REMARKS FROM IGOR IVANOV
FOREIGN MINISTER OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

RUSSIAN MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

February 28, 2003

Excerpts

Foreign Minister Ivanov: ...

Our current political dialogue with China bears a very intensive character. The talks have again confirmed the identity of Russia's and China's approaches to key international issues. Joint statements have been adopted on the situation around Iraq, as well as on that in the Korean Peninsula. With regard to Iraq, the position of our countries is clear and consistent. We favor a complete and strict implementation of the UN Security Council resolution concerning weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That's why Russia and China regard as necessary the continuation of the work of the international inspectors of UNMOVIC and IAEA in order to complete the disarmament process in Iraq. Currently all the necessary conditions exist for that, and we are convinced that the option of force must remain a last resort. Whereas the most reliable way for solving the Iraq problem is to act in strict accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and international law, a point of view which most countries of the world share today.

...

Question: Igor Sergeyevich, a joint statement of Russia and China on Iraq was adopted yesterday. Could you explain what is the essence of the Russian position and where it differs from the positions of the countries which stand for a military solution of the Iraq problem?

Foreign Minister Ivanov: As to the position of Russia on Iraqi settlement, it is clear and consistent. We have always stood and continue to stand for the complete and strict fulfillment of the relevant UN Security Council resolutions, primarily those concerning weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That was why we pressed for the unconditional return to Iraq of the international observers of UNMOVIC and IAEA and for their unimpeded performance of their mission. The international inspectors have now been for almost two months in Iraq, they have been freely performing their mission and we consider that their work should be continued. In our conviction, it is the work of the inspectors, their conclusions and opinions that must give an answer to the question whether there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq or not and it is the work of the inspectors that today can help in solving by political means the situation that has evolved around Iraq.

On the other hand, we, of course, have been carefully analyzing the arguments of our opponents, of those who stand for a force-based solution, who consider that time has run out for a political solution of the Iraq situation. By analyzing these arguments, one may form an impression that they are being arranged or selected for a definite, preset task. At first all members of the UN Security Council insisted on an unconditional return of international inspectors to Iraq. It was with this aim in mind that UN Security Council Resolution 1441 was adopted. Then Washington and London began to shift the emphasis to arguing that it really wasn't the inspectors even, but that Iraq must itself disarm and prove to the international community there are no weapons of mass destruction in the country. Then followed the statements even not about the disarmament of Iraq, but about a change of regime there. And all along the claim has been that no one is after Iraqi oil. Most recently, a military operation against Iraq is being presented almost as a step directed to democratic changes in the Arab world. In this regard, of course, we are also beginning to ask just what all this has to do with UN Security Council Resolution 687, and with all subsequent resolutions on the Iraq problem.

Once again I want to stress that regarding Iraqi settlement Russia will act strictly in keeping with the existing UN Security Council resolutions. Today we have all the necessary conditions for solving this problem by political means, and the international community simply cannot lose this chance.

Question: Will Russia veto the resolution submitted to the United Nations Security Council?

Foreign Minister Ivanov: All permanent members of the UN Security Council have the right of veto. This right each state must use very responsibly, in the interests of the stability and security of the world. Russia has always stood and continues to stand for unity in the Security Council and in the first place among the permanent Council members. It has been thanks to unity that we have managed to achieve many positive results, including advances in the Iraqi settlement. We, therefore, will continue to work to maximally preserve unity among the members of the UN Security Council as concerns Iraqi settlement. At the same time, Russia has the right of veto and, if necessary for international stability, of course, will be using this right.

Question: Igor Sergeyevich, consultations are beginning today on the draft new resolution proposed by the United States. What is the stand of Russia on this draft?

Foreign Minister Ivanov: I have already noted that Russia favors a political resolution of the situation around Iraq, and holds that today all the necessary conditions exist for that. We feel that there is no necessity to adopt new resolutions at present, because the inspectors are working, they have their mandate, and the necessary conditions for their work have been created. If some additional decisions of the UN Security Council are required in support of the inspectors' activities, we are ready to consider these variants. At the same time Russia will not support resolutions or a resolution which directly or indirectly would open the way for a force-based solution of the Iraq problem, because we think a force-based solution of the Iraq problem not only would aggravate the situation in the region, but also would have far-reaching consequences of a global nature.

Question: There have appeared reports in the press that the US has included in the terrorist list three groups of Chechen terrorists. Will this influence the position of Russia on Iraq?

Foreign Minister Ivanov: I think there is no need to explain or prove to anybody that the terrorist groups operating in the North Caucasus and, specifically, in the Chechen Republic have links with international terrorism. All know this very well both in the United States and in other countries, so we regard the inclusion of the three groups in the list of international terrorist organizations as a natural thing. Moreover, we had handed over a list of fifteen organizations which should be included, from our point of view, in this category.

We welcome the decision of the US State Department to include in the list of international terrorist organizations three organizations which are operating in Chechnya, and hope this list will be extended and that other countries will follow this United States example. I think that all countries must be interested in actively participating in the antiterrorist international coalition because terrorism is our common threat, our common trouble. Only jointly shall we be able to solve this problem. Therefore we will continue to cooperate with the United States and other countries in the struggle against international terrorism. Yet this does not mean that we cannot have a different position on individual international problems and, in particular, on the problem of Iraqi settlement.

...