I see a lot of familiar faces here, my colleague diplomats, representatives of foreign states, leaders of conferences and events on nonproliferation. Thank you so much for coming your today. I would like to express special gratitude to the director for cooperating with the foreign minister. Over the years of your work, this forum has become an important platform for the discussion on nonproliferation issues for representatives, leaders, and all those who deal with such important aspects of nonproliferation, Nuclear Development and arms control. In june next year, we will be marking the signing, the anniversary of the signing of the nonproliferation treaty, the npt, which is the main part of the nonproliferation regime. And we have to say that the treaty that has laid down the foundations of nonproliferation is now challenged quite a lot, and it is to a large extent related to the fact that many countries are challenging the norms and values and the successes that have become the result of our collective efforts. We are worried that unfortunately, the conference, as we come to the conference in 2020, we must have all the results we want, and the results of the conference in 2015 tell us quite a lot. And so, the position of russia is well known. We dont want to join the andear weapons ban treaty, the supporters of the treaty won and International Award recently. They believe they are wellintentioned. They want to limit and Ban Nuclear Weapons completely. But the complete elimination of Nuclear Weapons is only possible if equal security is guaranteed for all. As written down in the npt, and the document on the Nuclear Weapons ban, we are very far from these principles. We need to take into account all factors that influence stability today, and destabilize the nonproliferation regime. As a result, the world can become even less stable. There is no agreement on the existing elements of the nonproliferation regime. It is quite unclear, what the nuclearweapon free zone can be created in the middle east. The creation of this zone, as dated as far as 1995, and the two wasas for thwarted in 2015, and an opportunity was lost to actually move towards implementing this. We are convinced the lack of specific steps towards this goal, from the u. K. The u. S. , to who all contribute to the creation of this zone will have negative effects for the progress. We still support the creation of the zone and will continue to work with all the interested parties and all the interested countries. We believe that success lies in finding a consensus in a broader security context. We have still not resolved the issue of the comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban treaty. We continue to work toward implementation, and we call upon all of the eight countries to sign and ratify the treaty, so as to contribute to the nonproliferation regime. Also, the terrorists they use weapons of mass destruction also need to be combated. That is why we have resolutions and conferences. Resolution 1540 of the United Nations will do a lot to prevent the Nuclear Weapons and chemical weapons from coming into the hands, flowing into the hands of terrorist organizations. But we need unified and comprehensive norms to tackle this problem. That is why in geneva, we will launch efforts to implement in what was laid down in 2016, the fight against chemical and biological weapons. We believe this initiative is in the interests of all the states, and it can lead to progress in the geneva process. We can see a lot of attempts to use iaea resources, to direct these resources to make this institution and instrument of pressure on other countries to expand its mandate, to make it responsible for Nuclear Disarmament and for reviewing military activities. That it is not connected to. And we would like to point out, the International AtomicEnergy Agency needs to become a needs to remain a guarantor in the area of nonproliferation. And should also all states need to be responsible for providing physical security of Nuclear Weapons in their territory, including the parameters of their national systems, their security systems. And we will do what we can to make Everything Possible so that the guarantees of the agency remain nonpoliticized, and are based on International Law and work toward implementing towards a lot of issues such as the joint comprehensive plan of action towards iran, and the International Agency is doing a lot to review and actually implement the plan of action in iran. In any case, the situation around the Iranian Nuclear work around this problem continues. It is evident that the failure of the joint comprehensive plan of action is due to one of its most active actors. The leader of the p5 plus one group would be a warning signal to all of the members of this group and to those who tackle the problem. The Korean Peninsula problem. The resolution of this problem requires actions from all the parties in preventing a conflict that will lead to a great economic, political, ecological catastrophe, a humanitarian catastrophe. All parties need to show restraint and all the resolutions taken with regards to the Nuclear Problem in north korea, there were calls to restoring diplomatic processes and diplomatic dialogue between all parties. There is no other alternative. We call upon all responsible members of the International Community to support the ideals laid down in the russiachina roadmap. And our foreign ministers, on the fourth of june, expressed these ideas. We believe that all these actions will allow us to deescalate the situation on the Korean Peninsula and create visible and comprehensive security, not just in the Southeast Asia region but in the world as a whole. We can see attempts from other countries to create this balance and balance, to use the factor of force, and resolve their own issues while at the same time sorting test for king warting interNational Stability. One of the most important problems is in asiapacific and on the regions, attempts to create a Missile Defense system, and moving elements of this system closer to russia and chinese borders. Our calls on managing the balancegarding this remain unanswered. We see a plan to continue the deployments of new weapons on the borders in Eastern Europe and we are worried about what is happening. To lowering lead the threshold for which Nuclear Weapons would be used. We support banning the placement of Nuclear Weapons on the territories of other states, and ofcall on banning the use other nations for your interests in terms of Nuclear Weapons. The immediate and shortrange missile treaty, we have talked a lot about that. We have expressed our concern about that, but washington continues to blame us, and this approach does not lead to any positive progress. We see this provocation is an attempt to show russia as a villain in the international arena, while at the same time keeping silent about their own failings. Our position on the short range and intermediate range Missile Program is quite clear. The negative affect on National Stability is furthered by other factors. There are threats that space can become a space for international confrontation, military confrontation. This needs to be prevented, and the russianchinese project on the nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons in space. The nonproliferation is a collective responsibility of all the world. And russia is ready to work with anyone who wants to make International Peace and security more stable. I am ready to answer your questions. Thank you. [applause] you will be given a chance to ask three questions. I will give an opportunity first of all, to our foreign friends. You have sent a very experienced ambassador now, to washington. He has experience in negotiating strategic arms control with the United States. I am wondering what you have proposed to him, to restart the arms control dialogue with the United States. As you yourself mentioned, we have a big breakdown in this vital working relationship between the two nuclear superpowers. Mr lavrov we have had problems in our dialogue with the u. S. In recent months in recent years. During the Previous Administration there were many things that were failing. This is a different conversation. But after the Trump Administration came to the white house, we have stated our readiness to renew dialogue on all directions. We understand clearly, the situation that the new administration is in, how much pressure it is in at the moment, the allegations against it. And it is still confronted by those who supported the democratic candidate. Still, we are ready to renew dialogue in all directions. On the scale that would be comfortable to the Trump Administration. I talked about that with the u. S. President when we talked in the oval office in spring this year. Before that, i talked with rex tillerson, who came to moscow. As a result, we developed a channel of communication. Apart from other issues, we looked at where we stand on nuclear stability. The main issue we discussed was the bilateral issues, how to prevent the spiral of conflict from escalating. In september, we had a conversation on stability. These were issues of strategic limitation of arms. And the shortrange missiles. I cannot say the dialogue we have allows us to see any positive results in the near future, but this is still renewed. It will be continued on in bilateral channels. Mark fitzpatrick, from the International Institute for strategic studies. Thank you for your time. Almost everyone here agrees with you that the Iran Nuclear Deal needs to be preserved. One of the threats to the deal involves questions about the verification of the socalled section t, prohibiting activities relating to Nuclear Weapons and their development. The secretary general has asked for tools to be strengthened in verifying section t. Do you agree this would be a good idea to strengthen the iaes mandate to verify section t . You cannot strengthen something you dont have. There is no mandate to verify this section. This reflects the consensus with the participation of the e. U. And the security council, that the changes to any part of this consensus requires support from all members of the five plus one and iran, of course. I am convinced, as are our colleagues in europe, that any attempts to do so can put an end to these talks in terms of the Iranian Nuclear problem. Program. Very good t. Can you say two words about yourself . I am a retired military officer from pakistan. That is impressive. [laughter] the best part was still to come. In my own days, i handled some very complicated affairs. Frankly, i am in the business of peacemaking. No longer rearmament. Do some ar my question was about the stumbling blocks. Forh are coming in the way nonproliferation to achieve its core objective. Onelly on such occasions, is heard very often, we hope it will happen. There is a wishlist. Him but people very astutely deviate from mentioning the problem. If there are problems you would like to highlight, what is , is it the elitist approach that is preventing us from achieving that goal . Thank you. To be frank, it is not a question. But a philosophical point i t. We need to base our actions on the spirit and letter of the agreement. Essential,ortant, is to maintaining our efforts toward farther limitations in production of arms in the context of a comprehensive trek towards weapons reduction. As mr. Putin had said yesterday, we cannot ignore the new achievements in terms of military technologies. Saw after the nonproliferation treaty was signed. We cannot ignore them, that would be unreasonable. Those who support the idea of a complete nuclear ban, they ignore the threats to strategic stability. The creation of new, deadly weapons. I dont know what to add to that. The npt needs to be maintained , needs to be secured. We cannot have a different dialogue so that someone can play games with this. And follow their own line. That would include the mutual exclusive documents. We should not allow this to happen. Thank you. Agreed e rob mr. Lavrov agreed to answer another few questions. Thank you. When speaking a few weeks ago, it is not enough to work and at the level of administrations of russia and the United States to maintain arms control, but to also work with the congress . What is your view . I would say that the number of players needs to be even greater. The number of actors needs to be greater. When we talk about the issues of nonproliferation and strategic stability, it is not just for eign ministries. It is also done together with the ministers of defense in russia. Also federal Securities Services are involved. Certainly, it depends on how our interests are presented in the package we are proposing. And of course, the action of the parliament depends on that. I see the administration of the u. S. President trying to work with parliament with her congress. We see parties that try to use the congress to create unsurmountable obstacles for the american administration. As long as these negotiations, talks continue, i dont think we will receive any specific reaction from the congress. Theng an into account russophobia we have been saying for quite some time. I am the ambassador for disarmament from sweden. Mr. Minister, you stressed the importance of the and see and we agreeeement and we all how crucial the agreement is. I was wondering, apart from organizing this excellent conference, what could a more contribution concrete contribution be from the Russian Federation . Ensuring a successful outcome . Thank you. Alright. Dont ask what the country can do for you, ask what you can do for the country. In other words, a slogan a long time ago. Weve been blamed not only for interfering in the american election, sweden is also worried Russian Hackers will be involved in your elections. The french talked about that and. Any other countries rea accused of trying to block the minsk agreements. Now we are accused of the problems in the syrian peace process. Fortunately, there has been less talk about that recently. Probably, we will be made responsible for the north Korea Nuclear program issue. I dont think its reasonable to say it will be up to russia whether the 2020 conference will be effective. We see here someone who can tell you in detail about that. But the understanding we reached on out to lunch negotiations on the creation of a Nuclear Free Zone in the middle east, we are all the components were prepared. We have taken into account security concerns from israel. I will not go into details right now. All of the people in the conference who needed to engage started to block and jeopardize this very important document. There is a lot of goodwill coming from us. At the talks, currently taking place, as part of the reviewing process, we are looking for new alternatives for ways to overcome this pressure. This confrontation. I hope when you talk to americans, the british and other countries that you also point out to them the importance to make the review process successful. For many times, 35 years after the idea of convening such a actually fails, this will be a blow to the process. Nonproliferation process. We have time for another small question, short question. I am the counselor of the austrian embassy. I would have a quick question on Nuclear Disarmament proper. For the future, would you see actions and moving toward a unilateral setting for Nuclear Disarmament . We need to ensure the current agreement is implemented. Dateary of next year, the when we need to see agreement both from russia and the United States. Then we will continue to think about the next steps. I am convinced that dialogue will continue. I am also convinced it is quite difficult to imagine a situation hypothetical, virtual round of talks on further reduction of Nuclear Arsenals can take place in a bilateral format. The figures reflected in the current agreement reach more than the arsenals of the United States and russia. Thank you. Thank you and good luck. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] Armed Services chair john mccain and defense secretary james mattis poke briefly to reporters on capitol hill following their meeting about a recent attack on u. S. Troops in niger. I what can you tell us about the meeting . The secretary and i have had a series of to work we have had ge