INTERVIEW WITH FIRST DEPUTY FOREIGN MINISTER OF RUSSIA VYACHESLAV TRUBNIKOV TO ITAR-TASS NEWS AGENCY

Question: How do you assess the results of 2002 and what were the highlights of the Russian foreign policy during that year?

Answer: The year 2002 has been an exceptionally eventful year for Russia that has brought important results.

The country's strategic course in firmly upholding its vital interests relying on partnership and cooperation with all the leading world political centers has started to pay off. Russia has strengthened its positions in the international arena, consolidated its reputation as a responsible, constructive and predictable member of the world community. This has strengthened our security, created favorable external conditions for tackling the social and economic development tasks in Russia, for implementing the necessary reforms and improving the well-being of the citizens.

We have achieved some important practical results. This year Russia has become a full member of the G-8, the US and the European Union have recognized Russia as a market economy, our country has been dropped from the FATF black list and has managed to upgrade its credit rating. These factors expand the possibilities for business cooperation and contribute to the development of the Russian industry and trade.

The consistent Russian line of active participation in the global anti-terrorist coalition has helped to build up mechanisms for jointly counteracting the terrorist threat in the international arena and to overcome the inertia of double standards. There is better understanding abroad of the substance of our actions aimed at eradicating terrorism in Chechnya. The evolution of sentiments was highlighted by the October hostage crisis in Moscow at the Theater Center on Dubrovka.

In spite of the US withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, Russia has managed to preserve the foundations of international strategic stability, to ensure the continuity of the arms control processes and keep them within binding legal frameworks.

A new scheme of cooperation between Russia and NATO has been worked out and introduced that allows to jointly work on a wide range of key issues of European and world security. The links with the European Union have substantially advanced and enriched their content. The new climate in the relations with the EU makes it possible to solve the most complicated issues, as confirmed by the negotiations on the Kaliningrad transit problem.

The diversified character of Russian foreign policy has been strengthened. In 2002 we consolidated the positive trends in our relations with India and have secured the continuity of our friendly ties with China.

Certain achievements have been made in the Commonwealth of Independent States which is undoubtedly a priority for the Russian Federation. The creation of the Collective Security Treaty Organization and the real launching of EurAsEc, which is the trade and economic engine of the Commonwealth, was particularly important for us.

By no means all the problems have of course been solved. But it can be said that Russia has every ground for giving a generally positive assessment of 2002.

Question: What will be the priority areas of the Russian foreign policy in 2003?

Answer: The foreign policy priorities of Russia in 2003 remain unchanged. We will seek to consolidate the positive attainments in international affairs of recent times, consistently work to uphold many-sided law-based approaches to the solution of topical international problems.

In accordance with the nature of security threats to Russia, priority should be given to the fight against international terrorism, transborder crime, non-proliferation of WMDs and means of their delivery. These are global threats and consequently the resources of the whole world community must be pooled to neutralize them. We will continue to build up interaction with our foreign partners on global challenges, both on a bilateral basis and within the framework of existing international organizations and structures.

Obviously, this year we will have to deal very seriously with the issues of prevention and settlement of regional conflicts, post-conflict rehabilitation, stabilization and development. Russia will continue to pursue a balanced and pragmatic policy of developing cooperation in every geographical area. Building up ties with the states members of the Commonwealth of Independent States, improvement and strengthening of CIS mechanisms will remain our main task.

The range of issues connected with deeper integration of Russia into the world economy will continue to be highly important in practical terms. We will work persistently toward liquidation of discriminatory regimes and restrictions that infringe upon the interests of Russia, work to ensure that we join the WTO on standard terms, polish the economic aspects of interaction with the EU, and expand Russian participation in the activities of regional economic cooperation structures in the APR.

Russia will continue to pay particular attention to the position of its citizens and compatriots abroad to ensure their interests and legitimate rights in the countries where they live.

Question: What will be the Russian policy in the field of disarmament and arms control in 2003?

Answer: In 2003 Russia will continue to work to strengthen global strategic stability, to promote nuclear disarmament, to prevent the spread of mass destruction weapons and means of their delivery. Our disarmament and arms control policy is based on a clear-cut program of actions. Tangible results in promoting that program were the Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions and the Joint Declaration on New Strategic Relations between the Russian Federation and the United States signed by President Putin of Russia and President Bush of the US on May 24, 2002.

The Russian President Vladimir Putin, submitted the Treaty on Strategic Offensive Reductions for ratification by the State Duma on December 7, 2002. In early 2003 the Treaty is to be simultaneously approved by the Federal Assembly and by the US Senate whereupon it will come into force. The Treaty and Declaration fix the interconnection between strategic offensive and defensive weapons; they are to provide the basis for new confidence, transparency and predictability measures in the field of strategic offensive weapons and anti-missile defense.

Question: Will nuclear proliferation remain a Russian foreign policy priority?

Answer: The strengthening of the international non-proliferation regime and its basis -- the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty -- remains a priority of the Russian foreign policy.

Moscow intends to use the preparation for the 2005 conference to review the Treaty as a universal rostrum for promoting the Russian position and initiatives not only on nuclear issues, but on the entire range of issues of strategic stability, disarmament and non-proliferation, including the prevention of the placing of weapons in outer space. In this connection it is necessary to stress the importance of a coordinated position of nuclear powers in the "five" format.

We will build up our constructive pressure on the countries whose position has so far prevented the coming into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. In the first place these are the US, India, Pakistan and Israel.

Question: What will be the tasks facing the Commonwealth of Independent States in 2003?

Answer: The main task for 2003 is to accelerate the development of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Russia cannot be content with the pace of this process. Delay costs dearly both to Russia and to Commonwealth countries.

Milestones of the past year were the informal meeting of the heads of state in Alma-Ata and the Chisinau summit of the CIS in October. These forums confirmed the line promoted by Russia for investing the activities of the Commonwealth with concrete content, especially as regards countering the new challenges and threats, as well as in the economic field.

The taking of hostages at the Theater Center on Dubrovka highlighted the danger of terrorism and the urgent need to pool efforts to struggle against its manifestations.

The past year has brought important results in terms of development and adoption of important CIS documents aimed at counteracting new challenges and threats. The Interstate Program of Joint Measures to Control Crime for 2003-2004, programs for improving cooperation in the border sphere and military and technical cooperation were adopted, the Concept of Cooperation in Countering Trafficking in Narcotics, Psychotropic Substances and Precursors was approved, and a protocol on approving the regulations on the procedure of organizing and carrying out joint anti-terrorist measures was signed.

By decision of the heads of states -- participants in the Collective Security Treaty, an aviation group based at Kant airport in Kirghizia is being set up. It is called upon to strengthen the military component of the Treaty, the Collective Rapid Deployment Force.

During the recent visit of the Russian President Vladimir Putin to Bishkek an agreement on security cooperation with Kirghizia was signed.

The Russian law-enforcement bodies jointly with their counterparts in Tajikistan have carried out a series of measures to detect and cut channels for the smuggling of narcotics into Russia. According to the Russian Interior Ministry, more than 110 kilograms of heroin has been seized from drug smugglers.

Russia is satisfied with the improvement of relations with Georgia in the wake of anti-terrorism measures in the Pankisi Gorge and the extradition of Chechen militants to Russia.

Question: What are the prospects for the formation of a common economic space in the CIS?

Answer: Russia and its CIS neighbors should move towards the formation of a common economic space. The decision on phasing out exemptions from the free trade regime made by the Chisinua summit was a step towards that goal. The CIS heads of state in Chisinua have expressed their intention to have a special meeting in the first half of 2003 to discuss the problems in this area.

In the economic sphere the past year saw improved trade links within the CIS, the development of an effective payments system, a legal framework for multilateral and bilateral cooperation, including for interstate financial-industrial groups and other corporate structures, and development of common principles of the tax policy.

The fuel and energy sector was a priority. Russia has recently signed a series of important agreements with CIS countries on cooperation in this field. It plans to cooperate with Byelorussia in the gas industry and in creating equal conditions in the field of price policy. There will be interaction with Kazakhstan in the gas sphere and on oil transit. An agreement has been reached with Moldova on the supply of Russian natural gas and its transit through the republic and with Ukraine - an agreement on creating on parity terms of a gas consortium to manage its gas transportation system.

Draft intergovernment agreements are in preparation on cooperation in the gas field with Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Armenia, and on the use of Ukrainian oil pipelines for transit. The task of creating a common market of fuel and energy resources is highly relevant for the CIS at present.

We know that all the member states are interested in a concerted effort to strengthen and develop the Commonwealth which is the fundamental factor.

Question: How effective is the interaction of the Commonwealth countries in the framework of the CIS Anti-Terrorist Center?

Answer: On the whole, cooperation within the CIS Anti-Terrorist Center in 2002 was effective. Today the ATC fully meets its main task of being a permanent specialized CIS body. Its mission is to coordinate the interaction of the law-enforcement bodies and special services of the Commonwealth states in combating international terrorism and other manifestations of extremism.

During the last year the ATC dealt with the information and analysis issues: it formed a bank of data on international terrorist organizations in the CIS and their members, organizations and persons who support terrorists. It monitored the state and trends of the spread of international terrorism in the CIS and beyond, processing the results and presenting them to the member states.

The efficiency of the ATC was enhanced in the course of the preparation and holding of anti-terrorist command and staff and operational-tactical exercises. One potential function of the Center that is very effective is assistance to interested Commonwealth states in carrying out operational and detective measures and comprehensive operations to combat international terrorism, to apprehend criminals on the international wanted list. We believe that after the signing of the protocol that approves the Regulations on the procedure of organizing and carrying out joint anti-terrorist measures on the territories of the CIS member states that function will start to be performed.

Besides, the ATC has been charged with assisting in the training of specialists and instructors of anti-terrorist units. We are confident that the special force trained by ATC instructors will be an effective instrument against terrorists and extremists of every stripe.

In March 2002 the ATC created an office for liaison with the UN Security Council Counter-Terrorist Committee. Considering the importance of the Central Asian area, the ATC branch in Bishkek was transformed into a full-fledged regional ATC office.

Question: What priority measures should be taken to improve the structure of the CIS in 2003?

Answer: Making the Commonwealth bodies more effective and optimization of their structures were at the focus of the Chisinua summit in October 2002 when a package of measures was approved envisaging more thorough monitoring of execution of decisions, clearer delimitation of powers between the governing bodies of the CIS as well as optimization of the structure of the Commonwealth bodies while substantially cutting their staffs.

Proposals are being prepared for optimizing the structure of the sectoral bodies of the CIS whose number reaches 70 and to make their work more effective. These proposals will be submitted to the governing bodies of the Commonwealth next year.

Undoubtedly, we are not talking about dismantling the existing and well-performing mechanisms. The focus of attention is on fine-tuning the practical cooperation in concrete spheres of mutual interest so as to make it more effective and fruitful and to eliminate unnecessary and harmful duplication of functions.

Question: How efficient is Russian-US cooperation within the Anti-Terrorism Working Group?

Answer: Russia and the US have created a unique channel for confidential professional dialogue on ways of countering terrorism. Key specialists from various agencies of the two countries, including diplomats, military men and intelligence specialists, participate in the Russian-US Anti-Terrorism Working Group.

Concrete decisions and recommendations are produced within the framework of the group and submitted to the leaders of the two nations. The next meeting of the Group is scheduled to take place in Moscow this month.

Looking at the Group's activities as a whole, one can say that following the May Summit it became even more multifaceted, currently embracing virtually all the aspects of cooperation between Russia and the US in the fight against terrorism. Traditions of collaboration in the spirit of true partnership have taken shape in the group. Moscow views the Russian-US Working Group as a component of the international anti-terrorist architecture.

Founded in 2000 by decision of the presidents of Russia and the US, the bilateral Working Group on countering threats originating in Afghanistan became one of the most efficient mechanisms of Russian-US cooperation in fighting new threats and challenges. In May 2002 by agreement between presidents Vladimir Putin and George Bush it was transformed into the Anti-Terrorism Working Group. It was not just a change of facade: the Group's mandate was broadened considerable in terms of both geographic coverage and the range of problems to be addressed. Subgroups were created within that body, including a subgroup on countering terrorist threats involving the use of radioactive materials and other means of mass destruction.

G-8 should be mentioned in addition to the above formats. The Kananaskis G-8 Summit and the Whistler meeting of foreign ministers adopted a series of policy documents aimed at stymieing terrorism, including Principles to prevent terrorists, or those that harbor them, from gaining access to weapons of mass destruction, radiological weapons and missiles. The G-8 nations are urging partners to follow their example.

I would mention as well major regional organizations, such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Council of Europe, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, the ASEAN regional forum and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, in which Russia is playing an active role, and also the dialogue on anti-terrorism problems along the Russia-NATO and Russia-EU lines. Our country's collaboration with partners and allies in the CIS and the Collective Security Treaty in countering terrorism is gaining momentum as well.

It is the United Nations that is playing and should continue to play the central coordinating role in all these efforts.

Therefore, last year the international anti-terrorist agenda was quite packed. There was no lack of attention to these issues on the part of the heads of state and government or foreign ministers. Countering every manifestation of terrorism remained the key mission facing the world community as a whole and each of its members in 2002.

Question: How efficiently did Russia jointly with the international community counter other challenges, including drugs trafficking?

Answer: The growing scope of unlawful production of, commerce in and abuse of narcotics and psychotropic substances in the world in the recent period has indeed become a global problem and one of the deadliest threats confronting humanity. The mounting danger of the unlawful flow of drugs from Afghanistan's territory is a particular alarming and problem-ridden issue at present.

Russia is advocating the development of a comprehensive international strategy to resolve the Afghan drugs problem. Our approach lays emphasis on the proposal to combine assistance to Afghanistan's Transitional Administration in rehabilitating the country's economy and in fighting drugs production, on the one hand, and efforts to establish anti-drugs "security belts" along the entire perimeter of Afghanistan's borders. The finetuning and implementation of such a strategy requires the invigoration of foreign-policy efforts in every direction. A major condition of success, in our view, would be an enhanced coordinating role for the UN and the consistent buildup of the potential of the anti-drugs structures of that organization.

To this end Russia took a series of important practical steps in 2003, in particular, by voluntarily contributing 500,000 dollars to the fund of the UN International Drug Control Program with a view to its being used in the most "drug-risk" area, namely, in Central Asia.

At a time of globalization narcobusiness has become a major factor shaping the "criminal area" of the world economy, one directly related to such operations of global organized crime as corruption and trafficking in arms and people. The links of narcobusiness to terrorism and direct or indirect involvement in its financing mechanisms are more and more visible, and this undermines the foundations of regional and world stability.

This problem cannot be resolved through disparate efforts, and that is why we focus on establishing efficient mechanisms of counter-drugs collaboration within the CIS and on the more effective engagement of the Collective Security Treaty Organization and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in addressing these problems. We also take a favorable view of the dynamics of cooperation within the framework of the Central Asian Memorandum of Understanding on Countering Drugs.

Last year the list of bilateral documents on fighting drugs was supplemented by two agreements of Russia - one concluded with the US and the other with Uruguay. I am confident that all this is becoming an important contribution to the efforts of the world community to counter the threat of drug trafficking and other challenges to security.

Question: What prospects for enlargement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization are there, proceeding from the tasks of intensifying the fight against terrorism?

Answer: Cooperation on this front is one of the system-forming elements of SCO activity. It will be recalled that simultaneously with the Declaration on the creation of the SCO the founding states in June 2001 signed the Convention on Combating Terrorism, Separatism and Extremism. Work is now under way on the practical embodiment of the provisions of the Convention. The efforts are directed to the speediest launching of an SCO Regional Antiterrorist Structure (RATS) mechanism, this being a permanent body meant for assisting coordination and strengthening cooperation among the competent authorities of member states in the fight against terrorism, separatism and extremism. The RATS agreement, encompassing all the aspects of its formation and activities, was signed on June 7, this year, at the SCO summit in St. Petersburg.

It is necessary to note also the activities of the Bishkek Group of heads of law enforcement agencies and special services of the SCO countries, within whose framework cooperation is being bolstered in the struggle against the drug business, illicit arms trafficking, illegal migration and other problems.

As to the enlargement of the membership of the organization, that possibility is envisaged by the Charter of the SCO, yet this is not a question of today. In the first place it is necessary for the SCO to get on its feet. Some time will still be required for the elaboration of normative documents governing the procedure for the admission of new members to the SCO.

Question: What steps are being taken in terms of the intensification of cooperation by the SCO with other international associations, including ASEAN?

Answer: The Shanghai Cooperation Organization is an open, nonbloc organization, ready for broad cooperation with other international structures and states on topical problems of present-day life. Taking this into account, participants in the meeting of the SCO Foreign Ministers Council held in Moscow on November 23, 2002, signed the Interim Scheme for SCO Relations with Other International Organizations and States. This document permits the new organization, already at the stage of organizational formation, to actively join in international contacts.

So far as ASEAN is specifically concerned, we regard positively the interest shown for the SCO on the part of the association, and perceive wide prospects for effective cooperation on the antiterrorist and other fronts. In December of the past year the Russian President's special representative for SCO affairs, Vitaly Vorobyov, on the instructions of the SCO Council of National Coordinators, visited the ASEAN Secretariat, where he held an exchange of views regarding the establishment of contacts between the two associations.

Question: What legal framework has to be used for the struggle against terrorism and for the settlement of acute international problems?

Answer: Russia stands for maximal use of the potential of the United Nations and other international institutions in order to strengthen the legal foundations of combating terrorism. Only on this basis is a long-term, effective struggle possible against this highly dangerous challenge of our time.

Russia has been firmly pursuing a line on the inadmissibility, in the context of the settlement of acute international problems, of unilateral actions under the slogan of "war on terrorism," sometimes in circumvention of the Charter of the United Nations and the rules of international law. In the course of contacts with the American side attention has been focused on the fact that to fight terrorism, and the causes that engender it, is only possible together. Not a single state, even such a powerful one as the United States, is in a position to cope with the existing threat alone.

Question: How justified are the US claims to the role of a "world policeman"?

Answer: Claiming a single-power role as a "world policeman" is simply futile and unrealistic. Now too complex and extensive are the challenges with which the world community is faced.

As to the United States, the Americans are indeed pursuing a very active, even assertive foreign policy, in which they seek to use in full the geopolitical and economic potential they have for the advancement of their interests. There are grounds to speak of a temptation sometimes arising among a certain part of the US political establishment to dictate their terms to the surrounding world.

Yet the experience of practical cooperation shows convincingly the counterproductiveness of unilateral approaches, and proves the advantages of coordination of joint actions which yield their practical results. It is precisely collective efforts that lie at the base of the struggle against terrorism which the United States and Russia are waging, as well as the world community as a whole.

As before, regulation of the issues of arms control and strategic stability continues within a juridical framework. On the principles of a combination of interests, as shown, in particular, by the experience of Russian cooperation with NATO, mechanisms for the safeguarding of security are being developed. The principles of close international coordination are being applied in resolving even the most acute regional issues.

I am confident that given the persistent line of all the concerned parties there are enough possibilities to keep the development of international relations on a stable and predictable track. A contemporary world pattern should be based on respect for the sovereignty and national interests of different states, the firm observance of the rules of international law, and the politico-diplomatic settlement of conflicts and disputes.

Question: How justified are the US charges against Iraq?

Answer: The accusations that Iraq is concealing weapons are unsupported by evidence. Such allegations are not helpful towards the cause, but only increase the existing apprehensions in the world that the question of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction serves as a cover for other purposes.

If someone has any real information on the Iraqis' possession of prohibited weapons or continued attempts to develop them, then it would be logical to provide it to the special inspection bodies - UNMOVIC and IAEA.

The main efforts by Russia in the Iraqi sector are concentrated on preserving the process of resolving the situation on a politico-diplomatic plane. Based on this, we actively worked both with our partners in the UN Security Council and with Baghdad. We managed to convince the Iraqi leadership of the necessity of getting out of the continuing-since-December-1998 impasse in its relations with the UN on the disarmament dossiers as soon as possible. On the other hand, Russia exerted maximum efforts to elaborate a balanced resolution of the UN Security Council that would offer an opportunity to keep the situation within the United Nations framework and ward off the threat of an immediate military solution.

Baghdad's acceptance of Resolution 1441 made it possible to switch to the practical unfolding of inspection and monitoring activity in Iraq by UNMOVIC and IAEA. At the present time in Iraq there are more than one hundred inspectors from these organizations who could on the ground verify the data arousing the concern of individual states. Their conclusions, whatever they may be, should then be assessed by the United Nations Security Council, to whom the last word also belongs as regards subsequent steps to be taken by the international community in the Iraqi direction.

Question: How can you comment on the US charges against Syria?

Answer: Russia is not interested in seeing the appearance near its southern boundaries of new possessors of advanced missile technologies and of weapons of mass destruction. Those charges are not new because Washington has long since been accusing Damascus of such "sins," although it actually has never produced any concrete evidence on this score.

With regard to extremist Palestinian organizations allegedly being given protection on Syrian territory, I can only cite the statements of Syrian officials who have repeatedly pointed out that the Palestinian representations there perform only strictly informational functions. As for Lebanon's Hezbollah, Syria considers it an organization waging a national liberation struggle.

Question: Does the US have any weighty grounds for assigning Iran to the "axis of evil"?

Answer: Russia holds that the United States' line on assigning Iran to an "axis of evil" has no sufficient foundation beneath it, and we regard Iran as an important regional partner. Teheran not only condemns international terrorism in words, but has also demonstrated in practice, more specifically in Afghanistan, its readiness to participate in the struggle against this global evil. The Iranian side immediately condemned the recent hostage-taking in Moscow by Chechen terrorists.

Moreover, our experience of cooperation with Iraq confirms that that state is capable of playing a positive role in resolving conflict situations and in bolstering stability and security in the region.

Russia is continuing a regular political dialogue with Iran, encouraging the constructive participation of Teheran in international and regional affairs with special emphasis on the struggle against terrorism, extremism, and drug business and on the questions of disarmament, nonproliferation, and export controls. It is precisely such a line in terms of the support of Iran in pursuing a positive policy in Afghanistan, the Middle East and other regions that is productive.

Question: What is your attitude to the charge leveled at Saudi Arabia of having connections with terrorist organizations?

Answer: Moscow has taken notice of the materials published in the American media on the work of US law enforcement agencies to identify and suppress sources of financial support for international terrorists, including the so called "Saudi connection."

We expect that the US side will succeed in accurately identifying and bringing to justice those who provided financial support for the direct organizers and executors of the abominable crime of September 11, 2001.

Polemics have been continuing unabated between the United States and Saudi Arabia of late over the weak degree of cooperation by El Riyadh on the antiterrorist front. At the present time the leadership of Saudi Arabia has begun a serious review of relations with Islamist organizations, refraining from rendering assistance to radical groups, with the exception of Palestinian. New, stricter rules have been introduced for the financial accounting of charitable foundations, and control over banks' activity has been toughened.

At the same time fund-raising for charitable aims, with the end addressee often unknown, is actively continuing in the Kingdom. In this context the charges being made by the United States appear to be substantiated: up to the end of the 1990s practically all the sections of the population of the Kingdom, including the elite, had been participating in the financing of the various organizations acting under the slogans of "Muslim solidarity."

It is therefore important that Washington conduct a counterterrorist dialogue with El Riyadh. Recently there was announced the establishment of a joint American-Saudi group on the combating of terrorism, whose tasks, everything indicates, will incorporate also cooperation in doing away with sources of financing for terrorism. We would like the work in this new format to turn out to be productive, since to us these efforts have a practical meaning, for we have repeatedly drawn the attention of our American partners to the activity of international terrorists in Chechnya and their continuously being financed by the "terrorist international." The "terrorist international" - and this has been borne out by the hostage-taking in Moscow, as well as the tragic events in Bali, Kenya and elsewhere - has not and does not recognize any boundaries.

Question: What is the position of Russia on the settlement of the conflict in the Middle East?

Answer: It is necessary to break the vicious circle of violence in the Middle East, because its continuation objectively leads to a radicalization of positions and nourishes extremist forces, including those staking on terrorism. The persistent threat of a spread of the Middle East conflict has very dangerous implications both for international stability and for the national interests of Russia.

The Russian side, advocating collective and coordinated efforts, is convinced that in just this way it is possible to achieve the best results in the Middle East settlement. In this connection we consider important the formation of the Quartet of international mediators consisting of Russia, the US, EU and the United Nations, which has received an international legal status, as recorded in the resolution 1397 of the UN Security Council. Russia is taking the most active part in the activities of this mechanism and is disposed toward the all-out development of the work in that format.

In the course of the ministerial Quartet meeting in December in Washington it generally proved possible to agree upon the so called Road Map. This plan envisages a gradual solution to the crisis and the creation of a Palestinian state within a three-year period, as well as advancement towards a comprehensive Arab-Israeli settlement, including on the Syrian and Lebanese tracks. Now it is our task to ensure the speediest launching of practical implementation of this program.

Question: Can one regard as a policy of double standards the absence of criticism against Israel over its non-accession to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty?

Answer: Any attempts to keep Tel Aviv out of just criticism for its not acceding to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty are unjustified. The position of Russia is utterly clear and has been stated more than once at various international forums.

Israel continues to be the only state in the region which has not acceded to the Treaty and has not placed its nuclear activity under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards.

Russia is carrying out work on involving Israel in the international regime of nonproliferation of nuclear weapons. We feel that a change of the position of that country in the matter of acceding to the Treaty will really assist the reduction of tensions and ultimately the resolution of the Middle East crisis.

Question: Can the US charges against North Korea be regarded as a policy of double standards?

Answer: The DPRK should strictly fulfill its obligations both under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and under the agreement with the IAEA on the application of full-scope safeguards in connection with the NPT.

The sudden aggravation of the situation around the DPRK's nuclear program has no direct link to the situation on the Korean Peninsula or contacts between North and South Korea. This, above all, is the problem of relations between the DPRK and the United States, and it should be dealt with on lines of a constructive dialogue between them, in the conditions of the preservation and mutual observance of the Agreed Framework of 1994.

In devising its approach to the settlement of Korean problems, the Russian side proceeds from its consistent policy of strengthening security and stability in the region. With the advancement of the inter-Korean dialogue the task of providing the appropriate peaceful conditions for that has not lost its relevance, not only for Russia, but also for the other concerned states - China, the United States, Japan. Furthermore, the factor of inter-Korean rapprochement, of the development of many-sided ties, especially in the economic field, is assuming ever-increasing importance.

Taking into account these aspects, as well as the aim of unconditionally ensuring the nuclear-free status of the Korean Peninsula, the Russian side is continuing its intensive contacts with the United States, the DPRK, China, Japan and the Republic of Korea so as, first, to blunt the edge of the problem that has arisen, and second, to turn it into the channel of negotiations between Pyongyang and Washington, of a gradual normalization of American-North Korean relations.

Of course, we listen to the concerns being voiced by a number of Western countries. At the same time we reckon that many of them are dictated by political considerations.

Russia is actively carrying out the appropriate work in a bilateral and a multilateral formats to resolve the problems that have arisen. We expect from all the concerned parties the showing of restraint, fulfillment of the obligations assumed and the continuation of the dialogue with a view to peacefully solving all the issues of concern. Russia is not only against the policy of double standards, but also against the entry of any countries in the so called "black and white lists."

Question: What efforts is the Russian side making in the area of control over the nonproliferation of WMDs and missile technologies?

Answer: As you know, control functions over the observance of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty are exercised by the IAEA. Russia takes the most active part in the activities of this international organization and is pursuing a line on the improvement of the existing system of safeguards.

We are pinning special hopes on the realization of the initiative of Russian President Vladimir Putin for developing innovation nuclear technologies resistant to proliferation. Work on its embodiment continues to be carried out within the framework of the IAEA. This is one more weighty contribution by Russia to the cause of nuclear nonproliferation.

An important component of our efforts for the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their missile-delivery means is cooperation by Russia with other countries in the field of export controls. That cooperation is being effected both on a multilateral and on a bilateral basis. We attach special importance in this regard to our cooperation with the members of the Eurasian Economic Community and the CIS states.

Our representatives hold an active stance in the international export control mechanisms - the Missile Technology Control Regime, the Wassenaar Arrangement, the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Zanger Committee.

We are advancing at international forums, including the UN, the Russian initiative for creating a Global System of Control over the nonproliferation of missiles and missile technologies.

A remarkable event of the past year was the entry into force in November of the International Code of Conduct on preventing the proliferation of ballistic missiles - a kind of collection of the basic principles for the conduct of states in the missile sphere. Russia has joined this political document on the understanding that it is the first step along the road toward the elaboration of a legally binding multilateral agreement on a global missile nonproliferation regime.

Russia, of course, will continue its efforts to involve in work on the prevention of missile proliferation all the countries, in the first place those having their own missile capabilities.