I do not want to answer provocative question.

I have worked like a galley slave throughout these eight years, morning till night, and I have given all I could to this work. I am happy with the results.

In the area of international security, taking into account that the United States and Russia are the largest nuclear powers: We are ready to jointly work to strengthen the non-proliferation regime for weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery. We are ready to work together, and much closer than before, on the problem of fighting terrorism, international terrorism, and here we certainly have vast opportunities.

Presidents come and go, and even parties come to and away from power. But the main policy tack does not change.

At the request of my Japanese colleagues, in 2000 we revisited the possibility of signing a peace treaty based on the 1956 agreement.

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.

We are working in other areas [like ALROSA] as well, so there are no radical changes to our position. It is not the case when we have to, as we say, make a lot of fuss about it. In other words, we do not have to be obsessed with privatizing immediately and at any cost.