Permanent Representative of Russia to the OSCE Alexander Lukashevich’s interview with Rossiyskaya Gazeta, October 29, 2019
Question: Mr Lukashevich, I would like to start with a difficult question. The people seldom understand the role and importance of such institutions as the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). They believe that it is all talk and little action, apart from that of the adoption of resolutions. This is partly true. Are there too many international organisations that are hardly having any influence on realities? And it also costs a fortune to maintain them.
Alexander Lukashevich: In general, multilateral diplomacy helps to increase predictability when it comes to international relations. In the modern day world, it is difficult to resolve any problems in a bilateral interstate format alone. International organisations are platforms for interaction between states, dialogue and the coordination of positions on complicated global and regional matters. Whether we want it or not, the absolute majority of problems nowadays are of a cross-border nature. One country alone or even a group of countries cannot resolve them. Coordinated collective efforts are needed for the maintenance of peace and stability on the European continent. This is exactly what the OSCE is doing. Andrey Gromyko said on this account that 10 years of talks are better than one day of war.
Question: Can the OSCE be regarded as the European UN?
Alexander Lukashevich: A vital part of the Charter for European Security is the Platform for Cooperative Security, which is based on cooperation and stipulates a framework for the interaction of various regional organisations under the umbrella of the OSCE. At that time, we believed that we only needed to take the last step towards creating a European UN, that is, approve a charter that would confirm the central role of the new organisation in the European security architecture. But that step has never been taken.
The OSCE is still not a subject of international law. In other words, it can only issue recommendations, not adopt binding decisions. The charter has not been adopted. The result is that the OSCE is a major platform for the discussion of common European topics but not a decision-making centre.
Question: How have the OSCE’s priorities changed over the past decades?
Alexander Lukashevich: At its inception, the OSCE was designed to set the rules of the game for the coexistence of two confronting systems. Later, there was a short period of time when the OSCE was expected to become the central link in the Euro-Atlantic security architecture. At some stage we managed to keep the OSCE in the front ranks of international relations. Important moves were taken, which I have mentioned. But eventually the Western countries refused to bring this process to its logical conclusion. They probably feared losing the dividends of “Cold War winners.” The numerous phases of NATO enlargement were not designed to create an open system of European security but to draw East European countries into the orbit of American influence.
However, we look at the OSCE as a promising venue for rebooting the system of European security. The biggest problem is that the OSCE’s potential is not being used in full measure. Instead of building bridges between the conflicting parties, this unique organisation, which includes all Euro-Atlantic states and some Eurasian countries, is largely running idle or, worse still, is being used for increasing confrontation. Russia is categorically against this approach. We have been trying to direct the OSCE’s efforts towards reducing tension in Europe and combating common for all countries transnational challenges, such as terrorism, drug trafficking, cybercrime and organised crime.
Good morning and bon appetit to those who have some food on their tables.
I would like first of all to thank the organisers of this conference for the invitation. I understand this is a young forum, but it managed already in a few years to acquire importance, popularity and reputation. It is indeed very appropriate that we get together more often than in the past to discuss where we are in international relations and which way we are heading.
Question: What areas of cooperation will be in the focus of your visit to India and will determine the strategic partnership between the two states in 2020? What do you think about the Indian-Russian cooperation in general?
Sergey Lavrov: This is a special year for our countries. Twenty years ago, India and Russia signed the Declaration on Strategic Partnership.
Sir,
Polish Ambassador Rzegocki, in his letter published on 9 January, proposes to “question the USSR’s status as liberator”, claiming that Molotov-Ribbentrop pact “sparked the war and a double totalitarian invasion of Poland”. Let me suggest to my Polish colleague to look deeper into the history of that time.
Question: Since the end of the Cold War and the inception of the multipolar world order, you have spent many years engaged in international affairs and geopolitics. Are there any peculiarities in the relations between Sri Lanka and Russia originating in that period?
Sergey Lavrov: The relations between our states have always been intrinsically valuable and independent from international developments. They have always been and continue to be based on the principles of equality, trust, mutual respect and consideration of one another's interests. The peculiarities specific to certain periods of history are of marginal significance, since they do not affect the inviolability of the bonds of friendship uniting our peoples.
I know what the interests of my country are. And whatever somebody might say about me, this has no importance whatsoever when compared to the fundamental tasks that Russia is interested in solving. But of course, we see, we hear, we understand and we take those views into consideration in our work.
Thirty years ago, on December 18, 1989, Brussels hosted the signing of the Agreement on Trade and Commercial and Economic Cooperation between the USSR and the European communities. This date became the point of departure for official relations between Russia as the successor state of the USSR and the European Union.
Symbolically, the Agreement was signed slightly over a month after the fall of the Berlin Wall, an event that came down in history as a landmark signifying the end of the Cold War, a period, when the continent was divided into two opposing ideological blocs. The founders of the Russia-EU partnership knew that it would be impossible to erase the centuries-old divides on the continent unless a broad framework for cooperation was created in Europe. Both sides intended to make it mutually beneficial, long-term, and resistant to economic and political fluctuations.
Mr Chairperson-in-Office,
Mr Secretary General,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
First of all, allow me to thank Slovakia’s Chairmanship for its hospitality. Here in Bratislava, where Western and Eastern Europe meet, we are reminded that the purpose of our organisation is to facilitate the emergence of shared security through cooperation, as well as the removal of dividing lines and the growth of mutual trust. The goal adopted at the 2010 Astana summit of building a community of equal, comprehensive and indivisible security should remain our utmost priority. Today, CSTO foreign ministers adopted a statement to this effect, reaffirming their commitment to this objective.
Ladies and gentlemen!
I am pleased with the opportunity to deliver my first speech as Russian Ambassador to the United Kingdom at the Russian-British Business Forum.
Over the five years, the Forum has become a solid platform for open and direct dialogue and exchange of views, involving both business community and officials. The number of participants has been growing annually. Together, we have managed to create a constructive atmosphere of partnership.
Q: How would you comment on the statement made by the UK’s Chief of the Defence Staff Sir Nicholas Carter that the UK is in a state of cyber war with Russia? Has London raised this matter with Moscow? Has the British side provided any evidence?
A.: This is not the first statement of this sort made by the UK’s Chief of the Defence Staff, General Carter, and it certainly needs to be considered in the context of the large-scale anti-Russian propaganda campaign launched by the British government.
We have had very good talks with my Bahraini colleague and friend, Khalid bin Ahmed Al Khalifa, and we have reached agreements on all the issues we discussed.
Tweet Follow @russianembassy