30 March 201716:46
634-30-03-2017
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s talks with the
Foreign Minister of Kyrgyzstan Erlan Abdyldaev
On April 2-4, Foreign Minister of the Republic of
Kyrgyzstan Erlan Abdyldaev will be in Moscow on a working visit, at the
invitation of Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
The ministers will exchange opinions on key issues of
political, economic, military and humanitarian cooperation, including within
the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union, and will discuss cooperation at
the international stage, including at the CSTO, the CIS, the SCO, the UN and
the OSCE. They will focus on regional security issues.
The Russian and Kyrgyz ministers will review their
countries’ efforts to implement the agreements that were reached during the
official visit by President of Russia Vladimir Putin to the Republic of
Kyrgyzstan on February 28. These agreements provide for strengthening bilateral
relations through an intensive political dialogue, which is evidence of the
high standards of allied relations and strategic partnership between Russia and
Kyrgyzstan.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s participation in a
meeting of the CIS Foreign Ministers Council
On April 7, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will
participate in the meeting of the CIS Foreign Ministers Council in Tashkent.
Russia holds the rotating presidency of the
Commonwealth of Independent States this year. On September 9, 2016, President
Vladimir Putin approved the concept of Russia’s CIS presidency and an action
plan for its implementation. These documents cover all aspects of the
multifaceted cooperation within the CIS. The CIS ministerial meeting in
Tashkent is one of the key meetings of the high CIS agencies planned for 2017.
These events also include a meeting of the CIS Heads of Government Council in
Kazan on May 26, and a meeting of the CIS Heads of State Council in Moscow on
September 11.
The CIS is playing a crucial unifying role. Russia’s
Foreign Policy Concept, which President Putin approved on November 30, 2016,
prioritises the development of bilateral and multilateral cooperation with the
CIS countries and the strengthening of the CIS integration organisations, in
which Russia is involved.
This explains the packed agenda of the upcoming
meeting. The ministers will discuss a broad range of issues pertaining to the
development of international cooperation and the coordination of foreign policy
issues between the CIS countries. They will also exchange opinions on key
foreign policy issues.
The upcoming meeting of the CIS Foreign Ministers
Council will focus on the adoption of a joint statement condemning religious
intolerance and the discrimination of Christians, Muslims and members of other
religions. They will also review the interim results of their countries’
efforts to implement the decision on adjusting the CIS to modern realities,
which was made by the CIS Heads of State Council on September 16, 2016. This
decision includes a set of measures to strengthen the CIS status, enhance the
efficiency of its agencies and optimise the CIS budgetary expenditures. The
ministers will also discuss cooperation between their law enforcement and
humanitarian organisations.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to participate in the
25th Anniversary Assembly of the Council on Foreign and Defence
Policy
The 25th anniversary assembly of the
Council on Foreign and Defence Policy will take place on April 8–9. The Council
is turning 25 years, and its Russia in Global Politics magazine
is turning 15. The council members, representatives of academic circles and
leading think tanks, will discuss new global factors and trends as part of the
Assembly's main theme, “International Politics. System Change.”
By tradition, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will take
part in the Assembly on April 8 and share his assessments of global political
developments, talk about the priorities in the work of Russian diplomats and
our approaches to key issues on the international agenda, as well as the
Foreign Ministry’s vision and assessments.
The Foreign Ministry highly values long-term productive
cooperation with the Council, which, alongside other international NGOs, is
providing effective expert support to Russia’s foreign policy, prepares
analytical materials upon the Foreign Ministry’s requests and develops
practical recommendations. The Council places high emphasis on developing
breakthrough ideas and proposals, many of which materialise into actual
projects. The Council on Foreign and Defence Policy is a strong brand.
Holding regional consultations on Afghanistan in
Moscow
We have already commented on this issue when we
answered your questions. Today, I would like to talk about it in more detail.
Another round of regional consultations on Afghan
issues will take place in Moscow on April 14. The talks will focus on security
in Afghanistan and its prospects. In our opinion, the main goal of the
consultations is to develop a single regional approach with regard to further
promotion of the national reconciliation process in that country, while
maintaining Kabul's leading role and complying with the earlier reviewed and
approved principles on the integration of the armed opposition into peaceful
life.
Invitations to participate in consultations were
extended to Afghanistan, Central Asian countries, China, India, Iran, Pakistan
and the United States. I would like to say that Washington and US officials
expressed their interest in attending this event and participating in the
international discussion on this subject. We sent them an invitation. Most of
the countries have already confirmed their participation. We expect some of our
Central Asian partners to provide a response soon. We consider the
participation of the Central Asian states important. An agreement on this was
reached during the previous meeting of the Moscow format on February 15. Thus,
all the neighbours of Afghanistan and the key states of the region will be
represented at the upcoming talks. We regret Washington's refusal to take part
in the consultations. The United States is an important player in the Afghan
settlement, so it joining the peacekeeping efforts of the countries of the
region would help to reinforce the message to the Afghan armed opposition
regarding the need to stop armed resistance and to start talks.
Current events in Ukraine
We are alarmed by the deteriorating situation in
southeastern Ukraine. According to SMM OSCE reports, observers registered 500
to 5,000 ceasefire violations a day in March.
Towns and villages in the Donetsk and Lugansk people’s
republics were shelled on 14 occasions between March 13 and 26 alone, sometimes
by MLRS, which are banned by the Minsk Agreements. Residential buildings and a
secondary school in Dokuchayevsk were damaged and 13 people injured. I stress
again that civil infrastructure was shelled.
The SMM goes on reporting the presence of heavy
weapons along the contact line in violation of the Minsk Package, with 58 units
of the Ukrainian Armed Forces against militias’ 24 units.
OSCE observers also report that the Ukrainian
army-controlled stretch of the demarcation line in Zolotoye and a road in
Katerinovka are mined.
The Ukrainian Armed Forces continue to shell the
Donetsk water filtering station. On March 17, the station was shelled in the
presence of SMM observers, Russian officers of the Joint Coordination Control
Centre and local repairmen. Clearly, the shelling of such facilities poses a
threat of chemical contamination to the area.
As for the situation in other parts of Ukraine, the
SMM reports more instances of vandalism and blocking Russian banking offices in
Kiev, Kharkov and Dnepropetrovsk by local radicals with officials’ blatant
connivance.
The SMM also monitored the trade and transport
blockade of Donbass. Indicatively, the blockers told OSCE observers that they
had found a way to bypass police posts. The Ukrainian authorities are making
bewildering contradictory statements suggesting that they have not yet
determined whether to support or condemn the blockade, while the Ukrainian
National Bank and Finance Ministry have already made forecasts of its negative
impact on the national economy.
We call upon the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to
continue its objective observation of the situation in Donbass and other parts
of Ukraine in conformity with its mandate, which has been prolonged to March
2018.
Kiev’s plans to enshrine in law forcible Ukrainisation
of all spheres of life in Ukraine
With tenacity worthy of a better cause, Kiev continues
its policy towards the total de-Russification and forcible Ukrainisation of the
country. Following the infamous laws which deprived the Russian-speaking
population of Ukraine of the right to receive objective information in their
native language, the Kiev authorities intend to actually legalise a ban on the
Russian language.
The Verkhovna Rada introduced a draft law On the State
Language, which provides for mandatory use of the Ukrainian language in all
areas of daily life without exception. Any attempts to establish the official
use of more than one language in that country are equated with an attempt to
overthrow the political system and are subject to prosecution. I would like to
say that we are talking about decisions and actions of the very authorities
that came to power not illegally, but on the declaration of their allegiance to
European democratic values.
The draft law on media languages adopted
on March 23 in the first reading, which prohibits publications in the languages
of neighbouring countries, is part of the same approach. Had the Ukrainian
authorities tried to learn how the issues of multilingualism are addressed in
European countries, they would have realised that they had been heading in the
opposite direction all those years they were in power and declared their
commitment to European values. Look at how the Scandinavian and Western
European countries, as well as the United States and Canada, approach these
issues. After all, it’s not about the minorities residing in Ukraine, but the
people who have been using this language, which created the common culture of
Ukraine, for many centuries. Most importantly, it is not about the people who
moved to Ukraine in recent years or even decades, but the indigenous
population. Under this document, national TV channels would have to allocate 75
percent of the air time to programming in the Ukrainian language.
Approving such documents would mean actual
legalisation of the forcible Ukrainisation of the country, a legitimatised
fight not only against the Russian language and culture, but also languages
spoken by other ethnic groups residing in Ukraine. This “creative law-making”
is nothing more than a tool to limit human rights and crack down on dissent.
All international legislative acts and regulations governing human rights
issues in the European and North Atlantic space signed by Ukraine as a
sovereign state clearly state the inadmissibility of restricting human rights
in this sphere or any crackdowns on dissent.
Acting in this way, the Kiev regime not only violates
its own constitution, which guarantees “the free development, use and
protection of Russian, and other languages of national minorities of Ukraine”
(Article 10), but also openly demonstrates disdain for universally recognised
human rights protection standards, enshrined, in particular, in the European
Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, as well as in the Framework
Convention for the Protection of National Minorities. That country is, in fact,
about to introduce “language genocide” at the state level.
We realise perfectly well why official Kiev is doing
this. It is under heavy pressure from the nationalist ideas of radicals, whom
they once encouraged to take appropriate actions, and today, they cannot force
that genie back into the bottle. Any attempts to use language issues as a way
to flirt with radicals can cost Kiev dearly, especially given the highly
polarised Ukrainian society. Suffice it to recall that the attempt to repeal the
current law On the Foundations of the State Language Policy in 2014 provoked
the separation of Crimea from Ukraine and the onset of the armed conflict in
Donbass. This is precisely what led to the momentous changes in Ukraine.
The situation in Syria
The intra-Syrian talks based on UN Security Council
Resolution 2254 have been underway in Geneva under the auspices of the UN since
March 27. The consultations are being held separately. Special Envoy of the UN
Secretary General for Syria Staffan de Mistura and his staff are making efforts
to guide the discussion between the Syrian government and the opposition into a
constructive course. Russian representatives in Geneva, namely, Deputy Foreign
Minister Gennady Gatilov and Special Envoy of the Foreign Minister for the
Middle Eastern Settlement and Director of the Foreign Ministry’s Middle East
and North Africa Department Sergey Vershinin, are actively involved in this
process. Moscow looks forward to the Syrian parties showing their willingness
to achieve a compromise on all four baskets of the agreed-upon agenda in order
to make headway towards peace and stability in Syria.
We assess the military and political situation in
Syria as tense.
The Syrian army continues its anti-terrorist operation
in eastern districts of Damascus, which was undertaken in response to the
rebels’ attempts to invade the city centre on March 19–22. The extremists from
Jabhat al-Nusra who organised this raid suffered significant losses and were
forced to retreat into the suburban towns of Jobar and Qaboun and retaliated
with rocket and mortar fire on Damascus. The shells exploded in the districts
of Tijara and Qusur and in the suburban town of Sayyidah Zaynab. There are
casualties among civilians.
The offensive by Nusra and their accomplices in the
north of the Hama province, where terrorists created an immediate threat to the
administrative centre of the province and the Christian town of Mahardah, was
stopped.
Relief efforts are underway following a major bloody
provocation undertaken by the terrorists during a counter-offensive by
government forces, and the Syrian military are regaining their temporarily lost
positions.
We took note of the fact that the terrorist attacks
outside Damascus and Hama were synchronised and well prepared. Radicals from
Nusra managed to involve militant formations officially participating in the
agreement on cessation of hostilities, in their actions.
We are disappointed by assessments of these events
provided by a number of opposition politicians, primarily in Western and
regional media, who have tried to justify the terrorists and their accomplices,
and portrayed it as “the success of the Free Syrian Army in its fight against
the regime.”
This kind of propaganda game is unacceptable. Everyone
should clearly understand that any actions taken with the participation of
Nusra, ISIS, or other Al-Qaeda offshoots, are subject to decisive and
unconditional condemnation.
The Syrian government troops are continuing to drive
ISIS out from eastern Aleppo. They blocked an ISIS unit outside the town of
Deir Hafer in Aleppo and are on an offensive in the direction of the Jirah
Airbase controlled by ISIS. An operation is underway seeking to destroy it.
A lightning-fast attack by Kurdish militiamen
undertaken with the support of the US special forces made it possible to seize
a bridgehead on the right bank of the Euphrates River and drive ISIS from the
airbase outside the town of Tabqa. The town itself remains under the control of
the terrorists, who clearly stated that air strikes by the US-led coalition may
destroy the Euphrates, Syria’s largest hydroelectric power plant, built with
the technical assistance of the Soviet Union. Indeed, two security valves in
the southern part of the dam were damaged during an air raid on March 26.
Military operations in the vicinity of the power plant have been stopped.
Engineers were provided with an opportunity to inspect the dam and take proper
measures to prevent this catastrophe.
In this regard, we urge all participants of the US-led
coalition to act responsibly as they fulfill their mission to defeat terrorists
in Syria and Iraq in order to prevent civilian casualties and damage to
critical civilian infrastructure.
Work is underway to sign local reconciliation deals
between the opposing sides in order to avoid unnecessary loss of life and to
alleviate the sufferings of the civilian population. In accordance with the
plan, the evacuation of rebels and their families from the al-Waer
neighbourhood in the city of Homs continues.
On March 29, media reported that, with Qatar's
mediation, an agreement had been reached to evacuate the defenders of the
Shiite enclaves of al-Foua and Kafraya in Idlib in exchange for the rebels
withdrawing from Zabadani, Madai and the Yarmouk Palestinian refugee camp outside
Damascus. We welcome this agreement, which provides for the rebels and the
civilians who wish to evacuate to be evacuated, the unhindered delivery of
humanitarian aid and the adoption of measures to strengthen mutual trust and
release prisoners. We hope that the agreements will be fully implemented.
At the same time, I would like to remind everyone
that, within the Astana format, Russia has suggested that its participants
adopt a provision on a reconciled area, which would identify a clear path towards
stopping hostilities, including responsibilities on the part of the parties,
which would exclude any rumours about alleged forced relocations.
Unfortunately, as is known, the armed opposition representatives refused to
come to Astana this time.
French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault’s statements
on Syria
We are saddened by the statements issued by Western
capitals, by officials and representatives of foreign states with regard to the
Syrian settlement, most of which are absolutely devoid of objectivity. I’d like
to elaborate on one of them.
Against the backdrop of efforts to promote a political
settlement in Syria, which continue in the Astana and Geneva formats,
statements released by some of our Western partners arouse dismay and
disappointment. We think that they are beyond mere propaganda. We believe that
they can be qualified as direct instigation. In this context, we have taken
note of French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault’s speech at the Arab World
Institute on the occasion of the sixth anniversary of the Syrian conflict,
during which he made absolutely inappropriate and destructive remarks.
True, we have many differences with our partners, as
you well know. We speak at length about them and spell out our position both
publicly and, above all, during bilateral contacts. At the same time, a sincere
wish to resolve the Syrian crisis should, in our opinion, push all the parties
concerned not to fixate on contradictions or criticise each other (often
without any proof), but to search for new common points and expand the area of
understanding. This is not so hard to do, if there is a wish, because this area
is outlined by relevant resolutions, above all, UN Security Council resolution
2254, International Syria Support Group (ISSG) decisions and other jointly
adopted documents. They should be regarded as a single set, without distortions
or wishful thinking. It is impossible to build an effective counter-terrorism
strategy against the seat of international terrorism in Syria based on political
pressure on Damascus and its allies. Let me remind you that the Russian
military are in Syria and are helping Syrians fight terrorists on legal
grounds, unlike our European and American partners.
The position, according to which the removal of the
legitimate president of a UN member state is proclaimed a condition for
bringing aid to the population of that country, seems paradoxical. One gets the
impression that this is a kind of blackmail and that the officials in Paris
have stopped understanding humanistic values. From a political standpoint, it
is hard to combine the thesis that the Syrians themselves have the right to
decide their own future with attempts to force them preemptively to accept
humiliating terms: make one choice and get a carrot, make a different choice
and get a stick.
On the whole, continuing public talk of the “Bashar al
Assad must go” variety fully contradicts our common – I would like to
stress that – beliefs that it is up to the Syrians themselves to determine
their future and choose the government that will steer them there. Frankly
speaking, that slogan virtually torpedoes and undermines any attempts to move
forward along the path of intra-Syrian talks and dialogue and to separate the
armed Syrian opposition from the ISIS and Nusra terrorists. This is something
that Mr Ayrault cannot fail to understand.
We have repeatedly emphasised that Russia is ready for
equal and mutually respectful cooperation with all partners interested in a
political solution and the liquidation of the terrorist seat in Syria. Those
are very serious priorities requiring collective efforts on a solid
international legal basis. And here, there is no room for envy, jealousy or
unhealthy competition.
The situation around Mosul
The situation around Mosul is continuing to
deteriorate. The military operation to free the city, which has been going on
for four months now, has not yet achieved its declared goals, specifically
eliminating ISIS’s main base in Iraq. Despite the forces and assets used in
combat operations, Iraqi government troops, unfortunately (we take note of
this), have bogged down in gruelling urban fighting in the western right-bank
part of Mosul. Each step forward here comes at great cost. Regular army forces
and militias have to breach ISIS’s multi-layered defence involving the use of
locals and civilians as a human shield. Unfortunately, these tactics are well
known to us.
Meanwhile, in UN estimate, as many as 500,000 people
remain in terrorist-controlled districts. With such density, what kind of
“surgical” air strikes (something that our Western partners like to talk about)
are possible here? Consider this. Statistics speak for themselves. According to
the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, between March 17 and
22 alone, at least 307 civilians were killed and 273 injured in western Mosul.
And this is only confirmed data reported by the UN. However, what is happening
in reality and what are the actual casualty figures? It is terrible to think
about the actual figures and the casualty scale has yet to be assessed.
US military representatives had to acknowledge, albeit
with the utmost reluctance, the mass casualties among the Iraqis as a result of
the air strikes by the US-led anti-ISIS coalition. A few days ago, Lt. Gen.
Stephen Townsend, commander of the Combined Joint Task Force, made statements
to that effect. It may be recalled that this refers to the March 17 air strike
on the al-Jadid district. According to various sources, 200 civilians were
killed there. On March 22, a residential building was razed as a result of an
air strike against the Rajm al-Hadid district, burying people alive, including
children. These are only two tragic episodes that have been widely reported in
the media. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein aptly
described the operation to free the main city in northern Iraq as a massacre of
civilians, when coalition forces bomb residential districts from the air while
ISIS militants kill people on the ground.
The humanitarian situation in Mosul has escalated to
the limit. Iraqi President Fuad Masum has compared it to a full-blown disaster.
Now is the time to sound the alarm and constantly remind [everybody] that
400,000 residents remain in the city, where food and medical supplies are
running out. Experts are warning about the danger of mass famine if the
storming of Mosul drags on. Unfortunately, by all indications, this is the most
likely scenario.
The position of hundreds of thousands of residents who
have fled the city is also unenviable. Their suffering continues even after
they escape from that hell. The provision of aid still leaves a lot to be
desired, which is also recognised by international agencies.
It is impossible to understand why world media outlets
are keeping to mainstream coverage. To say nothing about what is going on in
Mosul is simply a crime, as evidenced by reports occasionally filtering through
that show the real picture of what is happening in the city.
The humanitarian situation in Yemen
We have taken note of a statement by UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, timed to the second
anniversary of the Yemeni conflict. He cites civilian casualty statistics
specifying that these are only figures obtained by his agency. As far as he
knows, 4,773 have been killed and 8,272 injured in these two years, while the
actual casualties are much greater. The United Nations does not deny these
figures, I stress again. More than that, 21 million Yemenis, or 82 per cent of
the population, are in urgent need of humanitarian relief. A nationwide
catastrophe has broken out.
Last month alone brought 106 civilian deaths, mainly
in air raids and naval artillery shelling. An incident is mentioned in which 32
Somali refugees and a Yemeni died, ten Somalis were reported missing, and 29
Somalis, including six children, were injured, some of them badly. According to
eyewitness accounts, their ship was attacked by the Coalition’s Apache
helicopter. The UN High Commissioner mentions a number of other instances of
helicopters shelling fishing vessels, and the Khokha marketplace tragedy, where
18 civilians died in an airstrike.
Instances are also reported of indiscriminate strikes
by people’s committees associated with the Houthis and former President Ali
Abdullah Saleh. They are also reported to impede humanitarian deliveries to
Taiz.
A similar statement was made by Stephen O’Brien, UN
Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, who said that even appalling
casualties do not entirely reflect the scope of the Yemeni humanitarian
disaster, with the economy in ruins and seven million people starving.
This is not an industrial accident or a natural
calamity that has stricken Yemen but a human-caused disaster. I took notice of
a statement by United States Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley, who said that
the United States is “the moral conscience of the world”. If you are really the
moral conscience, why do you turn a blind eye to what is happening to people in
Yemen? Or is it a new hybrid kind of conscience, which does not send signals to
the brain or other vital organs? It is impossible not to see the disaster. I
realise that the US media are preoccupied with other problems. The words
“Yemen”, “Mosul” and “Syria” do not occur in their front-page news. They are
focusing on Russia. We will talk about it later. But can “moral conscience” be
mute to such an extent? Surely, it cannot have atrophied completely. This means
there is no such conscience at all.
Two years of violence, bloodshed, despair, famine and
destruction are more than enough for all sides to see the necessity of an
urgent search for a peaceful settlement of the conflict. All this bears out our
assessments of the Yemeni situation and the correctness of repeated appeals to
an urgent peaceful settlement.
The international community’s duty is to work towards
an immediate cessation to all violence, whatever motivations might be found for
it. We are firmly convinced that there is no military solution to the Yemeni
conflict. The sides should return to the negotiating table with assistance from
UN Special Envoy for Yemen Ismail Ould Cheikh Ahmed and work for a lasting
ceasefire and the political settlement of the conflict.
More about Russia’s alleged meddling in the US
presidential election
We have taken note of yet another attempt to play the
Russian card in the internal political debates in the United States.
Personally, I wouldn’t describe this as an attempt but the continuation of a
campaign and a new round of the hellish propaganda campaign launched under the
previous US administration. The point at issue this time is a fresh bout of
hysterics over routine diplomatic contacts of the Russian Embassy’s leaders and
staff in Washington.
Some US and other media are again writing about
Russia’s alleged meddling in the US presidential election last year. It looks
as if you are preparing for a new round of an internal election campaign. I
think you should see that it’s time to do some work in-between the election
campaigns. As it is, it looks as if the US administration will approach the
next election cycle with only one result – artistic demagoguery about Russia
meddling in the previous election. I would describe this behaviour by some US
journalists and media outlets as a threat to our diplomats. If our diplomats
refuse to give interviews on highly specific matters – we understand that
requests for such interviews are made to keep the issue of Russia’s alleged
meddling in the US elections afloat – fresh batches of “compromising
information” will be planted in the media. We see this as dirt throwing and
misinformation. We are told about the fake news that appeared in January, which
was spearheaded against President-elect Donald Trump and contained allegations
about Russia. It was published by BuzzFeed and hinted that Russia should be
more actively involved in this information war or they would do everything without
us. Actually, this is information blackmail.
I can cite one more example. To avoid generalising, I
will provide hard facts. One of the items included allegations concerning our
colleague, Russian diplomat Mikhail Kalugin, even though we published a refutation
when Mr Kalugin’s name was first mentioned in the items about the alleged
Russian spies and agents in Washington. We said that this is disinformation
that has nothing in common with reality. However, these allegations continue.
I want to once again make it quite clear that neither
Mikhail Kalugin nor any other member of the Russian diplomatic and other
agencies in the United States was connected in any way with the US presidential
election. We believe it’s time to stop playing these dirty information games.
I would like to say more about Mr Kalugin. We have
taken note of a recent item published by a BBC correspondent in Washington. It
is a long item that has no respect for personal data. It includes claims that
have no relation to reality and is supplied with many photographs. It is an
absurd story that violates BBC principles. As I have said, the item has been
published, and I want to comment on it.
This item mentioned Russian diplomat Mikhail Kalugin,
who headed the Russian Embassy’s economics division until last August.
According to this item, Mr Kalugin is a spy and this confirms Mr Steele’s
dossier about the Russian connection in last year’s election campaign in the
United States.
I want to say that we have published the necessary
refutations. However, more than two months later, the allegation is being
repeated in an item that provides photographs, personal data and the photos of
the Russian Embassy in order to give more weight to the allegation.
I would like to repeat what I already said at a briefing
[in January] that Mikhail Kalugin is absolutely not guilty of the allegations
laid against him and the Russian Embassy. He is a Russian diplomat who has
worked in the United States for six years. His mission in the United States was
to facilitate the Russian and American companies’ business in Russia and the
United States. He helped promote bilateral economic relations and, contrary to
what the media claimed, he left the United States when his contract ended to
assume new responsibilities at the Foreign Ministry. He goes to his office [in
Moscow] every day. Contrary to what the BBC claims, when he worked in the
United States he regularly met with representatives of the US Department of
State, the National Security Council and various US economic departments,
including the Department of Commerce, the Department of the Treasury and the
Department of Energy. I am saying this now to lay to rest the fake news
published by BBC and its Washington correspondent. This is all lies, nothing
but lies, fake news and disinformation.
Mikhail Kalugin was also engaged in the public sphere
giving lectures and interviews on the prospects of our bilateral relations. You
can check this information and conduct your own investigations. By the way, the
BBC item claims that State Department staff who dealt with Russia did not come
across Kalugin. This is nonsense. However, I really do wonder if the State
Department knows anything. Based on my contacts with our American colleagues
over the past few years, I can tell you that they only admitted six months
after the beginning of the Ukrainian crisis that they had a clearer view on
what was happening there than they did at the beginning. For a long time, there
was nobody in the State Department with whom we could discuss matters. In the
past six months, it was unclear whom we could phone there in case of problems.
It is also unclear whom the BBC correspondent talked with. He mentioned
reliable sources. We know only too well just how reliable these sources are.
I have told you about the areas where Mikhail Kalugin
worked and his contacts. As for the claim that he never went to the State
Department or communicated with State Department staff, I can tell the BBC
reporter Paul Wood that he simply doesn’t know that in 2014 the US State Department
curtailed communications with Russian diplomats, which had been maintained in
full in many areas before that. Russian diplomats could only get an appointment
with the State Department in the case of an emergency. All other
humanitarian and economic contacts were curtailed. The Russian Foreign Ministry
holds regular consultations on information issues with the foreign policy
departments of all countries, both those with which we maintain trust-based
relations and those with which we are poles apart on information matters. We
hold consultations, exchange opinions and discuss issues of concern for us and
them. I can tell Mr Wood how we pressed the US State Department to talk with us
on information matters. Trying to get an appointment to talk with State
Department staff was no easy feat. You are writing nonsense, of course, but at
least try not to put your head on the block with such items as this one.
So, the US State Department curtailed any contact with
us in 2014 as prompted by the Obama administration. The Russia-US Bilateral
Presidential Commission was suspended by our American partners. The same
happened to other bilateral formats. When coming to any conclusions on a cosmic
scale, remember what writer Mikhail Bulgakov said about conclusions that can
turn out to be silly on a cosmic scale.
Although all official forms and methods of interaction
were curtailed at the initiative of the Obama administration, our diplomats
searched for and found ways to keep our bilateral relations afloat. I have said
above with which officials and agencies our diplomats cooperated. It is an
absolutely normal practice.
And lastly, I would like to present this “tough,
arrogant KGB man”, as the BBC reporter described him. Can you imagine this? A
“tough, arrogant KGB man” in 2017? Guys, the KGB was closed down long ago. What
are you talking about? Mikhail Kalugin goes to his office every day, but today
he changed his routine to come to the Foreign Ministry Press Centre. Here he
is, this “tough, arrogant KGB man”. He will be available to make comments, and
he will tell you about his work. This is a paradox, an information paradox. We
have to comment on these rumblings, which are published again and again. There
are such problems as Yemen, ISIS, Jabhat al-Nusra, drug trafficking, organised
crime, migration, illegal migration and Afghanistan. However, the intellectual
power of Washington, including the media and analysts, are busy searching for
the Russian connection in all their problems and failures. There will come a
time when these cases will be cited in textbooks as drivel, and this horrible
period in our history will be sharply criticised in the United States itself.
People will come to their senses and they will see that they wasted their time
on fighting imaginary dragons. Regrettably, it will
only happen later, not now.
To be continued
No comments:
Post a Comment