Sergey Lavrov: “The global balance of power is undergoing transformative changes”

Photo: MFA

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks at the International Symposium Inventing the Future, Moscow, November 4, 2024.

Colleagues and friends,

It is a privilege to be part of this new initiative, which seeks to unite people, identify shared values, and develop recommendations that will enable humanity to live in accordance with the legacies bestowed by the ancestors of each nation and nationality.

In this context, the platform of the Russia National Centre, established under the auspices of President Vladimir Putin, aims to consolidate Russia's social, economic, scientific, technological, and cultural potential. This will facilitate its continued sustainable development and promote our experiences, traditions, and ideals in dialogue with the global community, which I trust will commence today.

We convened here on November 4, National Unity Day, a public holiday commemorating the valiant efforts of self-defence forces. Precisely 412 years ago, under the leadership of Kuzma Minin and Dmitry Pozharsky, they liberated Moscow from Polish invaders and their collaborators. This vibrant chapter of our history exemplifies the achievements that can be realised when people unite for a common cause.

One session of our symposium, as just announced by Dimitri Simes, is themed The Future of a Multipolar World. This topic aptly captures the essence of discussions taking place within academic, expert, and political circles both in Russia and internationally. It is difficult to imagine today that in the early 1990s, many believed the "end of history" had arrived and that unipolarity would prevail indefinitely – a global Pax Americana, where Washington's oversight extended to every corner of the world. During that era, the distinguished statesman Yevgeny Primakov articulated and championed the then-novel concept of multipolarity.

Initially, few foreign partners (and candidly, even within our own country) were prepared to embrace this vision seriously. Nonetheless, our Chinese counterparts resonated with Mr Primakov's ideas. In 1997, the Joint Declaration on a Multipolar World and the Formation of a New International Order was signed, marking the first foreign policy document on this topic in history. Today, we observe that the foresight of Yevgeny Primakov and his colleagues has been vindicated.

The global balance of power is undergoing transformative changes, driven by the objective trends in the world economy where the influence of the states of the Global South and the Global East, and indeed the World Majority, is growing. By the end of 2024, the BRICS nations' share of global GDP in terms of purchasing power parity is expected to approach 37 percent, confidently surpassing the share of the Group of Seven, which stood at 30 percent at the close of 2023.

The economic resurgence enables an increasing number of non-Western nations to consistently bolster their sovereignty and to pursue a nationally oriented agenda in both foreign and domestic policy. Much like Russia, these nations are increasingly advocating for the democratisation of international relations and a multipolar world, showing growing resilience against external interference.

This is also evident in practical policy, particularly in the rising interest in groups such as the SCO and BRICS. The Kazan summit, which was attended by delegations from 36 countries, left an indelible impression, with the association receiving over 30 applications for membership or special relations. It is fair to assert that the strengthening of BRICS has become a catalyst for the emergence of a polycentric world order, which has its passionate supporters as well as open foes and detractors.

We are aware that not everyone is prepared to accept the natural progression of events. The Western community, which once took the lead owing to well-known historical occurrences – such as the Great Discoveries, the development of capitalism, and the amassing of wealth largely through colonial empires – seeks to retain its privileged status indefinitely. The United States and its subordinate Western countries are reviving the spirit of the Cold War with their doctrinal documents proclaiming the need to eliminate so-called threats to their dominance posed by Russia, China, and other nations pursuing independent national policies.

Following the start of the special military operation in Ukraine, Washington and its allies, as part of the hybrid war they are waging, have launched an aggressive sanctions campaign against Russia. In the past decade, more than 21,000 sanctions have been imposed on our country across various domains, including economy, finance, trade, investment, media, culture, sport, and broadly, people-to-people contacts.

These neo-colonial practices of the West primarily impact the developing countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. The extraterritorial application of unilateral restrictions harms the poorest nations by depriving them of essential energy resources, food, fertiliser, and basic technologies, not to mention advanced scientific achievements and developments.

The adverse effect of this campaign against the undesired is that the West is undermining itself and dismantling the global division of labour system that it has propagated since the early 1990s. Western capitals have conveniently forgotten principles such as fair competition, the inviolability of property, the presumption of innocence, among others. The dollar, long touted as the global commons of humanity, has been weaponised to suppress and penalise geopolitical competitors and the non-compliant. Thus, effectively, it has been nullified as the world's reserve currency and means of international settlements. Consequently, the United States and its allies are dismantling the globalisation framework they once fostered and promoted globally.

I would like to recall President Vladimir Putin's words at the Kazan summit, where he emphasised that BRICS, in developing alternative payment platforms and new interbank settlement systems, is not opposing the dollar. The United States itself is driving the dollar out of circulation, as more countries become wary of being the next target. No one can predict the reasons for which they might be penalised, or the whims of a particular US agency head.

When economic pressure fails to sway truly sovereign nations, the West, led by the United States, resorts to threats, blackmail, and even the use of force.

The coercive practices are used in a variety of forms. In 2022, the goal of inflicting a “strategic defeat” on Russia was proclaimed. That takes us back to London and Washington hatching Operation Unthinkable back in May 1945 to destroy or dismember the Soviet Union, their ally in the battle against Nazism, even before World War II ended. Today, the Anglo-Saxons plan to defeat our country using the Kiev regime as a proxy, just as Hitler tried to do when he rallied most European countries under Nazi banners. As a backup plan in case the Zelensky regime fails to deliver, they are priming continental Europe for a suicidal mission which is a direct armed conflict with Russia.

It is sad to state that the ruling elites in many European countries evidently see no future for themselves in a multipolar world and are looking instead to the overseas hegemon to save them. The German government has disgracefully acquiesced to the humiliating destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines, despite the severe harm this caused to Germany’s economy and people. Now, Berlin has fallen in line with the United States announcing its decision to deploy US intermediate-range ground-based missiles on German territory. All Chancellor Olaf Scholz did was call it a “good” decision.

Reckless proposals are being put forth to use long-range Western systems to strike deep into Russia’s territory. I won’t discuss the futility of the very idea of “prevailing” over Russia. At the very least, doing so will sharply reduce the chances of any such participant to play any role whatsoever in a multipolar future.

The desperate situation facing Western elites can be seen in the increasingly irrational behaviour of the countries that are following the policies promoted by these elites. The West (the Anglo-Saxons in particular) is never satisfied with what they have. The war they started against Russia in Europe wasn’t enough. In July, at a summit in Washington, NATO leaders asserted the alliance’s claim to a dominant role not only in the Euro-Atlantic region, but in the Asia-Pacific as well. If you look at NATO’s declaration, it may appear that this (supposedly defensive) alliance now plans to conduct “defensive” operations in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait which lie thousands of miles away from its shores.

Any right-minded observer knows that this path will lead nowhere. However, the United States is purposefully taking NATO’s military infrastructure to the Pacific, openly aiming to ratchet up pressure on China, North Korea, and Russia. While doing so, they are undermining the ASEAN-centric architecture of regional security and cooperation in Southeast Asia, which has been built over decades on the basis of equality, mutual interests, and consensus. In place of open mechanisms built around ASEAN, the United States and its allies are creating minilateral alliances such as AUKUS, the Quad, and various trilateral and quadrilateral groups involving Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand. They are also trying to pull ASEAN members into these configurations in order to destabilise ASEAN and to take it out of the game as a competitor to pro-Western bloc alignments.

The obsession with controlling absolutely everything has led to a rash of tragedies in the Middle East, including the US invasion of Iraq under the false pretext of searching for nonexistent weapons of mass destruction and the destruction of Libya’s statehood, with tragic consequences not only for Libya, but for North Africa and the Sahel region as well.

This year, yet another independent UN member -Yemen - came under an Anglo-Saxon aggression. The Syrian Arab Republic is still reeling from the shock of American interference. The United States has effectively blocked all multilateral mechanisms aimed at promoting the Palestinian-Israeli settlement, especially the work of the Quartet, which included Russia, the United States, the UN, and the EU. Washington is now trying to monopolise mediation efforts, organising improvised negotiating formats and putting forth new proposals that are supposedly meant to end the bloodshed in Gaza and Lebanon. Notwithstanding these efforts, casualties are mounting at an alarming rate, affecting mostly civilians - women, children, and the elderly - while the West stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the facts.

In just one year that the Israeli operation has been in effect, the death toll among Palestinian and Lebanese civilians is double of the civilian casualties on both sides in Ukraine over the ten years that elapsed since the neo-Nazi coup. Almost twice as many casualties in just one year, compared to ten years.

When the Americans and their satellites engage in international and regional issues, their primary goal is to preserve their privileged position and to call all the shots. They pay little attention to the lives of ordinary people. However, the serious challenges facing the world call for a united effort based on equality, rather than submission to those who seek global dominance.

In addition to armed conflicts, this applies to ensuring legal democratic regulations governing the use of innovative technologies, including artificial intelligence; adapting to climate change; engaging in joint exploration of outer space; preventing infectious disease epidemics; overcoming socioeconomic and digital inequities; combatting hunger and poverty; and many other areas that are crucial for the future of humanity.

Our diplomatic contacts, including at the BRICS summit in Kazan, have led us to make an unequivocal conclusion: the Global Majority countries clearly see that confrontation and hegemony are harmful and do not solve anything. The Global South and the Global East are increasingly asserting their right to fully participate in decision-making processes across all aspects of international life.

With the non-Western countries ramping up their foreign policy activities, the role of regional and interregional interstate associations in Africa, Asia, and Latin America is growing. In Eurasia, these include the SCO, ASEAN, the EAEU, the CIS, the CSTO, the LAS, the GCC, and the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative.

In Africa, the African Union members are becoming increasingly determined to ensure that the continent’s rich resources enter global markets not as raw materials, but as goods with high added value. This move is designed to put an end to neo-colonial practices and will radically shift the economic balance with Western countries in favour of Africans. Similar processes are underway in Latin America and Asia, which has long acted as the driver of the global economy.

Establishing direct contacts and horizontal ties among all regional integration entities and with BRICS which already includes the key countries that are regional leaders, is a significant step towards multipolarity. BRICS could act as a harmonising entity and make it possible to softly coordinate the approaches of integration associations of the Global South and the Global East.

Another area of focus is the de-dollarisation of the international financial and economic system. I wish to remind you that the share of national currencies in Russia's transactions with the SCO and EAEU countries has surpassed 90 percent, and with the BRICS nations, we are approaching 65 percent. This figure continues to grow.

Russia will persist in playing its vital role in this process, given our status as the world's fourth-largest economy (according to the International Monetary Fund, in terms of purchasing power parity) and as the largest resource power. Efforts to establish new payment platforms were initiated within BRICS under Russia's chairmanship and will be continued by our Brazilian successors in 2025.

Certain experts predict not only a strengthening of the role of national and regional currencies in international trade but also the formation of several macro-regions with their own standards, regulations, and value chains, as the once-global system rapidly fragments due to the self-serving actions of the United States.

Confidence in the dollar is dwindling. Regardless of how events unfold, we will continue to bolster the mechanisms of the EAEU and the SCO and deepen ties with members of other integration structures both on the Eurasian continent and globally, paving new avenues for mutually beneficial, genuinely equitable cooperation. This approach yields dividends for all participants without exception.

In this regard, we will persist in promoting the concept of the Greater Eurasian Partnership. Its development will provide a tangible foundation for the realisation of another initiative by Russian President Vladimir Putin, aimed at constructing an architecture of equal and indivisible security in Eurasia. This architecture will be open to all countries and associations on our continent without exception which are ready to collaborate in finding universally acceptable solutions. The highly productive International Conference on Eurasian Security, recently held in Minsk with participation from numerous Eurasian countries, associations, and delegations from across the continent, including Western Europe, was specifically dedicated to this topic.

We aspire that the countries of the Eurasian continent – the largest, fastest-growing, and richest in natural resources – determine their own destinies without external interference and resolve their issues in such a manner that Greater Eurasia will contribute to the construction of a sustainable multipolar world.

I wish to emphasise that we are not isolating ourselves from dialogue with the West. Although we will draw the necessary conclusions from the manner in which our Western neighbours abruptly backed on their promises, commitments, and agreements with us, and the decorum they exhibited, undermining their credibility. Should they become ready to resume contacts and build relations based on the principles of mutual respect and a fair balance of interests, we will decide how to approach such proposals, guided by our national interests rather than the "wishes" that we occasionally hear from Western capitals.

In July of this year, under our presidency, the United Nations Security Council convened an open debate on the principles of coexistence among nations in a multipolar world. We proposed a series of concrete steps for discussion, aimed at restoring confidence and stabilising the international situation. We intend to continue this dialogue at other multilateral platforms, including this month at the G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro.

As of now, the conversation at the intergovernmental, official level has been sluggish. The West persists in seeking unilateral advantages, resorting to any means necessary, including, I regret to say, privatising the secretariats of international organisations. This is vividly evident in the operations of the OSCE and the United Nations Secretariat where outdated and inefficient criteria for the formation of the Secretariat result in Western representatives dominating all key departments of these esteemed bodies. It is deeply regrettable that the leaders of the OSCE and the UN Secretariat are beginning to play unsavourily to Western interests.

On my way here, I came across a RIA Novosti article regarding a statement made by the Spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General during a press briefing. When asked about the Secretary-General's view on reports of military plans by Russia and the DPRK, he expressed deep concern as these reports contribute to the internationalisation of the Ukrainian crisis. The Secretary-General, therefore, stands firmly in support of resolving the Ukrainian conflict in accordance with the UN Charter, international law, and General Assembly resolutions.

I have two comments in this regard. Firstly, the Secretary-General mentioned "internationalisation" nearly three years after the West had prepared Ukraine for war and was directing it on the ground.

The facts were presented numerous times in the past. Yet, at that time, the leadership of the UN Secretariat was not troubled by internationalisation.

Secondly, we all aspire to be guided by the UN Charter (as the Secretary-General advocates) and UNGA resolutions. Let me remind you that when the West, fully supported by the Secretariat of the World Organisation, demands the restoration of Ukraine to its 1991 borders, it cites the Charter's principle on respecting the territorial integrity of all states, along with a series of resolutions adopted by voting, with a division among UN members, at the General Assembly in support of Ukraine's calls to restore its territorial integrity. Everything seems to coincide. There is indeed such a provision in the Charter and the UNGA resolutions. A partial truth is worse than a lie. The Charter, before mentioning territorial integrity, acknowledges the right of nations to self-determination, which underpinned the greatest decolonisation process in recent history. It is the right of a nation to self-determination.

Among the resolutions of the UN General Assembly, long predating the events in Ukraine, in 1970, the detailed Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations was adopted by consensus. It states that everyone must respect the territorial integrity of countries that honour the right of a nation to self-determination and, as such, have governments representing the entire population living within the territory. This was a UNGA resolution. Unlike those provocatively introduced following the launch of the special military operation and voted upon (with roughly a third of UN members not supporting them, and in some cases half), the Declaration I refer to was adopted by consensus.

The putschists who, in violation of the agreements with the legitimate government, staged a coup in February 2014 and took over government institutions, proclaimed their first goal which was to eliminate the status of the Russian language in Ukraine. They also sent groups of thugs to Crimea on “friendship trains” to storm the Supreme Council building. Did these people represent the people of Crimea, Donbass, or Novorossiya? Of course, not.

The UN Secretary-General should instruct his official envoy to have the UN Secretariat provide a more coherent and accurate interpretation of international law.

The UN Charter should be read in its entirety, not just the parts that one finds convenient to highlight in order to suit a particular conflict.

In 2008, Western countries declared independence of Kosovo, and not a single Western nation had anything to say about it. The International Court of Justice stated in its findings (President Putin often mentions it) that if a portion of a state unilaterally decides to declare independence, approval from the central authorities is not necessary.

Even if we take this off the table, the first article of the UN Charter (you can’t miss it if you read the document for real) stipulates that the rights of all people must be respected regardless of race, gender, language, or religion. This, too, is part of the UN Charter, which Secretary-General Antonio Guterres encourages everyone to follow with regard to the Ukraine conflict. I have yet to hear a single comment from his official representative addressing the law-based annihilation of the Russian language in Ukraine in all spheres of life, including education, culture, media, and everyday life. Nor have I heard anyone say anything about the recently adopted law on dissolution of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church. According to the UN Charter, language and religion must be respected, and Secretary-General Guterres is the main advocate for enforcing the Charter.

People often ask: what will multipolarity rely on in terms of international legal foundation? There’s no need to look for new principles; they are all there in the UN Charter. The problem is that our Western partners have never fully respected these principles. As a reminder, a key principle of the Charter states that the UN is founded on the sovereign equality of states. Now, quickly recap the conflicts and crises that broke out since the UN had been founded. In none of these has the United States or its Western allies abided by the principle of sovereign equality or treated anyone as equal partner.

We consider it a major achievement that the Declaration unanimously adopted by the leaders at the BRICS summit in Kazan explicitly underscores the importance of respecting the goals and principles of the UN Charter in their entirety and interconnectedness, rather than selectively, which is unfortunately what we observe today.

In this day and age of rapid change, we are interested in having researchers, thinkers, futurists, and (in modern parlance) visionaries who are endowed with imagination and an ability for unconventional thinking look beyond the horizon and contribute to conceptualising current processes, forecasting, and modelling new forms of international life that align with new realities and, in my view, should be based on timeless principles of the UN Charter. These principles are not upheld not because they are flawed or unfair. In fact, they are fair, and this is precisely why the West is reluctant to follow them.

Justice is not an attribute of the world system that the West created and would like to perpetuate against an objective historical trend towards greater multipolarity.

In this kind of work, it’s essential to rely on facts and clear-eyed analysis, while also being bold and courageous in articulating ideas that could become the foundation for a vision of the future of choice. That’s what you are encouraged to discuss here today.

Russia stands ready to be part of a group of countries that will provide intellectual leadership. Our nation’s millennia-long track record in statecraft and achievements - soon to be vividly displayed at the National Centre “Russia” - should serve as a powerful incentive for the creative activity of our civil society. If someone comes forward with such an activity (they always do in critical times), rest assured that diplomats will be your most dependable allies.

Here’s what I would like to say in closing. Your gathering bears the name of a science fiction symposium. I have no doubt that its scientific side is guaranteed by the high quality and reputation of the attending experts from many countries. As for the “fiction” aspect of your agenda, the discussions will surely offer much food for thought for practicing politicians.

To contribute to the exploration of the “fiction” side of it, I dare to propose that you consider the idea of “when and if the West comes to its senses” and “when it might regain its conscience.” I believe this will make a compelling scenario. Perhaps, one day the West (after all, there are many intelligent people there) will realise that neo-colonial approaches cause nothing but harm, including to the West itself, and that arrogance kills its reputation. Let us think back to what EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell had to say: Europe is a “garden,” and everything around it is a “jungle.” Or, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, “If you’re not at the table in the international system, you’re going to be on the menu.” It’s a quote. I was shocked when I read this.

I also encourage you to imagine what the Global Majority countries should do to expedite the process of awakening our Western colleagues, who, in the best interests of their own people, must come to understand that it’s critically important to behave.

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