Russia is willing to host Israeli-Palestinian talks

By Monitoring Desk
Thursday – June 10, 2021
MOSCOW (Russia): Russian foreign minister (FM) Sergey Lavrov said, on Wednesday, that Russia is willing to host a meeting of the Israeli and Palestinian leaders at the earliest, however currently it is necessary to wait for the results of the internal political processes in Israel.

According to a press release, he delivered his remarks and answered media questions at the Primakov readings international forum, via a videoconference, in the Russian capital.

He continued: it is very unfortunate that no attention was paid to our repeated reminders over many years that the concept of normalising Israeli-Arab relations cannot be carried out at the expense of the Palestinian problem.

This is a very serious problem that will only continue to get worse.


Russia will actively continue to facilitate the settlement of international conflicts, is working in Syria and helping the people of Nagorno-Karabakh to restore peaceful life after stopping the bloodshed, is taking a vigorous part in international efforts to achieve a settlement in Afghanistan, Libya, around Iran, the Korean peninsula and many other hot spots.

We will continue working to this end even on those problems that seem insoluble at first sight like a settlement in the Middle East.

We are actively trying to restore the work of the quartet of international mediators and promoting the concept of ensuring collective security in the area of the Persian Gulf.

We are actively working to coordinate the rules of responsible conduct in the information space now in the United Nations (UN) multilateral format.

We are promoting cooperation in countering the coronavirus (Covid-19). Contrary to the Western allegations, we are invariably interested in pragmatic, mutually beneficial relations with all parties, including the West, be it the United States (US), its North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) allies or the European Union (EU).

We are promoting a package of initiatives to prevent the complete collapse of the agreements and understanding in disarmament, arms control and non-proliferation after the US destroyed many treaties, for instance, START-3.

We suggested a voluntary moratorium on the deployment of the missiles covered by it at least in Europe. Despite our proposals on verifying the moratorium, the West continues avoiding any honest discussion.

In much the same manner, NATO has been literally talking our ear off for over two years in response to our very specific proposals aimed at reducing tension and military threat along the entire Russia-NATO contact line.

We are willing to work with any partner but there will be no one-sided game. Neither sanctions nor ultimatums will help anyone talk with us and reach any agreements.


Russia will never give up its fundamental values and will be true to its spiritual sources and its stabilising role in world politics. Therefore, we will continue doing everything for the firm, non-confrontational promotion of our national interests and developing cooperation with as many countries as possible.

I would like to emphasise only one idea: do not interpret our willingness for dialogue with any partner as a weakness.

Russian president Vladimir Putin stressed recently in his response to Western ultimatums that we will determine ourselves the red lines in relations with our Western partners and will primarily uphold our views on the world arrangement, on how to develop international relations in full conformity with the principles fixed in the UN charter rather than some agreements between a narrow circle of parties.

Russia will energetically promote the continuation of the peaceful movement towards a polycentric world based on the leading states’ collective guidance of efforts to resolve global problems.

But we are also realists and hence cannot disregard the stubborn, and I would even say aggressive unwillingness of our Western colleagues to accept this objective reality.

We cannot disregard the striving of the collective West to ensure itself a privileged international position at all costs. The results of the upcoming G7, NATO and US-EU summits will be a gauge of the current mentality in the leading Western countries.

Not only Russia but also many others face the situation where the West’s representatives are unprepared for an honest, facts-based dialogue, preferring to act in the “highly likely” spirit. There are many instances of this approach. This is certain to undermine trust in the very idea of dialogue as a method of settling differences and to erode the capabilities of diplomacy as a crucial foreign policy tool.


The zeal, with which our Western colleagues started promoting the notorious “rules-based world order” concept, looks even more irrational and devoid of prospects.

Rules are always needed. Let me remind you that the UN charter is also a body of rules, but these rules have been universally accepted and coordinated by all members of the international community, and they are not called into question by anyone. This is called the international law.

The UN charter is the main part of international law and its foundation. While dodging the term “international law” and using instead the expression “rules-based world order,” our Western colleagues have in mind a totally different thing: they want to develop certain West-centric concepts and approaches to be later palmed off as an ideal of multilateralism and the ultimate truth.

These actions are undertaken in areas such as chemical weapons, journalism, cyber security, and international humanitarian law.

There are universal organisations dealing with all these issues, but our colleagues, primarily in the EU as well as in the US, are eager to promote their own concept in each of these areas.


If asked why this is not being done at the top organisation of multilateralism, the UN, they give no clear answer.

We understand that it is, of course, more difficult to advance some initiatives of theirs and reach agreements in a universal format, where there are not only the “docile” members of the Western club but also Russia, China, India, Brazil and African countries.

We will see how this “rules-based world order” concept will be reflected in the outcomes of the events that have already been announced, including the so-called summit for democracy announced by US president Joe Biden, or in the initiatives in the area of multilateralism announced by French president Emmanuel Macron and a number of other leaders.

I am confident that we cannot ignore the incontrovertible fact that the present world order is a sum of agreements between the countries that won world war II. Russia will object to those wishing to cast doubt on the outcome of that war. We cannot and will not play up to those who would like to reverse the natural course of history.


We, incidentally, have no superpower ambitions, no matter how hard some people try to convince themselves and everyone else of the opposite. Nor do we have the messianic zeal, with which our Western colleagues are attempting to spread their axiological “democratising” agenda to the rest of the world.

It has long been clear to us that the outside imposition of development models will do no good. Look at the Middle East, Northern Africa, Libya, Yemen and Afghanistan.

A specific feature of the current situation is that the coronavirus pandemic has greatly accelerated the events, helping to settle existing problems and at the same time creating new ones.

I am referring to the global economic decline, destroyed industrial and marketing chains, growing isolationism and geopolitical opportunism. This common trouble is also reminding us, through growing problems, about the unprecedented connection between all members of the international community.

Nobody can escape to a safe haven. This is probably one of the main lessons we must draw from what is happening.

Russia calls for cooperation with everyone on the basis of mutual respect, equality and a balance of interests. We are aware of the value of each international partner, both in bilateral relations and in the multilateral format. We value our friendship with everyone who reciprocates this feeling and is willing to look for honest agreements, without ultimatums and unilateral demands.

The issues we are ready to discuss cover nearly all important spheres of life: security, trade, environmental protection, climate change, digital transformation, artificial intelligence and plenty more.

Russia is promoting its ideas in Eurasia. The principles I have mentioned underlie the operation of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO), the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO).

These associations are based exclusively on the principle of voluntary participation, equality and the common good. There are no “bosses” and “subordinates” in them.

These organisations have creative goals and are not spearheaded against anyone, and neither do they claim to spread their narrow values throughout the world, demanding that absolutely all states without exception comply with them, as some other integration structures are doing.

Our unconditional priorities include the strengthening of our comprehensive interaction with China. This year we will celebrate the 20th anniversary of the treaty of good-neighbourliness and friendly cooperation between Russia and China.

Another similar goal is to promote our privileged strategic partnership with India.

This is how it is defined in the documents that were adopted at the top level. We are expanding our cooperation with Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) nations and other Asian-Pacific countries.

We are doing this within the framework of the unification philosophy, which constitutes the basis of Russian president Putin’s initiative of the greater Eurasian partnership. It is open to absolutely all countries of our common Eurasian continent, and the membership of this association will dramatically increase the comparative advantages of all Eurasian countries in this highly competitive world upon the assumption that they will make good use of their natural, God-given advantages and will not try to create new or deepen the existing dividing lines on our continent.

Both China and India support, in principle, the concept of the greater Eurasian partnership, which I have already mentioned. Its merits have been highly assessed at the SCO. We are discussing it with ASEAN nations. We are also open for discussions with the EU as our natural neighbour on this huge continent.




Ads