РУССКИЙ
21:23 20.08.2025 •
Photo: MFA
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s statement and answers to media questions at a joint news conference following talks with Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan Ayman Safadi.
Moscow, August 20, 2025
Ladies and gentlemen,
My long-time colleague and friend Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan Ayman Safadi and I had substantive and productive talks. The exchange of views was useful.
Following the tradition, we continue to promote the trust-based nature of our relations. We value this tradition, which is kept alive by contacts between President Putin and His Majesty King Abdullah II. Foreign ministries and deputy foreign ministers, as well as directors of respective foreign ministry departments, are doing their best to promote this trust-based and mutually beneficial approach and to identify opportunities to support each other, as well as to coordinate our actions at various international forums, primarily the UN.
We highlighted the high dynamics of our political dialogue. We hope that His Majesty King Abdullah II of Jordan will have a chance to take part in the first Russian-Arab summit in October which will provide an additional opportunity for another meeting with President Vladimir Putin.
We want to see our cooperation in the trade and economic sphere unfold progressively. There is progress. Growth trends are clearly visible. In absolute figures, though, we can do much better. Today, we agreed to expedite the convening of the 7th meeting of the Intergovernmental Russian-Jordanian Commission on Trade, Economic, Scientific and Technical Cooperation. We hope that this meeting in Russia will be held before this year is out.
We also share a common opinion on the importance of expanding the humanitarian sphere, cultural contacts, and interaction in education. We continue to allocate state scholarships to our Jordanian colleagues for them to study at Russian universities. Currently, 1,500 Jordanian subjects are studying in our country.
Our performance groups, including troupes from Tchaikovsky Conservatory, the Bolshoi Theatre, and other cultural institutions, regularly tour Jordan. In turn, our Jordanian partners bring similar events to our country.
I would like to highlight the fact that Orthodox pilgrims from Russia are traditionally attracted by the shrines located in the Kingdom, primarily, the baptism site of Jesus Christ on the Jordan River. Sports ties have received an extra boost from a recently reached agreement to hold a football match between the national teams of our country and the Jordanian national team in Russia on September 4. We marked this event as another significant contribution to promoting people-to-people contacts.
Today, we signed an intergovernmental agreement on the mutual abolition of visa requirements for all citizens of our respective countries, which will boost tourism and business ties between Russia and Jordan.
We had an in-depth discussion of the current international and regional issues. We focused on the situation in the Near East and the Middle East, primarily the situation in the Palestinian territories, the Gaza Strip, and, more recently, on the West Bank of the Jordan River, which continues to worsen. Just like our Jordanian friends, we have grave concerns about the developments unfolding there. What we are witnessing is a full-blown humanitarian disaster.
Russia unequivocally condemned the terrorist attack against Israel, which was carried out on October 7, 2023. We maintain that those responsible for organising and executing this atrocity must face the severest punishment. However, we cannot accept the collective punishment of all Palestinians as a response to that terrorist act. The imposition of such collective measures against the residents of Gaza – and now also those in the West Bank – has severely obstructed the delivery of humanitarian aid to Palestinian areas where civilians are in dire need of food, medicine, and other basic essentials. United Nations personnel working in the region have already reported that dozens of Palestinians, including many children, are dying of starvation.
In light of this, we are keen to see the restoration of UN humanitarian mechanisms in the region and the removal of all impediments to their full operation, so as to meet – at the very least – the most urgent needs of all Gazans and West Bank residents enduring these desperate conditions.
Russia provides regular assistance to the Palestinians. The latest shipment of 30,000 tonnes of wheat was dispatched in June of this year. We are acutely aware, from our own experience, of the logistical challenges currently involved in such efforts. The most immediate priority must be addressing humanitarian crises and averting a full-scale catastrophe.
The next steps should focus on de-escalation measures. We advocate the swift resumption of negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis – both to resolve immediate issues and to secure a ceasefire, the release of hostages, and Palestinian detainees held in Israeli prisons. Subsequent stages must involve dialogue and negotiations on the final status of Palestinian territories, in line with the UN unanimous resolutions calling for the establishment of a Palestinian state that have been systematically obstructed for decades, primarily by Western nations.
We also discussed other regional matters, including the situation in Syria, a country facing profound challenges. We are committed to achieving lasting stability in the Syrian Arab Republic, ensuring its unity, territorial integrity, and sovereignty. In this regard, dialogue between Damascus and representatives of ethno-religious minorities – including Kurds, Alawites, Druze, and others – will be crucial.
Our talks also covered other international concerns: developments in Lebanon, the situation in and around Iraq, and issues surrounding Iran’s nuclear programme. All these factors influence the overall regional climate, which remains far from stable. Together with our Jordanian counterparts, we will endeavour – within the limits of our capabilities – to de-escalate tensions and pursue equitable solutions that reflect a balance of interests among all regional states and peoples residing here.
We express gratitude to our Jordanian colleagues for their objective and balanced stance on the situation surrounding Ukraine – a topic we revisited today. It is evident that Amman recognises the necessity of a political and diplomatic settlement, achievable only by addressing the root causes of this conflict. These originate from the West’s prolonged efforts to cultivate direct threats to the Russian Federation’s security in Ukraine, right on our borders, while indulging the Kiev regime – which seized power through a state coup in 2014 – in its campaign to eradicate all things Russian and Russian-speaking population on Ukrainian soil. Such actions constitute a flagrant violation of both the UN Charter, which mandates the protection of human rights – including linguistic and religious freedoms – as well as numerous international conventions and Ukraine’s own Constitution.
We briefed our guests on the recently intensified dialogue between Russian and American leadership, aimed at exploring pathways toward a just resolution of the Ukraine crisis. Overall, our talks were highly productive. I believe both sides are satisfied with the substantive nature of our discussions.
Question: According to US President Donald Trump, France, Germany and the United Kingdom consider deploying their troops in Ukraine. Neither does he rule out the possibility of Washington providing air support. What is Moscow’s assessment of this scenario?
Sergey Lavrov: We are closely monitoring international developments, including within the Western camp, with a specific focus on the ongoing processes concerning Ukraine.
I have had the opportunity – and the satisfaction – to highlight a growing understanding among our partners in the United States. They agree that there is a clear need to address the root causes of this crisis, rather than simply supporting those who posture as proponents of an immediate ceasefire while still insisting on continued weapons supplies. This was precisely the stance recently taken by French President Emmanuel Macron. It is heartening that this highly reckless and confrontational position, which supports prolonging hostilities, finds no favour with the current US administration. Instead, they are seeking to delve into the core of the problems to help eliminate the root causes of this crisis – the very points I have reiterated today and President of Russia Vladimir Putin has mentioned repeatedly.
Regarding reports that the UK, France, and Germany are poised to develop collective security guarantees, we are in favour of such guarantees being truly reliable.
A pertinent example of this which, in fact, stems from the Ukrainian side’s own initiative, was put forward in April 2022 in Istanbul. There, the Ukrainian negotiating team proposed a basic framework for agreements to end hostilities and ensure a sustainable settlement. Among its core principles was Ukraine’s agreement not to join NATO or any other military bloc, along with a commitment to its neutral and nuclear-free status. Crucially, as part of that framework, the Ukrainian side proposed – and our delegation agreed at the time – to develop a system of security guarantees. These would include all permanent members of the UN Security Council (the Russian Federation, the People’s Republic of China, the United States, France, and the United Kingdom), plus several other states such as Germany and Türkiye, as well as any other countries interested in joining this group of guarantors.
In that context, the Ukrainian proposal clearly implied that these guarantees would be equal, ensuring the security of all interested parties, including Ukraine’s neighbours, on an equal and indivisible basis. This approach, as I have mentioned, was supported by the Russian side in April 2022. The document was, in fact, initialled, and we were prepared to proceed to signing an official agreement. However, as we all know, and as President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly mentioned, the then British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, subsequently arrived and forbade his Kiev protégés from signing anything, instead demanding that hostilities continue. Had it not been for that single intervention, I believe much could have been accomplished by now towards a sustainable settlement – one that ensures the interests of all countries and peoples across our shared geopolitical space.
We cannot accept the current proposal to address collective security issues without the Russian Federation. This approach is simply unworkable. We have repeatedly made it clear that while Russia does not overstate its interests, we will uphold our legitimate rights firmly and resolutely.
I am certain that the West, particularly the United States, understands that any serious discussion of security without the Russian Federation is utopian. It is, quite frankly, a road to nowhere.
Question: How do you assess the diplomatic steps of the European Union to resolve the Ukrainian crisis, including after the trilateral meeting of the United States, Western leaders, and Ukraine in Washington?
Sergey Lavrov: What diplomatic steps from the European Union are you referring to? Before evaluating them, we have to see them first.
So far, what we have observed is not diplomacy but rather an aggressive escalation of the situation. We see awkward and unethical attempts to influence the position of the Trump administration and personally the President of the United States, as was evident during Mr Zelensky’s recent visit to Washington accompanied by European representatives. No constructive proposals were voiced by the Europeans there.
As for US President Donald Trump and his team, we note that they have been engaged in diplomatic efforts regarding Ukraine not just in recent weeks but practically since assuming office. This means their approach is aimed at seeking mutually acceptable agreements that address the root causes of the crisis and ensure that such conflicts cannot flare up again. The Europeans, meanwhile, appear primarily concerned with keeping the United States engaged in the conflict, increasingly unsuccessfully, while at the same time ensuring a continued supply of arms to Kiev.
Following the “Washington meeting,” EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas stated that the European Union would not trust any agreements reached with the Russian Federation, so it intends to continue supporting the Ukrainian armed forces and to promote new sanctions against Russia, regardless of any agreements that may be achieved, since they do not believe in them.
This is not diplomacy. It is degradation of foreign policy into little more than sanctions and, in some cases, outright appropriation of others’ assets, as was the case with Russia’s gold and foreign exchange reserves. I see no European diplomacy here. Unfortunately, I do not see it in other international contexts either.
For example, take the Middle East: specifically, Gaza, the West Bank, and the long-standing UN resolution calling for the creation of two states, including Palestine that would live peacefully side by side with Israel. This resolution has remained unimplemented for decades. Only recently, against the backdrop of the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, have Western leaders begun issuing statements about their supposed readiness to recognise a Palestinian state. President of France Emmanuel Macron, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, as well as the prime ministers of Canada and Australia, have all voiced such intentions. Just weeks ago, they spoke of possibly raising the matter at the UN General Assembly.
The General Assembly will convene in the last week of September. They issued these statements two months before it. I have a question: if your diplomacy and foreign policy arrived at the conclusion that what is happening cannot be tolerated any longer and only recognition of the Palestinian state is needed to stop all these humanitarian tragedies, as has long been required by the UN resolution, then why wait for two months? Why cannot they do it right away? I suspect that all these nice statements that “soon,” “we will recognise the Palestinian state in a couple of months” are largely made based on the diplomatic hope that there will be nothing to recognise when it comes to such recognition.
Perhaps, this is the rationale of the EU diplomacy in regard to the Middle East. And in regard to Ukraine, I cannot see such rationale at all.
Question: A lot has been said today about the humanitarian catastrophe in the Gaza Strip. The war there is going on. Israeli aggression does not stop. Still, Egypt together with Qatar has launched another ceasefire initiative. In your vie, how likely is it to succeed? Can Moscow and Amman do something to support this initiative and, mainly, to prevent its collapse, as it happened to previous initiatives? Indeed, there are some differences on this initiative between Israel and the United States as well as some objections from a number of Palestinian forces in this context.
Sergey Lavrov: We have just talked about it in detail. You asked what to do to prevent the collapse of the Egypt’s and Qatar’s initiative? It has already collapsed because Hamas expressed its readiness to support it and Israel, as we have heard today, refused to do it.
Jordan, Russia and other countries that sincerely wish to achieve a sustainable settlement of the Palestinian problem in accordance with UN resolutions must seek an urgent resumption of direct negotiations. We have been speaking about it at the Security Council, at the UN General Assembly and other fora. It is essential to talk about fulfilling what has been agreed upon – the creation of a Palestinian state. Without it, you can hardly expect stability in the region. If the state is not established, the risks of new violent protests up to armed struggle will remain. We should be honest about it.
Question: When might the negotiation process on Ukraine resume? Is Russia prepared for a trilateral meeting?
Sergey Lavrov: President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly affirmed that we are ready to engage in any format, provided there is an understanding that such engagement will be conducted with integrity and will not devolve into attempts – as certain leaders of major European countries have done – to create conditions for drawing the United States back into their aggressive, belligerent campaign. This campaign aims at preserving and strengthening Ukraine as a tool for containing Russia, waging war against our nation, and eradicating everything Russian present in this region, including within Ukraine’s territory.
Following a telephone conversation between President of Russia Vladimir Putin and President of the United States Donald Trump – when the American leader called the Kremlin to brief on his contacts with Vladimir Zelensky and the delegation of European “facilitators” – a Kremlin statement confirmed that Vladimir Putin reiterated Russia’s readiness to continue direct Russian-Ukrainian negotiations, which had previously taken place in Istanbul. Three rounds were held, resulting in agreements on humanitarian issues, prisoner exchanges, and the repatriation of fallen servicemen’s remains. During the third and final round, our negotiators proposed establishing three working groups to address agenda items more concretely – covering military, humanitarian, and political matters. To date, no response has been received from Ukraine.
However, after his telephone conversation with US President Donald Trump, President Vladimir Putin put forward a proposal not only to resume these talks but also to consider elevating the level of delegation heads. This aligns with our suggestion that a dedicated segment of this process should focus on the political aspects of settlement, alongside military and humanitarian issues.
It is clear that the Ukrainian side’s reaction is not within our control. Nevertheless, given that this idea was received positively by US President Donald Trump, we expect that he will convey and explain it to Kiev representatives, after which we anticipate a response. Such a step would mark significant progress in raising the level of negotiations, enhancing their specificity, and advancing toward addressing the key issues that must be resolved for a sustainable settlement.
We remain open to any formats. However, when it comes to high-level meetings, they must be meticulously prepared at all preceding stages to ensure summits do not worsen the situation but instead serve as a definitive conclusion to the negotiations we are prepared to continue.
read more in our Telegram-channel https://t.me/The_International_Affairs
