Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, December 29, 2022
Table of Contents
- New year 2023
- Main foreign policy results of 2022
- The Ukraine crisis
- Unfounded nature of Ukrainian and Western propaganda
- Ukraine wrecks adoption of resolution on BSEC-UN cooperation
- The 81st anniversary of the signing of United Nations Declaration
- US State Department spokesperson on the Nord Stream pipeline terrorist attack
- Russian Room opens at FAO headquarters in Rome
- The 35th anniversary of diplomatic relations with Nauru
- New anti-Russia steps by Latvian authorities
- Russia's contribution to strengthening humanitarian cooperation in public health
- Games of the Future international project and the Figital international movement
- Statements by Ukraine representatives
- Employment of civilian commercial satellites by the US and its NATO allies to support Ukraine
- Assessments of the essence of the Ukrainian regime
- Reasons why the collective West supports Ukraine
- Anti-Russia statements on the Crimean Tatar issue
- Russia’s approach to participation in the Munich Security Conference
- Prospects of Russia’s cooperation with European countries
- COVID-19 restrictions for Chinese nationals entering Russia
- Transnistria settlement
- Nagorno-Karabakh settlement
- Russia-Türkiye contacts
- Russia’s response to the oil price cap
- Russia’s foreign political course in 2023
- Meeting of the Collegium of the Russian Foreign Ministry and the Russian Ministry for Economic Development
- Nikol Pashinyan’s statements
- Results of the CIS leaders’ informal meeting
- Kiev’s plan to hold a peace summit at the UN
- Ukraine’s initiative to reform the UN Security Council
- The situation around the Lachin Corridor
- Russian peacekeepers’ role in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict zone
- Prospects of Armenia joining the Union State
- Türkiye-Azerbaijan military cooperation
- Russia’s stance on the murder of members of the Kurdish community in Paris
- New US Ambassador to Russia
- Poland’s interest in western Ukrainian territories
- Russia-Pakistan relations
- Russia-Pakistan counterterrorism cooperation
- 92 News Pakistan TV channel
- Breaking through the Western information blockade
I will say what you can already guess: this is our final briefing. What can I tell you? We all understand that the year has been incredible. At the same time, it has been very important, because it is a turning point. In many respects, it set completely new focal points and priorities in foreign policy, in the world economy, in the lives of each and every one of us. Of course, not everything it brought received a positive response, to put it mildly. Yet it revealed the most important things. It gave everyone the opportunity to show their true colours.
There are only days and hours left until the New Year. Until what has not yet been, until our future. Whoever celebrates this New Year, with whomever and no matter how, given these complicated circumstances, now we know that we are together. And this is very important. Together we can go through all kinds of trials, including these. This is probably one of the achievements of this year.
I would like to wish all of us warmth, hope and faith in these frosty, snowy days. Persistence and light. We don’t know what next year will bring. But it is in our power to fill it with light and sincerely, from our hearts, to fulfil our duty, to work, believe and support each other, to sympathise and empathise.
We will, of course, be together. Every month, every week and every day. The Information and Press Department of the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation is always with you.
You will probably be surprised. Such things are usually said at the end of a briefing or some speech. But this is no coincidence, because this is not the end. This is just the beginning.
Main foreign policy results of 2022
The main foreign policy results for this year will be summed up and published on the Foreign Ministry website. There you will be able to find our assessments of the international situation based on the results of 2022.
Tomorrow marks a memorable day in our common history. One hundred years ago on December 30, 1922, representatives from the RSFSR, the Ukrainian SSR, the Belarussian SSR and the Transcaucasian Federation signed a Declaration on the Creation of the USSR and a Union Treaty.
As part of a single Soviet state, the Ukrainian SSR had become one of the most highly developed and prosperous republics. It had strong research, industrial and energy potential and a thriving agriculture industry. However, afterwards
Kiev, which did much to facilitate the collapse of the Soviet Union and then declared its independence, failed to not only amplify, but even to preserve its Soviet legacy.
Are these our assessments? No, these are not only and not so much our assessments. I am citing “political figures” who ruled Ukraine only recently.
Pondering the price paid for Ukraine’s sovereignty, its second President, Leonid Kuchma, noted that “ordinary people paid the highest price, because they trusted promises… To an extent, we were lying to the people when we claimed that Ukraine was feeding Russia. After all, we used to get oil and gas at prices that were cheaper than tea, cheaper than plain water.”
Today, under the Kiev regime, Ukraine with its fertile lands and rich natural resources, through the efforts of the current authorities pursuing a nationalistic Russophobic policy, has acquired the questionable status of one of the poorest European economies and is on its way to becoming a new colony of the collective West. Who will benefit most from these developments? Without a doubt, the United States which considers Ukraine and Ukrainians expendables in its confrontation with Russia, a tool. But I think “expendables” is a more suitable term here.
The other day, Kiev came up with another “initiative” that is unhinged from reality. It is part of an insane public relations campaign that includes photo sessions with glossy magazines, around-the-world travel by Zelensky’s emissaries, and President Zelensky’s speeches at every forum ranging from sporting events to film festivals. There was more, though. I’m talking about convening a “peace summit” at the UN on February 24, 2023, the day that marks the start of the special military operation. According to strategists from Kiev, it is supposed to help implement President Zelensky’s strange fabrications wrapped in an obscure “peace formula.” They believe Russia can only participate after a “complete and unconditional surrender.”
What does this tell us? First of all, it’s an early signal that they are at the end of their tether. This is the only way to interpret it. It cannot be explained otherwise. They have been carried away by bloviating and “wielding power” and are now coming up with all sorts of outlandish ideas, which they try to wrap in an international legal form. But the goal remains the same: how to preserve themselves without recognising the obvious state of affairs.
We regard this delusional approach as another PR strategy from Washington, which has of late been trying to portray Kiev as a peacemaker. They have already been “sufferers,” “liberal democrats,” and “fighters for the freedom of Europe.” Now they are portrayed as peacemakers. That, by the way, was the name of a website (“myrotvorets” in Ukrainian), which operated for many years and posted the personal data of the people whom the Kiev regime tried to annihilate. They did die, and then information about that was posted on the website. If this is Washington’s idea of portraying the Kiev regime as a peacemaker, we can clearly see what this word means to them.
This is happening amid uninterrupted supplies of Western weapons to Ukraine and provision of large-scale military and other help, including the participation of NATO instructors in planning and conducting the Ukrainian forces’ operations and training its military personnel. All of that is unfolding against the background of make-believe peacekeeping efforts, the killing of civilians and children, and the destruction of civilian infrastructure, as well as insane actions by deranged people from Bankova Street.
Any kind of serious approach behind these “peace initiatives” advanced by Kiev and its Western sponsors is out of question. It can’t be done. These are not “peace initiatives.” There is nothing of substance behind them. This is just another attempt to slightly liven up the tired format of endless video addresses and speeches and to try to give some legitimacy to a dud discussion that will not be followed up by any concrete steps.
We have repeatedly noted many violations by the Ukrainian forces of international humanitarian law and international law on human rights.
These crimes have reached such a tremendous scale that even international organisations that have been discrediting the Russian Armed Forces and Russia as a whole since the beginning of the special military operation are forced to mention them in their reports. On December 14, 2022, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights published its Second Interim Report on reported violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law in Ukraine. The authors of the report note the following violations perpetrated by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, albeit sparingly and with caveats, as if they are bowing slightly and apologising all the time:
– the use of explosive weapons with a wide impact area in attacks on densely populated areas of the Donetsk and Lugansk people’s republics, causing civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian facilities;
– unlawful killings, arbitrary arrest and detention, including instances of forced disappearance, as well as torture, threats of sexual violence or death and other types of mistreatment, including with regard to individuals who presumably cooperated with Russian authorities during the so-called occupation;
– mistreatment of Russian prisoners of war who were tortured and subjected to physical violence during their capture and detention. They were beaten, stabbed, subjected to electric shocks and suffocated; they have suffered from atrocious and often degrading conditions during their evacuation to transit camps following their capture: they were packed into lorries, tied up and beaten; the entire process was filmed, and the videos posted online, with humiliating and degrading comments, including for purposes of intimidation.
It would be useful if international organisations looked at the real situation more often while monitoring developments in Ukraine, and if they remained unbiased while preparing their reports. They should also start tracking from an earlier date than February 2022. For eight years, these territories were the scene of an absolute nightmare, but nobody paid any attention.
Recently, Vladimir Zelensky’s regime, continuing the policy line of his Maidan predecessors, has stepped up the pressure on canonical Orthodoxy. They just found another “enemy” and charged at them with determination to eliminate the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, seize its shrines, churches and monasteries, persecute its bishops, priests and laity. Encouraged by the authorities, a campaign has been launched to ban the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and forcibly compel believers to convert to the artificially created, schismatic Orthodox Church of Ukraine.
Decisions are already being made in many areas that run counter to existing legal norms. The SBU security service has been conducting many searches and raids at Ukrainian Orthodox churches. Its parishes are being raided by supporters of the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, and priests are being detained and arrested on charges of “high treason” and “collaboration,” and are also held as tokens for potential prisoner exchanges with Russia.
As was recently reported, the Ukrainian authorities are planning to discontinue the Ukrainian Orthodox Church’s access to two churches on the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra Museum-Reserve grounds on January 1, 2023, in fact, almost on Orthodox Christmas Eve. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church took an active part in renovating the buildings, and has been leasing them since then.
All this is being done by the people in authority. These are not even religious processes; this is not a dispute about dogmas, or a “new look” at traditions. This is a matter of external influence, and now even a hostile takeover by people having nothing to do with Orthodoxy, who are as far away from any religion as can be and have never had any moral or ethical standards.
What they are doing is prohibited by humanitarian and international law, which regulates human rights and freedoms. For decades, the West has been proactively imposing this on the whole world as a fundamental regulation of both interstate and intrastate relations.
This grossly violates the national laws of Ukraine and international documents on the freedom of conscience and religion, deepening the split in Ukrainian society and Orthodoxy. Such actions once again demonstrate that the Kiev regime is indifferent to the feelings of millions of believers.
The Ukrainian authorities will not let go of their appalling fantasies regarding Crimea. Kiev regularly releases statements with varying degrees of absurdity and danger. First, they will “liberate” the peninsula by military force, or seize it in some unfathomable “hybrid” approach; they crave Black Sea sea snails, or matter-of-factly plan summer vacations in Crimea. This is an echeloned psychological attack against people on a massive scale.
It would have been funny if they had not been cynically exploiting the Crimean Tatar factor. The Ukrainian authorities only remember them when they need to ask the West for money for useless events like “Crimea Platform” or to adopt another anti-Russia resolution. For the same purposes, in 2021, Ukraine adopted a law on indigenous peoples and a concept for the development of the Crimean Tatar language.
A question arises: why didn’t the Kiev regime adopt both documents (supposedly aimed at preserving the identity of the indigenous peoples and the Crimean Tatar language) earlier? For years after Ukraine gained independence in 1991, Kiev could not be bothered less with the rights of Crimean Tatars, despite international agencies’ recommendations. The Ukrainian authorities only became concerned about Crimean Tatars’ problems after the Russian authorities took effective steps to improve the Crimean people’s living standards, to promote their languages and culture.
The behavior shown by Kiev and the Western countries – something we highlight on a regular basis – testifies to the unconditional expediency of completing the de-Nazification and demilitarisation of Ukraine, as Russian leadership has repeatedly said.
Unfounded nature of Ukrainian and Western propaganda
The unacceptable and even criminal nature of Ukrainian and Western propaganda has been clearly manifested over the course of the Ukraine crisis. It relies on catchy yet unreliable statements and materials planted in the information space, unsupported by any real facts. The numerous allegations of Russian war crimes or the shelling of civilian infrastructure provoking a humanitarian crisis in Ukraine are not accompanied by any photo or video evidence. Instead, references and footage from other places or historical periods are shown in abundance.
The rare footage showing the streets of Bucha and Izyum, the railway station in Kramatorsk, the destroyed drama theater and maternity hospital in Mariupol turned out to be fake dramatisations or doctored by people serving the Kiev regime. These provocations were immediately forgotten after being peddled by the media. The words are still there, but the materials and investigations have been consigned to oblivion. Investigations were announced and then put on hold, because the facts they found pointed to the Kiev regime as the mastermind of these crimes. Russia’s demands to present the lists of the dead in Bucha have been left without response. As a reminder, we have appealed to the UN Secretary-General.
At the same time, there are copious amounts of photos and videos circulating on Russian conventional and social media that clearly prove the numerous violations of international humanitarian law and war crimes by Ukrainian neo-Nazis, not only since the start of the special military operation, but over the eight years of the conflict in Donbass.
These materials are available in abundance. Everyone definitely remembers the footage showing the Ukrainian army’s use of prohibited phosphorus bombs in 2014; the execution and torture of Russian servicemen; the destroyed residential buildings and hospitals in Donbass; and civilians with their limbs blown off after explosions of Ukrainian Lepestok anti-personnel mines. The Alley of Angels outside Donetsk bears witness to the monstrous crimes committed by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, a burial site for the children killed during the eight years of the conflict, including those killed by Western weapons.
In total, since February 2022, Ukrainian artillery attacks on Donbass have killed more than 700 civilians, including 39 children, and injured almost 4,500 people, including 268 children. In about 100 recorded cases, civilians were injured from coming in contact with Lepestok mines. As many as 12,000 residential buildings, 2,500 civilian infrastructure facilities, including about 500 education and 120 medical institutions, over 700 electricity, water, heat and gas supply facilities were damaged by shelling from the Armed Forces of Ukraine. In the eight years of the conflict in the DPR and LPR, at least 50,000 civilian infrastructure facilities have been destroyed or damaged.
Russian investigative authorities are carefully recording the crimes committed by Ukrainian armed units. Detailed information on their atrocities is reflected in several editions of the White Book prepared by the Russian Investigative Committee and the Foreign Ministry. The International Public Tribunal on Ukraine, comprised of public figures and rights activists from Russia and dozens of other countries, is collecting data on the Kiev regime’s criminal acts.
All of these materials are in the public domain. We have been sending our findings to the UN and other international agencies. Throughout the eight years of the conflict in Donbass, we have called on Western journalists, correspondents and television crews to visit the territories east of the line of contact. However, the Kiev regime and the authorities in the Western countries forbade them from doing so to prevent the public from knowing the truth.
Adding this to Angela Merkel’s confessions that the Minsk agreements only served to buy “time for Ukraine” leads to an interesting situation. The Western countries prevented their media from visiting Donbass. At the same time, they needed time, as they say, for the Kiev regime to grow stronger. This is real evidence of what Russian leadership has been talking about.
All this indicates that the Ukrainian army and the West are using unacceptable methods not only on the battlefield, but also in the information war that they have unleashed against Russia. The Kiev regime and its Western handlers are trying to hide their own crimes and the truth about what is really happening in Ukraine.
This confirms the unconditional expediency of fulfilling the goals and objectives of the special military operation. As to the peace initiatives proposed by the Kiev regime – just look at what they are really doing at the UN. There were reports a few days ago that Ukraine aimed to convene a peace summit at the UN at the end of February 2023.
Ukraine wrecks adoption of resolution on BSEC-UN cooperation
This year, the organisation of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) celebrated an anniversary. Unfortunately, the traditional resolution on BSEC-UN cooperation was not adopted. Why not? Because the Kiev regime unilaterally blocked it. Of course, Ukraine did this for political reasons, so there was no consensus approval of this resolution. It is outrageous that the Ukrainian delegation announced its malicious decision just minutes before the approval of this document. It was silent during the discussion of the document at the negotiating rounds. Indicatively, not a single country, including members of the EU and Eastern Partnership, supported Kiev’s destructive position. This is what Ukraine’s position is all about. On the one hand, it’s okay to trumpet the need to meet at the UN for the sake of peace, and on the other, to block a fully coordinated document worked out by negotiating groups. It’s okay to be silent and then sabotage a consensus adoption of a resolution at the last minute. Such is reality.
We urge Ukraine to stop fuelling confrontation. We call for depoliticising the dialogue on issues that worry the entire world – the economy, humanitarian areas and food. We hope the resolution on BSEC-UN cooperation will be adopted in the near future.
The 81st anniversary of the signing of United Nations Declaration
On January 1, 1942, the USSR and 25 other countries signed the UN Declaration. This crucial document sealed on paper the formation of a broad anti-Hitler coalition and laid the foundations for a future multilateral structure called upon to unite the world’s countries in their striving for mutually beneficial cooperation, collective resolution of global problems and preservation of peaceful skies over the entire planet. These plans were carried out when the United Nations Organisation was established at the 1945 conference in San Francisco.
Unfortunately, now we are seeing the departure of a number of states from these unifying ideas. Washington and its allies are still locked in a Cold War mentality. They continue dividing the world’s countries into friends and foes, drawing lines of division, inventing a “new axis of evil,” and talking about the right and wrong sides of history. In so doing, they avoid analysing which side they have been on and what axis they have supported in occupying, seizing territories, supplying arms, setting fire and dropping bombs throughout the 20th century and the early 21st century.
This shows that the collective West wants to impose its will on the rest of the world by force. Such uncompromising actions further aggravate the split in the international community and undermine the prospects for effective multilateral interaction that the world needs now more than ever.
For its part, Russia intends to continue upholding depoliticised cooperation, for which there is no alternative. It relies on the central coordinating role of the UN and primacy of the provisions of its Charter, primarily the principles of sovereign equality of states and non-interference in their domestic affairs.
We urge all members of the international community to retrieve the spirit of the UN Declaration with a view to finding effective responses to the many challenges and threats of our time.
US State Department spokesperson on the Nord Stream pipeline terrorist attack
US Department of State Spokesperson Ned Price said that Russia’s demand to identify the actual paymasters and perpetrators of the Nord Stream pipeline explosions is an act of “disinformation.”
We are only asking to establish the truth, to investigate the crime and to reach conclusions based on facts, and then make them public. Is this disinformation? At this rate, the question “what time is it?” and the answer, after synchronising watches, can also be seen as disinformation. If we say that 2023 is fast approaching, will Washington construe this as disinformation as well?
In this regard, I would like to repeat the exhaustive description provided by President Vladimir Putin on December 22 during a question and answer session with journalists, who said that we are talking about an “act of state terrorism.” Without the support of government agencies, no individual is capable of perpetrating a large-scale terrorist attack. On the other hand, a paymaster is someone who is interested in seeing Russian gas distribution to Europe go exclusively through Ukraine so that Kiev can collect transit revenue. The Kiev regime does nothing without Washington. As the President said, the lack of a full-blown investigation into this unprecedented attack on international pipelines is surprising.
Ducks in a pond which, according to a number of experts in Washington, looked “sad,” caused a global scandal. They summoned our diplomat and imposed more restrictions on Russia. Here, we are not dealing with ducks, but a physically (not theoretically) undermined world, specifically, European, energy security in this case.
Declaring the absolute groundlessness of any hints of Washington’s involvement in the gas pipeline explosions, the US administration at the same time remains silent about the need to find out the causes and circumstances of what happened, which is not surprising. To put it mildly, the White House finds this issue uncomfortable, since it was Washington that has for many years been trying to impose on Europe “democratic” but also more expensive US-made LNG. Last January and February, senior US officials (a State Department official, Deputy Secretary of State and US President) said, basically, that this project would not come to fruition if Russia does not agree to America’s terms. Or are we quoting the wrong people? Or, do we engage in disinformation when we quote President Biden? Is this what Ned Price is getting at?
From the point of view of common sense, the assessments coming from the United States about Russia’s “involvement” in taking underwater transboundary pipelines that brought it steady revenue out of operation don’t make sense. However, given the atmosphere of Russophobia that is now being stoked in the United States, any kind of nonsense, like saying that Russia did this on purpose to hurt Europe, is used, absorbed and announced from the bully pulpit. Where is the evidence, the facts, or at least some hint of an investigation? It’s okay if they are not tied to any particular country. There should be at least some evidence.
Once again, I will go over the key questions, which should help us establish the truth if answered. Who benefitted from playing the Russian card in order to weaken Europe geopolitically and energy supply-wise? Who is the ultimate beneficiary of destroyed pipelines and hooking the EU on alternative energy resources? Who was dissatisfied with cheap and readily available gas from Russia? These are not rhetorical but practical questions. Most surprisingly, everyone knows the answers.
It is clear why Western stakeholders continue to ignore our calls to conduct a transparent, objective, professional and depoliticised investigation to identify the criminals and bring them to justice.
Russia will not allow the West to “sweep this under the rug” again. This truth will inconvenience the West. What happened to Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 is a crime, a terrorist attack that was prepared ideologically and politically. After the West ran out of economic and political levers of pressure in an effort to curtail the project, they proceeded to Plan B and physically destroyed this civilian infrastructure. This is not just about an unprecedented attack on international transport infrastructure, but also about an extremely dangerous precedent to which the international community should respond in a tough manner. We will seek justice and try to identify the undercurrents of this grave crime.
Russian Room opens at FAO headquarters in Rome
On December 21,
The idea for establishing the Russian Room was put forward several years ago and, finally, this project has been carried out. Financial support was provided by PhosAgro, a domestic fertiliser producer, who has been FAO’s partner for many years.
The practice of establishing national rooms at the FAO has been around for dozens of years. These rooms are used for receptions, themed events, and meetings for official and informal working groups.
The Russian Room is located on the upper floor of the FAO headquarters. It abuts a terrace overlooking the historical part of Rome. The room has modern interior design with Russian folk style elements, and it also incorporates various minerals that are mined in Russia to produce fertilisers. Related photo materials are posted on the website of the Permanent Mission of the
The opening ceremony included Director-General of the FAO Qu Dongyu from China, officials from the FAO Secretariat, and ambassadors and representatives from friendly countries.
Russian rooms have also been opened at the UN Headquarters in New York – the UN Security Council Consultation Room, and the United Nations Office in Geneva.
The 35th anniversary of diplomatic relations with Nauru
Tomorrow, December 30, we will mark 35 years since establishing diplomatic relations between our country and Nauru. This event was a logical move for this small island nation that aspires to sovereignty and independence, while on the part of the Soviet Union, it was a continuation of its traditional policy of supporting the decolonisation and liberation of the peoples of Oceania from the oppression of foreign countries, who had, on many occasions, tried to bring the people of Nauru under their neocolonial control. Today, Nauru, along with its neighbours in the sub-region, determines its future on its own without looking back at its “big brother,” Australia.
Russia is ready to progressively expand friendly bilateral relations with Yaren, including cooperation in international affairs. We believe more vigorous efforts to promote cooperation, primarily through the “
New anti-Russia steps by Latvian authorities
According to reports from our compatriots, the Latvian Ministry of the Interior’s Department on Citizenship and Migration has drafted a new, expanded version of a form for Russian citizens applying to receive or extend residence permits. The form has some overtly provocative questions. Thus, applicants are required to express their position on Crimea’s territorial affiliation.
Why has Latvia imposed such limits on itself? After all, it is a NATO country, a member of the collective West. It seems to me the form could be further expanded: what is an applicant’s attitudes towards the problems of Scotland or the Falklands? It is probably possible to find something else. There are endless interesting things – territorial and sovereignty issues can be found in the space to which Latvia belongs. What does Latvia have to do with Crimea? Where is the logic? This may fit in with the logic of Liz Truss, former British foreign secretary who thought that the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea were the same thing. But I think Latvians surmise that these are different seas. But what does Crimea have to do with this? Why is Crimea their concern? You should add something to this form. We will do our best to help you; we will try to think of interesting questions.
Our citizens are asked about their position on the demolition of Soviet monuments. They must provide information on their relatives in Russia, the character and purpose of their trips to neighbouring countries, their social circles, etc. So, now the attitude to monuments is also taken into account in decision-making on citizenship. And what about books? What does Latvia think about compiling a list of literary works? Is it allowed to read the listed books or not? Will they monitor whether people read these books?
Indicatively, the official website of the Latvian Ministry of the Interior carries only the standard form without the ideological additions. This makes it unclear whether this new form will be used generally or selectively. Here’s a good question: what are the legal grounds for this? Regardless, these measures will mean serious humanitarian consequences for thousands of our compatriots. But I must add that this is programmed for the future. Later they will blackmail people with this information. In effect, it implies another step towards the gradual expelling of a “politically objectionable” part of the Russian speaking population. It would be appropriate to recall at that point that Latvia is one of the countries that still practices the shameful division of people into citizens and non-citizens.
In its bellicose Russophobia, official Riga has long crossed all the red lines as regards the rights of national minorities living on its territory, including Russians and Russian speakers. The Latvian authorities have not just started closing their eyes to their international commitments to human rights but are deliberately and cynically neglecting them. We resolutely denounce these discriminatory actions. They constitute an obvious violation of basic human rights and freedoms, the principles of equality for all people before the law, the inviolability of privacy and the right to freely express political views.
A bad situation is getting worse because the related international organisations that are supposed to uphold human rights do not even react to these glaring practices in many EU countries. They simply fail to notice them. Incidentally, in preaching these double standards, the West itself is stifling the international human rights system that it has been nurturing for so many years. This system is evoking increasing rejection in the rest of the world because it was often imposed by force.
It is possible to say – let it be. If false things collapse, we don’t need them. Both yes and no. Indeed, all falsehoods must burn out. The problem is that humanity came to the basic notion of human rights in its true sense after centuries of colonialism, slave trade, and the depersonalisation of people via the introduction of official standards of law in the “developed countries.” Humanity arrived at this notion after many centuries of terrible mistakes, gas chambers and the division of people by skin colour and skull shapes. At any rate, humanity tried to stop its own depredations by introducing the notion of human rights. And what next? This system is undergoing debilitating destruction before our eyes just because it was politicised, staffed with political and in many respects even amoral theses that are promoted by the collective West. Human rights may be discredited as a notion. This should not be allowed.
It is important to emphasise in this context that the Russian Federation firmly adheres to its commitments as recorded in its Constitution and international treaties on human rights. It continues being open to all foreigners that are ready for dialogue and mutually beneficial cooperation. The procedures for entry and stay in this country do not entail any checkups as to their loyalty.
Russia's contribution to strengthening humanitarian cooperation in public health
Russia is strengthening humanitarian cooperation in sanitary and epidemiological well-being, infection prevention and control with dozens of countries in Eurasia, Africa, Latin America, Central and Southeast Asia.
We provide our partners with logistic, scientific and practical assistance in preventing and responding to epidemics, we help train personnel in partner countries, and we develop and implement joint scientific research programmes.
Our country is a leader in the Eurasian epidemiological space when it comes to combating global biological threats.
In 2022 alone we conducted seven international exercises of rapid response teams with a total scope of more than 500 people in Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. A large-scale exercise using mobile laboratories was held in the city of Mineralnye Vody in November.
During the pandemic, we continued to help our foreign partners, primarily the ЕАЕU and СIS countries, to combat the infection. In 2022, we donated kits to conduct over 1 million tests for coronavirus and monkeypox.
We trained specialists from ASEAN countries in modern methods of infectious diseases diagnosis and prevention in Vladivostok. About 100 ASEAN specialists attended the courses in March, May and November.
We continued joint research at our permanent centres in Guinea and Vietnam. We are also expanding our presence in Africa and Latin America. Laboratory equipment has been purchased and delivered to these countries. Joint research and training of local staff will start in 2023.
We continue to work actively with our colleagues to combat coronavirus. Let me remind you that Sputnik V was the world's first registered vaccine against the coronavirus. Our vaccine has been approved in more than 70 countries worldwide. We continue to work towards eradicating this pandemic. Russia has hosted regular conferences on COVID-19 and on combating antibiotic resistance, each attended by over 200 participants from dozens of countries, including the EAEU, the CIS, Asia, Africa and Latin America.
Russia’s public health efforts in 2022 were recognised by relevant international organisations: the Central Research Institute of Epidemiology of the Federal Service for the Oversight of Consumer Protection and Welfare was awarded the status of a Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations Reference Centre for Antimicrobial Resistance.
Games of the Future international project and the Figital international movement
The Games of the Future international project is a new format of sports competitions aimed at supporting the movement to develop innovative sports based on a combination of e-sports and classic sports.
This initiative is a unique project that has no analogues in the world, combining modern computer technologies and traditional athletic skill. This approach opens up significant opportunities for involving a wide audience, primarily youth, in sports through its new forms. We believe that this initiative opens up new prospects for the development of international sports cooperation.
Russia has already largely contributed to the promotion of this project. In 2022, three test events were held in Kazan: The Figital Live international games, and three more are planned for 2023.
The first global international tournament in combined disciplines requiring athletes to have skills both in virtual reality and physical fitness is scheduled to take place in Kazan in March 2024. In the future, it is planned to hold similar multi-sport competitions with a large prize fund every two years in various countries.
For our part, we are open to cooperation with our international partners in this project. We count on the widest possible participation of foreign sports teams in the Figital innovative sports movement and the upcoming tournaments of the Games of the Future.
Maria Zakharova: In this case, I do not consider it necessary to comment on these words. It is difficult to say what is behind them, propaganda or a particular outlook on life. I think a lot of this is not even worthy of attention.
Maria Zakharova: We have actively used the opportunities of the UN Committee on Outer Space to draw the attention of the international community to a new trend that has arisen in the light of the special military operation: the use of civilian commercial satellites and related ground infrastructure by the United States and its NATO allies for combat support of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The foundational Outer Space Treaty of 1967 provides for the use of near-Earth space exclusively for peaceful purposes.
During a real armed conflict in Ukraine, Washington is testing an innovative command and control system based on quasi-civilian space technologies. Its application is possible anywhere in the world, and most states are not able to offer any resistance. At the same time, the most important social and economic processes on earth that depend on satellites are being threatened. There is a growing concern about what is happening among developing countries, including BRICS partners.
Maria Zakharova: People watch our briefings and read materials on the Foreign Ministry website. They also have alternative sources of information. They draw their own conclusions. Everyone has their own opinion but it is important that it be based on facts.
I will not focus on the person who said this, rather I will comment on the issue itself.
International organisations have highlighted these problems many times. To begin with, the issue of corruption in Ukraine was raised by the White House itself to try and bring the Kiev regime and those personalities to accept reality, somehow or other.
Now, as you know, considerable attention is going to the issue of auditing everything that was supplied to Ukraine by the United States. The United States is well aware of the fact that everything was embezzled or misappropriated – [Ukrainians] did it either jointly with Americans or on their own – in different ways. This has been going on all these years. Just remember how much we talked about this – that the tranches that were allocated before 2022 to Ukraine allegedly in aid soon returned to the Western banks that had released them and that the industries that were expected to show progress, given the fantastical sums that had been pumped into them, failed to live up to expectations.
As for a crazy state, I prefer to begin with the word “state.” A state needs to have certain features, like sovereignty, independence and some sort of internal set-up in keeping with its laws and standards. What do you see? We see that every year everything that was written in the previous year was rewritten and given new interpretations. Did the country’s political system take account of real trends and facts that Ukraine was living with, beginning with language, and ethnic and cultural groups? Did these people have the opportunity to have their interests represented through elections and did the Ukrainian executive authorities acknowledge these interests and implement them on a practical level? No. One should have begun not by describing it as a “good” state or “bad,” a “right” state or “wrong,” a “crazy” one or “sane” but by saying whether it is a state or not. A blow was being delivered to the statehood of Ukraine not from the outside but from within. Another thing is that someone else was doing it for them. If you endlessly change the elected authorities to please the West, carry out coups and use force to seize administrative bodies, you should not even dream of any kind of statehood in the near future. No matter what anyone says.
The Ukrainians are starting to talk about how they are going to have a "revival." This is again such cheap, grey (only "grey" in a bad way) tall tale for their own population. They had thirty years of opportunities for a revival. All these years we have watched as they destroyed their own country from within, including with the help of some truly anti-Ukraine Western saboteurs who infiltrated under the guise of political activists.
As for humanistic values, what are you talking about? People have been "trained" in military "bases" for decades. Only these were not legal official military bases, but bootcamps in the Baltic states and Poland. These atrocities against who they call "occupiers" did not begin in 2022, not even since 2014, for eight years against the inhabitants of Donbass, whom they had always regarded as foreigners in their own country. The Ukrainians brutalised their own population, fellow citizens who fully fit the description of "decent people," in 2013-2014 during the "Maidan." The "Maidan" happened in Kiev, not in Donbass or Crimea. It was Kiev. Who did they pelt with Molotov cocktails, beat with truncheons and sticks, try to remove and block by burning tyres? Their own population. Those were not people they a priori considered alien, no. Those were people like them, the people of Kiev. So? Look, there are all kinds of footage now. It is better to remember how it all began. Look at what was going on in Kiev in 2013-2014. If anyone dares to say that those were peaceful protests, I want to tell you that that had nothing to do with the genuinely peaceful protests in the world. It was a completely staged and orchestrated event. Whoever said those things, one has to look at the core of them. We have just talked about it.
Maria Zakharova: They were building this neo-Ukrainian “state.” It is what they wanted to mold. The Western world did not plan to create a strong new democratic state. They were going to use the collapse of Ukraine as a weapon against our country. That is all. If it were necessary to make Ukraine a strong state, there were opportunities for this. Nobody would oppose it. Russia would pump its resources, which would go to Europe, through Ukraine, and would receive its profit. The Russian-speaking population, while remaining citizens of Ukraine, would be able to speak their language and communicate with their families and friends, and trade would move forward. Ukraine would develop thanks to Western investment. There would be no problems. Nobody was against such a scheme. For thirty years, no one has raised the issue of Crimea and never would have raised it further. An agreement was signed on the status and conditions of the presence of the Russian Black Sea Navy on the territory of Ukraine. Until what year? And we paid for it.
We have always paid in good faith and on time for everything that was promised to Kiev. The West had no use for Ukraine’s prosperity. Its prosperity would mean stability in the region. Who in the West needs stability there?
The Americans have been saying for many years that Europe needs to give up Russian energy, and if Europe does not give it up and Russia does not agree to all conditions, then they will destroy these projects. This was stated by the United States. If they are not interested in stability even within their “Western” world, how can it exist in a space to which they historically do not belong?
Maria Zakharova: On December 22-25, a conference on Crimean Tatars was held at Anadolu University in Eskisehir. It came as no surprise that representatives of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People, which has been designated as an extremist organisation for good reason in Russia, as usual made anti-Russia statements. However, it is regrettable that Vice President of the Presidency for Turks Abroad and Related Communities (YTB) Sayit Yusuf, yielding to the propaganda of stooges from the so-called “Mejlis,” called for holding the next conference in Bakhchisarai, Crimea, probably jointly with the activists of that Russophobic movement.
We regard these statements made by an official of the Turkish executive authorities as inappropriate, openly malicious and damaging to the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Russian Federation. We regard any flirting with extremist organisations like the “Mejlis,” which has been openly conducting anti-Russia activities, as unacceptable. We repeat once more that such rhetoric is damaging Russia-Türkiye relations and runs counter to the policy of comprehensive development of the mutually beneficial partnership pursued by our countries’ leaders.
We are always glad to see our friends, those who really want to know the truth about the situation in Russia’s Crimea and the life of people from different ethnic groups there, in that hospitable republic, including Bakhchisarai. We invite our Turkish friends to visit it, too.
If Mr Sayit Yusuf would like to travel to Bakhchisarai, he should not deal with extremist organisations but with the authorities of the Russian Federation, which will be glad to explain how this can be done. Let him talk with the people there instead of relying on false information provided by an extremist organisation. It would be better to meet with the real representatives of the Crimean Tatar people, and not abroad but in their native land, in Crimea.
Maria Zakharova: I replied to a similar question barely a month ago. Our position has not changed since then.
Once a respected conference, it has turned into an anti-Russia circus, to which they invite members of fringe movements they themselves are financing, assign them anti-Russia tasks and present as “independent experts,” allegedly for “promoting dialogue with Russian society.” This is an insane merry-go-round. Who can we conduct a constructive dialogue with or discuss anything there?
The standards of expertise have plunged accordingly. Here is an example I have cited several times. In February 2020, the Russian delegation at the Munich conference was listening to the statements transmitted from the conference room. It had been clear for weeks or even months that the world was entering a new situation called the Covid pandemic. It was strange to hear Western representatives accusing Russia. Delegates from other countries invented tall stories, while simultaneously the scrolling text reported the first COVID cases in Europe, notably France. By that time, the pandemic was raging in Italy.
The stark contrast between the events outside and their potential consequences and the conference’s agenda was obvious. If they are real experts in politics and security, in February 2020, they should have discussed biological safety, cooperation, the coordination of actions and logistics, combined efforts to prevent the proliferation of the disease, public assistance, emergencies and the like. But they didn’t even mention any of that.
A month later, the pandemic tsunami hit the world. So much for the standards of expertise. For two years after that, the world was busy fighting COVID-19. But a week before that, the best minds of the North Atlantic stratagem did not see what was perfectly obvious to the man in the street.
We regard as promising only the platforms that are open to different opinions and which take an objective view of reality. This is why such forums are created in the first place. The Munich conference in its current format is an extension of the Western mainstream which is demonising certain countries. We don’t see how this can help overcome the current crisis.
If the only desire of that Western “hobby group” is to condemn Russia and China, let them do it without us. If the organisers manage to get rid of their dependence, abandon the policy of confrontation towards other countries, stop trying to exclude them from conversation, and demonstrate their resolve to discuss a common security architecture, we may rethink our attitude to that platform, provided they do all of the above. We have not seen anything of the kind so far.
And lastly, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov spoke on that subject yesterday in an interview with the Great Game programme.
Maria Zakharova: The list of unfriendly countries has been published and you can read it for yourself.
There are constructive forces, agencies and organisations that continue to do business and implement projects in the interests of countries and peoples by virtue of their own responsibility for security, be it political, military-political or energy security. They don’t set any preconditions or join any anti-Russia projects. That's the answer to your question.
In the interview you mentioned, Sergey Lavrov gave all the necessary explanations. To sum them up briefly one more time, we are certainly ready for dialogue with countries that are open to equal relations. We have spoken about this repeatedly. I hope that the EU will eventually have more leaders who are able to think positively, to focus on creation, not destruction, who are ready to act in the interests of the European continent and their countries, and who would be prepared to engage in dialogue despite any differences.
It is my belief that, when there is no disagreement, it is more like a choir singing the same pitch. Dialogue is what happens when there is something to talk about and discuss, when there are different points of view. We will always be open to this. On the other hand, we are not going to talk to anyone acting destructively against our country.
Maria Zakharova: I have no such information.
Maria Zakharova: We have taken note of the draft law adopted by the Moldovan Parliament in the first reading on December 22, 2022; the new legislation amends the Moldovan Criminal Code introducing such legal concepts as “separatism” and “unconstitutional entity.”
We believe that this legislative initiative would have been justified if the Transnistrian conflict were finally resolved. So far, unfortunately, this is far from the case. That is why this bill caused such a strong reaction in Transnistria. It is no coincidence that the Supreme Council of the region called on the Moldovan Parliament to abandon its further promotion.
For our part, we note that the proposed amendments to the Moldovan laws are blurring the basic principle underlying the negotiation process of the Transnistrian settlement, which is equality of the parties. We are confident that the new additions to the Moldovan Criminal Code will not add mutual understanding to relations between Chisinau and Tiraspol amid a cooling of the dialogue between the two banks of the Dniester and a pause in the 5 + 2 format.
We hope that the Moldovan side will weigh the “added value” of this step again in the context of the Transnistrian settlement process.
Maria Zakharova: I don’t want to dwell long on what exactly that politician meant. If we’re talking about Russia’s assistance in the Armenian-Azerbaijani reconciliation, here Russia relies on the entire scope of trilateral agreements at the highest level, including statements of November 9, 2020, January 11 and November 26, 2021 and October 31, 2022. They provide a reliable foundation for advancing the process of normalising relations between Baku and Yerevan.
We certainly take into consideration that we are bound by allied obligations both to Armenia and Azerbaijan. Therefore, Russia, as a mediator, invariably takes a stance that allows us to effectively perform this function. I hope that Armenia knows this.
If we are talking about our obligations under the CSTO, if Yerevan is interested, all other CSTO members would be ready to send a monitoring mission to Armenia.
Maria Zakharova: We have no information about any upcoming events. Russia and Türkiye maintain dialogue at the level of foreign ministers. We have a positive opinion of Türkiye’s proposals for future contacts.
Maria Zakharova: We have repeatedly said that the introduction of the so-called price cap on Russian oil is an anti-market measure that will disrupt supply chains and can seriously complicate the situation on global energy markets. We are confident that a price dictate and the establishment of a buyers’ cartel create an extremely dangerous precedent for international trade.
It is hardly surprising that many countries do not support this provocative undertaking. They realise that today it is directed against Russia, but it can be used against any other country or any other goods and commodities in the future, for political or any other motives.
Under the presidential executive order, it is forbidden to supply Russian oil and petroleum products to foreign legal entities and individuals from February 1, 2023, provided that the relevant supply contracts stipulate a direct or indirect reference to the use of the price cap mechanism.
Given the current price level, the proposed oil price cap is simply absurd. It can create serious problems in the future and increase the uncertainty and volatility of the oil market.
Regarding practical measures, I would like to draw your attention to Paragraph 7 of the Executive Order, which allows the Ministry of Energy of the Russian Federation to provide official explanations regarding the application of this document, by agreement with the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation.
It important to note that Russia remains a major supplier of energy carriers to global markets, and that it will continue to interact with countries interested in equitable and mutually beneficial energy cooperation.
Maria Zakharova: Today we will release a material prepared by our experts on the foreign policy results of 2022. You will find all the answers there.
Russia’s foreign policy is dictated by its national interests. The strategic goals and priorities of our foreign policy remain the same: ensuring the country’s security, sovereignty and territorial integrity; creating favourable external conditions for domestic development; preserving and multiplying the prosperity of the Russian nation, and strengthening our country’s position as a centre of the modern world’s development.
As concerns methods and principles of achieving our foreign policy priorities, we started to rethink them long time ago, when it became apparent that the world is moving towards multipolarity. The special operation only expedited many of the processes that began earlier, and aggravated the existing disagreements to the extreme.
As a result, our disagreement with the West on certain matters was manifested in more than words. It is no longer possible to have a conversation with those who will undertake anything for Russia’s strategic defeat, like nothing happened. We are also limiting our activity and involvement in West-centric institutions. Concurrently, we are saturating the canvas of cooperation with the rest of the world, forming a network of cooperation mechanisms independent from the whims of the US or the European Union and mechanisms seeking to support an equal polycentric world order based on international law. There are many countries we can work with. Our major partners and like-minded counterparts are located in the CIS, the global East and South.
We hear many people say that we should be careful or somebody may withhold support or betray us. We have our strategy, tactics and knowledge of history at our disposal. Anything can happen in the future. The West has already betrayed us many times in the past. There have been two patriotic wars started not by Russia but by France and Germany. After the end of the Cold War, Moscow reached out a hand of peace and friendship, hoping that we would learn all the lessons and build a new world based on international law, coordinated by the UN and promising equal cooperation. We can see now that the collective West has betrayed all these ideals.
We will continue to defend, jointly, the right to establish fundamental principles of a just world order and new quality standards for multilateral interaction.
Maria Zakharova: Political and diplomatic support of projects is a standard form of work for almost all countries. It means that foreign diplomatic missions (usually a commerce and politics department at an embassy or a trade mission) provide information and advisory support to domestic companies operating in the country of presence and protect their legal interests, including in their contacts with local government agencies.
The Foreign Ministry has published a press release on the Collegium meeting and its results.
Maria Zakharova: We have repeatedly commented on this issue, including on December 23, 2022, when Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov spoke about it in detail during a joint news conference with his Azerbaijani colleague Jeyhun Bayramov. We also commented on it during our weekly briefings.
Question: Did the meeting of the CIS leaders contribute to the normalisation of this situation?
Maria Zakharova: According to the areas of responsibility, comments on summits are given by the Presidential Executive Office. Please adhere to the established format.
Maria Zakharova: We have already given a detailed comment on the inadequate suggestion to hold a summit with preliminary conditions for the participation of countries.
As for the statement that Moscow’s actions on the frontline allegedly conflict with its calls for peace, well look who is talking. Let me remind you that President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky signed an executive order that expressly forbids holding talks with Russia. There is nothing to talk about. What do they care about talks? They prohibited to hold them to themselves. Dmitry Kuleba had better tell us what condition Zelensky was in when he signed such a document and who advised him to do it. There is no need to talk or think for us. We can do that ourselves.
Maria Zakharova: The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry said that? So they think that Russia did not undergo some procedures in the UN? I have already said that I don’t see the need to comment on that. The Ukrainians tend to indulge in fantasies from time to time.
This is a totally twisted logic. So the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry believes that all decisions adopted by the UN Security Council have been illegitimate since the Soviet Union was rightfully replaced by Russia? If its presence was illegitimate, it means that the decisions are too? Maybe they will say next that there was no dissolution of the USSR? It’s interesting to hear what they say. It is like reading fiction. It has nothing to do with international law, reality or diplomacy.
Maria Zakharova: The use of the airport is beyond the scope of the Russian Foreign Ministry.
As for the OSCE Minsk Group, who has stopped its operation? Russia certainly has not. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has clearly expressed his views on the group’s current activities. That’s all there is to say about it.
Criticism of Russia and the Russian peacekeepers is unacceptable in this situation. We have pointed out many times that the Russian peacekeepers are doing everything possible to settle the situation on the ground. Public attacks on it won’t help. We are working to improve the situation.
Maria Zakharova: Can anyone responsibly state that the situation would have been better without the Russian peacekeepers? I believe the answer is apparent.
Talk all you want about enhancing efficiency. Efforts are being taken now to settle the problem. But making such statements now points to misunderstanding of the situation on the ground.
Maria Zakharova: Do the people who say that they are being forced cite anybody or any facts? Do they have proof of what they are saying? How was the enforcement used, with a glass of red wine in a friendly atmosphere or harshly? We would like to know how it happened. Or did somebody say that he knows that enforcement methods were used but does not remember who did it and how? We would like to see facts.
When such statements are made without any corroborating facts and a certain country is blamed, we would like them to provide facts. They claim that there are such facts. Alright, give us the facts, please. Only in this case will we make statements in addition to what has been said, for example, by the President’s Press Secretary, Dmitry Peskov. He said clearly that none of Russian officials had ever spoken about Armenia joining the Union State. He also provided an assessment of Armen Grigoryan’s statements you have mentioned.
The same can be said about the allegation about forcing Yerevan to accept the idea of a corridor across its territory it won’t be able to control. It’s a fake. In accordance with the statement signed by the leaders of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan on January 11, 2021, different scenarios are being discussed at the Trilateral Working Group on unblocking economic ties and transport links in the region, including the relaunching of railway communication in southern Armenia. One of the underlying principles, which neither Baku nor Yerevan have contended, is that sovereignty over a route belongs to the party across whose territory the route runs.
Maria Zakharova: We have already said that every country has its sovereign right to develop military and military-technical cooperation with other states.
At the same time, we regularly convey to our partners in the region the idea that such interaction should not be directed against third countries or disrupt the existing balance of power in the South Caucasus. That equally applies to this situation.
Maria Zakharova: Indeed, on the evening of December 25, three persons of Kurdish origin were killed and three others injured following a shooting outside the Kurdish Cultural Centre in Paris. According to the Paris prosecutor's office, the attacker, who is in pre-trial detention now, is facing charges of “murder or attempted murder motivated by hatred based on race, ethnicity, nationality or religion” and “illegal possession of a weapon.”
The French authorities said they had no reason to qualify this crime as a terrorist act at this stage. According to French media reports, the attacker, who had previously committed illegal acts against immigrants, said his attack was motivated by “racism” and a “pathological” hatred of foreigners. There is reason to suspect a psychological disorder, but this is yet to be confirmed by an examination.
According to a preliminary investigation report, the attack targeted foreigners in general, not Kurds specifically. As for the January 2013 incident in Paris, when three members of the Kurdistan Workers' Party were killed, we don’t believe it is appropriate to draw any parallels with the new case.
First, the answer should be given by the investigators and the court. Secondly, we would like to point out the general rise of xenophobia and hostility towards non-ethnic French and migrants in France of late. Ultra-right and neo-Nazi groups have become noticeably more active in the country of late. In this regard, the French Government should be concerned about the growing radicalisation of society and be more attentive to the increase in xenophobic and racist attitudes.
We can also note certain anti-Russia statements made by a number of public figures in France who directly call for anti-Russia steps. This is also a manifestation of xenophobia and hatred. Sometimes they disguise them as “cancel culture.” But the mechanism is actually the same – intolerance towards those who are not like you.
Maria Zakharova: We have repeatedly commented on this. In particular, during the December 15 briefing, we noted that a person who wants to work in Russia (this is a practice that all countries use, though maybe some of them have their own ideas, but we adhere to traditional diplomacy) as an ambassador needs to show their intent to do professional and constructive work to avoid a further (irreparable) deterioration of the dialogue between the US and Russia. We believe that this must be the most important quality in a US ambassador; he or she needs to show the intent, skill and capacity to work constructively and remedy the situation.
I also want to draw your attention to the interview of the Director of the Foreign Ministry Department of North America Alexander Darchiev to the TASS news agency, published on the ministry’s website on December 23, 2022. In the interview, he notes that in our opinion, it is important that the head of the diplomatic mission is intent not on further damaging the relations that already hang by a thread, but to try at least to maintain them at the current level while seeking to improve them.
It will still be necessary to talk and negotiate. To that end, they need to abandon their mentorship tone and messiahship – in the worst sense of the word – which are simply inappropriate under current circumstances. This is what true diplomacy is about, which must be based on respect for the history, culture and values of the host country.
Maria Zakharova: You are referring to President of Russia Vladimir Putin’s speech of December 7, 2022, while on December 15, we commented on this issue in detail and provided facts, quotes and data. I cannot repeat all that, as it was an extensive explanation.
It is true that an entire range of political, public and deep state actors in Poland are pursuing this agenda. As for official statements, much is omitted or has a serene rhetoric. At the same time, a lot of things indicate the contrary.
Maria Zakharova: The Islamic Republic of Pakistan is Russia’s important foreign political partner, relations with which are valuable by themselves and are not influenced by the international political environment. We are confident that the positive dynamics of our interaction will be maintained under any government because it is focused on the wellbeing of our peoples.
Maria Zakharova: Last week, we resolutely condemned the masterminds of the December 23, 2022 terrorist attack in Islamabad.
Russia stands by Pakistan in the face of this global threat. Against the backdrop of heightened terrorist activity in several Pakistani provinces, we reaffirm our commitment to strengthening constructive counterterrorism cooperation with the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. These efforts are conducted at multilateral formats, primarily the UN and the SCO, and as part of bilateral cooperation.
Maria Zakharova: We highly commend your television channel’s commitment to providing objective coverage of Russian developments for its audiences in Pakistan and elsewhere by relying on authentic sources and facts and by using direct contacts. You ask questions, and we reply to them live.
We stress the need for everyone to provide objective coverage and to renounce biased positions and approaches, while adhering to professional journalism ethics.
Unfortunately, we can see that many people, including those in the West, are creating an illusion of objectivity while waging an aggressive information war under the cover of journalist accreditations and the high status of journalists.
I hope that we will continue to maintain genuine interaction with your television channel and its representatives. Journalists and state agencies should interact on the basis of respect, a professional approach, objective facts and information checks.
Maria Zakharova: Answering the question about whether we have broken through the information blockade by the West, I can tell you that the West blew up on its own propaganda. That is for certain. The abundance of landmines, tripwires and explosives set up by the Western mainstream media played a cruel joke on them.
The Westerners have become hostages to their own lies and deceit. They have used up all their power (and they are powerful) to promote fake information that completely failed, exposing to the world the ugliness of these lies. They started to openly reveal their own minds by confessing that they were unwilling and uninterested in fulfilling the Minsk agreements, that they just wanted to pump more weapons into Ukraine to “make it stronger” (when, in fact, they only tried to bide their time) and by promoting the stories of “massacres” in Bucha and Mariupol. It is obvious to the entire world that those alleged incidents were staged. And there are plenty of other similar examples.
***
Thank you for your cooperation this year. Happy New Year and merry Christmas! Stay strong and patient in doing what is right, defending the truth and reaching for the light. I wish you peace, prosperity and everything good.
Additional materials
-
Photos
