10 March 201716:21
461-10-03-2017
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s
talks with Congolese Foreign Minister Jean-Claude Gakosso
On March 13-15, the Congolese Minister of
Foreign Affairs, Cooperation and Congolese Nationals Abroad Jean-Claude Gakosso
will be in Moscow on a working visit.
On March 14, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will
meet with his Congolese counterpart to discuss the further development of
Russian-Congolese political, trade, economic and cultural cooperation. The
ministers will focus on several areas of mutual interest, such as the
implementation of a pilot project to build a Pointe-Noire – Yie – Oyo – Ouesso
oil product pipeline in Congo.
The officials will discuss international issues
of mutual interest, such as creating a broad front against terrorism and
defusing crises in Africa.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s meeting with
National Security Adviser of the President of Afghanistan Mohammad Hanif Atmar
On March 17, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will
meet with National Security Adviser of the President of Afghanistan Mohammad
Hanif Atmar, who will be in Moscow on a working visit.
The officials will discuss the security
situation and prospects for promoting national reconciliation in Afghanistan,
as well as ways to develop multilateral cooperation within the Moscow format of
regional consultations on Afghanistan.
On March 17, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will
meet with the leaders of over a hundred Russian NGOs that are implementing
human rights, humanitarian, research and education, cultural and youth projects
with foreign partners.
This annual event was first held in 2004 and has
since become an effective platform for exchanging opinions and outlining
prospective areas for cooperation between the Foreign Ministry and civil
society.
We hope that the upcoming meeting will be held
in a constructive spirit and will help coordinate our views on key
international issues with those of the NGOs.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s participation
in Russian-Japanese consultations in the Two Plus Two format in Tokyo
On March 20, the second round of
Russian-Japanese consultations in the Two Plus Two format will be held between
foreign and defence ministers in Tokyo. The work of this dialogue mechanism
resumed following an official visit by President of Russia Vladimir Putin to
Japan in December 2016. The first round of these consultations was held in
Tokyo in November 2013.
The situation in Syria
Russia continues efforts to reach a political
settlement of the conflict in Syria as soon as possible and to create
additional opportunities for waging an unrelenting fight against international
terrorists operating in that country and their local accomplices.
The International Meeting on Syria in Astana is
scheduled for March 14-15 and will be attended by representatives of the Syrian
Government and the armed opposition groups that have supported the cessation of
hostilities. On the whole, we are satisfied with the progress of the Astana
Process, where the driving force is the three guarantors of the cessation of
hostilities – Russia, Turkey and Iran. Agreements reached in this format have
made it possible to meaningfully reduce the level of violence in Syria and
improve the humanitarian situation. It became possible to substantially expand
and consolidate the ceasefire and involve a number of armed groups based in
southern Syria in the political process. We proceed from the assumption that
the new meeting in Astana will be of much help for holding the fifth round of the
UN-sponsored intra-Syrian talks in Geneva, which are to begin on March 23.
We hope that preparations for the new contacts
in Geneva will facilitate yet another step towards forming a broad-based and
strong delegation of the Syrian opposition, which would take into account the
vision and points of view of all ethnic and religious segments of Syrian
society and whose willingness to negotiate is not in question. Meanwhile, the
military and political situation in Syria remains tense. The government forces
are building on their successes in the fight against ISIS and Nusra. As a
result of their operations, a vast swathe of eastern Aleppo Province has been
liberated. In the face of fierce resistance from ISIS, the Syrian army has
reached the Asad reservoir on the Euphrates River, taking control of two pump
stations in Al Hafsa, which supply drinking water to Aleppo and its environs. I
would like to remind you that Aleppo was cut off from its main fresh water
source for almost two months.
The Russian Centre for reconciliation of
opposing sides in Syria was active in brokering a truce in Eastern Ghouta near
Damascus. The truce came into effect on March 6. At the same time,
terrorists remaining in the enclave and groups of so-called “irreconcilables”
that have actually merged with them do not support this agreement. They made a
public appeal to renounce any reconciliation with the Syrian Government and
resume attacks on the government forces’ positions.
Statement from the Organisation for the
Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) on allegations of chemical weapons use
in Mosul
The Russian Federation fully shares the concern
expressed by the OPCW and the UN regarding the alleged use of chemical weapons
in Mosul, Iraq.
We have been following this situation since
March 2013 when one of the first incidents involving the use of sarin gas
against Syrian government troops and civilians was reported in Khan al-Assal.
In this context, it is interesting what western experts are saying. They stated
that after ISIS fighters occupied Mosul in the summer of 2014, they obtained
access to a research library and laboratories of a local university, which
greatly enhanced their capability to produce chemical weapons. ISIS counted
among its members former Iraqi officers who were involved in Saddam Hussein’s
chemical weapons programme, as well as certified chemistry experts from abroad.
As for ISIS chemical weapons production facilities in Iraq, Iraqis themselves
and representatives of the US-led anti-ISIS coalition reported the discovery of
these facilities.
In this connection, we suggest that journalists
forward their enquiries to the Iraqi authorities and the coalition command, who
had publicly announced the killing of ISIS chemical weapons experts, former Iraqi
officers Suleiman Daud al-Bakkar and Abu Malik. Last year, the coalition
announced the capture of an ISIS chemical weapons production facility in the
city of Hit in Iraq and the bombing of another “chemical facility” of that
sort.
The recurring cases of chemical terrorism in the
Middle East, including in Syria and Iraq, are a matter of grave concern. Not
only do fighters from ISIS, Jabhat al-Nusra and other affiliated extremist
groups have industrial and domestic toxic substances in their possession, such
as chlorine, but also toxic weapons-grade agents, including mustard gas and
sarin. There is no doubt whatsoever that the use of chemical weapons runs
counter to the existing international rules and norms. All this confirms what
we have been saying all along, that terrorists have the capability to produce
and use chemical weapons.
I would like to draw your attention to the fact
that national security threats have become a hotly debated issue in major
European countries, the United States and across the world in general. There is
nothing wrong with any country having a conversation on this topic.
Unfortunately, the threat of terrorists using and producing chemical weapons,
which is a global, not regional, issue, is not at the centre of these
discussions. Non-state actors in Syria and Iraq were able to expand their
cross-border terrorist activity, making it more systematic. Unfortunately, our
worst fears are about to materialise. We have warned about it on multiple
occasions. There is a threat of chemical terrorism spreading across the Middle
East. Even though this may sound ironic (although this would be a very sad
irony), we could use a hashtag #FMknew (i.e. “the Foreign Ministry knew”).
Moreover, chemical terrorism could spill over into neighbouring regions.
This is a serious threat and it is real. We have
to work on it. We hope that the Iraqi authorities will be proactive in dealing
with it. Of course, Russia fully supports OPCW’s commitment to provide
comprehensive assistance to Baghdad in investigating this incident.
In addition, we believe that the mandate of the
UN-OPCW Joint Investigative Mechanism on chemical weapons use in Syria, renewed
for one year under UN Security Council Resolution 2319, should be extended
beyond Syria to territories exposed to the threat of chemical terrorism.
We strongly believe that those responsible for
all crimes involving the use of chemical weapons should be identified and held
accountable.
In broader terms, the fact that non-state actors
are using chemical weapons for military and terrorist purposes with increased
frequency shows that Russia came forward with a timely and urgent initiative
when it proposed one year ago to draft an international convention on fighting
chemical and biological terrorism as part of the Conference on Disarmament in
Geneva. We hope that countries taking part in this Conference on Disarmament in
Geneva will back this initiative.
Detention of a Russian vessel in Libyan waters
According to information we have received, on
March 5 the coast guard of Zawiya in western Libya detained the Russian cargo
vessel Merle and escorted it to the port of Tripoli. The ship belongs to MT
Group based in St Petersburg. The crew comprises seven people, all of them
Russian citizens.
The Russian Embassy in Libya, which is
temporarily located in Tunisia, as you know, is currently investigating the
circumstances of the incident. Of course, all necessary measures will be taken
to rapidly resolve this latest incident involving our citizens in that country.
At the same time, considering the ongoing
difficult military and political situation in that country, about which we have
repeatedly warned through the consular service and our agencies abroad, and
given the security and other risks for Russian citizens and organisations
there, we would like to again strongly advise that Russian operators that are
engaged in international air, sea and car transportation, as well as Russian
citizens who are members of Russian and foreign crews, abstain from visiting
Libya for safety reasons until the situation returns to normal there.
We hope that the relevant Russian companies will
draw conclusions from this latest incident involving a Russian ship crew in
Libya.
European Parliament event to mark three years
since the tragedies in Kiev and Odessa
On February 28, the European Parliament hosted a
roundtable discussion devoted to the third anniversary of the tragic events in
Kiev and Odessa. Among the speakers were, besides some parliament members,
opposition journalist and blogger Ruslan Kotsaba who was recently released from
Ukrainian prison; one of the leaders of the Ukrainian Socialist Party Vasyl
Tsushko, former minister of the interior and former head of the Ukrainian
anti-monopoly committee; Alexander Hug, deputy head of the OSCE Special
Monitoring Mission to Ukraine; relatives of the Odessa tragedy victims; and
representatives of the media and non-governmental organisations.
It’s very telling that Ukrainian diplomats have
pointedly ignored the event despite the invitations.
Participants in the roundtable discussion again
demanded that the Ukrainian government stop putting off the investigation into
these tragedies and finally shed light on all circumstances of the case. They
emphasised that the radicals who openly admitted their complicity to the
killing of law enforcement officers in Kiev and civilians in Odessa are living
in freedom, while “anti-Maidan” supporters and their relatives in Odessa are
harassed by Ukrainian authorities and intimidated by Ukrainian nationalists.
In this context we find it very regretful that
most European Parliament members, organisations and media of the EU, which seem
to be very sensitive (as we all know) about upholding human rights and
combatting lawlessness, have turned a blind eye to the deliberate efforts to
delay the investigation of these tragedies and other crimes of the current
Ukrainian government.
We again urge the international community,
including human rights defenders and non-governmental organisations, to ensure
that Ukraine conducts a thorough and, of course, unbiased investigation, and
brings those guilty in the Kiev and Odessa tragedies to justice.
Canada’s decision to extend its military
training mission in Ukraine
We are deeply concerned over Canada’s decision
to extend its military training mission in Ukraine for two years. Within its
framework, Canadian military instructors conduct training on Ukrainian shooting
ranges, or, to put it differently, “coach” Ukrainian servicemen who are
subsequently sent to Donbas.
We consider such decisions and actions on the
part of the Government of Canada to be extremely dangerous. They are hampering
a political solution to the confrontation with the Kiev government, which is to
blame for the fact that it is still going on. Moreover, according to our
information, this is not just a matter of training: Canada has begun ammunition
supplies for the Ukrainian Armed Forces, and this ammunition will, no doubt,
end up in the conflict zone.
Instead of putting pressure on Kiev to get it to
fulfil its commitments under the Minsk Agreements, Ottawa has been openly
playing into the hands of those who favour a military solution in Donbass and
encouraging further bloodshed. The Canadians must understand that the
consequences of such a policy and such actions will be on their conscience.
The Russian chapter in the US Department of
State’s latest International Narcotics Control Strategy Report
We have carefully studied the chapter regarding
Russia in the 2016 report.
Regrettably, this largely technical document
contains hints that the Russian side is allegedly to blame for the fact that
our anti-drug cooperation, which was fruitful in the past, has been curtailed.
In addition to our cooperation in the bilateral format, we closely worked with
Washington in international anti-drug structures, including in preparing and
holding such an important event as last year’s special anti-drug session of the
UN General Assembly in New York. And we also expect to cooperate with the
American delegation during the 60th session of the UN
Commission on Narcotic Drugs, which is due to open in Vienna on March 13.
We have noted that US President Donald Trump, in
his March 1 speech to the Congress, repeatedly pointed to combating drugs as
one of the top priorities for his Administration. We believe that his concerns
over the present fairly dramatic situation with drug trafficking and drug abuse
in America are paving the way for the more active involvement of the United
States in a global anti-drug dialogue.
We are convinced that it is necessary to build
such cooperation in order to move towards a drug-free world. This meets the
vital interests of both the Russian Federation and other responsible members of
the international community.
Statements by Vice Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs
of Staff Gen. Paul J. Selva
We have noted statements made by Vice Chairman
of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Paul J. Selva, in which he told the US
Congress that Russia had allegedly deployed a land-based cruise missile that
violates the “spirit and intent” of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF)
Treaty.
Such statements are certainly disappointing. As
you know, this is not a new story. An informed person representing the military
leadership of a major country should have known better. In particular, he could
have finally explained what exactly they consider our “violations” to be and
how they came to this conclusion.
However, this is not the first time that public
accusations of Russia’s non-compliance with the INF Treaty are not backed up by any evidence. They seem to be following what has
already become a familiar pattern – making claims and immediately evading any
specificity.
We have repeatedly affirmed our commitment to
the INF. We explained to the US side that all missile tests in Russia are in
compliance with the Treaty. During all negotiations, consultations and meetings
we asked them to list Russia’s specific actions that are causing concern in
Washington. Invariably, we got little in response except vague proposals to
guess what they meant. This hardly seems like a serious approach.
Indicatively, though, the Americans are
threatening to retaliate for Russia’s mythical violations with certain steps of
a military nature. The very fact that US representatives are persistently using
such rhetoric, without bothering to bring any evidence or specific examples
whatsoever, raises questions about the purpose of these false media narratives.
At the same time, the Americans stubbornly
refuse to discuss our well-founded claims concerning their own compliance with
the INF Treaty. I am referring to the Mk-41 vertical launching units in the
Aegis Ashore ground-based anti-missile systems, which the United States has
deployed in Romania and plans to deploy in Poland, and which can reasonably be
considered cruise missile launchers. The large-scale programme of building
ballistic missile targets for missile defence-related applications, with
similar characteristics to intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles, is
also causing a lot of questions. In addition, the United States produces and
uses unmanned combat air vehicles, which fit the definition of ground-based
cruise missiles contained in the INF Treaty.
Once again, we suggest abandoning this
unsubstantiated rhetoric and public accusations without specific examples in
favour of a substantive dialogue aimed at addressing existing concerns and
clarifying potential points of disagreement. All the mechanisms are there. We
are open to such a dialogue through the appropriate channels.
Answers to media questions:
Question: How do you comment on media reports about the possible
appointment of Jon Huntsman to the post of US Ambassador to Russia?
Maria Zakharova: We don’t consider it necessary to comment on press
reports because a standard procedure is launched whenever any country deems it
necessary to have its ambassador replaced. Diplomatic practice exists for this
purpose. Obviously this is a decision for the Administration in Washington to
make. And the procedure is then launched via the appropriate channels.
Question: Could you comment on Russia’s decision
not to attend the March 22 meeting of countries, members of the anti-ISIS
coalition, in Washington DC?
Maria Zakharova: As you know, the Syrian peace settlement has many
formats. We are traditionally involved in some formats that have, among other
things, been established through the efforts of the Russian Federation. We have
never been involved in some formats, and this is not news or anything
sensational. We simply did not take part in these meetings. I have just
mentioned our efforts concerning the Syrian peace settlement. We are focusing
on precisely these efforts.
Question: What issues can the Norwegian and
Russian foreign ministers raise during their meeting at the Arctic – Territory
of Dialogue forum?
Maria Zakharova: We will inform you in great detail prior to the
meeting. As you know, those involved in bilateral meetings discuss issues of
the bilateral agenda, international issues and regional cooperation issues,
with due consideration for both countries’ location.
We will inform you about forum participants and
events on its sidelines in the run-up to the forum itself.
Question: Might Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
meet separately with his Turkish counterpart during Turkish President Recep
Tayyip Erdogan’s Moscow visit? If so, will they touch upon the Nagorno-Karabakh
peace settlement?
Maria Zakharova: As you know, we are not supposed to comment on the
format of summits. I have told you about all events due to involve the Minister
in the near future.
Question: Is it possible to talk about complete
mutual understanding between the countries co-chairing the OSCE’s Minsk Group
on the Nagorno-Karabakh peace settlement, or are there any disagreements?
Maria Zakharova: Any work amounts to a process aiming to coordinate
positions and to bring them to a common denominator for adopting subsequent
decisions. As in any other process, we voice completely coinciding positions on
certain issues, and we need to reach consensus on some others. Your question is
rather vague, and my reply is also quite vague.
Question: Yesterday, Chisinau recommended that
Moldovan officials refrain from travelling to Russia. Chisinau expressed
indignation and sent a note of protest over the fact that all officials from
the Republic of Moldova are questioned and even searched at the Russian border.
What is the way out of the situation, as you see it?
Maria Zakharova: I know that a relevant document has been sent to the
Russian Foreign Ministry. We are speaking about a diplomatic note regarding the
issue you’ve mentioned, which came from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
European Integration of the Republic of Moldova. I will say frankly that this
document is not easy. We are studying it and trying to understand what concrete
issues Moldova is putting before us. We are ready to cooperate and address
difficult issues, for which there are relevant channels. All problems can be
settled in the regular course of work. Currently we are analysing the note.
I would like to reiterate that we have received
a document that is not easy to understand.
Question: Did your comment at the December 27,
2017 briefing imply that the stories by the Belarusian authors Yury Pavlovets,
Dmitry Alimkin and Sergey Sheptenko published by Regnum used the words
“inferior people?”
Maria Zakharova: Neither Russian Ambassador to Belarus Alexander
Surikov, nor the Russian Foreign Ministry, nor the Foreign Ministry
spokesperson have ever claimed that the words “inferior people” were used in
the Regnum stories by the abovementioned authors.
Question: How would you comment on the four
North Korean missile launches on March 6?
Maria Zakharova:We proceed from the fact that we have already
commented on the said launches. You know our principled position based on the
UN Security Council documents.
Question: Relations between North Korea and
Malaysia have deteriorated after the assassination in Kuala Lumpur of Kim
Jong-nam, the North Korean leader’s brother. Earlier this week, Malaysia
expelled the North Korean ambassador. How does the Russian Foreign Ministry
view these events in the context of efforts to stabilise the situation in
Northeast Asia?
Maria Zakharova: This is a case of bilateral relations. We proceed from the
assumption that the two states are using every opportunity to solve these difficult
problems.
Question: Recently, WikiLeaks published new
documents. Mr Lavrov implicitly mentioned the possibility of the CIA hacking
mobile phones and other electronic devices. What measures will Russia’s Foreign
Ministry take in this regard to prevent further hacking and opportunities for
spying?
Maria Zakharova: The possibility of attacks by hackers, people who have mastered the
latest technologies under the guidance of US intelligence agencies, or the
impact of this process on mobile phones and other telecommunication devices was
not so much mentioned by Mr Lavrov as it was pointed out in the WikiLeaks
materials. It was these documents that made it clear that there is a strong
possibility of such attacks. If this information is true, it is scary that this
is what US intelligence agencies engage in and amuse themselves with. We learn
about such facts from time to time, and previously this information had always
been confirmed. However, there have always been attempts to remove this
information from front pages, to “airbrush” it somehow and tone it down, but
practically every time these facts were confirmed.
This is extremely dangerous, as first of all, it
would mean undermining the existing system of international relations based on
certain principles embodied in the UN Charter – namely, non-interference in
internal affairs, and so on. There is a large number of documents related to
information and digital security that are, among others, signed by US
representatives. Therefore, if confirmed – and they had been confirmed earlier
– such actions simply undermine the trust between countries that has been built
with such great difficulty. Of course, this also means, to a great extent,
undermining the relations between states in bilateral and multilateral formats.
But I think this is not the worst thing –
because, as paradoxical as it sounds, many counties that have fallen victim to
illegal wiretapping by the United States even took some pleasure in learning
this information, which was a great surprise. Any state that has dignity and
national interests should react to this unambiguously. I think the most
horrible thing is that these hacking technologies have become public domain and
may be used by the terrorist organisations we are talking about and trying to
fight together (no one knows – maybe terrorists have already made use of these
technologies). Earlier, the word “terrorism” meant a car rigged with
explosives, suicide belts or suicide bombers. Today, the definition of
international terrorism is much broader. It includes cyber-terrorism,
recruiting supporters via the internet, and influencing the collective consciousness,
targeting young people and children. It is scary that if confirmed, all this
poses a great threat to the world and global security (and we would very much
like the US intelligence community to give a comprehensive response to these
documents with all the specific facts they have). The information component of
international terrorism is a priority today. Of course, equally important are
examples of chemical weapons use by terrorists. Today terrorists make use of
the whole range of technologies to promote their ideology and reinforce their
actions, and this is really scary.
Question: Can we say that recent reports about
the alleged US actions in cyberspace are reason to end the information war
against Russia?
Maria Zakharova: This would have been possible if the global media –
the global information corporations that call the information tune around the
world – were objective. But expecting objectivity from them is absolutely
unrealistic in principle. You see what is going on in the United States. The media
have turned from a mechanical instrument of political struggle into an active
participant of the information war. These are two different things. The
information such as you mentioned is unlikely to be used for an objective
analysis of the situation. We have pointed to a very dangerous trend: the
public is losing trust in the global media at a time when there are objective
data that need to be carefully analysed. Unfortunately, these data are often
hushed up and disregarded, while fake news about hackers and their influence on
elections and internal political processes are published on front pages.
Vice Chancellor and Federal Minister for Foreign
Affairs of Germany Sigmar Gabriel, who was in Moscow yesterday, said clearly
that the federal government of Germany and German officials have never blamed
Russia and never accused it of fabricating fake news and interfering in
election campaigns. As he said, the responsibility for this rests with the
German media. He stressed that he only speaks on behalf of the German
government.
Question: I would like to ask you about the
upcoming talks in the Two Plus Two format in Tokyo. What do you think about the
revival of this format after a long pause? Which subjects will be discussed at
these talks?
Maria Zakharova: I thought you wanted to test my knowledge of maths. We
certainly see this as a very constructive step aimed at comprehensive
development of bilateral relations and capable of achieving this goal. There
are issues of mutual interest we can discuss in the areas of foreign policy,
defence, military policy and military cooperation. You have said correctly that
there was a long pause in the work of this mechanism, but Russia is not to
blame for this. We believe that it is never too late to see that suspended cooperation,
interaction and, most importantly, dialogue cannot produce any positive result.
We have always called for resuming a multiformat dialogue. We will thoroughly
prepare for the talks, which must certainly be successful and productive.
As for the agenda, different agencies will
discuss issues of interest to them. You can ask the Defence Ministry which
issues they plan to discuss in Tokyo. The talks between foreign ministers will
focus on bilateral relations, the international situation and regional cooperation
and security. The situation in the region is on the agenda. There will also be
media briefings. Anyway, we will update you on the results of these talks.
Question: It was recently announced that the
United States is about to deploy Marine Corps artillery in Syria, which is a
clear departure from the previous administration's vow that there will be no
boots on the ground. How will Moscow react to this?
Maria Zakharova: What previous administration? What are you
talking about? It didn’t have a consistent Syrian strategy in entire eight
years: one day we bomb it, the next day we don’t, one day we pull out of Syria,
the next day we go in, one day we overthrow the government, the next day we
establish cooperation with it. Such fluctuations occurred on a monthly basis.
One branch of government did not understand what the other branch was doing.
The position which had to be implemented on the international arena as a
consolidated US approach (the international community was supposed to
understand this policy, because the issue is about the actions on the
international arena), simply was not there. First, there was one concept, then
it changed. In the last six months before the elections, we witnessed agony of
Washington’s Syrian policy. On the one hand, there was increased activity in
the foreign policy area, and, on the other hand, there was activity which was
absolutely not supported by the on-the-ground actions of the US military. Do
you remember the gap between the position of certain forces in the State Department
and the US military?
Then there came an even more mysterious event:
they just went ahead and dropped all Syrian politics without seeing it to its
logical end. Then they focused on Aleppo, but not on resolving this situation,
but solely on building up hysteria and an information campaign geared
exclusively to the elections. What can we talk about if we analyse the previous
administration’s approach?
I suggest that we leave all that to historians and political scientists and refrain from discussing this seriously, because we can remember perfectly these endless changes and under-the-carpet fighting between US departments. It was just a political battle. Unfortunately, this political battle of the elites clearly continues. Anything goes in this fight.
We launched a dialogue with the State
Department. The two ministers had their first meeting. We operate on the
premise that we are ready to cooperate with the United States, including on the
Syrian settlement. You may be aware that the American representatives were
invited to a meeting in Astana, and they were present at the level they
considered necessary. Therefore, we are ready for interaction, because it is
important to articulate the concept. I reiterate that there is a sense that
this post-electoral fight does not allow us to formulate approaches to such an
important area of American foreign policy as politics in the Middle East and
North Africa. Therefore, I repeat that we are ready to cooperate.
Question: Do our esteemed American partners make
any non-public or informal attempts to build relations or is everything limited
to official events, like the meeting in Bonn?
Maria Zakharova: What do you mean?
Question: Do representatives of the US
administration and the State Department make any attempts to restore relations
by acting in a non-public field?
Maria Zakharova:What do you mean by a non-public field? Foreign policy assumes a
certain amount of publicity. Are you talking about behind-the-scenes talks? We
are doing regular diplomatic work with regard to both the United States and
other capitals and countries. We cannot keep adjusting to the fluctuations
coming from Washington. We are based on the approved Foreign Policy Concept. In
our work, we use methods and traditions that were laid down by the history of
Russian foreign policy and are based on international law and basic principles
of international relations. We are trying to work in a normal and constructive
manner. Once again, the methods of our work are open and clear: negotiation
diplomacy, meetings, contacts, etc.
Question: Can you comment on the Constitutional
Court in South Korea confirming the impeachment of President Park Geun-hye? You
have already very harshly commented on the deployment of a missile defence
system in Europe. It became known that parts for the THAAD anti-missile system
were brought to South Korea. It is planned that the work to deploy this system
will be completed in May. China in this regard strongly criticises the
government of South Korea and is imposing sanctions. What can you say onthis account?
Maria Zakharova: We closely follow the developments in South Korea, where the
Constitutional Court approved the decision of the National Assembly on the
impeachment of the head of state on March 10. We look forward to seeing the
internal political crisis in that country overcome as soon as possible. We are
confident that it is unlikely to be able to affect the level of Russian-South
Korean relations in any way.
As for deploying the US missile defence system
around the world, our position is known. Not so long ago we issued an
additional comment on this matter. Of course, this undermines regional and
international stability in many respects. Our position on this issue is clear,
and we make it so to our partners, to the people with whom the head of the
Russian Foreign Ministry meets. We voice it publicly. Our position is clear,
and it has not changed.
No comments:
Post a Comment