Question: What will happen to the representatives of the Kiev regime once Russia achieves its objectives in the special military operation in Ukraine? Will an investigation into the crimes of the Kiev regime be initiated and what will the trial be like?
Sergey Lavrov: The crimes of the Kiev regime are already under investigation. Russian law enforcement authorities are meticulously recording and documenting the atrocities committed by Ukrainian neo-Nazis, which extend beyond the timeframe of the special military operation. The suffering of Donbass civilians began as early as 2014. All those responsible will be held accountable.
The Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation is conducting investigations into various violations of the Civil Code. According to the Investigative Committee’s data, more than 4,000 criminal cases have been initiated against around 900 individuals. This includes not only members of radical neo-Nazi associations, Ukrainian security services and mercenaries, but also members of Ukraine's military and political leadership. Those who have been charged in absentia are already on the international wanted list.
Based on the evidence gathered by the Investigative Committee, the courts of the Russian Federation have already sentenced over 200 members of Ukrainian armed groups to long prison terms for their crimes. The remaining criminals will face the same fate and will be held accountable.
Question: Does Moscow plan to organise talks, to be held in Russia, between Palestinian movements, specifically Fatah and Hamas, in order to achieve national unity goals? How likely is it that the Palestinians will be able to agree on forming a government?
Sergey Lavrov: Russia consistently advocates for the initiation of Palestinian-Israeli talks. The lack of Palestinian unity remains one of the obstacles to this.
We support the actions taken by our partners, particularly Egypt and Algeria, to resolve this issue. We also assist our Palestinian friends in finding a solution. We have provided them with a venue for holding meetings in Russia. We call for unification based on the platform of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, and we emphasise the dangers of disunity for the establishment of a Palestinian state.
In April 2023, Russia proposed an initiative to convene multilateral consultations to synchronise approaches and ensure Palestinian unity. It was suggested that representatives of the main Palestinian movements be involved in the second stage. Our proposal is still on the table.
Recently, on December 20, I participated in the 6th session of the Russian-Arab Cooperation Forum in Morocco. During the forum, I spoke with my colleagues from a number of Arab states, and we discussed the situation in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict area and possible steps to resolve it. The discussions revealed that, among other things, we have a common understanding of the urgent need to restore Palestinian unity.
Question: During the protests in Belgrade, Russian officials held a number of meetings with Serbian partners. Prime Minister of Serbia Ana Brnabic thanked Russian security services for providing information on preparations for staging the riots. Can you confirm if Moscow actually provided this assistance? And which Western countries were specifically involved in organising these protests? How else can we help Belgrade, and have our Serbian partners made any specific requests for assistance? Is there a threat of a coup in Serbia and its subsequent inclusion in the anti-Russian coalition?
Sergey Lavrov: Serbia and Russia engage in regular dialogue, which is characterised by transparency and a strong commitment to developing cooperation in various areas, including security. This is a sensitive sphere, and it is fair to say that Moscow is always ready to lend a hand to our Serbian friends.
The events in Belgrade are yet another attempt to carry out an illegal takeover. It seems that not everyone in the West is prepared to accept the support that the Serbian electorate expressed for President Aleksandar Vucic and his political course during the elections.
This trend is not new, let's be honest. It is well known how similar ventures usually end. We need only recall the coup in Ukraine in February 2014, which was initiated by Washington and Brussels.
Serbia has not forgotten this, among other things, thanks to its own experience. Perhaps this is why the number of protesters is relatively small – only a few hundred people. People do not trust the activists who claim to be against violence but act in the opposite way: disregarding the expression of the citizens' will and provoking law enforcement authorities.
We assess the overall situation in Serbia as stable. The country's leadership firmly maintains control, clearly understanding that this is in the national interest.
Question: Recently, there have been signals that our country may reconsider its unilateral moratorium on the deployment of intermediate and short-range missiles. Is this true? Can the moratorium be lifted before the United States deploys such arms in Europe and the Asia-Pacific Region? Have possible locations for the deployment of Russian missiles been identified?
Sergey Lavrov: A clear signal that we may reconsider a unilateral moratorium on the deployment of ground-launched intermediate and short-range missiles was included in the original wording [of the INF Treaty], where we stated that we were imposing corresponding self-limitations.
Let me remind you that our commitment to the moratorium largely depends on the potential emergence of ground-launched intermediate and short-range missiles manufactured by the United States in the corresponding regions. Due to the characteristics and applications of arms in this class, the issue of their deployment by potentially hostile countries is highly sensitive in terms of Russia's national security. In the case of the United States, this aspect becomes particularly important due to its direct impact on other factors affecting strategic stability. If Washington creates additional missile risks, it will undoubtedly require a serious response from our side.
If the United States does not take any extraordinary steps to exert pressure through other means, Russia will not be the first to deploy missiles that were previously prohibited under the INF Treaty. However, judging by the preparations made by the Pentagon, practical actions by the Americans to deploy ground-launched intermediate and short-range missiles in different regions of the world should not take long. Therefore, the time when we will have to make necessary political decisions is fast approaching.
Question: When discussing the outcome of the year, President of Russia Vladimir Putin said that Moscow is ready to restore full-fledged relations with Washington if there are specific fundamental changes within the United States. Can we expect any shifts in the case of a victory of a candidate from the Republican Party in next year's presidential elections? Could this lead to the revival of bilateral relations?
Sergey Lavrov: Our readiness to restore a full-fledged dialogue with the United States should not be taken for granted. Russia-US relations have become strained to the maximum due to Washington’s strategic objective of inflicting a decisive blow on Russia. Although the White House is still cautious about completely ruining what remains of the relationship, the Americans are clearly not ready to engage in an honest dialogue based on mutual respect and consideration of each other's interests.
We will only be able to develop a formula for peaceful coexistence and cooperation in certain areas when Washington acknowledges our core national interests and engages in sincere negotiations. Meanwhile, the ruling circles in the United States deny the realities of a multipolar world and continue to think in terms of their own superiority and exclusivity.
The US political establishment, regardless of party affiliation, views Russia as an enemy and an existential threat. Given the existing bipartisan consensus on this matter, it would be naive to hope for improved relations in the event of a victory by a candidate from the Republican Party. In general, the outcome of the US presidential race is not of great concern to us.
