Sergei Lavrov - Russia's Role in the Global Realignment and the End of Pax Americana

With those of us who live in the West being exposed to a steady diet of anti-Russian narratives by our mainstream media over the past year and a half, sometimes it pays to go directly to the source of information about how Russia views the West and the global reality.  A recent interview with Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, one of the world's leading and most intellectually capable diplomats that appeared in Indonesia's Kompas newspaper, explains how Russia's leadership views a "new Cold War".

 

Here is the question posed by the Kompas journalist:

 

"How is Russia going to push for achieving a new balance in international politics and what path is it going to take? A new Cold War is believed to be ongoing. What are its ramifications for the political economy of the world? What policy is Russia pursuing in the new cold war?

  

Here is Lavrov's response with my bolds throughout:

  

"We do not define the current phase of international relations as a new Cold War. The issue at hand is different and is about something different, namely, the formation of a multipolar international order. This is an objective process. Everyone can see that new globally meaningful decision-making centres are strengthening their positions in Eurasia, the Asia-Pacific region, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America. These countries and their associations promote values such as national interests, independence, sovereignty, cultural and civilisational identity and international cooperation. In other words, they are fully within the global development trend and are, as a result, going from success to success."

 

As the thinkers among us have observed, there is a new multipolar global reality developing with the United States no longer functioning as the world's sole "police force".  Other nations and other organizations (i.e. BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization) are now taking their place of leadership at the global table, becoming ever more important when it comes to the future of geopolitics.

  

Lavrov continues, focusing on the United States and its new role in the world:

 

"With regard to the US-led collective West, these countries are trying to slow these processes down and turn them around. Their goal is not to strengthen global security or engage in joint development, but to maintain their hegemony in international affairs and to keep on pursuing their neo-colonial agenda, or in simple terms, to continue to address their own problems at the expense of others, as they are accustomed to do."

 

Here he weighs in on the West and its foreign policies and how these policies have impacted developing nations (i.e. the Global South and Global East), emphasizing the use of sanctions to punish nations that do not fall into line with the West's agenda and how this has led to the new global reality:

 

"Unilateral economic sanctions and our Western colleagues’ overall selfish foreign policy undermine global food and energy security. Their actions have complicated things for the developing countries. Enormous amounts of money that could have been spent on promoting international growth, including on helping the countries that are most in need, are being burned up in the form of thousands of tonnes of military equipment and ammunition supplied to Ukrainian neo-Nazis.

 

Western egocentrism and disregard for the interests of the Global South and Global East encourage the latter to look for alternative cooperation formats across all areas. The seizure of Russian gold and currency reserves in the United States and Europe have led the international community to realise that no one is immune from expropriation of tangible assets that are kept in Western jurisdictions. Not just Russia, but a number of other countries are consistently reducing their dependence on the US dollar and transitioning to alternative payment systems and payments in national currencies.

 

At the same time, the effectiveness of country associations without Western participation is on the rise. The SCO and BRICS are a case of modern multilateral diplomacy without leaders or followers where decisions are made based on consensus....".

 

Russia's leadership is clearly seeing the new global geopolitical reality and is playing a key role, along with China, in the global realignment.  While Washington still holds sway over many nations in the world largely because of the importance of the U.S. dollar to the global economy, it's ability to influence many of the world's largest nations is waning as the sun sets on decades of Pax Americana.  Those leaders who choose to wholeheartedly propagate the Western philosophy of exceptionalism are doomed to fail as the Global South and Global East rise.

The Collapse of the Rules-based International Order

Let's open this posting with a definition from the United Kingdom's government:

 

"The rules-based international system (RBIS) is founded on relationships between states and through international institutions and frameworks, with shared rules and agreements on behaviour.  It works for UK interests in multiple ways: promoting peace and prosperity through security and economic integration; encouraging predictable behaviour by states; and supporting peaceful settlement of disputes. It also encourages states, and a wide range of non-state actors, to create the conditions for open markets, the rule of law, democratic participation and accountability."

 

The rules-based order is a shared commitment among states to conduct their affairs in accordance with an existing set of rules that are underpinned by a system of global government that has evolved since the end of the Second World War.  The United Nations is generally considered to be at the core of this "order".

 

Here is an additional summary of rules-based order noting that there are no specific rules:

 

1.) RBO seems to be a broader term than international law which is defined as legally binding rules that are based on, and require the consent of each individual State.

2.) It seems to include both traditional international law rules, and what is usually referred to as “soft law” – legally non-binding political commitments.

3.) The term “rules-based order” blurs the distinction between binding and non-binding rules, giving the impression that all States and international actors are subject to this order, irrespective of whether or not they have consented to these rules.

4.) While international law is general and universal, the “rules-based order” seems to allow for special rules in special cases.

   

With that in mind, let's look at some excerpts from recent comments made by Russia's Foreign Minister (and consummate diplomat) Sergei Lavrov at the United Nation's Security Council's open debates "Effective multilateralism through the Defense of the Principles of the UN Charter" with my bolds throughout:

 

"For a little less than 80 years of its existence, the UN has been carrying out the important mission entrusted to it by its founders. For several decades, a basic understanding by the five permanent members of the UN Security Council as regards the supremacy of the charter’s goals and principles guaranteed global security. By doing this, it created the conditions for truly multilateral cooperation that was regulated by the universally recognized standards of international law.

 

Today, our UN-centric system is going through a deep crisis. The main reason is a striving by some UN members to replace international law and the UN Charter with a certain “rules-based” order. Nobody has seen these rules. They have not been discussed in transparent international talks. They are being invented and used to counter the natural process of the forming of new independent development centres that objectively embody multilateralism. Attempts are made to curb them through illegal unilateral measures – by denying them access to modern technology and financial services, excluding them from supply chains, seizing their property, destroying their critical infrastructure and manipulating universally accepted norms and procedures. This leads to the fragmentation of global trade, a collapse of market mechanisms, paralysis of the WTO and the final – now open – conversion of the IMF into an instrument for reaching the goals of the US and its allies, including military goals.

 

In a desperate attempt to assert its dominance by way of punishing the disobedient, the United States has gone as far as destroying globalisation which it has for many years touted as a great benefit for humankind serving the needs of the global economy’s multilateral system. Washington and the rest of the obeisant West is using these rules as needed to justify illegitimate steps against the countries that build their policies in accordance with international law and refuse to follow the “golden billion’s” self-serving interests. Those who disagree are blacklisted based on the precept that “he who is not with us is against us....

  

By imposing a rules-based order, the quarters behind it arrogantly reject the UN Charter’s key principle which is the sovereign equality of states. The “proud” statement by the head of EU diplomacy Josep Borrell to the effect that Europe is a “garden” and the rest of the world is a “jungle” said it all about their world of exceptionality. I would also like to quote the Joint Declaration on EU-NATO Cooperation of January 10 which runs as follows: The United West “will further mobilise the combined set of instruments at our disposal, be they political, economic or military, to pursue our common objectives to the benefit of our one billion citizens.”

 

The collective West has set out to reshape the processes of multilateralism at the regional level to suit its needs. Recently, the United States called for reviving the Monroe Doctrine and wanted the Latin American countries to cut down on their ties with the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China....

 

Since World War II, Washington has pulled off dozens of reckless criminal military operations without even trying to secure multilateral legitimacy. Why bother, with their set of arbitrary “rules?”

 

And, Russia is not just pointing the finger at Washington:

 

"The Anglo-Saxons (i.e. the United Kingdom) who are at the helm of the West not only justify these lawless adventures, but flaunt them in their policy for “promoting democracy,” while doing so according to their own set of rules as well, where they recognised Kosovo’s independence without a referendum, but refused to recognise Crimea’s independence even though a referendum was held there; according to British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly, the Falklands/Malvinas are not an issue, because there was a referendum there. That’s amusing."

  

Here's Russia's solution to the dilemma:

 

"In order to avoid double standards, we call on everyone to follow the consensus agreements that were reached as part of the 1970 UN Declaration on Principles of International Law which remains in force. It clearly declares the need to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the states that conduct “themselves in compliance with the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples as described above and thus possessed of a government representing the whole people belonging to the territory.” 

 

I would strongly suggest that you take the time to read Lavrov's entire commentary which you can find here. 

 

There is little doubt that the international order which was established by the victorious allies after the end of the Second World War is under threat.  Here is a quote from a paper entitled "Challenges to the Rules-Based International Order" which appears on the Chatham House website, again with my bolds:

 

"The framework of liberal political and economic rules, embodied in a network of international organizations and regulations, and shaped and enforced by the most powerful nations, both fixed the problems that had caused the war and proved resilient enough to guide the world into an entirely new era.

 

But given its antique origins, it is not surprising that this order now seems increasingly under pressure. Challenges are coming from rising or revanchist states; from unhappy and distrustful electorates; from rapid and widespread technological change; and indeed from the economic and fiscal turmoil generated by the liberal international economic order itself.

 

In general these challenges seem serious rather than catastrophic. There is little coherence or common interest among the challengers, except for discontent with aspects of the current order, and therefore little coordination. There is no sign of any integrated international opposition movement which might unite the discontented and advocate an alternative system, leading to the sort of ideological struggle that marked the last century. And, despite continuing conflicts around the world, war remains an exceptional and disreputable activity rather than, as in much of the past, a proper and attractive tool of international dispute resolution.

 

These are small mercies. The danger to the current order comes not from a single deathblow from a rival system, but from its gradual weakening in the face of widespread dissatisfaction among those it needs to serve. If the system is to survive, its weaknesses must be recognized and resolved, and it must adapt better and faster to the changing international situation."

 

Three interconnected problems must be resolved. The first is the problem of legitimacy. For a system based on rules to have effect, these rules must be visibly observed by their principal and most powerful advocates."

  

If you want a prime example of a breach of the rules-based international order, you need look no further than Washington's decision to invade Iraq in 2003, the failure to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, America's use of torture during the War on Terror, the use of presidential authority to carry out drone strikes and America's widespread use of surveillance technology which was pointed out by Edward Snowden.

 

The world is on the cusp of change.  Unless the ruling class in Washington and the West in general adapts quickly to the new global reality, it will be left behind as the new world moves ahead under the leadership of the BRICS nations and those who attach themselves to the growing influence of this group of nations who have been left out in the cold during the era of the rules-based international order.

Sergey Lavrov on the Russia - Ukraine Situation - March 2022

On March 18, 2022, Sergey Lavrov gave an interview with Russian Television or RT regarding the current situation in Ukraine among other issues.  Let's look at some of the key takeaways from this question and answer session with my bolds throughout:

 

Question: The sanctions that are currently imposed on Russia are of course unprecedented. And they are really negatively affecting the lives of ordinary Russians, even though Washington is saying that it’s not targeting Russians. What can you say about what the goals of these sanctions are and who the target really is?

 

Sergey Lavrov: I believe the goal of the sanctions is much more strategic than just Ukraine. I think what we witness in Ukraine is the quintessence of the western course, strategic course to marginalise Russia, to contain Russia, to stop Russia’s development and to reduce Russia to a zero role in world politics and world economy, world trade, world sports, art, science, education. And we observe unprecedented steps our Western colleagues are taking. One of the underlying trends is the United States’ desire – which has been much more manifested by the Biden administration – to come back to a unipolar world....

 

The latest sanctions wave was really unprecedented and, as President Putin recalled, we are now champions in the number of sanctions introduced against the Russian Federation – more than 5,000 individual acts, almost twice as many as was introduced against Iran and North Korea. But sanctions, or all of this, made us stronger....

 

If you wish to see all of Washington's anti-Russia sanctions, please click on these two links:

1.) Russian Harmful Foreign Activities Sanctions.

2.) Ukraine- /Russia-related Sanctions.

If the past eight years have taught Washington anything it's that Russians are not about to change the trajectory of their nation and their leadership just because the Obama, Trump and Biden Administrations all think that it's a great idea.

So, coming back to sanctions: sanctions we will survive. The measures which the president and the government are developing, elaborating, are being announced. This is only the beginning of our economy getting adjusted to the new situation. After 2014, as I started to say, we did gain experience to rely upon ourselves. And the biggest lesson from this particular historical period is, unlike what we saw after 2014, that now, if there was any illusion that we can one day rely on our Western partners, this illusion is no longer there. We will have to rely only on ourselves and on our allies who would stay with us. This is the main conclusion for Russia in the context of geopolitics.

 

He goes on to note that, while the leaders of both Germany and France keep repeating that they want autonomy for the European Union from the diktats of Washington, in fact, he believes that that is highly unlikely.

  

Lavrov also observes the following about Ukraine which clearly outlines one of the reasons why Russia took action when it did, keeping this in mind:

 

The idea that Russians should get out of Ukraine is still very much on the minds of politicians in this country. Oleg Tyagnibok, the leader of the ultra-radical party, Svoboda (“Freedom”), has repeatedly said that “we must have de-Russification”, as he calls it.  And de-Russification means that ethnic Russians must not have their own language, history and identity in Ukraine and so many similar things. But what is more important for us to understand in the current state of play are these statements by Zelensky himself. So I said that the ultra-radicals called for Russians to be wiped out of Crimea, and President Zelensky, in September last year, said, if you believe you’re a Russian, if you believe you want to be a Russian and if you want to be friendly with Russia, go to Russia. He said this just a few months ago.

 

Having travelled through Russia twice in the past eight years, meeting and talking with Russians who, as I have said in the past, are just like us in so many ways but yet have a culture that is uniquely Russian, I found this question most interesting:

 

Question: I think it’s safe to say that Russian culture specifically has become accustomed to being part of, you might say, a global village of countries that share deep economic ties and enjoy travelling between each other. How do you think these sanctions are going to influence the everyday life of Russians in the long term in relation to that?

 

Sergey Lavrov: Well, as I said, the assessment of what is going on, in my view, clearly indicates that what America wants is a unipolar world, which would be not like a global village, which would be like an American village and maybe American saloon where who is strongest is calling the shots. And they said they are succeeding to mobilize behind themselves and, on the basis of their own interests, the entire Western world, which is indicative of how independent NATO members and European Union members are and which is indicative of what place the European Union, as I said, would have in the future configuration of the world situation and the world system.

 

There are players who would never accept the global village under the American sheriff, and China, India, Brazil, Argentina, Mexico – I am sure these countries do not want to be just in the position where Uncle Sam orders them something and they say “Yes, sir.” And of course, Russia is not in the category of countries who would be ready to do so....

 

So we will be, as always, open to cooperation with anyone who is ready to do so on the equal basis, on the basis of mutual respect and searching for balance of interests, and the countries to the east of Russia are much more disposed to act on this basis, and we will certainly reciprocate for the benefit of both us and our partners. We are not closing the door on the West. They are doing so. But when they come back to their senses and when this door is reopened, we will be looking at proposed projects of cooperation with a very important thing in mind to which I alluded to already – that we will be going into cooperation with them knowing very well that we cannot be sure that they are reliable and that they are credible as long-term partners.

  

Given Victoria Nuland's recent Congressional testimony where she stated this:

...the following question is very pertinent:

 

Question: Well, I’d like to take the discussion now to a sort of different topic: these US-sponsored biolabs in Ukraine. I mean, for years already, Russia has been trying to bring the world’s attention to them. And the latest piece of evidence connected to them the Russian military just put forward not too long ago, with documents signed by US officials in connection to them. Why do you think is the world not paying so much attention to these biolabs? And will Washington and its allies be held accountable for what they’re doing there?

  

Lavrov begins by outlining discoveries made by the Russian military regarding the plans that Ukraine's military had for Donetsk and Lugansk, two of the most Russian regions of Ukraine who voted in 2014 to become independent of Ukraine and where there has been eight years of fighting between Ukrainian forces and what the Ukraine government terms as "terrorists" who have been fighting for their independence:

 

Sergey Lavrov: Actually, it’s interesting that the special military operation launched by the president of the Russian Federation helped discover many things which are very important for understanding what is going on. Recently, the military of Russia, together with Donetsk and Lugansk forces, discovered documents of the Ukrainian general staff indicating clearly that they were preparing a massive attack against the Donetsk and Lugansk republics. So the operation, which was launched by Russia, in fact, preempted this threat and did not allow them to implement what they wanted to do, and they wanted to do exactly what they failed to do implementing the Minsk agreements. They were trying to use what they called Plan B and to take these territories by force with bloodshed on an unbelievable scale, in addition to what they have been doing to civilians for the last eight years.

 

Here is his response regarding the United States-sponsored biolabs in Ukraine:

 

But another set of documents which was discovered – as you said, documents related to military biological activity of the United States in Ukraine – documents with signatures of Ukrainian officials, US military. Those laboratories have been created by the United States all over the world. More than 300 laboratories in various countries, many of them on the perimeter of the Russian Federation – in the former Soviet republics, including Ukraine. Ukraine is probably the biggest project for the Pentagon, who is running this show. The special Defense Threat Reduction Agency of the Pentagon is in charge of this biological activity, and they are developing very dangerous pathogens, including plague, brucellosis, anthrax and many others, which are really very dangerous. And we know that they were experimenting on potential infections, which could be related to the ethnic groups living in the east of Ukraine and in neighboring regions of Russia.

 

We have been raising this issue in international organizations for a while, I would say almost more than 20 years. In 2001, we suggested that the countries participating in the Convention on the Prohibition of Biological and Toxin Weapons should develop a verification mechanism which would be transparent, which would be understood by everybody and applied to everybody because the convention itself provides for consultations if any participating state has some suspicions or some information which the state would like to clarify. And if these consultations indicate that there is a good reason for some kind of investigation, then an investigation is supposed to be launched. But there is no mechanism to investigate, and there is no mechanism which would require each and every country, in response to an address, to provide information and to guarantee transparency of its biological activity anywhere, be it on your own territory or abroad.

 

By the way, the Americans some years ago decided that it is too dangerous to do these things on their own soil. So they moved all these threatening and dangerous activities to other countries, and more and more they concentrate their research and experiments around the borders of the Russian Federation and China....

  

Lastly, Lavrov is asked about the end point for the operations in Ukraine:

 

Question: Well, just one more question for you, Mr. Lavrov. Of course, this conflict in Ukraine is not going to go on forever. When it does come to an end, what do you foresee as the main challenges in future Russia–Ukraine relations?

 

Sergey Lavrov: Well, we never had any issues with the Ukrainian people. I have many Ukrainian friends, the two peoples are very close culturally. Practically all of them speak, and those who don't, they understand the Russian language. Culture, common history, way of life, attitude to life, traditions of families and communities. So I hope that when this anomaly is over, this will gradually come back. It will have to be gradual.

 

It cannot come back fast because the efforts of our Western colleagues to make Ukraine a Russophobic and anti-Russian instrument – anti-Russia, as President Putin called it – they started long ago, and they are already rather deeply rooted in Ukrainian mentality, especially the young generation which was born after the demise of the Soviet Union. They have been indoctrinated in a very, very heavy way.

 

The purpose was always to make sure that Russia does not have Ukraine as a friend. It's like Zbigniew Brzezinski in the late 1990s said, “Russia with Ukraine, a friendly Ukraine next to it, is a superpower. Russia with Ukraine which is not friendly to Russia, is just a regional player.” This concept is very deeply rooted in the minds of American policymakers, and it will take time to get rid of these negative legacies.

 

Even now, when the armed forces of Ukraine are fighting, trying to procrastinate the crisis. The leaders of Ukraine with the help of American and other Western advisors have reformed the army in the way which puts these radicals, Bandera-like trained officers, to lead all more or less meaningful units in the Ukrainian army. And these people radicalise and terrorise others, especially those who don't believe that this should be the fate of their country.

 

Their actions in Mariupol is an example of that. The refugees coming from Mariupol to Russia in dozens of thousands tell such stories. It's really threatening how this kind of people command armed men and women.

 

And, most importantly, the question and answer session ends with this:

 

But I am sure, at the end of the day, the historic closeness of two fraternal nations will certainly prevail.

 

That, along with Lavrov's other comments on the current crisis are most certainly not what you will hear in the Western mainstream media and its political masters which have taken a Russia all bad, Ukraine all good position no matter what happens.

Russian Diplomacy in Latin America - Playing in America's Backyard

A recent visit by Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to destinations that Washington regards as its backyard went pretty much unnoticed by the Western media.  In this posting, I will look at three of the nations that he visited and what he had to say about each of them and their relationship with the United States.

Mr. Lavrov's first stop was in Cuba, a nation that has decades of positive diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union and Russia.  While in Cuba, Mr. Lavrov met with Cuba's Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriquez Parilla as shown on this news item from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation:

Here are some of Lavrov's comments in his media address to Cuba's Foreign Minister noting that all bolds throughout this posting are mine):

"We are absolutely committed to the agreements that were reached during Russian President Vladimir Putin’s meeting with President of the Republic of Cuba Miguel Diaz-Canel Bermudez in Moscow in October 2019. These agreements primarily concern improving the mechanisms of economic cooperation, especially in the context of the illegitimate sanctions that the United States continues to increase.

All these matters will be substantively considered during the planned meeting of the Russian-Cuban Intergovernmental Commission on Trade, Economic, Research and Technical Cooperation in Moscow. It will focus on steps that must be agreed upon for the practical implementation of the cooperation programme in fuel and energy."

Mr. Lavrov also had additional comments regarding Washington's seemingly unending sanctions during an interview with Prensa Latina News Agency, the official state news agency of Cuba:

"We can see that US attempts to reformat the Latin American region in line with its geopolitical interests aim to overthrow the “undesirable regimes” in Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua. The archaic Monroe Doctrine serves as the ideological foundation. In the run-up to the presidential election, the White House continues to ratchet up sanctions against those states which preserve their national independence, sovereignty and identity. This openly anti-human policy runs counter to the generally accepted principles of international law, including the UN Charter.

An overwhelming majority of members of the international community condemn and reject lifting the waiver on Title III of the Helms-Burton Act, the ban on chartered and regular flights to all Cuban airports, except the Havana Airport, restrictions against transport companies cooperating with the island, numerous visa and financial restrictions and the campaign against Cuban doctors. The November 7, 2019 vote on the anti-blockade resolution at the UN General Assembly vividly confirms this.

I repeat: Washington’s sanctions against Havana prove that, in an effort to stifle the Cuban economy, the United States deliberately violates human rights, and ordinary people always suffer, above all.

We see the introduction of additional restrictive measures as a manifestation of Washington’s inability to break the will of the Cuban nation and to impose its own opinion and values. We emphatically reject these steps and stand in solidarity with our Cuban friends. We insistently call for the complete repeal of the financial and economic embargo, so as to ensure the country’s full-fledged socioeconomic development, implement the principle of the sovereign equality of states and guarantee the legitimate rights of the Cuban nation. (my bolds)

In case you have forgotten your high school history, the Munroe Doctrine of 1823 clearly states that European powers are not to interfere in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere since the Western Hemisphere is the United States' sphere of influence.  The Munroe Doctrine was symbolically invoked during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis when the Soviet Union began to build missile launching infrastructure on Cuba. 

Here is a brief quote from Mr. Lavrov about the relationship between Russia and Cuba:

"Today, Cuba is Russia’s priority partner in Latin America and the Caribbean. Our multidimensional collaboration, based on strong traditions of friendship and cooperation, and objective commonality of interests, is looking towards the future. Our mutual determination for strengthening the Russian-Cuban strategic partnership has been confirmed in the course of regular high-level and top-level contacts.

The history of our bilateral relations is inseparable from the name of Fidel Castro, the leader and creator of the Cuban Revolution, and genuine leader of the persevering and tenacious people of Freedom Island. His was a personality of global scale, without exaggeration. We specifically developed an itinerary that will honour the Comandante’s memory, including a visit to Santa Ifigenia Cemetery, where other fighters for Cuba’s independence also rest in peace. This has great significance for me because in the eyes of many generations of Russians Fidel remains an example of true service to one’s country and people….

Russia and Cuba closely coordinate foreign policies. This coordination is based on adherence to the unshakable principles of international law, including respect for sovereign equality between states and non-intervention in their internal affairs."

Mr. Lavrov's second stop was in Mexico, America's next door neighbour and one of its biggest trading partners.  Here are some excerpts from a question and answer session held with the media after Lavrov's talks with Mexico's Secretary of Foreign Affairs of Mexico, Marcelo Luis Casaubon:

"As you may know, the ties between our two nations have a long history. They were officially established 130 years ago: next December will see their anniversary and we have arranged with our Mexican colleagues today to celebrate this memorial date fittingly.

We have confirmed our shared interest in strengthening bilateral relations in all areas without exception. We have discussed how to promote and intensify the political dialogue, including at the high and highest levels…

There are good prospects in view, as we have confirmed today, in energy, car-making, shipbuilding, the aircraft industry, the chemical industry, pharmaceuticals, rail transport and agriculture. We have made good progress in the area of military-technical cooperation: Mexico operates about 50 Russian-made helicopters and a helicopter servicing centre with a pilot-training school attached to it. There are prospects in this area as well….

We share common approaches when it comes to international issues which we discussed at length. Like our Mexican friends, we stand firmly on the solid foundation of the UN Charter, the principles of respect for sovereignty and equality of states, non-interference in other countries’ domestic affairs and the settlement of disputes exclusively by peaceful means.

We compared notes on the UN General Assembly’s agenda. Mexico supports most of Russia’s initiatives, including resolutions on countering the glorification of Nazism, non-deployment of weapons in outer space, establishing cooperation to build trust in outer space, international information security and our new resolution, which was first introduced during the most recent General Assembly session, which Mexico strongly supported. It is about taking additional practical measures to strengthen and develop the framework for arms control agreements, disarmament and non-proliferation."

Once again, Mr. Lavrov brings up the Munroe Doctrine:

"We discussed the situation in Latin America and the Caribbean. Russia is interested in seeing this region as an important element of the emerging multipolar world order both now and in the future. We exchanged views on specific crises which continue unabated in the Latin American region and agreed that the attempts to reanimate neo-colonial doctrines, such as the Monroe Doctrine, or to repeat the scenarios of the infamous colour revolutions are fraught with a dangerous increase in tension. We share similar views regarding the situation in and around Venezuela. Like Russia, Mexico stands for resolving the problems that exist and are piling up in that country exclusively through a dialogue between the government and the opposition and an inclusive dialogue between all significant political forces in that country."

On his final stop, Mr. Lavrov met with Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro and attended a meeting of the National Dialogue Roundtable in Caracas.  Let's look at key excerpts from his meeting with the National Dialogue Roundtable as shown here:

"First of all, I would like to thank you wholeheartedly for inviting me to speak at the National Dialogue Roundtable. It is the only effective format of talks between the Government and opposition in Venezuela. Regrettably, all the other formats have failed because of the ultimatums presented by the radical part of the opposition, which, as far as we can see, cares more about its own ambitions than about the future of their country and people.

It is a great honour for me to take part in this event, which is proof of the high level of mutual trust between our states.

       

Venezuela is a long-time partner of Russia in Latin America and the world as a whole. We are impressed by your country’s independent position on the international stage. We would like Venezuela, just as any other country, to be independent, politically stable and economically successful.

Regrettably, the ongoing crisis in and around Venezuela is rooted in the large-scale campaign launched to overturn the legitimate Government with the use of all available options, including military force, as the campaign’s organisers say. We consider such scenarios completely unacceptable. We will work consistently to ensure that they are condemned by the international community. We are acting in this spirit in our contacts with the United States, as well as at the UN Security Council. We insist that everyone must honour their international obligations under the UN Charter, which stipulate, in particular, a peaceful settlement of disputes and avoidance of the use or threat of force, as well as interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states.

We condemn the illegitimate methods of financial and economic pressure being used against Venezuela. I am referring to the sanctions and the attempts of extra-territorial application of national legislation. These restrictions and totally illegitimate external pressure are the main causes of the economic recession in Venezuela.

The obvious objective is to foster discontent and provoke social unrest by blocking the operations of the financial, oil and gold producing sectors of the Venezuelan economy. It is obvious that these sanctions affect above all the ordinary people regardless of their political affiliations. It is especially disgraceful that the unilateral US sanctions are having a negative impact on the implementation of social and humanitarian projects. A glaring example of the consequences of the recent banking restrictions is the blocking of the treatment programme for cancer patients carried out through a joint Venezuelan-Spanish project.

We have no doubt that the lifting of sanctions as soon as possible is a key priority for all patriotic Venezuelans. I am sure that the participants of this roundtable are keenly focused on this topic."

An interesting development took place after Lavrov's talks with Maduro in Venezuela as reported by Tass:

This most recent diplomatic tour of Latin America shows us that Russia is using Mr. Lavrov's extensive experience as a true diplomat to build positive relationships with some of Washington's most sanctioned "regimes".    Rather than gutting the United Nations as Washington is attempting to do, Russia is attempting to use the United Nations to work around Washington's "rules-based international order", the post-Second World War embodiment of liberal Western values which has left the Soviet Union/Russia and China as second class nations in a Western-dominated global reality.  Given Washington's repeated interference in nations around the world (i.e. the invasion of Iraq, the appearance of America's military in Syria, interference in Venezuela's domestic affairs and a litany of sanctions against nations around the globe among others), is it any wonder that Russia is appealing to the reimposition of a more fairly balanced diplomacy that doesn't always favour Washington's world view to the exclusion of all other viewpoints?

Russia is, indeed, playing in America's backyard, an issue that must be causing great consternation in Washington which has taken an anti-Russia at all costs approach to the world of today.