The recent history of NATO enlargement has proved that it has not contributed to peace and security in Europe, but on the contrary has created new dividing lines on the continent, fostering instincts of «frontline states» and artificially dividing European countries into different groups of «privileged» and «non-privileged» states in terms of security. This NATO-centered model is outdated and inefficient in addressing real threats. It does not serve the interests of establishing cooperative security in Europe. We should not rely on the instruments we inherited from the past, but to look for ways to protect the security of all, create common European security space conducive to the principle of indivisibility of security based on the understanding that no one strengthens his security at the expense of others.

It is obvious that membership in NATO creates limits for a sovereign decision-making in the area of security. In real terms it means that Member States are expected to follow anti-Russian policies and military planning which are becoming the leading trends in NATO. It would be hard to believe that this will not affect Russian-Montenegrian relations.
25 June 2015
First of all, Russia is a responsible member of NPT regime. This became once again apparent at the 2015 NPT Review Conference as participating States were very close to adopting the Final Document – to a great extent due to Russian efforts and proposals. Our constructive approach was acknowledged by many participants. So, we take it very seriously when it comes to any aspect of the NPT, including carefully calibrating the corresponding rhetoric.
It is no secret that Russia is in the middle of modernization cycle of its nuclear arsenal which has to do mostly with a need to replace retiring systems. These efforts are in strict adherence to our bilateral Treaty with the US (the New START), and this obvious fact is not contested by the American side. That’s why it appears rather strange to us to see emotional reaction from NATO officials with regard to statistical data on this modernization process, including those recently presented by the Russian President Vladimir Putin.
23 June 2015
We have held a new round of the Normandy format talks between the foreign ministers of Russia, Germany, France and Ukraine. We discussed the implementation of the Minsk Agreements. Also, the Russian President had a telephone conversation with the French President and the German Chancellor yesterday, during which they talked about the key aspects of our work at this point. As you probably know, meetings of the majority of Trilateral Contact Group’s working subgroups were held in Minsk today.
The most important thing we noted was that the Package of Measures approved in Minsk on February 12 remains valid as a package, and that we need to implement all of its provisions, though not necessarily based onthe implementation of each other, but working towards progress on each of the provisions of the Package of Measures.
Second and very important as well, we spent a long time discussing an issue on which our leaders also focus, specifically, the development of direct dialogue between Kiev, Lugansk and Donetsk on the implementation of all the provisions of the Minsk Agreements without exception. This concerns the military-political sphere, security, the economy and humanitarian issues, and, last but not the least, political reforms.
19 June 2015
Question: Moscow’s reaction to the seizure of Russian property abroad in connection with the Yukos case is expected to be very tough. How will Russia respond to this?
Sergey Lavrov: The response will be reciprocal. This is inevitable. It is the only way of acting in the international arena. Reciprocity may be positive or negative, as in this case. Now we are working to reverse the seizure of the accounts of our diplomatic agencies in the first place. In France they also started by seizing accounts of the Embassy, our UNESCO office and the trade mission, but then backtracked and retained control only of the accounts of our companies with state participation. Belgium took the same inappropriate actions, announcing their decision to close the accounts of our diplomatic agencies—the Embassy, and the offices at the EU and NATO. This completely contradicts the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations that provides for the immunity of all diplomatic property – real estate and everything linked with it. Representatives of the Belgian Foreign Ministry are sending us signals that they were not in the know and that they have an independent judiciary. These explanations are unacceptable because in accordance with international law the immunity of diplomatic property is guaranteed by the state, which in this case is acting through its Foreign Ministry in relations with foreign partners.
18 June 2015
On June 5, the US Department of State published its 2015 Report on Adherence to and Compliance with Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments. Apart from the information on the United States’ adherence to its obligations, the report provides assessments of adherence to international agreements by other countries. This includes a number of complaints about the Russian Federation over the alleged violations of its obligations under several international agreements.
We note that the United States continues to act as the supreme certifier who has assumed the right to give other countries marks for their compliance with their commitments under arms control, non-proliferation and disarmament agreements.
It is obvious that such documents are primarily designed to service Washington’s political interests and are therefore openly subjective, prejudiced and biased. These documents are noted for numerous speculations, exaggerations, forced arguments, false messages and distortions. Considering this, the 2015 report, just as all the previous reports, can hardly be described as a serious document that reflects the real state of affairs in the sphere of non-proliferation and arms control.
Permanent Representative
Alexander V. GRUSHKO
Belgium, Brussels, 1180-Uccle,
Avenue de Fre, 66

32(0)2 372-0359

32(0)2 375-8547


In Focus