Russia’s Lavrov: “We expect relations with Washington to become smoother”

[webfact]

Russia’s Lavrov: “We expect relations with Washington to become smoother”

Seamus Kearney

 

 

MOSCOW: -- Donald Trump has made no secret about his admiration for the Russian President, but will that lead to a concrete change in US-Russia relations?

 

European allies are nervous, while Moscow seems delighted about the change of guard in Washington.

 

Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, told a media conference: “We respect the choice of the American people. We’re open about working with the new president and that would’ve been the case whatever the result.

 

“Of course we expect that the relations between Russia and the US, which at the moment are going through a very very unfavourable period, will become smoother and return to normal, which is not only in the interests of our peoples but also the international community.”

 

Russia has been suffering from EU and US sanctions over Moscow’s actions in Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea in 2014.

And that is a thorny issue Trump will have to quickly resolve with current US allies.

 

-- © Copyright Euronews 2016-11-11

[smedly]

“We expect relations with Washington to become smoother”

 

don't bet on it - there will be conditions

 

1. get out of Syria

2. leave the Ukrane well alone

[bassman]

Sounds like the Russian's hands are getting sore, after 8 years of slapping Obama around.

[craigt3365]

Interesting article.  Worth a read:

 

http://europe.newsweek.com/putins-murderous-syria-raids-set-him-back-ukraine-518515?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=yahoo_news&utm_campaign=rss&utm_content=%2Frss%2Fyahoous%2Fnews&yptr=yahoo

 

Quote

The single most important lie in Moscow’s effort to ease sanctions and reduce European Union support for Ukraine is that the war in the Donbass region is a Ukrainian civil war, rather than a hybrid war that is led, supplied and financed from Moscow, and involves significant numbers of Russian troops.

 

[zaphod reborn]

“We expect relations with Washington to become smoother”

 

Diplomatic speak for Trump has purchased KY jelly for his future relations with Putin.

[Kiwiken]

4 hours ago, smedly said:

“We expect relations with Washington to become smoother”

 

don't bet on it - there will be conditions

 

1. get out of Syria

2. leave the Ukrane well alone

75/25 % chance they will exit Syria, 50/50 on whether there is any movement on Ukraine. Syria they have an alliance with Assad. Ukraine they are claiming historic sphere of influence.

[ballpoint]

3 hours ago, bassman said:

Sounds like the Russian's hands are getting sore, after 8 years of slapping Obama around.

They'll get even sorer, pulling Trump's strings

Edited November 11, 2016 by ballpoint
Spelling

[KhaoNiaw]

4 hours ago, smedly said:

“We expect relations with Washington to become smoother”

 

don't bet on it - there will be conditions

 

1. get out of Syria

2. leave the Ukrane well alone

 

From things he's said before, there's a chance Trump might be willing to accede to both of those conditions.

[Krataiboy]

3 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

Interesting article.  Worth a read:

 

http://europe.newsweek.com/putins-murderous-syria-raids-set-him-back-ukraine-518515?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=yahoo_news&utm_campaign=rss&utm_content=%2Frss%2Fyahoous%2Fnews&yptr=yahoo

 

 

 

 

You mean the Russians run proxy wars, just like the US? Wow! What a staggering revelation.

 

 

[craigt3365]

36 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

 

You mean the Russians run proxy wars, just like the US? Wow! What a staggering revelation.

Hardly a proxy war.  This is Russia being directly involved.  But yes, both countries (as well as many others) run proxy wars.

[williamgeorgeallen]

9 hours ago, smedly said:

“We expect relations with Washington to become smoother”

 

don't bet on it - there will be conditions

 

1. get out of Syria

2. leave the Ukrane well alone

syria is a russian affiliated country. its america that needs to get out of there. 

[Morch]

9 hours ago, smedly said:

“We expect relations with Washington to become smoother”

 

don't bet on it - there will be conditions

 

1. get out of Syria

2. leave the Ukrane well alone

 

These were, perhaps, the conditions up until now. The US got a new president (well, almost there) - and apparently he's not too keen on military adventures abroad or direct confrontations with Russia.

 

Highly unlikely that the Russians will "get out" of Syria. They have a long term presence, military bases and are there at the invitation of the Syrian regime. This is pretty much their foothold in the area, and doubt there's anything on offer which will make them relinquish it. As for their ongoing military intervention - still a while until the inauguration, then more time until the new administration set up, and only then will serious talks begin. Some of the crucial points of the Russian military operations will be over by then, possibly making a partial withdrawal doable without losing much.

 

As for Ukraine, more complicated situation and in my opinion, will end up with a deal between Ukraine and Russia, leaving the US and the EU a bit meh.

[craigt3365]

15 hours ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

syria is a russian affiliated country. its america that needs to get out of there. 

What about Iran?  Saudi Arabia?  Lebanon?  Hezbollah? France? Qatar?  Canada? UK? Germany?  Netherlands? Belgium? Denmark? Australia? Jordan? UAE? Turkey?  Or is it just the US who needs to leave?

Edited November 12, 2016 by craigt3365

[craigt3365]

15 hours ago, Morch said:

 

These were, perhaps, the conditions up until now. The US got a new president (well, almost there) - and apparently he's not too keen on military adventures abroad or direct confrontations with Russia.

 

Highly unlikely that the Russians will "get out" of Syria. They have a long term presence, military bases and are there at the invitation of the Syrian regime. This is pretty much their foothold in the area, and doubt there's anything on offer which will make them relinquish it. As for their ongoing military intervention - still a while until the inauguration, then more time until the new administration set up, and only then will serious talks begin. Some of the crucial points of the Russian military operations will be over by then, possibly making a partial withdrawal doable without losing much.

 

As for Ukraine, more complicated situation and in my opinion, will end up with a deal between Ukraine and Russia, leaving the US and the EU a bit meh.

Russia's involved in Syria due to them being one of their largest buyers of weapons (Putin needs the cash) and to stop the gas pipeline to Europe.  Other than that, he could care less about Assad.  He's said that before.  Assad isn't critical to them.

[smedly]

OK so lets assume for a moment that the US under Trump leadership decides to pull out of the middle East Europe and Asia...........all back home and no longer has a presence outside of the US

 

Several EU Leaders including Junker have already warned the US to be careful about how they change foreign policy concerning all these points of interest........so

 

The EU is a big place and is not without its military, why is someone like Junker warning the US about Russia - lets just talk about Syria and the Ukraine for a moment, why does the mighty EU need the USA to be involved ?, if the US decided it was no longer interested in just these two conflict zones - why can the mighty Junker and his United States of Europe not form their own policy and military involvement in these two areas without the USA, why is the mighty big mouth Junker warning the USA not to step back ? surely the mighty EU can handle things without them......right ?, Mr Junker and his ass bandit mates Tusk and Holland are very quick at throwing out threats to the West maybe it is time for them to start looking at who is knocking on their door from the east and deal with it themselves.

 

Oh and just to add, how long would it be before North and South Korea are in full blown conflict and how long before China is at war with Japan and possibly other countries in the region over the south China sea.

 

People and say all they want about the US but without them the world would be a very different place, and yes there is stuff they may have got wrong now and again but there is an awful lot they get right and the world needs a peacekeeper - go back 50 years and try and imagine how things would be if the USA had remained neutral and not got involved in anything outside USA soil......and I mean really think about it...............would we all even still be here ?

Edited November 12, 2016 by smedly

[Morch]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

Russia's involved in Syria due to them being one of their largest buyers of weapons (Putin needs the cash) and to stop the gas pipeline to Europe.  Other than that, he could care less about Assad.  He's said that before.  Assad isn't critical to them.

 

In part, this is correct. But I doubt that "the cash" is anywhere near a sole motivator.  Syria doesn't have all that much to pay with (which in the past caused delays of agreed upon weapons transfers), and therefore pays by giving Russia a ME foothold and pretty consistently being aligned with Russia on most things ME. Russia may not need the current Assad (his dad was of a higher caliber), but can't see them pulling out or decreasing their involvement without making sure the replacement is a loyalist, or that their interests in country are secure. It can be counted upon that future scenarios relating to post-war Syria and possible Assad replacements were, are and will be discussed at the Kremlin. Could be a bit early to point some potential outcomes and candidates.

[craigt3365]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

In part, this is correct. But I doubt that "the cash" is anywhere near a sole motivator.  Syria doesn't have all that much to pay with (which in the past caused delays of agreed upon weapons transfers), and therefore pays by giving Russia a ME foothold and pretty consistently being aligned with Russia on most things ME. Russia may not need the current Assad (his dad was of a higher caliber), but can't see them pulling out or decreasing their involvement without making sure the replacement is a loyalist, or that their interests in country are secure. It can be counted upon that future scenarios relating to post-war Syria and possible Assad replacements were, are and will be discussed at the Kremlin. Could be a bit early to point some potential outcomes and candidates.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/04/syria-war-showroom-russian-arms-sales-160406135130398.html

 

Quote

 

Syria's war: A showroom for Russian arms sales

Moscow's arms exports hit a record $14.5bn in 2015 with orders surging to $56bn, according to President Putin.

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia–Syria_relations#Arms_sales

Quote

From 2000 to 2010, Russia sold around $1.5 billion worth of arms to Syria, making Damascus Moscow’s seventh-largest client, according to Dmitri Trenin in the New York Times.^[17]

 

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/04/syria-war-showroom-russian-arms-sales-160406135130398.html

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia–Syria_relations#Arms_sales

 

 

I think there's a gap between some of the reported arms deals and actual arms sales/delivery. For example, some of the systems detailed have not been actually supplied to Syria (far as I recall, at least).

 

Wonder how these projected arms sales stack against the cost of maintaining the Russian military intervention in Syria (same goes for the bottom line price of being involved in Ukraine, factoring in sanctions etc.).

[craigt3365]

6 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

I think there's a gap between some of the reported arms deals and actual arms sales/delivery. For example, some of the systems detailed have not been actually supplied to Syria (far as I recall, at least).

 

Wonder how these projected arms sales stack against the cost of maintaining the Russian military intervention in Syria (same goes for the bottom line price of being involved in Ukraine, factoring in sanctions etc.).

The Aljazeera article says Russia has spent about $500 million on the war so far.  I've seen estimates below and above that.  But that seems to pale in comparison to what they are earning on new sales!  Sadly.  Seems to be a profit making adventure for them.

[williamgeorgeallen]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

What about Iran?  Saudi Arabia?  Lebanon?  Hezbollah? France? Qatar?  Canada? UK? Germany?  Netherlands? Belgium? Denmark? Australia? Jordan? UAE? Turkey?  Or is it just the US who needs to leave?

who ever runs the country needs to decide. not you, not me. assad wants russia then that is the way it needs to be. will go for years and years the way it is going now.

[craigt3365]

2 minutes ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

who ever runs the country needs to decide. not you, not me. assad wants russia then that is the way it needs to be. will go for years and years the way it is going now.

And who is running the country?  Some experts say Assad is no longer the recognized leader as a huge portion of the country is not in his control.  It is a civil war. 

 

Perhaps all foreign parties should leave?  Russia has only extended, and added to, the chaos.  Not solved it.

[williamgeorgeallen]

5 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

And who is running the country?  Some experts say Assad is no longer the recognized leader as a huge portion of the country is not in his control.  It is a civil war. 

 

Perhaps all foreign parties should leave?  Russia has only extended, and added to, the chaos.  Not solved it.

complex issue for sure but why does america have more right to be there than russia?

[Morch]

29 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

The Aljazeera article says Russia has spent about $500 million on the war so far.  I've seen estimates below and above that.  But that seems to pale in comparison to what they are earning on new sales!  Sadly.  Seems to be a profit making adventure for them.

 

Difference is that running an ongoing military operation incurs immediate expenses. Revenues from weapons sales are delayed (most deals are in fact announcements, rather than done and delivered). Factor in sanctions and slump in oil prices - I'd be surprised if the Russians break even on this, presently.

[geriatrickid]

The manchurian candidate Trump may find that the US military is a tad suspicious of someone who was receiving  info from the Russian security services during the election and denyoing it. They also don't look favourably  on someone who seeks to facilitate the Russian imperialism.

Combined with a foreign former east bloc wife, I anticipate that we will see some serious sh*t going down with Trump. impeachment or assasination, take your pick.

[Si Thea01]

On ‎11‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 11:09 AM, zaphod reborn said:

“We expect relations with Washington to become smoother”

 

Diplomatic speak for Trump has purchased KY jelly for his future relations with Putin.

 

An absolute gem.  What is wrong with people who have to resort to this level of gutter talk.  I would rather America and Russia have a decent relationship then what may have happened.  They may not agree on everything but if Russia can take time to want a change, as the American people did, then it has to be good for all the world.  Give it a go instead of this type of rhetoric, no wonder the world, at the moment, is full of hate.

[Opl]

the world is in a thick fog

[craigt3365]

51 minutes ago, williamgeorgeallen said:

complex issue for sure but why does america have more right to be there than russia?

They don't!  But saying the US should leave and Russia should stay isn't the right answer either.  Both should leave.  Unless Russia actually teams up with the current COALITION that's there (it's not just the US who's there) and goes after JUST ISIS.  Then, we'd get this problem solved pronto! Or, faster anyway....sadly, this will never happen.

[williamgeorgeallen]

43 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

They don't!  But saying the US should leave and Russia should stay isn't the right answer either.  Both should leave.  Unless Russia actually teams up with the current COALITION that's there (it's not just the US who's there) and goes after JUST ISIS.  Then, we'd get this problem solved pronto! Or, faster anyway....sadly, this will never happen.

pretty sure the current coalition is there because of america. if it would speed things up then yes both russia and america should leave. i suspect we may be having this conversation for many years if something is not changed.