0 $
2,350 $
4,700 $
2,317 $
COLLECTED IN DECEMBER

“Fake Questions” From “Fake News”: Lavrov Slams CNN Provocation Over Venezuela

Donate

"Fake Questions" From "Fake News": Lavrov Slams CNN Provocation Over Venezuela

Click to see full-size image

On May 6th, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov slammed CNN over a provocative question regarding the possible Russian response in the event of the US intervention in Venezuela.

“Question: If Washington decides to start a military intervention in Venezuela, what levers or options does Russia have to stop it?

Sergey Lavrov: Some call your outlet CNN “fake news” and now you are asking me a “fake question.”

We are categorically opposed to armed action in violation of international law no matter where it occurs. The use of force can only be sanctioned by the UN Security Council, or force may be used in response to aggression against a sovereign state. Nothing of the sort is happening in Venezuela. I don’t see any advocates of a reckless military solution based on my contacts with US, European and Latin American colleagues. I hope that this understanding shared by all will be translated into practical policy and that there will be no military solution because it would be disastrous.

Question: Do US diplomats understand this?

Sergey Lavrov: Yes.”

Prior to the meeting, Lavrov also said that he had stopped counting a long time ago with how many US Secretaries of State he had met.

Lavrov praised the meeting with Pompeo as “a very good, constructive conversation.” In which the two diplomats “discussed many regional issues that are on the current UN agenda and the international agenda more broadly.”

It was a good follow-up on the phone conversation US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin had regarding Venezuela, Lavrov said.

He was also asked regarding Pompeo’s words that “Russia must get out of Venezuela,” and if the US diplomat repeated his claim in private.

In answer, Lavrov said the two didn’t discuss public statements that were simply made to cause a stir, and that they were influenced by “too many things that have nothing to do with real politics.”

“We tried to concentrate on real politics and we succeeded in this.”

Finally, Lavrov said that the US and Russian presidents agreed to meet when they have an opportunity, and the diplomat was “sure that such an opportunity will present itself and you will hear about it from the Kremlin.”

No information was provided on the meeting from the US Department of State or Mike Pompeo himself.

During the Arctic Summit in Finland, at the sidelines of which Lavrov and Pompeo met, Pompeo said that China and Russia were ahead of the US in terms of Arctic expansion. But, in a surprising turn, he didn’t accuse either, but rather said it shouldn’t be “a place of lawlessness,” but rather great powers should have “the courage & partnership to hold each other accountable.”

Lavrov, following the meeting with Pompeo, said they didn’t discuss the Northern Sea route, but it would be discussed at the Arctic Summit. Lavrov did reiterate that Russia had a right over the route.

“We did not discuss the Northern Sea Route. We will talk about Arctic issues at tomorrow’s meeting of the Arctic Council. The Northern Sea Route is Russia’s national transport artery. As a coastal state and in full conformity with international law, we are responsible for the safe operation of this route in the same way Canadians are in charge of the safe operation of the Northwest Passage. As such, we will do everything to ensure that the movement of foreign ships is in strict conformity with the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea and all international legal norms and is absolutely safe. We are responsible for this.”

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • chris chuba

    Perhaps he looked at the military budget and realized that we were already stretched thin provoking wars with Iran, Venezuela, China, and Russia on other fronts. He didn’t want to alarm Russia into preparing even more arctic defenses before we were ready for our aggression.

    • Pave Way IV

      “Question: If Washington decides to start a military intervention in Venezuela, what levers or options does Russia have to stop it?”

      Lavrov: “Russia? FFS, Russia wouldn’t need to stop anything. SOUTHCOM is pretty much run by has-been, incompetent US Navy commanders and their CIA cocaine dealer pals. We know a Venezuelan invasion and occupation would be a clusterfuck of epic proportions, even by US standards. It would slowly morph into a massive and everlasting counter-insurgency / counter-terrorist operation to protect US puppet Guaido and his fake government. Between the war expense and subsequent puppet regime welfare Guaido would need, the U.S. would quickly spiral into financial ruin. Why would Russia jump in front of that train?”

  • TopTier

    True journalism is gone. Nowadays a blogger is considered a journalist. There was a time people would feel ashamed if they printed lies even by accident…today they seem proud about it, kinda fits with the whole sjw activism. Sad times.

    • Sinbad2

      Media people really shouldn’t be allowed to use the word journalist to describe themselves, it’s an act of fraud.

      • Justin

        ahhhh so here is an example of Russia and Trump calling CNN fake news!

        Ohhhh, Sinbad, you cant say anything bad here can you?
        Ohhhhhh i see!
        Whats wrong? Conflict of interest?

        like i said before, Russia and the USA will be allies after 2020 Elections!
        REAL ALLIES!!

        But you’ll still love China and you will hate on Russia when that happens wont ya scum bag!

        • purplelibraryguy

          Speaking as a Canadian, the US doesn’t have real allies. It has flunkies, of which we are one, and then it shits on them whenever it feels like. The rule is, we slavishly do all the dirty work they tell us to, and then they fuck us over. Russia won’t be off the Americans’ shit list any time soon because the Russian government is nationalist; any country that won’t be a flunky has to go.

          • Justin

            i kind of agree with you!
            Lets be honest, We are flunkies to UK (Australia and Canada)! Examples of this is that the Queen ahas sacked our ministers!
            We do all the US wants, fight in their wars etc!
            But fact is they did save us (australia) from the Japs!
            they gave up 2 of their carriers which they needed in midway just to save our sorry ass!
            So im ok with the ANZUS treaty!
            But again, the Anglo empire is now the Anglo American empire! They just shifted over! So whatever u complain the Americans are doing is what the Brits WOULD HAVE BEEN DOING if they were still the empire of the world! So your real issue is with the empire, not so much America!

            i see the world a little differently too u! I see the Jewish Cabal everywhere! They tried to force Socialism and Communism in Russia via the Soviet union and take over the world! Now they try it in America! History repeating itself! Now i see them shifting this empire over to China, hence the transfer of our industries and the tech transfer being done right under our noses (Hillary’s bathroom server)

            our real enemy isnt a nation, its the Globalists who were once known as the elitists! They want to have the ultimate power, a monopoly and taxes paid by slaves via a fake climate threat!

            This is the JEW way of doing things!

            Know the real enemy! America has done some good things too, dont forget this, but once u get corrupt bankers, politicians and lawyers in, youre pretty much fucked!

            Lets see what trump does, i hear many indictments are going to drain the swamp! Please dont laugh at this last comment, there is credible evidence this is occurring very soon!

            Get your popcorn ready!
            Big names are going down! :)

      • Justin
  • Smaug

    South Front: Complains about budget issues due to poor readership.
    Also South Front: Runs an unveiled smear campaign on his own target audience’s news networks.

    • James

      So why are you still here?

    • purplelibraryguy

      I don’t think the South Front target audience is “People who like and trust CNN”. Just a wild guess here.
      (It isn’t really me either, because I’m a radical leftist and the South Front target audience seems to be a sort of “right wing but suspicious of elite plutocrats and the wars fought to enrich them” crowd. But I come here because it’s the only place I’ve found for solid, event-based news about certain wars. I was surprised to find they’ve got some good coverage on Venezuela as well)

      • Smaug

        The target audience is Americans.
        And I don’t care what you call yourself.

        • purplelibraryguy

          So, there’s only one American in the world, a monolithic entity with one opinion about things. Got it.

  • S Melanson

    I think diplomats in general have a pretty good understanding but loud mouths making politically motivated statements for public show can lead to unintended consequences, particularly when combined with poor intelligence.

    Nasser miscalculated in the lead-up to the 1967 war with Israel – a war Egypt’s Nasser did not want but events and bad intel from the Soviets propelled him into provocative acts that precipitated a pre-emptive Israeli military response.

    The Cuban Missile Crisis is a good example of public rhetoric taking control of events to the point Kennedy and Khrushchev we’re losing control of events as frontline commanders were taking matters into their own hands such as shooting down s U2 spy plane despite instructions from the Kremlin not to do so. The US reaction was to invade with faulty intelligence – the CIA estimated 10 to 12 thousand soviet troops in Cuba, it was 43,500. The CIA was unaware of tactical nuclear weapons deployed which the Soviet troops had authorization to use against a US invasion.

    The Russian subs had authorization to use nuclear tipped torpedoes which the CIA was not aware were equipped on Russian subs operating in the area of the US naval blockade of Cuba. A US naval captain started depth charging a Russian sub and the Sub commander ordered the firing of a nuclear armed torpedo, this was stopped because the decision required agreement by three officers and one officer refused.

    I point out also that the Russian ICBM bases in Cuba were operational unbeknownst to the CIA and an invasion of Cuba would result in a launch against the US of approximately 80 to 90 missiles against US cities of 1 megaton yield for each warhead.

    Sure, everyone intends to avoid a war in high games of brinksmanship but it does not always go to plan. Stumbling into nuclear war is the danger. Several times it nearly happened and do we really want to keep pushing our luck?

  • Jacob “Wraith” Wohl

    translation:
    Venezuela will be pummeled by the US Military and we wont do anything about it
    lol lol lol