Lavrov was driven to sin: Foreign Minister “leaked” confidential correspondence

“Equivalent to posting dispatches to a mistress in the presence of a living wife”

They brought our Sergey Viktorovich Lavrov, they brought him completely! The foreign minister released his confidential correspondence with the foreign ministers of Germany and France regarding the crisis in Donbass. From the point of view of diplomatic etiquette, this is tantamount to publishing your correspondence with your mistress in the presence of a living wife. Gentlemen don't usually do that? Not that word. However, in that segment of world diplomacy, which is associated with Russia, gentlemency is a highly scarce commodity lately.

Photo: Natalia Governor's

In the correspondence with his mistress, one can hope to find some piquant or even obscene details. Everything in the correspondence between the heads of the three foreign affairs agencies is boring and even boring. Although no, the correct word is “depressing.”

The ministerial dispatches and counter-dispatches confirm what we all already know: the resolution of the crisis in Donbass is far more than ever before.

They also confirm something even more alarming: France and Germany have de facto taken on the role of voluntary helpers of Ukraine in pushing the situation towards rewriting the Minsk agreements. Lavrov writes about this in plain text: “It seems that this is again an attempt to create conditions for a radical revision of the Package of Measures to please Kiev, which officially and publicly refuses to implement it.”

the frankly irritated tone of the Russian minister: “I will not hide: your answer disappointed. What is worth the phrase that our proposals contain provisions that “certainly will not be adopted” in the “Normandy format”.

I’ll borrow from Sergei Viktorovich his verbal turnover quoted above … It seems that our foreign minister can hardly refrain from inserting his trademark and immortal “morons” into correspondence with honorable and respected colleagues (plus one more short, but capacious word). Of course, it is quite possible that I ascribe to the most diplomatic Sergei Viktorovich something that he did not even have in mind. But I have an excuse: I would definitely not have resisted in his place.

The most humorous moment from the correspondence of ministers. On October 30, during a meeting, as diplomats now say, “on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Paris, the head of the French foreign ministry invites Lavrov to hold a meeting in the Normandy format in Paris on November 11. Our minister replies that he does not yet see a subject for conversation, and at the same time adds: “In any case, for November 11, I have already agreed on a dense program in Moscow, including negotiations with the head of the foreign policy department of one of the friendly countries.” p>

But the Frenchman, for some reason, pretends that he does not understand English (as I suspect, this is the language the ministers are using now): “The public statements that followed this conversation of ours in Rome that France proposed November 11 for the ministerial meeting and is Moscow's reactions look, to put it mildly, not entirely correct. ”

Why would Paris suddenly need such a wiring at the fifth grade high school level? Again, I can only share my suspicions. Trying, as Lavrov wrote, “to substitute protocol events for the sake of the events themselves,” the tripartite alliance of Kiev, Paris and Berlin purposefully exposes Russian negotiators to psychological pressure, hoping to tire them out and provoke them either to ill-considered and drastic steps, or to a gradual departure from their positions and concessions.

France and Germany have come to terms with the fact that the Ukrainian authorities either cannot or do not want to fulfill the Minsk agreements (most likely, it is about both at the same time). Therefore, now Paris and Berlin are guided by the logic: “If the mountain does not go to Mohammed, then Mohammed goes to the mountain.”

However, Moscow refuses the “travel with an erotic bias” offered to it. She responds to the not very diplomatic behavior on the part of Paris with her own not very diplomatic behavior in the form of publishing confidential correspondence between ministers.

The circle is complete. All the “high negotiating parties” sent each other to hell. What will follow after this? It is known that – leaving for a new circle. I will give an example not from the correspondence of ministers, but from the situation “on the ground.” Defiantly violating all possible agreements, Ukraine proudly reports on the combat use of a Turkish drone. Soon thereafter, by undoubtedly completely coincidental coincidence, Kiev and American officials begin with hysterical notes in their voices about “suspicious maneuvers” of Russian troops near the Ukrainian border. And of course, “all coincidences are accidental.” There is no need to look for a cause-and-effect relationship.

However, let us return to the “not quite gentlemanly act” of our Minister of Foreign Affairs. What is happening now in the field of conflict settlement in Donbass (the term “imitation of a settlement” is probably more correct) is very well characterized by the English wording blame game – a blame game, an attempt to shift the blame onto your competitor. Zelensky has come close to the actual denunciation of the Minsk agreements. This is what, for example, is the essence of the law “On the State Policy of the Transitional Period,” introduced to parliament by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine.

But the President of Ukraine still does not dare to take this “last decisive step”. Why? Because he wants the responsibility for the failure of Minsk to fall not on him, but on Moscow. Paris and Berlin understand and support this game of Kiev. However, Russia refuses to play the role of the scapegoat, kindly offered to it. So Sergey Lavrov has to violate the norms of etiquette. What can't you do for the good of your homeland!


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *