17 July 2019
1486-17-07-2019
Question: Can an improvement in the relations with the
United States be expected in the near future?
Sergey Lavrov: An improvement will hardly materialise any time
soon, since it is anything but easy to sort out the mess that our relations are
in, which is not our fault. After all, bilateral relations require reciprocal
efforts. We have to meet each other half way.
Russia is ready to move in this
direction, as we have said on a number of occasions. We proceed from the
premise that Russia and the United States bear special responsibility. We are
the two largest nuclear powers, the founding members of the United Nations and
permanent members of its Security Council. Cooperation between our two
countries is key to ensuring stability and predictability in international
affairs. However, not everything depends on us. It takes two to tango, as the
saying goes.
The situation is quite complicated on
the American side. On the one hand, President Donald Trump talks about seeking
to be on good terms with Russia, but this attitude is far from prevalent in
Washington. We see this in unfriendly steps, such as various groundless
accusations Russia faces, imposing financial and economic sanctions, seizing
diplomatic property, kidnapping Russian nationals in third countries, opposing
Russia’s foreign policy interests, as well as attempts to meddle in our
domestic affairs. We are seeing system-wide efforts to reach out to almost all countries
around the world and persuade them to scale back their relations with Russia.
Many US politicians are trying to
outshine each other in ramping up anti-Russia phobias and they are using this
factor in their domestic political struggles. We understand that they will only
escalate in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election. Nevertheless, we will
not give up in despair. We will continue to look for common ground with the US
despite all the challenges that there are.
It is essential that the Russian and
US presidents both understand that there is a need to end the deadlock in our
relations. During their June meeting which took place in Osaka the two leaders
spoke out in favour of stepping up economic cooperation, combining efforts to
settle regional crises, resuming dialogue on strategic stability, and also said
that they appreciated dialogue on combatting terrorism. Vladimir Putin invited
Donald Trump to Moscow to take part in the events to mark the 75th anniversary
of Victory in WWII.
All in all, it has to be recognised
that Washington has been inconsistent and quite often unpredictable in its
actions. For this reason, trying to predict anything in our relations with the
US is a fruitless task. Let me reiterate that as far as Russia is concerned we
are ready to patiently work on improving our relations. Of course, this will be
possible only if Russia’s interests are respected, and based on equality and
mutual respect.
Question: Our diplomats’ access to several Russian
properties in San Francisco has been restricted. What practical actions are you
taking to protect our property?
Sergey Lavrov: Washington has actually expropriated six Russian
buildings which have been registered with the US Department of State as
diplomatic property. These are two buildings of the Russian Consulate General
in San Francisco, the Consul General’s residence in Seattle, the countryside
facilities of the Russian Embassy and Trade Mission in New York, as well as our
Trade Mission in Washington. We have no diplomatic presence on the West Coast,
where tens of thousands of Russian citizens and compatriots live. We have been
denied the right to visit these places by the US State Department. All this is
a flagrant violation of the United States’ international legal obligations.
We have responded to these openly
coercive actions. We have shut down the US Consulate General in St Petersburg,
which incidentally was not a US property. We are mulling over a choice of
possible methods to reclaim the illegally seized Russian property. We regularly
raise the subject of Washington’s violation of its obligations at the bilateral
level and also at multilateral platforms. We will continue to do this.
Question: The United States abducts and hunts down Russian
citizens around the world, imprisoning them under far-fetched pretexts, whereas
we appear to be afraid of giving an appropriate response to these international
bandits.
Sergey Lavrov: We are not afraid of anything. But we will not
act like bandits either, because we respect international law.
The hunt for Russian citizens in
other countries is nothing other than an instrument of US pressure on Russia.
Washington has flatly refused to cooperate with our law enforcement agencies on
the basis of the 1999 Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters.
Instead, it puts pressure on its allies and other states to arrest Russian
citizens on their territory and subsequently to extradite them to the United
States. This is being done quietly, furtively and without any reliable proof
[of these people’s guilt]. Some of our citizens have been abducted, as it
happened to Konstantin Yaroshenko in Liberia in 2010 and to Roman Seleznev in
the Maldives in 2014.
Of course, we will not leave our
citizens alone with their problems. We carefully examine all the cases of
Russian citizens detained at Washington’s request. The Russian authorities are
working on measures to enhance the effectiveness of the legal protection of our
citizens abroad. The Foreign Ministry and Russian diplomats in the United
States are taking all possible measures to protect the rights and interests of
our compatriots in distress. We are doing our best to ensure that Russian
detainees have access to consular and legal assistance around the clock, as
well as to improve their detainment conditions. In our contacts with the
Americans, we invariably demand that our citizens be released and returned home
as soon as possible. This also concerns the widely publicised cases of Viktor
Bout and Maria Butina.
We raise this question at
multilateral platforms, including the UN Human Rights Council, as well as in
our contacts with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the OSCE High
Commissioner on National Minorities, and the Council of Europe Commissioner for
Human Rights.
Unfortunately, knowing the aggressive
methods of the American system, which does not just stop at using illegal
methods, we cannot guarantee that nothing bad will happen to Russian citizens
abroad. In this context, I would like to use this occasion to recommend that
our citizens thoroughly consider the risks of foreign trips, especially ones to
the countries that have extradition agreements with the United States.
Question: Why would Russia pay for PACE membership if it
is constantly subject to the assembly’s provocations?
Sergey Lavrov: Just to clarify, there are no separate fees for
the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Our country makes payments
to the Council of Europe’s budget pursuant to the council’s Statute and Russian
law. PACE-related expenses account for a small fraction of the Council of
Europe’s common budget.
Strictly speaking, Council of Europe
membership is a source of a number of benefits for our citizens and the country
in general. They include refining our national legal system, solving a whole
range of social and humanitarian issues, and fighting corruption. Every single
ministry and agency that is part of the Inter-Agency Commission on Russia’s
Council of Europe Membership (around 20 in total) confirm the importance of
proactive participation in this organisation, including mechanisms of over 60
conventions that our country joined.
As concerns provocations, they are
engineered by the aggressive Russophobic minority egged on by the United
States, an observer in the Council of Europe. Of course, this sours the
atmosphere and does not bode well for constructive PACE work. But then again,
the sensible majority of PACE members who support Russia’s return to the fold
of this parliamentary structure is sick and tired of this meaningless vagary.
This is indicated by the fact that at the June session, the assembly issued a
resolution to restore Russia’s powers without any reservations, thus meeting
the condition of Russia’s resuming payments.
Question: It is outrageous to watch the Ukrainian army’s
rampage against LPR and DPR residents. Innocent civilians, children and
defenders of these two republics are being killed. It was reported that local
people addressed Russian President Vladimir Putin with a request to send in
troops. Why not do it and force Ukraine to make peace as was the case with
Georgia?
Sergey Lavrov: True, the situation in Donbass remains extremely
disturbing. To this day, hardly anything has been done to cease fire and
shelling continues. Of course, the suffering of the people in these two
unrecognised republics strikes a painful chord in our hearts.
The signals that President Vladimir
Zelensky sent during his election campaign and right after being elected were
rather contradictory. We hope that Kiev’s recent pledge to fully comply with
the Minsk Agreements will take the shape of a practical policy after the
pre-term Verkhovna Rada elections. The most important thing is to end the war
and hear the people in southeastern Ukraine who want peace to be restored, who
want to freely speak their native Russian language and their socioeconomic
rights to be observed. All this was committed to writing in the Package of
Measures.
I really hope that the new Ukrainian
leadership will not continue the disastrous course of Poroshenko’s regime and
will successfully convert the credit of trust it has into actual efforts to
restore civil peace in Ukraine. The long-awaited disengaging of forces and
equipment that began in late June in Stanitsa Luganskaya that had been blocked
by the previous administration for two and a half years is a convincing
indication that where there is political will there can be progress.
Question: Does Russia intend to officially recognise the
DPR and the LPR as independent states?
Sergey Lavrov: Our position on this matter is well known.
According to the Minsk Package of Measures, where Russia acts as a guarantor,
Donbass has to be granted special status that is permanently enshrined in
Ukraine’s constitution. We believe in the need to focus at this point in time
on implementing the Minsk Agreements as approved by a UN Security Council
resolution, which makes them a binding instrument.
The Ukrainian leadership must look
its own citizens straight in the face and renounce the policy of putting
Donbass in an economic chokehold, recognise the right of Donetsk and Lugansk
residents to speak their native language and celebrate the dates and public
holidays they hold as sacred, and honour the memory of their national heroes.
Without this it would not be serious, to say the least, to talk about restoring
trust among DPR and LPR residents toward official Kiev. Of course, establishing
meaningful and direct dialogue between Kiev and the unrecognised people’s
republics is the central condition of the Minsk Agreements. This requires
streamlining the work of the Contact Group formed by Kiev, Donetsk and Lugansk
representatives and supported by Russia and the OSCE. In this case, the
Normandy Format can also be effective in facilitating the work of the Contact
Group. There can also be other ways to support the settlement process in
Donbass from the outside, as long as they are acceptable for all sides, and, of
course, do not water down the tenets of the Minsk Agreements. President
Vladimir Putin was abundantly clear in reaffirming his position, including
during his telephone conversation with President Vladimir Zelensky on July 10.
Question: What is Russia’s Foreign Ministry doing to liberate
Russian journalist Kirill Vyshinsky from detention in Kiev? He has spent more
than a year in prison, in essence, for his professional activity. Why cannot
Russia put pressure on Ukraine to free him?
Sergey Lavrov: The court proceedings in the case of RIA Novosti
Ukraine editor-in-chief resemble the theatre of the absurd. There is no doubt
that the journalist was subject to an illegal arrest, just for working for a
Russian media outlet and honestly reporting on the ongoing developments. Even
Ukrainian prosecutors seem to understand this, since they have been postponing
hearings under the pretext of studying the investigative materials.
Russia demands that Kiev immediately
release Kirill Vyshinsky and fully restore all his rights. Our diplomats
maintain close contacts with the journalist’s lawyers, since Ukraine declined
consular access. We do everything we can to reach out to our foreign partners,
including on international platforms, calling on them to work with Kiev in
order to bring about a positive resolution as soon as possible.
Question: What measures should the Georgian government take in
order to prevent individuals who are a disgrace for Georgia from holding
anti-Russia demonstrations near the country’s parliament?
Sergey Lavrov: Relations between the government and the
opposition are Georgia’s internal affair. We have no intention to interfere in
this process. However, we are definitely concerned about any attempts made by
some radical representatives of the Georgian political elite to whip up
Russophobic sentiment and pit our peoples against one another. I doubt that
these individuals thought about the damage their action was causing to their
country and the prosperity of its people, which depends to a significant extent
on the state of economic and humanitarian relations with Russia.
We expect the Georgian leadership to
recognise as soon as possible the detrimental nature and danger of further
efforts to fan anti-Russia hysteria. After all, it is essential that official
Tbilisi found the strength to condemn the shameful actions of a local
television network that offended the President of Russia, causing misgivings
even within the Georgian society.
We hope that the Georgian authorities
will be able to restore social and political stability in the country and
remove the existing security threats Russians currently face there. Should this
happen, the necessary conditions will be created in order to look into the
possibility for removing the precautionary measures Russia has taken, including
a ban on air travel to Georgia. We want to be friends and to cooperate so that
Russians and Georgians can benefit.
Question: The Chinese media have recently started referring to
Siberia as “Chinese land.” Some 12 million Chinese currently live in Russia’s
Far East and Siberia. Can it happen that China actually takes over Siberia and
Russia’s Far East in the near future?
Sergey Lavrov: Border disputes between Russia and China were
settled for good a long time ago. The bilateral Treaty of Good-Neighbourliness
and Friendly Cooperation adopted in 2001 states that there are no territorial
claims between the two countries. Against this backdrop, those who have
misgivings over the constructive development of Russian-Chinese relations seek
to spread the myth of the Chinese threat.
As for the 12 million Chinese who allegedly
live in the Far East and Siberia, I have great doubts about the accuracy of
this figure. The associated fears are clearly blown out of proportion.
The policy by Russia and the People’s
Republic of China to strengthen their neighbourly relations is a multifaceted
and long-term effort that cannot be affected by short-term fluctuations.
Sino-Russian cooperation is not aimed against anyone. Its main purpose is to
facilitate socioeconomic development and prosperity for our countries and
peoples. As Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping said following the June 5 talks in
Moscow, the two countries are entering a new era in their comprehensive
partnership and strategic cooperation. The growing mutual trust in military and
political affairs, record-high trade figures and expanding cultural and
humanitarian contacts, as well as better coordination with Beijing on
international affairs speak volumes of the positive momentum in our bilateral
dialogue.
Question: Relations with Iran are essential for Russia’s
geopolitics. However, Iran has indulged in unacceptable aggressive rhetoric
against the state of Israel on numerous occasions and went beyond words. How is
Russia’s position any different from that of European countries in the 1930s
when they encouraged Hitler’s anti-Soviet stance?
Sergey Lavrov: Russia sees intrinsic value in its relations
with Iran, Israel and all other Middle East countries. Russia has a
multipronged foreign policy that is free from the principle of “being friends
against someone.” In our contacts with the leaders of all regional countries we
are consistent in calling on our partners to find peaceful solutions to the
problems that may arise and renounce the use or threat of force.
The escalating tension in the region
we are witnessing today is the direct result of Washington and some of its
allies raising the stakes in their anti-Iranian policy. The US is flexing its
muscles by seeking to discredit Tehran and blame all the sins on the Islamic
Republic of Iran. This creates a dangerous situation: a single match can start
a fire. The responsibility for the possible catastrophic consequences will rest
with the United States.
As for the historical aspect of your question, it is not appropriate to project what happened in Europe in the 1930s
on the current developments in the Middle East. As we all know, Neville
Chamberlain and Edouard Daladier sought to appease Hitler in order to direct
the German military might against the USSR. We are not seeing anything of this
kind today.
Iran regularly reaffirms to us its
interest in regional stability through dialogue with all the interested
countries, including the Gulf Arab states. In addition to this, Tehran has
always stressed that it did not intend to undertake any aggressive action.
As far as Russia is concerned, we are
taking steps to de-escalate tensions. We are proactive in promoting the concept
of collective security in the Persian Gulf implying a stage-by-stage approach
to resolving conflicts and devising confidence building and control mechanisms.
We are working with our partners to preserve the multilateral agreements to
promote a settlement on the Iranian nuclear programme.
Question: Do you think that we are geopolitically losing
in Ukraine, Armenia and Georgia and allowing a belt of “Russia’s enemies” to build
up around us from among some of the former “brotherly nations” who earn money
in Russia and on Russia, repatriate it and still consider us if not enemies,
definitely not friends?
Sergey Lavrov: The political processes in Ukraine, Georgia and
Armenia concern us, there is no question about it, because they are our
brotherly peoples and we are tied by a long history of relations, including
being part of one state.
Unfortunately, after the dissolution
of the Soviet Union the West came to believe that it was the end of history and
the West can now blatantly interfere with the affairs of any country and
presumptuously call the shots in its domestic politics. Ukraine is perhaps the
most flagrant example.
Armenia is a different story. This
country is Russia’s key partner in the South Caucasus with whom we have strong
strategic relations and an alliance. We are engaged in an extensive political
dialogue and cooperate between parliaments and on the international scene.
Russia is Armenia’s leading economic partner. Our links in the education,
culture, investment, military and technical sector are on the rise.
As concerns Georgia, I am certain
that Georgians do not see us Russians as enemies. Unfortunately, right now we
see certain politicians in Georgia competing in anti-Russian rhetoric to
achieve their mercenary and opportunistic goals. I am sure that everything will
be ironed out sooner or later and that our countries will again enjoy
neighbourly relations.
Broadly speaking, our agenda in the
post-Soviet space has a unifying nature and is aimed at stimulating the
socioeconomic development of respective countries, promoting and harmonising
integration in the region, strengthening collective security and the potential
of our coordinated response to threats and challenges.
Question: What is the status of the talks with Iraq over
bringing back our women and children from prisons? What are the prospects of
them returning back home?
Sergey Lavrov: So far, we have managed to bring back home 90
children. According to our records, some 30 more children remain in Iraq. We
plan to bring them back within the next months.
Unfortunately, the situation is more
complicated when it comes to their mothers. All of them are convicted for
breaking Iraqi law, by illegally crossing the border, staying in the country
illegally and participating in terrorist activities. Sixty-six Russian
nationals are currently in prison. The Russian Embassy in Baghdad is constantly
monitoring their cases and providing necessary help.
To recap, we started working on the
humanitarian operation to return our minor citizens back to Russia in the
autumn of 2017 when Iraqi officials informed us that Russian women and children
were detained during a counter-terrorist operation in Mosul.
The office of the Presidential
Commissioner for Children’s Rights Anna Kuznetsova established a commission to
coordinate the operation. The commission involves representatives of competent
government bodies, including the Foreign Ministry. Together with the Iraqi
authorities we agreed on a course of action to locate the children and prepare
the necessary documents for their repatriation. Russian specialists collected
the children’s and mothers’ biological material for DNA relationship testing.
Meanwhile, we were looking for relatives to establish formal guardianship. Then
we received rulings of the Baghdad Central Court on returning the children.
We continue to work hard on this
matter.
Question: What is the reason for facilitating access to
Russian citizenship for people living abroad?
Sergey Lavrov: These decisions are based above all on
humanitarian considerations. This is why we have adopted a facilitated
procedure for the granting of Russian citizenship to the residents of certain
districts in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions. The procedure was formalized in
April of this year by a presidential executive order.
Kiev’s blockade has made the living
in certain districts of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions of Ukraine unbearable.
The people have been deprived of everything, including social payments,
pensions, wages, as well as the national system of banking, education and
healthcare services. They have been stripped of their voting rights, as neither
election commissions nor polling stations were established in their districts.
In other words, Kiev has de facto turned these people into stateless persons.
It was our duty to provide assistance
to these people in that situation. Russian citizenship will allow them to
tackle their current problems, give them freedom of movement as well as access
to healthcare services, education, banking services and transportation.
At the same time, Russia is not
forcing anyone to adopt its citizenship or abandon the Ukrainian citizenship.
Each resident of Donbass makes the decision independently.
Besides, this is not a new practice
at all. A number of European countries, for example, Poland, Hungary and
Romania, have been doing this for years.
The general procedure for granting
Russian citizenship is regulated by a federal law, which says that the basic
condition is the applicant’s residence in Russia. But the law also stipulates
preferences for foreign nationals living outside Russia if at least one of
their parents is a Russian citizen living in Russia. An exception has been made
for the stateless persons who used to hold Soviet citizenship and are living in
the former Soviet republics. They can receive Russian citizenship without
taking up residency in Russia. In addition to this, parents holding Russian
citizenship can register their children born in mixed marriages as Russian
citizens. We are working to improve this procedure.
In reality, Russian offices abroad
issue Russian passports to some 50,000 people every year. Over half of them are
children born in mixed marriages. Their parents usually write in their
applications that they want to maintain the legal and spiritual connection to
Russia.
Question: Have you ever developed good personal relations
with foreign colleagues even though you may have political differences with
their home countries? Can you provide an example of such friendship?
Sergey Lavrov: Good and trust-based personal relations are
extremely important in the diplomatic profession. In some cases communications
are maintained and solutions to problems are found only thanks to such personal
relations. In general, I believe that the ability to maintain close contacts,
avoid emotional decision-making and never forget about your country’s strategic
interests when dealing with short-term concerns are the required qualities of
all diplomats irrespective of rank and post.
Of course, partners and counterparts
do change. For example, as a Foreign Minister I have worked with five US
Secretaries of State. But this does not mean [personal] ties are broken off
when my colleagues retire or are appointed to another position. After all, this
is a small world.
As for giving examples, I would not
like to name anyone now, including out of respect for the other colleagues. After
all, friendship is a very personal matter. Besides, many of my friends are
still working in the diplomatic service or are prominent in the socio-political
sphere.
Question: What quality distinguishes a real diplomat from
a fake one?
Sergey Lavrov: As for the qualities a professional diplomat
must have, I would say that the most important of them is a deep understanding
of your country’s development goals and foreign policy interests. Of course,
this calls for special training, good knowledge of history, constant
involvement in all aspects of life, as well as colossal erudition. Diplomats
routinely work with people from other countries, ethnicities and cultures. So
they must be well-versed in a country’s specifics. Of course, it is very
important to have a knowledge of foreign languages, which is, by the way, a
strong point when it comes to our diplomacy. Overall, diplomatic work consists
of active contacts with people, which is why a real diplomat must make a good
impression, find common language with others in any situation, as well as be
able not only to hear but also to listen to what the counterparts say.
No comments:
Post a Comment