Russia's Ambassador to the US Anatoly Antonov's Interview with Russia-24 TV Channel

On August 17, Ambassador Anatoly Antonov gave an extensive interview to the Russia-24 TV Channel, speaking on a broad range of issues.

Evelina: Good evening! This is evening news on Russia-24 TV channel.

Relationship between Russian and the United States is a point of concern for everybody, even for those who believe otherwise. Recently American scientists have published a paper. The paper states that in the event of a sudden nuclear war between Russian and the United States over 5 billion people, that is 75% of the population of the planet, will face starvation.

The relationship between the two countries is at a historic low today. It would be no exaggeration to say that future of humanity is at stake. So why do American statesmen act with such recklessness, act like a loose cannon? They effectively destroy all the existing legacy of international law. Perhaps, because there’s no future for this strain of politics?

That will be the topic of our today’s conversation with Anatoly Antonov, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the Russian Federation to the United States. He is hailing from Washington D.C.

Your Excellency, it is a distinctive pleasure to talk to you today. You must be the go-to person to talk about the nature of Russo-American interaction today. With this in mind, let me ask my first question.

As of today, what is the political status of our relationship? Apparently, there is little that our leaders can discuss at this point. That being said, we have learned that Sergey Lavrov, Minister of Foreign Affairs, intends to visit New York to participate in the United Nations General Assembly.

What impact, if any, it might have on the status of political relationship between our countries?

Ambassador Antonov: Good evening, Evelina.

Thank you for this opportunity to share my vision of Russo-American relationship. I am compelled to admit that the political dialog between our countries is in a logjam today. Consequently, even domains of shared interest are adversely affected. Our contacts are sporadic. In the end of July Minister Lavrov spoke over the phone with the Secretary of State Antony Blinken. It was their first conversation in 6 months.

We are convinced that finding solutions to global issues, let alone matters of our bilateral relationship, hinges upon a direct dialog between us. We are often asked these days, whether Minister Lavrov will attend UNGA at all. That gives us plenty of reasons to state that his attendance will be welcomed by many. It would be fitting to remind you of Minister’s recent trips to Asia and Africa. He was warmly welcomed there and had a plethora of meetings. Russia’s top diplomat frequents international fora, be it G20, SCO, ASEAN, CIS, CSTO. Examples abound and they are perfectly familiar to your audience.

Granted, in the recent year the United States have often interfered with our official trips, including the United Nations-bound ones. Cognizant of this, our embassy has already demanded from the White House to comply with its obligations as a host country to the United Nations Headquarters. We requested immediate visa approvals for Minister himself and all the member of the Russian delegation. We will continue to insist on granting unimpeded access to all representatives of the Russian Federation participating in the 77th UNGA session.

By the way, tomorrow I will be visiting State Department and this will be one of the key topics that I mean to address – fully-fledged and full-scale participation of the Russian delegation in the General Assembly work in New York come September.

Evelina: Thank you, Ambassador. As we say it here, been there, done that. Therefore, you may probably anticipate the possible impediments that Russian public officials might run into while visiting the United States. That is to say, your concern is both understandable and well justified.

Since news are plenty and time is of the essence, I want to quickly touch upon other issues.

How does the US view Russian energy cooperation with other countries? By the way, Germany has admitted today, that without Russian gas their supplies will run out in two and a half months. What is the US stance on this and on the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline? After all, they have been interfering with its progress for so long.

Ambassador Antonov: Let me stress this. Washington may do whatever it wants, seeking to portray Russian as un unreliable supplier – and it does pursue this line doggedly. Yet there is a strong disconnect between this narrative and the reality.

Our buyers, including the ones you have just mentioned, have indeed run into predicaments. And the sole reason for these are the sanctions and restrictions that the United States had imposed or prompted others to. We have never imposed our supplies on anyone. Neither have we attempted to secure a short-term gain through it – which is something we are accused of. We are ready to sell it to anyone willing to buy. To anyone, who is in the market for affordable and high-quality resources.

Moving on to Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline now. It is operation-ready. Theoretically, putting it online it would have opened up virtually all the supply bottlenecks caused by the erratic sanctions imposed against Nord Stream 1. Only one thing is missing. Political will. Pushing the button is all it takes for Europe to bring Nord Stream 2 to life. Yet, Europe yielded to unrelenting pressure of Washington and opted for expensive LNG instead. Washington’s preferred way of describing it is that it consists of molecules of freedom.

If you think back to the Soviet era, you will see that this is history repeating itself. Back then the United States have also fought tooth and nail to dismantle our economic ties to Europe. For instance, back in 1960s we, together with German partners, sought to launch a famous “Gas for Pipes” project. Essentially it meant selling gas to Europe and getting paid in large-diameter pipes. Americans have put a lot of pressure on Berlin, yet the project has been followed through.

Now, Americans have left no stone unturned to make sure that Nord Stream 2 never sees the light of the day. And yet we persevered. Today though, Washington holds all the keys to this project. We may say everything aligned to Washington’s favor and it is now celebrating its victory.

It prompts a question. Who’s the winner. America – no two ways about it. Who’s the loser then? Russia is, but so is Europe. It is European competitive edge, not the Russian one, that was dealt a heavy blow. United States today tries to put some markets in the “good” basket, and others – to the “bad” one. Nothing will come out of it, but destabilization of the entire energy industry, fuel price swings and spiking inflation.

The US went as far as to propose introducing price caps for Russian oil. The goal is to strip Russia of its incomes. Washingtons seems oblivious to the fact that we are not going to sell energy at a loss. What will happen instead is another market pivot – a pivot away from the Western countries.

Evelina: I see. On a separate note, we have repeatedly discussed the tough life of Russian nationals serving time in American prisons. Several months ago, Russian pilot Konstantin Yaroshenko was swapped for former US Marine Trevor Reed. That being said, are there more prisoner swaps in the pipeline? And who might be a part of it?

Ambassador Antonov: That is a very sensitive and emotionally-loaded issue. Primarily, I want to join others in rejoice as they welcome Konstantin back home. Words fail me as I try to recount what he went through over his 12 years in captivity. His health condition has suffered badly. He was not offered a proper check-up in the US. Neither was he offered the required medication. About 2 weeks ago I met Konstantin in Moscow.

Seeing him safe and sound, happy to be back home meant the world to me.

Some other Russian nationals are going through same hardships as we speak. It took us a ton of effort to secure a physical check-up for Viktor But. Roman Seleznev is still denied proper medical care and embassy requests are neglected.

I emphatically affirm that protection of Russian nationals, who ended locked up in American penitentiary system, is our top priority. We can never stand by idly, when fellow compatriots are in harm’s way.

Just remember Maria Butina, our parliament MP! She has been unfairly held in prison for over 18 months, abused, harassed and tortured. When it comes to putting Russians under psychological pressure, no holds are barred. No effort is spared to get a confession out of them. Failing that, they are threatened with long prison terms.

This US administration is on a hunt for Russian nationals abroad. Since 2008, 58 Russians were arrested abroad. Remarkably, international community and human rights watchdogs are silent about it.

I personally and repeatedly approached them for assistance. And yet, we didn’t move the needle. We will never accept it. Instead, we will seek a safe passage home for all Russian detainees. And it is not hollow words for us – it us what we live for, it is our duty and our mission.

Evelina: Your Excellency, how is Viktor But doing?

Ambassador Antonov: Not very good, really. And why would he? American prison is not exactly a pleasant place to be in. We hope to visit him soon. He is in a sorry state. Haunted by hopes of going back home.

We are sparing no efforts to make sure it happens as soon as possible.

Evelina: Are you still able to discuss these matters with American public officials?

Ambassador Antonov: We do stay in touch with them. We believe that these matters are best handled privately, away from unnecessary attention. As agreed by our leaders, these issues must be tackled by relevant authorities. This effort is under way now. And I believe that it is time for us to wait and see what comes out of it.

Evelina: Thank you!

The only remaining US-Russia treaty on nuclear arms control is the New START, Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, which expires in 2026. Cognizant of the need to prepare for its extension, the parties seemed to be laying the groundwork.

Yet with start of the Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine this effort came to a halt. Having said that, President Biden has recently stated that he is ready to resume the talks on the matter immediately. What stands behind such statements?

Ambassador Antonov: His bold statement was timed to coincide with the opening of the 10th NPT Review Conference – an international conference for discussing international efforts on arms control, non-proliferation and peaceful use of nuclear energy. The Conference has been up and running in New York for over a month now. In his introductory remarks President Biden made this strong statement, signaling his readiness to immediately negotiate what he termed a “framework agreement” that would supersede the New START.

That being said, the US has not made any specific proposals available to us, to follow up on their initiative.

Biden’s words have been widely broadcasted both in Russian media and here in America. However, you have failed to mentioned one important phrase that he ended his remarks with. Russia, he said, is expected to show good will. Now, what is that supposed to mean? One may only assume that this was an offhand reference to Russia’s special military operation.

Now, that is an odd remark, coming from Americans. History of arms control talks, first between the United States and the Soviet Union, and then between the United States and Russia gives a proof-positive record of never yielding to pressure. Our negotiators have always demanded equitable dialog.

We requested meetings to clarify the statements of President Biden and some of his Administration’s officials. So far, we have got no response. Still, I’m planning to meet people from the Department of Defense and Department of State shortly, to cross all the Ts and get to the bottom of what was really meant. To find out whether Americans are actually up for an equitable and mutually beneficial conversation on the matter.

You know, these days we often hear that talking to Americans at all is a lost cause. That talks and negotiations are a waste of time. Let me tell you what I think. To my mind, an earnest conversation between the US and Russia is a condition sine qua non, unless we want the whole world and the international order to lose something very important.

Today, the New START is the benchmark for arms control treaties. It must be saved. It is bound to expire in 2026 and we need to decide, what comes the day after? What do we do when we wake up to a world without such a treaty. With this in mind, I need to remind you of the words our presidents said in Geneva: nuclear war can never be won and therefore must never be fought.

We desperately need a modicum of certainty. Something that is conspicuous with its absence in our bilateral relations today. We are ready to a frank conversation – that is what I gather from my communications with colleagues in Moscow. We just need to figure out, whether Americans are. All the more so, given that all the promises and commitments notwithstanding, the posture review papers whose publication was slated for summer are still pending. We hope for them to be made available any day now. I very much expect to have contacts with my US counterparts. We are ready for them.

Evelina: Are Americans ready? I think this has already become a rhetorical question.

You know, a very high-ranking American expert once told me what could bring Russia and the United States closer together. He said that Russia should be more flexible and the United States – more assertive.  

But, as the saying goes, the question of good intentions takes care of itself, and the pressure becomes clearer, and it builds up as Russia's special military operation in Ukraine goes on. What do you make of the way this pressure evolves? The United States has already spent $10,000,000,000 on military support of Ukraine, particularly during Russia's special military operation.

Do you think that this pressure will continue to build up according to your impressions, feelings, and calculus?

Ambassador Antonov: We have to look at this from a broader perspective.

The Americans believe that in 1991 they failed to follow through with their operation to precipitate Russia's downfall, to break it up and turn it into a third-class non-entity. After the 1990s, we began to raise from our knees, we strengthened our armed forces, made far-reaching political and economic steps. It irritated people here in Washington, it alarmed them and rubbed them the wrong way. Washington was only ready to see us as a second-rate sidekick, a yesman to agree to all of its policies.

That is why our President's demand for security guarantees and the rejection of the rules-based international order came as a shock to Americans. The West chose to ignore the admonitions of the Russian President, believing it possible to maintain a world order that benefitted them, but was detrimental to us. Naturally we rejected such approach.

But the special military operation seemed to be a kind of a trigger for imposing the "sanctions from hell" as the Americans put it. And as we were liberating the Republics of Donbass and Luhansk, Washington has come to realize that we're not bluffing. That our resolve is steadfast, and we are committed to accomplishing every single goal our President has set for us. Americans are not going to stop and are doing their best to form a front of loyal allies and states that, for one reason or another, are forced to obey Washington's orders. The pressure is being ratcheted up everywhere.

Washington sends its minions to Asia, Africa, Latin America. They are tasked with persuading the states there not to have any business with us. I would like to emphasize Washington's keen attention to the CIS countries. They are threatened and intimidated by sanctions. Washington is trying to force their hand and make them stop interacting with us.

Washington is imposing sanctions that are causing serious economic damage for both Russia and the United States. We are talking high gasoline prices, high inflation, low economic development rate here. The important thing here is that Russia, the word "Russia", "the Russian problem" has become a politically-charged issue, especially now, when midterms are looming in November. The White House repeatedly claims that it had achieved every single one of its goals and that we are isolated. Contrary to that most members of the international community continue to cooperate with us.

On August 9 Washington Post – and nobody can accuse this newspaper of cosying up to Russia – put it in no uncertain terms that two-thirds of the world population, living in various countries, have refused to support the Western sanctions. We see all US plans imploding. Look at the most recent examples. Look at the grand events that the Russian Ministry of Defense will be hosting today and tomorrow. Three major events: a conference on international security, Military Technical Forum Army 2022 and Army Games – will bring together 700 delegates from several dozen countries. I mean, seriously? If that is not the evidence of the well-recognized standing of both Russian Ministry of Defense, and of Russia proper, then I don't know what is.

Evelina: There is one question I ask you during every single interview, and regrettably, each time your answer only grows shorter. Do Russia and the US still have any opportunities for cooperation left? And a follow-up question, if I may. How likely is it that the US would go so far as to name Russia, say, a state sponsor of terrorism?

Ambassador Antonov: The situation is deplorable. I am scrambling for words here, really. All the legacy of recent years is razed to the ground. When we spoke two years ago, we discussed difficulties in our relations, when Donald Trump was the President. Here Russian diplomats were being kicked out, our property was seized, but today the situation is simply unprecedented. Had somebody said a year ago that it was possible to drive relations between our two countries down so low, I would have just smiled back. But here we are.

Russians face discrimination simply for being Russians. They are intimidated, harassed, threatened. It is indeed a very sad situation that cultural, scientific educational ties are being severed. Official propaganda tries its best to demonize the Russian authorities.

Every mention of our country's role in World War II is simply obliterated.

This is the most disappointing thing of all. I know many regular Americans here who watch it all with bitterness, as they remember that battle brotherhood of the American and Soviet people during the World War II. And it is my firm belief that no global challenge can be addressed without the cooperation of the major nuclear powers, the permanent members of the Security Council.

This, by the way, was clearly and distinctively stated by the Russian president in his opening remarks at a conference on international security. Nothing but breadcrumbs is what remains from our former cooperation. I could mention the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction but that would be subject to a huge reservation. Then there is the so-called deconflicting communications channel for Syria, perhaps, the peaceful space exploration. People from the US administration openly say that they are interested in our participation. Alas, that's all that comes to mind today. And other examples do not even merit the attention of your viewership.

Apparently, we have to wait out a little bit for all this fog of Russophobia to dissipate here in the United States. After all, we don't really need much from the United States. We seek them to recognize our national interests, show some respect and the willingness to talk to us on an equitable and mutually beneficial footing. We are not going to chase and beg anyone. We can make do without Coca-Cola. Our soft drinks are much better anyway. Still, it is my strong belief that steady and pragmatic relations between our two countries are in the interests of the people of Russia and the United States of America alike.

Evelina: And the last question. We don't have much time left, but you did mention regular Americans. Isn't American public having a Russophobia fatigue already? Isn't it tired of this anti-Russian rhetoric?

Ambassador Antonov: The Russophobia in the US is intense, but it mostly peaks in Washington, D.C., New York and other big cities. The farther away from the capital you go, the less interested people are in European affairs and the more questions they ask.

Why is the United States fighting with Russia? Especially today, when the economy is tight? Few people can even show Ukraine on the map, let alone Russia. People are mostly interested in their day-to-day life. How much do you have to pay for gasoline, for bread, for milk? How big is the pay check? Am I even going to keep my job tomorrow?

Who are the ill-wishers? The media, of course. Turn on CNN on any given day, which is what I do day in and day out, and you will quickly learn that it's all Russia's fault, the so-called "Putin inflation", Price hikes on anything and everything. But then, if you switch to Fox News, that is the mouthpiece of the Republican Party, they would scoff at those words and question the claims about Russia, about the alleged collusion between the former President Trump and the Russian authorities.

Crucially though, the media attitude to the special military operation is extremely negative. The political classes actively dislike our wish to create a new international order. And this is where they stand united. As much as I would love to, right now I cannot unequivocally tell you that people grew tired of all this, but the first sprouts are there, to put it mildly. Some statesmen say this.

For instance, Tulsi Gabbard, an influential Democrat, has bluntly said that the whole thing has nothing to do with the people of Ukraine or with defense of democracy. She said that the goal of all the actions of Washington is regime change in Russia. Hit the nail on its head.

Let me also quote Henry Kissinger. Recently, speaking to Wall Street Journal he said that we are on the brink of starting a war with Russia and China over issues that we have partially created ourselves. So, these are the sprouts I told you about, the political scientists, the colleagues I meet with, they talk reluctantly. We are still a long way from saying that the situation is under control.

Evelina: Thank you very much, Ambassador. But I have to tell you one thing. When your opponent is unhappy with what you do, you are probably on the right track. Your Excellency, thank you for your comments, your opinion and your work in a very difficult place. This was Anatoly Antonov, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of Russia to the United States of America. Thank you for attention and goodbye