They've been bumming each other at the Security Council for years and you only just noticed they're mates?Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
:rofl:
Printable View
They've been bumming each other at the Security Council for years and you only just noticed they're mates?Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
:rofl:
Try reading.
Also other superpowers are having a comprehensive strategic partnership
https://teakdoor.com/attachments/spea...54ef74145.jpeg
Is that a light at the end of the tunnel? Is there competition for the NPP? Or will the Assad butcher gas some more "innocent children"?
SDC Ready for 'Unconditional Talks' with Syria Regime
https://teakdoor.com/attachment.php?a...id=14710&stc=1
"The Syrian Democratic Council (SDC), the political arm of a powerful alliance of Syrian Kurd and Arab fighters, announced Sunday it was ready for unconditional peace talks with Damascus around two weeks after the head of the Syrian regime, Bashar al-Assad, warned he could use force against them if he was not able to take their territory through talks.
The SDC is linked to the Syrian Democratic Forces, a US-backed militia that holds much of the country's north and east.
Those areas are outside regime control, and most are managed by autonomous Kurdish-run administrations that the regime sees as a challenge to its authority.
In a statement on Sunday, the SDC said it was committed to resolving Syria's deadly conflict through dialogue, and would not "hesitate to agree to unconditional talks".
"It is positive to see comments about a summit for Syrians, to pave the way to start a new page," it said.
Leading SDC member Hekmat Habib told AFP that both the council and the SDF "are serious about opening the door to dialogue" with the regime.
"With the SDF's control of 30 percent of Syria, and the regime's control of swathes of the country, these are the only two forces who can sit at the negotiating table and formulate a solution to the Syrian crisis," he said.
Last month, Assad warned Kurdish forces he could use force against them, if he was not able to take their territory through talks.
Foreign Minister Walid Muallem subsequently said the regime was informally talking to the Kurds but that negotiations had not yet started.
Residents in SDF territory have expressed fear that an eventual US withdrawal could cost them their biggest ally and weaken their hand.
But Habib said he expected all non-Syrian forces to leave including the Americans.
"We are looking forward, in the next phase, to the departure of all military forces from Syria and the return to Syrian-Syrian dialogue," he told AFP. "
https://aawsat.com/english/home/arti...s-syria-regime
Democracy at Russian gunpoint.
Sweet.
And you been watching MSNBC news and you think they tell you the full truth nothing but the truth!:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
^ 20 posts all in this thread. All aimed at 'arry. Do you have a crush?
Maybe some other thread post might add to your eminence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
"The Syrian Democratic Council (SDC),
The SDC is linked to the Syrian Democratic Forces, a US-backed militia that holds much of the country's north and east.
How sweet is the democracy? (please ask in Afgh., Iraq, Libya, etc)
The President of Syria suggested Syria "could use force". THE LORDS desires is as yet to be confirmed.Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
Another piece of fake posting 'arry?
If you are suggesting THE LORD may allow ameristan and it's vassals to officially go to war with Syria and it's voted on by whoever legally needs to do such things in ameristan there will be repercussions.
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Syria wouldn't even have a military if it wasn't for THE TSAR.
And they're all shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
:)
^Think of it as a man crush and dream.:)
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_ArmyQuote:
On 18 September 1970, the Syrian government became involved in Black September in Jordan when it sent a reinforced armored brigade to aid the Palestine Liberation Organization
After 1970 further Syrian engagements included:
Yom Kippur War against Israel[15]
Lebanese Civil War (1975–1990), (against Lebanese militias, the PLO and Israel)
Syrian forces fought Israel during the 1982 Lebanon War.
In 2009 and 2010, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, the Syrian army comprised 220,000 regular personnel, and the entire armed forces (including the navy, air force and air defenses) had 325,000 regular troops.[23] Additionally, it had about 290,000 reservists.[23][24][25]
hmmm I'm just amazed how much he believes the mass western media nothing but that. He would not crawl out of his shell even to investigate.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
That keeps him in the right place where he really belongs.
About the subject (dangerous Putin)what this is started out of: This is just my opinion who lived in all over the world and seen many things when things were changing in the last 40 + years. This is a secret so please don't spread it. :sssh: He needs a defender like you I'm sure. Otherwise he could not tell me where to go in his ostentatious manner?
Oh fuck , I bow down to your superior knowledge. After all you must be the only person who has "lived all over the world".Quote:
Originally Posted by global
How did you Rejkavik? Puerto Rico?
:rofl:
^Don't forget Grimsby. He may be Polish.:)
He doesn't he just likes winding some here up. He chuckles, I chuckle and others here chuckle.Quote:
Originally Posted by global
THE LORD though has a MB hard drive his minions create on him and updated on a daily basis. One day he will eat seafood meal and disappear, just like a family pair have done recently. I just hope some body is around to care for his pet cat and Gerbils.
He does at least travel by float plane in Vietnam. The nearest I got was a BA Brittan Islander to Leeds:)
By the way showing your ignorance is not a bad thing. That is why the world today has chat forumsQuote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Have you been to Grimsby or are you referring to another aspect of my ignorance?Quote:
Originally Posted by global
TD a "chat forum" :), indicates an aspect of your own "ignorance".Quote:
Originally Posted by global
:sorry1:
No I never been in Grimsby England if that is you referring too. But if you are there you should advocate for Tommy Robinson. Who was sentenced to prison (death sentence)for showing the true law in England and the rest of the world today. Which your mass media did not report one word about.
Didn't he show contempt of court and was jailed for that? He walked into a well prepared trap, was allowed to incriminate himself and then felt a tap on his shoulder from Mr. Plod. He is an idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by global
There is no death sentence in English law now, unlike some "unexceptional" countries. Not that UK governments observe it anyway.
https://teakdoor.com/attachment.php?a...id=14977&stc=1
Yes it's true no death sentence in England and what do you call a high security prison for him with over 70% Muslim population? Why the media was silenced by the judge and put a gag order on his sentencing? So nobody can report on it? He did nothing wrong! This is like the old Stalin regime (silencing you) they send you to the gulag .. you know why? I hope you will never have to enjoy those benefits yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Niemöller is perhaps best remembered for the quotation:
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
:sleeping1:
Didn't he show contempt of court and was jailed for that? He walked into a well prepared trap, was allowed to incriminate himself and then felt a tap on his shoulder from Mr. Plod. He is an idiot.
You said "well prepared trap"? What damage he could have done on the sentencing day? he was banned to report inside the courthouse not on the public roadway outside the court. he was trying to point out the corruption whats happening in England reporting about things which the mass media completely ignored. unfortunately not just there now it's all over the same thing happening. They do not report on anything which is damaging to their agenda. maybe watch this then you will understand the magnitude of his story how things are on the other side. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4E42k5p-Qu0
Washington committed to Syrian southwest ceasefire arrangement, Pompeo says to Lavrov
https://teakdoor.com/attachment.php?a...id=15145&stc=1
”WASHINGTON, June 19. /TASS/. The United States is committed to maintaining a de-escalation zone in southeast Syria, warning Moscow and Damascus against unilateral activity in the area, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov over the phone on Monday.
According to US State Department Spokesperson Heather Nauert, Lavrov and Pompeo had discussed "issues and concerns related to Syria and the bilateral relationship." "Secretary Pompeo reemphasized the US commitment to the (Syrian) southwest ceasefire arrangement that was approved by President (Donald) Trump and President (Vladimir) Putin one year ago," Nauert said.
US Secretary of State noted that "it was critical for Russia and the Syrian regime to adhere to these arrangements and ensure no unilateral activity in this area," she added.
The Syrian southwest de-escalation zone has been agreed between Moscow, Washington and Amman. In a joint statement made on the margins of the APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) conference in Vietnam’s Da Nang on November 11, 2017, Putin and Trump confirmed that there is no military solution to the conflict in Syria. They also agreed that the ultimate political solution to the conflict must be forged through the Geneva process pursuant to UN Security Council Resolution 2254.”
TASS: World - Washington committed to Syrian southwest ceasefire arrangement, Pompeo says to Lavrov
One wonders when ameristani might read the document. It allegedly is is also a de-escalation zone necessitating the separation of the "good" terrorists and the elimination, from the area or for eternity, of the "bad" terrorists. It's now nearly a year long in duration.
ameristan has not eliminated the "bad" terrorists and is now threatening Syrian forces if they do the job.
Is this another false agreement, to be crowed about through MSM, upon agreement? But typically in fact unable to adhere too or deliver, by the ameristani POTUSE and his appointed government officers/military unexceptional armed forces?
Possibly trying to keep the bad terrorists around for future terrorist acts against Syrians, yes?
Partial ceasefire deal reached in Syria, in Trump's first peace effort
HAMBURG (Reuters) - The United States, Russia and Jordan reached a ceasefire and “de-escalation agreement” for southwestern Syria on Friday, as the U.S. government under President Donald Trump made its first attempt at peacemaking in the country’s six-year-old civil war.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-ceasefire/u-s-russia-prepared-to-announce-ceasefire-in-southwest-syria-ap-idUSKBN19S2DG
MIL-OSI USA: Press Releases: Preserving the Southwest De-escalation Zone in Syria
Source: United States Department of State Headline: Press Releases: Preserving the Southwest De-escalation Zone in Syria
The United States remains concerned by reports of impending Syrian government operations in southwest Syria within the boundaries of the de-escalation zone negotiated between the United States, Jordan, and the Russian Federation last year and reaffirmed between Presidents Trump and Putin in Da Nang, Vietnam in November. The United States remains committed to maintaining the stability of the southwest de-escalation zone and to the ceasefire underpinning it.
We reiterate that any Syrian government military actions against the southwest de-escalation zone risk broadening the conflict. We affirm again that the United States will take firm and appropriate measures in response to Syrian government violations in this area.
The ceasefire arrangement and southwest de-escalation zone were initiatives by Presidents Trump and Putin to de-escalate the Syrian conflict, save lives, and create conditions for the displaced to safely and voluntarily return to their homes. A military offensive by the Syrian regime into this ceasefire zone would defy these initiatives, which have been a success to date. It is vitally important that the three nations supporting the southwest de-escalation zone do everything they can to enforce and implement the understandings reached last year. Existing diplomatic channels have successfully monitored and de-escalated the situation in the southwest, avoiding any resumption of fighting for nearly a year. The ceasefire must continue to be enforced and respected.
https://foreignaffairs.co.nz/2018/06...zone-in-syria/
Vladimir Putin hints at sponsoring mercenaries abroad and the “troll factory”; The Bell learned what Prigozhin is now up to now.
https://teakdoor.com/blob:http://teak...9-7df6d8a62c2c
Evgeny Prigozhin’s next battleground will be Sudan
What happened
In an televised interview with Austria’s ORF, Vladimir Putin spoke for the first time about how he views restaurateur Evegeny Prigozhin’s international activities, as a sponsor of Russian mercenaries in Syria and having been accused by the U.S. of election meddling with the aid of the “troll factory”. Putin compared Prigozhin to billionaire George Soros, unequivocally hinting that both individuals hide under the disguise of private players while acting in their countries’ interests on the international stage.
- Prior to this interview, when Putin was asked about Prigozhin, he always gave the same answer — he is a restaurateur and private businessman, and has no relationship with the state. But this time, Austrian journalist Armin Wolf was insistent, and the president could not restrain himself, and offered this rather slim concept. Given what we know about Putin’s world view, it is most likely that Putin was honest in his reply this time.
Quote:
“There is such a personality in the United State – Mr Soros, who interferes in all affairs around the world. I often hear from my American friends that ‘America as a state has nothing to do with [his activities]’. There are rumours circulating now that Mr Soros is planning to make the Euro highly volatile. Experts are already discussing this. Ask the State Department why he is doing this. The State Department will say that it has nothing to do with them – rather it is Mr Soros’ private affair. With us, it is Mr Prigozhin’s private affair.” — Vladimir Putin, according to Kremlin’s official website.
- There is really nothing left to add to what Putin said. It is known that the president’s world view contains some elements of conspiracy theory. He does not believe in the transparency of Western democracies, and he believes that real politics are carried out by players behind-the-scenes. By directly hinting in a conversation with a Western journalist that Prigozhin is one of these behind-the-scenes players, Putin affirms that the practice of interfering in international affairs via intermediaries continues.
- We don’t know if the “troll factory” received any instructions vis a vis the midterm elections coming up in the U.S. But this week, The Bell learned exclusive details about the next place where Evgeny Prigozhin will conduct his “private activities”. It is yet another failed state, Sudan, which since gaining its independence in 1956, has been in an almost constant state of civil war. The Bell learned that after Vladimir Putin met with Sudan’s president, Omar al-Bashir in November 2017, PMC Wagner mercenaries, who are reportedly sponsored by Prigozhin, were sent to the African country and are already training the local army. At the same time, companies related to Prigozhin received concessions to develop Sudan’s gold deposits. A similar scheme for Prigozhin’s related companies was used in Syria: there Prigozhin’s companies plan to access one quarter of all oil and gas produced from those fields which are won back and protected by the mercenary army.
- The president of Sudan, Omar al-Bashir, has been indicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for allegedly directing a campaign of mass killing against civilians in Darfur. In his meeting with Putin, Sudan’s president said that his country needs protection from aggressive U.S. actions, and there was a discussion about the possibility of opening a Russian military base in Sudan. In his external politics, Putin is a child of the Soviet Union, which never missed an opportunity to take advantage of a conflict between a leader of a third world country and the U.S. The difference, however, is that the USSR had the goal of building socialist regimes, which Moscow was prepared to sponsor. Putin is more pragmatic — with the help of middle men like Prigozhin, he sees these conflicts as an opportunity to make a profit and gain access to Africa’s natural resources.
Why the world should care
Now it is clear without a doubt: if you want to understand where Vladimir Putin’s interests lie, you only need to look at what Evgeny Prigozhin is up to — he is the same kind of behind-the-scenes agent of Russian influence like Putin believes George Soros to be for the U.S.
https://thebell.io/en/vladimir-putin...hin-is-now-up/
So, another diplomats expulsion?
:smilie_clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by misskit
yup... Putin is dangerous, to the idea of transparent Western democracy
Russia’s exports to India up by 40% in January-April 2018
https://teakdoor.com/attachment.php?a...id=15483&stc=1
"NEW DELHI, June 24. /TASS/. Russia’s exports to India increased by 40.1% in January-April 2018 on the same period last year, to reach nearly 2.2 billion US dollars, a spokesman for Russia’s trade mission in India told TASS on Sunday.
According to the trade mission’s statistics, the most dramatic growth, of more than 600%, was reported in the sector of leguminous crops, with exports up from about two million US dollars in the first four months of 2017 to the current 14.5 million US dollars. The sector of sunflower and oil crops seeds also demonstrated an impressive growth, with exports jumping up from 37,200 US dollar to 207,400 US dollars, or by 457% in just one year. Other sectors demonstrating serious growth in terms of exports to India include radar equipment (from 2.7 million US dollars to 39.3 million US dollars), compasses and navigation tools (from 4.6 million to 23.9 million US dollars), electric transformers (from 2.5 million to 13.2 million US dollars), and others.
Overall trade between Russia and India grew by 29.1% in January-April 2017 on the same period last year, to amount to about 3.2 billion US dollars. Russia’s imports from India increased by 10.7%, to 1.02 billion US dollars.
Russia’s major exports to India include uncut diamonds, silver, mineral and chemical fertilizers, crude oil and oil products, as well as machine-building products, synthetic rubber, polymers, plastic articles, paper, etc. Russia’s exports from India are mostly medicines, tea, canned vegetables, grapes and raisins, rice, coffee, and other goods.
According to the Russian trade mission, the two countries have been demonstrating upwards tendencies in trade in the recent years. The sides agreed to increase mutual trade to 30 billion US dollars by 2025.
According to Russia’s Federal Customs Service, Russian-Indian trade in 2017 was 9.4 billion US dollars, or up by 21.4% on the previous year. "
TASS: Business & Economy - Russia?s exports to India up by 40% in January-April 2018
More:
TASS: Business & Economy - Russia?s exports to India up by 40% in January-April 2018
More:
TASS: Business & Economy - Russia?s exports to India up by 40% in January-April 2018
‘Post-West world order’ being shaped as we speak – Lavrov to Channel 4
A new multipolar order, driven by economics and history, is emerging in the world and Western attempts to stop or to slow it down are unlikely to succeed, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told UK’s Channel 4.
“I think that we are in the post-West world order,” Lavrov told the British Channel 4 in an interview on Friday. “It is a historical epoch, if you want. Certainly, after five or so centuries of domination of the collective West, as it were, it is not very easy to adjust to new realities that there are other powerhouses economically, financially and politically,” he added, pointing to China, India and Brazil.
The European Union is “certainly a very important pillar of any world order,” Lavrov added, but it needs to decide whether to remain reliant on the US or become more self-sufficient. By way of illustration, Lavrov brought up the migrant crisis, which the EU is currently struggling with.
“NATO bombed Libya, turned Libya into a black hole through which waves of migrants, illegal migrants, rushed to Europe. Now EU is cleaning the broken china for NATO,” Lavrov said.
Read more:
https://www.rt.com/news/431306-lavro...t-world-order/
(Also the comments below are interesting)
One of the LORDS trusted Minister, Foreign Minister Lavrov, answers some questions from a UK TV station, Channel 4 interviewer.
Foreign Minister S.Lavrov’s interview with Channel 4, Moscow, June 29, 2018
https://teakdoor.com/attachment.php?a...id=15780&stc=1
"Question: Foreign Minister, the summit is happening in Helsinki. Russian President V.Putin and US President D.Trump together. Is this the post-West world order that you have talked of in the past? Has it now arrived?
S.Lavrov: Well, I think that we are in the post-West world order, but this order is being shaped and it will take a long time. It is a historical epoch, if you want. Certainly, after five or so centuries of domination of the collective West, as it were, it is not very easy to adjust to new realities that there are other powerhouses economically, financially and politically, China, India, Brazil. African countries are going to be very much on the rise, as soon as they resolve at least some of the conflicts, which are there on the continent. Well, Russia certainly would like to be an independent world player. Independent in the sense that we do not want to violate and international law and norms, but the decisions, which we would be taking on the basis of international law, would not be influenced by pressure, money, sanctions, threats or anything else.
Question: Russia is shaping this world order that is clear.
S.Lavrov: It is not Russia is shaping this world order, its history. It’s the development itself. You cannot really hope to contain this new powerful, economically and financially, countries. You cannot really ignore their role in world trade and world economy. Attempts are being made to slow down this process by new tariffs, new sanctions for good or bad reasons in violation of the WTO principles and so on. But I think it is a logical reaction: trying to slow down something, which is objective and does not depend on any single administration in any country.
Question: But Europe has something to fear from that world order that you have just mapped out there.
S.Lavrov: What was that?
Question: Well the world order that you have mapped out involved all sorts of countries. You did not mention whether the EU fits into that. Do they need to worry about that new world order?
S.Lavrov: Well, the EU is of course part of the collective West with the addition of new members from Eastern Europe. But the European Union is certainly a very important pillar of any world order. As for the Russian Federation, it is our biggest trade partner in spite of the fact that after the unfortunate developments and the wrongly understood interpretation of what the coup d’état is. The volume of trade since 2014 between Russia and the European Union went down 50%, but it is still more than $250bn and it is our number one trading partner, as a collective, as a Union. But the European Union certainly is now fighting to make sure that it is not lost in this new world order that is being shaped. It is not easy, because the reliance on the United States is something, which quite a number of the EU members want to keep. There are some other EU members, who believe that they should be a bit more self-sufficient in military matters for example. The initiative of President F.Macron and Germany to consider some kind of European defence capabilities being beefed up is a manifestation of this case.
I am watching the EU summit, which is going on right now, and the discussion on migration brought an interesting thought to my head, namely it is about the relations between NATO and EU. NATO bombed Libya, turned Libya into a black hole through which waves of migrants, illegal migrants, rushed to Europe. Now EU is cleaning the broken china for NATO.
Question: You talk about NATO’s involvement in Libya, but then there is Russia’s involvement in Syria and that has also created millions of refugees.
S.Lavrov: Yes, but I would challenge you that the Russian involvement in Syria on the basis of legitimate request from the legitimate government, recognized by all as the representative of Syria in the United Nations, took place in September 2015, four years and a half into the Arab spring embracing Syria. The bulk of the refugees already was outside Syria by the time that we came to the rescue of the legitimate government.
Question: Well you talk of the legitimate government that is also the government responsible for killing of hundreds of thousands of its own citizens, making millions homeless. “A gas killing animal”, as President D.Trump, your ally, puts it. Do you rest easy being allied with that kind of government?
S.Lavrov: Well, I would not go into the names, which President D.Trump used to describe some of the world leaders. It is not something done in concrete, it might change. What I want to say is: it is a war. It is the war, which was started by mistakes made on the part of everyone, including the Syrian government. I believe these disturbances could have been handled politically at an earlier stage. But we have now on our hands what is the result of outside forces having tried to use the situation in order to reshape the map of the Middle East and Northern Africa by trying to get into Syria without any invitation and trying to promote their own agenda there. So, the efforts, which we are now undertaking together with Turkey and Iran, and both of them are present on the ground, Turkey without invitation, Iran with the invitation from the government, but we managed pragmatically to create what we call Astana Process, Astana Format. The Syrian government, given the fact that Russia, Iran cooperate with Turkey on the basis of decisions, which lead to de-escalation, accepted Astana Process as such. It is part of the process together with the armed opposition, they regularly meet, and try to create conditions for the resolution of UN Security Council 2254 to be implemented.
Question: Let me ask again about Syrian President B.Assad. A lot of people would like to know what is there to like about President B.Assad?
S.Lavrov: We do not like anybody. The diplomacy and politics are not about liking or disliking, it is for human beings as individuals to use this terminology. President Assad is protecting the sovereignty of his country. He is protecting his country and in a broader sense the region from terrorism, which was really about a couple of weeks from taking over Damascus in September 2015.
We did not want the repetition of tragedies, which happened during last couple of decades through the “adventures”. Maybe even more than a couple of decades. It started closer to the end last century in Afghanistan, when the US decided to support militarily, financially and otherwise mujahedeen, who were fighting the Soviet troops. I would not dwell upon why the Soviet troops were there. By the way USSR was also invited legally by the government, which was recognized legitimate. The US decided to use the mujahedeen to fight the Soviet troops, hoping that after the job is done, they could handle those mujahedeen. That is how Al Qaeda appeared and the US lost total control of this beast, whom they had created basically. Then there was an adventure in Iraq on the very false pretence. Now everybody knows this, even Tony Blair admitted that this was a mistake. But the fact of the matter is just like Al Qaeda was born in Afghanistan, ISIL/Daesh was born after the intervention in Iraq. After Libya was invaded in gross violation of the Security Council Resolution, and Syria is now, there is another beast that was born - Jabhat al Nusra, which changes names, but is another terrorist organization. Whatever the civilized West is trying to bring to the Middle East and North Africa turns out to be in favour of terrorists.
Question: That is a very impressive whistle-stop tour of history, but I want to ask about the present though and about President Assad. You said that it is not about liking President Assad. Does that mean that Russia would be prepared to see him go? Do the job, finish the war and then he goes?
S.Lavrov: It is the position, which is not Russian position, it is the position of the Security Council, endorsed by each and every country on Earth, that the future of Syria must be decided by the Syrian people themselves. That there must be a new constitution. On the basis of the new constitution there must be elections. Elections should be free, fair, monitored by the UN and all Syrian citizens, wherever they are, should be eligible to vote.
Question: So, it is irrelevant to you whether he stays or goes, that is for the Syrian people?
S.Lavrov: Yes, that is for them to decide. I believe that this view, which was rejected for quite some time after the Syrian crisis began, is now shared by more and more countries.
Question: When Russia withdraws from Syria? President V.Putin first raised the prospect in March 2016, he said that Russia had largely achieved her objectives there. Again, December 2017. By the end of this year can we expect Russia to be out of Syria?
S.Lavrov: No. I do not think that this is something, which we can intelligently discuss. We do not like artificial deadlines, but we have been consistently reducing our military presence in Syria. The last reduction took place a few of days ago. More than 1,000 troops have come back to Russia, some aircraft and other equipment as well. It depends on what is the actual situation on the ground. Yes, we managed together with our colleagues, with Syrian Army, with the help of opposition, which I would call “patriotic opposition” not to allow plans to create a caliphate by ISIL happen. But some remnants of ISIL are very much there. Jabhat al Nusra is still there. They are now preventing the deal on the southern Syrian de-escalation area to be implemented fully. So there are some leftovers. Besides, we do have, not actually full-fledged bases, but two places where our naval ships and our aircraft are located in Syria and they might be usefully kept for quite some time.
Question: Clearly, Syria will be on the agenda at the summit. Just want to talk about some other things that might be. For example, you have mentioned sanctions. Do you think that sanctions will be lifted, given that the EU has just talked about extending them? Do you think you can get President D.Trump to commit to that?
S.Lavrov: Actually, I have mentioned sanctions only in the context of the deterioration of relations. We are not pleading to remove them. It is not our business, it is for those, who introduced sanction, to decide whether they want to continue or whether common sense would prevail.
Question: Well, your President has very recently said that he would like them lifted.
S.Lavrov: Yes, absolutely. We would not mind them lifted, but we would not mind also using the spirit to build up our own capacity in key sectors of economy, security and other areas on which an independent state depends. In the recent years, we have learned a lot, including the fact that in these issues you cannot rely on the West. You cannot rely on Western technologies, because they can be abruptly stopped at any moment. You cannot rely on the items, which are essential for the day-to-day living of the population, coming from the West, because this could also be stopped. So we are certainly drawing lessons. But we certainly would not be against sanctions being lifted and we would reciprocate, because we do have some countermeasures in place.
Question: What are you prepared to give in this Summit? For example, if D.Trump says he wants NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden back in the US, is that something that you would consider? Is this something that you can put on the table?
S.Lavrov: I have never discussed Edward Snowden with this Administration. President V.Putin addressed the issue some years ago. When he was asked the question, he said this is for Edward Snowden do decide. We respect his rights, as an individual. That is why we were not in the position to expel him against his will, because he found himself in Russia even without the US passport, which was discontinued as he was flying from Hong Kong.
Question: So that is not going to be up for discussion?
S.Lavrov: I do not know why people would start asking this particular question in relation to the Summit. Edward Snowden is the master of his own destiny.
Question: Given that the US intelligence believes that the presidential elections were meddled with, can Russian President V.Putin give D.Trump any assurances that the upcoming mid-term elections in a few months’ time would not be meddled with by Russia?
S.Lavrov: We would prefer some facts. We cannot intelligently discuss something, which is based on “highly likely”.
Question: Well, it is more than highly likely, is not it?
S.Lavrov: No. The investigation in the US has been going on for how long? A year and a half now?
Question: Well, Robert Mueller indicted the Internet Research Agency, the Russian “troll factory”.
S.Lavrov: Indictment is something, which requires a trial and I understand that they have submitted their own case and they have challenged quite a number of things, which were used for the indictment. So let’s not jump the gun. I love Lewis Carrol, but I do not think that the logic of the queen, who said “sentence first, verdict later”, is going to prevail. So far, you take the presidential election in the US, take Brexit, take the Salisbury case, take the tragedy with the Malaysian Boeing MH17 flight, it is all based on “investigation continues, but you are guilty already”. It cannot work this way.
Question: But is Russia frightened of the truth? Because it just seems whenever the authority whether it is the UN or the chemical weapons watch dog OPCW, whenever they try to get to the facts, Russia objects.
S.Lavrov: No, I believe that the public and respected journalists like you have been misinformed. The OPCW must operate on the basis of the Chemical Weapons Convention, which says bluntly that there is only one procedure when you want to establish facts. First, experts of the OPCW must themselves without delegating this authority to anyone go to the place of the alleged incident. They must themselves with their own hands and with their own equipment take samples. They must continue holding the substances in their hands until they have reached a certified laboratory. In the recent cases, especially in the infamous case of Khan Shaykhun April last year, when the Syrian government was accused of using aerial bombs to deliver chemical weapons to Khan Shaykhun, the OPCW never visited the place, they never took samples themselves. When we asked where did they get samples they said: “the Brits and the French gave it to us”. We asked why do not you go there?
Question: Have you lost faith in the OPCW?S.
Lavrov: Wait a second, that is important information. Let’s not speak slogans, let’s speak facts. So they did not go there. But they said that “we got the samples”. We asked “where from?”. They said “well the British and the French got it for us”. “Why do not you go?”, we asked. “Why it is not very safe.” We told them if the Brits and the French made it there or rather they know people who can get there safely, why do not you ask Paris and London to ensure safety for your own inspectors to get there. We told the same to the French and to the British, they said: “no, it is something, which we cannot share with you, how we got hold of this”. So, no procedures, regarding the taking of the samples, and the chain of custody, meaning that the inspectors themselves cannot delegate to anyone the delivery of samples to laboratory. These procedures, embodied and enshrined in the Convention, were violated. The Report on this Khan Shaykhun case, submitted by this Joint Investigating Mechanism last fall was full of “highly likely”, “by all probability”, “we have good reasons to believe” and so on and so forth. We invited the authors of the Report to the Security Council, trying to get some credible information from them. Impossible, they were stonewalled, they refused to talk. We said: “guys, if you want to work on the basis of violation of the Convention’s procedures, this cannot continue”. We did not extend their mandate, but we suggested a new mechanism, insisting that this new mechanism must not violate the procedures embodied in the Convention.
Question: Do you still have faith in the OPCW?
S.Lavrov: Until recently we did. But the organization was grossly manipulated a couple of days ago, when the Brits and others convened the special sessions of the state parties to the Convention. They passed a decision by vote, which basically violates the Convention in all its provisions, giving the Technical Secretariat the right to establish guilt. I think that this is a step, which was not thought through very thoroughly, because it is very dangerous.
Question: Well, it is dangerous potentially for Russia, because now the chemical weapons watchdog can apportion blame to the likes of Russia. Are you fearful of the truth?
S.Lavrov: No, I am fearful of the future of the OPCW and the Chemical Weapons Convention.
Question: Will you withdraw from the OPCW?
S.Lavrov: Well, if people prefer to violate the Convention, if they say that this is the “will of the majority”. When they convened this conference, all kinds of tricks were used, including mobilizing small countries, who do not have any representation in the Hague, paying for their travel expenses, paying for their hotel bills. We know all this and they know all this. So, when the Convention is grossly violated, I do not think that you can really avoid raising concern. We will try to repair the situation, because this decision will go to the regular conference of the state parties. But if this is not repaired, I believe that the days of the OPCW will be counted, at least it would not remain as a universal organization.
Question: The OPCW has also investigated the case of the Skripals. I wanted to ask you, do you think that using a nerve agent to poison a former spy and his child, a policeman on the streets of a cathedral city in Britain is an act of a rational state?
S.Lavrov: Rational state? Not at all. It is an act of crime. We from the very beginning suggested that we investigate this together, because it is our citizen. At least the daughter is our citizen. The father, I think, has a dual citizenship, he is a Russian citizen and a British subject. From the very beginning we suggested a joint investigation. We asked so many questions, including the questions related to the Chemical Weapons Convention’s procedures. In response, we were told that the British side does not want to listen, because we have to tell them only one thing. “Did V.Putin order this or did V.Putin lose control over the people who did?”. That’s all that the Brits wanted to discuss. The inconsistences in the situation with the Skripals are very troubling. We never managed to get consular access to our citizen in violation of all international conventions on diplomatic and consular relations. We never got any credible explanation why the cousin of Yulia Skripal has not been given visa, she wants to visit the UK and see her cousin. And many other things related to the act itself.
Question: But why would Britain give consular access to the country suspected of being behind this attack?
S.Lavrov: You know that the investigation continues. The Scotland Yard said that it would take a few more months. UK Foreign Secretary B.Johnson recently mentioned that the place is being disinfected four months after the incident. The policeman became miraculously fine. The Skripals became miraculously fine. People now talk about levelling the house, where they lived, levelling the house of the policeman. It all looks like a consistent physical extermination of the evidence, like the benches of the park were removed immediately and, of course, the video images, when the policemen or special forces in special attire go to take a look at this bench, while people without any protection are moving around. It looks very weird.
S.Lavrov: Mr. Lavrov are accusing the British state of a cover-up of this whole incident?
S.Lavrov: I do not exclude this, as long as they do not give us information. You know that about 10 Russian citizens have died in London during the past years. All 10 cases have been investigated in the secret format. We do not understand why. One of the wise guys said: “who is to benefit?” Certainly, the UK benefited politically from what is going. Come to think of it, it is an interesting situation, thereby the country, which is leaving the European Union, is determining the EU policy on Russia. When they were running through all capitals of the European Union, saying “you must expel the Russian diplomats, you must expel them”. So they did. Most of them, some did not. Then we privately asked those, who decided to join Britain in this action whether any proof was given in addition to what was said publicly. They said no. But they said that “we were promised that later, as investigation proceeds, we would be given more facts”. Do you think it is ok?
Question: But you ask who benefits and there are many in the West, who say that the chaos whether it is Brexit, whether it is the Skripals, whether it is D.Trump in the White House…
S.Lavrov: You forgot Catalonia and you forgot the forthcoming elections in Sweden, as the Prime Minister said. Macedonia, Montenegro…
Question: Ok, we will include that later. But answer me this: does the chaos benefit Russia, as some in the West say?
S.Lavrov: You have to be within the historical and chronological framework. You mean the chaos benefits Russia couple of weeks before the presidential elections and months before the World Cup. What do you think?
Question: I am asking you. Does chaos benefit Russia?
S.Lavrov: I want to clarify the issue. Does chaos benefit Russia couple of days before the presidential elections and couple of days before the World Cup? Is it the question?
Question: Well you talked about the new world order that you are hoping that Russia will help shape. Much easier to shape that world order if the EU is in chaos, you are holding the ring in the Middle East, if you are calling the shots in Syria. Russia potentially benefits.
S.Lavrov: No, this is absolutely wrong. It is misreading what I have said. I did not say that Russia wants to shape the new order. I said that Russia must be one of the players on the equal basis, discussing how the objective reality of multipolarity, being developed in front of our eyes, could be managed the way, which would be acceptable to all. That is what I have said. The interests of those, who determine the Russophobic policy in the West, are absolutely diametrically different. Their interest is to punish Russia, to downgrade Russia.
Question: Why, do you think?
S.Lavrov: Because it is very painful to lose half millennium of domination in the world affairs. In a nutshell this is the answer. This is not the criticism, this is a statement of fact. I understand when people used to call the shots in India, Africa, Asia, elsewhere and now they understand that this time has passed.
Question: Is Brexit good for Britain? Is it good for Russia?
S.Lavrov: This is for the UK subjects to discuss.
Question: Good for Russia, though?
S.Lavrov: I do not understand why we should be thinking in this way. It is something that the Brits decided. It is something, which they still discuss with the EU: the divorce, the problems inside the country. We also know, of course we follow the news, that the Parliament has one position, some public activists want rethinking.
Question: Does it look like chaos to you in Theresa May’s Britain?
S.Lavrov: Look, it is something, which happened by developments inside the UK. We only want clarity. What will be the basis on which we continue to work with the European Union. Whcourse at will be the basis on which we might someday restore the relations with the UK, when they take some reasonable and not overly ideologised, “highly likely” attitude. I believe that this must be must be very much understood by those in the West, especially by the liberals, who keep saying that the “rule of law must prevail”. In my view, rule of law means that unless proven guilty you cannot sentence people. That is what is happening with Skripal, MH17, with the OPCW being an instrument of those, who would like to make this “highly likely” the order of the day in Syria.
Question: Just returning to the Summit for a couple of final questions. Does it help Russia in her dealings with D.Trump that so many people think that you have compromising materials, so-called “kompromat”, on him?
S.Lavrov: Look, I hear this for the first time that we have the compromising material on D.Trump. That’s what the Special Counsel R.Mueller is trying to dig. Actually, I stopped reading the news from this investigation. You know that when R. Tillerson was Secretary of State, he once stated publicly that they have an “undeniable proof”. Then, during our contact, I said: “Rex, can you give this undeniable proof to us? Because we want to understand what is going on. Maybe this is something that we can explain”. He said: “well, we cannot give it to you, we cannot compromise our sources and besides, your special services, your security people know everything - ask them”. Is it the way to handle serious things? It is a matter, which is used to ruin the Russian-American relations. To answer the way, in which he did, I believe that it is not mature. It is very childish, I think. I think that the people, who are trying to dig something to prove that we have decided the future of the greatest country on Earth through some Internet agency, are ridiculous. I understand that the Democrats in the US are really quite nervous. I understand that the UK is nervous. There were leaks in the Times, saying that the Cabinet members are nervous that D.Trump and V.Putin might get along.
Question: So you do read the papers?
S.Lavrov: I read the extracts, which my people give me. I love reading papers with a cup of coffee, but do not always have time.
Question: Finally, on that point of kompromat. The ex-FBI Director J.Comey has said and I quote “it is possible that the current President of the United States was with prostitutes, peeing on each other in Moscow in 2013”. Do you think that this is possible?
S.Lavrov: Well, he said that this is possible, ask him.
Question: Do you think that this is possible? It has happened in Moscow allegedly.
S.Lavrov: I do not know what people can invent again. I think that I have read this story a couple of years ago, when all this started. Again, if people base the real policies vis-à-vis a country, state-to-state policies on the basis of “it is “possible”, on the basis of “highly likely”, this is shameful. I believe that what is being done in the context of the Russiagate in the US, as President V.Putin has repeatedly said, is the manifestation of deep domestic controversy, because the losers do not have the guts to accept that they have lost the elections.
Question: Foreign Minister, thank you very much.
S.Lavrov: Thank you."
Foreign Minister S.Lavrov?s interview with Channel 4, Moscow, June 29, 2018 - News - The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
What a shame other countries Foreign Ministers do not give such interviews to a MSM outlet and/or if they do, they are not published, publicly, in full.
What about this one?Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Boris Johnson struggles in interview
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-40358...s-in-interview
To be honest my post is an official transcript. I'm sure the UK FM's transcript would be equally "polished".:)
For those who wish here is the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuaMR8d4xJo
"Credit to Russian MFA https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrVo... The footage is made by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, RI is allowed to publish it. Russian Minister Of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov Gave An Interview To Channel 4 host Kathy Newman ".
The words do seem to match the transcript but no mention of how many takes have been thrown away onto the "cutting floor". :)
You're kidding right? This is laughable. Example:Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Yeah, I'm sure he's hearing it for the first time.Quote:
Question: Just returning to the Summit for a couple of final questions. Does it help Russia in her dealings with D.Trump that so many people think that you have compromising materials, so-called “kompromat”, on him?
S.Lavrov: Look, I hear this for the first time that we have the compromising material on D.Trump.
:bananaman:
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
As in "dig out"/find/prove. Unsuccessfully it seems, so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Try not being a selective shit stirrer all you life. When FM Lavrov asked his official counterpart about the "evidence" backing up this fake allegation he was walked around the houses and his official counterpart was unable to deliver.
What's new in ameristanis lying?
A wonderful attempt at obfuscation, but you know that Lavrov was lying when he said he was hearing about this for the first time.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh
Like the rest of the interview, it's horseshit.
Well done Channel 4 for getting it on record.
How many times they (or similar to them) had tried to sidle up them?Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
Watch this BBC reporter straight-up ask Putin if Russia poisoned ex-spy Skripal
Published: Mar 16, 2018
It took some serious chutzpah to sidle up to one of the most powerful men in the world and ask about his country’s involvement in one of the biggest international incidents in the news right now.
But that's exactly what a BBC News Moscow correspondent did Monday, and he’s getting some rave reviews for his straight-up question. Steve Rosenberg decided to seize the moment and ask Russian President Vladimir Putin if his country had anything to do with the nerve-agent poisoning in the U.K. of an ex–double agent and his daughter.
Putin was attending an event at the National Grain Center in southern Russia when Rosenberg asked: “Is Russia behind the poisoning of Sergei Skripal?”
Here was the Russian president’s response:
‘We’re dealing with agriculture here, as you see, to create great conditions for people’s lives, and you talk to me about some tragedies. First, get to the bottom of it there, then we’ll discuss this.’
Putin Crushes BBC Smartass - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KHCNk9BYy4
A foreign reporter can walk up to a countries President and just ask a question and receive a polite reply? What country is this, we can't allow such things and people might see a different path is actually available!!!!!!!
Unless of course all BBC reporters and questioners at international events are really Russian Agents paid to make THE LORD look extremely competent and polite.
:)
Not seeing any factual, accurate, report of this recent meeting here I add a link to the Kremlin issued video and transcript:
News conference following talks between the presidents of Russia and the United States ? President of RussiaFor balance the Official ameristani "White House", statement:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings...ss-conference/
Considering it was a closed door meeting with only translators present you have no way of knowing what is factual or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by OhOh