[lbo-talk] Al-Jazirah Interviews Russia's Lavrov on Terrorism

[Chris Doss]

BTW there was a great interview with AJ's Moscow head
in the newspaper Trud recently. (I snipped out a lot
of what follows that dealt with Israel.)

Al-Jazirah Interviews Russia's Lavrov on Terrorism,
Iraq, Iran, Israel, Gaza Plan
Doha Al-Jazirah Satellite Channel Television in Arabic
1730 GMT 15 Sep 04

[Interview with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
by Akram Khuzam in Moscow; date and place not given;
in Russian with superimposed translation into Arabic;
translated from the Arabic; from the "Today's
Encounter" program--recorded]

[Text]    [Khuzam] Dear viewers, we welcome you to
another episode of Today's Encounter.   We will be
interviewing Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.  
Recently, the Russian defense minister said that
Russia has the right to and will direct deterrent
strikes at centers of terrorism in any area in the
world.   Does this announcement not contradict the
assertions that you personally made on the need to
respect international law?   In general, what is going
on?   Please explain to us what this announcement
means?

    [Lavrov] We must respect international law but
international law, especially Article 51 of the UN
Charter, recognizes the right of self-defense.  
Moreover, UN Security Council resolutions that were
adopted after the 11th of September 2001 unanimously
declared that the right of self-defense is not
confined to responding to classical military attacks
but also covers military attacks that fall within
terrorist operations.   The contemporary international
law is based on the fact that if a certain country is
exposed to a terrorist attack and if there is a ground
to believe that such an attack might recur, this
country can take the necessary measures to lessen or
remove this existing threat as an implementation of
its right of self-defense.   There is no doubt that
terrorism continues to threaten Russia.

    [Khuzam] US Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and British
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw supported Russia in its
declaration on terrorism, contrary to the EU stand.  
Do you not fear that, after possible Russian attacks,
the Americans and the British would announce that
there was a Russian aggression or human rights
violations, as happened in the past?   

    [Lavrov] I believe that your question is only
theoretical, a hypothetical question.   That Russia
has the right to self-defense against terrorist
attacks and the right to remove or lessen the threat
of terrorist attacks does not at all mean that we
would begin exercising this right all over the world
as of tomorrow.   Officials have already stated that
this right would be exercised when the necessary
proofs have been made available.   They also stressed
that the use of force would be the last resort in
accordance with our right of self-defense.   They
further emphasized that they would continue to fight
international terrorism in coordination and in
cooperation with the international community within
the antiterrorism coalition. 

    [Khuzam] Many observers have noticed that the
Russian rhetoric on international terrorism increased
after what happened in Beslan, Moscow, Rostov, and
Tula.   What exactly is international terrorism, and
what does your claim mean that international terrorism
has declared war against Russia?   Can you not think
of the possibility of a fierce war inside Russia with
certain groups that are not satisfied with the policy
of President Putin?

    [Lavrov] Who declared war?   I believe that the
terrorist war is characterized by the fact that
terrorism has no borders or national identity.   As
for those who inspire terrorism, we cannot link them
at all times with definite geographical areas or
certain official structures.   We can also follow what
some figures have said recently, including the
statements of Maskhadov, who, despite expressing his
condolences, added that terrorist attacks would be
inevitable unless the policy of the Russian Federation
on Chechnya has been changed.   Therefore, my answer
to the question is: Whoever declared a terrorist war
against Russia must be pursued, not only by relying on
the information that the Russian intelligence agencies
possess but by looking at television screens where we
have enough testimony about those who are interested
in continuing terrorist attacks against Russia,
fragmenting the unity of the Russian Federation, and
creating a crisis in the northern Caucasus region.  
Undoubtedly, these forces are part of international
terrorism, and international sabotage, the new
_expression that some journalists have started to
employ.   These forces are outside the Russian
territory but I do not rule out the possibility that
some of those who carry out the attacks are in the
Chechen territory as well.

    [Khuzam] Do you have irrefutable proofs that Aslan
Maskhadov and Shamil Basayev were involved in planning
the Beslan tragedy?

    [Lavrov] I am absolutely certain that Shamil
Basayev personally led this operation.   

    [Khuzam] We heard sharp criticism from you
concerning Washington's call for the need to negotiate
with Aslan Maskhadov.   Now, in your comments about
what happened, you did not mention his name.   Please
explain.    

    [Lavrov] I have not excluded Maskhadov when I
answered your previous question.   I mentioned him in
previous answers where his statements to the Georgian
media were mentioned.   What a coincidence.   He said
that it was impossible to avoid terrorist operations
unless the policy of the Russian Federation toward
Chechnya has been changed.   This is at least a direct
incitement for terrorism if not indeed an admission
that he stands behind all of this.   Therefore,
calling for negotiations with him in addition to
statements issued by some Western capitals to search
for means of political settlement with him--meaning
that Maskhadov would be one of our negotiating
partners--cannot be considered to be a manifestation
of the developing partnership between Russia and the
United States and between Russia and Britain and other
countries.

    [Khuzam] What is wrong with negotiating with him
especially if this leads to ending the war in
Chechnya?

    [Lavrov] This will not end the war in Chechnya but
will mean Russia's defeat in its war on terrorism
because any negotiations with these individuals mean
that we entertain hopes that they can play a political
role in the Chechen Republic.   It will mean only one
thing; namely, that they will win the possibility of
continuing their policy, the policy of terrorism, and
to continue their activities against other parts of
Russia.

    We have provided them with an opportunity in the
past, an opportunity to develop within Chechnya and to
enjoy full autonomy after the (Pavyort) agreements but
they ended up robbing their republic and launching
aggression against the neighboring Republic of
Daghestan.   Exactly at that time our antiterrorism
campaign started.   In answer to your question, I
would like to ask another question: What harm will
there be if Europe responds to the Bin-Ladin call,
implement some measures, and accept his conditions?  
Then Bin-Ladin would leave Europe alone.   What is
wrong with that?   If Europe categorically rejects any
negotiations with him then why should we negotiate
with his pupils and followers, as Europe wants us to
do?

    [Khuzam] Let us talk about the statements by
officials of the Russian security agencies on the
participation of 10 Arabs in the Beslan tragedy.  
These tragedies were met with divergent reactions but
eventually everyone started to ask about how true
these statements were.   Do you have proofs in this
regard?   

    [Lavrov] Taking into consideration the details of
the tragedy, it would not be possible to know the
identity of the bodies but information about the
presence of Arabs among the terrorists have been
confirmed.   Moreover, information about the presence
of others from other nationalities among them was also
confirmed.   There is a Russian, a Ukrainian, a
Chechen, and an Ingushian.   Of course this
information is being investigated.   However, casting
doubt on this information is strange.   If there are
among these individuals persons of various
nationalities, it means that this is a fact.   I do
not understand the reasons for this surprise.   We
have mentioned the facts and at the same time we
always reiterated that terrorists have no nationality,
religion, culture, or any ethnic affiliations.   We
are facing international terror organizations.   The
presence of these people in various gangs, whether in
Beslan or in any other places where terrorists
perpetrate their despicable crimes, does not at all
means that the guilty one is Islam, the Orthodox
faith, the Catholic faith, or any other religion.

    For your information, I returned form the Middle
East a few days ago where I visited Egypt, Lebanon,
and Syria.   I can assure you that the desire in these
countries to get rid of international terrorism is no
less intense than it is here in Russia or in Europe,
Asia, or Africa.   They all suffer from this evil,
including the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.   We are
holding a dialogue on this issue with all our partners
and this is what is being talked about in meetings
with the Arab leaders and the officials of the Gulf
Cooperation Council states.


=====
Nu, zayats, pogodi!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com