Vladimir Chizhov - Russian Ambassador to the EU HARDtalk

Stay with BBC World News.

Now on BBC News it's

time for HARDtalk.

Welcome to HARDtalk,

I'm Sarah Montague.

Russia is calling on the EU to stump

up billions of dollars

to help rebuild Syria.

I am in Brussels to speak to

Russia's representative to the EU,

Vladimir Chizhov. He said that if

the EU doesn't pay, then they will

bear the responsibility for that.

But Russian planes are still

destroying parts of the country

and rather than support

the peace process at the UN,

they have set up their

own parallel talks.

So what responsibility do

the Russians themselves have

for ending

the war in Syria?

Vladimir Chizhov, welcome to

HARDtalk.

Thank you.

What do you

mean when you say that if the EU

don't pay for the reconstruction of

Syria or contributed to it, they

will bear the responsibility for

that?

Well, the reconstruction of

Syria, after the extensive damage

that has been inflicted on that

country during over six years of

war, is, in my view, the

responsibility of the whole

international community, including

the European Union. Now the European

Union has been declaring a number of

times it's willingness to contribute

to resettlement in Syria, so that

would be one of the ways. Since the

European Union has admitted, rightly

so, that it is not part of any

military activity, it is not a

military alliance. But on the

economic side it has so far limited

its participation, its contribution

to a share of humanitarian aid.

When

you say a share, it is by far the

largest owner of humanitarian aid.

We are talking about more than 10

billion euros, Twell billion

dollars. But for reconstruction, a

conservative estimate, is 250

billion dollars. Why should they be

painted that now when Russian planes

are still bombing Syria?

What the

Russian planes have been doing,

throughout the two years of Russia's

involvement in combating terrorism

there inside Syria, has been

destroying the facilities of ISIL

and Al-Nour struck, which are

designated by the United Nations as

terrorist organisations -- Al-Nour

struck. There is no record of any

deliberate bombing of hospitals. It

is a fact that those terrorist

organisations have been using

civilian facilities, hospitals,

schools and even, as the shields and

also as their own headquarters.

But

there are 48 hospitals run by

medical aid charities, they have not

been acting as shields, and they

have been hit. There is evidence of

targeting of hospitals and medical

facilities.

There is no evidence of

deliberate targeting of hospitals

working as hospitals.

The Atlantic

Council, a Washington -based

research Institute, whose chairman

is the American ambassador to

Russia, produced evidence that

Russia and Syria had repeatedly

bombed hospitals and they suggested

he be evidence of that. Are you

saying it is all a mistake?

Well, in

operations like this mistakes are

unavoidable, certainly. But I can

assure you that the strategy of the

Russian air force and all Russian

military involvement in Syria has

been to destroy the assets and the

headquarters primarily of those

terrorist organisations. It has

never been a Russia's aim to destroy

the infrastructure.

So when the

UNICEF say medical facilities in

East Cooter were hit in the last

couple of days, would you say that

was a mistake to? It has been used

by opposition militants linked to

Al-Nusra and however it is called

now.

As a springboard for attacks

against the Syrian military. What

the Syrian military did was against

that. An area that is effectively

besieged, and in which very little

military aid has gone in, will there

be more evacuations, not least of

children in days of ad in Goutha? Of

course there will be. Humanitarian

aid will be reaching Goutha, as will

as many other difficult places

inside Syria.

Russia is saying to

the EU, you have to help with the

reconstruction. We are talking about

250 billion, how much is Russia

putting up?

Not exclusively. The EU

and all the others.

How much is

Russia putting up?

Those who have

joined the US coalition they should

also join the international effort

to assist in the reconstruction of

Syria.

How will Russia joined that

effort? How much will it put up?

I

cannot give you a specific figure,

because they are estimates. The wine

you referred to, citing, that is one

estimate, there may be others -- the

one. I have not heard any estimates

coming from the Syrian government.

Certainly it will be a huge sum.

Does Russia recognise is

responsibility in needing to repair

the damage it is responsible for?

Russia recognises its responsibility

for achieving the results of the

military involvement, which is

destroying the assets and the basis

of terrorist organisations in Syria.

We are also involved in promoting a

political solution in Syria.

Indeed.

You are also involved in shoring

President Assad is still in power

and in control of much of Syria and

yet you are asking much of the EU to

pay reconstruction money that would

effectively rob them a more --

ensuring.

I would put it

differently. Any reconstruction

money, properly channels, would lead

to reconstructing the housing, the

facilities, including hospitals and

schools, roads, bridges, some of

which have been destroyed, some of

them by the US led coalition, which

did not hesitate to bomb

infrastructure facilities.

The

argument that other countries should

put money in for reconstruction

surely can be made when there is

peace. Does Russia fully support the

Geneva peace process?

It certainly

does. The problem with the Geneva

peace process, from the outside, and

the reason why it has barely moved

forward for quite some time was that

the initial idea, as described in

the relevant UN Security Council

resolution, was to bring together

the Syrian government and a combined

representative of the Syrian

government. The government came

there but those people who claimed

to represent the Syrian opposition

came from all sorts of places,

London, Istanbul... But not Syria

proper. My question to you was how

it fits into the Sochi talks, to

they take into account what has been

agreed in the peace process, that

there will be a transitional

government and President Assad does

not represent the future of Syria.

Actually, that is not agreed in

Geneva. There is an understanding

describes in the Geneva conclusions

of 2012, that there will be a

political transition, yes, but not

in the current...

You accept that

President Assad will not remain as

president of Syria wants this peace

process is over?

Once there are

elections and somebody else is

elected.

But that could take years.

Not necessarily. Part of this

political process would be to draft

a new constitution.

There is a UN

diplomat who says of the Secretary

General, Antonio Guterres, that so

far Sochi does not pass the smell

test. You are not seen as an honest

broker.

It is unfair, to say the

least.

Do you seriously think that

Russia, by this process, can bring

peace to Syria?

Well, ultimately, it

is only the Syrians who can bring

peace to their country. Algol and

they have the goal of all others,

including the European Union, is to

contribute to that happening --

Algol, under the auspices of the

United Nations, definitely.

Whatever

happens at Sochi will feed into the

Geneva...

Absolutely.

The UN will

oversee this.

Yes. Both will feed

into the Geneva process.

It seems

almost as though Russia has had

enough of it now. President Putin

says Mission accomplished. But given

his aims at the outset of

stabilising the legitimate power in

Syria and the conditions of

political compromise, there is no

political compromise.

Well, I

believe that now that the

hostilities are mostly over, of

course there will be pockets and

flareups of military clashes, that

is inevitable in any conflict of

that they mention, we can now think

and actually proceed along the path

of a political solution.

And the

intensified campaign we are seeing

in places like Eastern Goutha, is

that a sort of vinyl, effectively

permission for President Assad, the

Syrian regime, to do what they can,

and there are suggestions that

chlorine gas, chemical weapons have

again been used, which, at the very

least, Russia must be complicit in.

Well, until I see evidence, hard

evidence of anything like that

happening, I am not prepared to

discuss it.

You've seen the

pictures. You've seen the reports of

the effects of the bombing.

Throughout the conflict in Syria, I

have seen hundreds of pictures and

videos staged of ostensibly chemical

attacks.

Could be Syrian regime use

chemical weapons without Russian and

knowledge?

I think that, to begin

with, the Syrian government, which

you prefer to call regime, I call

government, has no reason to use

chemical weapons...

It is a

different question. If I accept what

you are saying that there is no

evidence, let us accept that, what I

am curious about is the process, the

way things work in Syria. I am

wondering if it is possible that

Syrian planes could use chemical

weapons without Russian knowledge,

if not authority?

To begin with, the

Syrian Arab Republic, the

government, has got rid of all its

chemical weapons and that has been

recognised by international

institutions. You referred to

chlorine, Chlorine is not a chemical

weapon, technically.

So chlorine

would be fine to use?

No, of course

not. But it is known that some

opposition groups have been using

chlorine.

You have said that there

is a probability that the EU will

lift sanctions on Russia this year.

They've only just extended them,

unanimously, what makes you say

that?

Well, of course, I'm not going

to speculate when the EU will take

any decision on that or any other

issue, it is up to them, but what I

sense is that there is growing

understanding with in the European

Union of the need to reconsider its

position on those so-called

sanctions.

Now they were put in

place until there was full

implementation of the Minsk

agreement...

No. They will put in

place originally in order to

convince all parties concerned,

including Russia, to start

negotiations. And that happened in

February 20 15. So those sanctions

that had been imposed the year

before in 2014 should have been

lifted there and then.

You have had words from the German

minister suggesting that Russia

should be rewarded if the ceasefire

holds which it has not done in

years. Is that your position? If

Russia can ensure that separatists

in the east and those on the

Ukrainian side can hold a ceasefire

than the sanctions should be lifted?

We are not negotiating this issue of

sanctions with the EU, the US or

anybody else. It is not up for

negotiation. The EU has drawn itself

into a corner with those decisions.

The moment the EU managers to

collect enough political will to

reconsider its position and pull

itself back from that corner, they

will know where to find us.

You

believe that even without a

ceasefire, the sanctions should be

lifted?

There is a ceasefire,

technically speaking.

In name only.

There are numerous violations.

Unfortunately. Like in Syria, you

can never have a watertight

ceasefire in a conflict like this.

You may be having various EU

countries coming around and the

opposite in the US where there is a

new threat of sanctions and a threat

that if the sanctions that have been

signed but yet to be implemented by

President Trump, in the words of a

chief executive, they say if those

sanctions were imposed the Cold War

would look like child's play.

He is

in a better position than myself to

count the figures.

He did not think

they would be imposed. At the point

he was making is that they are a

very sizeable threat that would have

a huge impact on Russia.

So far the

impact of any of those restrictive

measures on the Russian economy has

been palpable but not extensive. In

some sectors of the Russian economy,

particularly in agriculture, the

producers are happy and asking the

government to make sure that the

sanctions day.

So they are a good

thing? Ringo and! Lets have more

sanctions! Seriously? What is your

view?

That is what the producers

think but I think that as a result

of these sanctions our relation with

the EU is in an abnormal state

today. Not only the restrictive

measures but the lack of proper

dialogue and cooperation.

You have

been a top diplomat here for many

years. Are things as bad now as they

have ever been?

I have seen a number

of ups and downs. I will not say

that the crisis in the Ukraine was

the starting point of the current

difficulties. Some of them predate

the beginning of the crisis. I would

say that the Ukrainian crisis could

be more accurately described as a

catalyst of those tendencies.

Certainly there will be common

effort needed to overcome the

current state of affairs.

They have

gotten worse, not least because of

what Russia has been charged with

doing in the democracies of other

countries. The accusations have

increased over the years in the

latest from the British Prime

Minister, Theresa May, saying that

Russia has deployed its state run

media to deploy fake stories and

Photoshop images to undermine our

institutions to her message is

simple. We know what you are doing

and you will not succeed.

I need to

say at this point that evidently the

virus of anti- Russian hysteria that

was cultivated on the other side of

the Atlantic due to domestic

political complications has managed

to somehow crossed the Atlantic and

has infiltrated the minds of certain

elements of political elites in

European countries.

So the fact that

the suggestion that there are over

19 European countries where there

have been accusations that Russia

has interfered in the democracy is

just paranoia on their part?

Germany, France, Norway, Italy,

Greece, Spain?

Not a shred of

evidence has appeared so far.

Neither in the United States nor in

any European nation. I would say it

is more an issue of psychiatry

rather than diplomacy.

Is a

different answer. You may accept

that there is not a shred of

evidence that it may be happening.

Can you categorically it is not

happening?

Categorically, I can say

it is not happening.

That there is

no Russian orchestrated attempts to

influence the outcome of campaigns

to the benefit of Russia?

Certainly

not.

The effect of all of this, if,

as you say, relations with countries

are not as they should be.

Unfortunately, that is correct. What

effect does that have? You might say

that I should feel frustrated that I

am not.

I feel the need to

concentrate my effort and those of

my colleagues here to work... I will

tell you that in the last three or

four years the volume of work has

increased although... OK, we used to

have a few summits a year and

numerous ministerial meetings. Not

since 2014. However we need to

continue to represent Russian policy

and interest and defend Russian

interests.

When do you have meetings

with your counterparts here in

Brussels? Are they frosty than they

used to be?

Some of the Marr but I

would say that as a minority.

Mostly... Particularly when you

discuss something one to one it is a

normal discussion like we used to

have.

The exception is when they get

together. The arrival of President

Trump in the White House, he has

been there for a year, has affected

the way that different EU nations

the rush hour?

As I told you, this

virus of anti- Russian hysteria that

was born in the United States,

cultivated perhaps, I am not an

expert in US domestic policies, but

cultivated by those who lost the

election, it has somehow managed to

cross the Atlantic and found some

fertile ground in some part of

European countries.

What I was

wondering about was whether

President Trump in the White House

move EU countries are turning more

to Russia because he is perhaps less

removed from the international scene

than his predecessors.

I would say

that we are in for cooperation, both

with a European Union countries and

with the United States and others.

But in the case of the United States

it takes two to tango and in the

case of the European Union it takes

29, so far.

Thank you for coming on

HARDtalk.