Mr. Schröder, you know
Vladimir Putin very well.
Maybe you are even with him friends.
Understand now in this situation still his thoughts, his motifs?
Do you still understand what drives him? Now?
I think I imagine can do what drives him even though I
could not talk to him.
I was in Sochi But there he was busy.
And certainly not over.
That was still Before this situation in Ukraine.
I think he is interested in it
is to consolidate Russia,
To develop Russia economically.
But to keep big and strong.
That he believes that Russia
act politically at the same eye level should.
With the United States of America, And that he
As someone who thinks historically,
also certain circuits, fears
are quite present with him.
When the development Take a look at,
The in the past ten or 15 years has taken place
Then it was clear that after the case of the iron curtain and integration
the former Warsaw Pact states in the EU and NATO
was clear, that the Russia had to accept.
That has no question.
It wasn't about accepting And it was about respect
The will of this peoples.
And we all have a bunch of it
contributed, that that was in the EU and NATO.
Then of course came to the edges
the Russian
Federation developments, that were certainly not suitable
to trigger only joy with the Russians.
So the circle, fears.
You can see that, especially in Georgia, but also in other areas.
That will employ him. No question at all.
Whether then the funds that are used
The right ones are I would also doubt that.
Only the problem Whatever you see too
need to To the current questions is
Where are the causes of the help For the crisis?
It was really right to go and Ukraine a cultural
split land?
You have to counter all the mainstream can say.
A culturally split the country namely
in the west, one rather
Europe -oriented, European oriented population,
the one in large parts is nationalistic.
That in what you can also see in the language dispute
And in the east and in the south, especially in the Crimea,
a traditional Russian
thinking and feeling population, At least a majority of the population.
It was correct that the EU says We introduce you to the alternative
Either association in the EU or
Participation in the customs union of the GDR, Russian Federation
to build with others able and is ready.
And I think that the EU in the face of the
the division of cultural division
I'm not talking about constitutional law now the cultural division of Ukraine,
This either or not should have formulated, but there
would have been a lot more sensible A both and.
I'm going to say so far
the cooperation contract, which the EU wanted to negotiate with Russia
And the old one Should replace cooperation contract.
It would have been better if you over Association would have negotiated with both,
About association with Russia Just like with Ukraine.
You would have many stumbling blocks did not have.
And perspective For European interests
I have always been concerned with a question
If you take a look at me What we are currently doing
Have Poland in the world, then they have A recessed America.
And I go from a recovering strong also economically strengthened America.
And they have Asia Under the leadership of China.
You just have to go out of that.
And they have a Europe that doesn't know how it should be.
And it can only set up To be at the same eye level
With these two poles to act politically and economically,
if it becomes more integrative.
So if we get more Europe.
And secondly, If we do one when we make it
With all difficulties which is currently in Turkey
also gives Turkey as
To win a member of the EU as a bridge into the Arabic, into the Islamic world
and an association with Russia get down,
That is the perspective that busy me.
And this perspective In any case, I arrange mentally
the below what I am currently On the situation in Ukraine.
Let's say a few problems with With this analysis.
So, Kissinger joked, in the 19th century
has circled itself, Russia expanded to Belgium every day.
So this one
Investment already has a certain one, The circling
in quotation already have a habit,
then relatively expansive, if not aggressive.
The second problem is that this Putin's Russia yes
No wish at all
or did not express any urging, to associate yourself with the EU,
but he has on the contrary So classic power policy of the 19th
Century probe a bit here, because gain spheres of influence,
guided.
And therefore I don't quite see this lever.
But even if this analysis I am not entirely correct.
That doesn't justify that yet The means that starts, right?
Nobody says that either.
I just think about it that it is not enough to judge.
Naturally Is what happens in the Crimea
something is also a violation of international law.
But you know
Why I'm a little more careful With the raised index finger?
I want that to you right now In such an event, say
Because I did it myself.
What do you have. Made violate international law?
We arranged. No I have not.
We have.
A small.
Leave Belgium.
Just. Do what it really is about.
When it comes to the question, went
How does that develop in the republic Yugoslavia?
Kosovo ranks we have our planes,
sent our tornados to Serbia,
And they have one together with NATO sovereign state bombed
Without it Security Council would have given a decision.
Oh well.
Without the security council Decision given.
That was just like that and my predecessor Did that also criticize this,
which is not very far away either
From what your newspaper does, criticized that sharply.
Helmut, of course.
He said that without security Decision does not work.
At the time. And formally he is right.
I still stand by Because I still have in mind
The refugee flows and that, What threatens, there is no question.
Formally, but without a security council decision,
A warrior To conduct discussion,
was a violation of international law.
Even if Mr. Joffe.
I heard little about criticism.
When it was in Iraq
That was so, and I'm afraid
And that shouldn't justify that
should just explain why I myself
With the raised index finger I'm more careful than others.
Because I am this situation And also the difficulties
The I then Had my own position
And still have I didn't forget that.
But.
But may I with mine register some submissive undertone,
that the situation is not
is comparable,
We were right at the time.
We say without a decision A country attacked,
But for humanitarian reasons, as they are described themselves
and that has the humanitarian duty.
In that case, at least so could be argued, international law,
About the above international law, triumphs on international law.
There was here no minority worthy of protection,
The only one that is protected.
I would say that Because you when you
If you discuss this on one level, As we sit here, see it.
But whether the affected people see it that way is a completely different question.
You rely on that, on that we call ourselves at the time.
The calling I don't think it is valid.
You don't have to assume that But that's exactly.
I think that What we are currently experiencing in the Crimea,
that the blueprint is Kosovo, And in two ways.
In me.
I want something. Justify.
Once
I don't say there either and bring myself But not in a situation.
I see again then
The headline is the point of the matter The same situation.
But I also tell you that If you are the argument
Listen, it At least cannot be doubted.
And that makes my caution in dealing with With the raised index finger,
that formally in both cases against
the charter has been violated.
That was just like that We only had a justification
A comment from the Secretary General the United Nations, the back then
And that was not after the judgment not sufficient.
And the fact
that it was occasionally said That is the first humanitarian commitment,
who had been done was something that
According to the predominant opinion at least doubtful in international law.
We still used it no question at all.
But please understand that then in the face of that
Given my own actions that understands that for
I am still a situation where I am more careful.
I just wish that then also colleague Putin.
I would.
Careful how you argue now, Because in the case of Syria,
Where it was really humanitarian disaster and remains strictly pro
International law, we are not allowed.
No intervention.
And then he turns around and.
I don't know.
Whether you.
Doubt whether you are in the Syrian question, If we are already there
really interpret that correctly.
I don't have my own information.
I never talked to him about it But my impression is for his
his Syrian policy And for those of the Chinese more.
I think you said At the time we have
than about intervention in Libya went, said we won't
insert a veto, then is That cannot be denied.
I say that very diplomatically.
The Libya resolution overused and the consequence of a
one permanent members of the Security Council
was of course to be said We don't want to experience that again
That has something to do with things which I also hardly imagine
can, maybe we are all difficult
can introduce them, but they are, so to speak Self -confidence of P5 members
concerned, so concerned by security council members.
I believe, that that played a role.
Nevertheless, I'm not here to justify anything.
I just said, Kosovo could be the blueprint, by the way
also in another dimension, namely what the
As for the question Referendum or not?
What does that mean?
What do you mean by that?
Well, it is said.
The detriment of the referendum Is problematic under international law
is illegal.
I have a little bit tried to make knowledgeable.
In the case of international lawyers.
And I found one who comments on this.
There is always one.
No, no, so that's special verses international law.
There it says,
The Kosovo was allowed to split off Serbia,
says the International Court of Justice In the Hague.
And then it goes on.
However, the judges were smart.
You just said know international law
No prohibition of declaration of independence.
This is the international lawyer Josef Joffe. 26.
September 2010.
Chapeau that.