標題:Moscow Optimistic about America's New Beginning In a SPIEGEL interview, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, 58, discusses positive diplomatic signals from the Obama administration, the possibility of nuclear disarmament and opportunities for cooperating in the conflict with Iran. SPIEGEL: Mr. Minister, it looks as if after a phase of tense relations the United States and Russia want to reach out to each other again. Could 2009 be "a year of new beginnings," as your German counterpart Frank-Walter Steinmeier says? Lavrov: The global financial crisis is forcing all countries to focus on the real problems. It's actually a simple task. SPIEGEL: Really? Lavrov: We can no longer afford the luxury of little geopolitical games, because we all face challenges that directly affect our citizens. So we should no longer ideologize problems, we should instead honestly express our own national interests, understand the legitimate interests of our partners, and have no more hidden agendas, where one thing is said while something else is done behind someone's back. The signals that we are receiving indicate that our Western partners are aiming for the same objectives. SPIEGEL: This also entails, however, that Russia stops its anti-Western rhetoric. Recently the West has been blamed for just about everything that has been happening in the world. Lavrov: We are accused of this time and again: anti-Western rhetoric. For example, when we object to a new wave of NATO eastward expansion … SPIEGEL: ... you're referring to Ukraine and Georgia's bids to become members of the Alliance. Lavrov: ... or to NATO military bases on the Black Sea or to the American missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic, which would pose a threat to us all because it upsets the strategic balance. We are only reacting here to real steps -- steps that violate commitments that the West has made over the past 20 years. It is odd that the West is allowed to act in the spirit of the Cold War while we are accused of anti-Western rhetoric just as soon as we voice our opinions. I think this is -- to put it mildly -- unfair. SPIEGEL: How might this rapprochement look -- America abandons its missile defense shield in exchange for help in Afghanistan or Iran? Lavrov: There have already been trade-offs in past eras -- when the Soviet Union collapsed, when our troops left Eastern Europe and during German reunification, for example. But our Western partners have unfortunately not kept their part of the bargain. That's why in Europe today we still live in the shadow of the Cold War. SPIEGEL: What about, for example, making a new attempt with Iran, which is suspected of building nuclear weapons? Lavrov: This is not just about the West working together with us. There is also the six-state group, which includes Great Britain, France, Germany, the US, Russia and China. It was agreed that we would all support the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and sanctions were approved that concerned organizations and persons who take part in the Iranian nuclear program. We are sticking to this agreement. SPIEGEL: At the same time, though, Russia is blocking stricter sanctions ... Lavrov: ... because their aim is an economic blockade and they do not bring negotiations forward. We strictly reject this -- this is not what we signed. We are pleased, however, that Barack Obama and his team speak of the necessity of taking a fresh look at the situation. They say that America will explore possibilities of speaking directly with Iran. This is what Russia has been calling for over the past four years. SPIEGEL: Obama is apparently also considering a new beginning on the issue of disarmament, on reducing the number of nuclear weapons -- perhaps to 1,000 warheads on each side. Lavrov: I still haven't seen any proposals where 80 percent of the warheads would be eliminated or their overall number would be reduced to 1,000. I am only familiar with media reports on this, but nothing has been presented to us -- neither officially nor behind the scenes. SPIEGEL: Something needs to happen: The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I) will expire at the end of this year. Lavrov: Over the past three years, we have repeatedly urged the Bush administration to engage in serious talks. We wanted a new agreement to replace the old one. At the time, America was not yet ready for negotiations. SPIEGEL: What is Russia's position on the issue? Lavrov: We favor disarmament, placing ceilings on the number of warheads and missiles, but also maintaining existing control mechanisms. The balance in strategic offensive weapons has been decisive for stability in the world over the past few decades. US Vice President Joseph Biden stressed at the Munich Security Conference that the US would very soon be prepared for talks with us. This shows that the Obama administration understands better than the Bush administration the importance of disarmament and arms control. SPIEGEL: Is it also conceivable that the US and Russia would work together on a missile defense shield? Lavrov: We made an offer like this a year and a half ago for a three-way Russia-Europe-US project. With the radar stations on Russian territory and in Azerbaijan, it would be possible to form a radar chain which we could use to monitor every missile threat from the south. This is the alternative to a unilaterally developed plan by the US. It is still not too late. We could sit at the negotiating table and begin with an assessment of the situation. SPIEGEL: For a long time Russia has been fixated on America -- and this has often been a source of irritation for Europeans. Now Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has proposed a new European security system. But it's not clear to the West exactly which objectives Russia is concretely pursuing here. Why don't both sides fall back on the Organization for Security and Co-Operation in Europe (OSCE) as a European security structure and modernize it? Lavrov: Because there are far more important players in the European sphere than the member states of the OSCE: NATO, the European Union and the Organization for Collective Security ... SPIEGEL: ... an alliance of Russia and six other former Soviet republics ... Lavrov: The OSCE was totally powerless when the Georgian aggression against South Ossetia began, as was NATO. We have urged the UN Security Council to confirm the Sarkozy-Medvedev plan for a cease-fire, but it has refused. Even the OSCE Council only managed to come up with a halfhearted solution. We are talking about a key principle that has not yet been achieved: Nobody should be able to extend their own security at someone else's expense. We absolutely need a new agreement on European security which guarantees this and contains the mechanisms for weapons and arms control. SPIEGEL: You like to speak of principles. One of the principles of the OSCE is that: There can be no use of force to change national borders. This principle was very much endorsed by Russia in the case of Kosovo, which broke away from Serbia. In the case of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, which broke away from Georgia, Russia is applying other principles. It wants to annex these areas. There are more troops stationed there than agreed and there are even plans to build Russian military bases. Lavrov: We fully embrace the principle of territorial integrity. But there is worldwide disagreement over how compatible this is with peoples' rights to self-determination. Up until now, there has only been one document that addresses the conflict of objectives -- the UN passed it in 1970. This affirms that every state should respect the territorial integrity of every other state, as long as no acts of violence are being carried out against national minorities in this region. Part 2: 'The West Is Applying a Double Standard' SPIEGEL: What does this mean for Georgia? Lavrov: Georgia has two small minorities that it has treated chauvinistically since the days when the Soviet Union was broken up. President Mikheil Saakashvili himself destroyed Georgia's territorial integrity when he ordered bombing raids against a peaceful city in South Ossetia. That was a crime against its own people because the violence was directed against inhabitants who Saakashvili had earlier described as citizens of his state. SPIEGEL: But the fact remains that with its army Russia has ignored Georgia's territorial integrity, while in Kosovo it maintains that this is a sacred principle. Lavrov: Both situations appear similar on the surface, but the West is applying a double standard. There was also a war in Kosovo -- a long, brutal conflict that, from our perspective, fully contravened international law. It was ended with UN Resolution 1244 in 1999, a decision that Serbia respected. In contrast to South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the Albanians in Kosovo were not pressured by anyone, and they were not attacked. There were no grounds for Kosovo's declaration of independence. SPIEGEL: No one has followed the Russian example of recognizing Abkhazia and South Ossetia, not even your closest allies have done so. Has this surprised you? Lavrov: We were not out to achieve some geopolitical effect. This was about protecting people who over the past 20 years have repeatedly been the victims of provocations and attacks. Following the Georgian aggression, we did not intend to recognize both republics. The Sarkozy-Medvedev paper promised to address the status of South Ossetia and Abkhazia following the cease-fire. SPIEGEL: And why didn't this happen? Lavrov: When Sarkozy presented the plan in Tbilisi, Saakashvili categorically refused to talk about the status question. Then the NATO-Russia Council refused to deal with the issue, as did the UN Security Council. Finally, the Georgian leadership declared that the war was not over, and that they would continue to pursue it at some point in time. And then voices could be heard in the West saying they intended to bolster Georgia's military. So we came to the following conclusion: We can only secure the sheer survival of South Ossetia and Abkhazia if we recognize them as independent states. SPIEGEL: Let's look ahead. The war in Afghanistan is the greatest foreign policy challenge that the new US administration faces. Russia must also have an interest in preventing the West from failing in the Hindu Kush. How can you help? Lavrov: In April 2008, we signed an agreement with NATO concerning the transit of nonmilitary goods over Russian territory to Afghanistan. Up until now, such agreements have only been made with Germany and France, and recently one was concluded with Spain. In late January, the US asked us to apply the NATO agreement as the basis for supplying the American contingent. We immediately consented and have also agreed with NATO to make Russian military transporters available to the peacekeeping troops in Afghanistan. We could also work more closely together to curb drug trafficking. SPIEGEL: That all sounds very encouraging. But why does Kyrgyzstan now, of all times, want to close the last American Air Force base in central Asia that supplies Afghanistan -- apparently in reaction to pressure from Russia? Lavrov: This is a decision by the Kyrgyz leadership. There were many incidents that caused dissatisfaction: Once an American soldier shot a Kyrgyz citizen and the police were not allowed to investigate the case; on another occasion, an American ran over pedestrians without legal consequences. In another incident, tons of jet fuel was dropped on Kyrgyz villages, and once again no one was held responsible. The Americans have even damaged the official state aircraft of Kyrgyz President Kurmanbek Bakiyev. SPIEGEL: Now Russia has agreed to grant significant loans to Kyrgyzstan -- are you saying this is just a coincidence? Lavrov: We have signed the corresponding agreement. Kyrgyzstan is one of the poorest countries and an ally. We treat an ally the way it should be. SPIEGEL: Mr. Minister, we thank you for this interview. Interview conducted by Andrei Batrak, Martin Doerry, Christian Neef and Matthias Schepp. Translated from the German by Paul Cohen. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,608161-2,00.html 新聞來源: (需有正確連結) -- --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.123.43.211