Save a Russian citizen

Speaking at Rashetudei, Minister Lavrov said (by the way, it is possible to check his English) that Russia never denied that it sent additional troops to the border with Ukraine, and added that " if the interests of Russian citizens are directly violated ," the answer will be given "in accordance with international norms." This is where everyone was worried. Because he did not say what such Russian citizens have in mind and where exactly to save them.

In general, this continues the episode that began with Slavyansk ("Easter incident"). Lavrov on Rush will be at the chronological end, and everything began on April 21. As for Slavyansk, Lavrov was clear immediately. According to him, "the authorities of Kyiv do nothing to eliminate the reasons that underlie the current Ukrainian crisis." The explanation was as follows: the attacks of " armed militants in masks, acting absolutely mercilessly, pointlessly, opening fire without warning. In these actions, a desire to provoke a civil war is visible in these actions ."

Well, in general, there is logic, a nuance is who exactly these provocateurs. There was no question for Lavrov: “ Everyone indicates that the Kiev authorities cannot, maybe they do not want to control extremists who continue to“ order music ”.” Specifically: “ The Right Sector has been ruled for almost six months in various cities of the Center and West of Ukraine, and has been trying to spread its influence to the eastern regions using power methods.” Lavrov’s problem was that the topic of participation of the “sector” was not very skillful. Say, Yarosh's business cards, which were magically found there, were printed with a banal mistake.

But such things are not worried. He further said that - he believes - the main proof of the participation of the Russian Federation in the events in the east of Ukraine " This is the presence of Russian weapons in the zones of the conflict. This is a ridiculous argument - there was no other weapon ." Well, this is not the only argument, besides, the weapons are of different modifications, and there the tools that are in service with the Russian army were noticed there, but they could not “stay there”, they were new - which, in fact, was noted by observers.

But this is not important to Lavrov, he had to say (yes, the case was at a press conference following a meeting with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Mozambique Balo) that “ Kiev delays constitutional reform ”, and also-this is just as mysterious about the Russian competence-that “ Kiev’s statements that the Geneva agreements are not extended to the“ Maidan ”are unacceptable . Although the Maidan is now difficult to attribute to the action in which people captured something and demand a referendum.

Lyrical retreat: Geneva and Agreements

Well, Geneva. There, foreign ministers of Russia, Ukraine, the USA and the EU, in negotiations in Geneva, signed a statement to resolve the situation in Ukraine. In general, enthusiasm on this occasion did not look so that it was realized: it was dull agreements, never instrumental. For example, even nothing about Crimea.

It seemed that the West this document is nothing more than a test in order to understand the current intentions of Russia, and then build a further line of behavior. Obama then said that the agreement proposes the prospect of de -escalation, but the question is whether Russia will continue to influence the topic " undermining efforts to restore order in Ukraine ." He already immediately reported that he was discussing the following sanctions against Russia - given the previous actions of Russia, he was skeptical.

The Supreme EU Supreme EU in Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of Azhton then performed from the EU. Well, there were protocol words: " Our main priority was to focus on de -escalation, and together we agreed on some specific steps that can be taken immediately. The word" immediately "is extremely important in this context ." However, she did not try to clarify what time period was meant by her “immediately” - in fact. The document did not even mention the implementation time. The consequences that would arise in case of non -fulfillment were not named. The situation was only recorded as of Thursday. That is, no one in the West did not consider the agreement to be instrumental, suitable for resolving the situation as a whole.

Lavrov, Slavyansk and further

Now the next nuance is further and immediately: Lavrov speaks of the Kyiv authorities, but what then does Russia see its obligations (in connection with Geneva?). From already what he has already said, he follows that he understands the Geneva statement so that all requirements relate only to Ukraine, and Russia signed the document as a country that controls the process. That is, there was already quite further tactics: to use the Geneva agreements as follows: everything that happens in Ukraine is the responsibility of the Ukrainian authorities. Accordingly, you can produce anything, it is supposed to be responsible for the consequences to Ukraine.

The same

After that, US Secretary of State Kerry called Lavrov and “ called on Russia to take specific measures to fulfill Geneva agreements, including openly calling for separatists to leave illegally busy buildings and checkpoints, to go under amnesty and solve exciting issues with the help of politics .” In other words, Kerry did not take Lavrov’s statements seriously that Ukraine was responsible for the same Slavyansk.

Moreover, Kerry added that " the recent statements of Russia, casting a shadow of doubts about the commitment of Ukraine to Geneva agreements, are not true ." Kerry sees the only way to get out of the situation after Slavyansk and Lavrov’s statements that Russia appoints a high -ranking diplomat as soon as possible, who would work with the OSCE mission in eastern Ukraine to give the separatists to understand that Moscow supports agreements and strives for de -escalation . ”

On the same day, the US Vice President Biden, in a press statement after negotiations with Yatsenyuk in Kyiv (yes, he arrived in Kyiv), said that in case of continuing the support of Russia who occupied administrative buildings in eastern Ukraine, Russia will fall into even greater international isolation. His understanding of the situation is expressed in the phrase: " We want Russia to not support people who are hiding behind masks and dressed in military uniforms, and who capture buildings in the east of the country, and we would like to say that the more provocative behavior of Russia will lead to a greater isolation ."

As a way out of the situation, he offers the same thing as Kerry, in other words, this is the consistent idea of ​​the United States: " Now is the time for Russia to start acting .... It is necessary that Russian representatives join the OSCE observers who are now in the east of Ukraine to fulfill" Geneva agreements ", the liberation of buildings, disarmament, and ensure amnesty ."

Actually, the idea of ​​joining Russia to the OSCE mission does not look extremely stringent, but for Russia it means the need to admit that Lavrov misled everyone, and Russian forces acted in Slavyansk. Well, it was clear that there would be no OSCE, but there would be something else.

It is executive, here it is and the other: Lavrov to Rashetudei switched from Ukraine to accusations of the United States of " unwillingness to concede in geopolitical battle ." Eternal topic, reliability itself. In this regard, Lavrov translated the conversation that " the troops of the Russian Federation participate in regular exercises " on the border with Ukraine, to which they have every right. At the same time, he added that " if the interests of Russian citizens are directly violated, I do not see another way out, except to answer in accordance with the norms of international law ." Well, yes: opening the possibility of an option when the troops will be introduced at the request of some Russian citizen living in Ukraine.

Immediately the USA. Lavrov said that US weapons were discovered in Ukraine and (once again) said that " there are several hundred private military organizations called Greystone that arrived in Ukraine from America ." Then, the conclusion followed that “ Ukraine is only one of the manifestations of America’s unwillingness to concede in geopolitical battle ,” after which Lavrov said that “ the matter is not in Ukraine ” and moved to the listing of the sins of the United States in Syria, according to Iran’s nuclear program and so on. The main idea was: " Every time we conclude some agreements, the Americans begin to blame someone else of intentionally delaying the process or, even worse, begin to put forward new requirements that do not meet the consensus achieved. This is what they are doing now in Geneva ."

In general, about the United States, everything is clear here, but why did he not answer about participation in the OSCE mission? This is not an American organization. Well, in the end, Lavrov simply pulls a pause, and how exactly Russia is going to leave this whole story, never can be visible. It’s not in Ukraine, but then.