Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, February 22, 2023
Table of contents
- CPC Political Buro member, Director of the CPC Office of the Central Foreign Affairs Commission Wang Yi in Moscow
- Meeting of the heads of the Foreign Ministry’s territorial bodies in the regions
- Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming visit to Azerbaijan
- Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming participation in the G20 Council of Foreign Ministers
- Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov visits India
- Sergey Lavrov to take part in a Russia-Islamic World Strategic Vision Group meeting with ambassadors from the OIC member states
- The Ukraine crisis
- On Norway’s Nansen Support Programme for Ukraine
- The fifth anniversary of the Salisbury and Amesbury incidents
- UN Security Council meeting on the Nord Stream bombing
- Russian Federation’s efforts to establish peace and stability in the South Caucasus
- The enactment of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
- Banning the Russian language at Latvia’s private universities
- Preserving historical memory in the Baltic countries
- 30thanniversary of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation
- 55thanniversary of the Bellingshausen Antarctic Station
- Defender of the Fatherland Day
- Statements by the President of Lithuania
- Reducing Russia’s diplomatic presence in the Netherlands
- The collective West’s pressure on Serbia
- The activities of the Russian Science and Cultural Centre in Bucharest
- Certain aspects of the Nagorno-Karabakh peace settlement
- Discussion of the conflict in Ukraine during talks between Sergey Lavrov and Wang Yi
- US President Joe Biden’s visit to Kiev
- China’s global security initiative
- The involvement of the EU mission in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace settlement
- Statements by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken
- US President Joe Biden’s visit to Kiev
- Russia’s economic diplomacy
- China’s global biological security initiative
- Financing arms shipments to Ukraine from the EU budget
- Statements by the Prime Minister of Estonia
- Statements by the Foreign Minister of Slovakia
Wang Yi, member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPC, Director of the Office of the Central Foreign Affairs Commission, is in Moscow on February 21-22. He arrived here after his tour of Europe and participation in the 59th Munich Security Conference.
Today, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Wang Yi held full and productive talks. The current state of Russian-Chinese relations was highly praised. Relations continue to develop dynamically in the context of sharp changes in the international arena. Naturally, the Ukraine crisis was discussed.
We are grateful to the Chinese side for their invariably balanced position on this issue. Wang Yi and his colleagues have repeatedly indicated that the current conflict is largely the result of the long-term policy of the collective West. External forces trying to gain benefits from it should take into account the reasonable concern of all sides in the field of security.
Russia’s vision of resolving acute international issues is largely similar to China’s: we advocate compliance with the UN Charter, respect for international humanitarian law, and we are committed to the principle of indivisible security, according to which the security of one country cannot be increased at the expense of another.
We welcome China’s interest in playing a positive role in the settlement of the Ukraine crisis. At the same time, we clearly see that the Kiev regime is not ready for independent behaviour today; it cannot afford it and is not an autonomous player on the international arena. A clear confirmation of this was Ukraine’s withdrawal from the talks at the direction of its curators, and then the ban on any talks with Russia at the legislative level, which consolidated this position.
Unlike Ukraine, Russia has never refused a dialogue or a search for a diplomatic approach to settle the conflict. This is our consistent position, regardless of who we are dealing with: allies, friends, partners or countries that do not have friendly feelings for us. We use the formal process of talks until the very end. Diplomacy and settlement are always a priority for us. In this case, everything was tried but to no avail.
In order to find peace as soon as possible, only the political will of the West and its Kiev sponsees are needed, but we are not seeing this. We hear suicidal speeches that the supply of weapons will continue, etc.
Meeting of the heads of the Foreign Ministry’s territorial bodies in the regions
On February 27-
The Foreign Ministry’s territorial bodies are a link between its central office and regional executive authorities and play a significant role in the development of the regions’ international and foreign economic relations in line with the unified foreign policy of
The meeting will focus on issues related to improving the efficiency of the ministry’s representative offices to ensure the coordination of external relations of the regions, as well as proposals for improving their performance.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming visit to Azerbaijan
On February 27-28, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will pay an official visit to the
During the dialogue in
On the second day of his stay in
Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming participation in the G20 Council of Foreign Ministers
On March 1-2, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will take part in the G20 Foreign Ministers' Meeting in New Delhi.
We consider this meeting a key global governance forum. The need for a diplomatic dialogue through the G20 has increased significantly against the backdrop of progressive confrontation in international relations, the increased risk to the global economy, and actual bullying from Western political regimes.
During the meeting, under the Indian chairmanship’s slogan One Earth One Family One Future, issues will be raised concerning the strengthening and possible reform of international institutions, and increasing the positions of developing states in the decision-making process. The ministers will also focus on energy and food security, as well as the fight against terrorism.
The conceptual framework of the discussions, as set by India, meets the logic for forming a polycentric economic system in the world. Russia will stress the building of equal and mutual cooperation, confirm the central role of the UN and international law, and once again note the negative impact of the illegitimate sanctions, unfair competition, protectionism and the urgency of collective opposition to Western dominance and neocolonial practices.
Sergey Lavrov will have a packed schedule of bilateral meetings on the sidelines of the Council of Foreign Ministers meeting. The minister plans to meet with his colleagues from other counties, especially Brazil, China, and of course, with the host, India.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov visits India
On March 1-3, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will be in New Delhi on a working visit, during which he will hold talks with his Indian counterpart Subrahmanyam Jaishankar. The Russian and Indian foreign ministers will discuss ways to further promote cooperation in key areas, as well as compare notes on the schedule of upcoming meetings. The main subjects for discussion will be trade, investment and transport/logistics cooperation, the use of national currencies in mutual transactions, and promising projects in the energy sector.
The ministers will exchange views on relevant international issues, including interaction under the Indian chairmanship of the SCO and the G20, as well as coordination of approaches at the UN, BRICS and RIC (Russia, India, China). A number of regional subjects will be considered, including the forming of security architecture in the Asia-Pacific region, and the developments in Afghanistan and in Ukraine.
During his visit to New Delhi, Sergey Lavrov will take part in a session of the Raisina Dialogue annual international conference on geopolitics and geo-economics.
On March 6, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will take part in a Russia-Islamic World Strategic Vision Group senior officials’ meeting with the ambassadors of the OIC member states accredited in
Chair of the Strategic Vision Group “
Officials from federal and regional authorities and members of the Group who are also leaders of Russian religious associations are invited to attend. The meeting will be held at the Russian Foreign Ministry.
Nine years ago today (in the early hours of February 22) an anti-constitutional armed coup choreographed by the West took place in
This turn of events could have been avoided if the February 21, 2014 agreement between President Viktor Yanukovych and the opposition leaders had been implemented. We posted the text of this agreement on our website. It was signed with the mediation of
The “winners” of the Maidan protests tore this document to shreds shortly after signing it, tossed it and forgot about it. Whenever they were reminded about it, they refused to address the issue and moved on to other matters. What is there to comment upon? It’s yet another falsehood and falsification. However, if implemented, the agreement would have opened up prospects for a peaceful way out of the internal political crisis. Instead of forming a government of national unity and holding new elections, the opposition chose the path of confrontation and violence, thus becoming a party to the coup and revealing their true colours and the nature of the order they were working on, for which no expense (in money and Ukrainian lives) was spared by Western regimes. All of that was happening with the tacit approval of the European guarantors of the agreement, who never got around to stop the high-handed “revolutionaries” (putschists, in fact) and, incited by the US emissaries who were handing out cookies on the Maidan, proclaimed the “change of power.” It was done against the backdrop of their favourite rant about democracy and lawlessness. The fundamental law - the constitution - cannot be implemented - it gets killed if all this is not observed. Despite this rhetoric, they failed to notice that the change of power in 2014 was done with their hands and absolutely illegally so. In the end, the pseudo-peacekeeping efforts of the West have led to severe consequences for
A number of tragic events that unfolded in
The snipers’ case remains unsolved. Scandalous details have emerged on the falsification of the lists of Maidan victims – the “heavenly hundred” heroes. It has turned out that those lists also included people who didn’t die from gunshot wounds sustained in the riots but from health conditions, and not even in Kiev. This was the core of propaganda by the Kiev regime and the West. For eight years, they produced films, videos and posters featuring the “heavenly hundred.” The present Ukrainian authorities are shamelessly building their “new history” based on lies and fraud – a new normal that is actually absolutely abnormal.
It is symbolic that on February 20, 2023, just ahead of the Maidan anniversary, Joe Biden – a mastermind behind the 2014 bloody coup who served as -US vice president at the time and is now US President – visited Kiev. There are many reasons for this. American experts are talking about the launch of the election campaign, with the new electoral cycle about to begin. Since they have whipped the issue of Ukraine and Russia to unspeakable levels in recent years, this should be a good topic to start with. As criminologists and psychologists claim, a perpetrator is always drawn back to the scene of his crime – just like Rodion Raskolnikov was in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s novel, and now Joe Biden is in Ukraine.
The US leader’s visit was full of theatrics: the White House took efforts to demonstrate to the world its faith in the success of Vladimir Zelensky’s regime and its intention to support it until the ‘final victory’ – which can be translated from the White House language as ‘down to the last Ukrainian.’ In reality it looked like a poor stage production by a provincial theatre, doomed to become a flop. To add the moment a dramatic flair, they even sounded an air raid siren. We’ve seen this already with other protégés of the United States, back when Mikheil Saakashvili fell to the ground in hysterics, shouting on camera that the ‘rain would fall from the skies.’ This is a similar scenario: Saakashvili fell to the ground, while this time the effect was to be achieved by sounding the siren. Though Kiev residents were told in advance to ignore the alarm as there was no actual threat. We know how it goes: they issued a friendly warning that Joe Biden would arrive and the siren would be turned on, but there would be nothing to fear and everyone should go on minding their own affairs as this was part of the staged show. By the way, amidst upbeat reports claiming they are in full control of the situation and are going to ‘win’ soon, the US president still did not dare to visit Kiev without notifying Russia first and asking us to comply with security requirements. This is about the question of who actually has the full control of the situation.
If Washington wanted to show its NATO allies yet another example of ways to support Kiev, it did not play out very well. The announced new military aid package to the Armed Forces of Ukraine worth $460 million appears to be more than modest compared to previous tranches. No amount of theatrics will work here. Money flows like water, but this flow is not unlimited.
Reports have appeared in the Ukrainian media that US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, who accompanied his boss on this trip, demanded when speaking with the head of the office of the President of Ukraine, Andrey Yermak, that Ukraine conduct a successful counteroffensive in the south and reach the borders of Crimea in the next six months. That’s right, there are no people there for Jake Sullivan. The United States has never perceived Ukrainians as people. I am not sure there is anyone they can consider to be equal to their own exceptional nation. Otherwise, Washington will not supply Kiev with fighter jets and long-range missiles. And if in six months there are no people left in Ukraine, who will use all these weapons? What will Jake Sullivan do then? I am not asking what he will say, looking into Zelensky’s eyes (judging by what is happening there, this would not be safe). Who will use the fighters and equipment?
On the whole, Joe Biden’s communication with Zelensky showed the citizens of Ukraine who governs Ukraine in reality and is its real master, although there was an example of this in the past, when Joe Biden, as US vice-president, came and led their government. It is noteworthy that the Americans did not even mention a political settlement of the crisis. All this goes to show the irresponsible and reckless intention of the United States to increase the degree of escalation in the confrontation with Russia. This is criminal on the part of the White House.
On February 19, Vladimir Zelensky delivered his remarks via videoconference at the Munich Security Conference. Nothing new was said, the same as in Sanremo and other song and dance venues. The usual accusations against Russia, appeals to Western curators for new batches of military assistance, demagoguery about the coming victory of Kiev, and the “no alternative” to its membership in the EU and NATO.
This time Zelensky’s stream of consciousness focused on Biblical stories. We no longer pay attention to a lot of what he says, but there are some pearls. The first is about him accusing Silvio Berlusconi, who led Italy for many years (successfully, unlike Vladimir Zelensky), that he has never seen bombings. That is the same Silvio Berlusconi, who, as a six-year-old boy, ran out of the house with his parents under the bombs of the allied forces.
There is another point that cannot but amaze. We can say that something is illogical when it is fragmentary, erroneous, a misguided train of thought due to the fact that no facts or circumstances are taken into account. But what we have here is not just illogical or absurd, but a kind of mysticism. Vladimir Zelensky compared Russia to Goliath, and Ukraine and the West to David, who overpowers a stronger opponent. There is such a story in the Bible, it is true. But there is a small detail that turns everything around and puts it in its place, showing the absurdity of Zelensky’s babbling.
According to the Old Testament, David defeated Goliath because of his deep faith in God. Vladimir Zelensky is an absolutely godless man. He has put an end to the canonical Orthodox Church in his country, fomented a religious schism and mocked the feelings of believers who prayed for mercy on their shrines. I am talking about feelings, but there is also such a thing as believers’ rights. There has been no talk of respect for believers for a long time. Perhaps this is his personal attitude towards a religion that is alien to him, to orthodoxy. I suppose he professes Judaism (we’ve heard a lot about this aspect of his life). But in that case, he should remember the ten commandments of the Old Testament and the Torah, two of which are more relevant than ever for the Kiev regime and personally for Vladimir Zelensky: thou shalt not kill and thou shalt not steal. This is just what his regime has been doing for years. Passing the commandments like a relay baton to kill more and steal more. It has become their trade, the only thing they have learned and that they teach others. Before citing texts that are sacred for millions, hundreds of millions and even billions of people, it would be good (there is no conscience, so it would be useless to look for it) to at least go through the reference literature, focus on what needs to be voiced, things that millions of people on our planet would understand.
The Western-orchestrated coup d'état in Kiev in 2014 and the Maidan events that came with it precipitated an explosive growth in neo-Nazi movements in Ukraine. Alas, there are people and countries that prefer to turn a blind eye to this, to pretend that it isn’t happening, and continue to expand ties with “friendly” Ukraine. We urge supporters of this approach to take an objective look at the situation. Because the world sees new facts every day, confirming the most dangerous spread of Nazism in that country.
Apart from theory, there is practice and there are facts that support our statements. On February 14 of this year, Vladimir Zelensky (as a mockery of course, primarily a mockery of reasonable thinking) gave one of the brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine the name Edelweiss. I am sure that for many young people, February 14 means gifts and flowers. What's wrong with that? Well, nothing would have been wrong, if it did not bring back echoes of the Nazi unit from Adolf Hitler’s time. Ukrainian armed forces widely use Nazi chevrons, and paint Nazi signs on their armoured vehicles. There are numerous videos on social media and the internet showing Ukrainian artillerymen giving the Nazi salute on camera, every time a shot is fired. Still, “civilized” Europe, which went through the tragedy of World War II, refuses to see Ukrainian Nazism. Maybe because they have their own ideological supporters and successors of the Third Reich emerging there?
Ukraine continues indiscriminate mobilisation, which by now has become more like a manhunt. The internet is teeming with videos and reports of people being caught on the streets like stray animals. The Kiev regime treats people like animals, setting snares in markets, train stations, shopping centres, bars, restaurants and even at funerals for people to get caught. Mired in corruption, the Kiev regime is treating the residents of Ukraine as expendables to satisfy its own all-absorbing and all-consuming passions and to suit its Western handlers.
The Kiev regime ceaselessly continues to churn out anti-Russia sanctions. This time, our financial sector came under attack. On February 19, Vladimir Zelensky signed an order imposing restrictive measures for a period of 10 years against 333 individuals, including financiers and managers of Russian banks and the Moscow Exchange MICEX-RTS. Earlier, the Ukrainian black list included Russian figures from cultural life, art and show business, as well as journalists, scientists, and public activists. The restrictions also affected the Russian Orthodox Church leaders. We can see that behind all this, there is the Kiev regime’s obsession with exerting pressure on various segments of our society and provoking internal political destabilisation in Russia.
This monstrous dehumanisation is being implemented in the heart of Europe, under its supervision and under pressure and abuse from the United States. All these plans are doomed to failure. Russian citizens know who we are dealing with in Ukraine, and will not allow the neo-Nazi infection to penetrate their homes or tolerate a fascist hotbed near our borders. When they talk about “occasional” incidents – indeed, those can happen anywhere. The world is imperfect, to put it mildly, and human beings are weak. The question is how the state, society and the relevant branches of government react.
If there is no immediate reaction precluding any possibility of legalisation, praise or even acceptability of this as a phenomenon, it is a lost cause. But if there is an instant reaction, including public censure and legislative action, then we can talk about an isolated case and a healthy reaction from all aspects of the state.
We have seen single manifestations grow into hotbeds in Ukraine and in many EU and NATO countries, and then merge together into a “common flame” amid total silence from the authorities. Any attempts by society to declare this unacceptable were curbed, while anyone who tried to say that manifestations of neo-Nazism were unacceptable were persecuted. This is terrible and leads to predictable results.
The notorious Secretary of the NSDC of Ukraine Alexey Danilov has delivered a few “gems of wisdom” lately. In an interview with The Sun, he promised that “Russia will inevitably be fragmented in the next 12 months,” and that “the war will end with a parade of Ukrainian tanks on Red Square.” Why is this monstrous? Not because this is nonsense. Nonsense often comes from the Kiev regime as there are a lot of mentally ill people there. It is monstrous because this is exactly how Hitler articulated his goal in June 1941, mentioning a parade of his troops, tanks, and equipment on Red Square. Everyone knows how it ended in May 1945; and there are no Ukrainian tanks as such, for that matter. Kiev’s Gauleiters are begging [Germany] to give them Leopards and trying to learn how to use them.
Nine years after the coup in Kiev, the collective West continues its policy of destroying Ukraine, no longer hiding its true goal – the fight against Russia and inflicting something they call a “strategic defeat” on us. It does not matter to the West that this criminal policy leads to numerous losses, not only among military personnel, but also among civilians in Ukraine.
President of Russia Vladimir Putin said it all yesterday and added a few points today when he spoke at Luzhniki stadium during the Defender of the Fatherland Day concert.
On Norway’s Nansen Support Programme for Ukraine
We took note of the five-year support programme for Ukraine which Norway’s government presented to the country’s parliament on February 16, 2023. Oslo will be allocating $7.5 billion, drawn from the country’s record oil and gas revenues, to support Kiev up to 2027. The package includes state-of-the-art armaments and military equipment. That is the analytics and the forecasting.
Thus, from the very beginning of the special military operation, Oslo, which has already been a major supplier of armaments to Ukraine, is forging ahead to become a leader in terms of funnelling arms to the Kiev regime on a per capita basis. Surprisingly, this is the country where the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded. Yes, unfortunately, I have had a lot of questions for the Norwegian Nobel Committee in recent years. The awards are politicised and they are mostly presented on credit. However, certain values which have stood the test of decades, could be preserved.
There is nothing new about Norway’s participation in the West’s militarist camp. Something else is noteworthy. The Norwegian authorities used the name of Fridtjof Nansen for the programme, which is in fact military, cynically referring to his substantial humanitarian contribution in fighting hunger in Ukraine a century ago.
Fridtjof Nansen is a well-known and respected figure in Russia. He is remembered not only as a legendary Norwegian polar explorer but also as an outstanding social activist and politician, a humanitarian, who stood at the origins of the League of Nations, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. He made a great contribution to rescuing starving people in the Volga Region, specifically helping refugees, and he was involved in the problems of hostages of war, including their return to Russia. Mr Nansen sincerely loved our country, being a strong advocate of the development of mutually respectful relations between Soviet Russia and Europe.
Just a year and a half ago, we held special activities to mark the 160th anniversary of Fridtjof Nansen, expressing the hope that they would be a reminder of the importance of making joint efforts to ensure safety and stability all over the world.
Today, Norway, in contrast, facilities the aggravation of the military and political situation in Ukraine, Europe and the world in general, hiding behind the name of an outstanding individual, Fridtjof Nansen. This will lead to new civilian casualties. In fact, Norway is becoming a side in the conflict, delaying its settlement and playing a part in the escalation of relations between Russia and the European countries.
The fifth anniversary of the Salisbury and Amesbury incidents
In early March of this year, it will have been five years since the Salisbury and Amesbury incidents. Not only did they substantially complicate Russian-British relations, but London used the incidents to launch a large-scale political and propaganda campaign against Russia, designed to drive our country into international isolation. This whole muddy, nasty and malign story is further proof of the fabrications the Anglo-Saxons use to push through their anti-Russian, Russophobic agenda.
Let us recall the situation. From the very first days after the incident, the British side did its best to avoid a constructive dialogue to find out all the circumstances behind the incident, including providing samples of the substance identified as Novichok. Does that ring a bell? Several years later, the same thing would happen following the infamous poisoning of Alexey Navalny. And six months ago, we saw a similar scenario around the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 explosions. Everything was the same: they would ignore all our urgent requests for information, and try to avoid a constructive dialogue to clarify all circumstances (back then it was the United Kingdom, several years ago – Germany, and now – several EU countries and the United States). You can simply substitute the names – Salisbury, Amesbury, Novichok, poisoning, Nord Stream sabotage – the scenario is always the same.
The United Kingdom refused to grant consular access to the Skripals and to provide information on their whereabouts and health status under flimsy pretexts and in violation of its obligations under the bilateral Consular Convention of 1965.
Let me remind you that five years ago a great deal of speculation was growing around this story via the efforts of English spin doctors: articles about an unspecified Bulgarian trace appeared in the media and new individuals suspected of poisoning the Skripals were named; Bellingcat, the well-known mystifiers, carried out a so-called investigation of them. Imagination ran wild. Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Theresa May was shaking. Fake stories with quite definite political goals actually replaced reality. Propaganda was working round the clock on Downing Street. Every day, new information with references to unnamed but well-informed sources appeared in the tabloids. All officials who were supposed to shed light on the incident – from Scotland Yard to all local representatives of relevant services – kept silent.
We can also recall how the English went around to the capitals of all EU members states and convinced them to expel Russian diplomats without presenting any facts, promising to provide the facts later. Remember the five-page presentation sent by the United Kingdom to its NATO partners as a proof. A link to these materials will definitely have to be published on March 4, the anniversary of the Salisbury incident.
The presentation consisted of drawn arrows, check marks and some words which did not mean anything at all. This looked like something made by an elementary school student for a lesson. Five pages with elementary, primitive graphics with one idea: this was done by Russia because (arrow to the left) Russia did this before and (arrow to the right) Russia can do this again. That is it. They convinced the others to exert influence on Russia, to expel Russian diplomats. They promised to give facts but gave none.
Most of those convinced by London (among its NATO partners) did so. Some did not expel the Russian diplomats. We later privately asked all those who joined this demarche whether they were given any proof apart from the public hysterics of Theresa May and Boris Johnson, or the “highly likely” statements made by various British politicians. Everyone said that they did not receive any information, except for that available to the broad audience. Well, another deception of its allies and a global hoax by the United Kingdom. It turned out to be no worse than what Colin Powell did with a test tube.
Opting for further escalation, the British took the case to international venues, including the UN and the OPCW, where they actively promoted allegations concerning Russia’s use of banned chemical agents despite the fact that WikiLeaks data, released long before the incident, showed clearly that it was the United States that had developed all this, including the Novichok family of chemicals. But even then, certain disclosed facts were a long way from favouring the British version. For example, speaking in an interview with the BBC in April 2018, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that the Spiez Laboratory in Switzerland had found that the Salisbury samples contained an agent known as BZ, which was invented in (a drumroll!) the United States in the 1950s and subsequently adopted by the US and UK armies.
The British disregarded more than 60 requests from the Russian Embassy in London related to the Salisbury and Amesbury incidents; they refused to cooperate on the investigations with the related Russian agencies, and left numerous proposals for legal assistance from the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia unanswered.
We intend to continue working to find the truth in a consistent way. We still hope to receive exhaustive answers to the following questions: where did Sergey and Yulia Skripal go on the morning of March 4, 2018, with their mobile phones turned off? How is it that they lost consciousness almost simultaneously several hours after the “poisoning” and were treated by a senior nurse of the UK’s Defence CBRN Centre who supposedly happened to pass by? Where are the Skripals now? What is the state of their health? Are they free in their contacts and actions? Why did Dawn Sturgess alone fall victim to a chemical warfare agent, considering that her death was due to a fatal accident?
Up until now, the British have provided no reliable information on the “Skripal case.” Neither do they intend to, I believe; this is typical of them. Judging by all appearances, the reason is simple: either they have something to hide (they definitely do), or they have no real evidence or basis for their accusations. Basically, it is the same thing; they have something to hide.
We hope that common sense will eventually prevail (we are not talking about those involved in these dramas) and that incidents like those at Salisbury and Amesbury will not further harm international relations. Everyone should take the path of sound political processes based on the fundamental standards of international law and then the situation in the world would be more stable and predictable.
On this subject, we also recommend that you familiarise yourselves with the detailed information and analytical material entitled, “Salisbury: Unanswered Questions” posted on the website of the Russian Embassy in London. We will repost these references on March 4.
UN Security Council meeting on the Nord Stream bombing
You could see a similar approach by the West on the eve of the UN Security Council meeting. Russia presented its resolution; it did not put it to a vote, it just presented it for discussion and further consideration. Our Chinese partners welcomed this move. But the Western countries went into hysterics like they usually do.
The problem was that it is difficult to respond negatively to the basic logic of a Russian resolution that calls for an international investigation into the terrorist attacks against the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines under the authority of or with the participation of the UN Secretary-General. There is nothing in this approach that can be criticised. It was hard on them. They tried to invent at least some argument, but there are none.
A civilian infrastructure facility, which was part of a global energy security arrangement, was blown up deliberately. This disaster, the result of connived criminal actions that could not have been taken by private individuals or some non-government controlled extremist groups, has inflicted immense damage on the environment. So much for the environmental agenda the West is so keen on.
After all, this is a terrorist attack. We have seen the Western countries’ tender and reverential attitude towards freedom, law and democracy, and their aversion to what they see as an encroachment on them. Terrorism and democracy are incompatible in principle. The same goes for their liberal values (I should not even mention this). The attack on a civilian infrastructure facility, which automatically harmed many world economies, has called into question energy security and security as a whole. The liberals should have become hysterical and demanded an immediate international investigation.
So, what is wrong with the Russian Federation urging the UN Security Council to launch an international investigation? Or was it again the wrong country to do this? No, that is not the point! The point is that they are trying to cover their tracks again.
Russian Federation’s efforts to establish peace and stability in the South Caucasus
Russia is consistently supporting the normalisation of Armenian-Azerbaijani relations under the trilateral agreements between the leaders of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia.
The Russian Defence Ministry and the Russian peacekeeping contingent are making every effort, in close cooperation with the Russian Foreign Ministry, to resolve the situation around the Lachin corridor. Since December 12, 2022, over 2,500 tonnes of humanitarian shipments have been sent to the region in cooperation with charity organisations. Seven humanitarian events have been organised in 88 communities, with over 8,300 children and 800 low-income families receiving relief aid.
While maintaining our dialogue with Baku and Yerevan, we continue to search for mutually acceptable solutions that can help resume the full operation of the Lachin corridor based on the document signed by the leaders of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia of November 9, 2020 and to improve the humanitarian situation in Nagorno-Karabakh.
No matter how tense the regional situation may be, we find it counterproductive to freeze the negotiating processes under this pretext. It determines the prospects for restoring lasting peace and stability in the South Caucasus.
We urge our partners in Baku and Yerevan to resume cooperation on every aspect of normalising bilateral relations as soon as possible. We will provide any support we can in organising regular meetings of the trilateral working group, co-chaired by the deputy prime ministers, to unblock economic and transport ties in the region and for Armenia-Azerbaijan border commission , as well as new rounds of talks to draft a peace treaty at the level of foreign ministers.
We will also do our best to promote expanded contacts between civil society, the expert community and religious leaders, and to launch a dialogue between members of parliament.
The enactment of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons entered into force on March 5, 1970. In the 50-plus years of its existence, the treaty has become a tool of universal international law and an important foundation for international peace and stability. In all, 191 states have signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons to date.
This year launches a new review cycle of the treaty, and we hope that it will help strengthen the document. This is a good pretext for assessing issues that need to be resolved once again, to try and evaluate the existing risks in the context of the treaty; all the more so now as the entire security system has been seriously tested lately. We see the Western governments putting great effort into destroying, rather than dismantling, this system.
Obviously, in conditions of today’s aggravated international situation, the signatory states should rally in the interests of facilitating a stable nuclear weapons non-proliferation regime, a central element in maintaining global stability. This is the treaty’s high-priority objective.
As a co-founder of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and as the depositary state, Russia urges all signatory states to act to confirm their unconditional commitment to this unique international tool of law and express their commitment to unfailingly honour their obligations.
Banning the Russian language at Latvia’s private universities
The
And now,
An important point must be made. In banning the language, the Latvian regime is interfering in private business, which is another pillar of their own ideology. This is a direct violation of the main principles under which this contemporary state functions, we are talking about private education here.
However, this is not just an issue of private education, but the values of a liberal economy which have been promoted by the Baltic countries and for which they joined
The Russian language is
Under a more just world order, if
The Constitutional Court’s decision was announced the very next day after the experts from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights reprimanded – and not for the first time – Riga over the fact that completely transitioning the education system to the Latvian language violates the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and contradicts the universal ban on language discrimination.
While the Latvian regime prefers to ignore the rare and rather toothless criticism by international human rights defenders, the defenders of Russian-language education are looking for justice at the European Court of Human Rights. Since 2019, it has received over 300 proposed lawsuits from Latvian residents who question the legality of the language reforms in schools for ethnic minorities.
Let’s see what the European Court of Human Rights will have to say. It will be interesting; it will need a manipulative mind to, on one hand, avoid condemning the Latvian regime or bringing it to responsibility, but, on the other, to reprimand it somehow. This will be difficult to achieve, but they are masters of it now. I will not say more. In fact, this qualifies as oppression of the citizens of the country. International law clearly defines this, and many residents of this country are still being denied citizenship.
Preserving historical memory in the Baltic countries
Ahead of Defender of the Fatherland Day, I would like to draw your attention to the proactive and increasingly productive activity of the Foundation for Supporting and Protecting the Rights of Compatriots Living Abroad. One of its priority activities is the preservation of historical memory and combatting attempts to revise the results of the Second World War.
With the foundation’s support, three projects by our compatriots who live in the Baltic countries have been realised recently. All of them are wonderful, especially amid the current developments in these countries that are trying to cancel everything Russian.
On February 2, 2023, Rossiya Segodnya International Information Agency hosted a presentation on Andrey Yakovlev’s documentary about Hero of the Soviet Union, sniper Janis Vilhelms who took part in the Red Army’s legendary counteroffensive during the battle near Moscow in December 1941 - January 1942 as part of the 201st Latvian Rifle Division. This film is not only about the fate of this Latvian soldier and his brothers in arms, but also about the battle to preserve historical memory in Latvia.
In Estonia, our compatriot Yulia Besedina launched the project, Estonia: Preserving Memory, Restoring Monuments. A Virtual Tour. The website for this media project features information about 350 Russian military monuments and burial sites, and also the film, Memory, based on documentary footage. You can also read stories and memoires by witnesses and locals.
In Lithuania, there are 289 memorial complexes and burial sites for Soviet soldiers killed during the Great Patriotic War. The names of 80,000 people are perpetuated on plaques at memorials all across the country. Our compatriot, history enthusiast V. Orlov created the interactive map, Lithuania: Soviet Military Burials. A Virtual Tour. The website has information on each memorial, the names of the soldiers and historical reference notes.
We are obligated to take care of the sacred memory of the events of the Great Patriotic War and resiliently counteract any attempts to distort and rewrite this history, or question the decisive contribution of our country and its peoples to the Victory. We must protect the honour, decency and good names of the living and the killed heroes. Otherwise, it would be the end to us as a people, to humanity and to today’s civilisation. We are undergoing a global test that involves each one of us.
The systematic work to preserve historical memory and counteract the glorification of Nazism must remain an important priority on the international agenda. Russia will continue to speak out against revising the results of the Second World War and to counteract neo-Nazism.
We invite media representatives to take part in covering these projects.
30thanniversary of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation
On February 26, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation will celebrate its 30th anniversary. Russia stood at the origins of its establishment and traditionally attaches great importance to promoting constructive and depoliticised dialogue on this platform. Inter-parliamentary cooperation plays an important role in the socioeconomic development of the Greater Black Sea Region, in strengthening its independent identity and enhancing the effectiveness of specialised regional cooperation.
55thanniversary of the Bellingshausen Antarctic Station
February 22 marks the 55th anniversary of the Russian Bellingshausen Antarctic Station. It is located off the coast of West Antarctica on Waterloo (King George) Island, part of the South Shetland Islands group in the Atlantic Ocean. The archipelago is separated from the Antarctic Peninsula by the Bransfield Strait and from South America by the Drake Passage.
The station bears the name of the Russian explorer Fabian von Bellingshausen, who discovered the southern continent and a number of islands during the Russian Antarctic Expedition of 1819-1822.
Scientific research has been continuously carried out here, at the northernmost Russian Antarctic station, under mild conditions for the polar region, since 1968. Its location in the unique region near Antarctic Specially Protected Area No. 125 Fildes Peninsula, which includes the glacial Bellingshausen Dome (Collins Glacier), also contributes to it.
Near the station there is a monument dedicated to the states signatories of the Antarctic Treaty in 1959, serving as a reminder of the legacy of international cooperation.
Thanks to the efforts of generations of Russian polar explorers, the Bellingshausen Station’s activities serve to preserve the region for peaceful purposes and international cooperation.
Defender of the Fatherland Day
On February 23, our country celebrates Defender of the Fatherland Day. The holiday was established by Federal Law No. 32-FZ On the Days of Military Glory and Memorable Dates of Russia of March 13, 1995.
The date first became a holiday on February 23, 1919, the first anniversary of the victory of the recently formed Red Army units near Pskov and Narva.
In 1946, the holiday received a new name – Soviet Army and Navy Day –to match the new names of the national armed forces.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the holiday survived and did not lose its original meaning. However, the name was changed to Defender of the Fatherland Day.
Today, Defender of the Fatherland Day reminds us of the glorious military past of our country and of all the military exploits in the history of our state. We honour its defenders and pay tribute to all service members – from Russian warriors to our contemporaries, all those who defended the freedom and independence of our Fatherland with a weapon in their hands and Russia’s right to choose its own way.
Today we extend our special greetings to those who are on the frontlines, who show courage and heroism every day in the special military operation zone. They are soldiers, officers, volunteers, doctors and medical personnel, war correspondents, clergymen, and many others. The frontline is there, but it is also here. Let me thank all those who have responded to the pain of our people, who have not remained indifferent to this suffering and these appeals, to all those who are now supporting our people there. We are all together on this frontline, too. Happy holiday! We will definitely send greetings to them on all our social media and accounts tomorrow.
MariaZakharova: In my opinion, these heads should have brains, not “red lines.” If there are “red lines,” there are no brains. This is sad. Judging by the statements of Lithuanian President Nauseda and representatives of other regimes in NATO countries, they do have some “red lines” in their heads and perhaps also a number of “black squares.”
MariaZakharova: The Russian Foreign Ministry has already made an official statement on this confrontational move by the Netherlands. There will, of course, be harsh retaliatory measures in response. You will find out about them in the near future.
Since we are talking about the unfriendly actions by The Hague, I would like to add a couple of important points to help you understand the political background of this decision and the image of contemporary representatives of the Dutch regime as a whole.
During talks on visa issues, the Dutch side persistently sought out “spies” among Russian candidates for long-term foreign assignments at the Russian Embassy in The Hague. Let me remind you that in April 2022 the Netherlands expelled 18 Russian diplomats, accusing them of being members of the Russian secret services without presenting any evidence.
When I hear such rhetoric from NATO capitals (Washington, London and Brussels) and other alliance countries about Russian “spies” working undercover as diplomats, I have only one request. Could your countries start self-identification?
Do America, Britain, the Netherlands, France, Italy, Germany and Spain have intelligence services? Intelligence exists, as it does in every country of the world. Huge resources are allocated. There are certain results. Regular reports are published. Reports are disseminated. Employees of these institutions are summoned to the legislative bodies of these countries and answer questions from MPs. Go out in the street with badges, and everyone will know who is an intelligence officer in these countries, and who is working in their embassies abroad. Everyone will know what they are talking about.
Today, it appears that Russia is a unique country in terms of organising its security and diplomatic services, as if Russia alone has its own secret services while the NATO countries have none. It seems that none of them have ever worked at embassies or other diplomatic missions or ever will.
I suggest that the authorities in the Netherlands publish a list of intelligence operatives and where they work. These people graduate from universities and get jobs. We will know who is who after they publish this list. Until then, all these discussions are pointless and simply indecent. Everyone understands what I am talking about.
The spy mania that has engulfed the country is the main subject of discussions aiming to incite passions in society, to take advantage of people’s fears and to whip up hysteria. This spy mania has gone so far that journalists vie with each other to uncover as much compromising material as possible on those omnipresent “Russian spies” and “Kremlin agents.” According to Dutch storytellers, these people have built a hornet’s nest in the kingdom, even though this is technically impossible. And they used other striking phrases.
In October 2022, the Dutch media published materials on Russian Embassy officials who were expelled from the country. These materials allegedly prove that they worked for a Russian intelligence service while posing as diplomats. Obviously, the journalists (it would be interesting to find out and publish their names), with assistance from the Dutch intelligence agencies, did not shy away from studying the social media accounts of these officials’ wives, and they posted their photos online, while forgetting about elementary ethical standards and laws on protecting personal information. These spy fiction style media leaks evidently aimed to maintain a high level of anti-Russia hysteria and to advertise the work of the Dutch counter-intelligence service whose operatives allegedly nipped the harmful activities of Russian “spies” in the bud.
I repeat: Does the Netherlands have its own intelligence operatives? Do they work abroad? Where do they work? I am addressing these three questions directly to the Foreign Ministry of the Netherlands. Journalists, not just us, will ask more questions later.
The Foreign Ministry of the Netherlands has now joined this absurd campaign, and it has decided to dismantle the entire structure of our diplomatic missions and to discard the ties that had evolved over many years. Obviously, this was not done because they fear those mythical Russian “intelligence operatives” but because they want to prove to their Euro-Atlantic partners that The Hague is determined to “punish” Russia for its actions in Ukraine and for Russia’s firm intention to defend its independent foreign policy.
It is not hard to conclude that there is a political background behind the decision to suspend the activities of the Russian Trade Mission in Amsterdam, which clearly prevents the Netherlands from proving the effectiveness of the sanctions pressure on Russia. After all, the Trade Mission addresses many issues related to facilitating logistics, banking operations, and the use of the remaining opportunities for trade in the context of the unilateral restrictive measures, not so much with the Netherlands, but with other interested countries.
Would the Dutch Foreign Ministry like to answer a second list of questions? How will suspending the Trade Mission affect trade relations with those countries the West pretends to care about so much, calling them the poorest and the hungry, considering its representation, activities and staff? Does The Hague have a memo of any kind on this?
Clearly having lost its sense of reality, this country is once again demonstrating its arrogance and disregard for the interests of other participants in international life, while claiming its own exceptionalism and infallibility. By considering itself to be the “justice capital of the world” (a number of related international organisations are actually located there), the Netherlands is showing its double standards, blaming Russia and literally hushing up and hiding the crimes committed by the Armed Forces of Ukraine on a daily basis. Not to mention the obvious attempts to sweep the war crimes committed by Dutch military personnel during the hostilities of the anti-Iraq coalition under the rug, not to mention the occupation and destruction of Iraq.
It is enough to recall Dutch pilots bombing civilian targets in Iraqi settlements, in particular Hawija in June 2015. This resulted in over 70 civilian casualties. In September 2015, RAF F-16s bombed two residential buildings in Mosul, mistaking them for an ISIS command post. Until now, the Dutch Ministry of Defence denies the responsibility of its military personnel and is trying to hush up these incidents.
Dutch journalists have many times published materials proving that in 2013-2017, a number of Islamic organisations registered as NGOs in the Netherlands provided so-called humanitarian aid to terrorist groups, with the connivance of the Dutch government, such as Jabhat al-Nusra and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. It turned out that for many years the Dutch government provided material support to the Syrian Association for Citizens' Dignity, headed by one of the former leaders of the Ahrar al-Sham group operating in Syria. It is noteworthy that in the Netherlands, its members have been convicted of terrorism. However, this did not stop the Dutch Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Justice from allocating Dutch taxpayers’ funds to these war criminals. For some reason, this group is not included on the national list of terrorist organisations even though there is a Dutch court verdict on this.
We also recall the Dutch military’s crime during the 1945-1950 Indonesia war, including using torture during the suppression of the guerrilla movement, keeping prisoners in inhuman conditions, burning houses and entire villages, as well as extrajudicial executions, mass arrests, and ignoring civilian casualties.
The hostile steps the Dutch are taking against Russia are deeply disappointing because they are destroying the traditions of neighbourliness and mutually beneficial cooperation between our countries that were established as far back as Peter the Great. This is not Russia’s choice, and not even the choice of the current government of the Netherlands.
We see clearly the inhuman violence the United States is committing through Euro-Atlantic structures against the Netherlands. But in fact, the entire responsibility for the collapse of Russian-Dutch relations lies entirely with The Hague. Despite the fact that we understand who is behind it.
Maria Zakharova: Everyone is under pressure in a way that no one could have imagined: large and not so large states, rich and poor, prosperous and not so prosperous, developed and developing, everyone is under pressure. Just some give in to this pressure and some do not, trying to withstand, to resist. That is all.
What would be my advice? Do not give in to the pressure. It is destructive.
Maria Zakharova: Westerners have long been lacking moral or ethical standards and frameworks. In my opinion, this is obvious.
Putting themselves above international law and elementary standards of human behaviour, morality and ethics and creating a new normal, the United States and the EU led by them have no regard for anything and are guided solely by the political situation. We cannot say how far they can go in this. For many years, there has been clear escalation, provoking and pitting peaceful people against each other in the centre of Europe. Irrespective of the facts that have come to light about the manipulation and interference in internal affairs by the West, they continued doing so and started accusing others of interfering. Where are they going to get a sense of responsibility, conscience and morality now?
In my opinion, the trend is clear: the degradation of everything that we used to think was unconditionally important: ethics, morality, conscience, responsibility, truth in the Western understanding.
Maria Zakharova: The decision of the Romanian authorities to suspend the activities of the Russian Centre for Science and Culture in Bucharest is, to put it mildly, disappointing, although it certainly cannot be called a “surprise,” against the background of the anti-Russian hysteria that has gripped the European Union.
We categorically reject the accusation that the RCSC is a “propaganda tool.” Oh sorry, I forgot. The Goethe Institute or the British Council is “soft power.” While Rossotrudnichestvo – the Federal Agency for the Commonwealth of Independent States, Compatriots Living Abroad, and International Humanitarian Cooperation, or the Confucius Institute is “propaganda.” We already knew that. Clear gradation. Obvious division. No, it will not work, and is not going to happen.
The activities of the RCSC have been aimed primarily at strengthening cultural and humanitarian ties between the two countries. The Centre hosts cultural, educational and social events, such as art exhibitions, presentations of Russian regions, forums, conferences, book fairs, film screenings, and concerts.
I have a question for the Romanian authorities – what is wrong with that? Propaganda in the sense of the word “promotion”? When was it bad? Propaganda is bad when it comes to merging states and independent media. When certain actors (state or non-state) begin to promote only one point of view through independent media, suppressing the independent essence of journalism and crushing everything else. In this sense, propaganda is unacceptable. Advertising as an element of propaganda – this is what economics, public relations and strategic communications are built on. These are all elements of promoting information about something that would be useful and interesting for the audience, and sometimes just beneficial. Boundaries should be clearly drawn. We are used to the fact that everything that is connected with us, with Russia (and now with China), everything is misinterpreted in order to give it a negative connotation. Everything they have is great.
I just spoke about how the Netherlands announced a reduction of our team of diplomats, because there, as they previously stated, they endlessly engage in propaganda, calling them intelligence officers, and so on. But do not they have intelligence officers? Or what do they call them? Specially trained people to search for information and data or workers from Big Data? There should be some word to call these people.
In other words, we are talking about classic, statutory cases that are of great interest and are popular with Romanian citizens. That is what this centre did. Open and transparent work, as they would say in the West, of both the centre and its employees.
Another natural task of our missions abroad – especially now – is to convey to a foreign audience objective information about modern Russia. When we read some Romanian press (most of it), we cannot recognise ourselves. The press reports nothing but myths about us. In Romania, people have an interest in what is happening in Russia, how things really are. Maybe they just want to know about our point of view on what is happening. We have a right to it.
I would like to emphasise that this function is expressly provided for in the preamble and Article 4 of the Russian-Romanian intergovernmental agreement on the establishment and terms of activities of the RCSC in Bucharest and the Romanian Cultural Institute in Moscow dated July 9, 2013.
In light of all this, we consider the demand to suspend the activities of the RCSC as another step aimed at cleansing the information space and depriving Romanian citizens of access to an alternative point of view that reflects reality and highlights the aggressive absurdity of NATO-EU propaganda.
Bucharest’s demarche will not go without response. We are sure they understand this clearly. Against this backdrop, the Romanian authorities’ desire to eliminate one of the few remaining channels of communication looks really strange.
Maria Zakharova: As far as I know, Suren Ghazaryan, that you mentioned, was in Russia for personal reasons. I have no information on the meetings he held. There is no reason to consider them anything but personal. Nor can there be any question of his official status, so such a trip cannot be considered a working visit.
Maria Zakharova: I would like to note that the two ministers’ opening remarks have already been published where they outlined the subjects in their discussion. You can see the text of Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and a video with the translation of Wang Yi’s comments. They clearly state what the parties intended to discuss.
I have said many times that we are grateful to anyone who wants to help with the settlement process. There are many possible intermediaries. Many ideas and plans have been put forward both publicly and behind the scenes. But it must be remembered that it is the Kiev regime that does not want talks and has blocked both actual talks and any legal possibility of holding them. This is where these efforts stumble. Mediation efforts, of which we hear a lot, unfortunately must take this reality into account. I would like to emphasise once again that the Kiev regime’s position to refuse talks and prohibit them at the legislative level was formed under pressure from the United States.
Maria Zakharova: I answered these questions in my opening remarks when talking about the developments in Ukraine.
There are many components as to why now and why in this way, such as the beginning of the electoral cycle, or the desire to somehow send a signal again, or lobby for the idea of another “round of aid,” travelling around the NATO countries asking for money to make them pay for this madness again. This is also a psychological story considering that they have promised Kiev a lot. With their own hands, the White House has ruined the country is has taken under its wing: they need to show that something is happening, they go there, encourage them, they do something, and they also need to see for themselves what they have done. As I said, a criminal is drawn to his crime scene. It is a complicated combination of things.
As for Joe Biden’s statements, we have already commented on them: they are all about the desire for escalation, which was originally the American position in relation to Ukraine and Russia: to do everything they can to fuel the conflict and continue to maintain an appropriate rate of escalation.
Maria Zakharova: Russia and China interact closely in the field of security, including its global dimension. Both countries have coinciding or similar positions on most current international issues. Russian and Chinese leaders have repeatedly noted this. One can say the same with regard to the Global Security Initiative; the conceptual document, published on February 21, 2023, which you have mentioned, specifies it. We are currently studying the contents; it is still too early to talk about any cooperative steps to implement it; we are studying a document that was only submitted 24 hours ago.
Under this initiative, Beijing suggests renouncing the Cold War mentality and honouring the principle of indivisible security. It suggests creating a balanced, effective and stable security system, and it notes that a country should not strengthen its own security at the expense of others. This is similar to our approaches, and I also noted this earlier.
At the same time, the document notes that the striving of certain states towards world domination, their commitment to the position-of-strength policy and double standards under the guise of democracy, their reliance on military-political blocs and self-contained systems living in line with their own rules and imposing them on others are the main threats to peace and stability. The document criticises the practice of imposing unilateral sanctions and exercising exterritorial jurisdiction over foreign defendants.
All these aspects are completely consonant with our approaches.
Maria Zakharova: We answered this in the first sentence of our comment. They are acting hypocritically when they talk about its purely civilian nature. I would like to emphasise this again. They are not telling the whole truth or are resorting to falsehoods when they portray the mission as purely civilian in nature.
Maria Zakharova: This statement shows that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has a distorted sense of humour, that’s all.
I also have a question, since I have to comment on such absurd statements. It is not for you, but for those who profess this logic. Please tell me, did Moscow expand NATO before 2022? Was Russia to blame for violating the Russia-NATO Founding Act, which includes a provision on the parties’ agreements, and which was also breached by the West? Are we to blame? This can only lead to absurdity. Judging by what our “non-enemies” say, they have already reached this level, and have even brought the world to a state of absurdity.
I would put it next to other similar statements that defy logic. Before 2022, there were 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018 and 2017. The story is long. Over the years and decades, NATO has steadily expanded. We constantly said that this was a matter of concern for us, and that there would be consequences. So, does this mean that we urged them not to expand, but they expanded anyway, and we are to blame for this too? That is a morbid, flawed, and absurd logic. This is like the gossip you hear on street benches: we have such a “genre,” where a person can become an “expert” on anything just by sitting on a bench and watching the passers-by: a car drives by, a person walks by, a dove flies by – and you always have what to discuss. The observer becomes an instant expert. This is the same kind of thing. The pseudo experts, who are not involved in international relations, think they know everything, but they see only the surface, they do not look deep into it or into the essence. When the Secretary of State talks like that, one fears for the department he leads.
Maria Zakharova: Do you think it could be a turning point because it could turn the US President’s head?
Question: He could mobilise his European allies to open a second front.
Maria Zakharova: Where is the first front? Are EU infantry units on the march? There are mercenaries and militants sent over there under the guise of instructors, but I have not heard of any regular units being formed. So, what is this about? If it is about the fact that they are wheedling money from the EU member states, then yes. Undoubtedly! In this sense, a fifteenth front is now probably open. This is the number of times money has been allocated to help Ukraine in various ways (humanitarian, food, military, and financial support to maintain the appearance of a viable economy); all this money has gone down the drain and it is anyone’s guess where it all ended up. I said this at the very beginning of the briefing. In this sense, recruiting vassals to make ever new donations is obviously an absurd thing to do.
But still, if I were you, I would not be so keen on terms like the opening of a “second front.” (I do not know whether you quote someone or it is your own idea.)
Maria Zakharova: Today, in conditions of unprecedented sanctions (I will not repeat that they are illegal, etc), economic diplomacy is becoming a major part of the Ministry’s activities. The goal of this work is to help Russian businesses carry out foreign economic transactions. We are upholding our national interests and beneficial initiatives at international economic structures.
Thus, in the G20, we are consistently promoting Russia’s positions on democratising global economic governance with a view to establishing genuine multi-polarity. We continue working with the key international financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, laying emphasis on their depolitisation and increasing the role of the developing nations in their governance.
We have focused on deepening cooperation with friendly states in the EAEU and CIS, the Asia-Pacific Region, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America. Our agenda includes the creation of new mechanisms for cooperation with these nations instead of the tools that the West is traditionally using to enhance its dominance in relations with them. We are taking an active part in these efforts. We are working with our partners on joint projects in energy, metallurgy, machine building, the chemical industry and construction, to name a few. We hope that implementing these projects will promote demand for Russian products, including non-commodity non-energy exports.
In the current geopolitical reality, transition to mutual transactions in national currencies in partner relations and the existence of a settlement infrastructure that would be independent of the West are a condition for the steady development of trade, economic and investment ties. We continue working on the gradual transition from SWIFT to protected mechanisms for transferring financial messages. With this aim in view, we are actively developing the Financial Messaging System (FMS) of the Bank of Russia. We are confident that along with Russia, many states are interested in having a truly unbiased international payments infrastructure, which would not depend on the changing moods of Western states. This is not just a pragmatic issue. For many countries, this is a matter of survival.
We have revised our approaches to ensuring reliable imports and exports of goods due to the changes that took place in logistics over the past 12 months. In this context, we are concentrating on accelerating the development of promising international transport corridors, including the North-South International Transport Corridor and the Northern Sea Route.
Naturally, we are actively cooperating with Russian businesses. In close coordination with business circles, sectoral associations, and financial and insurance companies, we are helping improve economic cooperation tools for creating new added value chains. The Foreign Ministry’s Business Council is one of the practical formats for coordinating our cooperation. It regularly holds sessions on the most urgent issues of the foreign economic activities of Russian businesses.
In developing cooperation with our partners, we are paying much attention to exhibitions. Thus, we are active in preparing large international forums, such as the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, the Eastern Economic Forum and the Russian Energy Week.
Maria Zakharova: I have just answered this question for your colleagues. It is still too early for conclusions on biological security. We are studying this document and will comment on this part later. For the time being, I described the points that fully coincide with our approaches.
Maria Zakharova: We have already mentioned today that we can only sympathise with the Europeans. The Europeans are facing an avalanche of economic problems that are primarily linked with US pressure, the disruption of traditional ties with Russia and the adoption of sanctions against our country. In these conditions, any revision of the EU budget in favour of the military-industrial complex will hit even harder the socioeconomic interests of average Europeans that are already in a deplorable situation.
Having fully subordinated the European military-industrial complex to US needs, Brussels officials have already taken 50 billion euros (including 12 billion euros for military expenses) from the pockets of the EU member-countries. This is just sheer waste. It triggered serious economic problems and aggravated the migration and social crises.
Importantly, higher spending on the conflict, new arms and equipment supplies, an increase in training camps, and expansion of the programmes for the training of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are further escalating the conflict in Ukraine rather than promoting its peaceful settlement. These aggressive actions are extremely dangerous for stability on the European continent. Judging by their statements, some NATO and EU politicians would really like the European continent to become a real theatre of military operations. This is something sane people would never wish to happen.
Maria Zakharova: I am convinced that all of us needed to wait long enough before someone made beastly, if important statements revealing their true desires and intentions. I did not expect that this statement would ever come from a NATO member. Just listen to this: “…forcibly rewrite the mentality of Russian citizens so that Russians will never threaten them again.” Did the Nazis reason differently about the peoples of the USSR in the mid-20th century? Let us recall how it was. They named the three categories: Slavs, Jews and Gypsies. Did the Nazis formulate their goal differently? Exactly in the same way! And they called this the final solution.
Prime Minister of Estonia Kaja Kallas, whose grandfather got mixed up with the Nazis, also formulates the goal: “…forcibly rewrite the mentality of Russian citizens so that Russians will never threaten them again.”
Foreign Minister of Russia Sergey Lavrov said that we were observing an attempt similar to what the world had seen in the mid-20th century, but now there were plans to finally solve our (Russian) question, the question of our country. An odd and savage wave of not even criticisms but of spluttering hate has surged, with the “bubbles of ire” popping up on the surface of public reactions in many countries. How dare he! Why did he say that? The Russian Foreign Minister has just stated what we read, hear or see Western officials write, say or do.
It would be OK, if it were a marginal party with three and a half members, which just register online and never hold congresses. Because they are marginal. In the past, we were told: don’t say that the EU has parties that support pedophilia, because they are not in power, have few members, etc. We have taken this position into account.
But in this case, we are faced with an individual who holds an official post and is urging others to “…forcibly rewrite the mentality of Russian citizens so that Russians will never threaten them again.” There were collaborationists in the family of this particular politician. Then where is Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov wrong? He said just that: judging by these statements, we see a reincarnation of what we fought against in the 1940s and enshrined in international law in the 1950s to obviate any relapse into things like this. We created an international organisation, drew up its Charter, and launched UN mechanisms to prevent the logic of forcibly rewriting mentality from ever reappearing on this planet – and not only in relation of us. We must understand and see this as a policy of revenge, a case of degeneration. Call it whatever you want. Some people invent formulas of their own, others take the available stuff. One could not be more outspoken, if we keep in mind the Western mentality.
Obviously unaware of what she said, Ms Kallas has formulated the US-led West’s fundamental approach to our people, country, history and future. (The United States is, after all, their master.) From their point of view, our mentality should be forcibly rewritten. Let me repeat what I said time and again: they will fail to do this by force. They are not strong enough. And we, for our part, will be strong enough mentally to prevent this. People lacking both mentality and morality have never been able to rewrite the mentality of others. You should never tackle what is over your head.
This is a monstrous statement. International institutions have failed to criticise it. International human rights activists that monitor inadmissible insults on account of various criteria have overlooked it. It’s amazing! When people recalled 50-year-old facts about someone – how someone looked the wrong way at another person – they were crossed out and “chucked overboard” of civilised society. But now, as it happens, a head of state, a politician holding the reins of power can say that they would forcibly rewrite the mentality of other countries and peoples.
MariaZakharova: It is none of our business. Or were we involved?
I did not see this report. I can say nothing on this score. I will not look it up either, since you have warned me that there is foul language in it.
Additional materials
-
Photos
