Skip to content

Lavrov on Strategic Threats: At a Certain Point, Russia's Patience Breaks

Amid a packed diplomatic schedule, Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has taken the lead in a series of official Russian warnings that the current buildup for war against Russia, including military actions by NATO/EU members that are already happening, will not roll ahead without a response. He addressed the current strategic threats to the world in speeches and press conferences in China (April 15) and at Turkiye’s Antalya Diplomacy Forum (April 18), along with other speeches and interviews. In his April 24 address to Russian NGOs, Lavrov presented a strategic overview from a historical standpoint: “As our Chinese friends say, a crisis is an interplay of danger and major opportunities.” That was the speech in which Lavrov said that “an open war has been declared on us,” with Ukraine able to act as a spearhead only with enormous material support and guidance from the West. He elaborated that “the West’s decades-long expansion into the Eurasian continent … in recent years has openly manifested itself in the slogan of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia.”

Earlier, at his press conference after the Antalya Forum, Lavrov amplified the discussion going on among Russian policymakers about specific military actions that have already occurred: while senior officers in Belgium and politicians in the U.K. and Germany talk about war against Russia “in the foreseeable future,” the Baltic states, likely Finland, and possibly Poland, have already provided their airspace for major drone attacks against Russia. After the crash of several drones in Latvia and Estonia, it became clear that the drone swarms that had heavily damaged Russia’s ports at Primorsk and Ust-Luga, which handle much of Russian oil and fertilizer exports, had skirted Russian and Belarusian territory by flying over the Baltics, then attacking the ports from the Gulf of Finland. On April 17 Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu warned that if the Baltics and Finland indeed “deliberately provide their airspace, thereby becoming open accomplices in aggression against Russia,” then Russia has the right to self-defense in response to an “armed attack” under Article 51 of the UN Charter.

In Antalya, Lavrov put it this way: “President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated that Russia has a response [to threats originating from Europe]. Certain commentators now try to mock this, claiming that Russia merely issues warnings while the West continues to cross new ‘red lines.’ Meanwhile, the Baltic states and Poland are offering to open their airspace for Ukrainian drones—or those supplied by NATO members—to strike northern Russia. Voices are increasingly heard claiming there is no reason to fear Russia. Maybe some are now calling us a ‘paper tiger,’ the way Donald Trump called NATO that. But I would caution against drawing such parallels. Indeed, there is in our character the quality of patience. … But at a certain point, patience breaks. And it may even be beneficial that no one fully understands where this ‘red line’ lies.”

On Sunday night, April 26, on Russia’s widely watched “Great Game” broadcast on Channel One Russia, host Dimitri Simes played that excerpt from Lavrov’s speech and asked Prof. Dmitry Trenin to comment. Trenin, who recently became president of the Russian International Affairs Council, replied that it should not be considered merely an escalation of a war of words, but, rather, an indication that the Russian leadership’s concern is growing, and may lead to some kind of an answer. Trenin cited the Ministry of Defense press release which itemized the addresses of drone-manufacturers in Europe; this drew attention, he noted, but the reaction was the usual: “We’re going to ignore this and keep doing what we’re doing.” Professor Trenin called such brushing-off a dangerous tendency among the Europeans, which shows shortcomings in their strategic thinking. In Lavrov’s remark about red lines, he commented, the foreign minister was speaking in his typically “correct” (diplomatic), but precise manner.