<- Rgb material-img: art | <- If boilerplate - - derive zagssylku!>! swig: /blocks/main/b-material-img/swig/b-material-img_art.swig | data: /blocks/rgb/data/rgb.js–>
ex-ambassador to Russia, the US, the president of the Russian Paralympic Committee Vladimir Lukin Photo:. Vladimir Trefilov / RIA Novosti
<- / rgb material-img:! art ->
Vladimir Petrovich, you expect that the referendum will lead to a similar result?
Vladimir Lukin: To tell the truth, no. But this is not due to the fact that I completely reject such a possibility, and that the human head is so arranged: accustomed to a more or less rational decisions. And the world is full of irrational decisions, and sometimes explosive. Therefore, most of the major events and the referendum and the decision to exit, of course, a very large event, perceived by many people, including a professional engaged in international affairs as some exception to the rule. But such exceptions occur periodically. So I took the opportunity, but he thought that she was in this particular situation is premature.
From your perspective, as it is now will develop?
<-! Incut b-read-more_large -> <-! Noindex ->
read also
<-! / noindex -> <-! / incut b-read-more_large ->
Vladimir Lukin: Of course, this is not a final decision. After the ruling circles – and Great Britain, and other countries, and not only in Europe – get used to it, recognize and analyze what happened, will search for ways how to mix, somehow dissolved in conversations, in poluresheniyah and chetvertresheniyah. It is always so. But the situation is complicated because there is a referendum referendum. And Britain has Britain. And it is in the last 600-700 years, accustomed to democracy and the law. And the result of the referendum is legally erase nobody can. Another thing is to create prerequisites for the new round of negotiations. Already we are talking about the enormous complexity of the release process, that for two years, at least, need to ensure that legally competent and properly organize the separation. I think that during this time will be offered the options of a new agreement with Great Britain, which will give it some advantage and create opportunities for a new referendum. The process of pupation and the bureaucratization of the expression of the will necessarily will occur.
But behind all this lies another serious problem, and the question has not changed and whether the world to which we are accustomed to from the mid 50-ies of the last century, when the great creation of the EU initiative was proclaimed and began to be implemented? Had he changed radically? And if the referendum does not represent a new political balance of power and the new market situation, which only resemble the old European combinations, schemes and diplomatic-political shows? It is a further transformation of most of the British Empire. On the one hand, they say now about the New Globalization of its policy, that the country has a lot of interest and in addition to Europe, America and Asia. Really. After all, Britain – a country with a strong tradition of global
.
And what dangers lurk for most UK’s decision to withdraw from the EU?
Vladimir Lukin: First and foremost, there is the threat of disintegration of the country, will be a referendum in Scotland, which I do not like the decision. There is a chance that Northern Ireland and Wales, not wanting to say goodbye to Europe, may choose a way out of what was left of the British Empire. But there is another story, which is not clear how it will develop, which will swing the British pendulum towards continental integration or towards the base of the former colony of the Union – the United States and Canada? Now it is very difficult to say.
What will Europe do now?
<-! Incut b-read-more_large -> <-! Noindex ->
read also
<-! / noindex -> <-! / incut b-read-more_large ->
Vladimir Lukin: Old Europe is between two fires. Between the fire, which appeared for the Channel Tunnel, and the fire that is raging in Eastern Europe. From my perspective, this situation raises the question of the integrity of the European Union in the form in which it existed since the mid 50s. To some extent, what is happening now, it’s wrong to charge for the chosen strategy of recent decades. After all, the European Union has begun with the dilemma: expanding and deepening. After much hesitation, was elected intensive strategy and the forced expansion. It has led to a huge gap between the idea of integration and the real possibilities of completely disintegrated and heterogeneous newly adopted EU countries. It turned out that London had to pay for it to Berlin and to some extent, Paris became the center of a larger Europe. At the time, Henry Kissinger famously said: “Well, there is the European Union, and where the phone where you can call?” Things reached the point that they began to look for the single phone. And he was not in London.
The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom David Cameron certainly knew about the risks, about which you are told. What made it all the same to go to a referendum?
Vladimir Lukin: Cameron took the risk in an environment where even in his own party he did not have a dominant position, not that of society. I do not think that his personal political career will continue. However, he has already declared his resignation. Negotiate with the EU is already someone else. Who! This is very interesting, as well as whether the European Union is now the core wants to make any major concessions to London, when they themselves is a huge impact – and the German Government, and the French, and the government in The Hague. After all, we will focus on the one who will now pay for the European Union and can be done so that London was paying little or nothing?
The issue that is discussed not only in political circles but also in the kitchens of ordinary Russians: the effect on our country a referendum in the UK
?
<-! Incut b-read-more_large -> <-! Noindex ->
read also
<-! / noindex -> <-! / incut b-read-more_large ->
Vladimir Lukin: there is a very interesting situation for us. By and large, I think that England made a historic choice between Europe and America. He gives us a unique opportunity of long-term, strategic nature. We – the country is definitely a European culture, European civilization. One of the largest on the European continent. The attitude of England towards Europe has always been very specific. And attributing it to the European continent were often ambiguous and strongly conditioned by many circumstances. So for us, and to what extent the European Union’s core offer is very serious and a new opportunity to seriously get back to a single formula of continental Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals, and then to Vladivostok.
It has been clearly formulated in the 1990 Charter of Paris, when the wall between Russia and Europe was destroyed in the literal and figurative sense. But this idea did not develop for many reasons. In particular, due to the wrong strategy of rapid expansion of the European Union and NATO. The desire to take advantage of the moment led to a loss of integrity, to the destructive processes.
Now the British people the solution opens, ironically, to Paris and Berlin, the positive and constructive alternative to the European Union: to increase incentives to create an axis Moscow-Berlin-Paris. This line of events is quite possible, but only through a serious analysis of serious errors and omissions in both Europe and Russia. First of all, in terms of definition of global and regional priorities.
<-! Incut b-read-more_large -> <-! Noindex ->
read also
<-! / noindex -> <-! / incut b-read-more_large ->
No matter how much we do not say that Russian global country, Europe is a traditional, geopolitical, historical and cultural her priority. On the other hand, if you think strategically, the categories of decades, a strong European influence in the world of the future is possible only if it is united from the Atlantic to the Urals. And England has always been considered and will be considered as a continuation of America in Europe. Therefore, I believe that we are opportunities that can be realized only if we clear the way for a deep, strategic conversation with Berlin and Paris. Of course, this conversation can not be diversified, affecting not only the foreign policy aspects. And I have a feeling that we have now become more active effort to do so.
You have almost answered one of the issues of common concern: why a referendum in the UK reacted the global economy, and the dollar pulled up? Who won cost?
Vladimir Lukin: The United States decision to complicate the political life of the English people. US does not want the deterioration of relations with Europe. After all, so far as England, relatively speaking, chooses American orientation, in Europe there are more incentives and more opportunities to create their own center of power in a multipolar world. And America perceives this, I think, is ambiguous.
The referendum is like someone or not, did the common people, which is still far from global policy. What they do not suit the EU that are most frightened? Really only migrants?
Vladimir Lukin: People are angry, firstly, the fact that they have to pay for some very general things and principles. It’s hard to accept the British taxpayer. The second factor – workers. Yes, the world is changing, and this process does not stop. But the pace of change is no longer able to perceive everyday psychology of people who are used to a certain way of life, culture and environment. There was a contradiction that was the motive of the crisis.
<-! Incut b-read-more_large -> <-! Noindex ->
read also
<-! / noindex -> <-! / incut b-read-more_large ->
And the third. I would say that this is a classic English traditionalism. And the feeling that not all decisions relating to England, made in England – very painful. “England – this is a great country we have global interests, we have, in the end, Australia and Singapore, and we want to feel a world power, and not part of a powerful new region where solutions do not accept us.!” – Talk like that about the English inhabitants
.
It can be said that the United Kingdom itself did not surprised “Brekzitu”?
Vladimir Lukin: UK no. Surprised England, which greatly underestimated the centrifugal tendencies.
To some it seemed that the deputy of the House of Commons Joe Cox killing Englishmen turn towards the EU …
Vladimir Lukin: Of course, it’s murder shook the British. But the major decisions taken before the voters of this event. I think that it could not radically affect the choice of this kind, because it is a historic decision, not situational. Although the situation is terrible.
You say that to take decisions against the EU has pushed the British economy. But is it profitable to traditional industrial English counties? Where they will do with their products, if not in the European Union countries?
Vladimir Lukin: The strength of the British economy is not in the industry and in the financial, scientific and technological capabilities. In the United Kingdom, apparently hoping that the British power factors will increasingly manifest itself in other regions outside the European Union. And this hope is to some extent justified.
Is Britain its position weakened against the anti-Russian sanctions?
Vladimir Lukin: I think that in matters of the British sanctions will focus on the alliance with America. Hopes that the sanctions will share much of Europe and Britain, Europe and America can hardly be justified.
But this is only sanktsii- topic of the day, and we talk about the “anger of the century”.
No comments:
Post a Comment