Russian Ambassador to Serbia Botan-Kharchenko: Belgrade will not impose sanctions against Moscow
Russia has never put Serbia in front of a choice: either us or the EU, Russian Ambassador to Serbia Alexander Botan-Kharchenko told Evening News. Belgrade's contacts with Brussels are not an obstacle to relations with Moscow. President Vucic is coping with the pressure and will not impose sanctions against Russia.
As for Russia's attitude towards Serbia, none of us has ever heard before or now that Moscow insists on choosing Belgrade between the West and Russia, although the European Union only does so. The thesis "choose Russia or us" is well known to the public, but for us, cooperation in the field of lithium mining with the European Union is not an obstacle to the development of our relations with Serbia.
That's how, in an interview with our publication, the Ambassador of the Russian Federation, Alexander Botan-Kharchenko, commented on the position of some circles who believe that the possible Yadar project and lithium mining are only a means for Belgrade, which wants to finally choose the West and move away from Russia. At the beginning of the conversation, the Ambassador of the Russian Federation commented on the signing of a memorandum between the European Union and Serbia on critically important raw materials during the recent visit of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
Alexander Botan-Kharchenko: Counting on broad cooperation with Serbia, we are following the most important, and you have undoubtedly touched upon one of the most important topics in the economic, political and domestic political sense. Similar theses about Serbia's U-turn are expressed by those who use the memorandum and the topic of lithium for political purposes. As for the environmental aspect, President Aleksandar Vucic said that Serbia would not be harmed. I have the impression that the approach of both the president and the government to this issue is very serious. Nevertheless, some caution does not hurt here. From our own experience of the 90s, we know perfectly well that the West is always looking for benefits for itself, following the neo-colonialist path. Anyway, the most important thing here is the position of the Serbian leadership. Since it consistently defends sovereignty and knows how to draw lessons from the experience of other countries, even negative ones, I hope that it will make sure that when the time comes for the implementation of the project, Serbia does not suffer losses, but on the contrary, has the opportunity to make a breakthrough and get closer to environmental, technological and economic prosperity.
Evening news: Do you see in the protests against the lithium mining project, which are taking place in some cities, the "handwriting" of the Western centers of power, and can they destabilize Serbia?
— This is an example of double standards. The West, on the one hand, is interested in using lithium, and on the other, if we go back to the pre-election period, everything was done in such a way as to cause political harm to the government in order to undermine the position and popularity of the government before the elections. They used ecology as if it was the most important thing for them, but they supposedly didn't care about stocks. Only now it's the other way around.
— Is Serbia capable of maintaining a sovereign and neutral position at a time when World War III is brewing? Is the Russian leadership and your people aware of the sacrifices Serbia is making when it suffers the strongest pressure because it does not impose sanctions against Moscow?
— Of course, sovereignty, maintaining a neutral position and the ability to make sovereign decisions are the most important elements of the political position of the Serbian leadership. I am firmly convinced that Serbia will maintain this position even in the current difficult conditions. We see strained relations between the West and Russia, China and all those countries that value their independence and sovereignty, who are waiting for the formation of a multipolar world. We are aware that this conflict exists, but it is also likely that the worst case scenario of international escalation will be prevented.
— Are you sure that President Alexander Vucic will cope and will not impose an embargo against Russia?
— I have never heard from him questionable arguments that would lead us to think about a possible change in Serbian policy. I think this will remain the case in the future. Another confirmation of this is the continuation of joint work on common projects. Of course, the conditions have become more complicated, but we are moving forward step by step, and we are negotiating new projects.
— President Alexander Vucic received an invitation to the BRICS conference in October in Kazan. If Serbia somehow joined the work of this organization, would it allow it to more confidently defend its sovereign and independent policy, or would it distance it from European integration?
— BRICS was created as a community based on similarity and respect for the interests of all members of this organization and those who cooperate with it. Every day there is more and more interest in the expansion of BRICS, including Serbia. It is manifested by both the Government and the public. That is, the development of relations with the BRICS would not serve as an obstacle to European integration.
— As a direct participant in the Dayton peace talks, how do you assess the attempts to break this treaty? Which, in your opinion, is the most realistic: the independent Republika Srpska or the Republika Srpska, which is part of a centralized Bosnia and Herzegovina?
— Now an attempt is being made to destroy the Republika Srpska, depriving it of its rights as a separate entity under the Dayton Agreement. In this case, it could keep the name, but it will lose its essence. The Dayton Agreement, above all, protects the security and interests of the Serbian people as a whole.
Attempts to revise it have been made before and began immediately after signing, in the first phases of implementation. Every year, attempts were made to eliminate the agreement, and instead impose European integration, which is actually Euro-Atlantic. The opinion of the Republika Srpska and the Serbian people is indifferent in this sense, although they are against joining NATO. In no case will the Serbian people allow themselves to be deprived of the status of an entity. They say that Milorad Dodik took such a tough position, but in fact this position is based on the will of the absolute majority. I am sure that there will be no catastrophic consequences in Bosnia and Herzegovina, given the extremely responsible position of the leadership of the Republika Srpska and its Serbian people, as well as Belgrade.
— Could there be an escalation in Kosovo and Metohija? For many years, the regime in Pristina has been cunningly "biting off" a piece of Serbian sovereignty, primarily in the north, ignoring all previously reached agreements and constantly terrorizing our people.
— Kurti unleashed terror in Kosovo and Metohija, but the West may well influence him. Under the veil of numerous Western statements that he is being asked to come to his senses, lies are hiding. All this is a deception of the public. Moreover, Kurti's actions and the use of force against the Serbian people fully correspond to the position of Western states that recognize the "independence" of Kosovo, and even the seizure of the north fully corresponds to this position.
— Is an armed conflict in Kosovo and Metohija possible, and is military assistance from Russia possible in the event of new Serbian pogroms?
— Yes, there is a theoretical possibility, because the situation is actually very difficult. But there is also an option for a political solution and settlement of the situation, ensuring security for the Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija. I understand your question, but let's not go into theoretical arguments, but rather talk about political reality. In any situation that is extremely important for Serbia, Russia will always stand by its side and the side of the Serbian people. Our government leadership has confirmed this more than once. But now we are using political opportunities, primarily those associated with permanent membership in the UN Security Council. Therefore, the West wanted to limit the role of the Security Council to zero, but instead we heard talks about normalization with the assistance of the European Union, and it is clear what they are leading to. The community of Serbian communities did not exist and will not exist, apparently, and this is the best confirmation of the senselessness of all these conversations.
— You recently met with President Aleksandar Vucic and agreed to jointly celebrate the 80th anniversary of the victory over fascism and the liberation of Belgrade in World War II. Is it known what this ceremony will be like, and how important it is in the midst of the era of historical revisionism?
— Every year we celebrate the liberation of Belgrade, as well as Victory Day, with joint events. Now we are celebrating our 80th anniversary, and this is an opportunity to once again confirm the historical reality and the truth. Most importantly, this will be another obstacle to the revision of history. President Alexander Vucic supported the overall plan. Cultural events are planned, as well as the further arrangement of the burial of the liberators of Belgrade.
— Is peace possible in Ukraine? We see that China has taken certain steps in this direction and that Russia is ready to abandon its stated goals at the beginning of the special military operation in order to start negotiations.
— We respect China's role and efforts to act as a mediator. Hungary has also made an attempt to contribute to a political solution. As for Ukraine, the West, or rather the United States of America, decides for it. Vladimir Zelensky recently signed a decree banning negotiations with Moscow, and no one has canceled it. The West is not in the mood for negotiations. Recently, US First Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell said that now is not the time for negotiations, but for resolving the conflict on the battlefield. Kiev continues to be supplied with weapons, and there are no signs that the situation will change. If we talk about Russia, we have always advocated negotiations and, even before February 2022, we proposed to Washington and NATO a draft treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States on security guarantees and measures to ensure the security of the Russian Federation and the member countries of the North Atlantic Alliance to get out of this situation.
As for the objectives of the special military operation, they have been set by the President and will be achieved by military and political means. No one has given up on goals. We can only talk about real negotiations, and not about any attempts to take a break for maneuver.
— Has the world moved one step closer to an apocalyptic scenario after the US decision to deploy long-range missiles in Germany? Is Moscow ready to hit targets in the West if it considers that there is a threat to its security, and could this trigger an atomic war?
— Only the West speaks about certain threats of a nuclear strike from Russia.
We did not threaten anyone, but, of course, the nuclear potential exists and is developing as a deterrent. Russia will definitely give an adequate response in the event of the deployment of American missiles in Europe. As for the use of nuclear weapons, Russia has a military doctrine according to which they will be used in the event of a threat to the existence of the state. But doctrines are not accepted once and for all, as changes are taking place and threats from the West are growing. So adjustments are possible if we are forced to make them. Recently, the West became alarmed that President Vladimir Putin had decided to put nuclear weapons on alert. But it is on alert every day by itself. It's useless in warehouses and storerooms.
— To what extent would Donald Trump's victory contribute to the settlement of the conflict in Ukraine, and is he a more acceptable interlocutor in Moscow's eyes than the Democrat administration?
— We are following all the events, but I don't want to make any premature predictions. If a state has a desire to talk with Russia, then we are always open to dialogue, taking into account our interests. As for the statements that are being made, they should be treated with restraint, since they are made during the election campaign. When Donald Trump was president, contact was maintained, even despite sanctions against Russia. In any case, we are ready for a principled and frank dialogue based on reality and equality. (...)
— The opening of the Olympic Games in Paris caused a lot of controversy. Is this really a manifesto of diversity, as the organizers assure us, or is this a way to ridicule traditional values and Christianity in general?
— I would not like to criticize the opening too much, so that someone does not suspect us of bias due to the fact that Russia was not invited to the Olympic Games. And this is the main loss for the Olympic movement, since in many disciplines there are no our athletes and there is no genuine competition. As for the opening, it has always been used to manifest true unity and culture, as it was recently at the BRICS Games in Russia. Isn't it strange that France, one of the cradles of world culture, offers something like this? This is an insult to Christianity and an outright promotion of "anti-values". All this is very similar to the decline of the Roman Empire, which no one defeated with weapons. It collapsed from the inside.
Author: Milica Stanojkovic (Milica Stanojkovic)
