13 July
201618:00
Foreign
Minister Sergey Lavrov’s answers to media questions at a news conference
following a meeting of the Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the
Caspian States, Astana, July 13, 2016
1314-13-07-2016
Question: What are your thoughts on the outcome of today's meeting? I would also
like to touch on the activities of the Russia-NATO Council. Do you think that
today’s Russia-NATO Council meeting can become a lasting, full-fledged format?
In particular, is there any chance of reaching any agreements on practical
cooperation in Afghanistan?
Sergey
Lavrov: I fully share the assessment of our meeting today,
which, incidentally, began yesterday. Foreign Minister of Kazakhstan Erlan
Idrissov has provided this assessment, and we all share it. We have done a fair
amount of productive work and made headway in several areas. There are only a
few issues left that were already named earlier. What’s left to do with regard
to them is to find the right wording for the principles agreed upon by the
presidents. As you may be aware, the sea bottom is divided between the
neighbouring countries. Russia has already signed such agreements with
Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan. With regard to delimiting water areas, the
presidents agreed at the summit in Astrakhan in September 2014 on designating
benchmarks in relation to the territorial and sovereign waters and the fishing
zone.
I believe it
is absolutely realistic to aim for signing the Convention on the Legal Status
of the Caspian Sea in 2017. I think this can be done even in the first half of
the year. In the next couple of months, our experts will focus on it
intensively. Then, we will see what role the foreign ministers will play at
that stage.
Notably, in
addition to the convention, today we agreed to speed up our cooperation on
implementing existing sectoral agreements and to try to prepare additional
documents, which are the subject of the talks. We have a working Cooperation
Agreement on Preventing Emergency Situations. A rapid-response mechanism to
provide relief in the case of natural and manmade disasters is being created in
the Caspian Sea area. In September, our partners will join us for collective
training of our rescue services in the Astrakhan Region.
We discussed
the need to implement the agreements included in the Agreement on Conservation
and Sustainable Use of Aquatic Biological Resources of the Caspian Sea, as well
as the Agreement on Security Cooperation. We discussed ways to counter
poaching. There are specific ideas, which we have also made available to our
experts. Everyone agreed on the need to draft large industry-specific
agreements, particularly in the sphere of trade and economic cooperation and
transport, as well as an agreement to prevent incidents involving warships in
the Caspian Sea. I think that confidence-building measures and transparency
create a very good foundation for further addressing and resolving outstanding
issues.
I don’t think
we’ll be seeing the same kind of atmosphere at the Russia-NATO Council meeting
today. The situation there is somewhat different.
Primarily, we
want to understand NATO's clarifications regarding the decisions taken at the
summit in Warsaw on July 8-9. The public comments on these decisions are not
encouraging. What we are seeing is the prevailing desire to perpetuate an
artificial image of Russia as an enemy in order to enforce unity in the ranks
and consolidate positions. Unfortunately, our NATO partners are again uniting
on the basis of the lowest common denominator, which is formed by the openly
Russophobic minority in Western nations.
With regard to
the long-standing relationship with NATO, it was not us who broke off the
agreements on counterterrorism cooperation or who froze all cooperation to
support the Afghan security forces so they can more effectively fight ISIS and
other radicals. It was not us who suspended all other forms of cooperation
between Russia and NATO.
When our
partners announced that they were willing to hold today’s Russia-NATO Council
meeting, I heard someone saying that they presented it as a gesture of
goodwill. They said they agreed to hold the Russia-NATO Council meeting. They
did not agree to hold it, because we didn’t ask them to. If they froze this
mechanism, then it’s up to them to take steps to revive it. They did ask us to
agree to a meeting of the Russia-NATO Council. We met them halfway because, by
and large, we never turn down a conversation. I hope that this will be a
responsible conversation, not a show for the public, not a staged event to score
some propaganda points, but rather a conversation that is consistent with the
grave situation that has developed in the wake of NATO's policy on military and
political security in Europe.
With regard to
future activities of the Russia-NATO Council, we know for a fact – I don’t
think I’m revealing a big secret here – that leading NATO countries, primarily
European, called for making the work of the Council regular again as it was in
the past. But the minority that derives immense pleasure from adopting Russophobic
positions completely blocked this proposal, saying that they will have to meet
before they can take a decision. It looks like that they are playing a game of
their own and fail to understand the important events that are unfolding.
I’m referring
to the division in Europe. I very much hope that adult policymakers in Europe
and the United States are fully aware of it, and they will change this policy
to reflect the agreements incorporated in the OSCE and the Founding Act signed
between the Russian Federation and North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. We are
willing to do so. Let's see how serious and responsible our Western partners
are with regard to the situation in Europe.
No comments:
Post a Comment