Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, and more are discussed.
Karl Sanchez
Oct 13, 2025
I’m convinced Lavrov would like to have held the Summit but Russia ceded to the desires of the Arab League to postpone so some of its members could attend what amounts to an Outlaw US Empire meeting being held in Egypt to validate the pause in the combined Genocide of American and Israeli Zionists—pause being Alister Crooke’s term for the meetings outcome as expressed in his chat today with Judge Nap. As I explained in the comments, I considered not posting this transcript for several reasons, one being the many other major events needing reportage, and the second being the very poor level of readership given to Lavrov’s and Putin’s pressers over the last several months and the paucity of discussion. However, given several key Q&As during the 75-minute presser that perhaps help to further explain Russian policy in West Asia and to the Palestinian issue, I’ve decided to do the work and provide the following translation:
]Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to media questions at a meeting with Arab media representatives, Moscow, October 13, 2025
Good afternoon, dear colleagues,
It is a pleasure to welcome you to the Foreign Ministry.
I know that the guests who came to cover the Russian-Arab summit have been here for quite a long time and had the opportunity to get acquainted with the sights not only of Moscow, but also of a number of other Russian territories.
The situation that led to today is well known to you. The summit has been prepared for a long time, but it has become clear that this week, including today, when the summit was supposed to begin, will be decisive in promoting the agreements on the Gaza Strip, agreements that were actively promoted by our Egyptian friends and Qatar. President Donald Trump has put forward his own plan, which we have repeatedly assessed as the best thing on the negotiating table today, although, of course, the Palestinian problems are not limited to this. Nevertheless, it is important to stop the bloodshed as soon as possible and resolve the gravest humanitarian problems of the population.
Now thousands of Gazans are returning home. I have no idea how they will live there, but, nevertheless, it is better to create their own housing than to be constantly under fire, to live daily under the threat of death of their children, relatives and friends.
We sincerely wish success to today’s event, the Sharm el-Sheikh Summit, which is attended by more than 20 countries of the Arab world and a number of Western states. I hope that all the agreements will be implemented, although we hear statements from Hamas and Tel Aviv that not everything is over yet and there may be a recurrence of the crisis. I think it is important that those who initiated this forum, primarily President Donald Trump with the support of the President of Egypt, the leadership of Qatar and Turkey, prevent such scenarios and focus on the need for an immediate ceasefire, respect for the line agreed upon for the withdrawal of Israeli troops in the Gaza Strip, the establishment of humanitarian aid and the restoration of this beautiful place on Earth, which probably suffered more than other territories in the world during the years of the post-war period.
Of course, a long-term settlement of this situation is possible only if the UN decisions on the creation of a Palestinian state are implemented. We have noted that Donald Trump’s peace plan refers only to the Gaza Strip. It mentions statehood, but in fairly general terms. It is imperative to specify these approaches, including determining what will happen in the West Bank of the Jordan River, because UN resolutions envisage the creation of a single, territorially integral Palestinian state within the 1967 borders.
For sure, there will be questions about how we see the development of this situation. I would like to say that we remain committed to implementing these decisions, as do the overwhelming majority of members of the international community. Taking into account the agreement to hold a special, important event on the Palestinian issue today, earlier this week, President Vladimir Putin agreed with Prime Minister of Iraq Mohammed Sudani, Chairman of the League of Arab States, to postpone our summit. I am sure that it will take place as soon as it is clear what dates are most convenient for this. The final documents are almost ready, so we will have the opportunity to meet again when you come again to the summit itself.
Our relations with our Arab friends are developing steadily. The League of Arab States has established itself and continues to strengthen its position as one of the pillars of the emerging multipolar world, authoritatively and actively participates in world affairs in the economy and in finance, and is increasingly contributing to the solution of regional and, more broadly, political problems. We have a steady increase in trade with the Arab League states. It has already exceeded $34 billion. Yes, this is not so much compared to the trade turnover with the countries of the Arab world that the United States and the People’s Republic of China have, but this figure is several times more than the volume of trade that existed 20 years ago. I can assure you that we are on the right track. The growth dynamics are good.
We have many projects related not only to energy and oil and gas processes. We cooperate within the framework of OPEC+, within the framework of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum, but not only. More and more countries in the region are interested in our experience in the field of nuclear technology, nuclear energy, and non-energy applications of nuclear energy. Such a flagship project is the construction of the first nuclear power plant in Egypt, El Dabaa. Our Arab partners are very interested in agriculture, the supply of our food and fertilisers.
Humanitarian cooperation. Traditionally, since Soviet times, we have established cooperation in the field of education with many countries of the Arab world. Thousands of students from the Arab League countries have received education in our country and continue to study on the basis of annual quotas from the Government of the Russian Federation. Tourism is growing, and in both directions. Our citizens are very happy to visit your countries’ beautiful resorts. More and more citizens of the Arab world are coming to the Russian Federation, which we are very happy about.
Major projects are being implemented in the field of culture aimed at popularizing the achievements of our countries in this area. The Russian Seasons, which are held in a number of countries, primarily in the Gulf countries, receive a good response, but this experience is also in demand in other areas.
We were pleased to see the participation of representatives of the Arab world in the Intervision International Song Contest. Performers from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt took part in this celebration of music, which took place on September 20 this year and received a good response. As you know, our Saudi friends have already invited this contest for next year. We will try to support this initiative in every possible way and ensure worthy Russian participation.
I conclude my opening remarks. Over the past 20-odd years, we have accumulated good experience. It allowed us to adopt all the best that we had in our relations from Soviet times. Let me remind you that the Soviet Union was the first state to recognize the independence of the current Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The experience of those historical contacts helps us to rely more confidently on the achievements we have already achieved in order to build long-term relations. Not everyone likes the partnership between Russia and the Arab countries. There are those who want to “play” colonial, neocolonial “games” again, “divide and rule”. We know perfectly well who we are talking about. These habits have not disappeared. Nevertheless, the fundamental trend is the development of mutually beneficial relations based on mutual respect, taking into account each other’s interests and building a strong balance of these interests.
Question: The most pressing event on today’s international information agenda is the Sharm el-Sheikh summit. You have already expressed scepticism about the success of this format in general terms. How do you assess the success of this ceasefire agreement? Can this turn into a full-fledged peace process between Israel and Palestine? Does Russia intend to attend or join this process?
An additional question – I have once again looked at the list of countries taking part in the peace summit in Sharm el-Sheikh. These are more than 20 countries at different levels, at the level of leaders, at the level of ministers and even at the level of embassies. Even the Japanese ambassador was invited to this summit. Why is Russia not taking part in this summit, although Russia has always played an important mediating role in this conflict within the Quartet and even in the current conflict in bilateral relations with Israel and Hamas, and has taken a positive part in the release of some hostages? Why is Russia not in Sharm el-Sheikh today?
Sergey Lavrov: I can only note that the invitations were sent by the hosts of the summit. This is the leadership of Egypt, which, as reported, coordinated its actions with other Arab initiators, but above all with the United States. By the way, Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Sudani has not been invited to the Sharm el-Sheikh summit either, although Iraq is currently chairing the League of Arab States.
The fact that the Japanese ambassador will participate there. I think US Vice President John Vance has already said that Gaza must be rebuilt. He stressed that the United States hopes that the Arab countries will bear the brunt of the burden. Japan is also periodically involved in the restoration of some territories that suffered as a result of hostilities. Probably, this also makes some sense.
Russia is ready to participate in any format. You mentioned the Quartet. It was destroyed by the efforts of the Biden administration, although it provided serious agreements, including the agreements of 2003, when the UN Security Council approved the Quartet’s roadmap, which spelled out all the steps necessary to create a Palestinian state.
Within one year, the “process” was to be completed. The Quartet introduced this resolution. The UN Security Council approved it unanimously. We know what happened next.
And several more times such initiatives met the same fate. Not to mention the Madrid Principles of 1991 and the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002, which were welcomed by everyone and led to nothing. As for the prospects for today’s event, all these efforts, which we actively welcome (President of Russia Vladimir Putin said this the other day at a news conference in Dushanbe), of course, skepticism, as you put it, remains. Too many times, those hopes for peace, for the prosperity of this part of the world, have not been realized. Moreover, as I have already mentioned in my opening remarks, we hear skeptical forecasts from different sides.
I have just read that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that not everything is over and that Israel still has many enemies and that they need to finish them all off. This can be called skepticism; it can be called a focus on continuing the offensive against those whom Israel considers enemies.
Hamas. There were also discussions on how these agreements will be implemented, who should take the first step. Thank God, the hostages have already been partially handed over. Now it is Israel’s turn. The IDF seems to have withdrawn to the line that was agreed.
We hope that everything we agreed on will be implemented. If the direct participants in this summit and those who will deal with this issue, the implementation of Donald Trump’s plan, after this summit, believe that Russia can be useful, I assure you that we will not refuse. ***But it is not in our tradition to impose your services either.***
We wish this summit success. First of all, so that the Palestinian people can breathe freely.
Question (retranslated from Arabic): How do you assess Russia’s role in putting an end to the bloodshed in Gaza? Especially given the fact that Russia confronted and condemned the terrible events that took place there, and tried to put an end to them. How did Russia influence Hamas?
Sergey Lavrov: We tried to influence everyone in the same direction. In the direction of renouncing violence, working out agreements on coexistence, and ending bloodshed. Compromises are inevitable in any conflict. Each side must make concessions.
The Arab countries (and this was manifested in the initiatives of Egypt, Qatar, Islamic countries, and Turkey following the Arab-Islamic summit) are ready to look for compromises. They proved it. I hope that the other side, our Israeli colleagues, with whom we are also in constant contact, will understand the need to find a balance of interests, rather than setting a goal that will mean eliminating any threats to one’s existence, regardless of what your neighbour’s think and what their arguments are.
A difficult situation. I have already mentioned that the root of the problem is the lack of progress in the creation of a Palestinian state. Even more than that, there is a growing regression in its creation.
I remember when I was working at the UN (this was 25 years ago), talking with my Israeli colleagues (absolutely informally, trying to understand how to find a way out of this situation). I have always told them in a friendly and human way that the most important risk to the region, including Israel’s security, and the security of other countries in the region, is the unresolved issue of implementing UN decisions on the creation of a Palestinian state for almost 80 years. At that time, my Israeli interlocutors said that this was an “exaggerated position”, an exaggeration. They say that if you think so, it will mean encouraging terrorists. But it is precisely the unresolved issue of a Palestinian state that is the most significant factor fueling the persistence and strengthening of extremism in the Arab world.
Do you remember when there was the outrageous terrorist attack on October 7, 2023 (which we immediately condemned), and several times after that, when Israel launched its operation, and under the slogan of destroying everyone, their defense minister, members of the cabinet from radical figures, in response to calls to do everything to spare civilians in Gaza, said, “There are no civilians there, all the extremists are there,” starting from the age of three. I remember it very well.
We have submitted a resolution to the UN Security Council five times. The United States (this was the case under President Joe Biden) vetoed these resolutions. But the “collective punishment” of the Palestinians continued. And if we talk about extremism, imagine that more than one generation in the Gaza Strip has been living under blockade, occupation, and the closure of normal channels of communication with the outside world. How do you think parents have been raising their children in Gaza all these decades? What did they tell them when the child asked his mother, they say, what happened here before, who is my grandfather, grandmother, how do you live, who is in charge here. And at school, of course, these children will also receive relevant knowledge. Does anyone want these children to grow up in a state of great happiness for the fate that has been prepared for them?
There is no escape from a Palestinian state. The issue must be resolved. How to do this is another question. But here we cannot do without mutual concessions. The Gaza Strip in Donald Trump’s plan is mentioned in the context of the formation of Palestinian statehood, while the West Bank is not mentioned at all. If you look at a map of the West Bank, there is almost nothing left outside the illegal settlements. I even heard that someone says that it is necessary to create 2-3 municipalities for Palestinians there. This is not a state. I do not think that the creation of municipalities or any quasi-state structures will be considered in the Arab world, and especially by the Palestinians, as a satisfactory outcome of this almost eighty-year-old drama. Compromises will have to be made here. I have no doubts.
The West dragged its feet on this issue, did not want to use its levers to accelerate the creation of a Palestinian state. Otherwise, the 25-year-old roadmap of the Quartet that I mentioned would have been implemented, and we would have already had a solution to the problem.
I have already mentioned that in June of this year, when there was another escalation in the Gaza Strip (a humanitarian catastrophe, without exaggeration), French President Emmanuel Macron, then British Prime Minister Christopher Starmer, and someone else in Belgium began to say, “That’s it, let’s go to the UN and recognise the Palestinian state at the General Assembly.” That was in June, and the General Assembly began three months later. But if you decide that you need to recognize the state, why wait three months? Or did you hope that by that time there would be nothing left to recognize? Here everyone must throw away double standards.
I read today a political scientist who says that the West does not need an independent Palestine, it needs a mandatory Palestine again. I would not like to believe this, but according to certain signs, a number of our Western colleagues, including the British, are moving in this direction.
I conclude the answer to this question (it was very important). The summit that begins today in Sharm el-Sheikh is already being convened on the basis of a compromise platform. The initiators have already proposed a compromise. What is needed now is not to tempt fate, but to clearly implement everything that has been proposed, which will make it possible to stop the bloodshed, resolve humanitarian problems and begin the reconstruction of Gaza. But in parallel, without delay, it is necessary to start working out the next plan: a plan for the creation of a Palestinian state.
Question (retranslated from Arabic): There have been several recognitions of the state of Palestine, and we hope that the Palestinian people will still be able to gain security and independence. There are also questions about Western Sahara. They relate in particular to Algeria. What is Russia’s position on this issue, especially in light of Rabat’s attempts to establish Morocco’s administrative authority there?
Sergey Lavrov: Our position is very simple. It is the same for all such cases. There are decisions of the UN, primarily its Security Council, on how to resolve the Western Saharan problem–-through the self-determination of the Western Saharan people. This problem is probably fifty years old.
I remember that former US Secretary of State James Baker was once appointed the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Western Sahara. I was working in New York at the time. He came, met with members of the Security Council, and held separate contacts with the permanent members. At that time, everyone reaffirmed the principle, enshrined in Security Council resolutions, of holding a referendum on the self-determination of the Western Saharan people. And no one even doubted that this should be done. They were mainly engaged in agreeing on criteria when the elders should ensure fair voting rules for different parts of Western Sahara. That is, the script for this vote was already being written very closely.
Then the situation changed. We know that Morocco does not renounce the principle of self-determination and believes that it should be realized in the form of autonomy. For us, such a solution will be acceptable that will suit all parties. This option was enshrined in the UN Security Council resolution.
By the way, the United States took a different path and recognized Western Sahara as part of Morocco during the first term of President Donald Trump’s administration. For them, the issue is closed. But it will be closed for us when not only one, but all parties involved really feel that the solution has been reached on the basis of a fair balance of interests. The UN Security Council resolution is the only thing that exists now. If a new resolution is drafted that will base the settlement on other principles, we will be ready to discuss such initiatives. On the understanding that they will be acceptable to all parties.
Question: Is there a prospect of exempting Bahraini citizens from the need to obtain visas to visit Russia? Especially considering that this year we are celebrating the 35th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the Russian Federation and the Kingdom of Bahrain.
Sergey Lavrov: This means that we and our Bahraini friends have been overlooked. My deputy, Sergei Vershinin, who is responsible for this area, is sitting here now. I will ask him to directly understand why our friends and I still have to obtain visas to visit each other.
We have excellent relations with Bahrain in all areas without exception. Bahrain is also a partner country of the SCO. The attractiveness of Bahrain for tourists is obvious, as well as the attractiveness of the Russian Federation for Bahraini citizens. I think that we will resolve this issue.
Question (retranslated from Arabic): How are trade and economic relations between Russia and Iraq developing? Today, there are certain mechanisms that Moscow and Baghdad have adopted to continue relations. How do you assess the development of the situation in Iraq, and what role does the North-South International Transport Corridor play in this now?
Sergey Lavrov: We have traditionally good relations. I believe that we played a constructive role after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair is now again mentioned in the context of the peace summit process that is beginning in Sharm el-Sheikh. They say that some kind of “technocratic” body will be created, as US President Donald Trump’s plan suggests, to manage the Gaza Strip for the period of its reconstruction. Tony Blair has been involved in Middle Eastern affairs for several years. It was he who immediately demanded the start of hostilities against Iraq and the overthrow of the government of Saddam Hussein under a pretext that, as it now turns out, was invented. And this he was forced to admit. At that time, I also worked in New York and I remember that it was a very tense situation and, in general, it was a tense time. After all the “experiments” that the interim administration of Paul Bremer carried out with Iraq, when all structures associated with the Baath Party (these were all the state-forming structures of Iraq) were banned, it is no secret that many officers of Saddam Hussein’s army formed the backbone of ISIS. Simply because they were “thrown out” on the street.
I believe that the government of Prime Minister Saad Sudani and his predecessors are effectively, competently, and without sudden movements, restoring national harmony. This is necessary for Iraq as well as for any other country in the region, be it Libya or Syria.
Our companies have been working in Iraq for a long time. First of all, I would like to mention PJSC Lukoil and a number of other oil companies that pay a significant share of taxes, ensuring the stability of the country’s economic development. Given that our companies are also working in Iraqi Kurdistan, they are helping to create the material basis for national accord.
We have the Russian-Iraqi Intergovernmental Commission on Trade, Economic, Scientific and Technical Cooperation. We regularly communicate at various levels. I mentioned the recent telephone conversation between Prime Minister of Iraq Sameh Sudani and President of Russia Vladimir Putin. My Iraqi colleague and I are in constant contact. We met a month ago in New York at the UN General Assembly session, and we had good talks there. Therefore, it seems to me that we can be quite satisfied with the way our relations are developing. We are ready to set new goals in the interests of our peoples.
Question (retranslated from Arabic): Two questions about Iran and Palestine. Is it true that Russia has made it difficult to implement the agreements on the Iranian peaceful atom? Has Russia supplied S-400 anti-aircraft missile systems to Iran?
No action had yet been taken against Israel, whose military actions had caused a large number of casualties during the Gaza conflict. What is your position on this issue?
Sergey Lavrov: In the first question, translation lagged behind. What does “Russia prevented the agreement on the peaceful atom” mean? Can you repeat it?
Question (retranslated from Arabic): Former Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said that in the past, Russia undermined attempts to revive the nuclear deal during the rule of President Hassan Rouhani. Is this really so? This is what Javad Zarif said. Has Russia supplied Iran with S-400 systems? And what about the deal with the Sukhoi Design Bureau aircraft? Have they arrived in 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 are engaged in the supply of the equipment that Iran needs. All this is done within the framework of international law.
As for Javad Zarif’s statements, we have been working with him for a long time on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) to resolve the situation around the Iranian nuclear programme. And it was he who made the final decision on the JCPOA directly with then US Secretary of State John Kerry. The rest of the negotiators did not participate in the final stage, but simply watched how the United States and Iran, represented by Javad Zarif, would come to an agreement.
Everyone is well aware that we have never deviated from our position in support of this nuclear deal, including UN Security Council Resolution 2231. I do not know what Javad Zarif meant, but the other day when the West staged an illegal and outrageous “spectacle” at the UN Security Council and then announced that the UN sanctions against Iran had been reinstated. The reason for the pretext used by the West was the “snapback” mechanism, which is unique for the decisions of the Security Council, because it essentially assumes that any country that wants to return some sanctions restrictions can single-handedly initiate this process, and no one will be able to interfere. It was this scheme that was eventually agreed. It was personally coordinated by Javad Zarif directly with John Kerry.
To be honest, we were surprised then. But if our Iranian partners themselves were ready to accept such a formulation, which was a pure “ambush” or “trap,” then, of course, we did not object. I understand why Javad Zarif supported such an “exotic” formula. Iran was not going to violate the JCPOA and was confident that no one would lead it astray. And it turned out that Iran did not violate, but at the same time the United States withdrew from the nuclear deal, and Europe did not fulfill its obligations. And then they began to say again, they say, let Iran make new concessions. If you mentioned Javad Zarif, I repeat that this is his “creation.”
About Palestine. We have just discussed this in some detail. The “legacy” that had accumulated in the region after the decisions to create Israel and a Palestinian state became more and more explosive. After the attacks of October 7, 2023, Israel reacted with, as I said, “collective punishment” of the Palestinians. This, like terrorism, is a gross violation of international humanitarian law. The hatred that is sown there on both sides, of course, is off the charts. Therefore, it is not necessary to talk about the fact that, say, Israel declares that “we will destroy Hamas and everything will be fine.”
There was logic in your question - everyone needs to put pressure on Israel and everything will also be fine. This will not work. No matter what anyone says, Hamas is part of Palestinian society, and all politicians in Israel, including not only moderates, but also radicals, are also part of Israeli society. And it is necessary to negotiate between the two, to look for a balance of interests. The great powers, of course, are called upon to use their influence on all parties to the conflict precisely in order to encourage them to search for a balance of interests. As President of Russia Vladimir Putin said the other day: “We see that US President Donald Trump is guided by this.”
Question (retranslated from Arabic): Syria is now experiencing violence and even genocide in its various parts, in particular on the Syrian coast. We saw it all. There are collective killings, kidnappings of children, women and similar horrible things. What is Russia doing to put an end to such practices and convince President of the transitional period of the Syrian Arab Republic Abdullah al-Shara’ to monitor this problem? How do you cooperate with Abdullah Sharaa now after he came to power?
Sergey Lavrov: As for Syria. In March of this year, there were alarming events. We provided our Khmeimim airbase for civilians and for some Syrian army soldiers to protect them from the violence that was provoked at that time.
How can this country be reassured? We have never pursued our special interests in Syria. When we were together with the Syrian people, we always advocated that Syria, as a multi-ethnic and multi-religious country, should rely on the promotion of national accord. This was the case during the years when Bashar al-Assad was president of the Syrian Arab Republic, when the United States was actually working to split Syria, when it did everything possible to fuel Kurdish separatism in the northeast of that country, creating problems for Syrian society, neighbouring Turkey, and other countries with a Kurdish minority. We have never done this. We have always advocated the immediate reunification of all Syrian territories.
Now, after the change of power in December 2024, we are also guided by these considerations. We are convinced of the need for all countries in the region, which is most important for global stability, to contribute to the full restoration of Syria’s territorial integrity, which is still being tested in the north and northeast, and recently in the south, when Israel began to put forward demands for the demilitarization of al-Suwayda and all territories south of Damascus. This directly affects the issue of Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. This is not a joke.
We support the actions of the new government aimed at calming the situation. In this vein, back in January of this year, an interdepartmental delegation traveled to Damascus in order to take stock of the relations that we have developed with the Syrian Arab Republic. This was followed by a telephone conversation between President of Russia Vladimir Putin and President of the transitional period of the Syrian Arab Republic Abdullah al-Shara’.
In April of this year, I met with Syrian Foreign Minister Ahmed Shibani in Antalya on the sidelines of the Antalya Political Science Forum. In July of this year, Foreign Minister of the Syrian Arab Republic Ahmed Shibani, together with the Minister of Defence and a number of other government officials, visited us, in the Russian Federation.
Recently, in September of this year, I met with A. Shibani in New York. We have a common understanding that the foundation of relations, which has been built over many years, remains relevant, with the understanding that we will have to make some adjustments to reflect the new state of affairs in Syria. These are, first of all, economic issues and issues related to our military and military-technical cooperation.
The Syrian side is interested in preserving our military bases in Tartus and Khmeimim. As President of Russia Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said, we rely on the interest of the host country, the Syrian Arab Republic. It is clear that in the new conditions, these bases can play a different role, and not just as military outposts. Given the need to establish humanitarian flows to Africa, it can be both a sea and air base, which serve as humanitarian “hubs” for sending humanitarian cargo there, including to the Sahara-Sahel zone and other countries in need.
I was talking about contacts. In the first half of September of this year, a new large delegation headed by Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak was in Damascus and held substantive talks. We are updating and adapting our legal framework and cooperation practices to the new conditions. We see mutual interest.
Question (retranslated from Arabic): What are the future problems associated with Bashar al-Assad? Now it is known that they allegedly tried to poison him in Moscow. Is there really such a problem and how is it solved?
Sergey Lavrov: Former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is here for humanitarian reasons. He and his family were threatened with physical destruction. We remember the fate of Muammar Gaddafi, which made then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton so happy, who watched his physical destruction live, clapping her hands.
For purely humanitarian reasons, we granted asylum to Bashar al-Assad and his family. He has no problems with living in our capital. There were no poisonings. If such rumors appear, then 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 the Arab states. Will the issue of partnership and investment between Russia and the Arab states be discussed? Which countries and in what areas?
We know that Africa enjoys special attention from Russia. What is Russia doing today to strengthen its positions in the North African states, including Tunisia?
Sergey Lavrov: We have a steady and progressive growth of economic ties with the Arab states (I have already mentioned this in my opening remarks). This applies to trade and investment cooperation.
As for trade, we cooperate in the global hydrocarbon markets within the framework of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum and within the OPEC+ format, where the monitoring committee operates on a permanent basis. It is co-chaired by Saudi Arabia and the Russian Federation.
Among other areas of trade exchanges, I would like to single out food supplies, including halal products, grain and other food products, fertilisers, in which our Arab friends are very interested, tourism (I have already spoken about this) and industrial cooperation. There are promising projects in the field of nuclear energy, including the use of nuclear technologies in medicine and agriculture. All this is being actively worked out.
He mentioned cooperation in the financial sector. The Russian Direct Investment Fund, together with its colleagues in Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and other countries, in particular, in the Gulf, is not only planning, but is already implementing a number of joint projects for co-investment in the Russian Federation on terms that bring good benefits to our fund and our Arab friends. So we have good prospects.
Question (retranslated from Arabic): What do you think about the creation of an international body to observe the ceasefire in the Gaza Strip? Is Russia playing a mediating role between Baghdad and Kuwait on the Khor Abdallah issue? Are there plans to introduce visa exemptions for Kuwaitis, as has been done for Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries?
Sergey Lavrov: I have already replied to your colleague from Bahrain about visas. We are interested in facilitating the visa regime as much as possible. If there have been no requests from our friends from Kuwait to introduce a visa-free regime, we will check. With such an interest, I do not see any great difficulties here.
Relations between Iraq and Kuwait are gradually normalizing. This process was not fast. Now there are certain difficulties that were recently considered in the UN Security Council, as a result of which a generally acceptable decision was reached and adopted.
I think that in the future, with our active participation, the UN Security Council will contribute to achieving the final and complete normalization of relations between Iraq and Kuwait. Both are our good friends.
As for the Gaza Strip. Donald Trump’s plan, as it is now called by everyone, in addition to releasing hostages, withdrawing Israeli forces to certain positions, and resolving humanitarian problems, also involves organising governance of the Gaza Strip for the period of reconstruction. The fact that there is a lot of work to be done, we see footage of completely destroyed streets and squares every day. All living space is destroyed.
How will this international body be structured? As far as I understand, the “peace council”, which will be chaired personally by the President of the United States, will be a supervisory board of trustees. A body consisting of technocrats will work directly on the ground, who will coordinate, not least of all, financial flows. The Americans have already said that the Arab countries will have to shoulder the brunt of rebuilding the Gaza Strip. All have their own function–-the division of labor.
The most important thing is that no one tries to revise the fragile wording contained in Donald Trump’s plan. And we are already hearing such attempts from different sides. There are figures in Israel who say that all these agreements do not prohibit Israel from resuming hostilities at any time. There have already been many such statements. Hamas believes that Israel is retroactively trying to clarify something, to concretize something and opposes it, stating that Hamas accepted D. Trump’s plan as it was presented.
There will be many more such “maneuvers” around this document. It is important not to stir up passions and not to provoke a new “escalation”, but to concentrate on the literal implementation of the agreements on the withdrawal and release, including of the Palestinians. We will do everything we can to facilitate this.
Question (retranslated from Arabic): Yesterday, President of Egypt Abdel Fattah el-Sisi said that it is necessary to have the UN’s “patronage” over the upcoming implementation of US President Donald Trump’s plan. How can we step up work in this area, in particular at the UN Security Council, especially given the fact that Donald Trump has failed to achieve success in resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict over the past period? What do you think about cooperation between Russia and Egypt on regional issues? What is Egypt’s role in these matters?
Sergey Lavrov: Egypt’s role is obvious. It is one of the most active mediators in a number of conflicts. The leadership of this country is taking the initiative in a number of areas. This is what is happening now. Just today in Sharm el-Sheikh, President of the Arab Republic of Egypt Abdel Fattah el-Sisi will co-chair an event in which we all have high hopes, together with US President Donald Trump, with the support of Jordan, Qatar and Turkey.
Our relations with the Arab Republic of Egypt are exemplary, including in the economy. We are building Egypt’s first nuclear power plant. In the field of economy, logistics and infrastructure, a Russian industrial zone is being created in the area of the Suez Canal. This is the largest project aimed at creating a hub for trade with many adjacent and even non-neighboring countries.
We have a rich history from Soviet times. Many key industrial facilities in Egypt were built with the assistance of our country. Education, culture. I mentioned the participation of an Egyptian singer in the Intervision Song Contest, which ended quite recently.
The Russian-Egyptian Intergovernmental Commission on Trade, Economic, Scientific and Technical Cooperation meets regularly and works out new areas of cooperation. It looks at where the processes of implementation of agreements require additional incentives.
In the field of foreign policy, Egypt is one of our key partners in North Africa. We have good and good relations with everyone in this region: with Tunisia, with Algeria and with Morocco. I hope that Libya will also achieve national accord, which is so lacking there.
Question (retranslated from Arabic): Many African countries, including in the Sahel region, are afraid that the African Corps is stationed there, which could influence both the international and internal affairs of these states. Do you think it is possible that the African Corps will commit crimes against civilians, as happened in Mali?
Sergey Lavrov: Everything was written to you carefully, and you conscientiously read out everything that was there. The Afrika Korps is a unit of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation. Our military does not commit any actions against the civilian population, against civilian objects. This is well known. If your editorial office or those who asked you to touch on this topic have facts, then they must be presented. It is all about attempts today to unfoundedly accuse Russia of anything, of the deadliest sins.
You said that the Afrika Korps is located in some countries neighbouring Algeria, and there seem to be some “questions” and concerns there. If you mean Mali, our African Corps is working there at the request and at the invitation of the legitimate authorities of that country. We are aware of the “friction” that exists between our friends in Algeria and Mali. These “tensions” are associated (let’s call a spade a spade) with the colonial past, when the colonizers simply divided Africa with a straight line, cutting through the places of residence of ethnic groups. This happened in the central part of the African continent: Rwanda-–Burundi, Tutsi–-Hutu. In the case of Algeria and Mali, this happened with the Tuaregs. This legacy is constantly “breaking through” in the form of certain conflicts. I do not rule out that those who drew the boundaries with the ruler sometimes try to provoke an aggravation.
Look at the map of Africa. There are many artificial boundaries there. The African Union, at one time after decolonization, considered the issue of making border demarcation more logical, so as not to cut ethnic and religious groups in half. Then it was decided not to do this, because it would open a “Pandora’s box”. The conflicts that now sometimes break out would then engulf the whole of Africa. That was a wise decision by the African Union.
On the problem that you have just mentioned (the problem of relations with Mali), we are in contact with our Algerian friends, as well as with our friends from Mali. Both of them are interested in our somehow helping to smooth out contradictions. We are ready for this.
Question (retranslated from Arabic): How seriously is America currently engaged in the issue of a peaceful settlement in the Middle East? As for the continuation of the unipolar world, we know that Russia is trying to change this. How are you preparing to move to a multipolar world in the Middle East? What could you say (we hear this every day in Lebanon) about Israel’s violations of UN Security Council decisions in Lebanon and the deployment of its forces there? You said that there was a terrorist attack on October 7, 2023. However, the fact that Israel has been committing murders for two years is not terrorism? Of course, I do not believe that there was a terrorist attack on October 7, 2023. We are now talking about the position of Israel.
Sergey Lavrov: You have the right to your own opinion. But the killing of more than a thousand unarmed civilians who “gathered to sing songs” is called nothing other than terrorism.
If you have listened to me carefully, I have said that Israel’s response, which has taken the form of “collective punishment” of the entire Palestinian people, is no less a violation of international humanitarian law.
As for your question. I do not quite understand what you asked about US plans in the Middle East. They are being implemented right now. We wish you success in this endeavor. With the understanding, of course, that the plan will be fully implemented, and in the middle of its implementation, the gates will not be “moved” again and the rules of the game will not be changed (we are already seeing such people). When it is fully and conscientiously implemented, it is necessary to immediately move on to the practical aspects of creating a Palestinian state and look for specific compromises based on the decisions approved by the UN Security Council.
As for the multipolar world. Not that we are “creating” it in the Middle East or that someone is trying to do so. This is an objective historical process. Over the past 40 years, the Gulf countries have sharply increased their weight (economic, financial, political) and immediately gained the ability to influence many processes. This is one of the naturally formed and continuing to develop poles of the multipolar world.
The same is true of the African Union and subregional structures in Africa, which in one way or another are now actively working and building up their potential. The same is true in Latin America and Eurasia.
Our concept of the Eurasian security architecture envisages the participation of all countries and all organisations of the Eurasian continent: the largest, richest continent of several great civilisations dating back many millennia. Among them are the GCC, ASEAN and many other structures that are in one way or another related to Eurasia. I am sure that for the Arab League, despite the fact that most of the number countries are in Africa, there will be a place for cooperation here.
A multipolar world is an objective reality. And the sooner our Western colleagues admit this and understand that it will no longer be possible, as in the previous 500 years, to lead the entire world, declare wars, enslave, exploit, destroy and massacre, the sooner they will realise the need to take their own, not dominant, but equal place in the new configuration of the world order.
Lebanon. Of course, it is necessary to comply with UN Security Council resolutions. We are closely following what is happening in Lebanon. Resolution 1701 is still relevant. Let me remind you that it involves the renunciation of any military operations, the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon with the simultaneous withdrawal of Hezbollah forces to the north of the Litani River. Violations of Lebanese airspace and other violations of its territorial integrity are prohibited by this resolution and are unacceptable.
Little of what I have enumerated and what is required by resolution 1701 has been implemented. But this does not mean that we should “give up”. We must try to help our Lebanese partner. One of the most long-suffering areas of the region, which has turned from the “Middle East Riviera” (Geneva, as it was called) into a country that is constantly engulfed in crises. We are ready to help ensure that this situation is overcome and the situation normalizes.
Why won’t pressure on the Zionists work? And what "moderates” exist in the Occupied Palestine government entity that oppose the Genocide—polling as shown close to 90% support at the initial start of the newest phase of the genocide which has operated off and on for almost 80 years. The current Zionist governments in Tel Aviv and Washington DC’s interests are to eliminate the Palestinians and colonize Lebanon along with Syria and much of Jordan—the Clean Break plan from 1996 along with Joint Vision 2010’s Full Spectrum Domination policy of the Outlaw US Empire it resides within. Yes, they say other things, but those other things have always been and remain lies. Why the continual Outlaw US Empire vetoes and obstruction of all efforts at solving the root of the problem for the last 50 years? Because the powers that run the Empire agree with the Zionist goal of genocide. That’s the only answer that fits the behavior we’ve witnessed.
Russian diplomacy can be faulted for being too correct if that is indeed a fault when it tries to get a balance of interests established and agreed to by parties in conflict so those conflicts can end. An example was Western Sahara. The JCPOA issue with Zarif and the snapback is IMO the first time that’s been said publicly by Russia—perhaps Russia grew tired of being accused of being the author of the snapback sanctions clause and decided to clear the air. But again, the interests of the two Zionist governments is to eliminate the current Iranian government—there can be no balance arrived at here since it’s 100% Zero-sum just as it is with Palestine. Now we’re in Syria and Lebanon where the same formula exists—submit/conform or die. Iraq isn’t out of danger from the Zionist plague, nor are the Saudis, Qataris or Emirates. The suggestion of an Arab collective security organization along NATO-lines was recently made to defend against Zionists and former European colonials.
IMO, some excellent and very pointed questions were asked that needed to be asked. IMO, having Trump as the head of anything means it will fail. And when it comes to reconstructing Gaza, it’s the Outlaw US Empire who provided the means for its destruction and by all rights ought to be the entity tasked with paying for its reconstruction, not any Arab state that had zero to do with the destruction. It’s very unfortunate that Russian’s Foreign Ministry has yet to modify its stance on what actually occurred on 7 October 2023 as much evidence exists that destroys the Zionist narrative and proves the Zionists killed over half of the victims in what was an allowed, previously known, event. And in like fashion, the evidence for Charlie Kirk’s public execution/assassination points to having Zionist roots.
Many have determined that the 21st Century’s Nazis are not just in Ukraine but are in West Asia, other nations, and are known as Zionists. They profess allegiance to their own similar Hitlerian Plan Ost when it comes to Palestinians/Arabs and Slavs. And within the Outlaw US Empire, those same Zionists crafted and publicly declared in Joint Vision 2010 in 1996 and in Joint Vision 2020 in 1999 their policy goal of Full Spectrum Domination of the planet and its peoples, and both those just happen to provide a harmoniously fit for the Zionist Clean Break plan published in 1996. All three plans sprang forth with the USSR’s demise and sudden appearance of what was called a Unipolar World and the triumphant declaration of the end of history. Fortunately for the world, the Outlaw US Empire was already in decline with its addiction to Neoliberal dogma assuring it would continue to decline to the point it has reached today. Yes, it has its own version of Nero or perhaps Caligula ruling, neither of which will stop the Empire’s decline and will only increase the threats to its own people it promised via MAGA to uplift.
https://karlof1.substack.com/p/no-russi ... vrov-holds
******
The Latest Estonian-Russian “Border Scare” Is An Example Of “Reflexive Control”
Andrew Korybko
Oct 14, 2025
Russia creatively employed “reflexive control” to troll Estonia by placing its officials in a zero-sum dilemma whereby whichever response they’d resort to would advance Russia’s soft power interests.
Estonia’s temporary closure of a road through the Russian-controlled “Saatse Boot” after around 10 Russian troops were spotted standing in the middle of it prompted another round of hysteria. Some connected it to last month’s alleged maritime airspace violation to speculate that “Russia has entered ‘Phase Zero’ — the informational and psychological condition setting phase — of its campaign to prepare for a possible NATO-Russia war in the future.” That’s arguably not the case as will now be explained.
The “Saatse Boot” is a legacy of the Soviet era from when Russia and Estonia were part of the USSR. Moscow never foresaw that this sliver of territory would one day connect two rural parts of a hostile military bloc, NATO, when delineating the border between these then-Soviet Republics. The road that passes through it, along which non-Russians (including tourists) are allowed to transit but not stop, was never significant to begin with and is even less so in recent years after an alternative was built.
This geopolitical-logistical oddity is therefore capable of easily attracting outsized attention, ergo the likely reason why Russia reportedly decided to order some troops to stand in the middle of it recently, not to saber-rattle against NATO but to troll Estonia. That country is one of the loudest anti-Russian voices in NATO and the EU, which are complementary US-controlled organizations at this point, and its regular harangues against Russia have fueled both blocs’ increasingly aggressive actions as of late.
Seeing as how neither of the aforesaid trends is expected to abate, thus leading to the prediction that NATO-Russian tensions will persist with varying degrees of seriousness (whether in general, as regards the Baltic region, or specifically centered on Estonia), Russia might have thought to make the best of it. Symbolically reaffirming its sovereignty over the “Saatse Boot” with “little green men” could have been meant to unsettle Estonians since it would remind them of the Crimean Operation with all that entailed.
For that to happen, local and international media would have to inadvertently play their part in sowing panic among the population, which contextualizes Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna’s tweet downplaying the situation. His response is still a soft power victory of sorts for Russia, however, since it represents a successful example of so-called “reflexive control” whereby Moscow was able to manipulate him into doing something that advances its own interests without him even realizing it.
To elaborate, he could either go along with the anticipated media hype at the cost of sowing panic or downplay the incident at the cost of people questioning his recent fearmongering about Russia’s alleged maritime airspace violation, thus placing him in a dilemma. He ultimately calculated that the latter was the least bad option, perhaps believing that the potentially resultant confusion and possibly associated demoralization would be more comparatively manageable than widespread panic, which makes sense.
In any case, no “border scare” objectively exists seeing as how the latest incident took place entirely within Russian territory and concerned only a handful of troops, which in no way suggests “preparations for a possible NATO-Russia war in the future” like some speculated. All that arguably happened was that Russia creatively employed “reflexive control” to troll Estonia by placing its officials in a zero-sum dilemma whereby whichever response they’d resort to would advance Russia’s soft power interests.
https://korybko.substack.com/p/the-late ... ian-border
******
Tightening immigration controls
October 14, 5:02 PM
Results of the adjustment of the Russian Federation migration control policy in 2025.
A general tightening of controls and the fight against corruption in the sphere of migrant legalization in the Russian Federation is noted.
As has been noted repeatedly, any tightening of controls is pointless if they are undermined by systemic corruption in regulatory and oversight bodies. And judging by the cases involving individuals who have managed to legalize thousands of migrants for money, circumventing current legislation, all the clamor for control is meaningless – it will all be profaned by petty corruption. Moreover, this isn't just about illegal migration, but also about the fact that enemy agents and terrorists can easily enter the country through such channels. And in a wartime environment, this isn't just corruption, but actual aiding the enemy.
Migration flows into the Russian Federation won't disappear on their own – the country is experiencing a severe labor shortage amid extremely low unemployment. Therefore, the question isn't whether migration will occur. Of course, it won't disappear. Objective economic factors contribute to it. But control over these flows could certainly be improved, and efforts must be made to attract qualified personnel to the country.
P.S. I believe the stated registry statistics are only part of the overall picture, which also includes those who are not listed in any registry.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/10128020.html
Google Translator
