Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, October 6, 2022
- Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming meeting with UN Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy for Western Sahara Staffan de Mistura
- Meeting of the United Russia Party General Council Commission on International Cooperation and Support for Compatriots Abroad
- Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s participation in the CIS Foreign Ministers Council meeting
- Update on the Ukrainian crisis
- Outcome of the UN Security Council meeting on attacks on the Nord Stream gas pipelines
- The situation in Denmark and Sweden in connection with attacks on Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2
- US accusations that Russia is destroying Ukraine’s agricultural infrastructure and aggravating the global food crisis
- Start of the 215th session of the UNESCO Executive Board
- UNESCO holiday in honour of teachers
- Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia marks 30th anniversary
- The 20th anniversary of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation
- Days of Russian Spiritual Culture in Bulgaria
- 60th anniversary of Ugandan independence and the establishment of diplomatic relations between Moscow and Kampala
- Exhibition dedicated to the 150th anniversary of the birth of Georgy Chicherin
Answers to media questions:
- EU pressure on Serbia in the context of anti-Russia sanctions
- Joint Japan-US-South Korea exercise
- Austria’s mediation proposals
- Kiev’s refusal to hold talks with Russia
- “Nuclear threat” on the part of Russia
- Ukraine’s application to join NATO
- The eighth package of the EU’s anti-Russia sanctions
- The de-industrialisation of Europe
- The draft Armenian-Azerbaijani peace treaty
- The situation on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border
- Certain statements by Elon Musk
- Certain statements in the Armenian press
- The repatriation of prisoners in the Nagorno Karabakh conflict de-escalation zone
- Signing a peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan
- The situation around the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant
- North Korean missile launches
- New appointments at the Russian Foreign Ministry
- Education opportunities for Russian citizens abroad
- The murder of Darya Dugina
On October 7, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will have a meeting in Moscow with UN Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy for Western Sahara Staffan de Mistura.
During the conversation, they will discuss the current state and prospects for achieving a fair resolution of the West Sahara issue in keeping with UN Security Council resolutions and in the interests of all the nations in the regions and improving the overall situation in North Africa.
As I have already said during the previous briefing, on October 7, Sergey Lavrov will hold, via videoconference, the fourth meeting of the United Russia Party General Council Commission for International Cooperation and Support for Compatriots Abroad, established by instruction of Russian President Vladimir Putin, which will take place in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk on the sidelines of the international inter-party conference New Environmental Policy and Sustainable Development (October 6-7, 2022).
The meeting will focus on public and political support for environmental security in the Asia-Pacific Region. There are also plans to discuss the further development of inter-party cooperation, aimed at strengthening ties among Eurasian states in various spheres.
Representatives of leading political parties from South and Southeast Asia, Latin America and the CIS will attend the inter-party conference.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s participation in the CIS Foreign Ministers Council meeting
On October 12, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will attend a regular meeting of the CIS Foreign Ministers Council in Astana.
Foreign ministers of the CIS countries will exchange opinions on topical international and regional issues, as well as prospects for developing cooperation within the CIS, and approve a plan of multi-level consultations between the CIS foreign ministries for 2023.
It is expected that the parties will specifically focus on security issues in the CIS and along its external borders. Foreign Minister Lavrov will inform his counterparts about the progress in the special military operation and the results of the referendums in the DPR, LPR, and the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, as well as on their accession to the Russian Federation.
The ministers will adopt decisions on issues concerning the cultural agenda, law enforcement and human rights, in particular, the calendar of events marking the Year of the Russian Language as a Language of Interethnic Communication in the CIS in 2023, and the plan of priority events in cultural and educational cooperation for 2023-2024.
Several documents approved during the meeting will be submitted for consideration by the CIS Heads of State Council, meeting on October 14, and the CIS Heads of Government Council, meeting on October 28, 2022.
Update on the Ukrainian crisis
Yesterday, October 5, 2022, the Russian President signed laws ratifying the treaties on the accession of the Donetsk and Lugansk people’s republics, and the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions to the Russian Federation, and on the creation of four new legal entities in the Russian Federation, which have been approved by the Federal Assembly. Also, relevant federal constitutional laws have been signed and come into effect.
Despite the efforts of Kiev and Western countries, most of the world’s population realise that our actions are justified and are aware of the origins of this crisis.
Unfortunately, portions of the regions which have reunited with Russia still remain under the control of the Kiev regime that continues to persecute the local population because of the language they speak, political views and ethnicity. Ukrainian militants never cease their barbarous shelling of peaceful cities and villages in the liberated areas. It is enough to look at the constant remote mining of the central part of Donetsk and its suburbs with banned Lepestok antipersonnel mines, of which we have talked a lot. The neo-Nazis are openly taking revenge on civilians for their conscious choice of who they want to be with.
However, all attempts to crush these people’s will are doomed to failure. The liberation of these areas will continue. Work is underway there to restore the ruined infrastructure and ensure that the regions can return to peaceful life.
At the same time Western countries are continuing to pump Ukraine full of offensive weapons and equipment and are training Ukrainian militants at NATO bases in Europe. The United States and the UK have been particularly zealous.
Recently, the British have trained several thousand Ukrainian militants, inviting military instructors from Canada, Poland, News Zealand and other Western countries. In the same manner they had trained militants who used force to carry out the anti-constitutional Maidan coup, which started to take shape in 2013 and was brought to fruition in 2014. Later they claimed that the extremists – that is, people who use force and intimidate civilians to take power – they had trained were members of “civil society” or “peaceful protesters seeking to reunite”, as they said, with what they called Western civilisation but trained to fight in the urban space. They are using the same bases today to train militants and extremists who during many years have been killing their compatriots, who they regard as citizens of their country, although “second-class” citizens.
Reports of new tranches of military aid to Kiev are coming from the United States almost every week. We remember the statement by the American political establishment about Ukraine’s main objective being to kill as many Russians as possible. We remember and know that this ideology of killing is being promoted by Ukrainian ambassadors around the world. We will never forget this.
It was announced the other day that a new consignment of HIMARS multiple rocket launchers was being prepared for shipment to Ukraine. The Americans are ready to add another four to the 16 available HIMARS, along with the ammunition for them, for a total sum of $625 million. This part of US political leadership hates us beyond any measure. Due to enormous domestic problems, recession, inflation and unemployment, it is impossible to paint even a false picture of prosperity of its own population even by mobilising the US media. Despite this, more and more money is being poured onto the Kiev regime with every passing week in order not to stop the hostilities and increase the human losses. They want to flood this region in blood on US money – printed but unsecured by anything. Meanwhile, the US national debt exceeded $31 trillion the other day. Can you imagine what is happening?
During the next year, Kiev may receive another 18 multiple-launch rocket systems. With the Pentagon’s consent, the Banderites are firing at civilians and public facilities. The Americans openly admit that they are transferring satellite and other intelligence information to the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (VSU) virtually in real time, and that they are taking part in planning combat missions. Is this not complicity? This is a genuine hybrid war. Even private American and European companies are involved in processing satellite information for Kiev. The hundreds of thousands of killed and wounded civilians are on the West’s conscience (if it has any at all).
The European Union is trying not to lag behind the United States and Britain. The EU is now discussing a mission for military aid to Ukraine. If the proposed mission is established, the EU’s involvement will be upgraded to the status of a party to the conflict.
Such open and large-scale support from the West for the Kiev regime only extends the hostilities and pushes Kiev to commit more crimes. Appeals to detonate a “dirty” bomb in Moscow are already cropping up in Ukraine’s segment of the internet. This is not news. We have heard Ukrainian politicians say that it is necessary to drop a nuclear bomb on us and that Ukraine must become a nuclear power to deal with Russia. What haven’t they said to us. True, civil society and the media in Western countries do not hear this. They are focused on something else. Ukraine-language online resources even demonstrate how to make such a bomb.
No need to try. Everyone has long understood what methods are used by the Kiev regime. They are equated with extremism and terrorism tactics. These are murders and acts of terror perpetrated against those whom they recently called their own citizens but have referred to as some “sub-human species,” and “second-rate” humans, as well as against citizens of other countries, not just ours. Many foreigners have perished in Donbass over the years.
We noted President Vladimir Zelensky’s recent executive order endorsing a decision by Ukraine’s National Security and Defence Council on the impossibility of holding talks with the President of Russia. We have heard many statements by Ukrainian leaders about this. Now they have decided to seal this at the legislative level.
Let me recall that, at first, Kiev itself asked us about peace negotiations in late February this year. Then it broke them off and left our April 15 proposals unanswered. Now it feigns the impression that it is rejecting or banning this possibility. This is classic. The same happened with the Minsk agreements. At first, they pretended they wanted to sign them. Then they pretended to sign them and then they pretended to fulfil them. Finally, they said straight out that they were not going to fulfil them. They had deluded the international community for eight years while pumping their country full of weapons in order to make a power surge at some point.
It was already obvious at that time that this was done under the West’s instructions, that the West does not want a cessation in hostilities but intends to continue them, as they say between themselves, “up to the last Ukrainian.”
Experts describe this as a proxy war waged by Washington, London and Brussels against Russia with Ukrainian hands. In reality, this is a hybrid war. The West wants to strike at Russia from all sides. It has tried to do this for a long time through economic, humanitarian and political acts. Now they are using weapons put into the hands of Ukrainians and mercenaries from all over the world. This is admitted in public.
These plans will not come to fruition. We will continue defending our homeland and its citizens, removing the arising threats to our security. We are adamant about this.
Outcome of the UN Security Council meeting on attacks on the Nord Stream gas pipelines
Russia called an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council on September 30 this year in connection with the rupture of three strings of the Nord Stream gas pipelines. All members of the UN Security Council recognised the incident as deliberate sabotage and unanimously supported the need for a transparent international investigation of what happened. That was constructive unity, but then something went wrong. Russia’s involvement in an investigation of the attacks would seem unquestionable to any educated person. There are no lawyers, engineers, financiers, economists, or public figures that could even imagine an investigation that would not include the party that owns the pipelines. And yet, this appears possible. A number of Western members of the UN Security Council have said, and continue to insist, that Russia should not be invited; more than that, Russia will not be allowed to participate in any investigative activities. An idea was expressed about the need to work out security guarantees for cross-border infrastructure.
Has anything like that happened in history? Yes. One example was the Malaysian Boeing that crashed over Ukraine. When was Malaysia greenlighted to join the investigation and included in the “working group”? Certainly not right away, but after a long period. Let me remind you that the flight was Malaysian. This is a classic. This alone – even before we discuss the motive – suggests they have something to hide. They are keeping the owner (not just the investor, but the actual owner) of the equipment, infrastructure and the very energy resource pumped through these pipelines away from the investigation; this means they are hiding something from the owner. This is not the first time the West has done this. Let me emphasise that as regards the Malaysian MH17, the situation was exactly the same, with respect to Malaysia as the owner of the aircraft.
For our part, we have noted the outlandish accusations that have been made and continue to be made against Russia of attacking the Nord Stream after investing billions in the project. It was not just about allocating the money and never actually spending it as planned. It was an operational project. The huge investment resulted in the construction of a unique, safe and efficient energy supply system for the European continent.
At the same time, Russia invited the participants to string together a number of well-known facts that raise questions about the possible role of certain countries in this incident.
Sergey Kupriyanov, a representative of Gazprom, presented a thorough technical analysis of what had happened at the meeting of the Security Council. He confirmed our company’s readiness to seek ways to resume the operation of the pipelines, noting that it was not yet possible to determine a timeframe for the restoration of the destroyed lines.
Overall, the meeting was useful in promoting unbiased information, especially among constructively minded UN member states.
Separately, it is worth mentioning the undignified behaviour of the French presidency of the UN Security Council, which deliberately delayed the timing of the meeting and refused to allow the representative of Gazprom to respond on the pretext of the company’s affiliation with the Russian government. Can you imagine? The meeting was joined by a representative of the corporation directly involved in all issues of energy supplies, the pipeline itself, its construction and commissioning, who has the full financial, economic and technological information. This is first-hand information. The French presidency has denied not itself, and not even the members of the UN Security Council, given that this is an official meeting of the Council, but the whole world the right to hear the owner’s opinion on what had happened to his property. This biased position makes us start to look more closely at the Western states’ selection of representatives of organisations, including non-governmental organisations, at UN Security Council events, including in the context of their funding or government control.
I would like to remind our Western “former partners” that they like involving their stars, what they call “celebrities”, i.e. people from show business, films and music, in various events on the UN platform. Not just public figures who are professionally involved in this or that topic, but people who are far removed from the issues under discussion and who attract public interest for being famous. Western countries, so fond of inviting well-known actors, singers and athletes to discuss political or environmental issues, refused to allow a specialist to bring his professional perspective to the global audience. It’s amazing. There will be something to talk about next time.
The situation in Denmark and Sweden in connection with attacks on Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2
The Danish Maritime Authority has announced the establishment of an exclusion zone of five nautical miles for vessels and a no-entry zone for aircraft within a one- km radius after gas leaks were discovered on Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines on September 26. All vessels in the vicinity were asked to leave the area immediately.
Three Danish vessels – the frigate Absalon, a patrol boat, and an environmental control vessel – are monitoring the leak area. According to the Danish Energy Agency, there are no security risks for the population of the nearby islands of Bornholm and Christianso.
Copenhagen believes that the explosions were not an accident but the result of deliberate actions, and that an international investigation is necessary. However, Danish Foreign Minister Jeppe Kofod said Denmark did not intend to hold a dialogue with Russia on the matter. The only explanation is that they probably know who did it and so are not interested in Moscow’s opinion, that they have identified a suspect and will discuss the problem with him or hold him accountable. There is no other reasonable explanation.
On September 27, immediately after the media reported the explosions at the gas pipelines, Swedish Foreign Minister Ann Linde hurried to say that “desperate” Russian authorities might act “irrationally and mercilessly.” I think I will adopt this. Judging by the developments, for example, in the White House, it is the US administration that is behaving irrationally and mercilessly. I am grateful to the Swedish Foreign Minister for the brilliant phrase she coined.
During a joint news conference held a bit later by Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson, Foreign Minister Ann Linde and Defence Minister Peter Hultqvist, a more careful assessment was offered. They said the explosions were a deliberate act, but they took place in international waters, and Stockholm did not regard them as “an attack on Sweden.” It was added, though, that no scenario could be ruled out.
The Swedish Prosecution Authority and Security Police are investigating the explosions. Swedish warships and coast guard boats and aircraft were sent to the leak area.
On October 3, the Swedish Prosecution Authority decided to restrict access to and prohibit diving or any movement in the leak area in Sweden’s exclusive economic zone until an inspection of the crime site is concluded. The decision has been criticised by Swedish experts in international law who doubt that the Swedish authorities have the legal grounds to introduce such restrictions in international waters. The Swedish Prosecution Authority replied that the movement of vessels, including Russian ships, in the leak area was not prohibited provided they do not hinder the investigation. If Stockholm doesn’t hear its own statements or the statements of its neighbours, both geographical and its NATO allies, the conclusion is that it is itself creating obstacles to the investigation. They have said many times, individually and together, that Russia won’t be allowed to take part in the investigation.
Russia regards the actions taken to damage the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines as deliberate sabotage, as we have pointed out more than once, against a crucial infrastructure facility of the Russian Federation. We will demand a comprehensive and open investigation and insist that authorised Russian agencies and Gazprom take part in it. Only on these conditions can any conclusion reached in an investigation be considered credible and objective. If the West acts as it usually does, barring owners, refusing to provide facts and factual material, concealing information, relying on controlled media outlets and manipulated information through media leaks and “unnamed sources,” then there is no question as to where this investigation will lead: it will lead nowhere, as has happened many times in recent decades.
US State Department spokesman Ned Price routinely shifts the blame for the worsening global food crisis onto Russia. In particular, references are being made to a report put out by the Washington-funded Conflict Observatory non-governmental organisation on the damage that had allegedly been inflicted by our country on Ukrainian grain depots during the special military operation. A familiar story. There was an “observatory” with regard to the situation in Syria. It was based not in Damascus or Aleppo, but in London (we covered this earlier) in a building that used to be a pizza place. Nominally, they created an entity that the British authorities, NATO, and Anglo-Saxons generously supplied with money and most importantly, fake facts. The same thing is now happening in the US. They are financing this entity, portraying it as civil society, and supplying it with materials. Later on, they will be citing these materials.
The report, which is financially backed by US official bodies, states that “at least” one in six food warehouses in Ukraine had been impacted since February, and about 8.4 million tonnes of grain were destroyed, damaged or “stolen,” which puts in jeopardy Ukraine’s ability to fulfill its obligations to the UN World Food Programme and deals a blow to the “Istanbul deal” which fact will impact the poorest countries.
We know perfectly well that NATO countries can’t sleep or eat because all they do is think about the poorest countries out there. They are using these groundless allegations to put forward heinous statements accusing our country of war crimes.
The armed forces of the Russian Federation target only military infrastructure and enemy troops. This has been stated. It is a fact that no “conflict observatory” in the United States is in a position to refute.
Washington’s mounting anti-Russian propaganda pressure betrays its concern about our criticism of the efforts to implement the food deal. That is what the UN Secretary-General Guterres called it (“a package deal”). It consists of more than one part and must address not only the interests of private entities in the United States and other Western countries as they continue to line their pockets with the money they are getting for cheap food. It must also cover the second part related to Russian fertiliser and food supplies to global markets.
The goal of the United States is to head off any accusations of possible disruptions in shipments of agricultural products from Ukrainian ports that may come from the developing countries, as well as of the “strange geography” of the end recipients of grain. As we have repeatedly shown through tables and charts, only a small fraction of food products (mainly fodder crops) is going to developing countries. The bulk of grain exports go to the European Union and other developed countries. Neither the US nor the EU was able to refute this. Countries that really need food are getting 8 percent of Ukrainian food products. The abstract conclusions supported by Washington to the effect that exporting food to the developed countries “increases supply on the international market” do not hold water and are examples of blatant hypocrisy and mixing facts with false claims.
Furthermore, the claims peddled by the US State Department about the damage to the Ukrainian agro-industrial complex clearly play into the hands of those who benefit from rising food prices and disruptions in supplies. Those include the largest Western agricultural and trading corporations including members of the Big Four – the American companies Archer Daniels Midland, Bunge, and Cargill, as well as the Dutch Louis Dreyfus. They account for 75 to 90 percent of global trade in agricultural products. Fuelling uncertainty in the food markets creates favourable conditions for them to gain additional profits. Apparently, this is how the West thinks. They have “cashed in” on the pandemic and will be happy to take advantage of the situation with Ukrainian food now as well. Everyone watched for two years as humanity struggled with a virus on an unprecedented scale, while American political players lobbied for their own business interests. They did not focus on helping people or joining forces to counter the global problem; they were eager to make more money at someone else's misfortune. They used every tool they could lay their hands on. Now the situation is repeating itself with food.
We would also like to point out that the United States is the main sponsor and supplier of weapons to Kiev, which uses them to strike civilian targets such as shopping centres, shops, markets, and food warehouses. This includes agriculture processing plants, which, according to the West, make products the poorest countries needed so badly. When agricultural facilities are showered with shells fired from American weapons, the United States temporarily “forgets” about the poorest countries that need food.
The Ukrainian command has repeatedly stated that the use of heavy artillery, in particular, the American MLRS HIMARS, is always coordinated with representatives of the Pentagon (we are constantly talking about this), who makes the final decisions on the choice of targets for missile strikes. Thus, Washington actually becomes an accomplice in the criminal acts committed by the Kiev regime through leading and directing them.
We also have facts proving that the Armed Forces of Ukraine and Ukrainian nationalists have been deliberately destroying grain crops and elevators, and mining arable land and other farmland. The relevant materials are available openly. A vivid example of such crimes committed by the Kiev regime is the deliberate destruction of a granary at the Port of Mariupol and the burning of 50,000 tonnes of wheat with it. Who in Washington, London, or Brussels (I'm not even talking about Kiev) was thinking about the poorest countries at that moment? No one. For the West, the end always justifies the means.
Washington certainly prefers to avoid talking about this, shielding in every possible way those who implement this terrible extremist ideology. We will make sure that this truth is heard.
Start of the 215th session of the UNESCO Executive Board
The 215th session of the UNESCO Executive Board opened in Paris on October 5, 2022. The Russian delegation is headed by Russia’s Permanent Representative at UNESCO Alexander Kuznetsov.
During the session, the participants will review over 40 items on the agenda, which deal with carrying out decisions and resolutions adopted by the Executive Board and the General Conference at previous sessions, as well as financial, administrative and personnel issues. They will discuss the Secretariat’s proposals on the draft Programme and Budget of UNESCO for 2024-2025, and the drafting of strategic foundations for multi-lingual policy and a framework programme on education in culture and arts. The participants plan to focus on issues linked with achieving Sustainable Development Goal 4: Education 2030.
The Board’s agenda includes a project, Routes of Enslaved Peoples, that is devoted to overcoming the difficult legacy of the slave trade and Western colonialism, and the implementation of the programmes of the UNESCO Chairs and UNITWIN Networks, Management of Social Transformations and Information for All. The participants will sum up the results of the UNESCO World Conference on Cultural Policies and Sustainable Development – MONDIACULT 2022 (Mexico City, September 28-30, 2022).
Delegations themselves suggested a number of topical issues for discussion. The Russian Federation joined as a co-author Kazakhstan’s initiative to proclaim May 20 World Metrology Day, and the projects of India “Auroville, a global cultural city for evolution and transformation” and Azerbaijan “Implementing the Sports for Life Initiative” and the Seventh International Conference of Ministers and Senior Officials Responsible for Physical Education and Sport (MINEPS).
Just a reminder that the 215th session will last until October 19.
UNESCO holiday in honour of teachers
World Teachers’ Day was observed on October 5. UNESCO announced this day 28 years ago. Meanwhile, our country started observing it as early as 1965. At that time we were in the vanguard of the struggle for the rights of teachers in the world and did much for the drafting of the first international documents in this area – the 1960 Convention Against Discrimination in Education and the 1966 Recommendation concerning the Status of Teachers. These fundamental documents read: “Education from the earliest school years should be directed towards the all-round development of the human personality and to the spiritual, moral, social, cultural and economic progress of the community…” It is surprising to read the documents of those years. Many decades have passed since then. Media have opened so many opportunities for learning. You can order any book from any library and promptly translate it into many languages yourself. Look how the situation has changed. In the 1960s, spiritual, moral, social and cultural progress and the development of the community came first. The economic aspects followed later. How far we have progressed since the middle of the 20th century.
According to these documents, another goal of education is as follows: “…the utmost importance should be attached to the contribution to be made by education to peace and to understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations and among racial or religious groups.”
Teachers have always played a critical role in educating society. They teach understanding and largely shape a human being and social attitudes in general.
We are seeing how mercilessly education is being politicised now. I would like to return to the situation in Ukraine even on this issue. With the connivance of international organisations, primarily UNESCO, teachers have actually been divided into two types – the right ones and the wrong ones. Dissident teachers are being persecuted and blacklisted on the notorious Mirotvorets website. They are imprisoned and subjected to physical violence. This is being done in public with extreme cynicism and cruelty only because they dare speak in their native tongue and teach in it, developing in children a love for their own culture.
Now, the teachers working on the territories joining Russia are thanking us and telling us about the horrors perpetrated in Ukraine’s educational system. We know about this. After Crimea and Sevastopol reunited with Russia in 2014, we saw many manuals and other materials disseminated at education institutions by the Kiev regime that had just assumed power. These were not materials made together in the USSR or based on common history. These were methodological tools compiled on American and NATO grants. Everyone saw and read them. Instead of morals and family values they imposed gender ideology that destroyed human beings, as well as nationalist, misanthropic and militaristic views on people through the schools.
We have repeatedly urged UNESCO to take note of the discriminatory laws adopted by the Kiev regime, specifically On Education, On the Functioning of the Ukrainian Language as the State Language, and On Complete General Secondary Education. We regularly highlight violations of Russian speakers’ rights in Latvia, where a specially devised package of measures aimed at phasing out education in Russian has been implemented for years. Currently, Riga’s discriminatory policy is focused on Russian kindergartens, which must ensure education in Latvian, as well as on universities and individual teachers. On September 29, the Latvian Saeima passed in the final reading a law approving the conversion of Russian schools to Latvian.
Thus, despite being parties to the Convention against Discrimination in Education, both Ukraine and Latvia grossly violate its provisions, specifically Article 5, which recognises the right of “members of national minorities to carry on their own educational activities,” and entitles them to “the use or the teaching of their own language.”
With rabid Russophobia on the rampage in the West, it is futile to hope for them to admit their mistakes or reverse the situation. We have no illusions in this regard. But we will continue our efforts.
Despite this, we will continue the work to ensure respect for the rights of teachers by all lawful means. We will not allow the light of knowledge they bear to become the darkness of forgetfulness and oblivion.
We have congratulated teachers on the Foreign Ministry and embassies accounts. I would like once again to congratulate you on your professional holiday on my own behalf as well as on behalf of the entire MFA staff. We highly appreciate your critical contribution to human development and formation of personalities and characters possessed of an inherent love for one’s homeland, traditions and native language. We are grateful to you for your commitment to your profession, your warmth, kindness, conscientiousness, industry, patience, and decency. I wish you new creative achievements and inspiration in your important and demanding work. I want to address some special words of acknowledgement and gratitude to all teachers and schoolmasters of the Russian Federation’s embassy schools. They provide children with knowledge while being actually in the line of fire at the forefront. We bow down before you, please accept our deepest gratitude. We know how hard it is for them to perform their duties. But they do it with great dignity.
Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia marks 30th anniversary
On October 5, 2022, the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA) marked its 30th anniversary. Russia has been taking part in this multilateral mechanism since its establishment.
CICA partners have been upholding their commitment to developing politics-free, practical cooperation in various spheres with a view to strengthening multi-pronged connectivity across the vast Eurasian space, despite the growing international turbulence and all the risks it entails for regional security.
Russia has always been a proactive contributor to CICA’s work. We have engaged in a system-wide effort to promote economic cooperation. Since 2007, our country has been coordinating confidence building measures on small and medium-size businesses. In 2015, Russia initiated the creation of the CICA Business Council. We hosted its meeting in Russia in 2017, and in June 2022 the Council held its regular meeting in Kazakhstan.
Russia also took part in organising CICA business forums in Bangkok and Istanbul, and held business conferences in Yekaterinburg and Moscow. In October 2020, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, we convened a roundtable to discuss the digital economy. Today, we are preparing a specialised international event on cooperation for helping SMEs sell their products, which has become a burning issue lately. We plan to hold this event in 2022.
In June 2019, CICA approved the Memorandum of Interaction in the Area of Small and Medium Enterprise, drafted by Russia. In December 2021, it approved a plan of action for the next two-year cycle (2022-2023).
In 2021, Russia initiated adding international information security to the CICA Catalogue of Confidence Building Measures in Asia (the association roadmap guiding its practical efforts). This is quite a topical issue for the region and the world in general. Being the first coordinator on this topic, Russia proactively contributed to delivering on the objectives and has already held an expert event on internet governance in August 2022. This meeting demonstrated that this is a very relevant topic for the region.
On October 12 and 13, 2022, CICA will convene an anniversary summit in Astana, with the Russian leadership expected to attend the event. We expect the summit to adopt important decisions for furthering cooperation processes in this format, including by making it an organic part of the multipolar world order matrix, and helping it emerge as a pragmatic and equitable pan-continental cooperation platform for building a single space within Greater Eurasia.
The 20th anniversary of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation
On October 7, 2022, we will mark the 20th anniversary of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO).
On that day in 2002, the Collective Security Treaty was assigned the status of an international regional organisation, the CSTO, and the CSTO Charter was adopted, setting out the organisation’s main goals, namely stronger peace and international and regional security and stability, and the collective protection of the independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty of the member states primarily through political means. The current member states of the CSTO are Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan.
The organisation has come a long way in a historically short period of time. By working together, its member states have created an integral and effective mechanism for jointly addressing security issues and for promoting their collective interests on the international stage. The CSTO now plays a key role in maintaining regional stability and security in its zone of responsibility, which includes the territories of its member states.
A recent example of CSTO’s maturity was the coordinated actions of CSTO peacekeepers to help Kazakhstan stabilise the domestic political situation in January 2022 upon its request.
The CSTO has a large legal framework regulating its efforts in the main areas of activity, such as political and military cooperation and measures to counter new challenges and threats. The member states are implementing the CSTO Collective Security Strategy for the period up to 2025, a policy document that defined the organisation’s main development priorities.
The CSTO cooperates with non-members and maintains relations with international organisations in the sphere of security.
In 2004, the CSTO was granted the status of observer at the UN General Assembly. The Joint Declaration on Cooperation between the Secretariats of the United Nations and the CSTO was signed in Moscow in 2010. The organisation is developing productive contacts with the relevant UN bodies, such as the Department of Peace Operations, Office of Counter-Terrorism and Office on Drugs and Crime.
Conditions are being gradually created for the participation of the CSTO Collective Peacekeeping Forces in UN-controlled operations.
The CSTO allies coordinate their efforts in the joint fight against international terrorism and extremism, illegal trafficking of drugs, psychotropic substances and weapons, organised transnational crime, illegal migration and other new challenges and threats to security. They are working to create a collective security system and improve crisis response mechanisms.
They have developed a capacity to repel and prevent threats, namely the Collective Rapid Reaction Forces of the Central Asian Region, Collective Operational Response Forces, Peacekeeping Forces and Collective Air Force.
The member states coordinate their foreign policy positions on international and regional security issues.
One of the main decisions adopted by the heads of CSTO counties was a decision to open the organisation to cooperation with interested countries and international organisations that share its principles. The CSTO Partner and Observer statuses were established in 2021.
Russia regards the continued strengthening and development of all-round cooperation with CSTO member states as a foreign policy priority.
Days of Russian Spiritual Culture in Bulgaria
Amid the ongoing attempts by the collective West to “cancel” Russian culture, Russia continues to promote its constructive, unifying approach in humanitarian projects and present the best samples of domestic culture to foreign audiences.
Another proof of this is the Days of Russian Spiritual Culture, which were held in Bulgaria on September 23-27 and were a great success.
The conference dedicated to the 120th anniversary of the consecration of the Russian Church of the Nativity of Christ in Shipka and the development of historical and cultural cooperation between the two countries aroused great interest.
The world-famous Moscow Synodal Choir performed spiritual canticles as well as pieces by Pyotr Tchaikovsky, Sergey Rachmaninov, Dmitry Bortnyansky, Pavel Chesnokov, and Georgy Sviridov with great eclat.
Two exhibitions, Masterpieces of Ancient Russian Painting, from the State Russian Museum and the Phanagoria, the Archaeological Gem of Russia display from the Phanagoria State Historical and Archaeological Museum-Reserve were an excellent presentation of Russian art. I was fortunate to visit those excavations, and I sincerely advise you to visit it too. It is an amazing place.
On October 9, the Republic of Uganda celebrates the 60th anniversary of its independence. We wholeheartedly wish all the best to our Ugandan friends on this significant occasion. October 13 marks the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between our countries. For six decades, Moscow and Kampala have maintained friendly and trust-based ties, which rely on the principles of mutual respect and consideration for each other's interests.
In recent years, our bilateral cooperation has become increasingly dynamic. Our partnership in the political, trade, economic, educational and other spheres is growing progressively. A bilateral Intergovernmental Commission on Economic, Scientific and Technical Cooperation has been established and is successfully operating. The legal framework for our cooperation is expanding, and fruitful ties are being established between Uganda and Russian regions.
Russia and Uganda maintain regular contacts at the highest and high levels. In December 2012, President of Uganda Yoweri Museveni paid an official visit to Russia, and in October 2019, he attended the first Russia-Africa Summit in Sochi. He also met with President of Russia Vladimir Putin on the sidelines of the event. In July of this year, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov paid a working visit to Kampala, for the first time in the history of our relations, where he was received by President of Uganda Yoweri Museveni and had talks with Foreign Minister Jeje Odongo.
Inter-parliamentary ties are intensifying, as are contacts between political parties. The United Russia party and the ruling party of Uganda, National Resistance Movement, signed an agreement on interaction and cooperation in June; the leaders of these parties, Dmitry Medvedev and Yoweri Museveni, had a meeting via videoconference.
We note with satisfaction that Russia and Uganda are constructively cooperating in international affairs and coordinating their steps at the UN and other multilateral venues. Moscow and Kampala have a shared perception of the processes taking place in the world and the emerging new geopolitical situation; they have similar principled approaches to addressing current challenges and issues on the global and regional agenda.
Moscow is ready to continue working actively with its friends in Kampala to build up multifaceted Russian-Ugandan cooperation for the benefit of the peoples of the two countries.
Exhibition dedicated to the 150th anniversary of the birth of Georgy Chicherin
The historical exhibition of the Moscow Kremlin Museums dedicated to the People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs of the RSFSR and the USSR Georgy Chicherin opened on October 7, 2022.
The opening is timed to coincide with the 150th birth anniversary of the man who determined the nature of our country's foreign policy at the most pivotal moments in history.
I won't spend much time talking about it. I encourage you to visit it.
Answers to media questions:
Maria Zakharova: Unilateral restrictive measures adopted by the EU in circumvention of the UN Security Council are illegitimate from the international legal point of view. Many are talking about compliance/non-compliance with international law, and Westerners are running from the UN General Assembly to the Security Council (and back). They’d better look at themselves and ask themselves to what extent their actions, in particular, the adoption of unilateral sanctions, correspond to international law. They can sit down and put decisions on the table, open the UN Charter, Security Council resolutions and clarifications to them and they will realise that unilateral sanctions are illegitimate. If they engage in illegal actions of this kind, they have no right discussing legitimacy/illegitimacy of other people’s actions.
By continuing this policy, the EU, which pays lip service to the rule of law, not only violates these principles, but literally forces other countries to go down the same road. Pressing anyone to take part in illegal activities is illegal to begin with. We consider the EU practice of imposing on other states the decisions in developing which they were not involved to be offensive and downright unacceptable. These actions can be subjected to legal and even criminal assessment. In the case of Serbia, such confrontational steps are at odds with its national interests, and the leadership of that country has repeatedly stated so.
These EU actions violate the principles of the UN Charter and the Helsinki Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe of 1975 on the sovereign equality of states and respect for the rights inherent in sovereignty and then it proceeds to pontificate about sovereignty as an international legal norm. It has a consumer attitude towards accession candidates, treats individual regions as its “backyard” and uses neo-colonialist policies in dealing with them. With a calculator in hand, the EU tallies the number of EU statements or decisions which the candidate countries have not joined, has no scruples about using blackmail or coercion, and shamelessly uses these countries as markets and labour sources. This transcends politics. This is neo-colonialism of the 21st century. They patched it up and repackaged it, but the methods remained unchanged. They are adopting old proven colonial superiority concepts using innovative technology this time.
The EU is not even trying to conceal the fact that Serbia will not become an EU member until it “settles” its relations with Pristina. We must call things for what they are and rephrase it to reflect the original message: “until Belgrade does what the West wants it to do.” The way the EU sees it, this means recognition of the unilaterally proclaimed independence of the province in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1244. The same applies to international law. Brussels must give a clear answer to the following question: has UNSC Resolution 1244 been recognised or acted upon? A simple question that anyone can ask since the EU is referring to international law and doing so to its advantage. Whenever they are unable to derive any benefit for themselves, they say that the world order is based on “rules,” not law. Even then, no one can guarantee that an EU member will not block its accession in order to push Belgrade into giving ground on bilateral matters.
We hope that sooner or later the EU will muster enough courage to show respect for the right of nation states to independent foreign policies, historical ties and national traditions. History knows examples of mutually beneficial cooperation built with partners in the West and in the East based on the expert use of geographical location.
Maria Zakharova: The exercise you mentioned took place in direct proximity to the Russian Far East. We believe that such Japanese activity is a threat to the security of Russia and the entire Asia Pacific region. In this connection, the Foreign Ministry expressed its grave concern to the Embassy of Japan in Moscow. We also urged the Japanese side to address issues of maintaining future peace and stability in Northeast Asia in a responsible manner.
Maria Zakharova: I believe that the European Union should, first of all, sort things out at home. First, they should decide whether they are implementing a common foreign policy or whether each country conducts its own, national, policy. This is important. We have repeatedly heard contradictory statements. On the one hand, they said that the EU had a common foreign policy. On the other hand, separate states voiced specific initiatives. Later, they either disavowed these initiatives or declined to confirm them because they had not been coordinated with Brussels.
First, they should decide whether they are speaking in unison or whether each country has the right to voice foreign policy initiatives as a sovereign state. Second, the European Union should decide whether it supports talks or a victory “on the battlefield” (as Josep Borrell said).
We have heard many contradictory and absurd statements in the past few months. Earlier, we were told that it is Josep Borrell who makes public the common EU foreign policy line. Until recently, they advocated a victory “on the battlefield.” What are they calling for today? Do they advocate victory on the battlefield, talks, neutrality, joint involvement or something else? Are they a hybrid side in the conflict? Do they see themselves as a party to the conflict? Brussels alone should clarify these important issues. After that, it will be possible to start commenting on certain agreed-upon initiatives.
A few countries voiced their desire to exercise peacekeeping and mediatory functions in line with their “neutral” status. We have repeatedly said that, unfortunately, the states that declare their neutrality have in fact lost this status since they are actively supplying weapons or weapons procurement funding and providing political support to these extremist aspirations of the Kiev regime. These countries are now quite active. Could they have facilitated the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures by the Kiev regime? At that time, they said that they could not support any party to the domestic Ukrainian conflict because of their neutral status. Today, they are providing material assistance, funding and presenting political arguments in support of one party to the conflict. How does this correlate with their neutral status? Consequently, when they offer themselves as a venue for talks on any specific issue, we should remember that, unfortunately, they have either lost their neutral status or are interpreting this status in a way that does not conform to international diplomatic practice.
Maria Zakharova: Using your vocabulary, it is certainly a stalemate for Zelensky.
I spoke on this matter at the beginning of my briefing today. I can repeat that it was the Ukrainian side that initiated negotiations in February 2022. We responded to that request positively, and the talks were held. However, the Kiev regime suspended them under Western pressure in mid-April. It is a fact. The US State Department issued statements to the effect that they don’t see any need for the talks, and there were similar statements by other officials. Brussels took up the tune, speaking about victory “on the battlefield” and so on. These statements have been reinforced with the supply of weapons and material assistance.
We never refused to talk, and we openly stated our position. The Kiev regime and the West refused to talk, indicating that they are not interested. They probably expected to win on the battlefield and thought that we would give up on the declared goals and tasks. They probably thought that the lives of people in Ukraine didn’t matter to them.
Speaking in the St George Hall of the Kremlin on September 30, President Vladimir Putin again called on the Kiev regime “to immediately cease fire and all hostilities; to end the war it unleashed back in 2014 and return to the negotiating table.” It is notable that Pope Francis spoke about this in his Sunday prayer on October 2. Similar statements have been made by public figures across the world, who cannot be suspected of support or sympathy for Moscow in the West. People here and there are speaking in the same spirit. But what do the Kiev regime and its handlers say? The office of the Ukrainian president has denounced all of them, including Pope Francis, as “a mob of starry-eyed aborigines,” as Alexey Arestovich put it. I think we should start collecting the quotes we hear from the Ukrainian president’s office, because I don’t remember any other organisation making so many insulting, obscene and disgusting statements.
This is exactly what we have been talking about for the past eight years, urging the West to encourage Kiev to implement the Minsk agreements. They are speaking loudly now, but during the previous eight years they only spoke quietly and only with each other. The worst thing is that they sabotaged negotiations and their results with their actions. They have exploded now, demonstrating in public what we have known about them for a long time.
There are public and political figures and members of civil societies in the West who wonder where this position would lead Europe. Threats, blackmail and cancel culture are being used to prevent these people from speaking out against this horrible, aggressive and man-hating rhetoric.
Maria Zakharova: The secret services use the Western media as a tool. This has long been an open secret. They use the media for carrying out their information and political campaigns. In the context of the Ukraine crisis, the Western media have been taking their cues from politicians and have been proactive in introducing the nuclear narrative into the public discourse for quite some time now. They accuse Russia of using nuclear blackmail and threats, spreading far-fetched allegations claiming that we are thinking about using nuclear weapons for either attacking the Ukrainian Armed Forces or carrying out a nuclear weapons test in the Black Sea to send some kind of a signal.
Do you know how this machine works? They took a page from propaganda and communications textbooks. When the Russian Federation, through its leaders, says something on not being the first to use nuclear weapons or on our commitment to all our fundamental documents governing nuclear weapons and technology, the Western media instantly cut and paste these statements into their articles, leaving only who said it, and the words dealing with nuclear weapons and technology. They throw out all the rest. This turns everything upside-down.
If the original statement focused on not being the first to use nuclear weapons, and reaffirmed the commitments under the existing documents, all these messages get thrown away. What remains boils down to “Russia” and “nuclear weapons,” followed by perorations on this subject.
This is a case in point when it comes to propaganda. I would go even further and argue that this is more than just propaganda. You see, propaganda consists of promoting one’s position or, in the worst-case scenario, keeping a lid on some information to heighten the importance of certain issues in public awareness. But what we see here is an effort to manipulate by distorting the message. When we ask them how that is possible, they answer that we were the ones who said it. Maybe so, but there were 15 more words, and you threw them away, leaving just two. To that, they respond: But you still said these two words. Yes, but you distorted the original message. Everyone is doing this to us.
During the August 18, 2022, briefing, we discussed commemorations held in Japan to mark the tragic anniversary of the nuclear strikes by the United States against Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Attended by Japanese officials, during these mourning ceremonies, the United States was not mentioned even once. However, these events offered an opportunity to mention Russia in the context of nuclear threats. This is manipulation at its finest. They threw out the facts and created a narrative built around false information. All this was coming from the country’s senior officials.
We are getting an impression that Washington and other Western capitals may be interested in the situation escalating to a dangerous point and pinning the blame for this on Russia. This is done as part of Washington’s policy to use any means to secure its global dominance, which is destructive in terms of international security and strategic stability, ignoring the threat of provoking a direct military confrontation between major nuclear powers, which is fraught with disastrous consequences.
If someone among officials in Washington preaches this policy line, this must be prevented. We have no intention of contributing to this horrendous discourse loaded as it is with the nuclear rhetoric. They – I mean NATO-centric structures and countries – keep raising the stakes, along with those who serve their interests in the media space.
Once again, I would like to remind you what our country’s leadership has said on multiple occasions: the Russian Federation is fully committed to the principle that nuclear war is unacceptable. A nuclear war cannot be won, and must never be fought. I will not list all the doctrines to this effect, since our position remains unchanged. I will only mention the Military Doctrine of the Russian Federation, as well as the Foundations of State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Area of Nuclear Deterrence. They set forth in all clarity our approaches to all these matters. There is no space for ambiguous interpretations. Searching for them would not only be ill-advised, but deprived of any meaning and fruitless. Do not do that. All this does is foment speculation on the nuclear issue.
It is beyond our understanding why the Western media failed to pay due attention when a nuclear facility – the Zaporozhye NPP – faced a real threat, considering that they know well who has been threatening this facility for months. They also understand that they – NATO and Western-centric countries – cover up these actions.
I would like to give journalists from Western countries some food for thought. I believe that they could remind themselves more often that only one country – the United States – has used nuclear weapons. It was the United States that dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki without any rationale from a military perspective. This was a de facto WMD test, carried out against these two Japanese cities and their people for the sake of intimidation. Has the United States apologised? No, it has not. Has it been held accountable for what it did? Has is claimed responsibility? Let those in the West and the Western media who every day attribute to Russia words we never said while crossing out the actual quotes from their articles think about this.
Maria Zakharova: NATO has consistently been molding Ukraine into an “anti-Russia” for years. It supported the Kiev regime’s determination to avoid implementing the Minsk agreements, encouraged its Russophobic policies, filled it with weapons, and openly praised its “Transatlantic choice,” being fully aware that human rights were something highly irrelevant under the circumstances.
In 2020, Ukraine was even given NATO’s Enhanced Opportunities Partner status. At the same time, the bloc was encouraging revenge-seeking sentiments in Ukraine. Kiev was a willing horse in this geopolitical game. All of this took place against the background of NATO’s emphatic disdain for Russian initiatives that were aimed at finding ways to de-escalate and reduce military tensions. There were many of these initiatives, executed in writing and sent to Brussels. We held joint events with many countries. These were to answer the basic questions on joint security and offered packages of measures designed to remove tensions, minimise mutual distrust, etc. This was a large, practical, applied effort.
Now, after Russia has launched the special military operation in Ukraine, the alliance makes a point of emphasising that it is not, as they say, “a party to the conflict.” In the meantime, NATO has been providing Kiev with all kind of weapons and information support, including in cyberspace. This is being done with just one aim in mind – to prolong the conflict as much as possible.
Thinking that the West and NATO want, as they say, “Ukraine to win,” is a terrible mistake on the part of the Kiev regime. At this point, Kiev does not realise this (I understand how hard it is to do that), but it will have to. In fact, Brussels, Washington, London and every Western capital keep talking about victory over Russia, saying how much they want and need it. The words seem to be identical, but their meaning is different. They want to drag this conflict out as much as possible. The aims and objectives are not what they are purported to be. If Kiev is aware of this, then the continuation of their crazy collaboration with the West is aimed against the people of Ukraine, the citizens of that country. If not, then the question is: what are they basically doing over there? The Kiev regime and the West are feeding Ukrainian citizens with tales of imminent victory over Russia in a short time. But the true purpose of NATO and all those in the West who are talking about this, is to protract the conflict as much as possible, fuel it further, and complicate the situation.
NATO leaders’ statements to the effect that all arms supplies to Ukraine are bilateral and are not carried out under NATO aegis are just a smokescreen that enables the alliance to insure itself against the need to intervene on behalf of a country that is a mere tool in their confrontation with Russia.
But Kiev’s bid for expedited NATO membership has put Washington and its allies in a sticky situation. It seems rather embarrassing to turn down a country that the West has so assiduously trained to become a “last-ditch defence position” against the Russian “threat.” They will have to explain this. At the same time, everyone is well aware that any demand to invoke Article 5 of the Washington Treaty (that automatically makes NATO a party to the conflict) is a completely serious and dangerous step.
According to Kiev, 11 member countries have allegedly voted for or supported fast-track accession to NATO. But the leaders of the majority of NATO countries, including the US and Germany, are in no hurry to show support for this. They obviously realise that the situation is very precarious and that crossing acceptable lines will result in grave consequences.
Until recently, the alliance stressed that Ukraine had failed to meet the formal requirements for candidate status that would lead to NATO membership. NATO leadership pointed out that Ukraine had to carry out reforms, launch an uncompromising fight against corruption, and take other steps before it could rise to the next level of rapprochement with the alliance. But the example of recently accepted Montenegro and North Macedonia shows that the so-called membership criteria can be easily sacrificed for a geopolitical goal. One of the main criteria is that the accession of new members should strengthen NATO security. The Ukraine situation is completely clear to any reasonable person, if there are still any left in the West.
This also shows that the Kiev regime is just a tool in the hands of the West. This is a chance to ensure that this region becomes exhausted under the burden of crisis and conflict. They don’t want any certainty for the Kiev regime; they just want the conflict to go on and on. If the Ukrainian administration (or the President’s Office, as they call it) was aware of this from the start, then they have committed the most terrible crime before their own people. Even if they weren’t, the consequences will be just as serious. A lot has been said about the personal qualities of the people who are, or were, at the helm of power in that country. We know them very well.
Maria Zakharova: We have said many times that the G7 initiative to set some kind of a price cap on oil demonstrates yet again that Brussels and Washington are unfamiliar with the principles governing the market economy. They seek to micro manage and exert political pressure on all economic actors, prioritising the geopolitical goal of weakening Russia and increasing revenue for their companies, major corporations and monopolies that support and finance the Western political elites. We will respond by shifting oil exports to countries that are ready to work with us normally, as our country’s top officials have said on multiple occasions.
As for the second part of your question, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken answered it on September 30, 2022. Without any qualms, he proudly said for everyone to hear what Washington actually thinks about the acts of sabotage perpetrated against the Nord Stream pipelines. He said that the fact that the pipelines are out of operation is “a tremendous opportunity to once and for all remove the dependence on Russian energy.” He went on to say that this “offers tremendous strategic opportunity for the years to come.” What is this, if not an honest confession? At the same time, the Secretary of State recognised that the United States has increased LNG output to become Europe’s largest supplier. This sheds new light on the question of who benefits from the sabotage and why. Whether the White House delivers on its promises is a separate question. What price will the EU have to pay?
I have to remind you that during last year’s energy crisis, the United States made it clear that it will not be able to help Europeans overcome the shortfall in gas supplies or offer lower fuel prices. In October 2021, the US administration, speaking through Amos Hochstein, who is Senior Advisor for Global Energy Security at the Department of State, said that “the US Government does not direct our companies in who they sell” LNG to. It would seem that this is a free market. In other words, this reaffirmed that the US would export its LNG to regions offering the highest price. You can see that being allies within NATO is one thing, but money is a different story.
How many times have we said that Russian gas ticks all the boxes when it comes to its quality and supply methods, and is also better for everyone from a business perspective? It may be that officials planted by Washington in Brussels and other EU capitals are playing against their own countries, guided by self-interest and seeking to enrich themselves.
Once again, I would like to express my deep concern over the attack, unprecedented in scale, against Nord Stream gas pipelines, which are critical elements of Europe’s energy infrastructure. The lack of transparency and the fact that Russian specialists have not been allowed to join the investigation, as I have already mentioned today, to uncover the true causes of what happened, and the blatant refusal to allow Russia to take part in the investigation into what caused the sabotage, cause special concern. Once again, we emphasise the need for a transparent investigation into what happened there.
Maria Zakharova: We have taken note of these reports. It is a very interesting subject. The European business elite is indeed thinking about moving their companies to the United States from Europe, where they have become unprofitable due to skyrocketing energy prices.
Experts believe that Europe could slide into a new period of deindustrialisation. This time production will be moved not to Southeast Asia but to the United States, where the economic situation is not ideal either but at least energy prices are considerably lower than in the EU and there is a guaranteed supply of energy resources.
Responsibility for the energy crisis in Europe and its long-term negative consequences for the EU countries’ industrial potential lies squarely with Brussels. It is because of its ill-considered green energy policy, aimed at slashing the use of fossil fuels, and its sanctions war against Russia that the EU has been faced with a shortage of energy resources and galloping energy prices. The numbers tell the story best: gas prices on the EU spot market are nearly 10 times higher than in the United States, which claims that the EU is a partner.
The situation reached a point where plants and factories, including large steel and chemical combines, are shutting down in some EU countries. Despite this, Brussels refuses to revise its policy of stepping away from energy cooperation with Russia. And this could be impossible to do now, after the explosions on the gas pipelines.
Instead, we see the increased deliveries of much more expensive US LNG to the EU. According to European Commission officials, the deliveries have doubled over the first eight months of the year.
European business, which is tired of the EU leaders’ promises to find alternative suppliers of energy for replacing Russian gas, oil and coal, is confused and looking for back-up solutions. In light of EU countries’ unprecedented political dependence on Washington and unwillingness to protect their real interests before the overlord, the European business community views the United States as the best of bad options for moving their production facilities. Washington started creating the necessary conditions for this even before the incidents on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, the circumstances of which have yet to be fully investigated.
It is also notable that these media reports appeared ahead of the upcoming November elections to the US Congress. They look very much like advertisements for US investment advantages over the EU. This is being done to demonstrate, at least on paper, the alleged economic achievements of the Biden administration and to help the Democrats keep control of the US legislative authority. At the same time, US media keep silent about the fact that the relocation of plants and the expansion of production facilities in the United States will be accompanied by numerous concessions and preferences promised by the White House, such as tax exemptions and subsidies for businesses that move their production facilities to the United States. This part of the deal is not disclosed in the advertising folder, but experts are fully aware of it.
But even disregarding this, official statistics show that the US economy has entered a recession. The US GDP decreased by 1.6 percent in the first quarter of 2022 and 0.9 percent in the second quarter, while the inflation rate is 8.3 percent. For comparison, it is over 10 percent in the EU. The US gross national debt exceeded $31 trillion as of several days ago. It is obvious that these figures, as well as the support packages approved for Ukraine, are seriously affecting the real economy sectors.
One can feel sorry for the EU, which has made its economy a hostage of the current US administration. There is a period of big trouble and suffering ahead. The EU, which has followed Washington’s lead for years and trusted its ally’s promises, now has to pay the US for its own mistakes and broken dreams.
Maria Zakharova: We provide comprehensive assistance to secure the normalisation of relations between the two states, which are both Russia’s close allies, including in the drafting of the peace treaty. We have submitted comprehensive proposals to Baku and Yerevan. As we have already reported, the Russian Foreign Minister’s Special Representative Igor Khovayev made a series of trips to the region for consultations on this subject. His most recent visits took place this past September.
Any attempts to question our role or active engagement are wishful thinking. We are making hands-on efforts on an ongoing basis. And no, we aren’t doing this to mark some date or create a beautiful format, but we are doing it to consolidate the process with concrete results. We are not doing this for show, with nothing actually achieved behind it. We are doing the opposite: we only talk about the things we have actually done.
Taking into account the high sensitivity of the subject, we consider it inappropriate to publicly comment on any details of the ongoing peace talks. As for the respective views of Baku and Yerevan, these questions should be addressed to them. We are focusing on the result.
Maria Zakharova: Unfortunately, we hear such reports regularly, from both sides. We have the opportunity to read more materials than can be found in the media, because the parties provide us with details. All such cases require immediate, thorough and comprehensive analysis, including for signs of war crimes.
We believe that the parties should adhere to all the provisions of the trilateral agreements between the leaders of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia of November 9, 2020, January 11 and November 26, 2021, including with respect to resolving any outstanding issues. This applies to POW exchanges and information about missing persons, as well as the protection of cultural heritage in the region.
Maria Zakharova: We see this as public discourse and personal opinion, where a person has his or her own idea of what is happening. There are many public discussions like this, as you know. Different people engage in this, ordinary people, people connected by family ties, people who have certain interests in the region; they may be impartial, but at the same time they have an urge to share their thoughts. This is public discourse. You know how much has been said over the years.
Maria Zakharova: For any information on the military-technical cooperation between Russia and Armenia, you had better contact the Russian Defence Ministry press service for a comment. This is their area of responsibility.
Regarding the first part of your question, about some “pressure” allegedly being put on Armenia, this is something Armenian officials should comment on. It is a question for them. Can they confirm or deny this information? If it were an official statement, we would comment. Most importantly, this is another country you are asking about. They have their own officials who are entitled to openly talk about it.
Maria Zakharova: I would like to disagree with your assessments.
Since the end of the armed confrontation in autumn 2020, a total of 147 people have been returned home (128 to the Armenian side, 19 to the Azerbaijani side) with the direct assistance of the Russian Federation. This is official information; I can confirm this.
At the same time, I would like to emphasise that Russia is not satisfied with the geopolitical games being played around these humanitarian problems. Moscow has consistently called on both Baku and Yerevan (and again today) to finally take this issue off the table with an all-for-all prisoner swap.
Maria Zakharova: Our approach is very clear. We understand that geopolitics implies elements of manipulating and manoeuvering. We are against geopolitical intrigues that could lead to a dangerous escalation. We are ready to support any effort leading to tangible, positive results, and by that we mean stabilisation in the region. We are playing our intermediary role. We have done everything we could to help the parties develop and conclude the trilateral agreements. Most importantly, we are determined to see them implemented. These agreements hold the answers to all questions. Naturally, there may be more questions, but they hold the answers to the biggest ones. This needs to be implemented.
As for the West’s approaches to the peace agreement between Azerbaijan and Armenia, we do not see them as well balanced. I do not want to talk about the role of certain Western mediators because it is impossible to call them “mediators of peace.”
Maria Zakharova: I would like to draw your attention to the Executive Order On the Specifics of Legal Regulation for the Use of Nuclear Energy in the Zaporozhye Region. President of Russia Vladimir Putin signed this yesterday. It covers the questions you have raised.
As for the details, many of them are still a work in progress. As for the IAEA mission, I do not have any information for you.
Question: What is the Foreign Ministry’s position on the DPRK’s missile launches?
Maria Zakharova: We keep a close eye on the developments on the Korean peninsula. Tensions persist against the backdrop of the first major joint military exercises held by Washington and Seoul since 2017, which included a carrier strike group.
It is our strong belief that the only way to find a comprehensive solution to the problems this subregion is facing is by creating a peace framework in Northeast Asia, taking into consideration the legitimate concerns of all interested parties and offering them security guarantees. We call for resuming the political and diplomatic process without delay in order to create this mechanism based on the principle of equality, in a step-by-step and synchronised manner.
Question: Who will replace Igor Morgulov as Deputy Foreign Minister in charge of the APR?
Maria Zakharova: Igor Morgulov has been appointed Ambassador to China. We do not comment on future appointments. You will be informed in due course.
Maria Zakharova: Children can benefit from Russian secondary education while living abroad, and receive general and secondary education certificates as long as they study at education institutions abroad which are accredited with and licensed by the Federal Service for Supervision in Education and Science (Rosobrnadzor). You can find the list of these educational institutions by country on the service’s website.
Under Article 107 of Federal Law No. 273-FZ Education in the Russian Federation, dated December 29, 2012, the recognising of foreign education and/or qualifications is subject to international treaties of the Russian Federation on governing the recognition and equivalency between foreign education and/or qualifications and the laws of the Russian federation.
Education or qualifications covered by international treaties on mutual recognition, as well as that obtained from foreign educational institutions listed by the Government of the Russian Federation (Directive of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 28-r of January 19, 2022) shall be recognised.
If the foreign degree programme or the qualifications do not meet the requirements as described above, there is a recognition procedure that can be engaged (as described on the Federal Service for Supervision in Education and Science’s website).
Holders of Russian education certificates can enrol in Russian higher education institutions by applying for a state-funded education or for a tuition-based education. Holders of foreign education certificates can enrol in Russian higher education institutions by either applying for tuition-based programmes or using grant quotas as allocated by the Government of the Russian Federation. Winners in academic Olympiads benefit from preferences when enrolling in specific higher education institutions.
Maria Zakharova: I am surprised that you are asking me about information leaked by The New York Times. We have been conducting an investigation of our own. The competent authorities have released video footage and materials related to Ms Dugina’s murder. You have seen all of this. I mean statements by the law enforcement agencies that directly implicated the perpetrators and the source that directed these criminals.
As for Washington’s supervision, or otherwise, of certain elements of extremist activity by representatives of the Kiev regime, let them sort out which parts of planned extremist actions the Kiev regime performs in close contact with its masters and which ones are under their own hand.
We have never heard Washington denounce, dissociate itself from, or even criticise the Kiev regime for all the horror it has been committing for years, starting from the Myrotvorets website listing the personal data of children, the murders of journalists and civilians, and blasts on and mining of civilian infrastructure. Has there even been a single statement with regard to this? Occasionally the US Department of State mutters something to the effect that they are either following or are not following a situation. And that’s all. No denunciations or direct charges. I think it makes little sense to try to identify individual elements of what was done under the direct supervision of the US secret services and what wasn’t. Washington has directed, covered up and controlled the Kiev regime for years. This is a matter of general responsibility for what the United States has done with that country and the region as a whole.
Can we avoid describing the direct involvement of US officials in the first and second anti-constitutional coups on Kiev’s Maidan Square as criminal activities? There are many US advisers and specialists from all US intelligence services staffing Ukrainian government institutions. They have participated in unconstitutional activities, contrary to Ukrainian law. Have we heard even once any reproachful comments from official US authorities about the outrages committed on Maidan Square in 2013-2014, when militants killed people, set fire to civilian infrastructure, and seized government buildings? Now, The New York Times has suddenly become concerned with things that are at variance with the general narrative. We understand this very well. And Reuters understands better than anyone that official US agencies are behind US media stories like this. It is just that they are reluctant to identify themselves and, for reasons known to them alone, engineer the relevant media leaks. In reality, it is high time Washington said in a loud, frank and clear voice that it is directly involved in Ukraine crisis, starting from the regime change to their motives in blowing up the gas pipelines.
Additional materials
-
Photos
