Sergey Lavrov: “Our relations with our Arab friends are steadily progressing”

Photo: MFA

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s statement and answers to Arab media questions.

Moscow, October 13, 2025

Good afternoon, colleagues,

I am pleased to welcome you to the Foreign Ministry.

I’m aware that the guests who have come to cover the Russia-Arab Summit have been here for quite a while now and have had the opportunity to see the sights of Moscow and several other Russian regions.

You are well aware of the circumstances that have led to where we are today. Preparations for the summit have been underway for a long time, but it has become clear that this particular week, including today, when the summit was supposed to open, will be decisive for advancing the agreements on the Gaza Strip, agreements that have been energetically promoted by our Egyptian and Qatari friends. President Trump has put forward his plan, which we have repeatedly assessed as the best available option on the negotiating table, although, of course, it does not address all aspects of the Palestinian issue. Nevertheless, it is crucial to stop the bloodshed as soon as possible and to address the grave humanitarian issues faced by the people.

Thousands of Gaza residents are coming back home. I can hardly imagine how they will live there, but it is better to rebuild one’s own home than to live constantly under shelling and in daily fear for the lives of the children, family, and loved ones.

We sincerely wish success to today’s event - the summit in Sharm el-Sheikh – which brings together representatives from over 20 Arab countries and a number of Western countries. I hope all agreements will get implemented, although we are hearing both Hamas and Tel Aviv say that the situation has not yet been fully resolved and that there could be more crisis outbreaks. It is important, in my view, that those who initiated this forum, first and foremost President Trump, with the support of the President of Egypt and the leadership of Qatar and Türkiye, prevent such scenarios and focus on an immediate ceasefire, adherence to the agreed-upon line for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the Gaza Strip, the organisation of humanitarian aid, and the rebuilding of this beautiful place on Earth, which, perhaps more than any other territory in the world, has suffered in the postwar years.

Without a doubt, a lasting settlement is possible only through the implementation of UN resolutions on creating a Palestinian state. We have noted that President Trump’s peace plan mentions only the Gaza Strip. It mentions statehood, but does so in rather general terms. These approaches will need to be clarified and what will happen on the West Bank of the Jordan River will need to be determined as well, since the UN resolutions envisage the creation of a single and territorially integral Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.

There will be questions about how we see this situation developing further. Notably, just like the overwhelming majority of the international community, we remain committed to implementing these resolutions. Taking into account the plan to hold today, early this week, a special and crucial event devoted to the Palestinian issue, President Vladimir Putin reached an understanding with Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Al Sudani and the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States to postpone our summit. I am confident it will take place as soon as the most convenient dates are determined. The final documents are practically ready, so we will still have the opportunity to get together when you come back for the summit.

Our relations with our Arab friends are steadily progressing. The League of Arab States has demonstrated its value and is consolidating its role as a key pillar of the emerging multipolar world, authoritatively and actively participating in global affairs – in economics, finance, and increasingly contributing to the resolution of regional and, more broadly, political issues. We have observed sustained growth in trade turnover with the League’s member states, which has now exceeded $34 billion. Whilst this figure is modest compared to the trade volumes the United States and the People’s Republic of China maintain with the Arab world, however, it is several times greater than the trade turnover recorded two decades ago. I can assure you that we are on the right path – the growth dynamics are positive.

Our cooperation extends far beyond the energy and oil-and-gas sectors. We collaborate within OPEC+ and the Gas Exporting Countries Forum, amongst others. A growing number of states in the region are expressing interest in our expertise in nuclear technologies, nuclear energy, and non-energy applications of nuclear power. A flagship project in this regard is the construction of Egypt’s first nuclear power plant, El Dabaa. Our Arab partners are also showing keen interest in agricultural cooperation, including supplies of Russian food products and fertiliser.

Furthermore, in the sphere of cultural cooperation, we have traditionally maintained strong educational ties with many Arab states, a practice dating back to the Soviet era. Thousands of students from the League’s member countries have been educated in Russia and continue to study under annual quotas provided by the Government of the Russian Federation. Tourism is growing bilaterally. Our citizens greatly enjoy visiting your nations, with their splendid resorts, whilst we warmly welcome an increasing number of Arab visitors to the Russian Federation.

Major cultural projects are underway, aimed at promoting the achievements of our respective nations in this field. Initiatives such as Russian Seasons, held across a number of states, particularly in the Gulf countries, have been met with enthusiasm, and this model is now being replicated elsewhere.

We were delighted by the participation of Arab representatives in the Intervision International Song Contest. Performers from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt took part in this musical celebration, held on September 20 this year, which was very well received. As you know, our Saudi friends have already invited the contest to their country next year. We will do our utmost to support this initiative and ensure strong Russian participation.

In conclusion, I would note that over the past twenty-odd years, we have accumulated substantial experience. It has allowed us to preserve the best aspects of our relations from the Soviet era. Let me remind you that the Soviet Union was the first state to recognise the independence of what is now the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The legacy of those historic contacts continues to serve us well today, providing a firm foundation for building long-term relations. Not everyone approves of the partnership between Russia and the Arab world. There are those who seek to revive colonial and neo-colonial games – to divide and rule. We know perfectly well who these actors are. Such habits have not disappeared. Nevertheless, the fundamental trend remains the development of constructive relations grounded in mutual respect, the accommodation of each other’s interests, and the consolidation of a stable balance between them.

Question: The event of greatest interest on today’s international news is the Sharm el-Sheikh summit. You have already expressed general scepticism about the success of this format. How do you assess the success of this ceasefire agreement? Could it develop into a full-fledged peace process between Israel and Palestine? Does Russia intend to attend or join this process?

A follow-up question: I have looked once again through the list of countries participating in the Sharm el-Sheikh peace summit. It includes over 20 states represented at various levels: heads of state, ministers, and even at embassy level. Even the Japanese ambassador was invited. Why is Russia not participating at this summit, despite Russia’s long-standing mediating role in this conflict within the Quartet, and despite its recent constructive contacts with both Israel and Hamas and its positive role in securing the release of some hostages? Why is Russia not in Sharm el-Sheikh today?

Sergey Lavrov: I can only say that the invitations were issued by the summit’s hosts: the Egyptian leadership, which reportedly coordinated its actions with other Arab initiators but primarily with the United States. Incidentally, Iraqi Prime Minister Mahmoud Sudani was not invited to the Sharm el-Sheikh summit either, even though Iraq currently holds the chairmanship of the Arab League.

As for the participation of the Japanese ambassador, I believe US Vice President J. D. Vance has already said that Gaza will have to be rebuilt. He emphasised that the United States hopes Arab countries will shoulder much of the burden. Japan periodically participates in reconstruction efforts, so perhaps that was a factor.

Russia is ready to participate in any format. You have mentioned the Quartet: it was undermined by the policies of the Joe Biden administration, despite having achieved significant agreements, including the 2003 road map adopted by the UN Security Council, which set out detailed steps required to create a Palestinian state.

That process was supposed to be completed within a year; the Quartet introduced the resolution, and the Security Council approved it unanimously. We all know what followed.

Several initiatives after that suffered the same fate, not to mention the 1991 Madrid Principles and the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, which were broadly welcomed yet led to nothing. As for the prospects of today’s summit: while we welcome any efforts to restore peace (as Russian President Vladimir Putin stressed recently at a news conference in Dushanbe), scepticism – as you said – is understandable. Too often hopes for peace and prosperity in the region have been compromised. As I have said in the opening remarks, skeptical forecasts are coming from many sides.

I have just read that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly said the matter is far from over, that Israel still has many enemies and needs to continue operations against them. That is either scepticism or determination to press on militarily against everyone Israel regards as enemies.

As for HAMAS, there have also been discussions about how agreements will be implemented and who should take the first steps. Fortunately, some hostages have already been released; now it is Israel’s turn. The IDF appears to have withdrawn to the agreed line.

We hope that all the agreements will be honoured. If the immediate participants of this summit and those who will implement President Trump’s proposals after this summit decide that Russia’s involvement would be useful, I assure you we will not refuse. However, it is not our custom to impose our services on others.

We wish the summit success, above all for the Palestinian people to be able to breathe freely.

Question (translated from Arabic): How do you assess Russia’s role in putting an end to bloodshed in Gaza? Especially so, given that Russia has opposed and condemned the horrific events that were taking place there and has sought to bring them to an end. How has Russia influenced Hamas?

Sergey Lavrov: We have tried to influence everyone towards achieving the same end, towards renouncing violence, reaching agreements on coexistence, and ending the bloodshed. Compromise is inevitable in any conflict. Each side must be willing to give something up.

The Arab countries – this was clearly reflected in the initiatives of Egypt, Qatar, the Islamic states, and Türkiye following the Arab-Islamic summit - are prepared to seek compromise. They have proved this. I hope that the other side, our Israeli colleagues, with whom we also remain in constant contact, will likewise understand the importance of seeking a balance of interests, rather than pursuing goals that amount to eliminating any potential threats to their existence, regardless of what their neighbours might think or what arguments they may present.

It is a complex situation. As I mentioned earlier, the root of the problem lies in the lack of progress towards the creation of a Palestinian state and even a growing regression in this process.

I remember when I worked at the UN 25 years ago I had informal conversations with my Israeli counterparts trying to find a way out of this situation. I told them as a friend, on a human basis, that the failure to implement the UN resolutions on creating a Palestinian state – for almost 80 years now – posed the greatest risk for the region, and for the security of Israel as well as other countries in the region. My Israeli counterparts said it was an “exaggerated position,” an overstatement and that thinking along these lines would mean emboldening terrorists. But the unresolved issue of Palestinian statehood remains the most significant factor fuelling the persistence and growth of extremism in the Arab world.

Remember the outrageous October 7, 2023 terrorist attack which we immediately condemned? After Israel launched its military operation under the banner of destroying everyone, the defence minister and other radical ministers, in response to calls to spare civilians in Gaza, said here were no civilians there and that everyone ages three and up was an extremist. I remember that very well.

We submitted a resolution to the UN Security Council five times. The United States under President Biden vetoed these resolutions. Meanwhile, the collective punishment of the Palestinians continued unabated. Speaking of extremism, imagine what it means for several generations in Gaza to live under blockade, occupation, and isolation from the outside world. What do you think parents were telling their children during these decades? What did they tell their children when they asked what was there before, who were their grandparents, or why do they live like that? Who is in charge here? Without a doubt, these children will receive corresponding lessons at school, too. Does anyone really expect these children to grow up filled with gratitude for the fate that has been imposed upon them?

There is no escaping the issue of the Palestinian state. It must be resolved. How to go about it is another issue, but it cannot be done without mutual concessions. In President Trump’s plan, the Gaza Strip is mentioned in the context of establishing Palestinian statehood, while the West Bank is not mentioned at all. If you look at a map of the West Bank today, you will see that almost nothing is left beyond the illegal settlements. I even heard someone suggest creating two or three municipalities for the Palestinians there. But that’s not a state. I do not think that creating municipalities or quasi-state entities would be seen by the Arab world and, above all, by the Palestinians themselves as a satisfactory outcome to this nearly 80 year-long drama. Compromise will be necessary. I have no doubt about that.

The West has dragged its feet on this issue, unwilling to use its leverage to accelerate the creation of a Palestinian state. Otherwise, the road map proposed by the Quartet 25 years ago would have been implemented, and the problem would have been solved by now.

I mentioned earlier that in June, during yet another escalation in Gaza which was a genuine humanitarian disaster, President Emmanuel Macron of France, followed by UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and a number of politicians from Belgium, said they would go to the UN and have the General Assembly recognise a Palestinian state. That was in June, and the General Assembly session was to open three months later. Well, if you decided that a state must be recognised, why wait three months? Or, you were hoping that nothing would be left to recognise by then? Everyone must abandon these double standards.

I saw an article by a political analyst today who wrote that the West does not want an independent Palestine, but wants another mandate over Palestine instead. I would not like to believe that, but judging by the actions of several of our Western colleagues, including the British, there are signs pointing that they are acting towards this end.

To conclude my answer to this crucial question, the summit opening today in Sharm el-Sheikh is being convened on the basis of a compromise platform. Its initiators have already proposed a compromise. Now is not the time to tempt fate, but to clearly implement what has been proposed, to stop the bloodshed, to address the humanitarian issues, and to begin to rebuild Gaza. Concurrently and without delay, it is essential to start working on the next plan to create a Palestinian state.

Question (retranslated from Arabic): There have been several recognitions of the State of Palestine, and we hope the Palestinian people will ultimately achieve security and self-determination. There are also questions regarding Western Sahara, particularly concerning Algeria. What is Russia’s stance on this issue, especially in light of Rabat’s attempts to establish Moroccan administrative authority there?

Sergey Lavrov: Our position is very straightforward. It is consistent across all such cases. There are United Nations resolutions – primarily those of the Security Council – on how to resolve the Western Sahara issue: through the self-determination of the Western Saharan people. This problem has persisted for, I would say, about fifty years now.

I recall that former US Secretary of State James Baker was once appointed as the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Western Sahara. At the time, I was working in New York. He visited, met with Security Council members, and held separate consultations with the permanent members. Back then, everyone reaffirmed the principle enshrined in Security Council resolutions – that a referendum on self-determination for the Western Saharan people must be held. No one even questioned that it should be done. The focus was primarily on agreeing upon the criteria – how elders would ensure fair voting rules for different parts of Western Sahara. In other words, the scenario for conducting this vote was already being drafted in meticulous detail.

Later, the situation changed. We know that Morocco has not abandoned the principle of self-determination but believes it should be implemented in the form of autonomy. For us, any solution acceptable to all parties would be satisfactory. Precisely such an approach was codified in the UN Security Council resolution.

Incidentally, the United States took a different path. During the first term of President Donald Trump’s administration, they recognised Western Sahara as part of Morocco. For them, the matter is closed. But for us, it will only be closed when not just one, but all the parties involved genuinely feel that a solution has been reached based on a fair balance of interests. The UN Security Council resolution is the only framework that exists at present. If a new resolution is drafted, introducing different principles for settlement, we would be prepared to discuss such initiatives, provided they are acceptable to all sides.

Question: Is there any prospect of exempting Bahraini citizens from visa requirements to visit Russia, especially given that this year marks the 35th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the Russian Federation and the Kingdom of Bahrain?

Sergey Lavrov: This is an oversight on our part and on the part of our Bahraini friends. My deputy, Sergey Vershinin, who oversees this area, is seated here. I will ask him to personally look into why we and our friends still require visas for mutual visits.

Our relations with Bahrain are excellent across all domains without exception. Bahrain is also a SCO partner country. Bahrain’s appeal to tourists is undeniable, just as the Russian Federation’s appeal to Bahraini nationals is evident. I believe we will resolve this matter.

Question (retranslated from Arabic): How are trade and economic relations between Russia and Iraq developing? Certain mechanisms have been adopted by Moscow and Baghdad to sustain these relations. How do you assess the current situation in Iraq, and what role is the International North–South Transport Corridor playing in this regard?

Sergey Lavrov: Our relations have traditionally been amicable. I am of the opinion that we played a constructive role following the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair has recently resurfaced in discussions surrounding the newly initiated process in Sharm el-Sheikh – the so-called “peace summit.” Allegedly, a technocratic body will be established, as proposed by US President Donald Trump’s plan, to administer the Gaza sector during its reconstruction. Tony Blair has been involved in Middle Eastern affairs for years. It was he who was among those demanding immediate military action against Iraq and the removal of Saddam Hussein’s government under a pretext now proven to be fabricated – a fact he himself was forced to acknowledge. At the time, I was also working in New York and recall the extreme tension of that period. Following all the experiments conducted by the provisional authority of Paul Bremer in Iraq, including the dissolution of all Ba’ath Party-affiliated structures (which constituted Iraq’s state-forming institutions), it is no secret that many officers from Saddam Hussein’s army formed the backbone of ISIS. Simply because they were cast aside.

I consider the government of Prime Minister Mohammed Shia’ Al-Sudani, as well as his predecessors, to have been effective and prudent in gradually restoring national unity. This is essential not only for Iraq but for any other country in the region, be it Libya or Syria.

Our companies have long been operational in Iraq. First and foremost, I would mention Lukoil and several other oil-extracting firms, which contribute a significant share of tax revenue, ensuring the stability of the country’s economic development. Given that our companies also operate in Iraqi Kurdistan, they help lay the material foundations for that very national unity.

The Russian-Iraqi Intergovernmental Commission on Trade, Economic, Scientific, and Technical Cooperation remains active. We engage in regular dialogue at various levels. I have already noted the recent telephone conversation between Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia’ Al-Sudani and Russian President Vladimir Putin. My Iraqi counterpart and I maintain constant contact. We met last month in New York during the UN General Assembly session and held productive talks. Thus, I believe we can be quite satisfied with the trajectory of our relations. We stand ready to pursue new objectives in the interests of our peoples.

Question (retranslated from Arabic): Two questions - about Iran and Palestine. Is it true that Russia hindered the implementation of the Iranian nuclear deal? Has Russia supplied S-400 air defence missile systems to Iran?

No measures have yet been taken against Israel, whose military operations have caused numerous casualties in Gaza. What is your position on this issue?

Sergey Lavrov: The translation of the first question was a little unclear. What does “Russia hindered the nuclear deal” mean? Could you please repeat that?

Question (retranslated from Arabic): Former Foreign Minister of Iran Javad Zarif said that Russia had previously undermined efforts to renew the nuclear deal during President Hassan Rouhani’s term. Is that true? That is, what Mr Zarif said. Did Russia supply S-400 systems to Iran? And what about the Sukhoi aircraft deal – have they been delivered to Iran?

Sergey Lavrov: Regarding our military-technical cooperation with Iran, after the UN Security Council sanctions were lifted, we have no restrictions. In full compliance with international law, we supply the equipment that Iran needs. All of this is carried out strictly within the framework of international law.

As for Mr Zarif’s statements, we worked closely together for many years on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) aimed at resolving the situation around Iran’s nuclear programme. The final decision on JCPOA was made directly by Mr Zarif and then-US Secretary of State John Kerry. The other participants were essentially observers at that point, watching the US and Iran reach an agreement.

It is well known that Russia has never deviated from its consistent position in support of that nuclear deal, including UN Security Council Resolution 2231. I do not know what exactly Mr Zarif meant, but several days later, when Western countries staged an illegal and outrageous “performance” at the UN Security Council, claiming that UN sanctions against Iran had been automatically reinstated, they invoked what is known as the snapback mechanism. This mechanism is unique for the decisions of the Security Council: it allows any participant to unilaterally trigger the reinstatement of sanctions, and no one can stop it. That provision was in fact agreed to in the final stage of the negotiations directly between Zarif and Kerry.

To be honest, we were surprised. But if our Iranian partners accepted this formulation – which, frankly, was a legal “trap” – we had no grounds to object. I can understand why Zarif supported such an unconventional formula: Iran had no intention of violating the JCPOA and was confident that no one would accuse it of doing so. What happened instead is that Iran did not breach the deal, yet the United States withdrew from it, and the Europeans failed to meet their commitments. After that, they began again demanding new concessions from Iran. Since you mentioned Zarif, this “creation” was largely his.

As for Palestine, we have just discussed this topic quite extensively. The situation that has developed in the region following the decisions to create Israel and a Palestinian state has become increasingly explosive. After the terrorist attacks on October 7, 2023, Israel responded, as I have already said, with collective punishment of the Palestinians. Like terrorism, this constitutes a gross violation of international humanitarian law. The level of hatred being sown on both sides is extremely high. So, the notion that “if everyone pressures Israel, everything will be fine” is inapplicable here.

Your question had this logic: let us all put pressure on Israel, and everything will be fine. That won’t work. Whatever one thinks of Hamas, it remains part of Palestinian society – just like Israeli politicians, whether moderate or radical, are part of Israeli society. What is needed is an agreement between both sides, a balance of interests. Major powers, of course, should use their influence to encourage precisely this: a search for compromise and mutual understanding. As President Vladimir Putin has recently said, we can see that US President Donald Trump is guided exactly by that.

Question (retranslated from Arabic): Syria is currently experiencing violence and even genocide in various regions, particularly along its coast. We have all witnessed this. There are mass killings, abductions of children and women, and other horrific acts. What is Russia doing to put an end to such practices and to persuade interim President of the Syrian Arab Republic Ahmed al-Sharaa to address this issue? How are you currently collaborating with Ahmed al-Sharaa since he assumed power?

Sergey Lavrov: With regard to Syria.  Alarming events transpired in March of this year. We provided our Khmeimim airbase to shelter civilians, as well as certain servicemen of the Syrian army, to protect them from the surge of violence that had been provoked at that time.

How can this country be stabilised? We have never pursued any special interests in Syria. When we stood with the Syrian people, we consistently advocated for Syria – as a multinational and multi-confessional state – to rely on the promotion of national reconciliation. This was the case throughout the years when Bashar al-Assad was President of the Syrian Arab Republic, while the United States, in effect, worked to fragment Syria, actively fuelling Kurdish separatism in the country’s northeast. This created problems not only for Syrian society but also for neighbouring Türkiye, as well as other nations with Kurdish minorities. We have never engaged in such actions. We have always called for the immediate reunification of all Syrian territories.

Now, following the change of power in December 2024, we continue to be guided by these same principles. We are convinced that all countries in the region – a region critical to global stability – must contribute to the full restoration of Syria’s territorial integrity, which continues to face challenges in the north, northeast, and, more recently, the south, when Israel has begun demanding the demilitarisation of As-Suwayda and all territories south of Damascus. This directly impacts the issue of Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. This is no joking matter.

We support the new government’s efforts to stabilise the situation. In this vein, as early as January of this year, we arranged for an interagency delegation to visit Damascus in order to take stock of the relations we have developed with the Syrian Arab Republic up to this point. Subsequently, there was a telephone conversation between President Vladimir Putin and interim President of the Syrian Arab Republic Ahmed al-Sharaa.

In April of this year, I met with Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Syrian Arab Republic Asaad al-Shaibani in Antalya on the sidelines of the Antalya Political Forum. Last July, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Syrian Arab Republic Asaad al-Shaibani, along with the Minister of Defence and several other government officials, visited the Russian Federation.

More recently, in September of this year, I met with Asaad al-Shaibani in New York. We share a common understanding that the foundation of our relations, built over many years, remains relevant, though certain adjustments will need to be made to reflect the new realities in Syria. These primarily concern economic matters, as well as issues related to our military and military-technical cooperation.

The Syrian side is interested in maintaining our military bases in Tartus and Khmeimim. As President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated, we rely on the interests of the host country – the Syrian Arab Republic. It is clear that under new circumstances, these bases may assume a different role beyond merely serving as military outposts. Given the need to facilitate humanitarian flows into Africa, they could function as maritime and air hubs for the delivery of humanitarian supplies, including to the Sahel-Saharan zone and other countries in need.

I mentioned our contacts. In the first half of September this year, a new representative delegation led by Deputy Prime Minister of Russia Alexander Novak visited Damascus and held substantive talks. We are updating and adapting our legal framework and cooperative practices to the new conditions. We see mutual interest in this regard.

Question (retranslated from Arabic): Do you foresee any future problems regarding Bashar al-Assad? An attempt has reportedly been made to poison him in Moscow.  Does the problem exist, and if so, how is it addressed?

Sergey Lavrov: Former President of the Syrian Arab Republic Bashar al-Assad is living in Russia for humanitarian reasons. He and his family faced the risk of physical elimination. We remember what happened to Muammar Gaddafi, which  delighted then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who watched his execution  in a live television broadcast and applauded it.

We have provided humanitarian asylum to Bashar al-Assad and his family for purely humanitarian reasons. He has no problems with living in our capital. No attempt to poison him has been made. If there are such rumours, I leave them on the conscience of those who spread them.

Question (retranslated from Arabic): The Russian-Arab Summit will also discuss economic issues related to Russia’s support for Arab countries. Is the issue of Russian-Arabic partnership and investments on the agenda? Which countries may be involved and in which spheres?

We know that Russia is paying particular attention to Africa. What is Russia doing to strengthen its positions in North Africa, in particular, Tunisia?

Sergey Lavrov: As I have mentioned in my opening remarks, our economic ties with Arab countries have been growing consistently. This also includes trade and investment cooperation.

Speaking about trade, we are working together on the global hydrocarbons market within the framework of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum and OPEC+, which has a permanent monitoring committee. It is co-chaired by Saudi Arabia and the Russian Federation.

The other trade exchange areas include food supplies, including halal products, grain and other food products, fertilisers, which our Arabic friends have a great interest in, tourism, which I have already mentioned, and industrial cooperation. There are promising nuclear generation projects, including the use of nuclear technology in medicine and agriculture. They are being actively coordinated.

I have mentioned cooperation in the financial sector. The Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) and its colleagues in Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and other countries, in particular, Gulf states, are not just planning but are already implementing a number of joint co-investment projects in the Russian Federation on the conditions that can benefit both the RDIF and our Arab friends. In other words, the outlook is quite positive.

Question (retranslated from Arabic): What do you think about the idea of an international body to monitor ceasefire in Gaza? Is Russia mediating between Iraq and Kuwait in the Khor Abdullah dispute? Are there plans to cancel entry visas for Kuwaiti citizens, as you have done for Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries?

Sergey Lavrov: I spoke about visas in my reply to your Bahraini colleague. We are interested in simplifying the visa regime as much as possible. We will check if there were visa waiver proposals from our Kuwaiti friends. I do not foresee any major problems if there is an interest in this.

Relations between Iraq and Kuwait are gradually normalising. It was not a quick process. There remain some problems, which have recently been discussed at a meeting of the UN Security Council, following which a mutually acceptable solution was reached and adopted.

I believe that the UN Security Council will continue to work towards a full and final normalisation of Iraq-Kuwait relations, with our active contribution. Both countries are our good friends.

As for Gaza, Donald Trump’s plan, as everyone calls it, stipulates not only the release of hostages, the withdrawal of Israeli forces to an agreed upon line, and the solution of humanitarian problems, but also the establishment of a governing body for Gaza’s redevelopment. So, there is a great deal to be done there. We see the footage of ruined streets and squares every day. In fact, the entire living space has been destroyed there.

How will this international body be developed? As I see it, the “Board of Peace” presided by the US President will act as the supervisory board of trustees. The situation on the ground will be monitored by a body of technocrats who will coordinate the financial flow, which is a matter of major importance. The Americans have already stated that Arab countries will have to bear the brunt of Gaza’s redevelopment. Everyone will do their bit, as in the division of labour.

The most important thing is to prevent a revision of the fragile formulas in Trump’s peace plan, considering the attempts that have already been made by many sides. Some people in Israel claim that these arrangements do not prohibit Israel from resuming hostilities at any time. Many statements have been made to this effect. Hamas believes that Israel is trying to retroactively adjust or specify some provisions. It has expressed its protest, saying that they have accepted Trump's plan  in its current version.

We expect to see a lot of such manoeuvres around that document. It is important to prevent the revival of grievances and a new aggravation, instead focusing on the literal implementation of the agreements on the withdrawal of forces and the release of hostages, including Palestinians. We will do everything in our power to facilitate this.

Question (retranslated from Arabic): Yesterday, President of Egypt Abdel Fattah el-Sisi spoke of the necessity for United Nations patronage over the forthcoming implementation of US President Donald Trump’s plan. How can progress be advanced in this regard, particularly within the UN Security Council, especially given that President Trump has thus far not succeeded in resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict? How do you assess Russia-Egypt cooperation on regional issues? What role does Egypt play in these matters?

Sergey Lavrov: Egypt’s role is clear. It is one of the most active mediators in a number of conflicts. The country’s leadership has demonstrated initiative across numerous fronts, and this remains evident today. In fact, as we speak, in Sharm El Sheikh, President of the Arab Republic of Egypt Abdel Fattah el-Sisi will co-chair, alongside US President Donald Trump, an event supported by Jordan, Qatar, and Türkiye upon which we all place considerable hopes.

Our relations with the Arab Republic of Egypt are exemplary, including in the economic sphere. We are building Egypt’s first nuclear power plant. In the economic sphere, logistics and infrastructure, a Russian industrial zone is being established near the Suez Canal – a flagship project aimed at creating a commercial hub with numerous neighbouring and even non-adjacent states.

Ours is a rich history dating back to Soviet times. Many of Egypt’s key industrial facilities were built with our country’s assistance, not to mention our collaboration in education and culture. I recently mentioned the participation of an Egyptian performer in the Intervision Song Contest, which concluded just recently.

The Russian-Egyptian Intergovernmental Commission on Trade, Economic, Scientific, and Technical Cooperation remains active, convening regularly to explore new avenues for cooperation. It monitors areas where the implementation of agreements requires additional impetus.

In foreign policy, Egypt is one of our key partners in North Africa. We maintain good and amicable relations with all in the region – Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco. I hope Libya, too, will achieve the national consensus it so manifestly requires.

Question (retranslated from Arabic):  Many African nations, particularly in the Sahel region, fear the presence of the Africa Corps, which they believe could influence both their international and domestic affairs. Do you think the Africa Corps might commit crimes against civilian population, as allegedly occurred in Mali?

Sergey Lavrov: You have meticulously recited everything written for you – dutifully delivering each prepared point. The Africa Corps is a unit of the Russian Federation’s Ministry of Defence. Our military do not engage in actions against civilian population or civilian infrastructure, this is well known. Should your editorial team, or those who prompted this question, possess any evidence to the contrary, let it be presented. The crux lies in today’s unfounded attempts to accuse Russia of anything and everything, up to and including mortal sins.

You mentioned the Africa Corps’ presence in certain countries neighbouring Algeria, where concerns are supposedly arising. If you refer to Mali, our Africa Corps operates there at the request and invitation of the country’s lawful authorities. We are aware of the rifts between our friends in Algeria and Mali – frictions rooted (let us call things by their proper names) in the colonial past, when colonisers carved up Africa with a ruler, slicing through ethnic homelands. This occurred across central Africa – Rwanda and Burundi, Hutus and Tutsis. In the case of Algeria and Mali, it was the Tuaregs. This legacy periodically resurfaces in the form of conflicts. I would not rule out that those who drew these borders may, at times, seek to provoke tensions deliberately.

Examine the map of Africa. Its borders are often artificial. Following decolonisation, the African Union once considered revising territorial demarcations to avoid dividing ethnic and confessional groups. Ultimately, they chose not to, recognising that it would open Pandora’s box. The conflicts sporadically flaring up today would then have engulfed the entire continent. That was a wise decision by the African Union.

Regarding the issue you raised – tensions between Mali and Algeria – we remain in contact with both our Algerian and Malian friends. The two sides have expressed interest in our assistance to mitigate disagreements. We stand ready to facilitate.

Question (retranslated from Arabic): To what extent is the US genuinely pursuing a peaceful settlement in the Middle East? We are aware of [the West’s] commitment to a unipolar world, a system Russia is actively challenging. How is Russia preparing for a transition to a multipolar world within the Middle East? Furthermore, how would you respond to Israel’s violations of UN Security Council resolutions in Lebanon, including the deployment of its forces there? This is something we hear about daily in Lebanon. You have characterised the events of October 7, 2023, as a terrorist attack. However, given that Israel has been carrying out killings for two years now, would you not define that as terrorism as well? While I personally do not believe October 7 was a terrorist attack, I would like to discuss Israel’s position.

Sergey Lavrov: You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. However, the murder of more than a thousand unarmed civilians, who were gathered simply to sing songs, is unequivocally terrorism.

If you were following closely, you will have heard me state that Israel’s response, which has spiralled into a form of collective punishment against the entire Palestinian people, is also a clear violation of international humanitarian law.

I didn’t quite follow your question about America’s “plans” for the Middle East. These plans are already being implemented, and we wish them every success in this endeavour. This is, of course, with the understanding that the plan will be fully implemented – that the goalposts will not be moved midway through, nor the rules of the game changed. We are already noting certain players who wish to do just that. Once the plan is fully and conscientiously implemented, we must immediately turn to the practical work of establishing a Palestinian state. This means seeking concrete compromises based on the frameworks approved by the UN Security Council.

Regarding a multipolar world, this is not a matter of Russia or any other country “establishing” it in the Middle East or elsewhere. It is an objective historical process. Over the past 40 years, the Gulf countries have dramatically increased their economic, financial, and political influence, thereby gaining the ability to shape regional and global processes. They represent one of the naturally formed “poles” in this emerging multipolar world, and their role continues to develop.

The same is true for the African Union and sub-regional organisations in Africa, which are now highly active and vigorously expanding their capabilities. Other natural poles are emerging in Latin America and across Eurasia.

Our concept for a Eurasian security architecture envisions the inclusion of all countries and organisations on the continent – the largest and richest in the world, home to several of humanity’s greatest civilisations, whose histories span millennia. This includes structures like the GCC, ASEAN, and other frameworks linked to Eurasia. I am confident there will be a place for cooperation with the Arab League, despite most of its member states being geographically located in Africa.

A multipolar world is an objective reality. The sooner our Western colleagues recognise this, and understand that the era of 500 years of global dominance – of declaring wars, enslaving, exploiting, and destroying other peoples – is over, the sooner they can take their place as equals in this new global configuration, not as a dominant power.

On Lebanon, it is, of course, imperative to implement all relevant UN Security Council resolutions. We are closely monitoring the situation there. Let me be clear: Resolution 1701 has lost none of its relevance. It explicitly calls for a cessation of all military operations, the withdrawal of Israeli forces from southern Lebanon, and the simultaneous withdrawal of Hezbollah forces north of the Litani River. The resolution also prohibits violations of Lebanese airspace and other breaches of its territorial integrity, which are unacceptable.

Very few of these mandated actions mentioned in Resolution 1701 have been implemented. Yet, this is no reason to give up. We must redouble our efforts to support our Lebanese partners. Lebanon, once dubbed the “Middle Eastern Riviera” or the “Geneva” of the region, has become one of its most long-suffering areas, perpetually gripped by crises. We are committed to helping resolve this situation and restore a sense of normalcy to the country.

read more in our Telegram-channel https://t.me/The_International_Affairs