Tweet
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Russia
July 6 2011
Russian foreign minister's Q&A after talks with Armenian counterpart - full text
Remarks and Response to Media Questions by Russian Foreign Minister
Sergey Lavrov at Joint Press Conference Following Talks with Armenian
Foreign Minister Edvard Nalbandyan
[Lavrov] I would like to express my satisfaction over the talks with
my Armenian counterpart Edvard Aghvani Nalbandyan. We traditionally
exchange views and coordinate our positions in a constructive,
trustful, allied spirit. It was from this vantage point that we
reviewed implementation of the agreements that had been reached during
the regular meetings between the Russian and Armenian presidents. We
attested to the intense nature of bilateral relations, the
strengthening of the legal framework of our interaction, and we note
the steady trend towards enhancement and build-up of the economic
foundation of our cooperation.
Trade has regained its pre-crisis level, and it continues to grow. Our
respective agencies and economic operators are implementing
progressively an array of large-scale joint investment projects.
Conducive to Russian-Armenian relations are, of course, humanitarian
and inter-regional contacts, which traditionally enjoy the widest
possible support of our citizens.
To be sure, international issues, the situation in the regions
adjacent to Russia and Armenia occupy a significant place in our
dialogue. We spoke for continuing the active participation of our two
countries in the integration processes in the Commonwealth of
Independent States area. We confirmed our intention to improve our
cooperation and coordination both bilaterally and within the framework
of the CIS and the Collective Security Treaty Organization, in the
formats of the UN, OSCE, the Council of Europe and other international
organizations and forums.
The situation in Transcaucasia has always been a part of our talks.
Today, we exchanged views on the outcome of the meeting between the
presidents of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan, which took place on June
24 in Kazan, where issues related to the development of the basic
principles for settlement of the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict were
examined. We attested to the fact that the presidents declared in
Kazan the harmonization of a number of important issues, helpful
towards creating the conditions for a final agreement on the basic
principles, and this work will continue, I expect, in the near future.
So we looked at, as I said, all key aspects of the agenda of bilateral
relations and cooperation in the international arena, and agreed on a
schedule of consultations between our two foreign ministries for the
second half of the year. We consider it necessary to strengthen and
develop our interaction.
[Question] Even after the statement made in Deauville on Nagornyy
Karabakh, in which the Russian, US and French presidents indicated
that the use of force again would be condemned by the international
community, urging leaders of both sides to prepare the population for
peace, not war, threats continue to be heard from Baku to use force
and prepare for a new war. Azerbaijan virtually ignores the opinion of
the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair countries, opposing itself to the
opinion of the international community. How could you comment on that?
In the context of the Kazan meeting, what steps are expected to be
expeditiously undertaken to advance the negotiation process?
[Lavrov] I would like to clearly stress right away that Russia sticks
to the positions set forth in the statement adopted in Deauville by
the Russian, US and French presidents and also approved in the last
few years by the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan with the
participation of the President of the Russian Federation. These
documents not only confirm the commitment to a peaceful settlement,
but also include the agreements on measures to reduce tensions, build
confidence and prevent incidents along the line of contact. The
leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan assumed these commitments, as I
said, with participation by the President of the Russian Federation.
Just the other day, regular OSCE monitoring of the situation on the
line of contact took place. The report presented at Vienna by the
mission which did the monitoring shows that the number of incidents is
decreasing. This is a positive trend. We will do everything to make it
stronger, and to ensure that the agreements I mentioned are respected.
With regard to further steps, Dmitriy Medvedev, as a mediator in the
negotiation process, and acting with the full support of the US and
French presidents as co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, has completed
analysis of the post-Kazan situation and will soon take his decision
on further steps.
[Question (addressed to both ministers)] How effective do you think is
the format of the OSCE Minsk Group? Are there plans to replace it? If
yes, then by what? Is consideration being given to the possibility of
participation of regional countries like Turkey and Iran in it?
[Lavrov] The OSCE Minsk Group, formed, as I recall, at the end of the
1994 Minsk Conference, includes a large number of states. However, in
recent years, the real tool in the negotiation process is not the
Minsk Group as such, but its co-chairs. Initially, its composition was
different - two, then three, and the current co-chairs were not in
that trio. Now it has become permanent in the current format of the
three co-chairs, namely Russia, the USA and France. On their behalf
the special representatives vigorously and routinely work on finding
solutions to issues in the context not only of the negotiation process
itself, but also of confidence and security building measures on the
line of contact. I have already said about it. The co-chairs meet
regularly with the parties, and visit Baku and Yerevan and
Stepanakert. They have achieved a very good rapport.
Two years ago, President Dmitriy Medvedev, taking into account the
special ties of Russia with Armenia and Azerbaijan, on behalf of the
co-chairs took the initiative to hold in a trilateral format (the
presidents of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan), a series of
consultations with a view to finding concrete agreements on the basic
principles for a settlement. This initiative was supported.
Essentially, we have reached the point where decisions must be made.
I do not think that talk about changing the mediation format,
especially at this critical phase, will be productive. It only creates
the illusion that if the format is changed, the content will sort
itself out. As a rule, ideas to constantly modify the mediation format
divert attention from the substance. This also applies to other
situations. For example, there are a lot of plans to change the format
of the Dniester conflict settlement. I think this is all the work of
the devil. The main thing is the political will of the OSCE Minsk
Group Co-Chairs, recognized by the parties as mediators. And that's
the basis to proceed.
July 6 2011
Russian foreign minister's Q&A after talks with Armenian counterpart - full text
Remarks and Response to Media Questions by Russian Foreign Minister
Sergey Lavrov at Joint Press Conference Following Talks with Armenian
Foreign Minister Edvard Nalbandyan
[Lavrov] I would like to express my satisfaction over the talks with
my Armenian counterpart Edvard Aghvani Nalbandyan. We traditionally
exchange views and coordinate our positions in a constructive,
trustful, allied spirit. It was from this vantage point that we
reviewed implementation of the agreements that had been reached during
the regular meetings between the Russian and Armenian presidents. We
attested to the intense nature of bilateral relations, the
strengthening of the legal framework of our interaction, and we note
the steady trend towards enhancement and build-up of the economic
foundation of our cooperation.
Trade has regained its pre-crisis level, and it continues to grow. Our
respective agencies and economic operators are implementing
progressively an array of large-scale joint investment projects.
Conducive to Russian-Armenian relations are, of course, humanitarian
and inter-regional contacts, which traditionally enjoy the widest
possible support of our citizens.
To be sure, international issues, the situation in the regions
adjacent to Russia and Armenia occupy a significant place in our
dialogue. We spoke for continuing the active participation of our two
countries in the integration processes in the Commonwealth of
Independent States area. We confirmed our intention to improve our
cooperation and coordination both bilaterally and within the framework
of the CIS and the Collective Security Treaty Organization, in the
formats of the UN, OSCE, the Council of Europe and other international
organizations and forums.
The situation in Transcaucasia has always been a part of our talks.
Today, we exchanged views on the outcome of the meeting between the
presidents of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan, which took place on June
24 in Kazan, where issues related to the development of the basic
principles for settlement of the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict were
examined. We attested to the fact that the presidents declared in
Kazan the harmonization of a number of important issues, helpful
towards creating the conditions for a final agreement on the basic
principles, and this work will continue, I expect, in the near future.
So we looked at, as I said, all key aspects of the agenda of bilateral
relations and cooperation in the international arena, and agreed on a
schedule of consultations between our two foreign ministries for the
second half of the year. We consider it necessary to strengthen and
develop our interaction.
[Question] Even after the statement made in Deauville on Nagornyy
Karabakh, in which the Russian, US and French presidents indicated
that the use of force again would be condemned by the international
community, urging leaders of both sides to prepare the population for
peace, not war, threats continue to be heard from Baku to use force
and prepare for a new war. Azerbaijan virtually ignores the opinion of
the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chair countries, opposing itself to the
opinion of the international community. How could you comment on that?
In the context of the Kazan meeting, what steps are expected to be
expeditiously undertaken to advance the negotiation process?
[Lavrov] I would like to clearly stress right away that Russia sticks
to the positions set forth in the statement adopted in Deauville by
the Russian, US and French presidents and also approved in the last
few years by the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan with the
participation of the President of the Russian Federation. These
documents not only confirm the commitment to a peaceful settlement,
but also include the agreements on measures to reduce tensions, build
confidence and prevent incidents along the line of contact. The
leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan assumed these commitments, as I
said, with participation by the President of the Russian Federation.
Just the other day, regular OSCE monitoring of the situation on the
line of contact took place. The report presented at Vienna by the
mission which did the monitoring shows that the number of incidents is
decreasing. This is a positive trend. We will do everything to make it
stronger, and to ensure that the agreements I mentioned are respected.
With regard to further steps, Dmitriy Medvedev, as a mediator in the
negotiation process, and acting with the full support of the US and
French presidents as co-chairs of the OSCE Minsk Group, has completed
analysis of the post-Kazan situation and will soon take his decision
on further steps.
[Question (addressed to both ministers)] How effective do you think is
the format of the OSCE Minsk Group? Are there plans to replace it? If
yes, then by what? Is consideration being given to the possibility of
participation of regional countries like Turkey and Iran in it?
[Lavrov] The OSCE Minsk Group, formed, as I recall, at the end of the
1994 Minsk Conference, includes a large number of states. However, in
recent years, the real tool in the negotiation process is not the
Minsk Group as such, but its co-chairs. Initially, its composition was
different - two, then three, and the current co-chairs were not in
that trio. Now it has become permanent in the current format of the
three co-chairs, namely Russia, the USA and France. On their behalf
the special representatives vigorously and routinely work on finding
solutions to issues in the context not only of the negotiation process
itself, but also of confidence and security building measures on the
line of contact. I have already said about it. The co-chairs meet
regularly with the parties, and visit Baku and Yerevan and
Stepanakert. They have achieved a very good rapport.
Two years ago, President Dmitriy Medvedev, taking into account the
special ties of Russia with Armenia and Azerbaijan, on behalf of the
co-chairs took the initiative to hold in a trilateral format (the
presidents of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan), a series of
consultations with a view to finding concrete agreements on the basic
principles for a settlement. This initiative was supported.
Essentially, we have reached the point where decisions must be made.
I do not think that talk about changing the mediation format,
especially at this critical phase, will be productive. It only creates
the illusion that if the format is changed, the content will sort
itself out. As a rule, ideas to constantly modify the mediation format
divert attention from the substance. This also applies to other
situations. For example, there are a lot of plans to change the format
of the Dniester conflict settlement. I think this is all the work of
the devil. The main thing is the political will of the OSCE Minsk
Group Co-Chairs, recognized by the parties as mediators. And that's
the basis to proceed.