Following the meeting with Kerry in Rome (in the villa of the US Embassy) and the shared laughing spell caught on cameras, Lavrov revealed today that Moscow does, indeed, want to see what Russian Novaya Gazeta (see my previous post) claimed to be the case: the Russian government wants to see Donetsk and Lugansk return to Kiev and to stay with Ukraine ... albeit in exchange for some local autonomy and a modified constitution (allowing the people of Donbass to write complaints in Russian?).
According to Lavrov, the Kiev regime (he calls them "the Ukrainian leadership ... Russia routinely uses the word "regime" for Syria) should establish dialogue (yes, the Maidan was all about dialogue and is open to dialogue as Nazism is conducive and open to dialogue by its very nature ... every politician and seasoned diplomat knows this, right? And Ukrainian thieving and murderous oligarchs just need to activate their ability to have a great dialogue with everyone else, while depending on the Nazi thugs, theft, responsibility for MH 17, and the Odessa massacre for their power ...).
According to Lavrov, the cause of the trouble is that the Ukrainian authorities were somehow (Lavrov does not explain how) "forcing" Donbass out of Ukraine and provoking them. Moscow and Lavrov are thus convinced that, while Crimea could not be trusted to remain under the junta, the Banderite regime can be trusted with regaining power and control over Donbass. A new wording in the constitution can fix it and some conditional local autonomy.
Moscow (Putin) and Lavrov seem to fail to notice that, for the West, Poroshenko and the Kiev regime, the idea of talking or having dialogue "on the basis of equality and respect" would amount to talking to "the terrorists," which, in this case, the West and Kiev absolutely refuse.
Thus, it seems that the latest version of Moscow's clever or cunning plan is to get from Kiev and the West at least some appearance of dialogue and autonomy, but the West and Kiev refuses to Moscow even that appearance, judging that there is no reason for it once things are on this sliding slope.
It also needs to be added that today's Lavrov's position is very much the same as he formulated it in Geneva on April 15. This means that Moscow's basic position did not change. In comparison with April 15, though, the junta has been legitimized by Moscow itself; the regime in Kiev has consolidated its power; its collapse prophesied under the previous version of the clever plan by December has not happened. Instead, the war started quite in earnest, at least, on the side of the West and Kiev who do see the conflict in Donbass as a war with Russia.
So, all in all, if one were to believe Lavrov, then there is no Novorossiya and there ought to be no Novorossiya, and Donbass is fighting merely for some constitutional amendment or wording, which has not been even formulated or raised by anyone else--except for Lavrov himself. Sometimes it is so happens that, instead of representing a people or a nation, a diplomat starts representing "neponyatno kogo"--who knows whom.
For a very similar verdict by Boris Rozhin (alias Colonel Cassad), "Moscow has been trying to preserve Donbass for Ukraine, but without atangible progress," see here. Among other things, Rozhni writes: "What Lavrov is talking about [what he is asking] is beyond the existing political realities." That's a good diplomatic language of how to state the obvious.
So what does this mean? Well, clearly, a lot.
Lavrov's statements, which also reflect Putin's position or decision, also underscore the fact, which has passed under the radars, that Russian government has not recognized to Donbass the right to self-determination and that, furthermore , but it has not even recognized the anti-fascist character of the Novorossiya or Donbass struggle.