Transcript submitted by a reader
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdLwjoRuonU
NewsX: 0:02
For our top story, we start in Europe, where Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has warned that NATO’s push to increase defence spending could backfire. Speaking in Moscow, Lavrov says the move may lead to the catastrophic collapse of the alliance. He added that NATO should be guided by common sense rather than escalating spending. NATO leaders recently agreed to raise defence spending to five percent of GDP over the next decade, a target driven by US President Donald Trump’s demands for increased burden sharing. Meanwhile, Russia says it plans to cut military spending next year despite a current defense budget that makes up 6.3 percent of GDP, its highest since the Cold War.
Lavrov’s comments came in response to Polish foreign minister, Radoslaw Sikowski, who warned an arms race could trigger Putin’s fall. Russia continues to dismiss claims that it would attack a NATO member, but the tensions reflected deep divisions over security and spending priorities across Europe.
1:07
We’re now joined by Gilbert Doctorow, who is a Russian affairs expert, and he joins us live from Brussels. Gilbert, thank you for joining us on the program. Putin has reiterated his ambition for peace over and over again. However, if Russia does really want peace, why does it spend over six percent on GDP on its military, the highest since the Cold War, while telling NATO to use common sense and spend less?
Gilbert Doctorow, PhD: 1:35
Well I think during the Cold War, Russia, particularly at the end of the Cold War, Russia wasn’t at war with anyone. So it’s understandable that its military budget would have been lower than today. If a country is in the middle of a fierce war for its own existence, as Russia says it is today, it’s understandable they would spend a large amount of their GDP on a war. So that isn’t the issue.
The promise to bring it down, well, that assumes, I suppose, that Russia will win the war with Ukraine in this time period, and so can afford to scale back its military budget. So long as the war is going on, as fiercely as it is today, I think it is improbable that any cut in the Russian budget would be realistic.
NewsX: 2:25
It’s evident this hike in defence spending is because of fears of aggression. And how can Moscow dismiss these fears when much of the international community claims that Russia has invaded or intervened in countries like Georgia and also regions of Crimea and Ukraine all of which used to be in Moscow’s sphere. What are your thoughts on that, Gilbert?
Doctorow:
I think that the current Information War offensive by Russia– And I say that because Mr. Lavrov’s remarks are in sync with what President Putin was saying yesterday. And I can tell you that on major talk shows like Vladimir Solovyov’s talk show last night panelists were almost hysterical about the dangers being posed to Russia by the increased military spend projected for NATO. The Russians are engaging in an information war, you can call it propaganda, which is the old word we use for this sort of thing.
3:24
And that’s a mistake, because they are very poor at propaganda. They don’t do it very well, not nearly as well as the United States and the West does. So they’re talking themselves blue, but I don’t think they will have any real impact on what’s going on in Europe, which is faced with its own internal contradictions and really does not react to anything that Moscow says. The agreed-upon increase in spending in Europe, in NATO last week was an empty exercise as anybody who seriously looks at it knows. The European countries cannot raise their military budgets, and that includes Germany, where the government will fall if Mr. Merz proceeds with his ambitious plans to introduce a draft, which is what his defense minister was calling for a week ago. Therefore, the threat coming from Europe is by no means as real as the Russians are now pretending it is. And it would be better if they just shut up.
NewsX: 4:30
Okay. Lavrov calls NATO’s collapse possibly catastrophic. One of the reasons why this conflict started was, of Ukraine, the possibility that it would join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Is this a threat, or does Moscow actively hope for NATO to fall apart?
Doctorow:
Well, of course it hopes that it will fall apart. There was a peculiar choice of words by Lavrov, “catastrophic”. Catastrophic for whom? Certainly not for the Russians. And it is a hyperbolic statement. It’s an exaggerated statement. In the worst-case scenario, NATO will not collapse catastrophically. It will downsize, it will break up into pieces that become part of the European Union’s defence.
But the different forces and equipment that NATO now has will not disappear. They will be integrated or reintegrated in the European defense, in the worst-case scenario. So Mr. Lavrov’s choice of words was very peculiar.
NewsX: 5:41
Yes indeed. He also claimed that Russia will cut its military spending down from the 6.3 percent it’s currently at. Why should anyone believe Russia’s claim while, [on] spending the next year, while still fighting this costly war in Ukraine?
Doctorow:
Well, as I said a moment ago, the hidden assumption of that statement that was made by President Putin and is repeated by his foreign Minister, the hidden assumption, is that the war will end because Russia will win, because Ukraine will capitulate. Now, that is the assumption. Nobody, he isn’t saying that.
But if it is true, if that happens, then of course Russia will scale back its military expenditures. If it does not happen and the war goes on, then of course Russia will continue to spend it at its present level, if not even more.
NewsX: 6:40
Gilbert Doctorow, thank you very much for joining us on the programme and for your insights.
4 thoughts on “Transcript of NewsX interview, 30 June”
Comments are closed.
Sergey Lavrov: “Well, if Mr Sikorski is a prophet on this scale, he may perhaps visualise that what I see as a disastrous boost in the NATO military budget will lead to the collapse of this organisation. Russia, for its part, is planning to cut its military expenditures […] Russia is guided by common sense, not pretended threats, as NATO member countries, including Mr Sikorski’s Poland, do.”
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s answers to media questions, June 30, 2025
https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/2033279/
That’s correct. Western Europe is heading towards a period of instability. Depending on whether Trumpism prevails permanently in the USA or whether the liberal globalists come back, this can take various forms. The mixture of the decline of the EU and armament is dangerous in any case. There are the components of internal disputes in the EU, which are already being conducted by “hybrid” means and may eventually turn into openly military ones. And there is the “Drang nach Osten” along with the pursuit of a “European” atomic bomb, which would be de facto under the control of the Germans.
Here is an accurate analysis by V. Nikiforova about what might be coming to Russia, but also to Germany. For us Germans, our own striving for great power is the danger. Our enemies, against whom we lose in the end, are only its secondary consequence.
“‘Drang nah Osten 2.0’ will end as shamefully as the previous versions…”
Victoria Nikiforova, RIA Novosti, 25.06.2025
https://netherlands.news-pravda.com/en/world/2025/06/25/5146.html
LikeLike
I have already written that Merz is the most dangerous German chancellor since Adolf Hitler. My objection to Lavrov’s remarks is that it is not for Russia to tell Europe that it will have a catastrophic collapse if it raises military budgets to 5% (in reality to 3.5%). That is the job of You the People of Germany, France, etc, the EU and NATO Member States. There must be public discussion of this idiocy in Western Europe, not in Moscow
LikeLike
so, true..but a consolation..Germany in 2025 is not the same as Germany 1933..just an observation from me born and raised and now residing in the BRD…but future is not ours to see..I believe that most Germans realise that another financing of Barbarossa II is not affordable, despite all that blubber of braindead and belligerent politicians in the EU leadership. Time will tell, always does.
LikeLike
I think that the Russians probably expect the Ukraine Operation to drag out a while longer, just at a lower intensity. So long as fighting is ongoing NATO has not yet lost.
The defense industry can only turn out weapons so fast no matter what the budget is. Having a large standing military is also expensive. Now that so many men have been trained the Russians can stand up a large army on short notice. Those young men are needed in the private sector. Besides they need to work on replacing all of those washing machines that they confiscated at the beginning of the war.
If Lavrov refers to Europe as a ‘Garden’ then you will know that he is trolling. The Russians need to begin to shift their economy more towards civilian goods for the domestic market and products for export. Reducing military expenditures may also be intended to help tame inflation. At this point the Russians need to fend off the terrorist attacks and then simply outlast the Europeans. The Russians are the least of Europe’s problems.
LikeLike