0:00:00 > 0:00:04Now on BBC News: HARDtalk.
0:00:08 > 0:00:10Welcome to HARDtalk, with me, Sarah Montague.
0:00:10 > 0:00:14Just a few months ago, Russia was congratulating
0:00:14 > 0:00:19Donald Trump on becoming president, and expressing the hope that
0:00:19 > 0:00:24both countries would take their relationship
0:00:24 > 0:00:27to a whole new level.
0:00:27 > 0:00:30Now, Moscow's relations with the US and the West are so bad
0:00:30 > 0:00:36that the Russian Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev talks
0:00:36 > 0:00:38of them as "ruined".
0:00:38 > 0:00:40That was after America's response to the recent
0:00:40 > 0:00:42chemical attack in Syria.
0:00:42 > 0:00:45But even before that, there was the stand-off in Ukraine,
0:00:45 > 0:00:47and accusations of Russian interference in American elections.
0:00:47 > 0:00:50Now there are fears the Russians could meddle in the French elections
0:00:50 > 0:00:52and other European votes this year.
0:00:52 > 0:00:55My guest is Vladimir Chizhov, Russia's ambassador to the EU.
0:00:55 > 0:00:59Will Russia promise not to pervert democracy in Europe?
0:01:29 > 0:01:31Vladimir Chizhov, welcome to HARDtalk.
0:01:31 > 0:01:33Thank you.
0:01:33 > 0:01:34France's Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault has
0:01:34 > 0:01:42accused Russia of meddling in French democratic life.
0:01:42 > 0:01:43Is that true?
0:01:43 > 0:01:44Of course it's not.
0:01:44 > 0:01:53Well, I'm afraid that this wave of anti-Russian rhetoric
0:01:53 > 0:02:00has become contagious, and has spread across
0:02:00 > 0:02:07the Atlantic Ocean.
0:02:07 > 0:02:10That's very bad for our relations with our countries involved,
0:02:10 > 0:02:15but I think it's bad for those countries themselves,
0:02:15 > 0:02:20including their democratic procedures and processes.
0:02:20 > 0:02:23But the accusation is being levelled against Russia for a reason.
0:02:23 > 0:02:26If we look at some of the things that are being said...
0:02:26 > 0:02:28Richard Ferrand, who is Secretary General
0:02:28 > 0:02:33of Emmanuel Macron's En Marche, Onwards Party, said that
0:02:33 > 0:02:39their campaign was being hit by hundreds, if not thousands,
0:02:39 > 0:02:48of attacks probing their computer systems, and that was coming
0:02:48 > 0:02:49from locations inside Russia.
0:02:50 > 0:02:53Well, in the modern world, you can never be sure where hacking
0:02:53 > 0:02:56attacks are coming from.
0:02:56 > 0:02:58There is no technical possibility of tracing anything.
0:02:58 > 0:03:02So, this is not a piece of hard evidence, by any means.
0:03:02 > 0:03:11But you can follow, you can, via the technology, follow
0:03:11 > 0:03:14where attacks are coming from.
0:03:14 > 0:03:20Emmanuel Macron's campaign say these attacks are coming from Russia.
0:03:20 > 0:03:22Well, that's an allegation that I wouldn't accept
0:03:22 > 0:03:30without any hard evidence.
0:03:30 > 0:03:33OK, what about the accusation of fake news that is
0:03:33 > 0:03:34being spread by Russia?
0:03:34 > 0:03:37Again, Richard Ferrand says two of the big media outlets belonging
0:03:37 > 0:03:40to the Russian state, Russia Today and Sputnik,
0:03:40 > 0:03:43spread fake news on a daily basis, they are picked up, quoted
0:03:43 > 0:03:50and they influence democracy.
0:03:50 > 0:03:58Well, I believe that those news outlets have been so successful,
0:03:58 > 0:04:05to the chagrin of their competitors among the Western media.
0:04:06 > 0:04:11That has been the case, because they have been providing
0:04:11 > 0:04:17alternative angles of the same events, and giving the floor
0:04:17 > 0:04:20to people, including many Westerners, who were willing to put
0:04:20 > 0:04:28forward their own views, which would, in some cases,
0:04:28 > 0:04:32contradict the so-called mainstream.
0:04:32 > 0:04:36But it's, in some cases...
0:04:36 > 0:04:39It's things that are wrong, they are saying things that
0:04:39 > 0:04:40are factually incorrect.
0:04:40 > 0:04:44Take a headline, they had to be picked up on it
0:04:44 > 0:04:47by France's polling commission, suggesting Francois Fillon,
0:04:47 > 0:04:50somebody who has in the past spoken very positively about Russia...
0:04:50 > 0:05:02Sputnik said he was at the head of the polls, and the polling
0:05:02 > 0:05:04commission said that's not true, that actually a poll
0:05:04 > 0:05:06is defined by law in France.
0:05:06 > 0:05:08They were improperly calling it a poll when it wasn't,
0:05:09 > 0:05:11and they shouldn't be saying things like that.
0:05:11 > 0:05:13Well, it's an expression of free press.
0:05:13 > 0:05:15Isn't that one of the main European values?
0:05:15 > 0:05:27If you compare the amount of fake news that are addressed
0:05:27 > 0:05:29to Russia from the West, that's incomparably more.
0:05:29 > 0:05:32And I would say to that, that anybody has a right to have
0:05:33 > 0:05:36one's own view on what the outcome of a future election would be.
0:05:36 > 0:05:46But this is something different, isn't it?
0:05:47 > 0:05:49You seem to be saying, and let's be clear, these
0:05:49 > 0:05:52are organisations that are owned by the Russian state,
0:05:52 > 0:05:54"it's fine if they say things that are wrong",
0:05:54 > 0:05:57is that your situation?
0:05:57 > 0:06:04Well, I'm not saying...
0:06:04 > 0:06:07First of all, what makes you so sure that they are wrong?
0:06:07 > 0:06:10Secondly, they have a right to say that.
0:06:10 > 0:06:11If you want to challenge that...
0:06:11 > 0:06:12Francois Fillon...
0:06:12 > 0:06:14This is a matter of fact, Francois Fillon was not
0:06:15 > 0:06:17at the head of the polls, he was way behind.
0:06:17 > 0:06:21So why, if they say something that's wrong and they are picked up on it
0:06:21 > 0:06:22by the polling commission?
0:06:22 > 0:06:26If they were wrong on that one, well, perhaps they might wish
0:06:26 > 0:06:29to apologise, or present some facts that would support
0:06:29 > 0:06:38the point of view.
0:06:38 > 0:06:43But the Russian government has nothing to do with that.
0:06:43 > 0:06:47The difficulty is that both these two organisations,
0:06:47 > 0:06:53the information they are releasing appears to be things that either
0:06:53 > 0:06:58support the conservative candidate, or the far-right candidate,
0:06:58 > 0:07:01the Front National of Marine Le Pen, and damage Emmanuel Macron.
0:07:01 > 0:07:06For example, it was down to Sputnik that there were stories that came
0:07:06 > 0:07:09out suggesting that he had a gay relationship outside his marriage.
0:07:09 > 0:07:13He actually had to come out and say: "that's not true".
0:07:13 > 0:07:21Well, what would you say if, in the view of the upcoming British
0:07:21 > 0:07:27election, those two outlets support Theresa May and the Conservatives?
0:07:27 > 0:07:31On the candidates in the French election, who is it that you want?
0:07:31 > 0:07:34Would you like Marine Le Pen to win the French election?
0:07:34 > 0:07:38We would like France to come out of this election
0:07:39 > 0:07:45without undue politicisation of the French society.
0:07:45 > 0:07:58Which means what?
0:07:58 > 0:08:00Would you like Marine Le Pen to win?
0:08:00 > 0:08:03Well, I am not a French voter, so I wouldn't
0:08:03 > 0:08:04want to speculate who is best.
0:08:04 > 0:08:07Sure, but we know that Marine Le Pen, the Front National,
0:08:07 > 0:08:12has been given a 9 million euro loan by a Russian private bank.
0:08:12 > 0:08:14Something that presumably is only possible when it's
0:08:14 > 0:08:18authorised by the Kremlin.
0:08:18 > 0:08:25Is that because Russia supports Marine Le Pen?
0:08:25 > 0:08:28That story is fake, it was not a Russian bank,
0:08:28 > 0:08:30it was a Czech bank, actually, with some
0:08:30 > 0:08:31Russian participation.
0:08:31 > 0:08:35And since the 9 million loan was given to the Front National,
0:08:35 > 0:08:37the bank actually went bankrupt.
0:08:37 > 0:08:45And those people who have undertaken their affairs,
0:08:45 > 0:08:50they are now demanding the money back.
0:08:50 > 0:08:54And so those who said, for example, Mikhail Kasyanov,
0:08:54 > 0:08:57who was Prime Minister under President Vladimir Putin before
0:08:57 > 0:09:00he joined the opposition, said: "For me, there is no doubt
0:09:00 > 0:09:02the loan was authorised by the Kremlin".
0:09:02 > 0:09:03Is he wrong?
0:09:03 > 0:09:04I am sure he is wrong.
0:09:04 > 0:09:09He was Prime Minister very long ago.
0:09:09 > 0:09:10OK, let's move on to Germany.
0:09:10 > 0:09:14You say all these things are inconsequential,
0:09:14 > 0:09:19what about the fact that the German Chancellor Angela
0:09:19 > 0:09:24Merkel refers to Russia "sowing false information in Germany",
0:09:24 > 0:09:26and her warning that it could play a role in
0:09:26 > 0:09:31the coming election campaign?
0:09:31 > 0:09:36Well, I respect her views as a German politician,
0:09:36 > 0:09:38and as a candidate in the upcoming Bundestag election,
0:09:38 > 0:09:41and of course, as Chancellor of the Federal Republic.
0:09:41 > 0:09:44But, whether there is hard evidence, I don't know if there is.
0:09:44 > 0:09:49Maybe she would like to present it.
0:09:49 > 0:09:51The head of the German domestic security service,
0:09:52 > 0:09:58Hans-Georg Maassen, says: "We see aggressive and increased cyber
0:09:59 > 0:10:01spying and cyber operations that could potentially endanger German
0:10:01 > 0:10:06government officials, MPs, employees of democratic parties".
0:10:06 > 0:10:11And he says, and he said after the Bundestag computer
0:10:11 > 0:10:13system was shut down, that in addition to spying:
0:10:13 > 0:10:17"Lately Russian intelligence agencies have shown a willingness
0:10:17 > 0:10:19to conduct sabotage".
0:10:19 > 0:10:22Is he wrong?
0:10:22 > 0:10:28Well, I think, as I said in the beginning, this
0:10:28 > 0:10:33anti-Russian hysteria is really becoming contagious.
0:10:33 > 0:10:37Look at what was happening a few months ago in the United States.
0:10:37 > 0:10:40It has now evidently spread on to France and onwards to Germany.
0:10:40 > 0:10:43I wonder if the United Kingdom will come clean in this situation
0:10:43 > 0:10:50in view of the upcoming election?
0:10:50 > 0:10:55I hope it does.
0:10:55 > 0:11:02But as far as that is concerned, you're right that even the current
0:11:02 > 0:11:06US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who was of course appointed
0:11:06 > 0:11:09by President Trump, who, the accusations go, benefited
0:11:09 > 0:11:15from Russian involvement in the American elections,
0:11:15 > 0:11:18even he says: "It's pretty evident that Russia is taking similar
0:11:18 > 0:11:27tactics into the electoral processes throughout Europe,
0:11:27 > 0:11:31and so they are really undermining any hope for improved relations
0:11:31 > 0:11:32with many European countries".
0:11:32 > 0:11:35Well, I think you should perceive these words as indication
0:11:35 > 0:11:38that there was no Russian involvement in the US election.
0:11:38 > 0:11:40So you would say categorically, this is just Russia...
0:11:40 > 0:11:43Clearly this was a man, part of President Trump's team,
0:11:43 > 0:11:46who didn't believe there was, but has now become convinced.
0:11:46 > 0:11:50He says it's becoming that Russians are getting involved in European
0:11:50 > 0:11:51countries' elections, they are all saying Russia
0:11:51 > 0:11:54is, and you're saying they are all hysterical?
0:11:54 > 0:11:55MR CHIZHOV CHUCKLES.
0:11:55 > 0:11:58Well, I would say that...
0:11:58 > 0:12:02It all starts with people who lose elections, then it spreads
0:12:02 > 0:12:08all across the political spectrum.
0:12:08 > 0:12:17And I would say that it is a sign of degradation of the intellectual
0:12:18 > 0:12:22and ethical level of electoral campaigns in the West, in general.
0:12:22 > 0:12:25I am not blaming any particular country.
0:12:25 > 0:12:27But it seems to be a contagious disease.
0:12:27 > 0:12:31Except in this case it's the winning team in the United States.
0:12:31 > 0:12:34And it's also not just politicians, it's the American intelligence
0:12:34 > 0:12:37agencies, who said: "We assess with high confidence that
0:12:37 > 0:12:41President Putin ordered an influence campaign
0:12:41 > 0:12:43in the presidential elections.
0:12:43 > 0:12:46The consistent goal was to undermine public faith".
0:12:46 > 0:12:51Well, I leave it to the current US administration to judge the degree
0:12:51 > 0:12:56of confidence in the information they get from the
0:12:56 > 0:13:01intelligence community.
0:13:01 > 0:13:04They are known in recent history to have misled
0:13:04 > 0:13:10previous administrations.
0:13:10 > 0:13:13OK, so you're saying they are wrong on this.
0:13:13 > 0:13:16The effect of all this has left us in a situation
0:13:16 > 0:13:18where your Prime Minister, Dmitri Medvedev, talks
0:13:18 > 0:13:26of "completely ruined" relations between the United States
0:13:26 > 0:13:27and the West, and Russia.
0:13:27 > 0:13:32And he said that after there was the American response
0:13:33 > 0:13:36to the chemical attack in Syria.
0:13:36 > 0:13:39But he talks about Moscow and Washington.
0:13:39 > 0:13:42He talked then of Moscow and Washington being on the verge
0:13:42 > 0:13:44of a military clash.
0:13:44 > 0:13:47Is that still the case, do you think?
0:13:47 > 0:13:52Well, of course Russian-American relations are at a low
0:13:52 > 0:13:54level today, definitely.
0:13:54 > 0:14:00And the lower the level is for two nuclear powers,
0:14:00 > 0:14:02the greater is the risk of a military clash.
0:14:02 > 0:14:13Well, I hope it won't come to that, of course.
0:14:13 > 0:14:16And I think Secretary Tillerson's visit to Moscow has proved to be
0:14:16 > 0:14:19a small step in promoting the mutual understanding that is
0:14:19 > 0:14:22so necessary, particularly in a situation like this.
0:14:25 > 0:14:29President Trump has said: "We're not getting along with Russia at all,
0:14:29 > 0:14:31we may be at an all-time low".
0:14:31 > 0:14:32Is he right?
0:14:32 > 0:14:39Well, "an all-time low" might be right or wrong,
0:14:39 > 0:14:45but we've known other periods when relations were quite low.
0:14:45 > 0:14:51But, in recent history, yes, I think he's right.
0:14:51 > 0:14:58If we compare this within the period of the last 10-15 years, yes,
0:14:58 > 0:15:00we are at a very low point.
0:15:00 > 0:15:03Your views on President Trump, because of course Russia was very
0:15:03 > 0:15:07hopeful that there might be a new relationship with this
0:15:07 > 0:15:08new American president.
0:15:08 > 0:15:14And then we have a situation where, after recent events,
0:15:14 > 0:15:19not just what's happened in Syria, but also the warnings
0:15:19 > 0:15:24in North Korea, where the anchor of your main weekly television news
0:15:24 > 0:15:30show, who is a very pro-Kremlin, Dmitry Kiselyov, says:
0:15:30 > 0:15:33"The world is a hair's breadth from nuclear war".
0:15:33 > 0:15:35He talks about the confrontation between Donald Trump
0:15:35 > 0:15:37and Kim Jong-Un: "Both are dangerous, but who
0:15:37 > 0:15:38is more dangerous?
0:15:38 > 0:15:41Trump is, Trump is more impulsive and unpredictable".
0:15:41 > 0:15:42Do you think he's right?
0:15:42 > 0:15:48I can refer to you the commentary made by the spokesman
0:15:48 > 0:15:53for President Putin, Mr Peskov.
0:15:53 > 0:15:59He said that: "That view of Mr Kiselyov was his own,
0:15:59 > 0:16:03and was not the official position of the Russian government".
0:16:03 > 0:16:06So what is the official position of the Russian government
0:16:06 > 0:16:07now on President Trump?
0:16:07 > 0:16:11Well, that's an interesting question, in view of some,
0:16:11 > 0:16:17I would say, evolutions of the US president's approach to various
0:16:17 > 0:16:25international issues.
0:16:25 > 0:16:29I think the position of the new administration
0:16:29 > 0:16:38will settle in a matter of weeks or months, because I think
0:16:38 > 0:16:48it's too early to say.
0:16:48 > 0:16:49It's too early to say?
0:16:49 > 0:16:52On that, what appears to have damaged, what Dmitri Medvedev talks
0:16:52 > 0:16:55of ruining the relationships, was when there was the United States
0:16:56 > 0:17:02air strike on an airbase in Syria in response to a chemical attack.
0:17:02 > 0:17:09Now, Russia had it within its powers to activate air defence systems,
0:17:09 > 0:17:13and prevent some of that attack on the Syrian airbase.
0:17:13 > 0:17:15Why did it not do so?
0:17:15 > 0:17:26Well, first of all, I would ask you not to cut corners
0:17:26 > 0:17:29in describing the sequence of events that happened.
0:17:29 > 0:17:33If you referred to a "chemical attack", then you would perhaps
0:17:33 > 0:17:38wish to at least say an "alleged chemical attack".
0:17:38 > 0:17:42Because there is no confirmation of that attack having happened.
0:17:42 > 0:17:47Of course, there could have been a direct counter-hit,
0:17:47 > 0:17:58but that might have led to much more serious consequences
0:17:58 > 0:17:59in Russia-US relations.
0:17:59 > 0:18:02I'm not talking about a retaliatory strike, I'm talking
0:18:02 > 0:18:05about something that neutralised.
0:18:05 > 0:18:08You can just say: "Look, we didn't have the military capability".
0:18:08 > 0:18:09Is that what you're saying?
0:18:09 > 0:18:12No.
0:18:12 > 0:18:14So there was the military capability to neutralise?
0:18:14 > 0:18:19I'm not a military expert, but I will tell you what I think of it.
0:18:19 > 0:18:21OK...
0:18:21 > 0:18:24I think that particular situation required consideration
0:18:24 > 0:18:30of all the different aspects.
0:18:30 > 0:18:34So it was a political decision not to do that and use
0:18:34 > 0:18:40the air defence systems?
0:18:40 > 0:18:43Perhaps, but my guess would be as good as yours.
0:18:43 > 0:18:45OK.
0:18:45 > 0:18:48You picked me up on my question, because you said there isn't
0:18:48 > 0:18:51even evidence that there was a chemical attack.
0:18:51 > 0:18:53Are you really going to hold to that position?
0:18:53 > 0:18:55Well, until proven otherwise.
0:18:55 > 0:18:57Did you see the images?
0:18:57 > 0:19:00The staged images.
0:19:00 > 0:19:06You know, let me tell you, I am not a chemical expert either.
0:19:06 > 0:19:09But you're a human being, and I imagine you saw those images
0:19:09 > 0:19:10coming out of Syria.
0:19:10 > 0:19:13Of course. Yes.
0:19:13 > 0:19:20You know, sarin is a very toxic substance, so if you
0:19:20 > 0:19:23have an agonising child, you cannot hold it close
0:19:23 > 0:19:29to your chest without dying in a few minutes afterwards.
0:19:29 > 0:19:39The infamous White Helmets, that are known to have staged
0:19:39 > 0:19:46artificial scenes on video, they were there without any
0:19:46 > 0:19:49protective garments, without even gas masks.
0:19:49 > 0:19:52So the whole thing was fabricated, do you seriously suggest that?
0:19:52 > 0:19:57I suggest that, but I'm not saying that that was the case,
0:19:57 > 0:20:01because there was no...
0:20:02 > 0:20:04You know, two weeks have passed, but still there has
0:20:04 > 0:20:06been no investigation.
0:20:06 > 0:20:09The British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and the French Foreign
0:20:09 > 0:20:11Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault described that story as: "A shameless
0:20:11 > 0:20:16production of lies".
0:20:17 > 0:20:19They say that British scientists and others have analysed samples
0:20:19 > 0:20:22which have tested positive for sarin, or a
0:20:22 > 0:20:24sarin-like substance.
0:20:24 > 0:20:29You are not implying that British scientists were there on the ground
0:20:29 > 0:20:30collecting the samples.
0:20:30 > 0:20:33Nobody, either from Britain, the United States, or France,
0:20:33 > 0:20:39went there and had any inspection on the ground.
0:20:39 > 0:20:42Why...
0:20:42 > 0:20:46Let me finish.
0:20:46 > 0:20:49That is why my country has been consistently demanding that
0:20:49 > 0:20:58international investigators, experienced specialists
0:20:58 > 0:21:00from the Organisation for the Prohibition
0:21:00 > 0:21:02of Chemical Weapons, should go down there...
0:21:02 > 0:21:04So why did you veto the UN resolution calling
0:21:04 > 0:21:07for an investigation?
0:21:07 > 0:21:09Because the resolution, the draft resolution blamed
0:21:09 > 0:21:13the Syrian government for that.
0:21:13 > 0:21:16If it had been only a call for investigation, we would have
0:21:16 > 0:21:20supported that, wholeheartedly.
0:21:20 > 0:21:21Do you think Russia...
0:21:21 > 0:21:23Actually, we tabled an alternative draft,
0:21:23 > 0:21:24which unfortunately was not supported.
0:21:24 > 0:21:28Not supported?
0:21:28 > 0:21:30You were isolated.
0:21:30 > 0:21:33Is there a danger that Russia has become almost dangerously isolated
0:21:33 > 0:21:36as a result of this issue?
0:21:36 > 0:21:40I do not accept the claim that Russia was isolated,
0:21:40 > 0:21:44even in this particular case.
0:21:44 > 0:21:48As you know, the Western draft resolution was not supported by five
0:21:48 > 0:21:52of the 15 members of the Security Council.
0:21:52 > 0:21:56Abstained rather than vetoed.
0:21:56 > 0:22:00Well, there is only the need for one permanent member
0:22:01 > 0:22:04to veto a resolution.
0:22:04 > 0:22:09And on the question of what happened with...
0:22:10 > 0:22:12Whether there was a chemical attack, you call for
0:22:12 > 0:22:16an investigation by the OPCW.
0:22:16 > 0:22:20They are going to carry out an investigation.
0:22:20 > 0:22:22Will you accept whatever their finding is?
0:22:22 > 0:22:23Of course.
0:22:23 > 0:22:31I wonder why they are not there yet, because two weeks have passed.
0:22:31 > 0:22:38The Syrian government has invited them to inspect the airfield
0:22:38 > 0:22:45which was the object of the US air attack, and certain prominent
0:22:45 > 0:22:49figures of the opposition that controlled the area
0:22:49 > 0:22:56where the alleged chemical attack happened, they said
0:22:56 > 0:22:58that they would ensure safety of the inspectors.
0:22:58 > 0:23:01So I don't see any real obstacle preventing those
0:23:01 > 0:23:04inspectors from going.
0:23:04 > 0:23:10The former director of the CIA, John Brennan, who was in post
0:23:11 > 0:23:15until this year, said this month: "The Russians feign sincerity
0:23:15 > 0:23:17better than anyone I know.
0:23:17 > 0:23:21They would promise they would work with us, try to restrain the Syrian
0:23:21 > 0:23:23government and military from carrying out these atrocious
0:23:23 > 0:23:26attacks, and they wouldn't, so I lost faith in their willingness
0:23:26 > 0:23:31and interest to do the right thing".
0:23:32 > 0:23:35Is that Russia's problem here, that you are losing the trust
0:23:35 > 0:23:36of people around the world?
0:23:36 > 0:23:38I don't have that impression.
0:23:38 > 0:23:48Actually, this in my view isn't the case at all.
0:23:48 > 0:23:53You don't fear that that might happen?
0:23:54 > 0:23:59I don't think so, because Russian foreign policy has been
0:23:59 > 0:24:04clear and transparent, and of course, our goals
0:24:04 > 0:24:09are quite obvious, be it in Syria or elsewhere.
0:24:09 > 0:24:11Vladimir Chizhov, thank you for coming on HARDtalk.
0:24:40 > 0:24:44Hello.
0:24:44 > 0:24:47After several days of fairly quiet weather taking us through much