David Miliband

Visiting Moscow

I will be visiting Moscow on Sunday and Monday at the invitation of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.   This is the first full bilateral visit to Russia by a British Foreign Secretary for five years and forms part of a continuing political dialogue with Moscow - shortly after my visit Peter Mandelson will be hosting Deputy Prime Minister Kudrin in London for the bilateral Steering Committee on Trade and Investment.

We don't always see eye to eye with Russia, but we share the same global challenges and it is important that we work on them together.  And as we are both permanent members of the UN Security Council and members of the G8 and G20, there is a wide range of questions where, by working together, we really can make a difference.  

The wealth of people-to-people contacts and the dynamic business links which have grown between Britain and Russia over the last twenty years make political engagement all the more important. While I am in Moscow  I will be meeting representatives of  Russian civil society  -  I look forward to hearing what they have to  tell  me about the issues which matter to them. 

Posted at 16:13 30 October 2009 by David Miliband  |  Comments[7]

Tagliavini report on the Georgia-Russia conflict

Last week’s publication of the Tagliavini report on the Georgia-Russia conflict is another reminder of the importance of conflict prevention. There are lessons to be learned. The international community should ensure international mechanisms (such as the Geneva process) contribute to solutions, that all parties meet their obligations and, crucially, that those who have committed human rights abuses are brought to justice.

But there are still many issues that need to be resolved. Russia needs to use its influence to allow access for humanitarian organisations and international observers to South Ossetia and Abkhazia – EU monitors are still being barred. And internally displaced persons must be allowed to return home – over 30,000 are still unable to.

To progress, we also need to build confidence between the parties. That is why I applaud the success of  a package of joint Russia-UK-Georgia over-flight missions that was completed last week under the auspices of the Open Skies Treaty (a military treaty unrelated to commercial Open Skies arrangements). These flights showed that progress can be made on arms control treaties even amidst the most trying circumstances. It is testament to the professionalism not just of British forces, but of their Georgian and Russian counterparts, that the missions went so smoothly.

Posted at 17:20 08 October 2009 by David Miliband  |  Comments[2]

Trade up

In the blizzard of briefing for the G20 summit and associated bilaterals I was informed that despite the recession UK exports to Russia grew by 46 percent in 2008. Pretty extraordinary and good. Trade with Russia is beneficial to us both.

Posted at 10:47 01 April 2009 by David Miliband  |  Comments[3]

Human rights in Russia

A spokesperson for the OSCE has said the failure to try those who murdered Anna Politkovskaya signals "a human rights crisis" in Russia  Tanya Lokshina of Human Rights Watch in Moscow has also written powerfully about this case

In November, when I spoke at the Wilberforce lecture , where Anna Politkovskaya was given a posthumous medal for her contribution to democracy and human rights, I said that journalists like her are footsoldiers in the fight for freedom.  That another Novaya Gazeta journalist, 25 year-old Anastasia Baburova, was murdered only last month, indicates that the risks remain. Women like Politkovskaya and Baburova should never have had to become soldiers in such a literal sense.

At the same time there's been some commentary in the FT  and Huffington Post on the language Medvedev has used since Baburova's death. They suggest we are now seeing a shift of tone from inside the Kremlin. This is welcome.

Posted at 10:58 02 March 2009 by David Miliband  |  Comments[3]

Russia: Present, ish

My session at the Munich Security Conference was entitled "Nato, Russia, Oil and Gas".  John McCain pulled out because of the Senate's debate of the UK Stimulus Package.  But I was sorry that Russian Deputy Prime Minister Ivanov shifted from this session to a discussion on disarmament.  It left the panel without a Russian voice - other than the speaker in the audience who complained about the lack of Russian representation.

I said in my speech that we had to have the confidence to be clear in our own principles but also understand how Russia saw things if we were to find a way to shape a non zero sum relationship.  Vice President Biden touched on this in his speech which managed to be forceful and humble at the same time.  I agree with Andrew Kuchins and Samuel Charap in the IHT that the economic recession increases the potential for Western/Russian cooperation.  It would be the ultimate irony if nuclear disarmament through restarted US/Russia talks provided the salve for the US/Russia relationship .
 

Posted at 11:04 09 February 2009 by David Miliband  |  Comments[7]

Thankfully...August is over

It must be a western conceit to think that just because we are on holiday in August there should be fewer crises in foreign policy. Sure enough, August is usually full of crises: coups, scares etc. We go on holiday; we jet back from holiday. Why do we even think that two weeks could go by without a problem?

This year has proved no different. And the Georgia crisis is a real crisis. The European Council meets today in emergency session for the first time since September 11 2001. Over 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.

But the rupture in international norms is more significant. 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. As Fareed Zakaria cleverly points out in Newsweek, Russia's actions in Georgia are a potentially serious strategic blunder: Europe has been united by Russian action; trans-Atlanticism 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 America 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 in the FT 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.

Posted at 21:51 01 September 2008 by David Miliband  |  Comments[27]

Mediation or pressure?

The vote at the UN yesterday on Zimbabwe was not a North/South split - after all Burkino Faso voted for the resolution. But it did reveal, in the use of the veto by Russia and China, two different ways of thinking about the exercise of responsibility in the modern world.

The argument at one level was about whether to give mediation "longer". But how much longer? And how much more suffering in the interim?

But there is a more fundamental point - or two actually. First, since when does pressure on a regime that has been flagrant in its abuse of human rights and democratic standards undermine mediation? Surely it brings home much more clearly that the world is determined to tilt the balance away from a government that has forfeited international respect? But second, the argument of China and Russia was that the Security Council had no business "interfering" in a national issue. But the crisis in Zimbabwe has gone way beyond that - not least through three million plus refugees caught up in the violence fleeing to South Africa (see above "If your neighbour's house is on fire" of 8 July).

The Russian and Chinese vetoes have shielded Robert Mugabe and 13 of his top supporters from international pressure. Their preferred route of mediation will have the chance to prove itself - too late for too many but no one will be happier than I if I wake up one day soon and find that this route has delivered a government that respects the March 29 election result.

Meanwhile the governments of western and other democracies should have no regrets about bringing into the open a vital debate. The alternative is for the threat of veto to mean we all clam up and pretend that there is no disagreement. That is not real diplomacy.

Posted at 18:19 12 July 2008 by David Miliband  |  Comments[8]

Iran: Nuclear Ball in their Court

At the beginning of May I chaired a meeting in London to agree a renewed offer to Iran of economic and scientifitic (including civil nuclear) cooperation if they would suspend uranium enrichment to allay fears of it being used for nuclear weapons. This package has now been delivered in Tehran. You can read it here

I would emphasise the comprehensive nature of the package; the unanimous view of the EU 3 plus the USA, Russia and China in support of the package; the difference it would make to the Iranian people; and the fact that the ball is now in the Iranian court.  The Russian government is delivering nuclear fuel to the Bushehr plant for civil nuclear purposes; we support this; it shows the possibilities of cooperation; but that requires openness and transparency.  This is a good place to start.

Posted at 10:40 16 June 2008 by David Miliband  |  Comments[1]

From Russia

I joined hundreds of Brits (and foreigners) for the late night opening of the From Russia exhibition at the Royal Academy on Friday. I think it is great that the exhibition of the unique combination of four Moscow and St Petersburg collections has come to London, and the response of the public (as well as the fabulous layout by the Academy) has spoken for itself.(I was lucky enough to visit the astonishing State Hermitage musuem in St Petersburg when I went there in 2001.)

The exhibition covers a febrile cultural (and political) period spanning the last quarter of the 19th century and the first quarter of the 20th.  It speaks to state as well as private passion for art and collecting as well as the strength of Russian culture and its openness to the outside world (especially the rest of Europe: see below). The diversity as well as the continuities from impressionism through to cubism (to "suprematism" - I am ashamed to say I had never heard of this movement) are beautifully laid out.

I suppose one striking point through all the changes is the cultural engagement westward - especially to France (there are beautiful pictures of Paris) but not only there. It's a good reminder about the common historical and cultural reference points, as well as the distinctive parts of Russian history and culture.

Dead in the Water?

The European Council on Thursday/Friday actually achieved something - including some BBC red faces after morning news programmes announced that the UK had "lost" in its argument for the Commission to look at varying VAT rates for environmentally friendly goods - fridges, light bulbs etc. I think the phrase used in the morning on the radio was "dead in the water".  Mark Mardell's blog is decently up front about this - though I am told it was not him who said 'dead in the water'.

But the wider point is why is every European Council turned into a great battle of rebuffed (in this case not) British initiatives. I am sure people can find instances when the government has not covered itself in glory but there must be a better way to report things.

Actualy there is a real discussion - not Britain versus the rest but about whether it pays or loses to be leaders in the environmental race to low carbon.  This is in fact a proxy for the wider debate about how to win/lose from globalisation. But the rise of 'green protectionism' - resisting regulation and standards on the grounds that the pollution will come from elsewhere if it does not come from us - is both real, pointing to real issues, and a real problem.  One thing that will kill hopes of a global deal is if Europe goes soft on its commitments - and as the communique said on Friday a global deal is the best way to prevent the 'leakage' of carbon from one polluting continent to another.

The pain of globalisation is immediate and visible and the benefits medium term and invisible but if you are not a leader you are a loser.

Serbia's Choice

"Kosovo made a historic choice for independence last month.  Serbia will soon have a chance to make its own historic choice - either for a better future as part of the EU or for isolation, stagnation and decline". So said the International Herald Tribune on 13 March - and it is right.

Longer standing readers will remember the last Serbian election - for the Presidency.  Now the government has been dissolved and there are to be Parliamenary elections.  This matters. Serbia's future depends on stability in the western balkans and its engagement with the European Union and voters supported that in February. Kosovo does not change that.  Nor does it change the need for the EU to continue to reach out to the whole of the western balkans including serbia.

The determination of the Kosovo authorities to follow through on the Ahtissari principles respecting minority rights - nine of the 39 key acts of parliament are underway - is wecome and is contributing to stability in Kosovo. That needs to be matched by all concerned.

Posted at 12:11 17 March 2008 by David Miliband  |  Comments[9]