Russian Permanent Representative to the UN Vassily Nebenzia’s interview with RT
Rick Sanchez: And we are joined now by Vassily Nebenzia. He happens to be the Russian Ambassador to the United Nations, and let me also say, that he probably has one of the most difficult jobs in the entire world. Only he knows exactly what I'm talking about, when I say that. Mr. Ambassador, thank you so much, sir, for taking time to talk to us.
Vassily Nebenzia: Nice meeting you, Mr. Sanchez.
Rick Sanchez: It's a pleasure to meet you, sir.
Vassily Nebenzia: Although on the screen...
Rick Sanchez: Yeah. Well, look, the UN is celebrating, what? 80 years now of its original chapter. And I'm thinking to myself, as I watch the United Nations, and you're there, you're one of its most important players. Many would argue the most important player these days. Has the United Nations met its mission? Is it accomplishing its mission?
Vassily Nebenzia: June 26 is the day when the UN Charter has been signed, exactly 80 years ago in San Francisco. In 2018, I made the UN pilgrimage to San Francisco and visited all those historical places. You know, it became kind of fashionable to criticize the UN, and in many instances, rightly so. But, you know, UN doesn’t have any magical international force.
If we talk about UN as the member states, not as a Secretariat — which are 193 — UN is the sum of those nations, all with their own national interests. And the current situation in the UN reflects the state of international affairs, which is, of course, much to be desired. But at the same time, UN still has the legitimacy codified in its Charter, in the Security Council decisions.
The question is that people criticize the UN that it cannot prevent or resolve crises that flare up around the world. But the UN doesn’t have any magic pill. You cannot really have inflated expectations from multilateral diplomacy when the state of world affairs is such as it is. You cannot eradicate human sins. So, I mean, quoting a classic — “this is the art of possible”.
Rick Sanchez: Listen, I'll give you some examples of what's going on right now. You know it well. At least Colin Powell once went to the United Nations and he lied. Benjamin Netanyahu showed a bomb and said this bomb's about to go off, and he was essentially lying as well. But at least they went and they lied. Today, countries are just doing whatever they want to do without even going to the United Nations, without even making a case before they act. That seems to most people to be bothersome. It must be bothersome to you as well.
Vassily Nebenzia: Not all of them, but some of them definitely do. And many accuse the Security Council of not living up to its mandate, and some offer radical solutions like abolishing veto power or empowering the General Assembly. But again, let’s take the Middle East crisis. The vote number is 14 to 1, and when they say the Security Council didn’t fulfil its job — it’s not the Security Council. It’s one country that blocked the decision.
Rick Sanchez: The United States.
Vassily Nebenzia: The other thing is — and that’s true — that the respect for the Security Council resolutions dwindled. I can give you just one example. When in 1967, during the Six-Day War, the ceasefire was negotiated in the United Nations — mainly between the Americans and the Soviets, of course, with the participation of Israel, Egypt, and Syria — the Israelis tried to delay the ceasefire. Finally, the day of the ceasefire was set. And Israelis literally rushed to fulfil their military objectives before the ceasefire went into force, thus occupying the Golan Heights. That is to demonstrate that at that time, Israel respected the decisions of the Security Council and was bothered about the reputation it would get if it didn’t fulfil them.
And it’s not the case only with Israel. I remember when the former US Ambassador to the UN, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, after one of the resolutions adopted in the Security Council on the Middle East — on Palestine, on Israeli-Palestinian conflict — said to the press that this resolution is not mandatory to be implemented, while under Article 25 of the Charter it is.
Rick Sanchez: Yeah, things have changed. You know what else has changed? I'm thinking now, and this interview that you and I are doing might be seen by hundreds of millions of people, so... A lot of people will be interested in what you say about this change. It has to do with one person, Donald Trump. How is Donald Trump changing the geopolitical environment? Is it a net gain? Is it a net loss? How do you see it? How is it seen at the United Nations, Mr. Ambassador?
Vassily Nebenzia: Well, if we talk about the United Nations and the change of the administration and the change in the US policies — the multilateral institutions continue to function, the wheels are rolling, the gears are turning. They have their own dynamics. But of course, with the change of the administration from Democratic to Republican and vice versa, the position of the US on many issues changes 180 degrees.
Yes, Donald Trump is a special kind of politician. He likes paradoxical decisions. He likes quick fixes. He likes grandiose deals. And I think that he thinks also that the UN is another swamp which needs to be drained. Yes, the UN needs streamlining because there is a lot of duplication, non-coordination, non-core activities — but we have not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, all together.
So, yes, if I put it roughly, the position of the US in the UN changes to more conservative with the Republican administration and to more liberal with the Democratic one.
Rick Sanchez: Let's talk about Ukraine. It seems like the whole world, sir, is starting to realize that the gig is up for Mr. Zelensky. It looks like Donald Trump is realizing that, although further action is probably needed. The Global South community certainly is recognizing it. Countries like Hungary have realized it. Slovakia has realized it. Unfortunately, for the Russian position, there are countries that are stalwarts, part of the old European system like France and Germany, and the UK who have not realized it, and for some reason they want this war to continue. Make the best argument that you possibly can for people who are listening to us for why you think the situation in Ukraine is what it is and how it should be settled.
Vassily Nebenzia: There were some changes recently. We must recognize it happened thanks to the current US administration. For the first time in three years, we had two rounds of direct talks in Istanbul, where important humanitarian decisions were adopted — on the exchange of prisoners of war, on the exchange of dead servicemen, on other things. We exchanged memorandums on how we see the endgame of the conflict.
But if you talk about the Europeans, they changed their rhetoric on the conflict — from “we should inflict strategic defeat on Russia,” then to “Russia should not win in this war,” now they’re advocating a full, immediate and unconditional ceasefire — which is a testimony that they want to shield and protect their proxy, because he’s obviously losing on the battlefield. This is rhetoric. But when it comes to the deeds, they continue to supply arms, military advice on the ground, they provide satellites and other reconnaissance data. They are beating the drums of war, saying Russia is going to attack NATO imminently, and they have to rearm and spend more money on their military budgets.
But we already passed through it during the Minsk agreements. When the Minsk agreements were adopted, everybody — we at least — believed that it would be the game changer and the deal breaker. But it turned out from day one that the Ukrainians and their sponsors sabotaged that agreement and demanded that Russia would be implementing it, although Russia was not even mentioned in those agreements. Then came the confession of Angela Merkel, François Hollande and Petro Poroshenko, who openly acknowledged that they were not going to implement that agreement in good faith — but it was needed only to buy time for Ukraine to rearm.
So we are not going to get into this trap once again. We need to know what the endgame is, what the outline of the final outcome would be, how genuine the Ukrainians are in willing to negotiate, what their position is. Their position at the moment is to roll back to where we were in 1991, which is not realistic. Then they have to demonstrate it by stopping the conscription, by demobilising people. That will be a litmus test on the seriousness of their demands and their position. But given their general non-negotiability, I think we should be realistic in realising how serious that is.
Rick Sanchez: Well, let's talk about some of the realism in Ukraine. And these are, you know, reports that have been confirmed inside and outside of Ukraine. And that is that they are taking people of the streets... we can show the video. I've seen the video. You've seen the video. People all over the world have seen the video. Unfortunately, these videos are not shown on CNN or on Fox News or on NBC, but they should be because we're looking at them now. These are people literally being ripped off the streets, thrown into cars and taken to the front lines. We've confirmed reports that journalists have been arrested. One, an American journalist, was actually killed. That priests have been taken to jail, that political opposition has been imprisoned. These are realities of things that are taking place inside Ukraine. I am not saying that because those things are taking place the war needs to be decided one way or another. But these are things the world should know about, and many in the world do not know about these things. It has to be very frustrating for you. I imagine there's people at the UN who know about these. Maybe they talk about it in the corridors though, right? And maybe not in public.
Vassily Nebenzia: Of course I’ve seen these videos, and of course we talk about it at the meetings on Ukraine in the Security Council. But, you know, they are not listening — those who have to listen to it — I mean our Western partners. They won’t listen. They prefer to use Ukraine as a proxy in the game against Russia that they are undertaking. They are not sorry for the poor Ukrainians who are sent to the front as cannon fodder. They were not hesitant to prevent the deal that was nearly reached in Istanbul in April 2022, and already initialled by both sides.
When Boris Johnson rushed to Kiev to tell Zelensky to continue and win on the battlefield — which costs Ukraine hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians — which is awful, of course. So they are not humanists — I mean the Europeans in that sense — they do not care about Ukraine. And this is not the war between Russia and Ukraine. Ukraine is a proxy in this war.
This is a centuries-old war of the West against Russia — starting with the Polish invasion in the 17th century, then Napoleon in 1812, then Crimean War, then the joint American–UK–German intervention during the time of the Revolution — let alone the Nazi invasion during the Second World War.
And by the way, it was not just the Germans who fought the Russians. It was the whole Europe. There were French, Dutch, Finnish, Romanian, Italian, Hungarian battalions, divisions in the Hitler army. The Ukrainian nationalists collaborated, served in the Nazi SS divisions, etc.
I mean, this should be seen in a larger context, I would say — not just in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
Rick Sanchez: I was looking at some statistics. I did a little research before this interview with you, and I went back to look. Prior to this war, they asked Ukrainians, do you want to join NATO? Only 22% of people in Ukraine back then wanted to join NATO. 66% wanted to remain on friendly terms with Russia. So, it makes me think that something was cast or forced upon them that they didn't want. Do you feel sorry for the Ukrainian people, sir?
Vassily Nebenzia: Yes, it was. I am sorry for the Ukrainian people. I also have roots there too. It’s all mixed — with Russia and Ukraine — and when Putin says that we are one people, he’s not far from the truth. And in fact, he’s right. I think the same. I mean, of course, there are local folklore, temperament and other differences. I mean, these differences exist within Russia, within the regions, as much as with Ukraine. But that’s not the case.
The case is that Ukrainians are our brothers — no doubt about it. But the clique that came to rule them is — indeed, this is a regime, this is not a government. Zelensky came to power on the promise to end the war in Donbass, which they started against their own population — against Ukrainians with their army, which is forbidden in their constitution. He promised one thing, but he turned 180 degrees after it. And he changed everything that he promised to Ukrainian people. And he’s not very popular in Ukraine these days, if I may put it mildly. Besides, he’s an expired president.
Rick Sanchez: I have read that, yeah, expired, you're right, because his term expired. And he decided not to have elections, something that interestingly is really important to me as an American, because even Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War, at the height of the worst time with people killing everywhere, blood everywhere, decided, no, we still have to have elections. And he almost lost, but he still had elections. So, if the excuse is we can't have an election because there's a war, well, then that's not a good one, based on history, anyway. Let me ask you, though, about Zelensky.
Vassily Nebenzia: Politically, Zelensky is already dead. But personally, physically, the end of his presidency may entail something for him which he is trying to avoid at all costs — that is, reporting on the money stolen and the loss of the people whom he failed miserably. So, he has all the reasons why to cling to power and not to hold elections.
Rick Sanchez: What do you mean by what you just said? What do you mean by what you just said about the money he has stolen? Can you explain that? I've always tried to understand how he's stealing. Is he just taking the money that NATO and the United States have given him in the past?
Vassily Nebenzia: That’s an open secret. They stole billions of dollars out of the aid they were receiving. He was asked about it — not just in Ukraine, but by their sponsors as well. Even during the Biden administration, there were attempts to get him to account, to report on the money that he was provided with. And I think that when finally it comes to it — it will come to it — the revelations will be very dire.
Rick Sanchez: I want to ask you about the EU and NATO. Organizations of people who are not elected and are very, very aggressive. And yet they seem to have an awful lot of power. They conducted coups in different parts of the world. They often pay media organizations and form media organizations in different places. They conduct regime changes. They have been aggressive. They bombed Belgrade. They bombed Iraq. They've tried to enter into Georgia. By the way, that has nothing to do with the North Atlantic. How can the North Atlantic Treaty Organization be involved in Georgia which is, last time I checked on a map, very far away? So, I'm puzzled by the EU and by NATO and by its role and a lot of people are starting to ask why they do the things they do. For example, what they're doing in Ukraine. The Ukrainian people said we don’t want to be a part of NATO and NATO seems to be saying NO, you will be a part of NATO whether you like it or not. That sounds crazy.
Vassily Nebenzia: At the Madrid summit of NATO a couple of years ago, they made a decision that NATO has a global responsibility now. So Georgia is within reach, the Far East is within reach. You take any part of the globe — it’s all NATO responsibility now.
They say they’re a defensive alliance, they stand for democracy — which can be challenged — and you just said it in your introduction exactly why. They are not a defensive military alliance. They are an aggressive military bloc that promotes expansion, promotes dominance. That was one of the reasons why the whole thing happened — because they were moving towards our borders, despite the promises and commitments and pledges that they gave before the Soviet Union collapsed. So it’s nothing to comment on. It has been commented so many times. It’s all clear with that.
As for the EU — you said non-elected officials. Yes, they rule the ball there despite not being elected, and they glue their members together. And in fact, European diplomacy here in the UN looks really very miserable, and I think that reflects some kind of political, moral, and civilisational crisis of the West.
They are engaged in only one narrative — building their identity against one enemy, which is of course Russia, who is responsible for all the ills that happen in the world. They are busy with promoting their neoliberal agenda in the UN, or wherever it belongs, and wherever it doesn’t.
The other thing is that they have this bloc discipline. Very rare and very few countries can raise their voice to defend their own national interests, but most of the time they read from the same script that was prepared for them in Brussels. So it’s all very, very sad, of course.
But the question is the crisis of the European politics in general. Look who is ruling Europe today — let alone Churchill and Roosevelt — where is De Gaulle? Where is Chirac? Where is Mitterrand? Where is Kohl? These people were giants in their own sense. But these are some kind of dwarfs — I’m sorry to say that. I’m not naming any one of them, but regarding the names — for example, I don’t know by heart the names of most of the European foreign ministers, because they come and go like in a kaleidoscope, leave no mark of their presence in the position. So this is a crisis of European politics altogether.
Rick Sanchez: I won't say their names either, but I'll just say their initials are Starmer, Macron and Merz. And we'll leave it at that.
Vassily Nebenzia: Recently Merz made a statement saying that Israel and Iran are doing the dirty work for us — and this is a country, a member of the JCPOA. Can you imagine that?
Rick Sanchez: Yeah, I heard Starmer recently also was asked by a reporter if it was going to cost his people a lot if they end up engaging in a war with Iran. And he said, well, you know, the British people had to pay a lot during the situation in Ukraine, and they're probably going to have to pay again, and, you know, tough luck. Those are your people, sir. You're supposed to be thinking of them, not Ukraine. I thought, wow, wow.
Vassily Nebenzia: At the Sunday Security Council emergency meeting on Iran — the UK Ambassador there said that she calls on Iran to demonstrate restraint. Can you imagine the irony and the absurdity? Iran was the subject of unprovoked attack — and it is being called to demonstrate restraint.
Rick Sanchez: It's a funny world we're living in, sir, and you are handling it right there. You're on center stage, as Shakespeare would say. Mr. Ambassador, thank you, sir, for taking time to talk to us. You're a smart man, and I really enjoyed the back and forth. Yes, thank you, sir. Thank you. We appreciate it.
Vassily Nebenzia: Thank you.
