Question: On April 12-13, open debates of candidates for the post of the UN Secretary General took place in New York. How do you assess each candidate’s chances? Who would Russia like to see as a new UN Secretary General?

Vitaly Churkin: Indeed, unofficial meetings of contenders for the UN Secretary General’s post are taking place in the General Assembly format. It would be inaccurate to describe them as debates, as the candidates (at present, there are eight of them, including four women and four men) are meeting with UN members separately. Each has been allocated two hours.

I believe that all candidates have grounds for their ambitions. It has yet to be decided who our country will back. The UN Security Council, upon whose recommendation the General Assembly will eventually appoint the next Secretary General, will begin to consider the issue in late July. So a long “election campaign” still lies ahead, which can also be joined by new candidates.

Question: Will the role of the UN in the world and its agenda change depending on who becomes the next Secretary General?

Vitaly Churkin: The Secretary General can have a certain influence on UN activities, but a leading role in this regard is played by member states, especially the most influential ones, including Russia.

Question: How do you evaluate the efforts of the Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura in resolving the Syria conflict?

Vitaly Churkin:  We take a positive view of the special envoy’s activity. He is a skillful and experienced diplomat who, during the first round of talks, on the whole managed to establish a certain exchange of opinions between the Syrian governmental delegation and the opposition (for all the division within the latter) and, based on the results of the first round, work out a document that is useful in searching for points of convergence and continuing the negotiating process.

Question: On April 11, a new round of intra-Syrian talks began in Geneva. Do you think these talks will follow the fate of previous meetings in Geneva?

Vitaly Churkin: The fundamental difference between the current negotiations efforts (Geneva-3) and previous efforts (Geneva-1 and Geneva-2), which were mediated by Kofi Annan and Lakhdar Brahimi, is that now they are based on more substantial support from the international community than before.

As you remember, last autumn, the International Syria Support Group was created through the efforts of Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and US Secretary of State John Kerry, which paved the way for UN Security Council Resolution 2254 of December 18 that laid the groundwork for the consensus-based political process in Syria. So today, the UN Secretary General’s Special Envoy has more effective leverage in his hands than his predecessors had.

Question: Russia’s draft statement with a call to ensure the broadest possible representation at the intra-Syrian talks was blocked. Whose interests, in your opinion, were ensured in taking this decision? Is there still hope for Turkey’s constructive position on the issue of Kurdish participation?

Vitaly Churkin: Turkey irrationally impedes the Syrian Kurds’ participation in the talks, thus unwittingly prodding them towards “separatist options.” Even though this is precisely what Ankara fears. Unfortunately, the situation regarding our draft statement shows that the United States and other Security Council members from the West do not want to make a constructive impact on Ankara’s position. This is regrettable and not conducive to effective negotiations.

Question: Russia and the US-led international coalition are not acting together. There is only one agreement, i.e. on the coordination of actions to prevent incidents in the airspace. In reality, however, Russian and US actions in Syria appear to be coordinated efforts in the fight against terrorism. Maybe there is coordination after all, but the Americans prefer to keep the fact under wraps?

Vitaly Churkin: Indeed, at present, our actions are to a very large degree coordinated with US actions, and not only in preventing incidents in the airspace but also on an important issue such as the observance of the ceasefire in Syria, which has been holding for over a month.

Generally, intensive Russia-US collaboration on various levels – political, diplomatic and military – is the mainstay of the efforts to resolve the crisis. Everyone understands this. That the Americans, especially Pentagon representatives, are being “modest” on this score apparently shows that they are still somewhat at a loss regarding Russia’s energetic actions in Syria over the past six months.

Question: Last week, the US president declared readiness to attack militants in Libya. To all appearances, again, the US leadership is not going to ask the UN Security Council for permission to conduct such an operation. Could you comment on this?

Vitaly Churkin: The situation in Libya remains extremely complicated. Despite the UN efforts, national unity among the Libyans has not been achieved. There is a disturbing new development: ISIS has taken control of strategically important areas in the country. All of this calls for coordinated efforts by the international community, including at the UN Security Council.

Even though the Libya experience (NATO bombings in 2011, in breach of the Security Council resolution. – Izvestia) is rather painful for the Security Council, at present, we have common interests: restoring Libya’s unity and territorial integrity and preventing the country from turning into a breeding pool for terrorism, further destabilising a significant part of the African continent.