Question: You represented Russia at the G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro. Shortly before that, a series of meetings with African foreign ministers took place in Sochi, a city that hosted the first ministerial conference of the Russia-Africa Partnership Forum. Combatting modern practices of neocolonialism is increasingly taking a centre stage internationally. Was this issue addressed during the above events?

Sergey Lavrov: Of course, it was. Increasing numbers of participants in the international dialogue are coming to the realisation that the exploitation of former colonies by the colonial powers has never stopped. All it did was merely adjust its form, but the goal has remained the same, and it is to pump out resources from the countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America to sustain the West’s dominance and ensure a high standard of living for its people. The methods can vary from sanctions pressure to coercion into signing unequal predatory agreements. Clearly, this slows down the development of the Global South and the Global East, particularly the poorest and the least developed nations among them. 

The cynicism of the Western countries profiting from the hardships of the most vulnerable countries is particularly striking. For instance, after the devastating earthquake in Haiti in 2010, of the $2.5 billion in recovery aid promised by the United States, merely 2.6 percent made it to Haitian companies and organisations. The rest of this amount stayed with the US contractors. There are more cases like that. Similarly unconscionable abuses took place with the Western aid for the peoples of Iraq and Afghanistan that is the countries that the Americans and their NATO allies themselves first laid to waste.  

I’d be remiss not to mention the fact that the developing countries keep raising the issue of their rightful spot in the global division of labour, which, in its current form, is a stark manifestation of modern neocolonialism in and of itself. I noted on earlier occasions that African countries receive less than 10 percent of the revenue from global coffee sales, and the rest is pocketed by transnational corporations. 

We have no illusions and we are clear-eyed about the fact that Western neocolonialists will never give up their privileges of their own accord. Everyone can see that the West is shamelessly leveraging international financial institutions to promote its self-serving interests. The IMF and the WTO have been politicised, and “undesirable” members of these organisations are being openly discriminated against.

This is why, alongside our like-minded partners from the World Majority, we believe that bringing principles and governance system established by the Bretton Woods institutions in line with the realities of the global economy is a long time coming. In fact, the G7 economies account for less than a third of global GDP, whereas BRICS nations make up 36 percent. The West ostensibly agrees with this view, but is unwilling to take action.

Question: The UN Climate Change Conference ended in Baku the other day. Dialogue on climate change in connection with energy security and environmental protection is also held within other formats, including the G20.

Sergey Lavrov: This is true. Our priority during these discussions is to depoliticise cooperation on climate issues. Our goals in this sphere should be realistic, and their implementation should promote a balanced socioeconomic development of all countries.

The results of the G20’s efforts on the energy track can be assessed as positive, largely thanks to the effective contribution of Brazil’s Presidency, which has cleansed the group’s sectoral formats from extraneous geopolitical topics. In particular, we managed to adopt a ministerial declaration on energy, for the first time in three years. It has been formulated so that the interests of the Global South countries are taken into account.

Like before, the Russian delegation cautioned the participants against increasing the global funding of renewable sources of energy by reducing investment in traditional energy. We believe that investments should be made in all available types of fuel to prevent spikes on energy markets and the aggravation of energy poverty.

Transition to low-emission technologies is being actively discussed on international venues. The idea is that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions create a greenhouse effect, which subsequently leads to climate warming. The conclusion is that a reduction of CO2 emissions would prevent or slow the rise of temperature.

At the same time, as professionals we should take into account the fact that not all scientists adhere to this view. Some of them say, using facts and convincing arguments, that climate change is a naturally recurring process and, hence, that the importance of anthropogenic factors used by the advocates of fighting against climate change is strongly exaggerated, to put it mildly.

Anyway, we regard the task of energy transition in the context of ensuring universal access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern sources of energy. The key role in this process belongs to natural gas, the cleanest hydrocarbon and an ideal transition fuel.

We consistently protest against the accelerated green transformation, which Western countries are advocating. Their fixation on that subject has already caused an unjustified growth of energy prices and, consequently, unprecedentedly high prices of mineral fertilisers. We insist that industrialised countries honour their commitments to assist developing countries.

Incidentally, it would be interesting to see them fulfil their obligation, which they have assumed in Baku, to annually provide $300 billion to developing countries for green energy projects. I would like to remind you that the West has not fulfilled its previous green funding obligation, which was three times smaller in terms of annual allocations.

Question: In this interview, we cannot fail to mention the so-called hotspots. Today, this matter primarily deals with the tragedy for the Palestinians as the Middle East crisis continues to escalate. Have the participants in the Group of Twenty summit raised this topic?

Sergey Lavrov: They have, especially considering that the situation in the Middle East continues to deteriorate. You were right to point this out. Tens of thousands of people have already died during the current stage in the Israeli-Palestinian confrontation, and military hostilities spilled over into Lebanon and other neighbouring countries. All this directly results from Israel’s aggressive, militarist policies, coupled with Washington’s efforts to monopolise the mediation process while throwing the UN Security Council decisions under the bus, despite the fact that these documents were adopted by consensus.

It is quite obvious that Israel’s desire to ensure its security at the expense of the security of others, while benefiting from the unwavering support it gets from the United States, leads nowhere and is a very dangerous thing, considering the way this tragedy will affect the relations between the Islamic world and Israel for many years to come.

Bringing the situation with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict back to normal is the only path to improving the situation across the Middle East, including in Lebanon. Everyone understands this, but the United States keeps preventing the UN Security Council from adopting a resolution which would include strong wording to demand a sustainable ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.

Creating conditions for achieving a two-state solution would be the next step in terms of moving beyond the violent phase in this crisis. This deals with fulfilling the commitments as articulated by the international community back in 1947, which is to establish a Palestinian Arab state living side by side with Israel in peace and security.

We believe that in our efforts to achieve this goal we must enable countries within this region to take centre stage instead of those who are trying to impose their terms and conditions from overseas. By the way, this applies not only to the Palestine issue, but to other crisis situations across the world too.

Question: The Ukraine crisis seems to have entered yet another stage in its escalation…

Sergey Lavrov: Judging by what has been happening on the battlefield, we have still a long way to go before we achieve a political and diplomatic solution for this crisis. Washington and its satellites remain possessed by the idea of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia, and are willing to go to great lengths to achieve this goal as far-fetched and unrealistic as it is.

Carrying out strikes deep inside Russian territory contributed to this escalation, while they ignored our warnings that these unacceptable actions would be met with an adequate response. In his televised address on November 21, President Vladimir Putin made it abundantly clear how Russia intended to respond to steps of this kind. I am certain that everyone responsible for hurting Russians or damaging Russian infrastructure will be held accountable.

No matter what the adversary does to escalate the situation, it will never make us renounce efforts to achieve the special military operation’s goals. To paraphrase President Vladimir Putin, we are ready to face any developments but would prefer to address issues and resolve disputes by peaceful means.

In Ukraine’s case, this deals with addressing the root causes of the conflict, which include the emergence of entrenched security threats for Russia along its western borders, including NATO’s eastward expansion, as well as recurrent and system-wide violations by the Kiev regime of the rights of Russians and people identifying as Russians in terms of their cultural affiliation and the Orthodox faith.

A political settlement must include the demilitarisation and de-Nazification, while also ensuring the unaligned, neutral, non-nuclear status for the territories controlled by the Kiev regime. Of course, any agreements will hinge upon recognising the political and territorial reality as per the Constitution of Russia.