Here is an example: while resolving current issues, our American colleagues made a proposal on the Syrian settlement but then suddenly declared at the UN that they were not going to discuss anything with us. It is necessary to understand what people want in one department versus another department of the United States. Do they have a common position? And this happened many times on very many areas of our cooperation.

Russia will not soon become, if it ever becomes, a second copy of the United States or England - where liberal value have deep historic roots.

Any country is hard to govern, even a very small country. It's not a question of whether the country is large or small. It's a question of how you relate to the work, to what extent you feel responsible for it. Russia is also hard to govern. Russia is at the development stage of both its political system and the creation of a market-based economy. It's a complicated process, but very interesting. Russia, actually, is not just a large country, it's a great country. I mean its traditions, and its cultural particularities.

However, personally, I see this as not having the right to abuse this trust [among the citizens of Russia and Japan], and any decision we reach should correspond to the national interests of the Russian Federation.

Besides, does it really matter who hacked Mrs. [Hillary] Clinton's election campaign team database? Does it? What really matters is the content shown to the community. This is what the discussion should be held about.

This, for instance, is what Egon Bahr said on June 26, 1990: "If we do not now undertake clear steps to prevent a division of Europe, this will lead to Russia's isolation."Bahr, a wise man, had a very concrete suggestion as to how this danger could be averted.

Russia has not taken part and is not going to take part in any actions aimed at removing legitimate government.