Russian diplomat interviewed on relations with Latin America

(RIA Novosti – December 15, 2015)

Interview with Aleksandr Shchetinin, director of the Russian Federation Foreign Ministry’s Latin America Department, by RIA Novosti special correspondent Tatyana Kukushkina, date and place not specified: “Foreign Ministry: Russian Federation Makes Contact with All the Political Forces in Latin America

In an interview for RIA Novosti, Aleksandr Shchetinin, director of the Russian Federation Foreign Ministry’s Latin America Department, has talked about how Russia’s relations are shaping up with the new political forces in Latin America, what the results of the parliamentary elections in Venezuela will lead to, and what prospects remain for energy cooperation with Argentina.

The domestic political situation has become complex in several countries of Latin American – a region with which Russia traditionally maintains friendly and close contacts – at the same time. The opposition has come to power in Argentina in the form of a new president and has gained the majority in Venezuela’s parliament while in Brazil protest moods are growing in connection with the case of corruption in regard to the country’s president. Aleksandr Shchetinin, director of the Russian Federation Foreign Ministry’s Latin America Department, has talked to RIA Novosti special correspondent Tatyana Kukushkina in an interview about how Russia’s relations with the new political forces in Latin America are shaping up, what the results of the parliamentary elections in Venezuela will lead to, and what prospects remain for energy cooperation with Argentina.

Brazil

[Question] The head of the lower chamber of Brazil’s parliament accepted the opposition proposal to launch the procedure for the impeachment of the country’s president. After this mass actions began in several major cities calling for the immediate dismissal of the head of state who is suspected of using state resources to finance her 2014 election campaign. In your view, might the complex domestic political situation in Brazil not influence our cooperation within the BRICS framework and on a bilateral basis?

[Answer] First of all, the impeachment procedure in Brazil has not formally begun yet. We shall see what happens next. Undoubtedly we are following the events that are happening in Brazil now with a sense of great solidarity with this country and we wish that it gets through this difficult period peacefully and without serious domestic political upheavals.

Brazil is a weighty player in Latin America and not just because this is the region’s leading economy and one of the world’s leading economies. A stable and strong Brazil that has its own weighty voice in international affairs accords with our interests.

It is noteworthy that the leaders of all the branches of power in Brazil – President Dilma Rousseff, Vice President Michel Temer, both speakers of the two chambers of congress, and the chairman of the Supreme Court – have visited Russia this year. We maintain good relations with all of them. Many of them are at different ends of the spectrum in the current alignment of forces but the important thing – and this is our principled position in regard to the other countries of the region too – is that we maintain contacts with all the leading political forces. And the development of constructive relations and cooperation with the region’s countries is a political constant for us. Just like for them and furthermore independently of the political hue of the government which at the present concrete moment characterizes each concrete country of the region.

[Question] There has been talk of Russian Gazprom’s plans to acquire a share of Brazil’s Petrobras in a number of Brazil’s hydrocarbon deposits. Could the judicial investigation into the corruption case wreck these plans in some way?

[Answer] It is not only Gazprom that is cooperating with Petrobras – this is one of the world’s biggest oil giants. Our other energy companies are cooperating with it. As for the individuals maintaining contacts with representatives of our economic structures – yes, the individuals at Petrobras have changed but the company remains. And it is not going away from the world market and we are continuing to cooperate with it. At least no direct negative effects have reached us or had a direct influence.

[Question] At the beginning of November two dams burst at an iron ore mine in the state of Minas Gerais which resulted in seven deaths and around 20 more counted as missing, villages were destroyed, and local inhabitants were evacuated. According to the experts’ assessments, it could take decades to clear up the aftermath of the ecological disaster and, in addition, there are increasing fears of an acute deterioration in the quality of drinking water and the undermining of the water supply on the territory of the whole state. Has Brazil not asked Russia for help in clearing up the aftermath of the major ecological disaster in the state of Minas Gerais?

[Answer] No, they have not appealed to us. The Brazilians intend to resolve this ecological problem independently, by their own efforts. Our procedures in such instances are very simple – we provide assistance when we receive an official request from the corresponding country’s government. If they make a request we will examine it. But there have been no appeals yet.

[Question] Against the backdrop of the growing threat of terrorism are Russia and Brazil now cooperating in the prevention of incidents at the 2016 Olympic Games? What assistance is Moscow giving Brazil on this question?

[Answer] We are collaborating closely with the Brazilians on questions of the organization of major sports competitions including on a range of security measures. We study their experience and they study ours. We hosted the [Winter] Olympics in Sochi and they hosted the world soccer championship. Now we are trading places: They are hosting the Olympics in Rio de Janeiro and we are hosting the World Cup. We believe that Brazil’s experience in ensuring the security of major sports competitions is extremely valuable.

[Question] Is progress being made in the talks on the acquisition of Pantsir S-1 systems which are planned for use in ensuring the security of the Olympic Games among other things? Previously it was reported that the conclusion of the contract had been postponed to the beginning of 2016: Are talks on this question continuing now?

[Answer] The talks are proceeding. The Brazilians are stating a readiness to acquire them but what is going to happen next with their domestic situation including the economic one? From the viewpoint of the qualitative parameters we have full mutual understanding. As for the political and economic component, we shall wait for a signal from our Brazilian colleagues. We proceed from the Brazilians’ statements and they are saying that their decision to conclude such a contract is unchanging.

Venezuela

[Question] How does Russia assess the results of the Venezuelan parliamentary elections that have been held? Could the inflaming of the situation from outside have influenced the election results in some way?

[Answer] The election campaign in Venezuela was very tense for a number of factors. Society proved to be extremely electrified and split. At the same time a significant and, perhaps, even decisive section of society supports the political and social policy of Hugo Chavez and his successors. However, that part of society lives in the real world and is aware of the serious economic problems that the country has faced in recent years. It is right to believe that the vote that took place was determined to a considerable extent by this specific section of the population. A population which objectively wants to resolve the social questions that exist.

In our view, aside from the political context of the confrontation between the supporters of Nicolas Maduro and his equally committed and politically engaged opponents, the cranking up of the hullabaloo around the elections was an undoubted element in the election campaign. We saw clearly how much this was cranked up from outside as well. The idea was foisted on people that the elections would not be democratic and that the government would never allow an outcome that did not correspond to its interests.

The worsening of Venezuela’s relations with its neighbours began completely “unexpectedly.” Yes, there are chronic territorial disputes in Latin America but here, in such a complex situation, they began to crystallize completely unexpectedly and to acquire additional impulses.

Or, for example, the idea began to be clearly promoted that the legitimacy of the elections could be verified only by international observers. Although the people are the repositories of sovereignty under any legislation and any constitution, of course.

One of the main conclusions of the election campaign that has now taken place is this: Venezuela’s electoral system confirmed its democratic nature. The government has also confirmed its democratic nature because despite all the results that went against it, it recognized them without hesitation. The most interesting thing is that all the doubts about the democratic nature of the electoral system that were voiced externally by a considerable segment of countries suddenly and unexpectedly evaporated. And everyone acknowledged everything – without any opinions from the observers.

A new reality has now formed in the country in which the government will have to work in a situation with a parliament in opposition to it. Furthermore, the present opposition in parliament will have a constitutional majority. In our view it is very important that both forces – both the government and the opposition – realize that they bear joint responsibility for the country’s future. The future will show how far the forces that now hold a majority in parliament are ready for this.

A post in parliament gives an opportunity to act differently which includes rocking the boat. This will determine the responsibility of the political force that has declared a readiness to act in the country’s interests by being not simply an opposition but the force which leads the legislative organ of power. Herein lies the main question that we will monitor attentively.

[Question] But, according to our assessments, is the opposition ready for this?

[Answer] An opposition that finds itself in the stage of a political struggle and an election campaign, and a former opposition that bears state responsibility – these are two big differences. The reality is considerably more diverse than the heat of political battles. There were many things including political statements – very heated and harsh ones – too. We shall see what happens in practice.

[Question] Are there some risks for our bilateral agreements with Venezuela?

[Answer] We have a very developed and diverse economic cooperation. Primarily, in the sphere of hydrocarbons but this is not all. There are social and agricultural projects too. They are implemented between economic components so that there is no question of a revision of contracts in this context because parliament does not participate in this. How their implementation is going to take place subsequently in the light of the new realities I do not want to guess but the government remains the same and the president does too. We have state mechanisms of support for such cooperation – there is a high-level Intergovernmental Commission. It continues to operate. I see no complexities here.

The main task – and our interest lies here too – is that Venezuela should turn the page of very active rally-based political battles and jointly embark on the solution of tasks in the interests of the country’s development. Political stability is an undoubted factor for the advancement of cooperation including economic cooperation. We have no agreements with Venezuela that have not been ratified by parliament. As for the revision of the existing agreements – this is hypothetical at the moment.

[Question] And the cooperation in the sphere of military-technical cooperation is not suffering at all? There is talk of the creation of Russian military bases in Venezuela…

[Answer] We maintain contacts in various areas including the military-technical sphere. Our relations in military-technical cooperation are transparent in character and are based on absolutely open and published intergovernmental agreements. They must be mutually beneficial. If the continuation of such cooperation meets Venezuela’s interests we are ready to discuss the corresponding subsequent steps.

As for the question of the bases there is a strange logic here. First there are some information leaks that appear unexpectedly from somewhere. Then they acquire their own inertia and begin to be discussed and the specialists who engage on such questions professionally can only wonder: Where did all this come from? There has never been a question of bases with Venezuela in any form if only because the existence of foreign military bases is not envisaged by the existing Venezuelan constitution and is contrary to it.

Potential for boosting trade

[Question] Against the backdrop of the new economic restrictions that Russia is introducing in connection with the worsening of relations with Turkey, is it expected that commodity exchange with the Latin American countries could grow?

[Answer] Relations with Latin America and furthermore with all the region’s countries are relations that are based on a win-win concept. And whatever the political hue of the government and the alignment of political forces within this or that country, the development of relations with Russia is beneficial to each of them. They note this and stress their readiness to develop such cooperation. None of the Latin American countries supported the policy of sanctions in regard to Russia. Furthermore, they have seen good opportunities in the existing situation for the expansion of their export. And we welcome this line, of course, in light of the policy of import substitution and support for our domestic producers. In those places where domestic producers cannot fill the niche we are ready to help – and such steps are being undertaken actively – to fill the corresponding segment, primarily agricultural, by means of import from the Latin American countries. This refers to meat output, vegetables, and fruit. The Latin Americans are very active here despite the pressure that is being exerted on them by those countries to which the corresponding niches in our market previously belonged.

Despite the complexities that are emerging in our countries in light of the current economic situation we and the Latin Americans are finding forms, including in terms of financial support, that enable progress to be made in technological and investment cooperation projects. Furthermore, both from the viewpoint of our investments in the region and investments by the region’s countries in our country.

Another area is the Latin Americans’ interest in the establishment of contacts with the Eurasian Economic Union. They have clearly seen the opportunities that are shaping up in this connection and at the same time have understood the need for work with the Eurasian Economic Union in the interests of achieving accords, in particular on phytosanitary norms. After all, our phytosanitary norms are determined by the Eurasian Economic Commission so that if there is talk of the expansion of supplies of fruit and vegetables it is impossible to proceed without the Eurasian Economic Union here and contacts with the Latin Americans are already underway in this direction. Memorandums of collaboration have now been signed between the Eurasian Economic Commission and the governments of Peru and Chile. A protocol on trade and economic cooperation between the Eurasian Economic Commission, which acts on behalf of the Eurasian Economic Union countries, and the member countries of MERCOSUR is now being examined by the MERCOSUR partners. Our coordinated position of all the Eurasian Union members has been submitted to the Latin Americans’ examination and we are expecting to arrive at an accord next year. This will essentially be the first document on cooperation between the Eurasian Economic Union and an integration association outside our region.

[Question] And nevertheless after the curtailment of cooperation with Turkey, which countries have expressed a desire to boost supplies to Russia even further?

[Answer] We are talking about commercial contracts. The Latin Americans are attentively monitoring all the conditions that exist in our markets. We shall see from the concrete indicators but the interest that is being expressed and the concrete steps that are being undertaken are obvious.

Colleagues from the Federal Service for Veterinary and Phytosanitary Oversight are working very actively with the Latin Americans.

Argentina

[Question] According to the results of the elections that have been held in Argentina, an opposition has come to power in the country which has brought the “era of Kirchnerism” to an end. As a candidate Mauricio Macri did not rule out that energy projects with Russia could be suspended. Are there now actually signals from the new government about the freezing of such projects?

[Answer] We shall wait for concrete steps and an exposition of the new government’s position on the organization of its international line. We proceed from the fact that our countries are linked by long years of good strategic cooperation which bears a stable character. This year we marked 130 years since the establishment of diplomatic relations which, I want to stress, developed independently of the direction of the governments that were in power. Here is an historical example: In Soviet times the greatest commodity exchange was achieved in the 1980s when there was a military government in power in Argentina which absolutely did not prevent us from intelligently and pragmatically organizing ties that corresponded to the common interests.

Much water has flowed under the bridge since then but our cooperation with Argentina is not short-term in character. In recent years we have taken a considerable leap forward. The accords between us and the Argentine Government correspond to the mutual interests of the two countries’ development. I shall cite an example: One-fourth of Argentina’s electricity is produced using our turbines which have been supplied to this country since the 1970s.

For us the people who have come to power in Argentina are not strangers. If only because it is difficult to develop relations with a country without developing them with its capital and, as is well known, in recent years Mauricio Macri was chairman of the Buenos Aires city government. As an example I shall cite the Matushka Rus [Mother Russia] festival, an extremely wide-ranging and representative festival of Slav culture that is held by our follow countrymen annually on the Buenos Aires streets with the support of the city authorities.

We are ready for cooperation with Macri in his capacity as president of Argentina now. An eminent Russian delegation headed by Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev took part in the transfer of power ceremony. A message from the president of Russia has been sent to President Macri. We are ready for cooperation and further collaboration, primarily at the United Nations and within the G-20 framework.

Judging from the statements that we have been hearing from President Macri and Ms Susana Malcorra, who has been appointed foreign minister, Argentina’s foreign policy postulates remain the same. A change of emphasis is possible but there are constants that the Argentines have had, have, and will have. We are ready to work according to these constants.

I have not heard any statements that the new government is going to suspend energy cooperation with Russia. This is very hard to imagine because, first, I repeat, one-fourth of Argentina’s electricity is produced using Russian turbines and it is necessary to maintain and develop them and build new power stations.

Second, there can be certain nuances, not only stylistic ones, between the statements of a candidate and the statements of a state figure. And we proceed from the fact that Mr Macri apart from being a politician has substantial business experience which is based on the criteria of mutual advantage. And everything that we do in Argentina consists of mutually beneficial projects.

Russia “not trying to compete” with United States

[Question] But nevertheless, the domestic political situation is clearly heating up in Venezuela and Brazil, there has been a change of leadership in Argentina, where the opposition has come to power, and pro-American sentiments are growing in Central America: Is there not a sense that Russia could lose a part of its influence in the region?

[Answer] I do not think that this is how it is. One of the criteria with which we approach cooperation with this region, unlike the way it was several decades ago, is the recognition of its self-worth and our absolutely deideologized position in regard to the Latin American countries. When this was proclaimed in the 1990s it perhaps did not even sound as relevant as it does now. The fact is that the Latin Americans by means of their political evolution, sometimes a very complex and even tragic one, have been able to elaborate approaches that are very important for us.

First, there is the readiness to seek and elaborate joint positions. For all the difference in the hue of this or that government the idea of Latin American unity is a significant factor.

Second, there is adherence to the principle of non-interference in internal affairs and the rejection of coups d’etat as a form of changing power. This is enshrined in the founding documents of all the regional integration associations. The unacceptability of the extraterritorial application of national legislation is added to this. If we look at these positions and at what we are now persistently pursuing within the UN framework, the Latin Americans are our allies. Furthermore, we propose that the principles that they have inscribed in their documents should be universal.

There is a whole series of areas where our cooperation is absolutely pragmatic and mutually beneficial in character. Yes, the intensity of contacts depends on this or that government – we are realists in this regard but we are ready for and open to the development of cooperation with all political forces and they, in their turn, and they really are in the majority in the region, are ready for cooperation with us. These are objective facts and this is not an attempt “to paint” some kind of reality.

[Question] In other words, do you not believe that there is a struggle in progress between the Russian Federation and the United States for influence in the region?

[Answer] I cannot speak for the United States but we have our own agenda in the region. We have our own approach to the Latin Americans and we see that this approach is valued. We are not trying to compete with anyone there – the political, economic, and humanitarian niche in the region is very broad and we have things to offer the Latin Americans.

Cuban-American relations

[Question] Almost a year has passed since the moment of the historic beginning of the process of the resumption of relations between Cuba and the United States, several rounds of consultations have been held, Cuba has been removed from the list of countries that are sponsors of terrorism, and embassies have been opened. Does Moscow also see any movement in the solution of Cuba’s main questions – the complete lifting of the economic embargo and the return of the base at Guantanamo?

[Answer] Indeed, a dialogue has begun between the two countries on various aspects of cooperation and it is proceeding actively. As for the embargo, I believe that many of the emphases in the recent [UN] General Assembly vote on the draft of the corresponding resolution were realistic. Thus despite the mood in favour of cooperation and the broadening of contacts it was demonstrated that by voting against it, the US Administration as such has restrictions on its own freedom of action.

At the same time the election campaign has begun in America and it is not conducive to the solution of questions. Especially since the embargo question is a question of a change in US legislation. Everything depends on the extent to which this step corresponds to the interests both of US business and the development of US relations with Latin America as a whole.

As for the Guantanamo base, this is a topic that Cuba sees increasingly acutely. Politically we support them. As for the legal aspects the Cubans themselves must determine which legal arguments they are going to use to justify this demand.

The main thing is that we believe that the process of normalization is an objective process that we have advocated for a long time and the fact that this has happened signifies the elimination of one of the Cold War relics. The process of the normalization of Cuban-American relations does not cast doubt on the Cuban leadership’s desire for the development of contacts with Russia. We are linked by the fraternal and friendly relations of many years of mutual support and cooperation. I am sure that we have good prospects.

[Question] What top-level and high-level visits are planned for next year?

[Answer] I believe that we must proceed from the fact that top-level dialogue this year was very active. In various formats the Russian president met with his colleagues from Venezuela, Cuba, Argentina, Bolivia, Peru, and Brazil. I believe that next year it is possible to expect the intensive Russian-Latin American political dialogue at various levels to continue especially since in Latin America there will be important international forums including the APEC summit in Lima.