We Can Tell The General Public That

I Do Not Even Know Where Bill Clinton Delivered His Speech And I Know Nothing About Any Funds. Both Parties Simply Use It As A Tool In Their Internal Political Contention, And I Am Sure It Is A Bad Thing. But Again, We Welcome The Fact That Somebody Expresses Readiness To Work With Russia Whatever The Name Of That Person.

Some Years Ago Our Japanese Counterparts Asked Us To Resume The Discussions Of The Issue And So We Did Meeting Them Halfway. Over The Passed Couple Of Years The Contacts Were Practically Frozen On The Initiative Of The Japanese Side, Not Ours. At The Same Time, Presently Our Partners Have Expressed Their Eagerness To Resume Discussions On This Issue [the Kuril Islands].

However, There Is A Fundamental Difference Between The Issue Related To Japan's History And Our Negotiations With China. What Is It All About? The Japanese Issue Resulted From World War Ii And Is Stipulated In The International Instruments On The Outcomes Of World War Ii, While Our Discussions On Border Issues With Our Chinese Counterparts Have Nothing To Do With World War Ii Or Any Other Military Conflicts. This Is The First, Or Rather, I Should Say, The Second Point.

At No Time In The Past, Now Or In The Future Has Or Will Russia Take Any Part In Actions Aimed At Overthrowing The Legitimate Government. I'm Talking About Something Else Right Now - When Someone Does This, The Outcome Is Very Negative. Libya's State Is Disintegrated, Iraq's Territory Is Flooded With Terrorists, It Looks Like The Scenario Will Be The Same For Syria, And You Know What The Situation Is In Afghanistan.

The Ability To Compromise Is Not A Diplomatic Politeness Toward A Partner But Rather Taking Into Account And Respecting Your Partner's Legitimate Interests.