Burning Issue: Is the EU right to imposesanctions on Russia over events in Georgia?

Published on Tuesday 2 September 2008 22:27

Yes DAVID MILIBAND Foreign Secretary

The European Council met on Monday in emergency session for the first time since 11 September, 2001. More than 100,000 Georgian refugees have joined the 200,000-plus left over from the civil wars of the early 1990s. That is reason enough to say there is a crisis.

As recently as April, Russia supported a UN Resolution affirming the territorial integrity of Georgia. Today it is occupying and recognising two breakaway states. Talk about unilateral use of force without UN cover.

Many people have made the point that "we" need Russia – if not for gas then over Iran or Afghanistan. This is true. But Russia needs "us" too. Russia's actions in Georgia are a potentially serious strategic blunder: Europe has been united by Russian action; transatlanticism revived; and China alienated. Not a clever day's work.

I do not celebrate this breach. Russia's integration into global economics and politics is actually the best hope for a country losing population at Russia's rate.

Europe and the United States have not rushed thoughtlessly into action. We will be deliberate and effective in choosing the right ways to react to Russia's actions. In the short term we support democratic and sovereign countries, starting with Georgia, which need economic and political help. In due course we will raise the costs to Russia of such behaviour.

This isn't about winning or losing, as the Russian foreign minister pointed out two weeks ago. What we want to see is Russia on a different course, not Russia ground down.

A weak Russia is as little in our interests as an aggressive one.

No

SERGEI LAVROV

Russian foreign minister

David Miliband declares the need to review relations with Russia in international institutions, mentioning the G8, the Russia-Nato Council, Russia-EU relations and Russia's upcoming entry into the OECD. Russia is interested in partnership in these and other structures to the same extent that our western colleagues are interested in this. The trouble is that a tendency has recently begun to show itself in the G8 and in the Russia-Nato Council and in our relations with the EU, when a bloc is built against Russia.

Mr Miliband starts by saying that "the Georgia crisis has provided a rude awakening", and declares that "the sight of Russian tanks in a neighbouring country on the 40th anniversary of the Prague Spring" has shown that "the temptations of power politics remain". Surely, you as the ones watching the events know that it was not at all the "appearance of Russian tanks in a neighbouring country", but the attack by the Georgian army using Grad volley-fire systems, aviation, and artillery on the peaceful city of Tskhinval that triggered all these events.

The question addressed to us by Mr Miliband concerns the need for Russia to clarify its attitude to the use of force to solve conflicts. I have already answered it. We are against the use of force to settle conflicts everywhere, including in Yugoslavia, in Iraq and also in Iran, where there is no conflict, but there is more and more talk going on about this. We are against the use of force both in the Middle East and in the Caucasus region. It is Mr Saakashvili who is for the use of force to settle conflicts in violation of all the agreements that bear among others the signature of the Georgian leadership.