THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
official site

Question: Moscow yesterday withdrew its request for a Russia-NATO Council meeting on the Georgian-South Ossetian conflict. Presumably it would have convened a week ago, but the United States ignored the proposal.

Alexander Grushko: Our partners proved not to be ready for this. The Americans did not attend a preparatory meeting, citing the absence of instructions and clear-cut procedures for convocation of such meetings. But in the meanwhile a meeting of the NATO Council took place, at the end of which the alliance’s Secretary General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, made a statement assessing the events in Georgia. Alas, we did not hear a single word of condemnation of the aggression, ethnic cleanings and war crimes that had been committed in South Ossetia by Mr. Saakashvili. After this we could not help but think about the advisability of holding a Russia-NATO Council meeting at all.

We know it is not always that the Secretary General expresses the common position of the alliance. But Mr. Jaap de Hoop Scheffer is not only NATO Secretary-General, but also Chairman of the Russia-NATO Council. It would have been natural, before giving public assessments, to have held a dialogue with the Russian side too. This did not happen. It will hardly be helpful in strengthening trust between Russia and NATO.

Russia is honestly fulfilling all its obligations, particularly as part of our partnership with NATO. We continue helping in Afghanistan, provide transit possibilities, and cooperate in counterterrorism and the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction. But if NATO tries to shield Georgia, we will have problems in interaction with the alliance. We still oppose NATO’s continued enlargement. This kind of policy leads to a deadlock. The Caucasus tragedy attests that the policy of rapprochement with NATO as pursued by Saakashvili had a reverse side – it is a policy of “simple solutions,” a policy of war.

Question: Is Georgia likely to get a NATO membership action plan in December?

Alexander Grushko: I can’t imagine this happening. Otherwise it won’t merely be double standards, but the absence of any standards. Georgia has violated all the main obligations arising from its membership in international organizations. The Helsinki Final Act, the Code of Conduct of States in the Military-Political sphere, and the Charter for European Security have been flouted. The humanitarian and political obligations of Georgia, arising from its Council of Europe membership, have been grossly violated. CoE puts the principles of nonuse of force and the peaceful settlement of disputes at the top of the list. But the obligations Georgia had assumed in the context of rapprochement with NATO and the EU have also been violated. They are confirmed in the respective documents signed between Georgia and these organizations.

Question: Will Russia review its approach to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe now?

Alexander Grushko: Georgia has also grossly violated the CFE Treaty, whose preamble states that states parties are conscious of the need to prevent any military conflict and will refrain from the use of force. The consequences of this have yet to be assessed. Yet in the long term we continue to presume that arms control must remain the material basis of European security. We will persistently continue to work with the partners to ensure the entry into force of the adapted CFE Treaty and raise its viability in the new conditions. The ball is now in NATO’s court.