To be with you. Its a great pleasure to discuss russia america relations. Of course, its not a very easy task. Of course its very difficult to talk about russia america relations. Too many contradictions have accumulated. There is ongoing debate on who is more at fault for their deportable deplorable current state. Who should take the First Step Towards the other side . Step tor side . I have to admit that for now we are walking in a circle without any clear perspective. On occasion i tend to persuade the American Public that russia and the United States are not enemies and that we cannot afford the luxury of not talking to each other despite all the existing disagreements. The wellbeing of the whole planet depends on the quality of russian and United States relations. We must remember that the common victory in the struggle was the very foundation of the human civilization. 75 years ago it was the responsibility for maintaining peace and security according to the u. N. Charter. The basic principles of international communication. As a result we witnessed a decrease of manageability and politics. A pandemic has pushed a rising nation to the activity to respond to mutual challenges. Consequently the president of russia in his latest article on the occasion of the military victory in world war ii said they will should Pay Attention to the history of the initial relations. They claim their commitment to seek compromises and demand in a lateral escalation. Its our duty to preserve global strategic stability and prevent local complex from breaking leading to great wars. Today its more crucial as the institution tries to maintain world order. In this regard the president of russia put forward a to commit a meeting on behalf of the Member States of the u. N. Security council. We believe it would play an essential role in finding ways to improve a dangerous scenario with unpredictable consequences. [inaudible] i can only say that i can see there is such a check tree over the past 30 years with the ups and downs of the continuance of the failure to finish the cold war with dignity on the basis of equality. I emphasize we are ready for this conversation. Of course for us its vital that our relations have respect for our legitimate interests and we need to talk about the importance of russia in terms of the United States. It would be an exaggeration to say these issues have always been at the forefront right we are deeply concerned about the United States nation leading to the collapse of the strategic the architecture of mutual transparency that proved to be the most difficult moment of the cold war sends the burden to washington. Its creates a military strategic environment with the United States. Russia failed to achieve its object if and history has demonstrated it tends to misuse tools with instability and growing conflict. Although its an approach to find a common solution to the Common Threads of local security the United StatesRussia Strategic ability application. The latest on june 22. It should be considered a positive signal. Instead of megaphone diplomacy we need a direct conversation on the most pressing issues. Overall the meeting was conducted in a positive manner. Its focused on the practical efforts of crowd control as wells approaches to initial security. It controlled their interest in continuing the dialogue. There were few topics for discussion. In particular they agree to hold a working Group Meeting on space issues. Both sides decided to conduct an expert level meeting to discuss Nuclear Strategies including the use of Nuclear Weapons. They agreed to use transparency issues. Its likely to be one of the most difficult topics as her country approaches this matter deeper and significantly. They will also discuss the issues related to weapons capable of performing Strategic Missions and strategic stability which are not current by any international means. The arms control would pursue with United States should be based on Mutual Respect for each others interest and concerns. Therefore we support a comprehensive approach to agreements in this area. We do not see any point in treaties that fail to take into account strategic stability. For example the relationship between the offensive and defensive strategic systems. The dialogue revealed consistent differences between our countries on a number of key issues. The parties could not achieve a common understanding on the extension of a new s. T. A. R. T. Treaty and the socalled china and i hope therell be time today to discuss with you all of these elements. The russian delegation reiterated its argument why under the current circumstances the extension of the treaty would be unreasonable and a mutually official step. It would not form an arms escalation and military stability but would provide space to overcome existing difficulties and agree on approaches to expand the possible membership of future arms control agreements. For those reasons last december russia announced that it was ready to start discussions on technical issues related to the extension of the treaty immediately and without any conditions. However the United States it wasnt sufficient. We are convinced that the restoration of strategic stability and the search for mutually Acceptable Solutions are contrary to the claims of certain United States officials this approach does not imply outdated or obsolete staff at all costs. About rewarding extreme steps and those who use arms control as it protects its triedandtrue foundations. The main Global Concerns over the collapse of the imf treaty and the certain future of new start we deemed it important to reassure everyone that we do not intend to drift towards confrontation fraught with the end of humankind. We suggested that russia and the United States should conduct a joint declaration in the in admissibility of nuclear war. A positive reply has yet to be received, has not yet been received. I would like to conclude with their oars of the russian president said on june 24 on the 75th anniversary of the deep state quote we understand how important it is to strengthen friendship between nations and we are open to dialogue and declaration on issues of the international agenda. Among them is creation of a common reliable Security System something the world needs. Only then can we protect the world from dangerous threats end of quote. Heres another important idea. Homeland security does not like like what the world requires is not a race towards imf. It requires a race towards reasonableness. We had better run that race end of quote. These words were said not by mr. Putin but vy the merra. We would like to invite the United States to fulfill this aspirations of the american politician. Thank you very much. Thank you mr. Ambassador for that fascinating and sweeping exposition. An issue that is provoking a cry in the nations capitol namely the issue of the purported russian bounty in afghanistan. My query to you is has the Trump Administration contacted the russian government about this issue in any form since it became a public matter in recent weeks . C of course jacob i would like to say that i hope there will be an opportunity for me to answer. I mentioned there have been strategic talks between the United States and russia. I mentioned that they are involving the socalled chinas factor involving positive developments in russian and american relations. Im not surprised that you embrace this issue. Frankly i tried to establish construct if communication with american journalists. I would like to confirm openly that the Russian Embassy doors are open for everybody who would like to know an opinion, russian opinion on the latest subject. But i have to say today that fake news information is very popular in the United States. Sometimes im shocked by reading some articles involving socalled maligned activities of one country or another and i would like to reflect on what may be a stupid question on this decency and selfrespect, dignity when we are talking about journalists. I know that there is a lot of popular mask media have published such news but i would like to say to you officially that these allegations distributed by the media are at downright lie. No concrete evidence has been presented and they are trying to create an impression that our country is an enemy of the United States and by the way dont forget i started my remarks in a message that we russian and the United States are not enemies. I try to persuade everybody who lives in United States. Seeking sensation some journalists tend to the dialogue between ministries of Foreign Affairs and representatives of our country. It deflects attention from the need to find efforts to launch to counterterrorist emanating from pakistan but id like jacob to emphasize that we are ready and we are insisting the United States find entries in afghanistan. We have a close adoration and its better to say not declaration but consultations. I remember the one side made a mistake in a discussion by saying negotiations. I was quoted by a journalist saying come on it means the position between the russian and american president but i just made a mistake so id like to say to you that we are in close contact with our american official colleagues and we are also discussing all the issues regarding this provocation published by the mask media in the United States. But i would like to totally reject all accusations against russia. We are not interested in the victory of terrorism in afghanistan. We already lost so many thousands of lives of russian soldiers and we understand how it is difficult and with United States negotiators on this issue we are in close contact with them. Its a shame those guys who are trying to divide the line between the russian and the United States on this issue. Thank you for that comprehensive answer. Theres only one thing id have to dispute which is that your english is superb. Course i will smile once more. We have a question. Open skies treaty is an important issue. Jacob i would like to say personally ive spent more than 30 years on this question. Iran number how we created the architecture together with United States with members. And i would like to express my regret that the United States decided to withdraw from the very important legally binding documents and treaties. Open skies treaty in light of their decision to restore the open skies treaty announced by the United States its important to remember that the treaty is relevant and vital means of strengthening measures and ensuring the direction of the participating states. I would like to remind you in the beginning the United States tried to persuade the russian figuration to defy this treaty and the United States did a lot of treaties with us. As usual we have agreed with ratifying it a newly now dont know what kind of effort should be made to dissuade the United States to return back to this treaty. Given the shortage of dialogue between russia and western countries on military Security Issues the loss of such expert communication will be hard to compensate for. You have mentioned at the conference on the open skies treaty to lace. The participants in the media discuss the implications and future procedures of the duration in connection with the United States announced decision to resume the treaty. Unfortunately jacob, unfortunately russia and the United States failed to bring together their impositions. We consider washington showed no clinical will to accept the sanctions. Seems to me this is similar to the imf. There was a decision by the United States to withdraw. The United States has sounded and blames the Russian Federation for the formation of this treaty. The same situation we see when we are talking about the decision of the United States to withdraw from this treaty. But there is a difference. If youre a member imf was a bilateral treaty and open skies treaty is not. I just would like to raise the question and i dont want to ask from you and the answer but i would like for you to answer one thing. Why the rest of the nato countries can see that its important to stay in this treaty. Why just only one country decides to withdraw from this treaty . Moreover i would like to refresh your memory saying that we have a special open skies consult it to have commission words open to discuss technical problems and we have also a lot of technical implementations by the United States and its obligations to meet this treaty. I would like to raise one question maybe to myself, not to you and not to the United States. What kind of steps should we take after withdrawal of United States from this treaty . You know that this treaty asked a flight of the territory European Countries as well as the United States and canada. Now there will be no possibility for us to see what is going on in the territory of the United States. We understand what kind of joint communication lines are existing between nato countries and im hesitating that nobody will share information on the situation in the territory of the Russian Federation using the provisions of this treaty. So i would like to say its a very serious step taken by the added states and im sure the minister of defense and the other Agencies Concerned will take the proper steps in the end to protect the initial interest. I can see that jacob. Im very much concerned by this. I consider it very counterproductive to go from one treaty to another one like the japanese proverb. Its very easy to destroy a church. It will be needed only one day but to construct its, it will take three years. As the situation with the s. T. A. R. T. Treaty and the situation with the jcpoa, i consider it very important to respect achievements by our countries and this fear to try to find a solution on very as problems of the United States. So again i would jeff to apply to the United States authorities to make its decision and to support our efforts to keep multilateral agreements in the strategic sphere alive. I now have an even grander question about grand strategy from someone who is a close observer of russia and happens to be the chairman of the board of the center for the national interest, drew go who asks you mention both china and mr. Putins article in the national interest. Mr. Putin mentioned that the p5 will meet soon. Nuclear arms control may be an important topic. What are the realistic chances that china will finally join a discussion with the u. S. And russia on arms control in general and hypersonic missiles in particular . Jacob its not fair for me to say you have mentioned at least three questions and i dont know how to begin because all the elements of your questions are very important. The chinese that are initiative introduced by mr. Putin and the future talks of arms control called trilateral negotiations that the United States envisages for arms control. Let me start with a simple point maybe thats more easy to understand. Its a proposal for Vladimir Putin on the meeting of five government meetings of the u. N. Security council. Like to inform you that we have conveyed our proposals. They include key issues affecting Global Politics security and governing. The date of such a meeting has not been determined. We think that its important to reach an agreement on the substantial content of the assignment before you move forward to Organization Details and jacob its very important to the staff that our intention is not just only focused on arms control issues during negotiations between our p5 leaders. You will see that we can see such meetings very seldom. Its a lot of pressing issues that are leaders have to discuss. Arms control issues have to be just only one a month, comprehensive agenda that we are offering our friends to discuss. Im sure china, the uk and france have their own interests on the p5 meeting. Now the issue regarding the socalled chinese factor. The chinese factor was at the center of discussions in vienna between our delegation. Frankly to our regret washington has taken the s. T. A. R. T. Treaty hostage by insisting that its extension is conditional on the progress in socalled bilateral arms control mcgough sheesh and i