Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov

- Sergey Viktorovich, some experts believe the Russian-American two-plus-two talks will again amount to nothing. Others think progress is still likely. What do you expect from the talks with Condoleezza Rice and Robert Gates?

- We want to use this meeting in order to show once again with clear and convicing evidence what dangerous situations can arise in the absence of mutual accords and what action should be taken to try and reach such an understanding.

We are going to discuss the positive achievements in Russian-American relations, which are not fewer than – I would even say that they exceed – the number of questions on which we disagree. There is something to talk about in terms of the development of positive trends in the relationship. And, of course, there are issues, about which we want to carry a frank, honest, and mutually-respectful dialogue.

We need to reach a joint understanding, without which it is impossible to tackle large problems in world politics.

- What do you think can be done to minimize the consequences on a global scale of Kosovo’s proclamation of independence?

- This precedent has already had repercussions in many areas. There is every reason to assume that all this is not a random occurrence. Beyond doubt, a gross violation of international law has been committed. It is far from accidental that many nations, including Islamic states, do not intend to recognize Kosovo’s independence. I would like to caution against the temptation to succumb to exhortations that are coming from non-Arab and non-Islamic countries but are addressed precisely to Islamic countries to display Islamic solidarity and recognize Kosovo. The situation in Kosovo is the most striking example of ethnic separatism.

How is this to be fought? The trend can be countered only by legal means - explaining the two-facedness of this situation, the full danger that it carries for international relations with unpredictable consequences. Attempts to make people forcibly live in an illegitimately-created state are contiuning in Kosovo.

Other disturbances in different regions of the world have also been set in motion. I believe it is immoral to encourage separatist tendencies. You see what is happening in China’s autonomous region of Tibet, the way the separatists are acting there. Now the Albanians in Macedonia too are demanding a degree of autonomy, which is an obvious step on the road towards independence. The developments in other parts of the world also suggest that what we see is only the beginning of an extremely explosive process.

All those who follow this path should not call for a show of solidarity, whether Islamic or Euro-Atlantic. They ought to think of their responsibility in the first place. The larger, the more serious a country, the greater is the responsibility it bears. The need for explaining this responsibility at this point is probably most important. We are endeavoring to exert these efforts.

- With whom and on what subject are you going to hold talks in the Middle East?

- This trip is a part of our regular visits to the region. Of course, our bilateral relations hold an important place during all these visits. In the case of Syria, for example, our trade-and-economic relations are developing quite intensively. Still, there are quite a few possibilities to expand them further. I look forward to signing with our Syrian colleagues an agreement to establish a visa-free regime for our citizens. Primarily this will concern the holders of diplomatic, service, and special passports. In Israel, we will sign an agreement to abandon the visa regime entirely.

Central in the talks with the Palestinian colleagues will be questions of assistance to the Palestinian National Authority, particularly assistance in strengthening PNA security forces. Although we offered such assistance quite a while ago, the logistics are still being coordinated. That isn’t related to our position. It stems from the need to reach agreements on many separate issues with the Israeli leadership, as well as with the transit countries. In addition, we will be discussing questions of further humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people, who are suffering more and more from the continuing crisis. This will include additional assistance to the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

We will also have a talk about the status of Russian citizens in the occupied Palestinian territories. They are having considerable problems with travel outside of Palestine. We will be trying to achieve some practical shifts.

As to international aspects of the trip, the talk will, of course, be about Palestinian-Israeli settlement. We want to continue making our contribution in peace efforts. It does not matter how this will be called - a truce or a cease-fire. The main thing is to ensure that rockets cease to fly and bombs stop falling. It is innocent civilians who are suffering in the first place. To them it is of absolutely no importance who was the first to start and who ought to be the first to stop.

The spiral of violence, if you approach it according to the “you stop first, then I will” principle, will never end. We support the efforts being undertaken by the international community in order to put an end to violence.

Apart from the necessity to create conditions for the resumption of the negotiation process, one should not forget about the other aspects of Middle East settlement. In this sense we will discuss with our Syrian colleagues the possibilities of exerting positive influence on the situation in Lebanon. I stress, precisely the necessity of positive influence. All those members of the world community able to influence specific groups within Lebanon must, of course, encourage them to stop trying to tackle their own problems at Lebanon’s expense.

- Analysts have surmised that you may have contacts with Hamas representatives during the visit to Damascus. Is that really so?

- We are maintaining relations with Hamas. Khaled Maashal has visited Moscow more than once. And we stay in contact. We are pursuing the sole aim of furthering the restoration of Palestinian unity and ensuring that Hamas starts moving towards accepting the appeals that have been addressed to it by the world community, including the Quartet of international mediators. Unfortunately, by virtue of a whole series of factors, the understandings were disrupted, and the situation is where it now is. We will be discussing this topic with the Syrian leadership too.

- The West suspects Russia of covering up the plans of Iran to bolster its defense capability. Russia did vote for the adoption of the new UN Security Council resolution somewhat toughening up the sanctions against Teheran. How justified are the questions of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with regard to the Iranian nuclear program?

- In our relations with either Iran or any other country we are not covering up for and are not shielding anybody. In our foreign policy, including the policy towards Iran, we are guided solely by Russia’s national interests and by international law. International law alone can serve as a firm basis for any efforts in resolving all problems, including those that have appeared between Iran and the IAEA.

The world community quite justifiably had questions after Iran had been pursuing its nuclear program for many years without properly informing the IAEA, although Teheran was duty-bound to do that in accordance with the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Those questions needed to be answered. I am pleased to say the latest IAEA report indicates that Iran, even if belatedly, has begun to cooperate actively with international experts for the purpose of eliminating the blank spots in our knowledge of its nuclear program.

And yet not all of the IAEA requests have been met so far. First of all, I have in mind the need to freeze uranium enrichment - not as an end in itself, but as a tool for strengthening trust.

That is why the UN Security Council adopted the new resolution. The text of this document was carefully drafted over a long period of time. As a result, the resolution contains no excessive measures of economic or political pressure on Iran. It only imposes restrictive measures directly related to nuclear program activities. That is, activities which the IAEA considers necessary at this stage to freeze until confidence in the Iranian program is fully restored.

Also, recall that this resolution was not adopted in isolation, but in a package with the statement of the ministers of six foreign states (Germany, Russia, China, U.S., France, U.K.), which reaffirms that the principal and sole path of resolving the Iranian problem is talks, the diplomatic method. Any other steps in the form of force are completely ruled out. The statement adopted by the six ministers especially stresses that as soon as Iran resolves all issues with the IAEA, Teheran will enjoy all the same rights without exception as does any other non-nuclear-weapon state party to the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

The six nations also recalled their proposals that had been made to Iran a year and a half ago. They concerned the development of economic cooperation and the development of cooperation in the field of high technologies, including peaceful nuclear energy, and the development of security cooperation. Bearing in mind regional security, our group notified Iran that it would be ready to solidify and develop these proposals.

This is an absolutely balanced approach, it seems to me. I am certain that the six nations should consistently be implementing the assurances that are contained in this statement. At issue is also the need to search for innovative approaches towards resuming the talks.

- Western politicians continue to reproach Russia for applying double standards: on the one hand, Russia is following through with its commitments to construct the nuclear power plant at Bushehr and, on the other, it is voting in the Security Council for new sanctions against Teheran.

- Not a single one of the UN Security Council resolutions contains any restrictions on either the establishment of a nuclear power plant at Bushehr or on the construction of other nuclear power plants that will operate in Iran using similar reactors to those that Russia is completing at Bushehr.

I am convinced that the erection of this nuclear power plant is the weightiest contribution to ensuring the fulfillment by Iran of its obligations under the NPT Treaty. The Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, if you will, is the anchor that very firmly keeps Iran within the NPT Treaty.