Interview of Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs I.V. Morgulov to Interfax on 24 June 2012
Question: Igor Vladimirovich, during the visit of the President of Russia V.V. Putin to China the strategic nature of relations between the two countries was reaffirmed. The change of power in China is coming soon – the current Paramount leader of the People’s Republic of China Hu Jintao will leave the office next year. Will it impact the relations of strategic partnership and cooperation between Russia and China?
I.V. Morgulov: First of all, I want to agree with you that the visit of the President of Russia V.V. Putin to China confirmed the strategic nature of our partnership. The negotiations in Beijing were crowned with success of achieving the agreements on the development of bilateral connections in all key areas. As for your question, in the framework of his visit, V.V. Putin met with those representatives who, as expected, will form the core of the new power of China. These discussions showed that our partners share the common view on the lack of options of strengthening friendship, partnership and strategic interaction between Russia and China. I believe that the point does not lie in the subjective view of one or another leader about our relations; the point is that the long-term national interests of both countries are common. We are interested in supporting each other regarding the protection of sovereign issues and territorial integrity. We prioritize the establishment of peaceful international environment which is conductive to domestic development. We strive to deepen the mutually beneficial economic and trade relations in order to modernize economy and to ensure satisfactory life of people. The reality is that just being good neighbours and friends, Russia and China, connected by one of the largest borders in the world can stably and peacefully coexist and mutually enrich spiritually and materially. This is why the multidimensional strategic partnership between our countries is not connected to the short-term factors and is built for the long-term perspective.
Question: At the Beijing summit, there was no agreement on the oil and gas issue. How will it affect the economic development of our countries? How do you estimate the economic cooperation between Russia and China? What is good about it and should be changed?
I.V.Morgulov: Correct, we could not agree on the issue of supplying Russian natural gas to China. The reason for it is the continuing disagreement over the price, which in turn is connected with the rigid state regulation in China’s energy pricing. However, we continue the negotiations between companies. Various options of potential and mutually beneficial cooperation with the organization of the export pipeline delivery of natural gas as well as the establishment of joint ventures, etc. are being discussed. The main thing is that there is the disposition to negotiate, and this means that sooner or later the agreement will be reached. The cooperation in the oil industry is proceeding well. Pipeline supplies from Russia to China are working at no failures. The agreement of configuration of the future joint venture to process crude oil and petroleum products, which promises to become Russia’s largest investment project in China, is at its final stage. The projects of Rosneft with the CNPC and Sinopec for the exploitation and production of oil in Russia are being successfully implemented. The overall situation in the bilateral trade and economic cooperation is also positive. High dynamics of growth and trade turnover is being kept, which for the past two years has increased by more than 40% annually. According to the results of 2011, the turnover has exceeded the record bar of 83 billion dollars. China remains our main trade partner. We can say that the realization of the goal set by the leaders of the two countries to bring the annual volume of bilateral trade to 100 billion dollars in 2015 to 200 billion dollars in 2020 is a very real problem. One hundred billion dollar limit of the turnover could be overcome this year while keeping the dynamics of the past years. At the same time, I have to admit that the growth is happening mainly because of the extensive basis due to the increase in global prices. This in turn bears risks in it. It is necessary to increase the degree of the stability of the bilateral trade and economic connections primarily due to the expansion of the investment partnership. Russia is interested in increasing the investments from China to timber industries, mining industry, consumer goods manufacturing industry, innovation infrastructure, tourism facilities, agriculture, and construction of power plants. These and other sectorial priorities are fixed in the approved high-level common plan of the development of investment cooperation. Now it is essential to run effective mechanisms to support investment and create favourable conditions for the implementation of several "pilot" projects that could become a point of a new quality of growth in our cooperation.
Question: According to the experts, the summit SCO held in China showed that the countries of the Organization did not come up to a consensus on how SCO will develop further. Is this true? What are the differences? What will be the priority of the development – economic and financial aspects or politics?
I.V. Morgulov: I doubt that the experts who you refer to, own the full range of information on the outcome of the Beijing Summit of the SCO. Otherwise, they would have stated that the Member States have a very clear idea of what should be the vector of development of the Organization. This consensus is reflected in the Guidelines for the strategy of the development of SCO in the medium term, which was approved the Leaders of the countries who met in Beijing. Cooperation regarding the issues of regional security, combating terrorism, separatism, extremism, drug trafficking, transnational organized crime, the problems associated with ensuring international information security will be the key activity of SCO. At the same time, the SCO is not going to turn into a military-political bloc, and its activities will not be directed against anyone else. At the same time, Member States unanimously supported the development of economic cooperation, the main form of which will be the implementation of common projects. One of the SCO pillars is the cooperation in the humanitarian area. Its build-up has an important capacity in the context of the strengthening the social base of the Organization, as well as in the formation of the common educational space and development of contacts between people.
Question: Will the SCO play more active role in the regional security in future? What are their priorities in this area? What actions are the SCO countries going to take regarding the forthcoming withdrawal of the international coalition forces from Afghanistan? How do we relate to the plans of the Americans to keep their military bases after the withdrawal of forces from that country?
I.V.Morgulov: SCO has already established itself as the optimal platform for a broad dialogue on the full range of regional problems, including security. In the past few years, Member States are holding regular consultations on Afghanistan topic, in course of which the approaches to various aspects to the situation in the region are being coordinated. It is common that India, Pakistan, Iran, and Afghanistan itself are actively participating in it. With the granting of the observer status to Kabul with SCO, further opportunities arise for the connection of Afghanistan people to the activities of the Organization, in particular, to the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure in Tashkent, as well as the practical implementation of the SCO anti-drug strategy for 2011-2016. On the other hand, the Member States shall receive additional channels for building work to assist Afghanistan in rebuilding the economy, training, etc. We are concerned about the situation in Afghanistan, where, unfortunately, the terror acts are still going on and drug production volumes are increasing annually. That is why the final declaration of the SCO summit emphasized that the Member States are in favour of building an independent, neutral, peaceful and prosperous nation in Afghanistan, free from terrorism and drug trafficking. Speaking about the plans of Americans to keep their military bases in that country after the withdrawal of coalition forces in 2014, I must confess, that a lot stays unclear to us. For example, what would their goals be if the stabilization efforts by this date will be mostly complete. It is unclear how the statements of Washington regarding the deficiency of plans to deploy bases on an ongoing basis relate to the nature of the work conducted at their locations. The same issues arise in other SCO partners. We hope to get answers for them.
Question: How does Russia feel about the idea of creating a free trade zone in the SCO? For quite a long time there are ongoing conversations regarding the establishment of the bank of the SCO. What prevents this process?
I.V.Morgulov: The development of regional economic cooperation and promoting an enabling environment for trade and investment with a view to the gradual transition to the free movement of goods, capital, services and technologies – is an important component of the SCO activities. It is written in the Charter of the Organization and meets the general logic of global trends related to globalization of world economy, as well as to the effective cooperation and to the strengthening of economic ties within the framework of existing regional structures. At the same time, I would like to remind you that the SCO is not an integration association, and the question of free trade zone of the organization does not appear on the agenda. Plans to create a Special Account and the Bank of Development of the SCO are equally associated not with the trade liberalization but with the need to develop mechanisms for the financial support of project activities within the framework of the Organization. The expert’s discussion of the existing ideas on this subject is being held now. The meeting of finance ministers and national banks, which took place in mid-May in Beijing, has decided to continue this work. The Leaders of the countries supported him.
Question: Russia and China have the common positions on many major international issues. Have the negotiations in Beijing confirmed that Russia and China intend to continue to coordinate their efforts, in particular, hold a firm line at the UN Security Council against the tightening of sanctions against Damascus and the attempts of foreign intervention in Syria in order to eliminate the regime of Bashar al-Assad?
I.V.Morgulov: Russian-Chinese summit reaffirmed the unity of our countries' positions on a wide range of international issues, including those from Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, and North Korea. We have similar or very close approaches to current issues such as the provision of global strategic stability, Missile Defence System. We are increasing the cooperation in the framework of the "Group of Twenty," BRICS, SCO and other multilateral formats, including those operating in the Asia Pacific region. Regarding the situation in Syria, Russia and China have consistently advocated for its settlement via a dialogue between all groups of Syrian society. International efforts should be consolidated to help the people of Syria in resolving the existing problems and self-determination of the future of Syrians themselves. This approach lies in the heart of the Russian proposal to hold an international conference on Syria, as well as our support of efforts of the Special Envoy of UN / LAS Kofi Annan. We have no doubt that attempts to impose any schemes from the outside to change the regime in Damascus, and one-sided support for the opposition is a direct way to plunge this country into full-scale civil war with dire consequences not only for the Syrian people, but for the whole region.
Question: During the visit of V. Putin to Beijing, the North Korean nuclear problem was definitely discussed. After Kim Jong-Un came to power in North Korea, their nuclear missile programme began to develop rapidly. How can Russia and China affect Pyongyang to comply with its international obligations? Is the six-party format still active or it is unlikely to be relevant?
I.V. Morgulov: The topic of the Korean Peninsula is featured on a regular basis on the agenda of Russian-Chinese dialogue. The past negotiations have not been an exception. Unfortunately, the situation on the peninsula continues to fluctuate between the "high tides" of positive expectations and "low tides" in the direction of disturbing expectations. If we talk about the current situation, it is appropriate to compare it to fragile balance between these two "poles". I cannot help mentioning the assurance of the absence of plans for further nuclear tests recently announced Pyongyang. The approaches of Russia and China in Korean affairs are very close. We always believe in the possibility of resolving the problems of the peninsula by the political and diplomatic means exclusively. We have a common understanding that the best way for the interchanges is not through increasing sanctions and military-political pressure on Pyongyang, but lies in the formation of the effective security system of North-East Asia, that would adequately take into account the legitimate interests and concerns of all participants and become an organic part of the overall architecture of the APR. And, of course, we agree with the transformation of the NEA in the new arena of the arms race. International legal alternative that eliminates the need for the possession of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction should be opposed to the inflation of the nuclear muscle. The intensive consultations with a purpose of finding an optimal algorithm for its renewal continue between the participants of the six-party process. This in itself is the evidence of an unreasonable skepticism regarding the viability of the format. At least, none of the member countries questioned the importance to continue the negotiations.
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, Today the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin had a conversation with Secretary General of the Council of Europe T.Jagland, but I had detailed negotiations with the Secretary General. We discussed the whole spectrum of issues topical for the Council of Europe at the modern stage.
Vladimir Putin met with Secretary General of the Council of Europe Thorbjorn Jagland, who is in Russia on a working visit. The meeting discussed current issues concerning Russia’s relations with the Council of Europe.
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, We have completed the main part of our negotiations with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. He will have a meeting with the President of Russia in a few hours. As always, our conversation was very substantial and honest. We are sincerely interested in the consolidation of the role of the UN. This is one of the main tasks in the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation approved by the President Vladimir Putin on 12 February 2013.
Question: I would like to start our conversation from your last international contacts and, first of all, from your meeting with US Secretary of State in Moscow on 7 May. The day after he left Moscow, John Kerry made a statement in Rome that there is no place for President Bashar al-Assad in the new transitional government. There were also statements that the White House had not made its final decision about armament of the opposition and is waiting for the results of the investigation of the use of chemical weapons in SAR to make this decision. We know about the agreements reached between Russia and the USA in Moscow, however, we would still like to understand why we have heard other statements, which do not fit within the framework of the agreements reached the day before, as soon as the US Secretary of State left Moscow.
Question: The “Partnership for Modernisation” program is a significant element of the Russian-German dialog. What else would you like to decide within the framework of this format? How do you see next stages of its implementation? Sergey Lavrov: First of all, I would like that governments do not interfere with the cooperation of companies dealing with innovations and their industrial deployment within the framework of “Partnership for Modernisation”. Governments should know how this happens, to create a legal framework, a maximally comfortable regime for such cooperation, while professionals should decide each in its sphere. The more contacts we have within the framework of “Partnership for Modernisation”, the more weighty results we achieve in the form of final products, workplaces, additional profits of companies in Russia and Germany. I think that we share these interests, especially on the background of the most magnificent events in the world and European economy.
Dear Mr Minister, dear Guido, Dear Dr von Studnitz, Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, friends, First of all, I would like to join the welcome words addressed to participants of the ceremonial meeting and to congratulate with an anniversary – 20 years of the German-Russian Forum, to wish its leaders, all employees and members success in their further work for the benefit of peoples of our countries.
Question (addressed to US Secretary of State John Kerry and Sergey Lavrov): After your recent discussions, including on Syria and the episode of detention of a US Embassy official in Moscow on a charge of espionage, do you think that your collective work is constructive? Sergey Lavrov (answers after John Kerry): Regarding the incident of the detention of a US Embassy official in Moscow that you have mentioned, everything, that the Russian party wished to say about it, was said yesterday in the comment of the Information and Press Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia. I have nothing to add.
Dear Mr Chairman,Dear colleagues, friends, First of all, I would like to thank our Swedish hosts for their hospitality, good organization of the today’s meeting and to congratulate Mr Carl Bildt with the results that were reached by the Arctic Council under Swedish chairmanship.
Today we sign the second in history legally binding panarctic document – Agreement on Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic. This is another evidence of high responsibility of Arctic countries for the state of affairs in the region. The next is the preparation of the Agreement on Marine Oil Spill Prevention.
Tweet Follow @russianembassy