America can go for a new "reset" of relations with Russia, but under certain conditions. According to IA TASS, the ex-Secretary of State announced this yesterday during the presidential election debate in the Democratic Party. Hillary Clinton.
She, as one of the participants in the pre-election race, was asked if she was ready - if she becomes president - to press the "reset" button in relations between the two countries, as it was in March 2009. The answer was purely pragmatic - it all depends on what "we (the United States) get for it." As an example, Clinton recalled that seven years ago, the United States was able to obtain permission from the Russian Federation for the transit of military cargo to Afghanistan, concluded an agreement on the limitation of nuclear weapons, and agreed on sanctions against Iran. That the symbolic red button, then presented in Geneva by the US Secretary of State to the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, as a sign of a reset in relations between Moscow and Washington, turned out to be with a spouse, she did not mention.
However, a minor incident (the button said "reset" in English, and "overload" in Russian) ended up being prophetic. Clinton then promised Lavrov, who drew her attention to the incorrect translation, not to allow an "overload" in Russian-American relations. But then there was Libya, Syria and Ukraine ...
Naturally, you ask yourself: does Russia need a "reset-2" today? Yes, even on the almost ultimatum conditions of Washington?
- Let's start with the fact that Hillary Clinton is the leader of the Democratic Party. And the Democrats, even during the 2008 election campaign, admitted that America is not omnipotent. He cannot lead the world alone, '' says Sergei Samuilov, head of the Center for the Study of US Foreign Policy Mechanisms at the Institute of the USA and Canada of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
- Therefore, in order to solve global and regional problems, cooperation with other states is necessary. Or, as they put it, "building partnerships." Clinton herself, when she was Secretary of State, as I remember, in the summer of 2009 declared that “we must move from a multipolar world (even then the White House administration recognized that the world had become multipolar) to a multiparty world. During Obama's first term, more or less all of this was being implemented. And then came the Ukrainian crisis. And the "reset" with Russia was buried.
"SP": - But not through our own fault. We made contact. And the Americans behind our back prepared a coup d'etat in Ukraine. As a result, we have today an "overload" of relations, not a "reset" ...
- By the way, the incident with the button, which then took place at the meeting between Lavrov and Clinton, testifies to the very low level of American diplomacy. We could not accurately translate one word into Russian.
And the fact that Clinton did not rule out a second "reset" is, in a sense, a continuation of the Democrats' policy of pragmatism. Republicans are not like that. They do not recognize that America is not in a position to single-handedly rule the world. They believe that she can do anything.
"SP": - Clinton set conditions. What did she mean?
- It is difficult to say specifically what it may require as payment for the next reboot. But in recent years, a very serious debate has been going on in the United States about the fact that the geopolitical role of Russia and China has sharply increased in the world. Therefore, I do not exclude that they will strive to do everything so that within the framework of this polycentric world the role of Russia and China does not increase so much.
I will dwell on just one example. The other day literally there was information that a new bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, began operating in the PRC. In our government, they say that this is not an alternative to the generally recognized IMF and World Bank, which are de jure UN bodies - that is, international. This is an addition to them. However, it is clear to everyone in the world that this is real competition. It is not difficult to guess what its meaning is: the IMF and the World Bank are only de jure UN bodies, but de facto the United States dominates there.
China, India and Russia will play the main roles in the new Asian Bank. These are the main donors, sponsors, etc.
And if Clinton becomes president, she will, of course, strive to ensure that this bank is not too much of a competitor to the IMF and the World Bank. This means that it will exert pressure on both China and Russia.
At the same time, I do not think that it will start supplying arms to Ukraine. What exactly will a traditional Republican do if he comes to power? In this case, the resumption of a full-scale war in the East of Ukraine is quite possible. And then our leadership will have no choice but to really send troops and liberate these areas entirely from Kiev.
"SP": - But the current rhetoric of Mrs. ex-Secretary of State is not peaceful either. Speaking of the "reset," she said Washington should not allow Russia to take, as she put it, "a more aggressive position in Europe and the Middle East." That is, when we defend our national interests, they call it aggression. When they begin to impose their own on the world, this is the promotion of democratic values.
- For them, this is a normal world order. In relation to us, to China, to other countries, of course, this world order is discriminatory. It ensures the dominant role of the United States, and of Western civilization in general. This is the norm for them. But when we resent, or China, and create some kind of alternative (as with a new bank) structures, they naturally perceive this as an encroachment on normality. And they are presented (and will be presented) as aggression, or a manifestation of some kind of imperial ambitions.
"SP": - At the same time, on a mutually beneficial basis, they do not offer to come to an agreement, but again they set conditions ...
- Here we must proceed from the civilizational mentality. The attitude of Western civilization towards non-Western states is chauvinistic. And Russophobia in general is a centuries-old psychological basis of the West's self-awareness.
But where their interests coincide with ours, they will go to cooperation. They agreed, with the mediation of Russia, on Iran's nuclear program. And now - after the lifting of sanctions - Iran will soon enter the market with its oil. Which, in general, is not very good for us, since the price for it will fall even more.
"SP": - Or maybe, on the contrary, we finally get off the raw material needle ...
- Of course. But this will take several years. Although they already admit that their sanctions against Russia have not worked. After all, what did they want?
From the point of view of Western psychology, the main thing for a person is material well-being. They thought, they say, “we are now worsening the material well-being of tens of millions of Russians, they will be indignant. Protests will start. This intractable power has been overthrown. Someone accommodating will come. " The opposite happened. What is this talking about? This suggests that they absolutely do not know our history. Our mentality is not understood. And most importantly, they do not want to understand.
In this regard, Democrats are still smarter than Republicans.
"SP": - Let's say. But do we need a new "reset" on Clinton's terms?
- “Restart” is only a clear slogan. I would say we need to act pragmatically - where interests coincide, we need to cooperate. And Putin said, and Lavrov, and Medvedev, that we are ready to cooperate where interests coincide. And where they diverge, you need not to aggravate the relationship. So that the sphere of disagreement and confrontation does not grow to such an extent that it could crush the sphere of cooperation. A reasonable balance is needed here.
Therefore, in principle, we do not need this "reset" as a handout from the United States. You just need to show pragmatism. Where interests coincide, there is cooperation. Where they diverge, seek compromises.
Political scientist and publicist Leonid Krutakov believes we have a lot to learn from the Americans:
- How tough and consistently the United States defends its interests around the world can probably be credited to them. God grant that our country also always pursues its own interests.
If at the negotiations we defend our positions and clearly outline the lines beyond which Russia will never retreat, then, perhaps, the agreements will be more firm and tough. And not like under Gorbachev, when we gave half of Europe and surrendered the Warsaw block just like that, you live well. For a promise, which, it turns out, was not even legally recorded - I mean NATO's advancement to the East.
"SP": - What does Clinton mean when he talks about his interest?
- And the interests of the United States are more or less clear. The first is to turn Ukraine into a territory that will never cooperate politically with Russia under any pretext. Second, remember Obama recently said that America is the only country that has to set the rules of business conduct. All this is obvious. And we see this from the signed Transoceanic Partnership and the planned Transatlantic Trade Partnership.
What are they willing to sacrifice in this position in order to come to an agreement with Russia? I honestly. I don't see what they can fundamentally sacrifice here. Because there is too much at stake in this game for the United States.
Recently ex-head of the US Audit Office David Walker stated that America's external national debt is not $ 19 trillion, but $ 65 trillion, including all liabilities, including insurance, domestically. 65 trillion is the amount that America has already climbed into the future. That is, in the future, profits are divided and assigned, and to refuse them means to get massive bankruptcies.
It is difficult to imagine what they can offer Russia in this structure. Maybe they will promise once again that Russia will be included in the global American project and will receive its share from this. That is, a share of the rent, as she received at high oil prices, when they were $ 135 per barrel. Because high oil prices, first of all, hit the economies of China and Europe. And the oil-producing countries actually made a profit on this. Maybe ... But I don't think that a repetition of this combination is now possible.
- I don’t know how to “reboot”. But negotiations, of course, are needed. Otherwise, if there is no dialogue, it means war. I don't think there is any interest in the war on their part, or on ours. Therefore, we need to negotiate. Moreover, without Russia, which has a nuclear and military-technical potential comparable to America, it is impossible to resolve world issues.
And just security issues have come out on top today. Therefore, Clinton, as a politician and a contender for the presidency of the United States, could not fail to note that she would definitely try to find common ground with Russia. If you do not look for them, then the world will just slide into hell
Whether they can find it, this is a rather complicated question, in my opinion.
ALL PHOTOS
The first meeting between Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, held in Geneva on Friday, turned into a curiosity that can be called symbolic. According to Interfax, Clinton gave Lavrov a souvenir in the form of a button on which the Russian word perezagruzka, a symbol of new relations, was to be written in Latin. However, an error crept into the word on the button. The written word looked like this: peregruzka. RIA Novosti notes that in English this word - reset - was spelled correctly.
“You wrote it wrong, there should be a reset, not an overload,” the Russian minister corrected. Nevertheless, as reported by the agencies, both foreign ministers pressed the souvenir button. And Clinton laughed and promised that she would try to avoid an "overload" in Russian-American relations.
Lavrov and Clinton held their first full-fledged meeting on Friday at the InterContinental Hotel in Geneva to discuss the future foundations of Russian-American relations. The main topics were missile defense, strategic offensive arms, the Iranian nuclear dossier, interaction in Afghanistan and the Middle East, settlement of the nuclear problem of the Korean Peninsula, non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the fight against terrorism and drug trafficking.
Following the meeting, the heads of the foreign ministries gave a joint press conference, during which they expressed satisfaction with the "very productive" dialogue and hope for continued interaction on a number of bilateral and global issues.
"On issues where there are differences, we will work honestly and openly," said Clinton. "Both sides are ready for this kind of work. Today we have an excellent chance to build relations, a chance that cannot be missed," RIA Novosti quotes the Secretary of State. ... She added that both countries are aware of their responsibility for what is happening in the world.
Lavrov, for his part, noted that after negotiations with Hillary Clinton, they had an excellent personal relationship. He also allowed himself to joke once again about the confusion in the spelling of the word "reset", noting that at least one practical result had already been achieved at the meeting: "We agreed how the reset should sound both in Russian and in English. No discrepancies. ", - he said.
The parties were confident that they would still be able to find a common language
Speaking about the problems of missile defense and strategic offensive arms, Lavrov expressed his conviction that the United States and Russia can find a common language. "I am sure that we are quite capable of reaching a common denominator, and perhaps with some advantage for our strategic relations - on the issue of strategic offensive arms and missile defense. I note the readiness of our American partners for dialogue," he said.
In his opinion, the United States is ready to take into account Russia's interests when addressing these issues.
Earlier, the American side admitted the possibility of changing approaches to the issue of the deployment of missile defense elements in Europe, and Hillary Clinton, before the Geneva meeting, declared that the United States was interested in cooperation with the Russian Federation in this area.
The head of American diplomacy informed that "during the talks, an agreement was reached to expand cooperation in resolving the issue of strategic offensive weapons." “We also agreed to reduce the number of nuclear weapons and strengthen the non-proliferation regime,” she added.
Answering the question whether the parties will be able to agree on a new agreement on strategic offensive arms before December 5, 2009, when the term of the current document expires, Lavrov and Clinton expressed their mutual readiness to do everything to reach an appropriate agreement.
"The issue of a new treaty on strategic offensive arms is a high priority for our government," Clinton said. "Instructions have been given to start work on this issue immediately. We want to reach a new agreement by the end of the year."
The parties also touched upon the existing problems associated with the threat of violation of the nonproliferation regime. In particular, the Iranian nuclear program was discussed in detail at the meeting. In this regard, Clinton indicated that Washington is "considering potential steps to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons" and "will do everything possible so that it does not support terrorist organizations."
In the meantime, she continued, sanctions against Iran "will continue."
At the same time, Clinton assured that the United States is ready to conduct an open dialogue with Russia on this issue. "Unity in approach to Tehran's nuclear program is very important," she said.
On the occasion of the meeting, security measures in Geneva were strengthened
Increased security measures have been taken in Geneva in connection with the meeting between Clinton and Lavrov. Many streets of the city were blocked, and a large number of policemen were observed.
Journalists who walked into the hotel to attend the press conference faced the same stringent security measures as, for example, when boarding a flight to the United States.
There was a dog in the hotel building, which sniffed the bags of some journalists for explosives. Metal detectors were also installed there, personal belongings were not only shown through, but also carefully examined by the security personnel.
at. She was supposed to symbolize a new start in the relationship, however
the inscription in Russian on this very button was made with an error. Instead of the word “reset,” there was “overload”, which later gave experts many reasons to joke that the new policy was doomed at the start.
True, having learned from her Russian colleague about the mistake, Hillary Clinton found something to answer: "We are resetting, and because of this, both I and Minister Lavrov will be overloaded with work."
Both sides were ready to improve relations, which were not going through the best times at the end of the US president’s presidency. The climax was the clash between Russia and Georgia during the Georgian-Ossetian conflict, which in the United States, regardless of Tbilisi's actions, was considered Moscow's aggression.
In those days, Obama, who criticized his predecessor's policies a lot, really wanted to improve relations with Moscow. In the 2010 National Security Strategy, Russia, along with other members, was noted as a country that is one of the "key centers of influence" in the world.
“We had a long list of priorities, and those were specific goals that we set out in the early months of the Obama administration. We did some, and it was a period of good collaboration, ”McFaul recalled.
By accepting the "reset", Russia also accepted a number of American proposals. In particular, Moscow agreed to help Washington in the delivery of goods to Afghanistan, imposed sanctions against Iran, and also signed an offensive arms limitation treaty with Washington in 2010.
In turn, the United States facilitated Russia's admission to the World Trade Organization (although many today call this step controversial), made certain changes to plans for the deployment of missile defense in Europe, lifted sanctions on a number of Russian defense companies, and also stopped so obsessively promoting expansion plans in the post-Soviet space.
“I was present during most of the president’s meetings with both Putin and Medvedev, and I don’t remember talking about NATO expansion - this issue seemed closed,” McFaul recalled.
However, by pressing the "reset" button, Russia and the United States were unable to get rid of the burden of accumulated problems overnight, and it seems that they did not strive for it. Moscow believed that the "reset" would give it some freedom of action in the post-Soviet space, while Washington, in turn, believed that Moscow would turn a blind eye to US actions in other countries of the world.
At the same time, reports began to appear in the American expert community in which it was said that the United States should stop trying to remake Russia, and cooperate with it on a mutually beneficial basis. One of them was prepared by a group of American political scientists led by former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, later chapter.
In contrast, they proposed recognizing that US interests are not always identical to those of Russia, and also warned Obama about the need to avoid turning the US into an instrument of blackmailing Moscow by the post-Soviet states.
Today this report looks almost like a fantasy novel, but then the parties were really ready to move on to greater cooperation.
However, this did not happen - tactical interaction gave way to new contradictions. If the spy scandal of 2010 with the arrest of "sleeping" Russian intelligence officers could be survived, then the events in Libya gave impetus to a significant deterioration in relations. After Russia refrained from vetoing the no-fly zone in Libya, the United States decided to use the opportunity to air strikes on that country. Washington's goal was to help radical rebels who fought against the Libyan leader.
The then prime minister of Russia, Vladimir Putin, called the US actions a "crusade." Obama himself subsequently described the Libyan operation as the "biggest mistake" of his presidency.
In his latest book, From the Cold War to a Hot World, McFaul notes that after the 2012 elections, Vladimir Putin changed Russia's foreign policy vector.
He writes that when he was appointed ambassador to Russia in 2011, "the situation was frozen." Putin has already announced his return to the presidency, and McFaul himself notes that the Russian leader "had little enthusiasm" for the "reset." “I became an ambassador for pushing the reset, and instead I presided over its demise,” the diplomat writes.
Some experts from the American side believe that the "reset" ended immediately after Putin's return to the presidency, others that it was influenced by the case of Edward Snowden, who arrived in Russia in 2013. The situation forced Obama to cancel his visit to Moscow, although after that the parties were able to agree on the elimination of chemical weapons in Syria - perhaps the latter "forgive" the "reset" policy.
The "reset" idea would later receive a lot of criticism on both sides of the Atlantic, recalling unfulfilled hopes and exaggerated expectations.
Many will remember the wrong inscription on the button, and the fact that Hillary Clinton, unloved by many in Russia, pressed it. However, later, the Deputy Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation will say that the "reset" "had positive results." True, at the same time, in 2014, he said that he did not expect a new "reboot". Although the fact that a new "reset" is possible, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said in 2016: "Well, it depends on what we get for it."
Her predictions were not destined to come true: Clinton lost the election to Donald Trump, who promised his own "reset" - to get along with Russia and with Putin, for which he himself would be called a "Russian agent."
At the same time, the relationship became worse than ever, reaching in ten years the very "overload" about which the button warned. Now those who like to “reboot” relations will have to wait at least until the 2020 elections. There is a possibility that a new president will emerge in the United States, and perhaps new ideas will be proposed in the event of his re-election by the President of the United States. Perhaps it will do and. The main thing is to check that everything is correctly written.
The main world news of this Saturday: it was already night in Moscow, when in neutral Geneva, after their first direct talks, Sergei Lavrov and. There are no figures yet, but it looks like Moscow and Washington will come up with a new treaty on the reduction of nuclear weapons this year. This may be deceiving, but Russian and American officials have not smiled at each other for a long time.
This, perhaps, was - after all, it began with a gift.
- We tried very hard to write this word correctly in Russian. We made it? Hillary Clinton asked Sergei Lavrov, showing him her gift - a big red button with the word "overload" written on it.
- No, you wrote it wrong. It should say "reboot", not "overload".
And then there were two hours of already very serious negotiations and a press conference at which both ministers said: now we know how and what should sound in Russian and in English.
- Madam Secretary, first of all, thank you for the wonderful gift that you presented to your Russian colleague. I'm sure the journalists here liked him very much, as well as he did. The question is: the Russian word that was written on the button - there was a small mistake - the word means "overload". Do you think that Russian-American relations are overloaded with problems?
- In a sense, the word that was written on the button is also true. We are rebooting, and because of this, I and Minister Lavrov will be overwhelmed with work.- answered Hillary Clinton.
- This interaction includes very different topics: we paid special attention to the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, - Sergey Lavrov picked up.
Among other topics - NATO expansion, the situation in the South Caucasus, the problems of the Korean Peninsula, the Middle East, Afghanistan, where both the Americans and NATO really need Russian assistance in the form of cargo transit. The same Afghanistan that Sergei Lavrov mentions last in his speech, as it were for a reason.
At the same time, along the way, the Russian minister notes that the other day Afghanistan will be discussed at the SCO conference in Moscow, where the first violin, in fact, is played by Russia and China, which are much closer to Afghanistan than from America. And besides, Iran's nuclear ambitions. Sergei Lavrov was asked about the sale of S-300 air defense systems to Tehran.
But on the whole, it is difficult to remember when Russian and American diplomats so often began to answer questions with the words that they agree with each other.
"We think this is truly a new beginning - not only to improve our bilateral relations, but also in terms of joint leadership in the world," said Hillary Clinton.
- Sergey Viktorovich, have you already pressed this button? If not, when will you click, and what will the Russian-American relationship you seek after clicking this button look like?
- Yes, Hillary and I pressed this button, as you saw - this button is large, it is red, and I hope that Russia, the United States, and all other countries will never press another button, the button , which was previously associated with the beginning of a destructive war. We will press the button to restart constructive interaction.
Still, pressing the "reset" button turned out to be a very successful metaphor - both sides are now ready to press the button, without even delving into what is written there. And although after these negotiations, at first glance, there are not so many concrete results - there is a lot of determination to achieve them - the next chance will be at the first meeting of Medvedev and Obama at the summit in London. Until now, they have only managed to exchange messages.
During the week, there was a lot of speculation about what kind of messages Presidents Medvedev and Obama exchanged. But we managed to find out that these days correspondence with the United States was carried out from one more Moscow, or rather a Moscow region address. It turns out that Naina Iosifovna Yeltsina is still in correspondence with Hillary Clinton.
“I congratulated her on the high status that she now has in the country. It seems to me that she will work with dignity. And she is a very serious person. I think she will represent her country with dignity, "Naina Yeltsina said in an interview with Sergei Brilev.
GENEVA, 7 Mar - RIA Novosti. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are pleased with the results of their first talks, which took place on Friday in Geneva, and look forward to continuing dialogue and interaction on a number of bilateral and global issues.
The first meeting between the heads of the Russian and US foreign ministries lasted a little more than the planned two hours and took place against the backdrop of Washington's declared desire to "reset" relations with Moscow, which were badly spoiled during George W. Bush's eight-year stay in the White House.
At a press conference following the talks, Clinton called the meeting "very productive."
Among the main topics of cooperation, the heads of diplomacy of the two countries named the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan, settlement in the Middle East, as well as the problems of the Iranian and North Korean atom.
"On issues where there are differences, we will work honestly and openly. Both sides have shown a willingness to do this kind of work ... Today we have a great chance to build a relationship, a chance not to be missed," Clinton said, adding that both countries are aware of their responsibility for what is happening in the world.
“In addition to the problems to be solved, we talked about purely practical issues that should facilitate contacts between citizens on environmental protection issues,” the Russian Foreign Minister said in turn.
In addition, according to him, the United States and Russia are interested in bringing economic relations to a new level.
Lavrov also noted that after negotiations with Hillary Clinton, they had "excellent personal relations," expressing the hope that the US Secretary of State would agree with him.
The US and Russia hope to reach a new START agreement by the end of the year
The United States and Russia have agreed on a work plan to reduce strategic offensive arms and nonproliferation issues, Washington hopes that by the end of the year it will be possible to agree on a new START agreement, said US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
"Indeed, we discussed the issue of control. This is part of the agenda ... We intend to prepare a document by the end of the year. This is a high priority for us," Clinton said.
According to her, the United States and Russia have already identified some elements of a new treaty on strategic offensive weapons.
Lavrov, in turn, also expressed confidence that Russia and the United States will reach a new agreement on strategic offensive arms by December 5 this year, when the current treaty on the reduction of strategic offensive arms expires.
"We will do everything to achieve the goal set," he said, noting that the United States is ready for a dialogue on strategic offensive arms, taking into account Russia's interests.
The current Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) expires on December 5, 2009. It was signed in 1991 by the presidents of the USSR and the United States and obliged Moscow and Washington to reduce their strategic nuclear forces from 10,000 warheads on each side to 6,000.
Iran is one of the main topics of negotiations
According to the heads of the foreign affairs agencies of the two countries, one of the important topics of the talks was the Iranian theme.
Lavrov stressed that Russia does not violate international obligations on the supply of weapons abroad, including to Iran, and in military-technical cooperation with Iran, Moscow takes into account the concerns of the United States and Israel.
"Issues of military-technical cooperation with Iran and other countries are resolved exclusively in the legal field, in accordance with Russian export legislation, which is one of the most stringent in the world, as well as in accordance with international obligations," the Russian minister said.
"We only supply non-stabilizing, defense weapons," Lavrov said, adding that he would like the same restraint with regard to those countries that have recently used offensive weapons near Russian borders.
In his opinion, the way to remove such concerns lies through the intensification of work on the proposals of the "five plus one" group on Iran. These proposals provide for the beginning of an equal dialogue with the participation of all countries of the region on the issue of ensuring sustainable security.
Clinton, in turn, said that the United States does not intend yet to abandon unilateral and multilateral sanctions against Iran.
"We discussed the issue of Iran in great detail. We are currently reviewing (foreign policy). We would like to know how to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and end support for terrorism through Hamas and Hezbollah," the secretary of state said.
According to her, the United States will be glad to hear advice and suggestions from Russia regarding new approaches to this problem.
For his part, Lavrov said that Russia is very pleased that the Obama administration is ready to listen to the views of other countries, including Russia.
Stabilization in Afghanistan is a common challenge
Sergei Lavrov called the stabilization of the situation in Afghanistan a common task for Russia and the United States.
"We agreed that we will contribute to the success of the conference on Afghanistan under the auspices of the SCO, which will be held in Moscow on March 27, as well as the conference to be held at the initiative of the United States at the end of March in Europe on Afghanistan," he said.
Kosovo and Georgia remain problematic issues
Kosovo and Georgia remain problematic issues over which the US and Russia have not yet managed to overcome their differences.
"Kosovo is definitely one of those problems on which we still have serious disagreements," Sergei Lavrov said, stressing that Moscow still considers the unilateral declaration of Kosovo's independence to be illegal. The Russian minister recalled that Serbia has applied to the international court on the issue of Kosovo independence, and added that Russia will express its opinion in this court.
In turn, Clinton named Georgia among the problems on which Washington and Moscow still have serious disagreements. According to her, in this region "it is necessary to reduce the level of violence and promote the Geneva process."
One bottom line at the meeting has already been achieved
As Sergei Lavrov noted, despite the "burden of problems", one practical result has already been achieved at the meeting.
“We agreed on how the reset should sound in Russian and English. No discrepancies,” the minister joked, referring to the incident with the souvenir presented to him - a red button to “reset” relations.
As it turned out, the button says "reset" in English, and "overload" in Russian. After Lavrov's explanations, the Secretary of State laughed and promised that she would try to avoid an "overload" in Russian-American relations.
Continuing the linguistic discussion on this issue, Clinton noted that the word "overload" is also correct to some extent. “We're going to be overwhelmed in terms of work,” she said, adding that this is a very big agenda.
Lavrov agreed with Clinton, saying: "The load is huge, but there is no desire to get rid of anything. The agenda is heavy, but one should not compare it with the stone that pushed Mount Sisyphus. We will definitely master this stone."
He also expressed the hope that the "red button" they pressed would not be compared to another "red button" that was previously a symbol of the possible start of a destructive war.
"We will press the button to reset our constructive relations," the Russian Foreign Minister stressed.
