From Ukraine to Karabakh: Russia Not Allowing West to Balkanize Post-Soviet Space

Speaking at the UN General Assembly on Saturday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov warned against sliding into a large-scale conflict and destroying international cooperation mechanisms.

Ukraine became the first issue addressed by the Russian foreign minister at a press briefing which followed his UNGA speech. He was asked whether Russia is eager to join Ukraine at the negotiating table and whether Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is ready to revoke his decree banning talks with Russia.

Lavrov made it clear that Zelensky has not yet canceled his decree: "What we are guided by is the bare truth: the President of Ukraine and everyone who governs him in Washington, London, and Brussels firmly say that there is no other basis for peace other than the 'Zelensky format.' This 'format' can be described in different ways, but it is unfeasible. Everyone is aware of this. But at the same time, they say that this is the only basis for negotiations, and in general Russia must be vanquished 'on the battlefield'."

What's in the Ukraine Declaration of Sovereignty?

One of Zelensky's demands is the return to the borders of 1991. At the same time, the Ukrainian president snubs the idea of Ukraine's neutrality and non-aligned status, pushing ahead with the project of its NATO membership.

However, the truth of the matter is that decades ago Ukraine's independence was agreed upon, Moscow and Kiev within the framework of Kiev's Declaration of Sovereignty of July 16, 1990, specified that Ukraine had the "intention of becoming a permanently neutral state that does not participate in military blocs and adheres to three nuclear free principles: to accept, to produce and to purchase no nuclear weapons" (Art IX).

According to Lavrov, Ukraine's sovereignty was later "destroyed by those who carried out and supported the [February 2014] coup, whose leaders declared war against their own people and began to bomb their own people." Moreover, the West took years-long efforts to transform Ukraine into "anti-Russia," the minister underscored. Eventually the rights of Russian speakers in Ukraine were abused in sheer violation of both Ukraine's Declaration of Sovereignty and founding principles of the UN.

There is also a legal issue pertaining to the topic of Ukraine's borders, according to Vladimir Olenchenko, a senior research fellow at the Center for European Studies, Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

"As we know, in 1991 the Belavezha Agreement was signed, and it, in fact, served as the basis for, say, Ukraine establishing its borders," Olenchenko told Sputnik. "In addition, the fact is that before the signing of the Belavezha Agreement in Ukraine, a decision was made on the state independence of Ukraine. But this does not mean that these are internationally recognized borders. That is, these are the borders declared by Ukraine. Therefore, raising the question that returning to the borders of 1991 as internationally recognized is not a justified demand. If one were to take the position of Ukraine, then one would say that we should return to the state of affairs, say, in 1991, and clarify what territories Ukraine could lay claim to - if we were to be consistent in the legal implementation of this issue."

Earlier, some Russian lawyers subjected the legal procedure of the Belavezha Agreement to criticism, saying that in some respects it contradicted then-existing state laws.

When it comes to the much discussed status of the Crimean peninsula, Russian lawmakers have recently revealed an apparent fraud in the transfer of Crimea to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (SSR) in 1954 under Nikita Khrushchev. When issuing a decree on the transfer of Crimea from the Soviet Russian Republic to the Ukrainian SSR, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR referred to a non-existent document, head of the Legislation Committee of the Crimean Parliament Sergey Trofimov told Sputnik earlier this week.

Touching upon the issue of negotiations with Ukraine, Lavrov made it clear that Russia is open to talks but will not consider any proposals for a ceasefire, since Moscow has already been deceived once.

Black Sea Grain Deal Played Into Hands of Foreign Corps

Apart from possible peace talks, the question of West's continuous criticism of Russia's decision to withdraw from the Black Sea Grain Deal was once again raised during Lavrov's press conference. Western countries claim that Russia is undermining food security in the Global South.

The Russian foreign minister explained that the deal consisted of two parts: while the Ukrainian part of the agreement was implemented in full, the West has not implemented Russia's part which contained the delivery of Russian agricultural products and fertilizers to the world market.

Moreover, while the Ukrainian part of the initiative was still functioning, "those Black Sea corridors that our naval officials opened for the safe passage of vessels carrying grain were used several times to launch USVs to attack Russian ships," Lavrov underscored.

Meanwhile, Ukraine's grain has become an apple of discord in Europe, with Slovakia, Poland and Hungary banning Kiev's foods to shield their domestic producers. Lavrov called on the European Commission (EC) to buy Ukrainian grain, which the EU states are refusing, and redirect it to African countries in need if Brussels is indeed concerned with the Global South problems. While the grain deal was still in place, only 3% of the commodity went to the Global South, while the lion's share was taken by EU countries.

At the core of both the EU's criticism of Russia and the bloc's failure to ensure the delivery of foods to poor countries are vested interests of multinational companies, according to Olenchenko.

"The world grain market estimates Ukraine's potential to be about 5%. Can 5% meet the needs of African countries? Well, probably, even without being an expert, you can say that this is unrealistic," said the expert. "The Russian market and the Russian contribution to the world market is more than 20%. And here a contradiction is immediately visible in that the EU seeks to give preference to Ukrainian grain and blocks the delivery of grain from Russia."

"Why is preference given to, say, Ukrainian grain? Ukrainian grain, in the language of the stock exchange, is a nominal name, but in fact it is grain from American companies, three companies: Cargill, Monsanto and Dupont. They own massive areas and own the crops. Therefore, the EU – to call a spade a spade – calls for giving preference to the export of grain belonging to American companies from Ukraine and deciding only then where it will go," the expert pointed out.

West Cannot Isolate Russia in Global Affairs

Despite the contradictions simmering between Russia and the collective West there are plenty of issues which could not be solved without Russia, per Olenchenko.

In particular, Russia and Western countries' interests in nuclear non-proliferation and climate change problems still overlap, according to the academic. Still, he bemoaned the fact that while Russia is following the rules and trying to implement the provisions of the international agenda, the US and its allies on multiple occasions refused to walk the talk when it contradicted their interests.

When it comes to solving local conflicts in post-Soviet space or in Eurasia, Russia has repeatedly proven itself to be a powerful peace broker. Most recently, Moscow halted hostilities between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh, despite Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan earlier claims that Russia cannot maintain order in the region and his requests to Western countries to step in. However, when the conflict began neither the US nor the EU managed to interfere and stop the havoc.

"Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan and President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, under the auspices of the European Union, signed a document that recognised each other’s territorial integrity within the 1991 borders. This means Nagorno-Karabakh is part of Azerbaijan, plain and simple," Lavrov told the press conference.

According to the expert, now Pashinyan is trying to pin the blame on Russia for his own inability to protect ethnic Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh. The goal of Pashinyan's pro-Western government is to try to squeeze Russia from South Caucasus and force it to leave its Gyumri military base in the region, per the expert. As some Sputnik's interlocutors suggested, by trying to alienate Russia the incumbent Armenian government is risking becoming yet another Western bulwark on Russia's borders and to cede its sovereignty to the West.

"We are strongly convinced that the Armenian people remember our common history and connect their history with Russia and other friendly countries – first and foremost, the countries in this region rather than those overseas," Lavrov underscored during the presser.