Аннотация: The Monologue about personal impressions about the interview with the Minister
The Monologue about personal impressions about the interview with the Minister
There passed some time after listening of the interview received by "Radio - KP" at the Russian foreign Minister Lavrov.
There are some personal impressions. Perhaps, in some details - not an exact (owing to imperfection of human memory and inaccuracy of perception of information "aurally").
Part of questions were devoted to the relations with Ukraine.
And in the relations with Ukraine - not the last question is the question of a legal status of the Sea of Azov.
Now era of abundance of information. In this sea of information the small fragment sometime appeared: some skilled person, the scientist, the expert in questions of international law, very cautiously estimated the bilateral Agreement on cooperation in the use of the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch (on December 24, 2003).
Let's believe that the status of the Sea of Azov - not a simple question. Quite naturally - at such opinion - to expect that dear Minister will tell during the interview about plans and intentions concerning optimization of the status of the Sea of Azov. And if now no problems with the status of the Sea of Azov, - then he will specify, will explain.
However, the interviewer focuses on various assessments of the Ukrainian authorities. The question is inexhaustible. Many can say a lot on this topic. But, nevertheless, it is a separate topic.
Personally at me as the listener, had an impression that the Minister in general repeated these estimates of the interviewer. Perhaps, I am mistaken?
Perhaps, the words "... it is necessary to be at war" are not from this interview at all? It is clear, that the Minister did not say this phrase, and, probably, could not say. But in this phrase and other phrases there are some estimates, and there is some direction of a thought.
Let's consider that these words (quoted in quotes) have no relation to this interview.
The interviewer very actively stated the position.
If the Minister repeats (let and in other verbal formulations) the opinion of one of interviewers, then this opinion is perceived as a part of a "governmental", official position.
Do not appreciate at us talents. The person works as the journalist, and professional level - like the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs (or is even higher).
Let's consider that somewhere memory was not exact, somewhere the listener (that is I) created the wrong opinion.
We move in reflections further. How to be with the status of the Sea of Azov?
If there are misunderstanding, then they need to be resolved? And how? By diplomatic methods? Or - by some another?
Thanks for the promise: "We will not be at war with Ukraine". But if not to be at war, then - to conduct negotiations, to carry out diplomatic activity?
Or there are other options? Suppose there is an option that the problems are resolved by themselves...
In General, I, as a listener of the interview, did not have any clarity - what the prospects for changing the status of the Sea of Azov does the respected Minister see.
December 19, 2018 06:32
Translation from Russian into English: December 19, 2018 07:25.
Владимир Владимирович Залесский "Монолог о личных впечатлениях об интервью с Министром".