Excerpts from the briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, January 17, 2024
- Sergey Lavrov’s participation in UN Security Council meetings on the Middle East conflict settlement and the Ukraine crisis
- Sergey Lavrov’s participation in the 26th meeting of the Working Group on Сooperation between the Foreign Ministry and the Russian Orthodox Church
- Ukraine update
- Developments in Moldova
- Escalation in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq and northern Syria
- Britain’s letter to the UN Security Council on keeping the Skripal case on the council’s agenda
- Russia’s draft UN General Assembly Resolution on Space Science and Technology for Promoting Peace
- Washington’s intention to supply weapons to Kosovo officials
- Foreign Ministry releases its latest report on violations of the rights of Russian citizens and compatriots abroad
- Russian humanitarian aid for the people of Mali
- The Gorchakov Fund to hold the second foreign policy meeting in memory of Vitaly Churkin
- 140th birth anniversary of Ivan Maisky
- The 370th anniversary (1654) of the Pereyaslav Council, which reunited Malorossiya (Ukraine) with Russia
- 80th anniversary of fully lifting the Nazi siege of Leningrad
- Poland’s agreement to host German troops
- The Davos Economic Forum
- Growing tensions in the Red Sea region
- Nauru’s stance on the one-China principle
- Russia-Iran interstate treaty
- The tanker incident in the Gulf of Aden
- The victims of the Kiev regime
- The outcome of Sergey Lavrov’s talks with the North Korean Foreign Minister
- Certain statements by the Estonian Prime Minister
- The upcoming elections in the United States
- Developments in the Middle East
- The translation of Sergey Lavrov’s news conference into Arabic
- Russia’s efforts to counter US military biological activity abroad
On January 22-24, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov plans to attend the UN Security Council’s quarterly open debate on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question, and a meeting on Ukraine initiated by Russia.
During the debate on the situation in the Middle East, the council members will continue to discuss ways out of the current large-scale crisis in the zone of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which is affecting the situation in the region as a whole.
Since the start of the current unprecedented outbreak of violence in the occupied Palestinian territory, especially in Gaza, Russia has firmly called for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, including as an integral condition for ensuring unrestricted and sufficient access to all those in need of assistance, as well as for restoring the political horizon in the process of a Middle East settlement.
As for the meeting on Ukraine, we regard it as an opportunity to use the respected UN venue to once again inform the international community of Russia’s stand, including on the political and diplomatic methods of settling the crisis with due regard for Russia’s legitimate security interests.
More details will be available on the Foreign Ministry’s website following the meetings.
On January 26, the 26th meeting of the Working Group on Сooperation between the Foreign Ministry and the Russian Orthodox Church, co-chaired by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia, will take place at the Foreign Ministry’s Reception House.
The meeting, which will be held on the occasion of the group’s 20th anniversary, will focus on various aspects of cooperation between the ministry and the Russian Orthodox Church, including the protection of people’s right to freedom of religion in the world and traditional moral and spiritual values.
The Ukrainian neo-Nazis have continued targeting civilians in Russian regions with their terrorist attacks.
On January 12, 2024, a combat drone attacked an ambulance in Golmovsky, a community in the Donetsk People’s Republic. The paramedics were responding to a call to help three wounded power supply workers who were injured in an attack by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Tragically, a paramedic and a power company employee died in the attack, which also left three more medics wounded. There is no doubt that this was a targeted strike against this ambulance.
In the Kherson Region, Banderites carried out artillery strikes on January 15, 2024, against Kazachy Lagerya and Velikaya Lepetikha, leaving two civilians wounded.
In the early hours of January 16, 2024, the Kiev regime made a cynical attempt to attack Voronezh with drones, but the air defence forces intercepted them. However, fragments from the downed UAVs damaged 35 apartments in three apartment blocks, leaving a 10-year-old girl wounded.
Thorough investigations will be conducted into all of these criminal acts perpetrated by the Ukrainian Nazis, and everyone who was involved in them will be held to account.
Based on the evidence gathered by the Investigative Committee of Russia, the courts of the Russian Federation continue to deliver sentences against Ukrainian fighters who have committed grave crimes against civilians.
Sergey Mikhailenko, a fighter from the neo-Nazi Azov regiment who shot four civilians in a passenger car, including a child, in Mariupol in the spring of 2023, received a life sentence.
Ukrainian neo-Nazis Alexander Kovalyk and Ivan Oliy were sentenced to 25 and 26 years in prison, respectively, for firing on civilian vehicles in Mariupol in the spring of 2022. These criminal actions resulted in the death of two civilians.
Alexander Zazhirenko, a member of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, was convicted in absentia and sentenced to 28 years in prison for torturing and then shooting a wounded Russian serviceman in March 2022 in Mariupol.
Sergey Burkovsky, a Banderite follower, received a 16-year prison term in absentia for using violence against captive Russian servicemen.
All Ukrainian criminals will be identified and held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.
Moving on to NATO’s continuing support of the Kiev regime, UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak made a brief visit to Kiev on January 12, 2024. He pledged funding for Ukraine amounting to 2.5 billion pounds over the next year, and announced the biggest shipment of UAVs for the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The British authorities will allocate 200 million pounds for this purpose, bringing the total aid package to 12 billion pounds.
The visit culminated with the signing of an Agreement on Security Co-Operation between the Kiev regime and London. Ukraine presented it as a security guarantee treaty, while Rishi Sunak called it a treaty on security assurances. What this document actually does is that it stipulates the UK’s intention to continue helping Ukraine in defence, security and related matters. It is noteworthy that London also asked the Kiev regime to provide it military assistance in the event of external military aggression against the UK.
Buried in the ruins created by the Kiev regime, Ukraine signed an agreement with the UK pledging to help it in case of attack. No sane person would believe that this has actually happened, considering Vladimir Zelensky regime’s unrelenting wailing that nothing will be left of Ukraine unless it gets another dollar, pound or euro. It is in this state that Kiev has assumed the obligation to help London if the UK faces a military threat.
I understand that the people of Ukraine did not have a say in this matter. However, Ukrainian citizens who are still in the country could at least ask Vladimir Zelensky what he actually signed. Those responsible for the UK’s security can now peruse this agreement. Its adoption was an astute trick to wrap a pretty fabric around a set of promises which mostly boil down to offering advice and guidance as a way to reaffirm support for Ukraine without assuming any legally binding obligations.
The British leaders did this in order to maximise their efforts to prevent their G7 and NATO allies from losing interest in Ukraine, which London continues to view as a geopolitical tool against Russia. The agreement signed in Kiev indicates that Ukraine is left with no chance to settle the conflict through negotiations. It is being used as a bargaining chip in reckless Euro-Atlantic and anti-Russian confrontational policies pursued by the Anglo-Saxons. Amazingly, in the age of universal digital literacy and the opportunity to access information within minutes, the citizens of Ukraine have once again been deceived. Kiev received many promises and committed to certain things, after which the Anglo-Saxons left.
Another notable factor is that, concurrently with Rishi Sunak's visit, it was reported that the Australian European Lithium Limited, owned by British businessman Tony Sage, unexpectedly acquired the European Lithium Ukraine Company. This company holds a license to develop the rich Shevchenko lithium deposit in an area of the DPR that is temporarily controlled by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Interestingly, in the summer of 2023, European Lithium Limited refused to buy it because of the “proximity of the frontline”, but today British investors suddenly had an urge to get their hands on these mines.
Clearly, security guarantees, however imaginary they may be, come at a cost. The clowns at the helm of Ukraine continue to incrementally turn the country into a destitute and disenfranchised colony, which the Western colonial powers will squeeze dry. Everything that the Kiev regime is getting now is being put on credit, with the obligation to pay back. This has always been the case. Never before in history have the Anglo-Saxons given anything to anyone without expecting repayment with interest. How will Ukraine and its people repay the debt? Clearly, it will be through sacrificing land, resources and values that were laid out in the historical code in the form of morality and ethics. Everything that was codified in laws to protect the people of Ukraine will have to be sacrificed to cover the debt.
Meanwhile, the Ukrainian economy is plunging deeper into a debt pit courtesy of the Kiev regime. According to experts, in 2024 Ukraine may face default due to the mounting public debt, which exceeded $140 billion in late 2023, or over 90 percent of GDP, and a menacing budget deficit of over $40 billion. On the other hand, they have someone to take cues from. The US public debt has long gone through the roof and exceeded the country's GDP. Clearly, Kiev is following in the footsteps of its boss.
Against this background, Zelensky attended the World Economic Forum in Davos on January 15 in an attempt to persuade his sponsors to once again shell out some money for Ukraine's needs, whether in the form of a loan or a credit line, just to cover its current expenses.
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba, who vows to never betray the interests of the West, is absolutely certain of receiving continued unconditional support from the United States and the EU. He believes Ukraine will triumph, regardless of the party affiliation of the future occupant of the White House. In his interview with ABC, Kuleba said that should Kiev run out of weapons, Ukrainian soldiers will not flinch and “will fight with spades”, emphasising that “Ukraine's existence is at stake.”
Too bad he didn't mention who specifically put Ukraine's existence in jeopardy. The Kiev gang led by Zelensky (such a thing never occurred even to his predecessors, who were brought to political offices by their Western handlers) gambled with everything Ukraine had, including its people, resources, and land. Dmitry Kuleba did so too, but he doesn’t talk about it. The future of Ukraine should be determined not by the West, but by the people of Ukraine. The problem is that the puppet government, which includes Kuleba, has long since stripped the people of Ukraine of their rights, including the right to vote.
On January 18, we will celebrate a landmark event in our country’s history. Exactly 370 years ago, the Pereyaslav Council, or Rada, convened by Hetman Bogdan Khmelnitsky, took the historic decision placing the Zaporozhian Host “under the high arm” of the Moscow tsar. Our people, who once lived within a single state, the Ancient Rus, and were later broken apart, have now been reunited.
At that time, the Polish nobility ruled over a considerable part of Ukrainian territory. Hetman Bogdan Khmelnitsky led a liberation war against the Polish-Lithuanian oppression, long-standing violence and the forced conversion of the local population to Catholicism. It was the assistance from the Russian state that enabled these territories to rid themselves of foreign invaders and oppressors.
The regime of Vladimir Zelensky, obsessed with rewriting history, has failed to learn any lessons from the events of the past. It is possible that it would have learned these lessons if it had sufficient knowledge. However, Western elites chose a person who has no understanding of the history of Ukraine and its people. Thanks to this ruthless individual, the country is losing all traces of independence and sovereignty, becoming a Western colony completely dependent on its overseers. Just like during the time of Polish rule, millions of Ukrainians find themselves on the brink of survival. However, the ruling elite in Kiev shows no concern for this. Its members are willing to sacrifice the futures of millions of Ukrainians for their own profits and a mythical “military victory over Russia.” They are ready to deprive the country of its wealth, history and faith. This means only one thing: they are robbing Ukraine of its future.
I can reiterate that all the facts I have mentioned support the importance of the stated official objectives of the special military operation.
We will also publish historical materials on the 370th anniversary of the Pereyaslavl Rada. It is crucial to be aware of these interesting facts. I know that Ukrainian authorities have been rewriting history textbooks for a long time. However, it is impossible to dispute these facts. We will not allow them to be forgotten.
We follow developments in Moldova, whose leaders never let up on their anti-Russia rhetoric.
We noticed that President of Moldova Maia Sandu travelled to Romania, where she received the Timisoara Award for European Values on January 13. In her remarks at the awards ceremony, she laid out her usual toolkit of unfounded accusations against Russia, alleging that the latter was seeking to destabilise the political situation in Moldova, undermine democracy, launch a hybrid war, and spread misinformation. She claimed that the EU’s eastern expansion was about putting the historical record straight after 1945, when East European nations were doomed to an existence of oppression and deprivation.
Think it over! On the other hand, if we recall that Ms Sandu is a Romanian citizen, it becomes clear why she hates the true freedom the Moldovan people enjoyed after World War II so much. They survived, fought for this freedom, and won victory over Nazism and fascism along with other peoples of the USSR and the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition. Then they started rebuilding their lands. If we recall that Maia Sandu is a citizen of Romania, it becomes clear why she hates this so much.
After these “historical insights,” we think it appropriate to remind you once again what kind of “oppression and deprivation” Moldova supposedly suffered after 1945.
The USSR transformed Moldova from an agrarian country with an economy in tatters into a prosperous agrarian and industrial republic. During the Soviet period, over 550 industrial facilities were built in its territory. Power production grew by almost 500 percent from 3 to 17 billion kWh and practically the whole of the present transport infrastructure was created. Three billion roubles from the USSR budget was spent on rebuilding and modernising the Moldavian railway between 1946 and 1950 alone. By 1990, agricultural production had increased by 270 percent on 1940. As a result of all of this, the population grew by77 percent, from 2.46 to 4.36 million people.
But what is happening now?
When she ran for president in 2020, Maia Sandu promised to create a rule-of-law state, upgrade living standards, and develop the economy.
In reality, almost a third of the republic’s population lives below the poverty line. After Ms Sandu’s three-odd years in office, the cumulative inflation has reached 54.6 percent. Since 1991, Moldova’s population has shrunk by 41.1 percent to 2.5 million people and the depopulation continues. Young Moldovans emigrate to escape poverty and lawlessness. According to the National Statistics Bureau, there are 56,500 university students in the 2023-2024 academic year compared to 132,000 way back in 2007. Have we misquoted something? The only thing the current Chisinau authorities can do is to accuse, call names, and threaten. But can they set their own facts and figures in opposition to ours?
The Moldovan authorities are stamping out all ideological dissension. They pull independent media off air, persecute the opposition, and openly blackmail their own people. They consistently follow a line for giving up national identity and the Moldovan language. Besides, Maia Sandu is a past master at rewriting history. A recent case in point is the AUR party, which seeks the unification of Moldova and Romania, coming up with the initiative to rename Pushkin Street in central Chisinau Queen Marie of Romania Street.
This is a spit in the face for the Moldovan people and a disregard for democracy which Sandu speaks so much about. How many more streets will be dedicated to past monarchies? How many squares and public institutions will be put under royal auspices? But look, here is the real issue. If the current Chisinau leaders had ran on this ticket, there would have been no questions. If they had honestly announced that they would distort the country’s history, give up the Moldavian language for Romanian, and laud and glorify royals from other countries instead of those who fought for Moldova’s freedom, independence and democracy – with the voters buying this – there would have been no questions. But the thing is that the Sandu team ran on the opposite ticket. What sort of democracy is it that robs people of their own language and names central streets in honour of other nations’ royals? This is colonialism, not democracy.
Against this background, Bucharest-supplied staff are appointed to posts in Moldovan government agencies. In December 2023, Romania’s former finance minister Anca Dragu became Governor of the National Bank of Moldova and Daniel Marius Staicu was made the head of the Money Laundering Prevention and Combatting Service. A number of Romanian advisers were appointed to the Prosecutor General’s Office, the Justice Ministry, and other ministries and agencies.
It seems these “European values” are what fetched Maia Sandu her €30,000 prize in Timisoara.
People in Moldova call this policy “hybrid colonisation” disguised as European integration. Moldovans are increasingly active in protesting against their leaders’ anti-national and anti-Russian course. They remember their history and culture, national history for which their ancestors shed their blood and worked hard in factories and in the fields and orchards. They also value ties with their friend Russia. We share this attitude and are ready to promote cooperation with our Moldovan friends.
Escalation in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq and northern Syria
We have had many requests to comment on the escalation of the situation in Iraq's autonomous region of Kurdistan and northern Syria.
We are closely following the developments in these regions. On January 15, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) fired a combination of missiles and drones at a number of targets in the Kurdistan Region, which, according to Tehran, had links to external forces engaged in subversive activities against Iran. At the same time, in response to recent terrorist attacks, the IRGC launched missile strikes against facilities used by ISIS and other terrorist organisations in northern Syria, particularly in the Idlib province.
In addition, the Turkish Defence Ministry recently announced a successful military operation against Kurdish groups in Syria and Iraq, in which more than 70 targets of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party were hit. According to Ankara’s statements, these retaliatory strikes were a reaction to the deaths of nine Turkish servicemen in northern Iraq on January 13.
We are confident of the importance of continuing the uncompromising fight against terrorist groups wherever they may be. At the same time, we believe that any antiterrorist operations on the territory of other states are permissible only by agreement and in coordination with the governments of those states, in this case Syria and Iraq, which are friendly to us. Such an approach would, among other things, minimise civilian casualties and humanitarian risks.
Russia has consistently advocated the need to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Syria and Iraq, as well as the expeditious withdrawal from their territory of all foreign military contingents illegally stationed there.
The current crisis is a direct consequence of the unprecedented escalation of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and Washington’s short-sighted policy of preventing its sustainable settlement in order to further militarise the Middle East. Moreover, in violation of all norms of international law, the United States is nurturing and using terrorist groups, including ISIS and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, for its own selfish purposes.
These terrorists again showed their true nature on January 3, killing 95 people in an attack on a ceremony to commemorate General Soleimani at a cemetery in Kerman, Iran.
The Americans, in fact, are using the same old tactic, not hesitating to conduct overt operations in order to physically eliminate their opponents. In this connection, it is appropriate to recall the assassination of one of the commanders of the Shiite movement Hezbollah al-Nujaba, Mushtaq al-Jawari, killed by a drone strike in the centre of Baghdad on January 4. This act of international terrorism triggered a wave of protests in Iraq, demanding the immediate withdrawal of US troops from the country.
We are deeply concerned over the direct involvement of the United States in destabilising the region through its illegal presence and illegal actions in Syria, as well as its new aggression in Yemen, together with its British accomplices, which has actually derailed a budding political settlement in that country. It is a cause for deep concern for the future of the Middle East as well as for global security.
Britain’s letter to the UN Security Council on keeping the Skripal case on the council’s agenda
A few days ago, Britain circulated a letter within the UN Security Council, asking it to keep Item 66 (the Skripal case) on the council’s agenda. This refers to the letter from the Charge d’affaires a.i. of the UK Permanent Mission to the UN dated March 13, 2018 (S/2018/218). In doing so, London has disregarded the brief statement by the UN Secretary-General, dated January 2, 2024, which stated that this issue has not been addressed at the council’s official meetings for the past three years, from January 2021 to December 2023.
We are puzzled by this move by London, since over the past six years, the UK has persistently avoided engaging in any meaningful dialogue with Russia to clarify the circumstances of the incident and refused to provide the samples of the substance that has been identified as the Novichok nerve agent.
I would like to remind everyone that Sergey Skripal and his daughter Yulia were found unconscious near a mall in Salisbury, Wiltshire County in South West England, on March 4, 2018. The police found a container with an “unknown substance.” Scotland Yard launched an in-camera investigation, which led to an information explosion, accusations against Russia, a statement by Prime Minister Theresa May in parliament, the expulsion of Russian diplomats and much more, with the exception of facts.
After the incident in Salisbury, the UK authorities refused to cooperate with concerned Russian agencies in the investigation of the case. In response to the April 2018 requests sent by the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia to the UK Home Department for legal assistance in the case of the attempted murder of Yulia Skripal, the UK Foreign Office notified the Russian Embassy of the British authorities’ decision to reject them.
Overall, since the day of the Salisbury provocation, the Russian Embassy has sent over 60 notes to the UK Foreign Office with numerous questions about the Skripal case. The majority of these notes were completely disregarded, but a few of them received pro forma replies that lacked any substance.
We also remember that London convinced all EU member states to expel Russian diplomats, promising to provide the facts later. And then something surprising happened. The materials which the British presented as facts were given to journalists. It was a five-page presentation that looked like it was made by a 3rd or 4th grader, with circles, arrows and schematic drawings of people. That presentation was designed to show that Russia was responsible simply because it had done such things in the past and could do it in principle. That was all. The majority of EU countries did as they were asked, but some of them refused to expel Russian diplomats. We later asked those who joined in this ritualistic act if they received any proof other than the “presentation” and London’s statements in the “highly likely” manner. Many EU countries replied that they had not seen any proof. Moreover, nobody, neither EU member states, nor the EU as a whole, nor NATO countries, ever saw any proof during NATO bodies’ meetings or summits. No proof was ever provided to the public or media.
But there is proof that London has been lying all these years. Scotland Yard, which initiated the inquest, has held only one meeting with the press over these years, during which its representative mumbled that they were working and would provide their conclusions soon. Have they? We deeply regret that the professionals from the City of London Police have been involved in a dirty worldwide political intrigue and are now open to criticism. I would like to urge journalists to ask the police what they think about the letter from the UK permanent mission to the UN urging the Security Council to continue investigating the Skripal case. I think that Scotland Yard has a lot to tell British diplomats on this score.
We intend to continue pressing for the truth to be revealed. And we still hope to receive exhaustive answers to the following questions: Where did the Skripals go on the morning of March 4, 2018, when their mobile phones were turned off? How could they lose consciousness almost simultaneously several hours after they had been “poisoned” and received first aid from the chief nursing officer of the British army’s chemical warfare forces? Where are the Skripals now? What is their current health status? Do they have the freedom of association and action? Have any of the “independent and free” UK media outlets or individual journalists had an opportunity over these years to see, talk to or ask them these obvious questions?
Feeling great concern for the Skripals, Russia has regularly appealed to the British authorities to provide the necessary information and to give us consular access to these Russian citizens in accordance with the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the bilateral 1965 Consular Convention.
Facts clearly show that London is not interested in conducting a fair and unbiased investigation into the Skripal case and is deliberately dragging out the process. They probably thought that by provoking the Kiev regime into taking anti-Russia actions and creating a NATO bridgehead in its territory to aggravate the situation in the region, they would make us forget about the Skripals, the alleged poisoning in Amesbury and everything else they have recently done. They also hoped we would forget about their promises of Russia’s imminent “strategic defeat,” as they put it. But their plan did not do as intended. We have not forgotten, and we will never forget. We will regularly remind London about this. London’s actions have shown once again that the poisoning of the Skripals was an orchestrated event aimed at damaging Russia’s international standing and bilateral relations.
Russia’s draft UN General Assembly Resolution on Space Science and Technology for Promoting Peace
We would like to draw public attention to an extremely dangerous trend that is gathering pace as the United States and its allies are using commercial satellites and associated ground infrastructure, claimed to be for civilian purposes, to support the military activity of foreign armed forces and interfere with sovereign countries’ domestic affairs.
Essentially, they are testing new tools to provoke internal upheaval and change governments that do not fit in the “rules-based world order.” Serious risks are being created for the security of space operations and the long-term stability of space activities. It may entail negative consequences for multiple socioeconomic processes that directly depend on space technology. They also constitute a threat to the Sustainable Development Goals approved by the UN General Assembly.
The Russian Federation has drafted and submitted, for the consideration of the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, a draft resolution of the UN General Assembly on Space Science and Technology for Promoting Peace. This document seeks to affirm, at the inter-state level, a general awareness that it is unacceptable to use civilian space systems to exert pressure on geopolitical opponents thus making them legitimate targets for retaliation, including a military response.
We expect that the Russian draft of the Resolution on Space Science and Technology for Promoting Peace will receive broad international support and have a sobering effect on those who consider it acceptable to put the space future of all humanity on the line today.
Washington’s intention to supply weapons to Kosovo officials
It has become public that Washington intends to supply the self-proclaimed Republic of Kosovo with Javelin anti-tank systems with an impressive amount of munitions. The noble goal of “strengthening the security of a European partner, assisting with protecting its sovereignty and territorial integrity” declared by the United States is a good example of cynicism and doublethink.
I would like to ask journalists a question (asking Washington would be useless). The United States of America claims that, by supplying these weapons to Kosovo, it is working towards “strengthening and protecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a European partner.” At the same time, Washington claims that it sees Belgrade in the same way. Tell me, how does Washington plan to guarantee Belgrade, Serbia and Serbian people their sovereignty and territorial integrity? Or does Washington not plan to guarantee Serbia its territorial integrity and sovereignty? These two processes not only contradict each other; they are incompatible.
Allow me to remind you that, according UNSC Resolution 1244 that lies at the core of the Kosovo settlement, the province has neither sovereignty nor respective attributes, including the status of territorial integrity. According to international law, it is part of the Republic of Serbia. A multi-party corps is responsible for ensuring stability in Kosovo. Creating parallel security bodies that Pristina and its protectors, including the United States, call an “army,” serves a completely different purpose, which is to support the nationalist ambitions of Kosovo “prime minister” Albin Kurti, who continues to inflate tensions in Kosovo’s confrontation with Belgrade, expecting that the Westerners will force Serbs to compromise their vital interests.
Obviously, Kosovo’s “government” is committed to forcing the Serbian-speaking population out of the province, getting rid of the obligation to observe its rights, which includes creating a community of Serb municipalities. To achieve the future that the West has drawn for Kosovo, the Kosovo Albanians are using all available intimidation tactics, outright terror against civilians, children and seniors. There is plenty of evidence and we have provided it many times. Now there is an intention to supply the Kosovo radicals with more serious weapons, which, according to the United States, is supposed to strengthen their independence.
We strongly condemn any attempts to arm Pristina’s illegitimate militarised structures. The irresponsibility and neglect for international law and Resolution 1244 of the UN Security Council, demonstrated by Washington and its allies, undermine the talks on Kosovo and aggravate the risks of destabilisation in the province and across the Balkan region in general.
There is one more curious trend related to these very supplies of US weapons to the centre of Europe. Listen to what Germany and Sweden say or what Baltic states repeat almost every day. The governments of these countries terrify their population with the prospect of war on the European continent. Are these Javelin supplies to the Kosovans linked to the Anglo-Saxons’ plans with respect to continental Europe?
The Foreign Ministry has released its latest report on the situation with Russian citizens and compatriots abroad, publishing it on its website.
Defending the rights of our citizens and compatriots abroad is a priority topic for the Foreign Ministry. Unfortunately, statistics confirm that the situation here has not shown any signs of improvement with persisting negative trends caused by the collective West’s efforts.
Russian citizens continue to suffer from multiple violations of their rights in Western countries, which use the special military operation carried out by the Russian Federation to de-Nazify and demilitarise Ukraine, as well as defend civilians in Donbass, as a pretext to justify the shameful way in which they have been treating our compatriots. Reading these accusations makes one laugh considering that in a number of countries, Russian nationals and our compatriots were the targets of the same discriminatory, humiliating and unlawful treatment abroad before 2022. This includes the institution of non-citizenship, attempts to deprive entire generations of people, young and old, of their mother tongue, infringing on people’s right to study and receive information in their mother tongue, and to develop their own culture. It all started prior to 2022 and has been elevated to the rank of state policy in several EU and NATO countries. Now, Brussels has opted for the convenience of linking these practices to the special military operation. This is not the case. There is no truth in this falsehood.
In its previous reports, the Foreign Ministry noted that Russians were facing violations in their everyday lives. It is worth emphasising that in several countries which unleashed a sanctions and trade war against Russia, officials, specialised agencies and international organisations have been turning a blind eye to the discrimination and persecution of Russians.
It is clear as daylight that by sticking to this Russophobic attitude and encouraging the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev, the West offered Poland, the Baltic states, Ukraine and several others a powerful impetus in their efforts to condemn the Russian aggression while in fact unleashing a war on monuments and memorials to Red Army soldiers who sacrificed their lives to liberate Europe from Nazism. This has also breathed new life into other activities by these countries to rewrite history in general and whitewash collaborationism. We would like to note that we have paid special attention to these matters not only in this report, but also in a recent update to a Foreign Ministry report on the glorification of Nazism around the world.
At the same time, activists from the Russian speaking community committed to preserving cultural, linguistic and historical ties with Russia have been facing government pressure and repression in several countries, primarily in the Baltic states, the United States, Canada, and Ukraine. This has nothing to do with their political views but rather with their cultural code and identity. Civil society figures calling for constructive relations to be built with our country and the preservation of true historical memory are suffering from persecution, pressure and repression.
The authorities in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and the Kiev regime have achieved the most in this Russophobic race by proactively seeking to purge the Russian language from all educational institutions. This prevents a substantial portion of their population who use the Russian language as their mother tongue from accessing Russian-language education. In addition to this, the Baltic states have been openly preparing a mass deportation effort targeting Russians as what could be a way for them to come up with a final solution to the Russian question and resolve the issue of so many people living as non-citizens on their territories, which has become an anomaly in the 21st century. The non-citizenship issue must be resolved in a different manner. Instead of deporting people, the solution must consist of granting them citizenship in keeping with the international obligations of these countries.
As for the Foreign Ministry, it will continue taking every possible step on the diplomatic front to defend the rights of Russian citizens. Considering the continuing Russophobic campaign, unprecedented in terms of its scale and intensity, as well as the multiple forms of aggression against Russians and those who come from our country, we have kept special communication channels open via various applications and messaging services to enable our compatriots to stay in touch with our missions abroad.
We have no illusions regarding the true intent behind the efforts by several countries in the collective West targeting Russian nationals and Russian-speaking communities. Nevertheless, we will make every effort to defend the rights of our citizens and compatriots. To do so, we will continue monitoring these developments and reporting the manifestations of discrimination abroad in order to alert leaders in these countries to these violations and request them to honour their legal obligations regarding our compatriots. We will do so in our bilateral contacts as well as in multilateral settings.
The situation as it stands today demonstrates in all evidence that we must closely monitor, take proactive steps and act in accordance with international law in the face of these manifestations of intolerance across the Euro-Atlantic space, which have already evolved into overt xenophobia and racism, with Russophobia as one of its most widespread forms. The situation regarding Russian citizens in the countries of the collective West, which have been casting themselves as model democracies, demonstrates in all clarity that they have failed to overcome discriminatory and racist attitudes.
Russian humanitarian aid for the people of Mali
On January 6, 2024, 25,000 tonnes of Russian wheat, designated as humanitarian aid for the Republic of Mali, arrived at the port of Conakry, the Republic of Guinea. On January 9, 2024, this humanitarian shipment was officially handed over to authorised representatives from Mali. The wheat delivery was made in accordance with a decision by President of Russia Vladimir Putin, to provide food support to multiple African states, as announced at the 2nd Russia-Africa Summit in St Petersburg in July 2023.
This was the fourth free shipment of Russian goods, which are greatly needed by the people of Mali. On June 7, June 18 and December 6, 2023, the Russian Emergencies Ministry provided Malians with 50,000 tonnes of wheat and over 22,000 tonnes of fertilisers.
Russia plans to continue actively helping African countries overcome severe socio-economic problems, including through the provision of essential humanitarian aid.
The Gorchakov Fund to hold the second foreign policy meeting in memory of Vitaly Churkin
On February 20-23, the Gorchakov Fund will host a competition to select participants for the 2nd Youth Forum, which aims to perpetuate the memory of outstanding contemporary diplomat Vitaly Churkin (1952-2017) and to train foreign affairs specialists capable of skilfully and steadfastly defending their positions.
Representatives of the Russian regions, former Soviet countries, Asian, African, Middle Eastern, Latin American and other states are invited to participate in the forum. Researchers in the field of international relations, political analysts, economists, jurists, historians, as well as undergraduate and postgraduate students, students from specialised universities, foreign affairs journalists, representatives of public organisations involved in international cooperation and public diplomacy, young diplomats and representatives of government agencies are also invited to participate.
Applications for the forum will be accepted until January 21. The fund’s website provides more detailed information.
140th birth anniversary of Ivan Maisky
January 19 marks the 140th anniversary of the birth of Ivan Maisky, a prominent Soviet diplomat, public figure, historian and writer. He dedicated almost a quarter of a century to the diplomatic service serving in high-responsibility positions at the Soviet embassies in Japan (1927-1929) and Finland (1929-1932), and heading the permanent mission to Great Britain in 1932-1943.
Maisky made a significant contribution to major international conferences, including the Crimean (Yalta) and Berlin (Potsdam) conferences, which laid the foundations for the post-war international system.
As Deputy People’s Commissar of Foreign Affairs (Minister from 1946) and a member of the Soviet Foreign Ministry board, Maisky led the Inter-Allied Reparation Commission in Moscow. The commission worked on a detailed plan to collect compensation from Germany for the damage caused during the war, including the return of looted and illegally exported from the Soviet territory cultural property.
In 1947, Maisky focused on research projects at the Institute of History, and later, at the Institute of General History of the USSR Academy of Sciences. He authored a series of works on international issues, the history of a number of foreign countries and Soviet foreign policy, including Mongolia on the Eve of Revolution (M., 1959); Memoirs of a Soviet Ambassador in two volumes (M., 1964); Memoirs of a Soviet diplomat, 1925-1945 (M., 1971); People. Events. Facts (M., 1973) and others.
Of particular interest is Diplomat’s Diary, published in 2006 with the support of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Department of History and Records, which contains detailed accounts of Maisky’s contacts and meetings during his service abroad and in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. They portray Maisky as an outstanding personality, a well-read and well-versed diplomat and politician with a brilliant style. This book can serve as a model of the high art of diplomacy, both for the younger generation of diplomats and for a wide range of readers.
Interest in Ivan Maisky’s personality and legacy is also strong abroad. In 2015, Yale University Press published three volumes of his diaries in English.
His services to the Motherland were recognised by the Order of Lenin, three Orders of the Red Banner of Labour, the Order of Peoples’ Friendship and other government awards. A memorial plaque was installed on the facade of the building where Maisky lived in Moscow.
In the 16th and 17th centuries, after Lithuania and the Polish Kingdom signed the Union of Lublin in 1569 and formed the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Catholic nobility pursued an aggressive policy of Polonisation and Latinisation of the residents of Ancient Rus and seized vast swathes of land. Faced with the looming threat of losing their religious and national identity, the Orthodox people in the Dnieper River region began a liberation movement. These were the early days of the movement to overcome the oppression of the Poles and reunite with Russia.
On January 8 (18), 1654, in the town of Pereyaslav, representatives of the Zaporozhian Cossacks led by Ukrainian hetman Bogdan Khmelnitsky declared their decision to move, as they said at that time, “under the high arm” of the Moscow tsar. Thus, Ukrainian Cossacks who rebelled against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth decided to finally separate from the Polish-Lithuanian state. By that time, they were effectively independent from it.
The leaders of the uprising considered various options for the future of Ukraine, including reconciliation with the Polish king or even seeking protection from the Turkish sultan. Eventually, however, the decision to unite with Russia emerged as the historic choice.
Lev Gumilyov, an outstanding Russian historian, geographer and philosopher, wrote about the events of that time: “Of primary importance was the common super-ethnicity of Russia and Ukraine. Rational plans hatched by strong-willed and intelligent seekers of power shattered against this sense of unity like waves against a rock. Two closely related ethnicities − Russians and Ukrainians − became one not thanks to, but in spite of the political circumstances, because the people's will or lack thereof invariably overruled the initiatives that were at odds with the logic of ethnogenesis.”
On January 8 (18), 1654 the Pereyaslav Council (Rada) adopted the historic act “to be with Moscow”, i.e. to become part of the Russian state. Unlike previous radas, this one represented all the lands of Ukraine, which were divided into military-administrative units known as Cossack regiments. A letter from Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich on accepting the Ukrainian people under his authority was read out during the Rada. Bogdan Khmelnitsky, Cossack chiefs and the local people swore allegiance to Russia.
The congress of the Zaporozhian Cossacks, undoubtedly, marked a turning point in the history of Eastern Europe and the future Russian Empire.
On March 14 (24), 1654, the agreement between the representatives of the Cossack Hetmanate and the Russian Kingdom was signed, and on March 27 (April 6) it was approved by Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich. This treaty, known as the Articles of March, secured the transition of the Zaporozhian Sech to the Russian state and defined its rights and privileges.
Centuries of fighting to reclaim all the lands seized from Kievan Rus' lay ahead. It was only after bloody wars with the Poles, under the Truce of Andrusovo in 1667, that the left-bank Malorossiya joined the Moscow State, and in 1686, Kiev and surrounding lands were returned under the Treaty of Perpetual Peace. The wars of 1768-1774 and 1787-1791 resulted in the recovery of the Northern Black Sea coast, or Novorossiya, from the Turks. Right-bank Malorossiya became part of Russia as a result of the partition of Poland in 1793 and 1795. Galicia and Northern Bukovina were returned in 1939-1940.
During the fierce battles for liberating Soviet Ukraine and in memory of its great son, the Order of Bogdan Khmelnitsky of three degrees was established by the resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR on October 10, 1943. The order was awarded to the Red Army and Navy commanders and soldiers, leaders of partisan units and partisans who acted with particular resolve and skill in fighting the enemy, showing patriotism, courage and selflessness in the war for liberating the Soviet land from Nazi invaders.
The decision of the Pereyaslav Rada clearly showed the will of a united nation, which had been divided during the Mongol-Tatar invasion, to live in a single state. This decision was beneficial for the Ukrainian people. Ukrainian culture began to develop more freely. The Ukrainian people found a loyal friend and a reliable defender in the Russian people.
Unfortunately, today the term “reunification” has been largely forgotten in Ukrainian official historiography. The Kiev regime's rejection of the centuries-old traditions of friendship, brotherhood and partnership with Moscow, and the fomenting of anti-Russia hysteria in Ukrainian society are openly encouraged by Kiev's Western curators, who aim to distort our common history and to create an image of Russia as the main enemy who hinders Ukraine's development. However, the attempts of the Kiev government to reject its past, to renounce their brotherly ties with the Russian and Belarusian peoples have so far only resulted in Ukraine becoming dependent on the West and sinking into the abyss of poverty and humiliation.
80th anniversary of fully lifting the Nazi siege of Leningrad
There are a plethora of historical documents, chronicles and documentaries on this topic. Unfortunately, there is no way around our reporting on them to drive home our principled position on the need to preserve history. But what makes this so unfortunate? The answer to this question is that this constitutes our response to a global onslaught by the Anglo-Saxon liberal dictate on historical facts.
January 27, 1944, marks the date in the history of the Great Patriotic War when the lifting of the siege of Leningrad was completed and the city liberated. The battle for Leningrad went down in history as one of the longest, cruellest and bloodiest engagements.
Soviet troops made many attempts to liberate the city in 1941 and 1942 during their counteroffensives. On January 18, 1943, they finally succeeded in breaking through the encirclement as part of Operation Iskra (“Spark”) and carve out a narrow corridor just 11 kilometres wide along Lake Ladoga’s southern coast. This enabled them to deliver supplies to the city and evacuate its people.
An opportunity to complete the city’s liberation presented itself one year later, resulting from the Leningrad-Novgorod Strategic Offensive, carried out by the Leningrad Front commanded by Army General Leonid Govorov, the Volkhovsky Front under Army General Kirill Meretskov’s command, and the 2nd Baltic Front led by Army General Markian Popov. These fronts worked in tandem with the Baltic Fleet commanded by Vladimir Pributs and Long-Range Aviation Forces led by Aviation Marshal Alexander Golovanov.
The Soviet troops remained on the offensive throughout 1944, liberating the Leningrad, Novgorod and part of the Kalinin (now Tver) regions. They forced the enemy to retreat to the borders with Estonia and Latvia. Finland may have harboured plans to seize Soviet territory by allying itself with Nazi Germany, but it had to withdraw from the war and sign a truce with the USSR. The successful and strategic offensive in the northwest paved the way to the victorious march by the Soviet troops across the European theatre.
German war documents show that the Nazis and their accomplices wanted to raze Leningrad to the ground and exterminate the people living there, including by cutting off supply routes, destroying food stores and causing hunger. The order from the Nazi command were quite clear: keep the city under siege, be firm in maintaining its blockade, never accept its capitulation, kill anyone crossing the frontline and work to exterminate all people living there. The enemy spared no effort or weapon to achieve its inhuman designs by pounding the city on the Neva River with over 150,000 shells, and dropping over 107,000 incendiary and high explosive bombs. Residential neighbourhoods, hospitals, maternity wards, museums, palaces, research and educational institutions all suffered in these barbaric bombings and regular shelling incidents.
Unprecedented in terms of its duration and severe consequences, the siege of Leningrad lasted for 872 days, from September 8, 1941, until January 27, 1944. According to various estimates, during that time over a million people succumbed to hunger, diseases and shelling, including people from nearby cities which were also encircled. Up to 4,000 people died in Leningrad every day from malnutrition and exhaustion. Tens of thousands of people lost their lives while being evacuated.
In 2022, at the request of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia, the St Petersburg City Court recognised the actions by the German occupying force and troops together with their accomplices, i.e., armed units formed in Belgium, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Norway and Finland, as well as individual Austrian, Latvian, Polish, French and Czech volunteers, as “war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide against national and ethnic groups forming the population of the USSR and the peoples of the Soviet Union.”
The courage and heroism demonstrated by Leningrad residents and defenders during the siege have come to symbolise unprecedented resilience, mass self-sacrifice and patriotism. On December 22, 1942, the Presidium of the USSR’s Supreme Soviet issued an order establishing the For the Defence of Leningrad medal. It was awarded to 1.5 million people. In 1945, the city on the Neva received the Hero City title and the order of Lenin, followed by the Golden Star medal in 1965.
We have been marking January 27, 1944 since 1995 as the Day of Lifting the Siege of Leningrad. In 2014, the remembrance day’s name was changed to the Day of Fully Lifting the Nazi Siege of Leningrad to better reflect the role of civilians and their contribution to defending the city.
Question: The Polish Foreign Ministry stated that Warsaw would agree to station German troops on its territory if Berlin wished to do so. What does Russia think about such statements?
Maria Zakharova: This is yet another anti-Russia step in the global Russophobic campaign of the NATO countries and this country in particular.
Allow me to remind you that around 10,000 US troops are already stationed on Polish territory, along with one of NATO’s multinational combat tactical groups consisting of American, British, Romanian and Croatian personnel.
It is obvious that, by encouraging more foreign troops to be stationed in Poland without need if these countries are peace-oriented, that indicates an intention to escalate tensions in Europe and prolong the global collapse of pan-European security that has demonstrated that the Europeans are unable, due to the position of NATO and the leading Anglo-Saxon duo, to agree on rules of co-existence and cooperation on their own continent. Perhaps, it is an attempt to fuel the fire.
I would like to remind you that only recently, in December 2023, did Germany and Lithuania sign an agreement on expanding the Bundeswehr’s military presence in this Baltic republic to brigade level. It appears that the Polish leaders want to keep up with their neighbours when it comes to demonstrating loyalty to their big brothers in Berlin and Washington.
Once again, I would like to stress that increasing the activity and military capacity of NATO and its member states close to the borders of Russia and the Union State of Russia and Belarus is provocative and may lead to the total deterioration of the European security architecture. Naturally, these steps will not remain without a corresponding response from the Russian side.
I am curious if the Polish officials plan to request compensation for the cost of maintaining German troops as part of Warsaw’s financial claims against the Germans for the occupation during World War II? It is a good question to ask them.
Question: Do you think any significant documents or concepts have been approved or signed during the World Economic Forum that is taking place in Davos now without Russian representation?
Maria Zakharova: You know, the funny thing is (I think it’s really funny) that the key theme of this year’s annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos is “Rebuilding Trust.” It’s not a joke, it truly is so. That’s the theme under which they planned to address issues such as security and cooperation in a divided world; shaping growth and employment for a new era; developing artificial intelligence as a leading force in the economy; and a long-term strategy for climate, nature and energy.
We just talked about the loss of any potential for rebuilding security in Europe any time soon.
As you know, Davos is a European platform (understandably, with the North Atlantic component). They mostly discuss European matters and European trade and economy, and so on. What kind of trust building can we talk about when a number of NATO countries are talking about military operations in the European theatre as a realistic scenario?
I just quoted the statements by Poland, Sweden and Germany. They make them regularly. The Baltic States are a lost cause in this sense, so I won’t even mention them. That is the first point.
Second, discussing the rebuilding of trust given what NATO, the United States, Britain and other countries do every day as aggressors as they strike, for example, targets in Yemen is an exercise in absurdity. Has that done anything to rebuild trust? No, it hasn’t.
They dealt another blow to trust when they came to the UN Security Council demanding a resolution for the strikes. When they failed to obtain it, they defeated the purpose of the Security Council and attacked a sovereign state the very next day.
I mentioned earlier today that they are supplying arms to the illegally declared government of Kosovo, which has no right whatsoever to engage in any kind of defence cooperation independently from Belgrade because it is part of Serbia. What kind of trust rebuilding are we talking about?
There is, however, an important theme that Davos should be devoted to, namely, the trade war waged by the NATO countries. We could formulate this topic to sound closer to reality: the waging of a trade war by the global minority against the global majority. There would be much to discuss such as sanctions used as an illegitimate and unlawful tool that the collective West has been resorting to for many years now whenever it is unable to keep up with the competition and do better than its competitors. This theme could also be used to look into the collective West blocking the monetary tools it has created to wage trade wars.
“Destroying global energy cooperation based on peaceful and legal grounds” would be an excellent and a more realistic theme for Davos. It remains unclear who will rebuild trust and with whom. Even during the pandemic, when the world was supposed to unite in the face of the virus which affected everyone, “the poor and the rich, and people of different skin colour, skull shape, age, social status and cultural identity,” the collective West did everything it could to use this historical moment, this human tragedy, to further segregate people on all grounds. There were vaccine-related manipulations, the vaccines from other countries were made ineligible for licensing and practically unavailable in a number of the world regions. This is all just about hypocrisy and another case of staged performance, which Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov mentioned in his article that was published a year ago in the Izvestia newspaper.
You asked me about the documents. These issues were discussed at the forum by political and economic representatives who based their input on their own calculations and the materials provided by various financial organisations. All of this is far from reality. There are things that are not and should not serve as a literal reflection of existing needs, because they are oriented towards the future. In that case, they should be based on realistic estimates. If they devote the forum to “rebuilding trust” and at the same time increase NATO military contingents around the world, unilaterally attack sovereign states, and deploy their troops against the will of independent states, what kind of trust building in the economic sphere are we talking about? All this is happening amid a trade war that has been waged by Westerners for many years now.
Question: A couple of days ago, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said that the tense situation in the Red Sea is evidence that the conflict in Gaza is spreading. According to him, the main priority at the moment is to end the war in the Gaza Strip as quickly as possible and prevent the conflict from expanding and even getting out of control. How does the Russian side assess this statement? What factors do you think are increasing tension in the Red Sea region?
Maria Zakharova: We have already commented on the developments in the Red Sea in light of the US and Britain’s attack on Yemen during the briefing on January 12. On the same day, a UN Security Council meeting was held on this topic at Russia’s request. We gave our detailed assessments of the current situation and events taking place in the Middle East. Russia’s and China’s approaches on this issue, as well as on many other international issues, coincide.
The unprecedented escalation of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the continuation of the Yemeni crisis is the direct cause of the current increase in tension in the Red Sea. The military actions taken by the United States have only further destabilised the military-political situation in the region, which was the result of the extremely ill-advised policy the Americans and its closest allies chose. All this could cancel out the latest positive trends in the Yemeni settlement process in the long term and considerably worsen the situation in the region, and in the entire world.
Question: On January 15, the government of Nauru issued a statement that it recognises the One China principle. Nauru authorities have severed diplomatic relations with Taiwan and are ready to restore diplomatic relations with China. Could you comment on this?
Maria Zakharova: First of all, I would like to say that Russia has a principled position on this issue. It is widely known and was reaffirmed again just the other day. This position has not changed.
There is only one China in the world, the PRC government is the only legitimate government representing all of China, and Taiwan is an integral part of it. At the same time, relations between the two shores of the Taiwan Strait are a purely internal affair of China.
As for the decision of the Nauru authorities, this is the sovereign choice of the island state in its relations with the PRC. It seems to me that it once again confirms the unity of the world community in recognising the One China principle.
Question: On Monday, during the talks between Russian Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu and his Iranian counterpart Mohammad-Reza Gharaei Ashtiani, it was noted that Russia and Iran are preparing to sign an interstate treaty. How soon do the parties intend to sign it and what are the main terms?
Maria Zakharova: I can say that the draft of a new interstate treaty between Russia and Iran is reaching the finalisation stage.
The document will cover the entire scope of multi-dimensional Russia-Iran ties and formalise the overarching strategic nature of the Moscow-Tehran partnership. Let me remind you that this step is not just timely but long overdue. It has been over 20 years since the current treaty was signed, in 2001. Naturally, international conditions and context have changed. The relations between our countries are experiencing an unprecedented boost.
As concerns the timeline, once again, preparations are in the final stage. The treaty itself will be signed during one of the upcoming meetings between the presidents of Russia and Iran. I would like to point out that it is the prerogative of the Presidential Executive Office to comment on the dates and formats of interaction between heads of state.
Question: On Saturday, it was reported that a missile had fallen 500 metres away from a Panamanian-flagged tanker carrying Russian oil. The incident occurred 90 miles from the Yemeni port of Aden. What does the Foreign Ministry think of the incident? What can be done to settle the situation as soon as possible?
Maria Zakharova: We have seen the reports by Reuters – specifically, the reports of January 12 concerning the incident in the Gulf of Aden, that an unidentified tanker allegedly carrying Russian oil was erroneously attacked. However, the Foreign Ministry has not received any official confirmation to this effect.
We consistently support the security of international sea routes, passenger and cargo operations, including in the Red Sea and the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait.
At the same time, as we warned, another military gamble by the United States and Great Britain in the region (the Yemen strikes) has resulted in further escalation. The necessary conditions for stabilising the situation in this strategically important transport artery include an immediate ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, intensifying efforts to develop a comprehensive political solution to the Palestinian problem based on international law, and settling the Yemeni crisis through a full-format dialogue involving all influential military and political forces in the country.
It is necessary to stop the endless military gambles by the NATO countries that call themselves “coalitions” and operate in defiance of international law, without a UN Security Council mandate. I am saying this not only because these risky ventures are not a good idea as they are, but also because they do not turn out well. In the past decades, they failed to improve the situation, to relieve the local population’s suffering or to somehow settle a crisis. What eventually happens is the exact opposite. The current developments in the region are leading to a catastrophe. Unfortunately, it is getting worse every day because Washington, London and Brussels are in collective denial of their own accountability for another collapse in the region. By not admitting one’s mistakes, one is bound to repeat them and even make them worse.
Question: According to the Russian Permanent Mission to the United Nations, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of prisoners like Gonzalo Lira being held by the Kiev regime. Are any of them Russian citizens?
Maria Zakharova: Yes, there are. We have received a large number of appeals about our citizens and compatriots who have become victims of the Kiev regime. Most of them are being considered by the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation, Tatyana Moskalkova.
The figure is terrible and horrifying. Unfortunately, the number is only growing. I will not even try to name all of them now. There are just a few approximations of what is happening there. Some of the victims are known; others have simply perished in the clutches of the Kiev regime. We are calling on all specialised platforms, literally on a daily basis, and appealing to the international community through our information resources to do something to alleviate the suffering of innocent people whom the Kiev regime is blaming for its own failures and who are labeled as politically unreliable or collaborating with the “aggressor.” They are being labelled with various implications.
There is no justice for these people; they have no access to lawyers, while law firms, bar associations, and international human rights institutions have no opportunity to help these people. We have seen even citizens of Ukraine being publicly massacred, despite thousands, tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of their compatriots (I mean citizens of Ukraine) backing them. They were cynically massacred for show, as an edification for others, as a tool of intimidation. So imagine how it is for those whom the Kiev regime does not consider its own or considers “sub-humans.” That’s what they call them – species, sub-humans. They call them different names. These are off the scale figures and horrifying facts.
Question: Kim Yo Jong, the sister of the North Korean leader, told the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA): “In case of even a small provocation, our army will immediately launch a baptism of fire.” Was this regional security issue or other such issues discussed during Sergey Lavrov’s meeting with the North Korean Foreign Minister?
Maria Zakharova: In the course of the discussion between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and his colleague, Choe Son Hui, on the situation on the Korean peninsula and in Northeast Asia, the parties reaffirmed their mutual commitment to a political and diplomatic settlement of any tension in the region, which is being exacerbated by the irresponsible and provocative actions of the United States and its satellites.
We will publish a final report on the talks in the near future. We have not released it so far because the visit of North Korean Foreign Minister is still ongoing. As agreed by the parties, we will post a comment after its completion.
Question: Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas said Russia would again pose a serious threat to NATO’s eastern flank in three to five years. What do you think about her statement?
Maria Zakharova: We have already discussed this today.
Anyone who does not swear allegiance to the West, does not support these neocolonial values, who calls the truth the truth and a lie a lie, who upholds the basic values of humaneness and our civilisation, poses a threat to the representatives of the NATO-centric axis. These are those who dare say and defend what we have always considered obvious – for instance, the existence of two genders (male and female) and the birth of babies as boys and girls. Those that advocate the preservation of our civilization, its achievements and experience at the government level, individually or on behalf of some socio-cultural community pose a threat to them. This is an important point. It is not Russia that threatens them. It is they that see us as a threat. In the past few decades, they have invented an extravagant world of non-existent values that they call neo-liberal.
This concept is based on the substitution of notions. For some reason, they have equated freedom, including digital and information freedom, with dictate. They deem it possible to use cancel culture and praise only those pieces of art that meet or service their interests. They regard anything that does not fit into their neo-liberal little world as a threat.
Second, they endlessly attempt to create tension and convey via other states (the Kiev regime, the Baltic regimes, Poland and now, unfortunately, Germany and Northern Europe as well) hysterical predictions about some inevitable global events that will rock Europe (as they formulate it). If these are their plans, let them announce them themselves.
We have always advocated cooperation, peace, indivisible security and joint efforts to overcome real rather than invented threats. We have never allowed and will never allow anyone to threaten our sovereignty and independence. We have been open about this. That said, we have always urged others to search for points of contact and alternatives for reaching consensus.
But if they are planning for what is periodically expressed by such figures as Kaja Kallas, Swedish Civil Defence Minister Carl-Oskar Bohlin or some German politicians, then why not say it openly? They have obviously failed to talk honestly for a long time. They need to at least stop claiming that someone wants to attack them or that someone is threatening them. Nobody wants to attack them and nobody is threatening them. If they feel a threat to their fragile world of neoliberal values, this is their own problem. If they want to seriously and finally destabilise the situation in Europe, this is their position.
Question: Donald Trump called Joseph Biden the worst president in US history. Do you agree with this? If not, who is the worst president in US history, in your opinion?
Maria Zakharova: I believe that the Americans, citizens of the United States should express their opinion about this. The main point is for their opinion to be considered.
We saw how even dead people voted for Mr Biden four years ago. Apparently, he keeps thanking them, singling them out in the crowd of the living.
The main point is for the opinion of US citizens to be really heard. The citizens of a country upholding the principles of freedom of speech and democracy should be able to use their right to express their will in the course of legal electoral procedures.
Let Americans say what they think, whom they like better and consider more important and indispensable. This is their country, and their presidential nominees. Let them decide. The only problem is for them to have access to the elections in the United States.
Question: The alignment of forces in the Middle East has become clearer. On the one hand, the US is an ally of Israel. On the other hand, there are different forces that are acting militarily and politically against the US and Israel – from Iran to South Africa and Latin America. Can Russia play a role in uniting these forces?
Maria Zakharova: To begin with, I don’t fully share your assessment of the situation and the alignment of forces (as you put it). You mentioned that the US is an ally of Israel in the region. But it seems to me (based on various documents) that the US also has other allies in the region. At any rate, they are mentioned as such in related bilateral documents. It is hard to agree with your assessment of the situation.
Second, as Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has said more than once, that in principle, Russian diplomacy rejects the approach of “separating parties” in order to “pit” them against each other at different levels, to exacerbate differences.
Russia does not urge its partners to be friends against someone else. Nor does it establish any blocks aimed against anyone, be it Israel or some other state. The main goal of our efforts in the region today is to facilitate general de-escalation. Now it is primarily necessary to stop the bloodshed in the Gaza Strip and help resolve all the issues of the Palestinian-Israeli settlement through political and diplomatic methods on a universally recognised legal foundation and in cooperation with all constructive partners in the Middle East and the rest of the world.
I would like to invite you to attend Mr Lavrov’s news conference tomorrow. I think this will be one of its central themes. You can well develop this theme further. It is urgent and very important.
Question: You said Mr Lavrov’s news conference would be translated into different languages. Why have you excluded Arabic?
Maria Zakharova: We will translate the text of the news conference into Arabic. This is related to linguistic peculiarities.
During the event, we will be doing simultaneous interpretation in the languages I mentioned. We translate the text into other languages as well, but will do this a bit later.
Question: On January 15, the Russian Defence Ministry stated at its briefing that the scale of dual-use research being conducted by the United States and the global biological risks it poses raise the question of an independent international investigation. Will the Foreign Ministry seek such an investigation and work on a legally binding protocol to the Convention, which would be binding on all states-parties to the BTWC, especially the United States?
Maria Zakharova: In collaboration with the relevant agencies, the Foreign Ministry is engaged in systematic work in the international arena to counter US bio-military activity abroad, including that carried out in violation of the BTWC on Ukrainian territory. We talk about this in detail. I believe that this is a well-known fact. The relevant claims against Washington and Kiev were presented in detail by us at the Biological Weapons Convention Article V Formal Consultative Meeting in Geneva on September 5-9, 2022. The overwhelming majority of questions remained unanswered as a result of the event.
In accordance with Article VI of the BTWC, we convened open meetings of the UN Security Council on October 27 and November 2, 2022, in New York to consider a draft UN Security Council resolution prepared by the Russian side on the establishment of an international commission to investigate the issues presented in the Russian complaint against the United States and Ukraine regarding compliance with BTWC obligations in the context of the activities of biological laboratories on Ukrainian territory. Consideration of the draft resolution at the UN Security Council was accompanied by an unsubstantiated campaign by Western delegations accusing Russia of "propaganda and misinformation" and making unilateral statements that got out ahead of the UN Security Council’s conclusions. The US, the UK and France voted against the draft, while 10 non-permanent members of the UN Security Council abstained, leaving the Russian initiative unimplemented.
Our questions for Washington and Kiev regarding this activity have not received substantive answers and still need to be addressed. We continue to work at the relevant multilateral platforms (primarily within the BTWC and the UN) with a view to resolving the current situation and removing the questions and claims that we and others have.
The developments in Ukraine clearly demonstrate the need to urgently strengthen the BTWC, primarily by drawing up a legally binding Protocol to the Convention with an effective verification mechanism. In cooperation with like-minded countries, we consistently advocate the resumption of negotiations on this document. We also continue to push for the implementation of Russian initiatives aimed at strengthening and institutionalising the BTWC.
***
Once again, I should like to draw your attention to tomorrow's event – a news conference by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. It will begin at 11 am Moscow time. It will be broadcast on all the resources of the Foreign Ministry with simultaneous translation into several languages (English, French, Spanish). The text of the transcript will then be published on the Foreign Ministry's website. It will also be translated into additional languages.
See you again tomorrow. All the best to you. I ask all journalists to prepare your questions.
Additional materials
-
Photos
