Address by H.E.Mr.Gleb A.Ivashentsov,

Ambassador of Russia

to the Republic of Korea,

at the 5-th Jeju Peace Forum

(Jeju, August 13th, 2009)

 

 

 

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Dear friends and Colleagues,

I am glad to be with you at the 5-th Jeju Peace Forum and to have an opportunity to share with you the Russian vision of promoting Multilateral Security Cooperation in Northeast Asia.

Russia has been, she is and will be an integral part of Northeast Asia. I will add: in no other region are internal and external interests of Russia so interconnected as in Northeast Asia. For the future of Russia as a great power to much extent depends on the economic, technological and social uplift of Siberia and the Russian Far East. To achieve that aim we need the absence of external threats. By Russia’s view such guarantees could be best provided by promoting positive relations with her neighbors.

In that we have made headway. Our strategic partnership with China has become today a factor of global significance. Russia’s relations with Japan are characterized by an intensive political dialogue at different levels. To the DPRK Russia is linked with the Treaty of Friendship, Goodneighbourliness and Cooperation.

The partnership with the Republic of Korea bears an independent value to my country in all aspects – be that political, economic or security considerations.

Russia and the Republic of Korea have common interest in eliminating the war threat in Northeast Asia. The main source of that threat is the more than half-century old military confrontation on the Korean Peninsula presently aggravated by the nuclear issue.

That issue is of a direct concern for Russia as the DPRK conducted its nuclear tests in an area which is located at a distance of less then 180 kilometers from our border. We do not like such a situation. We need neither nuclear and missile tests nor sabre-rattling by anyone at our border. Russia does not recognize the DPRK as a nuclear power and together with the partners in the Six-Party talks tried its best to convince Pyongyng to give up the military nuclear programme.

The DPRK’s recent actions have threatened peace and security in Northeast Asia. Pyongyang should bear accountability for that and the UN Security Council resolution 1874 sent the North Koreans an appropriate message. However we think that it would be counter-productive to undertake steps leading to the de-facto complete international isolation of the DPRK. The restrictive measures in regard to Pyongyang should not infringe the needs of the civil population in humanitarian aid and the economic assistance.

We understand that the DPRK might have certain concerns about its own security, when the factor of force was getting increasingly manifested in the international relations. However we do not view a real alternative to provide her security but along political and diplomatic tracks.

With all our condemnation of the recent missile launches and nuclear test in the DPRK, I would like to note that Pyongyang's actions were not unexpected. The North Koreans had notified about such a possibility a number of times well in advance. Those events were triggered by the disruption of the Six-Party talks and it is not only the DPRK which could be blamed for that disruption. Therefore if we really want to find a way out of the present crisis, it is very important to cut off emotions. We are to thoroughly analyze   all   new   nuances   and   move   forward   while   combining   firmness   and determination with restraint and composure. The recent actions of the DPRK should not be used by anyone as a pretext for a forceful enlargement of own military potential, first of all for building nuclear arsenals, and strengthening military alliances creating lines of division and confrontation in Northeast Asia.

It is necessary to take all efforts to resume the Six-Party talks process and to continue the search for an universally acceptable settlement of the nuclear issue of the Korean Peninsula on the basis of the already achieved accords and taking into account justified interests and concerns of all parties. On the other hand all parties to the talks should fully implement all their obligations in regard to denuclearization as well as in regard to economic compensations. We should also continue our discussions on the draft guiding principles of peace and security in Northeast Asia in the framework of the relevant working group headed by Russia.

In our opinion the solution of the problem lies not in that first to achieve a complete and final nuclear disarmament of North Korea and after that to settle political issues left from the time of the Korean War. There should be a parallel advancing in two directions. First, in the direction of freezing and dismantling of the DPRK's military nuclear programme along with its coming back to the NPT and under the guarantees of the IAEA. And secondly, in the direction of defusing political tension on the Korean peninsula and promoting dialogue between the DPRK and the Republic of Korea as well as with other countries of the region. It is only on such a path that the nuclear issue will be settled strategically and finally.

Russia has been constantly standing in favor of the moves by two Korean states aimed at peaceful unification and is prepared to make its contribution to the cause of inter-Korean normalization as well. To facilitate the process my country had suggested earlier a number of major tripartite partnership projects involving Russia and both Korean states such as linking the Transkorean railway with the Transsiberian railway as well as creating a common electric power grid in Northeast Asia and a pipeline system connecting the Korean peninsula with Eastern Siberia and Russian Far Eastern regions. We are of the firm opinion that the realization of such and similar joint projects on the Korean peninsula with Russia or other international actors not only would bring considerable economic benefit to the participating countries but would also promote mutual trust and confidence which is the most needed for building bridges between Pyongyang and Seoul.   

Common work on long term mutually beneficial joint economic projects is the best way to build mutual trust and confidence. We experienced that in the Soviet times in late 1960-s and early 1970-s. when the first gas pipe-line was laid from the Soviet Union to Western Europe and the West European companies took part in construction of a number of industrial plants in the USSR like the Volga automobile plant by the FIAT company of Italy. Those economic projects largely helped to promote detente in Europe which led to the success of the Helsinki Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in 1975. To take another example from the European developments one can also recall that the first step towards the European Union was made almost sixty years back by creation of the European Coal and Steel Community.

I think that some experience of Europe could be used in Northeast Asia as well. On February 18th the first natural gas liquefaction plant was put into operation in South Sakhalin in the Russian Far East. That plant will deliver to the Republic of Korea 1.5 Million tons liquefied natural gas annually for a period of 20 years. The leading gas companies of Russia and the Republic of Korea, viz “Gazprom” and “Kogaz” have also agreed to prepare a feasibility report on laying a gas pipeline from the Russian Far East to the Republic of Korea.

Big deliveries of liquefied gas from Sakhalin are to go also to Japan and as far as to the Pacific Coast of the United States. The first phase of the oil pipe-line from Eastern Siberia to the Pacific Coast of Russia is under completion. It will end at the new oil port and refinery in the region of Vladivostok. A gas pipe-line will be laid later parallel to the oil pipe-line directed to the Russian Pacific Coast and to China.

          But Russia is not just an exporter of gas and oil. More than a third of the ROK needs in fuel for nuclear power houses are covered by Russian sources. The bilateral cooperation in that sphere may be further expanded. At the Moscow summit in September 2008 the Presidents  of two countries noted that Russia’s proposal to establish the International Uranium Enrichment Center is useful for the sake of nuclear non-proliferation and stable supply of nuclear fuel and agreed to examine the possibility of interaction in that regard. 

                Russia is an important supplier of fuel for Japanese nuclear power plants too. New opportunities in that sphere have opened for my country recently in regard to the USA as well. Russia and China also actively cooperate in peaceful use of nuclear energy. Will you deny the opportunities opening here for enhancing mutual understanding through cooperation in energy?

                Dear friends!

          The illusion of the one-polar world has been irrevocably left in the past. The strengthening of the regional level of global management is becoming a more influential trend of the modern world development.

          Russia welcomes such a trend whole-heartedly, in relation to Northeast Asia as well. I would add: the issues of peace and security have become too fateful these days to remain the monopoly of governments. The broadest political, academic, business circles of all relevant countries should take part in decision-making. It is on such a ground only that a more democratic, a more just, and through that – a more secure international order could be established.

          I am confident that the ideas and suggestions put forward at the 5th Jeju Peace Forum will be taken up by the interested governments to serve as basic elements of future international agreements and will be put to life.

          I wish you all success in your work!

 

 

6