Following his talks with Chairman
of the State Affairs Commission of the Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea Kim Jong-un, Vladimir Putin answered media questions.
April
25, 2019
12:45
Russky
Island, Vladivostok
1 of 6
News conference following
Russian-North Korean talks.
President of Russia Vladimir
Putin: Good afternoon,
I suggest that we go straight
to questions and answers. I will try to answer your
questions. Go ahead, please.
Question: Mr President, this was your
first meeting with Kim Jong-un. There is significant interest towards him
as a person around the world. Could you share with us your
impressions about him as a person and a politician,
and whether you are satisfied with the outcomes
of the talks?
Vladimir Putin: Yes,
my colleagues and I are all satisfied with the outcomes
of the talks. Chairman Kim Jong-un is quite an open person
and speaks freely. We had a very detailed conversation on all
items on our agenda and discussed them in various aspects,
including bilateral relations, sanctions, United Nations, relations with
the United States, and, of course, the denuclearisation
of the Korean Peninsula, which is the main subject. I can
confirm that he is quite an interesting and substantive interlocutor.
Question: Mr President, coming out
of these talks, what in your opinion are the real prospects
for denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula and for Pyongyang
and Seoul to improve their relations? What needs to be done
to achieve this? What steps need to be taken and what barriers
will have to be overcome? What prevents the parties from reaching
common ground?
Vladimir Putin: The most
important thing, as we have discussed today during the talks, is
to restore the rule of international law and revert
to the position where global developments were regulated
by international law instead of the rule of force. If this
happens, this would be the first and critical step toward resolving
challenging situations such as the one on the Korean
Peninsula.
So, what is denuclearisation all
about? It implies North Korea’s disarmament to a certain extent.
Naturally (I have noted this on numerous occasions and can
confirm this once again), the North Korean side is also talking about
this. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea needs guarantees
of its security and sovereignty.
But what guarantees can there be,
except those based on international law? We can think about international
guarantees, and this would probably be correct. But these guarantees also
lie in the sphere of international law. Therefore we will not
invent anything new here.
How substantial will these guarantees
be, and to what extent will they meet the interests
of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea? It is still too
early to talk about this today, but it is necessary to take
the first steps towards strengthening trust. To my mind, this
seems possible on the whole.
It was possible as far back
as 2005, when the United States and North Korea signed
the relevant treaty and agreement. For some reason, our American
partners suddenly decided that the provisions stipulated
and coordinated by the United States were not exhaustive,
and that it was necessary to add something else there. These aspects
were included in the treaty, and North Korea immediately
withdrew from it.
If we act like this, and if we
take one step forward and two backwards, then we would fail
to achieve the desired result. But it will eventually be possible
to achieve this goal, if we move forward gradually and if we respect
each other’s interests (here I am talking about all the parties
involved in resolving the North Korean problem
or the denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula), if we move
ahead carefully, and if we respect each other and each other’s
interests.
Question: Could you please tell
us if you are planning to inform Donald Trump of today’s meeting
or discuss the results of the talks with your other
colleagues, due to gather in Beijing tomorrow? To what extent do
Russia’s and US efforts correlate on the Korean track,
and do the interests of our countries regarding
the situation around the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
coincide?
Vladimir Putin: They coincide
in some respects.
Of course, I will certainly
speak with the leadership of the People’s Republic of China
in Beijing tomorrow. But we will also discuss this matter and today’s
meeting with US leadership in the same open and candid manner.
There are no secrets here; Russia always voices an open position, there
are no conspiracies. Moreover, Chairman Kim Jong-un himself asked us
to inform the US side about his position, about his questions arising
in connection with processes on the Korean Peninsula
and everything taking place around this. Therefore, I repeat, there
are no secrets here. We will also discuss this with the Americans
and our Chinese friends.
Regarding your question
as to whether our interests coincide with those
of the United States on this issue, I can say that this is
also true. For example, we advocate complete denuclearisation: this is
a fact. Actually, we completely oppose the global proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction. And that is why
a considerable share of steps within the framework
of the United Nations is being coordinated. True, we will not conceal
the fact that the sides often wrangle over specific clauses while
making the decisions, and you know this well. But, naturally, we
prioritise efforts to reduce the threat of nuclear conflicts;
this is our common priority.
But I have the impression
that the North Korean leader also shares this viewpoint. All they need is
national security guarantees. Everyone must think about this together.
Question: During Kim Jong Il’s
rule, Russia planned to build a gas pipeline to South Korea via
North Korea and to upgrade railways in the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea. But many of these projects are
in limbo because Pyongyang now faces sanctions. Did you discuss these
projects with Kim Jong-un? Is the Russian side interested in these
projects today?
Vladimir Putin: I spoke
about this. We have been talking about this matter for many years. This
includes direct railway traffic between South Korea, North Korea
and Russia, including our Trans-Siberian Mainline, opportunities
for laying pipelines – we can talk about both oil and gas,
as well as the possible construction of new power
transmission lines.
All of this is possible.
Moreover, in my opinion, this is also in the interests
of the Republic of Korea, I have always had this
impression. But, apparently, there is a shortage of sovereignty
during the adoption of final decisions, and the Republic
of Korea has certain allied obligations before the United States.
Therefore, everything stops at a certain moment. As I see
it, if these and other similar projects were implemented, this would
create essential conditions for increasing trust, which is vitally needed
to resolve various problems.
North and South Korean railways
have linked up not so long ago. In principle, there is a connection
to Russia already. So far we have been unable to operate trains
there, even in the test mode. We will work on this steadily,
intensively and patiently. I hope that we will be able
to accomplish this someday. The sooner we do this, the better.
Question: Is Kim Jong-un ready
to continue contacts with the United States of America?
And what is the North Korean leader’s mood?
Vladimir Putin: First
of all, he is determined to defend his country’s national interests
and to maintain its security. If North Korea’s partners (I am
talking about the Americans, in the first place) voice
a desire for constructive dialogue, then I believe that it will
eventually prove impossible to do without talks. As I see it,
there is no other way. But you had better ask him about what he can
or cannot agree to.
Question: Has the topic
of North Koreans who work in Russia been raised during
the talks? They are supposed to leave our country, but they do not
want to. Thank you.
Vladimir Putin: Yes, we talked about
this. There are several different options here. There are humanitarian issues,
and there are issues related to the exercising of these
people’s rights. There are smooth, non-confrontational solutions. I must
say that the Koreans work well for us, never giving the local
authorities any trouble. They are very hardworking people, law-abiding
and disciplined. We discussed it.
Question: In the 2000s,
there was a six-party format for mediating the Korean issue,
and the parties even managed to achieve some agreements.
However, for obvious reasons, the format has now been suspended. Do
you think it makes sense to revive it under the current conditions?
Vladimir Putin: I do not know
whether this format should be resumed right now, but I am deeply convinced
that if we reach a situation when we need to work out certain
guarantees for one of the parties, in this case, security
guarantees for the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, then
international guarantees will have to come into the picture. It is
unlikely that agreements between two countries will be enough.
But ultimately, it is up
to the country that it primarily concerns, so it is primarily up
to North Korea. If that country deems guarantees only from the United
States or from its southern neighbour, South Korea, the Republic
of Korea, to be enough – well, good. If this is not enough,
which is more likely, I think, and if we get to that
at all, which we would like very much, then this six-party talks format
will certainly be highly relevant to develop a system
of international security guarantees for North Korea.
Question: Mr President, yesterday you
signed an executive order introducing a fast-track procedure
for issuing Russian passports to Lugansk residents. Are you aware
of the fact that the response around the world and in Ukraine
to this initiative was overwhelmingly negative? By doing so, aren’t
you provoking the country’s new president, Vladimir Zelensky?
Vladimir Putin: Are you saying that
there was a negative response? It is strange when decisions of this
kind are met with a negative response. Let me explain. Poland, for example,
has been issuing identity cards to ethnic Poles for as long
as ten years, I think, since 2009. Hungary and Romania went
as far as give away passports to ethnic Hungarians
and Romanians, respectively.
In this connection there is
a question: are ethnic Russians living in Ukraine worse than
Romanians, Poles or Hungarians, or Ukrainians who live there but feel
an unbreakable bond with Russia due to various circumstances (family
ties, mixed marriages or other considerations)? I do not see anything
extraordinary in this regard.
Moreover, when other countries
neighbouring Ukraine have been doing the same for many years, why
should Russia refrain from taking the same steps, especially since people
living in Donetsk and Lugansk republics are in a much more
challenging situation than the ethnic Poles, Romanians and Hungarians
living in Ukraine? In fact, they face a lot of hardship.
They are deprived of the most basic human rights, for example
in education. They even have problems moving around Ukraine or third
countries, and even in Russia. Sometimes they cannot even buy
a plane or train ticket. This is beyond all reason.
As for provoking anyone,
the government and I personally are far from provoking anyone.
The question of passports is a purely humanitarian issue
and nothing more. As for the current Ukrainian authorities
and those set to replace them, both the outgoing
and the incoming leadership, as far as I know,
and judging by their public statements, have never intended
and will not sign off on an amnesty bill. They do not intend
to recognise the special status of the Lugansk
and Donetsk people’s republics. These are the key provisions
of the Minsk Agreements. This means that they do not intend
to implement the Minsk Agreements.
But what about the people who
live there? Will they be abandoned? Will they continue to live
in complete isolation? After all, it was not Russia that isolated them,
but the Kiev authorities. We were not the ones who did it. This also
directly contradicts the Minsk Agreements. They have not restored
anything, neither the economic ties, nor financial relations. Nothing.
In addition, these people face humanitarian issues. It goes without saying
that we cannot stand by and just let it be this way.
That said, provoking anyone is not
what we are after. If Ukraine’s incoming leadership finds the courage
to implement the Minsk Agreements, we will facilitate these efforts
and will do everything to bring the situation back
to normal in southeast Ukraine.
Question: To continue
on the subject, what is your general assessment
of the election in Ukraine? What do you think about
the development of Russian-Ukrainian relations with the new
President?
Vladimir Putin: I do not
know. It will depend on the policy pursued by Ukraine’s new
political leadership. We want and are ready to restore these
relations in full but we cannot do it unilaterally.
As for my assessment,
what is there to assess? This is a complete failure
of Poroshenko’s policy. Complete and absolute. I am sure that
the new authorities are bound to understand this. They are well aware
of this. Let’s look at their first steps at least. Understanding
is one thing but adopting a realistic policy in the interests
of one’s nation is another.
Question: To continue
the topic of your executive order, Poroshenko is now trying
to rally his partners to convene the UN Security Council.
As for the Western reaction, the term of “territorial
integrity” is being used. Does your executive order concern Ukraine’s territorial
integrity because the President that is still in office qualified it
as an attempt at annexation and formation
of a Russian enclave on Ukrainian territory?
Vladimir Putin: Look, I think
I have already answered this question. When other neighbouring states
issued passports, there were no attempts to submit this question
to the UN Security Council. But why are they being made in this
case? What is the difference? There is none at all. The only
thing is that people living in the Lugansk and Donetsk people’s
republics are in a much worse position. This is a humanitarian
issue. Well, let him submit it and we will discuss it.
At one time Mr Poroshenko
suggested there should be a UN presence on these territories
for protecting and ensuring the security of OSCE observers.
We agreed but our Ukrainian partners instantly rejected the idea. They
demanded more than that, notably, that everything should be transferred
to the UN forces. This is a separate issue and it may be
discussed. However, this is not a desire to resolve the issue
through dialogue with the people who live on these territories. These
are all attempts to bend them in this or that way,
to resolve these issues by using force, either directly
or indirectly, and, in effect to settle the legitimacy
issue with regard to the government produced by the coup
d’état.
Thank you. I wish you all
the best.
See also
April
25, 2019
No comments:
Post a Comment