Assad barred from politics, Damascus did not request his return: Russian ambassador

ERBIL, Kurdistan Region - Russia has no plans to fully withdraw its forces from key bases in Syria, and the new leadership in Damascus has made no request for the return of Bashar al-Assad, Russia’s ambassador to Baghdad told Rudaw, adding that the ousted dictator is barred from media and political activities. Elbrus Kutrashev also emphasized Moscow’s longstanding partnership with both Erbil and Baghdad.

The Russian diplomat detailed Moscow’s role in the fight against the Islamic State (ISIS) during the group’s 2014 rise in Iraq, noting that Russian President Vladimir Putin then ordered swift military aid per Baghdad’s request.

“President Putin’s decision was very quick,” Kutrashev said, adding that the Russian leader had told Iraqi officials, “We will take planes already in our army and send them to you,” stressing that the arrival of Russian planes boosted morale, making the Iraqi forces feel that they “were not alone.”

On the current military relationship, he confirmed that military-technical cooperation continues, adding, however, that Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine has hindered its capability to sell some types of arms.

In the economic dossier, Kutrashev affirmed that Russian energy companies such as LUKOIL, Gazprom and Rosneft remain active in the Kurdistan Region and Iraq, while dismissing Western sanctions as “illegal” and adding that they obstruct Russian companies.

The Russian diplomat also welcomed the recent resumption of Kurdish oil exports, describing it as beneficial for all of Iraq.

Russia's long game in Syria

On the Syrian front, the Russian ambassador noted that while Moscow has reduced its military footprint in Syria, it has no intention of fully withdrawing from its strategic bases there - including the Hmeimim Airbase in the coastal province of Latakia. He emphasized that Russia’s continued presence in Syria carries greater “political and strategic significance” than military necessity.

The ambassador acknowledged that Russia’s combat mission in Syria has fundamentally changed.

“Our forces were there to fight terrorist groups, and that situation has changed. We are not engaged in combat on Syrian soil anymore,” he said. “However, those bases have a strategic significance beyond Syria itself.”

When asked by Rudaw about the number of Russian forces still stationed in Syria, he replied, "Perhaps half the previous number, or a bit more.”

Crucially, he stressed that Syria’s new leadership has made no request for a Russian withdrawal. Diplomatic engagement with Damascus - including the recent visit of interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa to Moscow - has reportedly focused on maintaining bilateral ties rather than dismantling old alliances.

The issue of the ousted Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, who remains in Moscow, was notably not raised during Sharaa’s visit, according to the ambassador.

“I believe that during Ahmad al-Sharaa’s visit they [Syrian side] did not ask for Bashar al-Assad’s extradition - I’d say that with 99 percent certainty,” he stated, adding that the topic had been discussed previously with other Russian representatives.

Ambassador Kutrashev further explained that Russia regards Assad’s presence in Moscow as “humanitarian, not political,” confirming that the toppled dictator is prohibited from any public activity.

“He has no right to engage in any media or political activity. Have you heard anything from him? You haven’t - because he is not allowed to. But he is safe and alive.”

The ambassador also commented on Russia’s relations with the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), describing them as “normal and friendly.” He encouraged continued dialogue between the Kurdish-led forces and Damascus to resolve outstanding issues.

He emphasized that questions regarding Kurdish rights and the integration of the SDF into the Syrian army are “internal Syrian matters,” not decisions for Moscow. Nevertheless, he underscored the importance of constitutional guarantees ensuring “linguistic, cultural, economic, administrative, and political rights” for Syria’s various ethnic and religious groups.

The following is the full transcript of the interview with Elbrus Kutrashev, the Russian ambassador to Iraq:

Rudaw: One of the world’s great powers, Russia - what is happening in the region, and what is Russia’s view on it. Some topics relate to Russia itself and its relations with the Kurdistan Region and Iraq, Russian companies operating in this country- in Kurdistan and Iraq - Russia’s relations with the Kurds, and other issues. I discussed these with the Russian Ambassador to Iraq, Elbrus Kutrashev. Welcome to Rudaw, and thank you very much.

Elbrus Kutrashev: Welcome, and thank you for the invitation.

Mr. Kutrashev, I want to know, at the beginning, before your visit to Kurdistan and Iraq, I want to know your opinion about the period 20 to 22 years ago, perhaps even longer - what is your perception of this region?

Naturally, I had an idea, but it was theoretical. I worked in Baghdad as an attaché and then as a third secretary from 1999 to 2002. Of course, under those circumstances, there was no chance to visit Kurdistan. My first visit to Kurdistan was after the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime, in 2004, I believe.

How was your perception of the Kurds and Kurdistan? And when you came, what did you see?

The Kurdish people are not strange to us. We know them well; we have many researchers specializing in the Kurdish issue, many of whom are of Kurdish origin. There is a large Kurdish community in Russia - especially during the Soviet Union, it was bigger. But even now, in the Russian Federation, in Moscow, Saint Petersburg, and the Krasnodar region, there are Kurds as Russian citizens, part of Russian society.

Do you know how many there are?

In Russia, we have 300 languages, but I apologize, I don’t have an exact number. Surely it exists on the internet. But I want to say that during my work at the Russian foreign ministry, I met at least three Kurds of Russian origin. By the way, they were all Yazidis. I don’t know why there is a special attraction for Yazidis in the Russian foreign ministry, but they were good young people. One was in the ministry’s security detail, the second was our martial arts trainer in the ministry’s sports department, and the third worked as a diplomat until recently. There may be more, but these are the ones I know.

Do the Kurds play a clear role in getting jobs, managing work, and assuming positions?

Of course, the Kurdish people are known for their talents, ambitions, and global presence, so I am not surprised at all. Russia is a country where minority rights are well respected, and opportunities for work and promotion are equal for everyone. Naturally, in Moscow, like any capital in a large country, there are large minority communities - so large that sometimes they do not even appear as minorities.

Mr. Ambassador, your Arabic is very good. This does not mean I am evaluating you, but your Arabic is very good, and your English is also very good. I want to know if you have learned any Kurdish.

Honestly, thank you for this assessment. My Arabic is modest. Language is something that requires continuous practice. I learned my first Arabic letters in 1992, and now it is 2025, so it is time to speak a little better than before. Regarding Kurdish, of course, if I had started learning it at university, it would have been easier, but I did not have that opportunity. I live in Baghdad and often visit Kurdistan, and of course, I apologize for not having learned much besides “zor supas.” By the way, the word “supas” is similar to a word we use in Russian; we say “spasiba” for thank you.

What other words do you know? Because some linguists say there are more than 300 words shared between Kurdish and Russian. Do you know another word shared between them?

Honestly, I am not surprised that there are 300 shared words; I am surprised it is only 300. I thought it would be more. Especially in today’s world, languages are becoming closer, and there is exchange between peoples and countries - not only commercially but also linguistically. Unfortunately, I haven’t had the chance to learn Kurdish. If I were given the opportunity, I would definitely learn it. I now have a special relationship with the Region and Kurdish friends, and this relationship began in 2003, when I met Kurdish officials and party representatives in Baghdad.

It happened by chance, because during that period, during the occupation, the situation was very chaotic; the internet did not work properly, and neither did the phones. In my diplomatic work, I had to drive around Baghdad looking for party signs. That’s how, by chance, I entered the headquarters of the Democratic Union and the Islamic Union, while my colleague Aleksey Solomatin entered the office of the Kurdistan Democratic Party [KDP], whose chief of office was Hoshyar Zebari. That’s how our opening to the Kurdish forces happened. After a year, we went as an official delegation to both Erbil and Sulaymaniyah, and that’s how the exchange of visits started. Perhaps they didn’t visit us much in Baghdad, but we frequently visited Kurdistan.

Are those good relations still ongoing?

These relations are not only ongoing, but I believe they are continuously improving. If initially the relations were political and friendly, now they are more friendship than political.

You - Russia - always say we do not deal with states, but we deal with peoples, and the Kurds, as a main ethnic group in the region - don’t you see a distance between Russia and the Kurds, especially in the Kurdistan Region?

There has never been any distance at all. First, we are not in competition with any country, and we look calmly, even welcomingly, if a country has more activity than us in Kurdistan. The important thing is that this activity is for the benefit of the Region and in the interest of its people. We are comfortable with our situation and our relations in Kurdistan. I am surprised by the word “distance.” We opened the consulate a long time ago, in 2007, and its activity is well known, with good relations with all political forces in the Region, in addition to large economic activity. Russian investments in oil and gas in Kurdistan are in the billions, not millions of dollars.

We will touch on economic affairs, but for example, why has there not been a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and the President of the Kurdistan Region, Nechirvan Barzani? Is there a plan? Are you arranging something like this?

Regarding the lack of this meeting, we should ask President [Putin] why such a meeting has not taken place. Perhaps he is busy with issues like Ukraine, relations with the United States, the topic of war and peace, and the survival of humanity on this planet, because current developments pushed by Western countries opposing us are foolishly leading the world toward a third world war. This worries us. As for the level of President Putin’s visits, recently he does not travel abroad except in necessary cases. In this regard, Moscow’s doors are open to friends from all over the world, including Iraq in general and the Kurdistan Region in particular. Believe me, friends in both Erbil and Sulaymaniyah know this and have made more than one visit at different levels. We have no agenda preventing exchanges, negotiations, or cooperation in all forms with the Kurdistan Region - no political or other agendas.

You talked about the economic issue and the export of the Kurdistan Region’s oil, which began through Turkey. I want to know, how does Russia view this issue?

Naturally, we welcome in principle any solutions reached through diplomatic and negotiation channels, especially if the matter is being discussed among the people of one country. That’s generally speaking. Specifically, of course, we had an interest in resuming this export because our companies operate in Kurdistan and have huge investments there. These companies, like others, suffered from problems, particularly the halt and suspension of exports. Naturally, we warmly welcome the resumption and want to continue working in this field. The difference between Russia and other countries is that from the beginning, we considered this issue an internal Iraqi matter and did not allow ourselves to intervene. As an ambassador, I have addressed this topic several times in my meetings in Baghdad, Erbil, and Sulaymaniyah with officials and presented a supportive position for resuming oil exports. However, we did not take a public marketing stance as some countries did. This topic was sensitive and internal, and to the extent possible, we helped find a solution. I am not saying that we played a bigger role than others, but this issue has been a center of our attention from the start.

Do you know how many Russian companies and how much money were affected during the period of oil export suspension?

Companies claim they lost hundreds of millions, billions even, but they do not tell the truth. Naturally, there might be exaggeration in this matter - maybe not. I am not responsible for knowing their losses. Our dealings with our companies are based on this: if they want something from me, I am at their service as the Ambassador of the Russian Federation. But if they don’t want anything from me, frankly, I do not know much about their operations, especially regarding money, costs, or profits. Any businessman, especially one with large wealth - if you ask him about his situation, he will say he is poor and has nothing.

Did the US and Western sanctions obstruct the work of Russian companies present in the Kurdistan Region and Iraq?

Regarding sanctions, they are a bad thing. We consider sanctions illegal. Legitimate sanctions can only be imposed by the UN Security Council through a resolution. Sanctions imposed outside such a resolution are unilateral and illegal - indeed, from the perspective of international law - as a method to punish free trade and free dealings, and an illegitimate way to pressure countries. What happened with the consequences of these sanctions imposed on Russia: firstly, we take pride in saying that the Russian Federation ranks first in the world in terms of sanctions imposed on it - more than those imposed on Iran, North Korea, or Cuba.

We have extensive experience in this regard. It has been proven that sanctions are unsuccessful because they harm those who impose them. Europe became the first victim, and the struggling state of its economy is clear proof, along with problems in the US economy. Naturally, we suffered from these sanctions, but we were surprised that their real impact was much less than expected. Initially, when the sanctions war against Russia began, our morale was unstable, and there was fear, especially among businessmen. But later, it became clear that the situation was not so bad and that these sanctions could be overcome. Importantly, there is a global willingness to bypass them.

As for Iraq, sanctions imposed on Russian companies obstruct their activities, but let’s look at reality: LUKOIL’s investments in Iraq exceed $11 billion, which is an important part of Iraq’s industrial capabilities. If the US imposes sanctions on LUKOIL, will Iraq respond by saying, “We cannot deal with these investments”? Or will it say, “We must preserve this $11 billion”? It’s not just $11 billion frozen - it’s a figure that can increase. There are negotiations between Iraqi and Russian parties to launch new projects with Russian investment. Therefore, these sanctions are illogical and unreasonable steps; they do not consider Russia’s situation or that of its partners worldwide. Consequently, their fate is failure.

Are LUKOIL and Gazprom still operating or not?

Gazprom, Rosneft and TBC, in which we own 60 percent of the shares, are all operating in Kurdistan. Of course, I cannot say their situation is excellent, because Kurdistan is not like Dubai; its economic situation is complex due to known events. But the companies are still present, and despite difficulties, they will continue their work because they have invested hundreds of millions of dollars in projects. These investments cannot be withdrawn and moved elsewhere. This capital has been invested on the ground. These are very important investments, and the business sector must look beyond today, to tomorrow, whatever the problems. From this perspective, we believe the Region, with its natural resources and internal situation, has a promising economic future, and we should encourage our companies to work here.

Apart from oil and gas, in which other sectors do you want to operate? Where else in Kurdistan could you invest?

Honestly, this question should be directed to businessmen. If I were strong in business, I wouldn’t be an ambassador - I would be a director in one of the companies.

Businessmen come to you, as representatives of their country, from Russia to Iraq. Do they request work in certain sectors, or does Iraq ask them to invest in specific sectors? I mean, which other sectors could they work in?

For us, the Iraqi economy is not unfamiliar; we know it well. We have experience dating back to the Soviet era in many fields, especially electricity, water, and industry. For known reasons - the occupation of Kuwait, the sanctions imposed on Iraq, then the US-led occupation, the chaos that followed, and then the Iraqi war against [the Islamic State] ISIS - these events did not allow a rapid return to those fields where we were present. Secondly, there are what I call “biological laws”: those who worked in Iraq from the Soviets and Russians in the 1960s and 1970s - some are alive, some are not, but they are certainly not working now. Due to the problems that started in the 1990s until now, the older generation with Iraqi expertise left, and the current new generation does not have that experience, creating a gap between generations.

This can be overcome because there is acceptance of Russia in Iraq, even morally. When we say Iraq, some feel fear, but for Russians, the general attitude toward Iraq is very positive because we remember the era of cooperation. In general, nothing came from Iraq against Russia that people are aware of. We encourage our companies to come to Iraq and work in different fields, not limited to oil and gas. But there are problems and obstacles to overcome. Some of these obstacles are not Iraq’s fault, such as sanctions. Any Russian businessman dealing with Iraq first asks: How will I pay or receive money? But solutions can be found. The global financial system cannot be fully controlled by the US or its allies.

The second point - and I speak as a friend of Iraq - is that attracting investors requires effort and creating a specific mechanism. No outsider can come to Iraq, invest, and succeed easily; you know the reasons. I am not criticizing; Russia is almost in the same situation. Russia is very large, and investment conditions vary from region to region. Some Russian regions have worse investment conditions than Iraq. So, this is not criticism, just advice.

You mentioned the cooperation between Iraq and Russia and about the war against ISIS. During the war, how did then-Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki communicate with President Vladimir Putin? Can you tell me about Russia’s role in Iraq at that time?

This is a topic worthy of movies and series. Even we who witnessed these events are amazed if we go back 11 years: how events developed this way. My Iraqi friends told me that when the war with ISIS erupted and the organization threatened Baghdad, it turned out that neither the Americans nor their allies wanted to materially help Iraq. As former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said more than once, they refused to give even a single bullet. The reason is difficult to comment on. In my view, ISIS as a phenomenon was an American creation; perhaps not all Americans knew, but I understand their method and am not surprised by such an act. This explains why they were initially reluctant to fight ISIS - or maybe it was conditional. Perhaps they thought, as usual, short-sightedly, that ISIS was a way to pressure a pro-Iran government in Baghdad. The situation was like that, so Nouri al-Maliki directly turned to President Putin and requested help. President Putin’s decision was very quick. He said we do not have time to manufacture warplanes for you, nor do we have a reserve, so we will take planes already in our army and send them to you. Indeed, they were sent. The Russian planes arrived in Iraqi airspace before the contract was signed, piloted by Iraqi pilots. Initially, 5 or 6 planes arrived - not a large number, but importantly, it changed the morale of both sides: the ISIS side and the Iraqi side. The Iraqi fighter felt he was not alone, that planes came from Russia to strike ISIS positions. ISIS realized the Iraqi was not fighting alone and had allies.

Which day, which month, and how many days did the airstrikes continue?

At that time, I was in Syria, and our situation there was very complex and tense. We monitored the situation in the region from Damascus, especially in Iraq. But honestly, my thoughts at that time were: If a terrorist group enters Damascus, will I be able to gather my belongings and leave? Or leave without my belongings? Or perhaps they will kill me? If they capture me, I thought: let them kill me quickly, without torture. These were my thoughts, so I apologize for not knowing the details of the war against ISIS in Iraq. But it was our joint fight anyway. Russia’s contribution in Syria was far larger than in Iraq, where the main role was played by the Iraqi army, Popular Mobilization Forces, and the so-called international coalition, but our contribution existed and, in a critical part of these events, we played a major role.

Within the framework of the Western-led international coalition, where was Russia?

We were not part of that coalition because they did not invite us. As you know, at that time our positions differed completely regarding events in Syria and even regarding ISIS. The history of ISIS is very strange; there are American confessions that they created it. I am not surprised that Americans did not want any coordination with Russia. But I tell you with full responsibility, in my strong impression, without Russia’s victories in Syria against ISIS and terrorist groups - and I mean our joint victories: Russia, Syria, allied forces from Iran, Lebanon, and other countries - the Americans would not have acted. It encouraged them to work because otherwise all victories would have been Russian. Isn’t this an additional Russian contribution to the fight against terrorism in Iraq?

What I want to know is whether Nouri al-Maliki bought warplanes or helicopters from Russia at that time. But I think Iraq does not buy weapons from Russia now, or it has stopped. What is the reason? Why did Russia stop selling weapons to Iraq? Does Russia no longer have weapons?

Honestly, first, this is a sensitive issue. The media wants to get everything from the ambassador. I will discuss this in detail after 20–30 years when confidentiality is lifted. Generally, I can say that military-technical cooperation between Russia and Iraq continues, with multiple parties involved. This cooperation is very normal, not new or exceptional, but routine. Of course, under current circumstances, we can say that since 2003, when Americans tried to monopolize the field of arms in Iraq, cooperation became harder than before. But we are proud to say that regardless of our opponents’ efforts, Russian-Iraqi cooperation continues because the Iraqi friend - let me repeat - loves Russian weapons and is accustomed to Russian weapons.

After 22 years of American control, or attempted control, over all areas of life in Iraq, especially arms, they failed in this regard. Despite the presence of weapons of various types in Iraq, most of these weapons are still of Russian-Soviet origin. They may have purchased models from other countries, but the origin is Russian. Moreover, there is a mutual desire to increase this cooperation. Naturally, there may be periods when Iraq cannot purchase - for example, during the war on ISIS, they bought a lot because of urgent need and limited Western interference. Now, perhaps the interventions are stronger. And you in Kurdistan know how Americans sometimes deal even with friends, let alone non-friends.

The important point here - and I do not want to prolong - is that regarding arming Iraq, the Russian Federation has no agenda preventing us from supplying Iraq with anything it wants. Following this, Iraq may not currently have the capacity, or perhaps Russia - which is now fighting a proxy war against the entire NATO system, not against Ukraine alone but against NATO’s complete military, population, and financial capabilities - sometimes cannot sell certain types of weapons because we need them on the front. We have a front where 600,000 fighters fight daily.

Speaking of wars, Russia is continuing with its military action on the Ukrainian front. Does Russia, or Russian President Vladimir Putin, intend to stop the war?

First of all, the initial plan was to force Ukraine to make peace at the beginning of the events. There was no plan to wage a long war, especially one lasting three and a half years or more. Frankly speaking, that plan succeeded at first. Combat operations began, and after about a month or two we reached, with the Ukrainians - through Belarusian and Turkish mediation - a draft peace treaty. In this draft treaty, everything Russia wanted was included. In fact, it is no secret that the Ukrainians even proposed some points that we ourselves wanted, because they knew what Russia’s demands were and wanted a quick resolution.

After that came Boris Johnson, who was the British Prime Minister at that time. He was facing domestic problems in Britain and wanted to present himself as a great diplomat. He imposed a ban on the Ukrainian government preventing it from signing that treaty. I do not want to place all the blame on Boris Johnson, although what he did was a devilish act. He is largely responsible for prolonging the war. We can joke about this matter, but if we count the scale of destruction, the number of dead, wounded, widows, and orphans - Boris Johnson bears a great share of responsibility for all that. I don’t want to continue talking about him because I don’t have polite enough words to do so.

So let’s return to the Ukrainians. This does not justify their position, because the decision should have been a sovereign one - not one imposed by a foreigner. But that opportunity was lost, and events spiraled out of control.
 
Our goal was to compel the Ukrainian regime to make an agreement - above all, to stop its attacks on the Donbas regions (Donetsk and Luhansk). We preempted them with an attack because they were about to launch an offensive on those regions and carry out demographic cleansing there.

Well, you mentioned the dead, the wounded, widows, children, and orphans - all those young people. Do you intend or plan to stop the war?

There is more than one plan. There is a Russian plan to find a comprehensive solution to this war, to end it, and to establish lasting peace. But there are also other plans meant to deceive Russia - based on past experiences - plans built on the belief that Russians are naïve and can be convinced to stop the war, giving Ukraine another opportunity to rearm and redeploy its forces.

Which scenario is Russia moving toward now? What is Russia’s option, and how does it want to achieve peace?

The whole world knows that we want peace in Ukraine. But we want a comprehensive peace that addresses the root causes of this war. All the current proposals from different parties deal only with the consequences, not the causes - and we do not believe in such solutions because we have bad experience with that.

If I may, back in 2014, there was an uprising by the people in eastern Ukraine, and it was suppressed by force. You in Kurdistan know very well how such things happen. Russia intervened and stopped the war. In 2015 the war stopped, and a reconciliation process began between Kyiv and eastern Ukraine - the Donbas region, which has a Russian-majority population - within one state.

The situation was very similar to Kurdistan in Iraq at that time. The population of Ukraine was about the same as Iraq’s, and the number of ethnic Russians who held Ukrainian citizenship was comparable to the Kurdish population - and geographically, the situation was similar too. The central government’s attitude was severe, bloody, and harsh. When people took to the streets demanding linguistic rights, armed forces were sent against them.

During the Anfal campaign in Iraq, the Kurds had no one to intervene to protect them, but the Russians in Ukraine had a “big brother” beside them - so we intervened to protect them, not to tear Ukraine apart, but to seek a solution between eastern Ukraine and the central government.

A reconciliation framework was formed with the participation of France, Germany, and some other parties, and with American involvement. All of them spent eight years lying, pretending they wanted peace, while in reality they were supplying Ukraine with weapons, training its forces, and preparing it for war against Russia. Later, [German Chancellor Angela] Merkel and [French President Francois] Hollande admitted - after leaving office - that they had never intended peace or a solution; they just wanted to give Ukraine a second chance.

Now, after all that has happened, should we repeat the same experience? The Russian people are not fools. We may make a mistake once, but not twice or thrice.

Your Excellency, there are reports, videos, and photos claiming that Iraqi citizens are fighting alongside Russia on the war front. What is your comment?

I’m not surprised by that, because if one searches the internet more deeply, one can find people of many nationalities taking part in these events on both sides - and they still are. For example, there are volunteers from Israel fighting alongside the Ukrainian side.

How many Iraqis are fighting alongside the Russian army?

I already discussed this issue in detail at a press conference in Baghdad recently. I will repeat: there is nothing new. Such cases exist, but they are individual, not on a large scale as some try to portray. We know this because, as I recall, we have issued visas for the relatives of those killed - who went to receive the bodies of their loved ones - perhaps three or four times. That’s the reality, and it proves that some were there. But how many exactly? I don’t have numbers.

There is something important I want to emphasize: for us, this war is not a war between governments, but a war of our people for their vital interests. Every Russian has either friends or relatives fighting on the front. I have many myself, and we stay in contact constantly, even just to give moral support. We also send them aid. Fighters at the front know they are supported by their homeland - not only by the government but by the people as well.

We receive much news from there, but I have not heard anything about a noticeable foreign presence on the Russian side. On the Ukrainian side, foreigners are present - we have prisoners, bodies, and documents from them, and some are well known by name, including their military and intelligence positions. But on the Russian side, there’s almost nothing like that. Russian television occasionally shows reports about a volunteer from Latin America who joined the Russian army and fights there, with photos alongside his Russian friends - he came alone. So I say again, these are isolated cases, not a widespread phenomenon.

But if you allow me, I must thank the Iraqi citizens who have taken a supportive stance toward Russia. Of course, I am sorry if any of them were injured or killed, but I repeat: we did not recruit them - they came voluntarily.

Do they receive any compensation for their participation?

First, receiving a salary does not make someone a mercenary. Policemen and soldiers receive salaries, yet they are not mercenaries. Even the host here in this studio receives a salary, and an ambassador lives on a salary. As a state, even for volunteers, we pay them as much as possible. Of course, there are fields where it’s impossible to pay volunteers - for example, volunteers who help organize Islamic religious events in Moscow. Some help inside or outside the mosque, and they receive nothing. But if someone works in a certain place for months or years, it’s natural he should receive a salary - otherwise, how can he live?

I have one more question about Iraq before moving to Syria, if possible. Regarding the Russian visa - an Iraqi citizen must meet some conditions, such as having an invitation from Russia. What are the requirements, and how can Iraqis obtain Russian visas?

Frankly, this is our shared pain. I want to open the doors for Iraqis to visit Russia - for tourism, business, and cultural exchange. But unfortunately, there are restrictions. I’m “fighting” on behalf of the Iraqi side, but it’s difficult. I’m partly joking, but it’s largely serious.

The problem is not that we have anything against Iraqis as guests - on the contrary, Iraqis are known to us as respectable people. The reputation of Iraqi students in Russia is very good. In one interview, I joked that Iraqi students are more interested in Russian girlfriends than in lectures. I said that jokingly because the interviewer kept insisting on the topic of Iraqis fighting in Ukraine, so I replied that if an Iraqi student skips lectures, it’s not because of war but because of girlfriends! That’s natural. By God, when they return home, they usually have good reputations and hold important positions.

Now, about visas, the security situation in Russia is complicated. Russia is not only facing an information war and sanctions war, but also a bloody proxy war on Ukrainian soil, and on top of that, terrorist threats. There have been attempts by Ukrainian intelligence and its backers to carry out terrorist attacks inside Russia.

You don’t need to be reminded of the tragic “Crocus City Hall” attack - where families were gathered for leisure, and terrorists entered and started shooting people, killing over a hundred. They were arrested before crossing into Ukraine. It turned out these terrorists had no prior extremist records; they were simple people somehow recruited, who entered Russia legally, were given weapons, and went on a killing spree, filming themselves trying to appear like ISIS. They even tried to slit throats but clearly had no experience.

Because of all that, Russia must tighten its security measures - it cannot afford to open up further now. But I promise that after we emerge from the Ukrainian crisis and stability returns, Iraq may be among the first countries with which we reopen the visa issue completely. We are already opening up toward the Arab world in general, and with some Gulf countries we have achieved full visa-free arrangements. So how could we not cooperate with our old friend Iraq in this area?

How long does Russia intend to keep its forces in Syria? For example, what is the current situation of Russian troops in Baniyas and Hmeimim?

As for our presence in Syria - naturally, there is no longer a military necessity for it now. Our forces were there to fight terrorist groups, and that situation has changed. We are not engaged in combat on Syrian soil anymore.

However, those bases have a strategic significance beyond Syria itself, and our adversaries know this well. The key point is what the new Syrian government wants. Initially, there were expectations that it might ask Russia to withdraw, which would have been understandable at the time. But as time went on, it became clear that the bases would remain - and they do. The number of personnel stationed there is much smaller than before, but they are still present.

How many are there?

Perhaps half the previous number, or a bit more - this information is classified, of course. We’ll talk about it in 20 years, or after my dismissal or retirement from the Foreign Ministry. The number isn’t very large, but they are there. Their continued presence in Syria now has much more political and strategic significance than military. These bases serve as proof that our relations still stand strong - even on such a sensitive issue - despite the change of regime in Syria.

Communication remains active; visits are ongoing between Russia and the current Syrian government. Recently, [Syria’s interim President] Ahmad al-Sharaa visited Moscow, and before that, several high-level Russian delegations visited Damascus. There have been detailed meetings and negotiations between intelligence chiefs and ministers of defense and foreign affairs, covering many details - but the issue of closing the bases was never raised.

During Mr. Sharaa’s visit to Russia, did the Syrian government ask for Bashar al-Assad to be handed over?

I believe that during Ahmad al-Sharaa’s visit they did not ask for Bashar al-Assad’s extradition - I’d say that with 99 percent certainty. The issue had been discussed earlier, during the visit of the Russian president’s representative, Deputy Foreign Minister Mr. [Mikhail] Bogdanov, to Damascus. He is now retired and a well-known political figure globally.

The Russian explanation was that Assad’s stay in Russia is humanitarian, not political - he may live here but cannot engage in political activities. Therefore, he cannot be handed over to Syria, because that would endanger his life. This explanation was acceptable to the new Syrian leadership.

So Bashar al-Assad remains in Moscow. He has no right to engage in any media or political activity. Have you heard anything from him? You haven’t, because he is not allowed to - but he is safe and alive.

Your relations with the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) are good, aren’t they? Tell us about your relations with them. For example, the U.S. and France are now demanding that the Syrian government in Damascus recognize Kurdish rights and that the SDF become part of the Syrian army. What is Russia’s view?

Our relations with the SDF are normal and friendly - they are based on dialogue. The United States, on the other hand, is the one arming and supporting the SDF and seems to want to use it for its own interests - as a kind of private military company. That’s the American position.

Our position is that the SDF is both a military and political force, and we encourage dialogue between Damascus and the SDF. We did so under Bashar al-Assad’s regime, acting as mediators, and we still encourage such dialogue now - even though we are no longer mediators ourselves.

Does Russia share the view that Kurds should be recognized within the new Syrian government and that the SDF should become part of the Syrian army?

This is a very important issue. We believe it must be resolved through national dialogue and that it is an internal Syrian matter - it’s not about whether Russia agrees or not. Our public stance is that Russia is a federal state with 300 languages and more than 80 regions. You in Iraq have one autonomous region; we have 80. Naturally, we call for guaranteeing the rights of every ethnic group - especially linguistic rights - because the war in Ukraine began after a ban on the Russian language.

Imagine if the Kurdish language were banned in Iraq - not only in Baghdad or Basra but also in Erbil, Sulaimani, and Duhok - what would happen? Uprising and war. Linguistic, cultural, economic, administrative, and political rights must all be guaranteed by the constitution and law.

As for the details - whether the SDF should be merged into the Syrian army or remain independent - thankfully, that is not for us to decide. We just insist it be solved through dialogue, because when dialogue disappears, war erupts.

Earlier you said that the United States and British intelligence agencies monitor you at your embassy or consulate in Iraq. Is that still happening?

You should ask them - I’m not in contact with them about that.

How did you know they were monitoring you, and now you say you don’t know whether they still are?

It’s well known, and diplomatic life is a life under constant surveillance - we’re used to it. Especially nowadays, mobile phones are the best spying tools in the world: they can be activated without your knowledge, using the microphone and camera to record, and all your messages and calls can be tracked.

We live in a very transparent world, and important figures - diplomats included - are always under scrutiny. We are not surprised by that. But we have our own tools to counter such attempts. I don’t know how effective those efforts against us are, but the Americans haven’t complained about me - I simply don’t give them the chance.

Our situation in Iraq is excellent, and we thank the Iraqi leadership and people for their hospitality. We have an embassy in Baghdad and two consulates - one in the Kurdistan Region and one in Basra. We are in a friendly environment, with many friends and supporters.

We meet students and the public, and the impressions are always positive. Working in Iraq gives us valuable experience for future assignments elsewhere. Within the Russian foreign ministry’s Middle East Department, there is a sort of “Iraqi family” and “Syrian family” - those who have worked in Iraq or Syria form a close bond. Even among foreign diplomats who have worked in Iraq or Syria, regardless of their country, we feel a kind of brotherhood with them.

Of course, working in Iraq has security dimensions. In 2006 we lost five members of our embassy staff - they were kidnapped and killed by al-Qaeda. So we live here under special security conditions. Without Iraqi security protection, we couldn’t operate.

As for [the Central Intelligence Agency] CIA or other intelligence activities - may God bless their efforts - but at least our situation here is far better than that of our colleagues in the US or some European countries, who face direct and unethical pressure from local intelligence. One of my friends in a Baltic state was told by an intelligence officer, “Work with us or we’ll expel you.” My friend replied, “Do you think your country is so important that you can threaten me with such a choice?” Three months later, they declared him persona non grata. Such mass expulsions of diplomats - dozens at a time - happen in some countries. Thank God, there is no such thing in Iraq. We are very comfortable here. And as for the CIA - may God ruin their house!

Let my final question be about the elections. There are elections now, campaigns are underway, and only a few days remain before election day. What is your opinion of the campaigns? Do you think the elections will be free from interference?

I am not participating in these elections - neither as a candidate nor as a voter - but we have been invited to observe, and we will take part as observers. We have experience from previous elections too. As guests in this country, we support the need for elections to take place on schedule, and we wish for their success. Our diplomatic duty is to follow developments and assess the situation.

Thank God, so far we see nothing alarming. Mutual accusations are common in every election campaign. The important thing is that candidates are not subjected to assassinations. To those who criticize Iraq, I remind them that in America there were two assassination attempts against Trump before his election. If we compare Iraq to other countries, my position is: “Thank God, things are going quite well.” My personal impression is that this campaign is calmer than previous ones. These are my own impressions - if I’m mistaken, I apologize.

• SHARE ON
• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share on Whatsapp
• Share on Telegram
• Share on Viber
• Share on Messenger