations was used as the trigger for this Maidan demonstration which culminated in February 2014.

Question: Can I bring you back to the present day now, Mr. Lavrov, because we’re running out of time.

Sergey Lavrov: I understand that you represent cancel culture.

Question: No. Not at all.

Sergey Lavrov:  Whatever part of root causes you don’t like, you want to switch over them. I think you explained it.

Well, if we are running out of time, then I was right. You wanted to drown me in Syria.

Question:  I think these are rather important issues.

Sergey Lavrov: I addressed it very seriously.  So briefly, this confrontation between the president and the government was resolved with Germany, France and Poland witnessing and guaranteeing the deal between the government and the opposition. And next morning, they took all administrative buildings. And the deal signed the night before said we create a government of national unity and go for early elections. And when they took the administrative building, they said, please congratulate us. We created the government of the winners, not of national unity, winners. Then their first announcement was – we will cancel the status of the Russian language. They sent armed groups to take Crimean parliament. That’s how it started.

But this all is canceled. We were only accused you annexed Crimea. No attention to the fact that Crimeans held referendum.

They said territorial integrity. Few years before that, they announced unilaterally, without any referendum, independence of Kosovo and said this is in line with the UN Charter because it’s self-determination of nations which is the right.

So, self-determination principle of the Charter was the basis for decolonization, for awakening of the people who understood that the colonial masters did not represent their interests. By the same token, the people whom Zelensky in an interview before the special operation called not people but species and publicly said those who live in Ukraine and feel associated with the Russian culture get out to Russia, these people do not consider Zelensky and his regime as legitimate masters.

And the last point, human rights. This you cannot interrupt.  Article 1 of the United Nations Charter says you must respect human rights of everybody irrespective of race, gender, language or religion. In Ukraine, since 2017, five years before the special operation started, they passed legislation piece by piece exterminating legally Russian language at all stages of education. In media, Russian TV outlets were closed. Ukrainian TV companies who were broadcasting in Russian were closed. They were storming libraries and throwing out books in Russian language like Hitler did, and then recently they passed a law prohibiting the canonic Ukrainian Orthodox Church, thus violating the Article 1 of the Charter which prohibits discrimination on the basis of language or religion.

Our Western brothers and sisters who on any occasion, on something which happening in any part of the globe, including Antarctic with penguins and others, put human rights on top, they never mumbled human rights in relation to Ukraine where a racist regime has been breeded by them. So those are the root causes, and I hope the people who are sincerely interested in promoting some solution and would be drafting some initiative would concentrate on the things which I mentioned including, of course, non-NATO situation because NATO wanted to create a stronghold in Ukraine with the plans to build naval bases on the Sea of Azov and on the Black Sea. They were eyeing Crimea, and when all this was stopped, you see, the reaction is really hysterical.

Question:  Foreign Minister, my final question. We have the ATACMS missiles being used by the Americans. We have Russia now using its new hypersonic missiles.

We have lots of nuclear talk. How dangerous is this moment right now in your view, in your long career as a person at the top table of global diplomacy? And do you hope that the arrival of the Trump administration can turn the page?

Sergey Lavrov:  Well, I cannot speculate about the policies which the Trump administration would eventually formulate. There are many rumors, many testing ground statements.

As regards the danger, it is dangerous. And I hope you can at some point interview somebody from the American – Biden administration, because everything they do indicates that they persuade Europeans not to believe in Russian red lines. They push them farther and farther, providing an example like ATACMS to make the French and the British with their Scalp and Storm Shadow missiles more aggressively involved. They also pressure the Germans with Taurus, as far as I understand.

Once Mr. Kirby, who is a National Security Council Coordinator for Strategic Communications at the White House, was asked whether the U.S. is concerned about possible escalation. He said, yes, we are, because if nuclear weapons are used, Europe would suffer. Mentally he cannot even think about the fact that the U.S. can suffer. With this mentality, it’s very reckless for the current administration to push and push and push Europeans to the brink.

So I hope reason would prevail. There are wise people in the United States, and we hope that they would be taking the final decision and not those who play with fire.

Question: Sergey Lavrov, Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, thank you for talking to Al Jazeera at the 2024 Doha Forum. Thank you, Foreign Minister. Thank you for your time.