Стр. 31 - V

Упрощенная HTML-версия

http://interaffairs.ru
Russian ministries and government agencies, need to get used to the fact that on certain issues,
the Russian side alone is not competent to make decisions. This is difficult, but it is essential to
accept it and learn to make collective decisions, naturally, taking into account both national in-
terests and controversial issues. Disputes proceed at the level of experts, deputy prime ministers
and heads of government, who meet on average every three months. The most complicated is-
sues are addressed at the presidential level.
Sergey Ordzhonikidze
,
Deputy Secretary, Public Cham-
ber of the Russian Federation (Russia):
I would like to
focus on the situation around the integration
processes in the CIS space and the political situation
in our country and other CIS countries, because this
clearly underlies the integration processes that we will
discuss. Some serious changes have taken place on
the international arena recently.
I would like to say a few words about the EU, because
the integration processes there began much earlier. Let's see how we were able to collaborate
with the EU. Initially, in the 1990s and the early 2000s, the EU evolved largely as an autonomous
association. However, then NATO solidarity came into play through the mechanism of the mil-
itary-political bloc, and the EU countries started increasingly gravitating towards the Big Brother.
As a matter of fact, they were forced to do so. Meanwhile, our country repeatedly proposed to
the EU a constructive program on the entire range of issues both in the military and political
sphere, including the creation of a single and undivided European security system, and on eco-
nomic issues.
Recent reports on the creation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) as the world's largest trad-
ing bloc with the participation of 11 countries are disturbing. This accounts for about 40% of
global trade.
Remember when NATO was founded in 1949, the first proposal put forward by the Soviet gov-
ernment was to join it. However, at the time they said "no" to us, because NATO with our par-
ticipation would make no sense. Perhaps the Transatlantic and Trans-Pacific partnerships should
be viewed from the same position, too? It is important to note that if only recently a policy of
open confrontation with Russia was followed in the EU space over the events in Ukraine and in
Syria, today, society, primarily the business community, increasingly believes that this is a road
leading to nowhere and that the EU countries should cooperate with Russia. In particular, there
have been several visits by EU members of parliament to Crimea in breach of EU rules and the
policy of their own national governments.
G. Muradov:
We say that Ukraine has fallen victim to the Eastern Partnership program and I
believe that this situation will be repeated in other CIS countries. However, if we are civilized
integration associations and if our partner behaves in this way, why cannot we respond? For ex-
ample, invite Greece or some other countries to join the Eurasian Union. In my opinion, we do
not have a coherent strategy as a counterbalance to the options proposed by our opponents -
i.e., the European Union or NATO. The question is: Are we going to develop this kind of strat-
egy?