Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova on the sidelines of the Eastern Economic Forum, Vladivostok, September 4, 2024
- Far Eastern Federal District’s international and inter-regional relations
- Events of the Foreign Ministry’s Information and Press Department at the EEF-2024
- 5th Dialogue of Young Diplomats from Asia-Pacific countries at the EEF-2024
- The Ukraine crisis
- Developments in Moldova
- The German “investigation” of the terrorist attack on the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines
- Finnish Prime Minister’s statements regarding the current situation along the Russian-Finnish border
- International Anti-Nazi Forum
- International Day of Journalists’ Solidarity
- Rise of radicalisation in the West
- India's participation in the settlement of the Ukraine crisis
- Reports on freezing Armenia's participation in the CSTO
- Statements by UN Special Rapporteurs on New Caledonia
- Russian-Chinese partnership
- Anti-Russia statements by the President of France
- Upcoming presidential elections in Moldova
- Finland's participation in NATO exercises
- Effectiveness of the international search tool
- Swedish investigation into the Nord Stream terrorist aсts
- Activities of foreign journalists on Russian territory
- Foreigners' presence at the Forum and “isolation”
- Upcoming elections in the United States
- Russian-Mongolian relations
- Changing Russia's nuclear doctrine
- Situation in Ukraine and possibilities of peaceful settlement of the conflict
- Recruitment to the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Western countries
Far Eastern Federal District’s international and inter-regional relations
I will traditionally begin our offsite briefing by expressing appreciation to the event organisers. To put my impressions into words, Vladivostok is a charming, welcoming and beautiful city. The panoramic windows we have here on the right side show all the beauty of this region, but I must tear myself away to fulfil my duties.
For several years, our briefings are taking place on the sidelines of the Eastern Economic Forum. You can see how both the forum and Vladivostok are advancing; it has become a wonderful tradition to come here regularly and see all the positive changes. This forum’s theme is Far East 2030: Combining Strengths to Create New Potential, which accurately reflects global trends and regional demands.
Amidst the current geopolitical developments, we see the increasing relevance of the efforts to develop international relations by the regions in Russia’s Far Eastern Federal District. Involvement in the global market of the Asia Pacific region, immense natural resources, and advanced logistics are important factors for further development of potential interregional cooperation areas. The annual Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok expands opportunities for new mutually beneficial agreements with our partners in the Asia Pacific region as well as deeper cooperation with them in priority sectors, both in their specific areas and on a wider scale.
The People’s Republic of China remains a major foreign economic partner of Russia’s Far Eastern regions. This year marks the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations between our countries. Interregional ties, including border links, have played an increasing role in the development of the Russia-China comprehensive and strategic partnership. Both states’ strong commitment to implementing joint projects, particularly in trade, the economy, investment and education, was emphasised by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at the 42nd meeting of the Council of the Heads of Constituent Entities of the Russian Federation at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in April this year.
Russian regions have shown considerable interest in participating in such events as the 3rd Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation (Beijing, October 2023), the 32nd Harbin International Economic and Trade Fair (Harbin, June 2023), the 6th China International Import Expo (Shanghai, November 2023), and the first Made in Russia festival and fair to showcase Russian goods (Shenyang, January 2024). These events greatly contributed to boosting interregional cooperation.
We have noted the progressive development in relations between Russia’s Far Eastern regions and Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Mongolia, as well as India, Vietnam, the Philippines, Indonesia, and other countries in the Asia Pacific region.
With its foreign trade amounting to $13.2 billion last year, the Primorye Territory remains a leading region in the Far Eastern Federal District in terms of interregional and foreign economic cooperation. Other regions in the district, such as the Kamchatka Territory and the Sakhalin Region, are also making efforts to expand their international activities.
The Russian Foreign Ministry’s representative offices in the Far East, which are in charge of coordinating the regions’ external interaction in various areas, play a major role in establishing and enhancing interregional and foreign economic cooperation.
Events of the Foreign Ministry’s Information and Press Department at the EEF-2024
We announced during the previous meeting that several events held on the sidelines of the 9th Eastern Economic Forum would be organised with support of the Foreign Ministry, in particular, the Information and Press Department. I invite forum participants and guests to attend these events and those who will not be attending the forum in Vladivostok to follow them online.
A session titled AI Pivot in International Relations: Sphere of Conflict or Cooperation will start at 12.30 pm local time on September 5 in Conference Hall 18, Building D, Level 6. This roundtable conference will be attended by Russian politicians, public figures, members of the civil and expert communities, as well as business people.
As you are aware, the world is currently experiencing a new technological revolution associated with worldwide robotisation and the introduction of AI-assisted systems. This process began decades ago, and now these systems are being widely used. Neural networks can help humanity find solutions to many chronic problems and current tasks. On the other hand, AI can become the source of new challenges and threats, such as cybercrime, which is regrettably gaining momentum.
What mechanism should be created for distributing the benefits of AI? What environmental, socio-political, economic and financial problems could global digitalisation create? How can we respond to the Western attempts to usurp the AI agenda and impose new forms of digital neo-colonialism in order to prevent the Global Majority countries from becoming dependent on the “golden billion” states? Solutions to these and other issues will be discussed at the session. Its participants will also talk about new formats of cooperation which will shape the future development of this sphere.
A panel discussion titled Eurasian Space: Civilisational and Geopolitical Challenges and Prospects will start at 10 am local time on September 6 in Conference Hall 4, Building A, Level 5. It was organised by The International Affairs magazine of the Foreign Ministry.
5th Dialogue of Young Diplomats from Asia-Pacific countries at the EEF-2024
Our experts on economic and regional issues actively contributed to organising and holding other panel discussions, including the 5th Dialogue of Young Diplomats from Asia-Pacific countries, which will be held on the sidelines of the 9th Eastern Economic Forum on September 3-6.
These meetings are traditionally organised by the Ministry's Young Diplomats Council. This year, young diplomats will discuss the eastern vector of youth cooperation amid the rising multipolar world.
The event is attended by personnel from foreign ministries and missions aged 25 to 40 who are responsible for economic, political, cultural and humanitarian cooperation, as well as those responsible for relations in the above areas with Russia. This year, about 20 diplomats from Asia-Pacific countries are taking part in the Dialogue.
The event’s busy business programme includes participation in the main forum sessions, meetings and discussions with senior officials from Russia’s Foreign and Transport ministries, the heads of Russian regions, international affairs experts, and members of the scientific and business communities.
During a plenary session titled International Youth Policy in the Asia-Pacific Region, organised by the Young Diplomats Council, young people held an open discussion of conditions for young people’s development and self-realisation in the region, as well as the possibility of rallying young people in the Asia-Pacific region on the basis of the goals and values of the Global Majority, in which Russia constitutes a substantial part.
The young diplomats from Russia, China and ASEAN nations who met for the roundtable titled International Youth Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific Region had a friendly conversation about the specifics of training foreign ministry personnel in their countries and exchanged their experience of organising international events for young people.
Dialogue participants also hold meetings with the heads of Russia’s Far Eastern regions, in particular, the Sakhalin Region, the Kamchatka Territory and Vladivostok, to discuss examples of effective interaction between local authorities and young people within the framework of socioeconomic, cultural and educational projects.
The ceremony of admitting new members to the International Association of Young Diplomats will be held on the last day of the Dialogue. The Association was established at the initiative of the Ministry’s Young Diplomats Council in 2017 to strengthen cooperation between young diplomats of foreign ministries and currently has over 150 members.
We can see developments in the Ukrainian state system, as I would have said earlier. But considering little remains of Ukraine’s statehood, it is difficult to even call it statehood. Let us call it some sort of a political entity. We will certainly return to this topic.
Let us begin with Ukraine’s attempts to lift restrictions on strikes against Russian territory. The Kiev regime and its Western handlers persist on their efforts to inflict a so-called “strategic defeat” on Russia. The frontline situation of the Armed Forces of Ukraine continues to deteriorate steadily. As a result, the Kiev junta has started promoting a new “victory plan” (if I were in their shoes, I would formulate it more realistically as “a disaster plan”) and begging the West for permission to lift restrictions on using long-range weapons against Russia. Ukrainian Defence Minister Rustem Umerov has even provided the US handlers with a list of targets on Russian territory. This activity of the Zelensky regime is completely detached from reality and shows their disregard for the well-being of their citizens and those forcibly conscripted into the Armed Forces of Ukraine. They also show no concern for the future of the country, or regional and global security. Their actions only serve to fuel the escalation of terrorist activities by their neo-Nazi units, posing a threat to the entire world.
We can see that the West is directly involved in the Ukraine conflict. The collective West acts as the main client and instigator of the Kiev regime’s military aggression. The West is openly and boldly demonstrating its direct involvement as a concerned party. Previously, we were told that their main goal (their only goal, in fact) was to support the Kiev regime on its journey towards democracy. They claimed to support Kiev in its struggle for independence and efforts to ensure national security. However, these statements by the West have become so blatant that they themselves pose a direct threat.
During a conversation with German media representatives on August 31, 2024, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg wholeheartedly endorsed Zelensky’s audacious undertaking in the Kursk Region. He fully supported the arguments made by the so-called President of Ukraine regarding the establishment of a “buffer zone” in the Russian border regions. I am not entirely sure what they mean by this, but it seems to suggest that Ukrainian citizens will be sacrificed in the process. I can clearly see the Kiev regime’s undisguised cynicism and its absolutely brutal attitude towards its citizens. What does Zelensky mean by a “buffer zone” in Russian border regions? Will they shield themselves somehow with Ukrainian citizens’ bodies? What is he talking about? They should elaborate on this matter. Those, including Jens Stoltenberg, who make such statements, should fully elaborate on their idea of a “buffer zone” to the Ukrainian citizens whom they have literally ensnared, calling it “Ukrainian mobilisation.”
Moreover, Jens Stoltenberg brazenly offered a pseudo-legal justification for this unlawful invasion. He presented it as Ukraine’s right to self-defence. Strangely, Jens Stoltenberg says nothing about the right of Donbass citizens or people in other Russian regions, who are subjected to the Kiev regime’s terrorist attacks, to defend themselves. Even if he is having difficulties with geography or logic, he should approach the situation systematically.
During an informal meeting with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba (who reportedly filed his resignation soon after that) on August 29, 2024, EU foreign affairs chief Josep Borrell said that “Ukraine has shown great strategic courage” by launching an attack in the Kursk Region.
This sounds like a quotation from the Third Reich Nazis, who used members of the Hitlerjugend (Hitler Youth) in the last line of German defence, thus thanking them for self-sacrifice. The same logic can be traced in later statements by Western and NATO officials who relied on young people during the state coups they staged in many countries, only to abandon them later on.
Borrell also proposed lifting all restrictions on the use of Western weapons for strikes inside Russian territory. According to the departing guard of the European “garden,” Ukraine not only may but must use Western weapons “in full force.”
All these people – Josep Borrell, Ursula von der Leyen, Joe Biden and Antony Blinken – previously inspired Ukraine with their alleged concern about its brighter future, human rights and democratic procedures. They are no longer talking about the human factor. They are not saying anything about people or their rights in their statements. The sole remaining Western narrative revolves around defeating Russia, with no mention of the. people or democracy in Ukraine.
The crazy idea of supporting terror against Russia has garnered support from several other Western attendees of that event, namely the foreign ministers of the Netherlands, Poland, France and the Baltic regimes. EU politicians have abandoned rational thinking and prudence in the hope of getting short-lived political benefits and Washington’s approval. They are losing all sense of reality and are acting without any thought of the risk of a dangerous escalation of the conflict even when it may affect their own interests. It is clear that Ukraine and its citizens are no longer their concern.
We would like to issue another warning to European and American irresponsible politicians. If the Kiev regime takes such aggressive steps, Russia’s response will be immediate and exceedingly painful, as you could see in the past few days.
The Ukrainian Nazis continue with their barbaric attacks on civilians in Russia. These are not hostilities but rather acts of terrorism and extremism.
On August 28 in Zaporozhye, Ukrainian forces targeted a civilian vehicle with a drone, killing a child on the spot and wounding four other people.
On August 29, five Ukrainian drones attacked a hospital in the Kherson Region, wounding a nurse.
On August 29, a Russian serviceman shared harrowing details with the media about the murder of three children aged 10 to 12 in Malaya Loknya, the Kursk Region. The Ukrainian Nazis shot them in the back.
Do you remember the West and all other proponents of the liberal idea ridiculing the story of a crucified boy? They said that this could never happen, that it was a fake. Do you know how many children have been crucified in Ukraine and Donbass? Would those who laughed at such stories care to count them? Or do they only see what they can use for their propaganda purposes, turning a blind eye to facts and real human pain and suffering? This is the price of their human rights rhetoric and their alleged concern for democracy. Children are dying constantly, but the West doesn’t care. They only care about the “abstract” children who have allegedly been abducted by Russia, which is why the International Criminal Court has issued the relevant arrest warrants. They only call for helping these “abstract” children and for protecting their rights, including the right to a future. The West believes that other, real-life children and their rights don’t need protection.
This reminds me of a fairy tale by Hans Christian Andersen where a capricious princess rejects a real rose and a live nightingale, saying, “Ugh, they are not artificial, they are real!” It looks very much like the Western attitude towards the adults and children who die, suffer, are maimed and yet survive despite all the odds. “Ugh, they are real!” says the West and its army of human rights defenders.
Footage has emerged in the media showing Banderites massacring elderly residents of this settlement, who had gathered in the square for evacuation. In total, around ten people were victims in Malaya Loknya.
A chilling account came from a resident of the Sudzhansky District, who narrowly survived. During an attempted evacuation, Ukrainian militants opened machine gun fire on a civilian vehicle, resulting in the deaths of a pregnant woman and two young children. Where is even one official or representative from a human rights organisation? Has anyone changed their profile picture in solidarity or posted relevant images? Maybe lit a memorial candle? Illuminated any cultural or architectural landmark in symbolic colours? Of course not.
A growing number of captured Ukrainian Nazis confirm that such atrocities are carried out under direct orders from their command. These are not merely acts of dehumanisation by individuals showing their cruelty, but systematic directives. This was highlighted by Petr Poroshenko, who at the time warned people of a bleak future if they didn’t comply with the Kiev regime’s mandates and sought to preserve their cultural identity. He explicitly stated, “You will be confined to basements and never have the right to the prosperity given to those loyal to the Kiev regime.” Vladimir Zelensky echoed this sentiment when he knelt at a stadium, allegedly asking for forgiveness for his predecessors’ crimes. Who could have known then (although many foresaw and warned) where this would lead?
On August 30, the Ukrainian Armed Forces intentionally targeted Belgorod and the Belgorod district with cluster munitions fired from a Czech-made MLRS tellingly named Vampire. Five civilians were killed, and dozens were injured, including minors. Many residential apartment buildings, private homes, other civilian infrastructure, and vehicles were also damaged. Russia has formally appealed to the UN Secretariat and other relevant international organisations, demanding condemnation of this cynical and bloody attack. The organisers and perpetrators will be identified and held criminally responsible. The blood of Russian civilians is on the hands of the Kiev regime and the conscience of Western suppliers of weapons and tactical intelligence to Kiev. This once again underscores the urgent need to stop the flow of arms to the Zelensky junta, as discussed at the thematic meeting of the UN Security Council, convened at our initiative on August 30.
On September 1, the Zelensky regime attempted a massive attack on 15 Russian regions. Air defence systems successfully intercepted and destroyed 158 UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles).
On the morning of September 2, the Kiev junta carried out another heinous act, launching a deliberate missile strike on a kindergarten in Belgorod. Fortunately, there were no casualties. The precautionary measures taken by local authorities to close preschools and schools in vulnerable areas, including the kindergarten destroyed by the Banderites, proved effective.
Why did the Zelensky regime launch its largest attack on September 1-2? Primarily because it coincided with the Day of Knowledge, when children of all ages returned to school. The Kiev regime specifically targeted them, exemplifying terrorism. Reflecting on the North Caucasus, the West then labelled the perpetrators as champions of human rights, freedom, and democracy. In reality, these so-called fighters for democracy used Western funds to kill children. Let us recall the terrorist attacks on the school in Beslan and the theatre in Dubrovka, where the audience comprised mostly families with children.
On September 3, Ukrainian drones targeted a church and a social facility in the village of Gruzskoye in the Belgorod Region, deliberately dropping explosive devices on them. At the time of the attack, there were 10 people in the church – parishioners and staff – resulting in a concussion for the rector.
These crimes are the responsibility of the Kiev regime and its Western backers. Russian law enforcement agencies are documenting each incident, and all those involved will be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.
Ukrainian neo-Nazis, many of whom received military training in Germany, should reflect on the history of the Great Patriotic War and the grim fate of their ideological predecessors among German Nazis and their collaborators. The Lvov-Sandomierz offensive by the Red Army was devastating for them and pivotal in the liberation of Ukraine; the 80th anniversary of its victorious conclusion was observed on August 29, 2024. It was precisely during this period that Banderites were preparing to attack social facilities in the same region where the great-grandfathers of today’s schoolchildren risked their lives for future generations.
At that time, the residents of the Lvov region welcomed Soviet soldiers with flowers and tears of joy. Their happiness was heartfelt. During the years of occupation, they endured great suffering at the hands of the Nazis and, even more so, from collaborators who were sometimes more brutal than the Germans. In Lvov and the surrounding area alone, these monsters caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands, including the elderly, women, and children. Today, in the Kursk Region, we are witnessing a similar brutal and inhumane approach from contemporary Ukrainian fascists and the foreign mercenaries among them.
This year September 1 marked the 85th anniversary of the beginning of World War II. This serves as a reminder to reflect on the lessons of history, particularly for those who have supported the Kiev regime throughout these years.
Efforts to bring war criminals of the Kiev regime to justice are ongoing. On August 28, the Lefortovo court in Moscow ordered the detention of Colombian mercenaries Alexander Ante and Jose Aron Medina Aranda, who were detained in July by Venezuelan law enforcement agencies and extradited to Russia. They face charges of participating in hostilities against Russia as part of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. During the search, documents confirming their illegal activities were found in their possession, along with military uniforms bearing the insignia of the Carpathian Sich neo-Nazi battalion.
On the same day, the Prosecutor’s Office of the Donetsk People’s Republic approved an indictment in the criminal case against former Latvian MP Juris Jurass. He is accused of participating in hostilities on the side of Ukraine as a mercenary from September 2022 to June 2024. Notably, the investigation revealed that he posted fake information online regarding the bloody events in Bucha, which are attributed to our servicemen. That said, he was not a witness to those events. The defendant his now on the international wanted list.
The illegal stay of media members in the Kursk Region has been recorded again. Illegal stay means that the foreign nationals had no Russian visa or accreditation needed for journalistic activities in our country. One such infiltrator, US national Tom Mutch, published a propaganda piece on the The Daily Beast website on August 24. He spread the Ukrainian message that Russia had seemingly “abandoned its land and people,” quoting militants who claimed that Belgorod, Bryansk and Kursk belong to Ukraine. Such materials have sparked an outrage and prompted an immediate reaction from law enforcement agencies. We take swift action against those who create such materials, and law enforcement authorities investigate each such case thoroughly to determine the perpetrators’ location and the people they spoke with.
In this context I want to once again caution foreign media that unauthorised stay by their employees in our country is a criminal offence. Moreover, if they associate with Nazi thugs from the Ukrainian Armed Forces, they will be investigated by law enforcement agencies for complicity in war crimes.
The West continues not only to supply weapons to the Kiev regime, but also to keep hypocritical silence with respect to the crimes in the humanitarian area against democracy, human rights and pluralism of opinions sacred for the West. It does not say anything about the adoption by the Zelensky regime of an outrageous law aimed at destroying the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, in fact against the canonical Orthodox Christianity and Christianity proper as a matter of principle in Ukraine. The fact that this is a blatant infringement of the rights of believers and a flagrant attack on freedom of religion in Ukraine is of no concern to anyone in Europe or the United States. Such double standards have become even clearer against the background of the reaction by a number of Western media outlets and representatives of socio-political and religious circles.
Specifically, the US publication National Review has rightly pointed out that Kiev’s repressive actions towards the Ukrainian Orthodox Church will not only harm Ukraine’s image, but will also lead to a religiously divided society. I disagree only in one respect – Ukrainian society is already divided. This is now legally established. The investigation by the American Conservative magazine, based on analysed facts, clearly shows that the systematic violations of the rights of the Orthodox flock by the Kiev authorities did not begin in February 2022, but as early as in 2018 or even earlier. It made a special emphasis on the role of Ukrainian media in inciting intolerance regarding the Ukrainian Orthodox Church clergy.
Meanwhile, notwithstanding that the United Nations has documented violations of the rights of the canonical Church, including in reports by the High Commissioner for Human Rights, official Washington persistently ignores them. It would be understandable if Washington did not deal with this topic in principle, referring to the fact that the cause of believers is their own business, and without singling out any specific areas while defending specialised non-governmental institutions. In reality, the US State Department and the White House in the context of protecting religious rights and freedoms do not just pay attention, but professionally work on this topic in the form of reports and creation of specialised state institutions, which are part of the US government apparatus and are financed with US money. However, this scandalous situation is beyond their field of vision, although US journalists are writing about it and the UN has started to put them on record. It is worth mentioning our published materials, refuted by no one, as well, since they contain specific facts, numbers, names, photos and references.
Washington’s leniency towards Kiev in religious issues still strengthens Zelensky regime’s sense of permissiveness and impunity. Mass media controlled by the junta are replicating the ideology of Ukrainian Nazis citing fake data on the alleged support of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church prohibition by a majority of Ukrainians. In the conditions of a totalitarian dictatorship flourishing now in Ukraine, people are coming out in support of their own convictions, despite the awareness that they may be in danger if they disobey the Kiev regime. Everything that the Kiev regime is saying about the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is a brazen and blatant lie. It is an attempt to pass off wishful thinking for reality. People are still loyal to their church. However, the deliberate disregard for the interests of millions of people in Ukraine may lead to open hostility on religious grounds and become a real civil confrontation.
The above facts confirm one more time the topicality of the goals of the special military operation to denazify and demilitarize Ukraine and remove the threats emanating from its territory. All of the goals will certainly be reached.
We continue to monitor the situation in
On August 31,
It would indeed be laughable if it weren’t so tragic. The head of Moldovan diplomacy, alongside making patently absurd statements, went so far as to justify the terrorist actions of the
Amidst the reckless statements by Moldovan officials, the country’s expert community is also focusing on the unprecedented surge of hostile rhetoric from Chisinau and
In this context, we want to reiterate a firm warning against such reckless actions. Only those who wish to undermine and destroy Moldovan statehood would propose such initiatives. It is important to remember that, besides the Russian peacekeepers in Transnistria, over 220,000 Russian citizens reside there. Any provocations against them will be regarded, under international law, as an attack on the
In
Following the recent high-profile transfer of the republic’s gas transportation networks under
There are calls to emulate
Moldovan citizens are well aware of the risks posed by the anti-Russian stance of the official Chisinau government. They are determined not to become pawns in a geopolitical game that primarily targets them rather than
For almost two years following the terrorist attack on the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines, we have been talking openly all the time that we are interested in establishing the truth in this case, and that it is necessary to bring those guilty of blowing up these pipelines to account, to conduct an open investigation under the auspices of the UN and the UN Secretary-General. The West blocked our proposal. We repeatedly addressed German authorities and insisted that Russian law enforcement agencies take part in the investigation, conducted by the German Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office for the sake of its openness and objectivity.
I would like to recall that German Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office is investigating, and we would like to obtain information on how this investigation is proceeding because we are also conducting an investigation. The German side has failed to respond adequately to all our requests for legal assistance on this issue; and none of them has been answered.
Official Berlin is trying to claim that the situation around the act of sabotage is advancing in the right direction, and that everything is proceeding according to plan. However, they have failed to unveil any specific results so far. I would like to recall that, when it became necessary to accuse Russia and to impose anti-Russia sanctions, it took a few days and weeks to find the required evidence and to formulate charges.
At the same time, they have been investigating terrorist attacks on the Nord Stream gas pipelines for the past two years, with no results. The ongoing ineffective investigation has confirmed the inability of Germany and Poland to detain a suspected attacker who managed to escape to Ukraine. A recent statement by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk that those worried about the pace of the Nord Stream investigation should shut up speaks for itself.
In this case, they ought to list legal cases and investigations that should be conducted under national or international law, and those requiring no attention, regardless of who opens them and who conducts the investigations. In that event, we will understand when the international community should not expect any scraps of information on the Nord Stream pipelines, not to mention a fair verdict. They should mention this at least once. You see, the statements they are making show a clear picture, yet they insist that the investigation is underway.
With all respect for investigative journalists and bloggers (who find separate elements and piece this puzzle together), how long should they fish out and select various details form media reports? This is happening at a time when Germany has relevant officials who are obliged to do this. So many Russophobic news conferences, roundtable discussions and seminars have been held for members of the so-called Russian opposition who, in reality, have been hired by them? An active information hullabaloo has been organised around this issue. Representatives of German law enforcement agencies and other countries, involved in the investigation, should have held at least one news conference. We have seen nothing.
On the other hand, a similar situation shaped up around the Skripal case. Over all these years, they held just one news conference when Scotland Yard was forced to make a statement after being pelted with questions. Obviously, the British police force had nothing to do with intrigues, spun by British special services behind their backs; the latter portrayed all developments around the Skripal case as an investigation.
We can see an ineffective approach, and we cannot help but ask: How sincere are the intentions of German authorities to conduct unbiased investigations? Does Germany make any independent decisions on conducting these investigations? Indicatively, journalists and the parliamentary opposition in Germany, as well as experts, are concerned about these questions. They are noting substantial losses incurred by the German economy and asking who will pay for this and be punished. The answers are up in the air.
Finnish Prime Minister’s statements regarding the current situation along the Russian-Finnish border
We have taken note of the recent statement by Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo, who said that
Since November 2023,
Initially, the Finnish authorities decided to close border crossing points, a move that contradicted
However, this was not deemed sufficient. Now, the head of the Finnish Cabinet is demanding that
Human rights, democracy, and freedoms should not remain mere declarations but must be actively applied and implemented. In this context, I would like to remind our once-friendly Finnish neighbours of the importance of adhering to international law, rather than the self-proclaimed rules-based order of the collective West. This order, embraced by a limited number of states, including
From the very beginning of the Finnish authorities inflating the so-called “migration crisis” at the Russian border, we have consistently expressed our willingness to discuss any concerns raised by the Finnish side. However, it is evident that
On September 11-12,
Over the past decades, we have consistently highlighted the rise of neo-Nazism and provided supporting evidence. What began as a trend has now become a troubling routine in many countries around the world.
Unfortunately, even 79 years after the Soviet victory in the Great Patriotic War, humanity continues to confront manifestations of Nazism and fascism. In the 21st century, the “brown plague” has given way to a new form of aggressive imperialism led by the United States and NATO, which promote the rights of the golden billion while expressing hatred for those they deem as “the jungle,” “subhumans,” or “biological waste.”
One of the primary goals of the International Anti-Nazi Forum is to alert the world to the genuine threat of Nazism, which has resurfaced. Its motto is: “Remember the past – think about the future.”
During the forum, the Organising Committee will present a report on current manifestations of Nazism across various countries, as well as effective strategies for societal counteraction. The discussion will also address issues such as the distortion of World War II and Great Patriotic War history, the provision of moral, legal, and material support to victims of Nazism, and the importance of patriotic education for the younger generation.
The forum will feature an international video conference with live participation from representatives of various countries, including Austria, Armenia, Belarus, Bulgaria, Germany, Israel, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Poland, Serbia, Slovenia, the US, Uzbekistan, France, Estonia, and others.
Participants will also lay wreaths and flowers at the Tragedy of Nations memorial on Poklonnaya Gora. Reports will be delivered by leaders of veteran and youth organisations, federal executive bodies, specialised committees of the State Duma and Federation Council, as well as representatives from religious denominations, foreign diplomatic missions, and Heroes of the Soviet Union and
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will deliver a welcoming speech to the forum participants.
International Day of Journalists’ Solidarity
September 8 commemorates the International Day of Journalists’ Solidarity, established in 1958 by the IV Congress of the International Organisation of Journalists. This day honours Czech journalist Julius Fucík who was executed by the Nazis in 1943.
This date serves as a reminder to the global community that a true journalist’s duty is to impartially and honestly present the real state of affairs to the public. Journalists are often at the forefront of crises and conflicts, sometimes risking their own lives to report on unfolding events and provide objective coverage rather than engaging in propaganda. This challenging and noble profession has long been defined by a strong international camaraderie with its own ethical standards and code of honour.
However, these values are now under scrutiny. There has been a shift in Western discourse, with claims that traditional journalism no longer exists. New media has been promoted, the blogosphere has been equated with established journalism, and social networks have increasingly replaced traditional media.
Unfortunately, the era when journalists’ solidarity was unwavering and free from ideological bias is fading into history. We now witness a significant void where there should be statements, petitions, and declarations condemning the murders and terrorist attacks against Russian journalists, including those killed by the
In the West, where the genuinely independent journalism is degenerating into an obedient tool of aggressive propaganda, this concept has become just empty words. They have betrayed and forgot the principles of unity, mutual help and solidarity. Now they practice solidarity under pressure. For example, when NATO people vote, they find out what they are voting for only after the voting finishes when they are given a text that they did not see before. Solidarity is something that comes from the soul, conscience, code of honour. International journalism has always been at the forefront of such solidarity. What has been left of it now?
It has become almost the rule that reporters from Western mainstream publications and their trade unions are among active participants in the harassment of colleagues from other countries, primarily Russia. Germany is the clearest example. The German Journalists Union (DJV) led by Frank Überall has unleashed awful harassment against Russian journalists and media outlets. It is monstrous. They were the ringleaders. The German people did not intend to segregate Russian journalists. They are interested in reading and learning different points of view and are ready to make their own conclusions about what they like and dislike, what is fake and what is true. They would have sorted it out. But then the German Union of Journalists arose and decided everything for everyone. Instead of defending journalists and the principles underlying journalism, this institution is a whistleblower and provocateur who appeals to the German authorities (of course, this is all arranged behind the scenes) with a request to influence the allegedly arrogant Russian/Russian-speaking “non-colleagues.”
Still, not so long ago it was difficult to imagine that they will literally set the local authorities for reprisals against same members of the media who write and speak in a different language. It was impossible to imagine that once reputable traditional Western media began to spread Russophobic information with gusto in the context of harassment of journalists.
On the contrary. In the past 30 years, Westerners, being on the verge of interfering in our internal affairs, have been following the fates of Russian journalists and demanding that the Russian authorities take steps to investigate and protect them. And in a second “the screen was pulled back” and everyone saw the true face. Instantly, Russian journalists were transformed in the West from those who needed protection into those who should be persecuted, expelled, segregated and “marked.”
Speaking about Western unions of journalists, individual Western journalists and elites engaged in the harassment of their Russian colleagues, this is based on the fear of competition and the inability to withstand it (to say nothing about winning). When Russia Today TV channel began broadcasting in German, the audience in Germany, Austria and other German-speaking countries felt it like a breath of fresh air, an alternative point of view, an opportunity to compare and make a choice in favour of their traditional media or subscribe to one more information resource. However, the interest in the Russian media broadcasting in German rose so much that became a challenge for German journalists who asked the FRG authorities to take measures against Russian journalists.
Specially disturbing is the Western media's orchestrated silence about the murders and assassination attempts on Russian journalists and war correspondents who defend a different point of view in hotspots and with facts in hand, persistent ignoring of the fact that the criminal Kiev regime and its Western patrons are behind each such tragedy. After all, they are your colleagues!
Western journalists have been affected by collective blindness. There are exceptions, of course, some are starting to see the light, but the majority make a shameful bargain with their own conscience. Many of them say that they have to pay for children’s education, medical insurance, housing, we are not so bold as you are and are not ready for this. Now they are putting up with the brutality, misanthropy and lawlessness against Russian journalists, but they forget that this is not just a conciliatory tactic, but complicity.
The conditions for media pluralism and free access to information keep on degrading in many “advanced democracies” and a worthy rebuff from Western media professionals is nowhere to be seen. The Baltic states actively continue to persecute unwanted journalists who dare to doubt whether the authorities’ policies are correct and express their point of view.
The Maia Sandu regime is following the well-trodden Russophobic path of the Baltic states, where they have deliberately deprived Russian-speaking residents of the country’s last sources of information by shutting down the broadcasting and rebroadcasting of Russian television channels and media outlets. The permissiveness of the neoliberal pseudo-democracies is only gaining momentum against the background of solidarity inaction of not only relevant human rights organisations but also the journalistic community of the West itself.
I think you know about the scale of reprisals against Russian media in the countries of Old Europe and North America, because they concern your friends and colleagues.
Hopefully, there will be someone who will not only recall all the above problems on International Day of Solidarity, but also write and stage rallies in support of their colleagues and journalism.
Question: The Alternative for Germany far-right party has won elections in one of the country’s regions. The German leadership has already called this victory disturbing. We see that radical sentiments are taking hold of the voters in the West more and more often. What is your assessment of this turnaround? Are we going to see soon among our Western neighbours a country with a radical government and radical views?
Maria Zakharova: I agree with your point about the growth of radical movements and sentiments in Western countries. It is a fact. There is a lot of evidence to that. But what does the Alternative for Germany have to do with it? Perhaps they can speak for themselves. But since you asked me, I’ll give my viewpoint. Firstly, this party gave its country and its citizens an opportunity to take a realistic look at Germany’s problems. It did this, first of all, so that society, not being able to express itself legally, would not radicalise. The Alternative for Germany suggested that people take a sober look at the real problems of the country and start addressing them.
Secondly, the Swiss newspaper Blick published an article disavowing the accusations of radicalism regarding the Alternative for Germany. I emphasise that this is not a Russian publication; Russian journalists have nothing to do with this. This is not a Russian expert sharing his views on the platform of a Swiss newspaper. This is the opinion of a Swiss publication. The article says that nine points from the Alternative for Germany programme have already been implemented in Switzerland. I haven't heard of anyone being labelled “radical” in Switzerland for this. This shows that what the current German authorities (partly the previous ones as well) are most afraid of is talking to their own citizens about topics that the people of the country are really concerned about.
Look at the the German edition of Compact. It is certainly not pro-Russian. It is also called radical in many ways. But it asked specific questions. What were they interested in? What the German people, who are facing enormous economic difficulties, are most interested in: what is happening to Russian gas that until recently had been coming to Germany? Can gas deliveries begin through the remaining pipe of the Nord Stream pipeline? They travelled to Moscow to seek a qualified answer to this question from the official authorities − could Russia start supplying gas to Germany if such a decision was taken, and was it technically possible? That was the only thing they were interested in. Our answer was that Russia would be able to start supplying gas to Germany within a few weeks if such a decision is substanciated economically and politically.
Is this information radical? Does it have far-right or far-left overtones? No. It’s technical information about gas supplies. What was done to this publication for that? They were shut down, outlawed. Even German government ministers came out and gave a report on the work done, saying it was a radical publication. Is that normal? As soon as a publication, a party, a public organisation in Germany starts asking the government or themselves as representatives of society real questions about pressing problems, they are promptly labelled as radicals.
You know who the real radicals are? Those who support Nazis and fascists. You and I know this as an absolute truth. If you support Nazis, you’re a radical. Who supports this ideology? German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock presented to the media a part of her memoirs where she said that she was proud of her grandfather who fought in Königsberg. Where did her grandfather fight? In the Red Army? No. He was a Nazi. The same is true of many of the current German ruling elite. That’s where the radical views come in.
Russophobia as anything else directed against people of a particular nationality, race, religious views is radicalism. It thrives in Germany. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz lied to his people about the fact that Russia had allegedly stopped supplying gas. Listen to his Russophobic statements as well. This is radicalism. But for some reason it is not called that there. One should be able to see where there is professional and profound labelling, and where there is an attempt to look at things objectively and reflect the real needs of society.
Democracy exists so that different parts of society could promote their views legitimately and get answers to pressing questions. Germans are denied this, just as they are denied cheap natural resources. Why, you may ask? Their country’s government is made up of Germans but they decide to cut off the supply of cheap, stable and guaranteed raw materials. They are citizens of their country only because they have German passports. In reality, they are pursuing not a German-centred policy but that of the US and NATO. That is why they were brought to power, nurtured and financed through various indirect structures. They get information support, all Western television and other information opportunities are open for them to pursue this logic. Weren’t there many examples in history when people, as they spoke about their national feelings, patriotism, love, did exactly the opposite? Unfortunately, this is what is now happening in Germany.
Question: Vladimir Zelensky has proposed that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi convene a conference in India on the settlement [of the crisis] in Ukraine ahead of the upcoming US presidential election in November. Has there been any response from New Delhi or any reaction through diplomatic channels?
Maria Zakharova: It appears (and I am not even mentioning Vladimir Zelensky’s poor judgment) that the Kiev regime fails to get the stance expressed by India and its leadership. We know and appreciate Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s earnest willingness to make contribution to a possible political and diplomatic settlement of the Ukraine crisis; we have always praised the Indian leadership for their balanced position on Ukraine. But most notably, Vladimir Zelensky simply fails to understand the very essence of the stance given by India and its leadership, which states that “the decision to when and how to commence peace talks is the prerogative of the two parties to the conflict.” I can see why the Kiev regime distorts the outcomes of the negotiations and meetings that took place in Kiev: they sought to provide their own interpretation. But they should actually see the essence of New Delhi’s position.
Question: How would you comment on the reports saying that Armenia has frozen its membership in the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) at all levels? How will the organisation adjust its activities in this context?
Maria Zakharova: I read statements made by the official Yerevan on a regular basis, including on this particular matter. The recent one has claimed that the CSTO had withdrawn from Armenia’s territory and the country had frozen its membership in the organisation.
Obviously, along with its essential meaning, each statement (when made by an official) should also imply the responsibility for what was said as well as for its consequences.
Second – and we have made comments on this on numerous occasions – Yerevan de jure remains the association’s full member and retains its rights and obligations. Yet, the Armenian leadership has actually started to pursue the policy of withdrawing from such interaction, which we think contradicts the interests of the Armenian nation.
We expect our partnership with Armenia within the CSTO to be fully resumed in the interests of the security of the friendly country as well as of the entire region.
And lastly, the point that relates to the first two: a play of words may lead into trouble, given that the region has already been through many hardships.
Question: How can Moscow comment on the statement by UN special rapporteurs who have accused the French government of violating the basic rights of the indigenous Kanak people in New Caledonia to self-determination? According to the UN, Paris “used excessive force” that resulted in the deaths of several Kanaks and another 169 wounded, as well as in mass detentions and over 500 victims of enforced disappearance.
Maria Zakharova: This is a joint statement by four special rapporteurs of the UN Human Rights Council, namely: special rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples Francisco Cali Tzay, special rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association Gina Romero, special rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance Ashwini K.P., and special rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression Irene Khan. We support major points of concern that the UN experts mentioned.
We are closely following the developments in New Caledonia, which are causing concern. An unprecedented social and political crisis there was caused by the failure of those who had engaged in the efforts to ensure the future of these territories, as well as from Paris’ intention to make drastic changes in the legislation on the procedure of local elections. Just to remind, in May 2024, the archipelago saw massive protest rallies attended by thousands of people who represent the local indigenous population and viewed such developments as violation of the right to self-determination. Paris has once again neglected the declared values of democracy as the right to freedom of speech and assembly. These protests were brutally suppressed by the French authorities, sadly ending in casualties.
On numerous occasions, we have mentioned the unacceptability of methods used by French law enforcement agencies and the military. This fact has now become obvious to international structures as well. The world community sees that the decolonisation process is not complete. Many claimed that these issues were a thing of the past; however, now they note that gaining independence de facto and de jure does not actually imply complete liberation. Certain territories still lack the status that they are entitled to and willing to fight for. As stated by documents of the UN Special Committee on Decolonisation, New Caledonia is on the list of non-self-governing territories. We believe that facts of human rights violations and excessive use of force by law enforcement agencies should be made public and strictly documented, with most outrageous cases being subject to impartial investigation rather than swept under the carpet as if nothing has happened. Common standards are required. Just look at the way Paris is obsessively concerned with giving assessments of elections in a certain country or freedom of speech in different regions of the world. France is responsible for this territory with all its current developments and is simply not ready to answer for what is happening there.
The archipelago sees persisting socioeconomic and political tensions. Instead of eliminating the prime causes of the conflict, the French authorities have chosen blatant political oppression, with some 2,500 arrests already made, according to open sources. We are talking about an archipelago here, not about a country with a population of millions. They transferred the most active leaders of the national liberation movement to France in a futile attempt of passing them off as goons and robbers. But it is obvious what this all is about. We hope that the international community will give a proper assessment of an essentially colonial policy that France pursues in its overseas territory.
I believe that countries, states and regimes that commit such actions should be denied the right to give peremptory assessments on the quality of democracy in other states – until they improve the situation in their dependent territories. Why do they feel entitled to lecture and even condemn others?
Question: Two years ago, Russia’s turn to the East was announced, with China being its key partner. How do you think the quantitative and also the qualitative structure of interaction between the two countries has changed?
Maria Zakharova: Please do not use words like “turns,” “overturns” or “turnaways” for Russia. Our country has borders in the west, south, east, and north. Cooperation with all the neighbouring countries and others is developing.
Our location and history imply that we should develop these relations along all azimuths. It is different when the option for developing full-fledged relations is closed in some areas through no fault of ours. Then we will develop areas that yield specific results and prove their effectiveness to a greater extent. This does not mean that we will not maintain relations with public organisations and economic operators in those countries whose leadership wanted to inflict a defeat on us. We can see a direct benefit in interaction with peoples.
As for China, we have been seeing, for about fifteen years now, that China is the top trading partner of the Russian Federation. This proves that our deep cooperation with China goes back way further than just two years. A large part of the Russian territory is located in Asia. I believe it is time we started saying Eurasia.
I remember both television and newspaper debates about whether Russia should follow its own path (the path of Eurasianism), or choose the Western, or Eastern one, in the 1990s. Now life has answered the questions of those who were saying Eurasianism is not for Russia. It means opportunities and potential for growth. This is objective reality. Therefore, being largely in Asia, we can draw historical conclusions that Russia shares a long border with China and other Eastern countries, which predetermines the significance of the Asian vector in our policy and plans for the future world order.
It is true that over the past two years the Russian-Chinese trade has reached a record high level; comprehensive investment cooperation has intensified; intense cultural and humanitarian contacts are being maintained; and ties between Russian and Chinese regions are strengthening. Strategic projects in the energy sector are being implemented, and cooperation in such high-tech industries as nuclear energy and automobile manufacturing is increasing. Mutual access of agricultural products to the two countries’ markets is expanding.
These processes are characterised positively by the Russian leadership. They are not subject to the current political situation but are a result of systematic, future-oriented work based on historical ties and a vision of the future. It was further boosted by the geopolitical changes occurring in the world. The broken (or it would be better to quote former US President Barack Obama here: “torn to shreds”) logistic chains of economic ties – they have been destroyed on purpose, above all by the Americans – have largely contributed to cooperation we can see in this region, among others. Russia and China speak strictly against unilateral sanctions, illegitimate restrictions, and protectionism. While others seek to burn bridges, we build them. Literally: back in 2022, two cross-border bridges across the Amur River were opened at once. We aim to deepen this cooperation and interaction that is beneficial to Russia and China, as well as the region and the world as a whole.
Question: President of France Emmanuel Macron published an article in the Politika Serbian newspaper ahead of his visit to Belgrade. He wrote that the task of maintaining a united front against Russia is facing all Europeans, including Serbia. How would you comment on the French president’s words?
Maria Zakharova: Mr Macron said nothing new or clever. I have a question for the Serbian newspaper: did they feel anything when publishing such an anti-Russia article? There are obvious signs of nationalism in the statements of the President of France. The Serbs know from their own history when NATO builds its policy against one specific nation or nationality. How can this be published? They should have at least added a footnote or their comment on this.
We hear Western leaders putting out a lot of nonsense. This is a most striking example of this pure nonsense. They have agreed that there is no such thing as male or female, but a variety of genders: dozens of them. They have said so much that they decided to openly glorify the Nazis, as was done in the Canadian parliament.
We hear a lot of nonsense: information that was not verified but presented as an environmental agenda and then immediately refuted by them. But there are things that are not only marginal, shocking, or extravagant, but firstly, anti-historical, and secondly, nationalistic to the level that is close to Nazism.
It would be nice if Serbian media and journalists don’t forget about this, or about our common past, and also think about the future. I cannot recall the official France ever coming to help them, but can recall the many times Russia came, both in the distant and recent past. I am talking not just about Russia’s opposing what was being done to Serbia when it was bombed by NATO or its strict position on the Serbian unity and inadmissibility of dismembering Serbia by recognising the quasi-state of Kosovo, but also about the colossal economic assistance provided to Serbia.
This assistance is also manifested in implementing mutually beneficial projects, including infrastructural ones, and considering direct requests from Belgrade and Serbian economic operators. After this, their media publish calls for a march on Russia or creation of an anti-Russia front that Serbia has to join. Let me repeat that I am in favour of pluralism of opinions. However, there is a difference between freedom of speech and insults, Nazi chants, and "fakes." The main thing is not to forget it.
Question: Presidential elections and a referendum on joining the EU will be held in Moldova on October 20. The country’s officials have repeatedly expressed their doubts about the possibility to ensure safe voting of Moldovans living in Russia. How justified do you believe these statements are and what can be the reasons for this?
Maria Zakharova: We saw these messages, which have nothing to do with reality, fakes, in fact. Let me remind you that there were 17 voting stations open in 10 constituent entities of the Russian Federation in November 2020 when presidential elections were held in Moldova. There were no complaints from Chisinau. No problems with security issues. Everything was provided and done.
We would like to stress once again that Russia does not intend to create any obstacles in arranging voting of Moldovan citizens living in our country or limit the number of voting stations. We are ready to take necessary measures to secure the voting process as in the previous years.
You are well aware of our principled position: if Russia holds elections – presidential or parliamentary – in other states we declare every time that we want to grant the opportunity to Russians located abroad to vote. On our side, we will always be ready to render similar assistance to all countries requesting the same. Everybody knows this, no need to garble information.
The real cause of these statements on some “difficulties” with arranging voting of Moldovans in Russia is not hard to plumb. It is clear to every person. Moldovan authorities are seeking any pretexts to deprive citizens, whom Chisinau finds untrustworthy, of a chance to vote.
Moldovan community in Russia amounts to half a million people. I believe that deprivation by Maia Sandu’s regime of Moldovan citizens’ right to vote would be another proof of a retreat from democracy and demolition of democratic principles. This would mean a mass violation of human rights which ought to be qualified by the international community.
Will Chisinau do this? I do not know. Follow the situation yourself. As for Russian approaches and readiness to render assistance in arranging voting in our country, there have never been any problems with ensuring voting safety of Moldovans living in Russia.
Question: The military organisation, NATO, is preparing large-scale drills in Finland. A large number of troops are going to take part in them. Of course, terrorist organisations – ISIS, Ukrainian Nazis and so forth – will be involved in case of conflicts. How will Russia respond to such scenarios?
Maria Zakharova: We see that once-stable region of northern Europe is turning into a geopolitical confrontation area through the efforts of NATO. Those who draw parallels with the events of 85-90 years ago are absolutely right. We have made numerous warnings concerning the risks arising out of military presence of the alliance in Finland.
Any drills by the aggressive military alliance near Russian borders are demonstratively provocative. Military exercises in Finland are part of the hybrid war against our country. Besides, such activity results in new threats for safe shipping and economic activity in the Far North.
We are monitoring the situation and assessing potential risks. Our military are making corresponding conclusions. The Leningrad Military District has been re-established to prevent challenges in the northern direction. The Russian leadership will make further decisions to ensure Russia’s security depending on further developments.
Question: In recent days, Russia has issued an international arrest warrants for several Western journalists, who illegally crossed the Russian border, and for Jaroslaw Hunka, a Nazi criminal and former 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS (1st Galician) serviceman. How effective is the international search tool? What should this step demonstrate to our opponents internationally?
Maria Zakharova: Interpol is a huge organisation with a membership exceeding that of the United Nations. It has demonstrated its efficiency on numerous occasions. But there is a problem – the position of Western countries. Interpol will lose much of its efficiency if they continue to politicise its work and bend law and law enforcement standards to their ideology (not even their policy), rather than defend their rights or enhance the organisation’s effectiveness. This happens to many organisations, where the West begins to deviate from international law, introduce its rules and ways, and attempt to dominate others.
As for Jaroslaw Hunka and his international arrest warrant, almost 20 countries have joined the search for him after our painstaking efforts to put him on the international wanted list. But what are Hunka’s relatives saying? They’ve set up a howl that the “granddad” is being forced to feel uncomfortable in his old age. Decent and reasonable people used to call this lawful retribution or fulfilment of justice. The anti-reward comes home to the anti-hero for the atrocities he committed decades ago. This is the kind of justice we want to see. He is not behind the bars so far, but the “tubs of popular wrath” are being poured upon his head for a very good reason. What’s wrong with that? The most interesting thing is that he would have died in quiet ingloriousness tortured by his own demons, but unexpectedly someone has jerked him out of his obscurity and put on a pedestal. It was decided that he would be a central figure, a historical hero who would make a good background for Vladimir Zelensky as a knight in shining armour fighting the Russian “evil.” But it turned out otherwise. The idol fell from the pedestal and everyone had a dig at him, in both direct and figurative sense of the word. This refers to both Hunka and Zelensky.
The PR aspect is also an indicator of Interpol’s efficiency. We must preserve this organisation and spare the true mechanisms that have been built into it and proven effective for years. Interpol must not be turned into yet another subservient outfit pandering to US mental disorder.
Question: Sweden’s state security service has made a statement about what it called a threat of possible “Russian sabotage attacks.” At the same time, everyone keeps silent about the terrorist attacks against the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 pipelines and the investigation into these. What is your comment on this Swedish rhetoric?
Maria Zakharova: It’s a dichotomy. If they were concerned with investigating sabotage attacks, they would not have stopped the inquiry into the real terrorist assault on the Nord Stream pipelines. If they stopped investigating the actually committed terrorist attack but feel concerned with imagined threats, they have toys in the attic or have elevated hypocrisy to the rank of national policy.
Question: After what happened in Kursk with a foreign correspondent, who had legitimately entered Russia and interviewed neo-Nazis, the Russian authorities wanted to withdraw the accreditation of an anti-Russian Italian journalist, who continues to work in Russia.
Maria Zakharova: If the Italian correspondent turned up in Russia legitimately and violated no laws, he has nothing to fear. We do not obstruct the writing of articles. Neither do we change anything in them. We do not put pressure on or punish journalists for providing information from their own standpoint.
Question: My question is not clear enough, perhaps. Why am I asking it? There are Italian journalists in Russia, right now, who express an anti-Russian point of view. They write and publish anti-Russian propaganda and yet are allowed to remain in Russia.
Maria Zakharova: Why are you so surprised? We uphold the right to freedom of speech, even if we do not share the point of view and values of certain journalists. There is the right to state a position. But if we think that falsifications have crept in, we use anti-fake content to discredit this or that position. We oppose falsifications and data distortion, not their right to publish what they write. At the same time, we do our best to help journalists who do justice to Russia’s point of view. We support them and do whatever is needed to bring across true and correct information by organising briefings and news conferences in Moscow and encouraging them to travel to various regions, where this or that event has taken place. We work not only with the correspondents, who call themselves “friends of Russia,” but also those interested in developments here, if not projecting pro-Russian views. We work with everyone. We do not censure them but want them to see the truth. This is rather difficult and emotional.
In many cases, journalists write propaganda, and this can be understood. Many just want to make money and are reluctant to cover the real facts. But we understand that we need to go on with our work that consists in fighting for the truth with the use of lawful methods.
Question: What is your impression of the Forum and its foreign attendance? We just saw that it was attended by a deputy prime minister of Serbia. Previously there were more representatives of foreign countries. How do you regard the results of this Forum? Do you believe that Russia is isolated or is it acquiring more friends in this world?
Maria Zakharova: My advice is that you ought not to discriminate against forum participants by saying that its success is measured by positions and titles alone. The Forum’s success is determined by its participants. Each time a forum is over, we say how many deals have been signed and their value in monetary terms. Or we just give the figures provided by economic operators themselves. This is the measure of its success, not the number of high-ranking guests alone. The important thing is the eagerness on the part of economic operators to implement projects and sign deals.
You have come from Japan. Why are you placing yourself below officials? I always thought that journalists were the “fourth power.” There are quite a few representatives of the Asia-Pacific region. You should regard this as a success.
Does Russia feel isolated? We see that it is Japan that has isolated itself from the point of view of economic indicators. You know them as a representative of Japanese media.
On the other hand, how do you estimate Japanese economic indicators, if you, [the Japanese], do not regard yourselves as isolated? Is it what the Japanese leaders were eager to achieve? We have recorded attempts to isolate us. We are aware that this is an idée fixe with quite a number of countries. Primarily Western countries.
Regrettably, Japan is not displaying independence and tends to succumb to Western pressure. At the same time, our economic indicators show that the plan to isolate Russia has failed. These indicators are recorded not only by Russian institutions and governmental agencies but also by international organisations that include them in their statistics. More than that, the supposed isolation has opened new opportunities and given an impetus to tapping new potentials for this country and the region at large. It has put the de-dollarisation on the agenda, as it has the search for and development of new sales and consumption markets.
The Japanese auto-making industry has lost the Russian market. Who did that? Was it Russia? Of course, not! Japan was trying to isolate Russia. In their attempts to isolate us, the Japanese have hurt themselves. Take this message to your numerous Japanese audience. Perhaps they will also pose some questions to their foreign ministry spokesperson. Why should you try time and again to isolate Russia, given that economically it has not just survived but also increased its capabilities. Japan, in the meantime, has lost a lot.
I think it is not much of a secret any longer. There are honest analysts in your country, who know that Japan has lost the highly important Russian auto market, and lost for long.
And the reason is just one – Tokyo’s attempts to curry favour with the United States and make a contribution of its own to Russia’s [supposed] isolation. As the saying goes, “Don’t do unto others what you would not have done unto you.”
Question: The United States will soon hold elections. What are the expectations for the outcome and, accordingly, what are the expectations and prospects for the development of relations between our countries after the election?
Maria Zakharova: I understand why you are asking. Everyone is tired of the twists of American democracy. Everyone is tired of what is happening in Washington and what it is doing. I understand why this question is always asked everywhere.
Let me repeat our principled position. Every time when an election takes place in a country, when answering a question on who we will communicate with or who we will support, we say that we do not interfere in elections. We always say that we will build relations with the forces that are truly in favour of mutually beneficial, mutually effective, and mutually respectful development of relations.
We accept the expression of the will of the people in a given country as a sovereign fact. If you are talking about who we would like and prefer and how to treat it, then it is extremely interesting for us, as for any state, to build mutually beneficial and mutually respectful relations based on international law. We profess this approach.
Elections is every nation’s sovereign affair. Their results must concern people who take part in them. Do they reflect their aspirations? Have they succeeded? We accept lawful expression of the will. Now, when everything created by humanity, including during the post-war period, is being destroyed, all the things considered unshakable, associated with peace and friendship, become relevant.
Outside of the election context, we would like words related to such concepts as peace, its maintenance and protection, friendship and respect to appear more often or at all in the lexicon of politicians operating in the international arena and in their own countries, claiming a certain role in international affairs.
It seems like these words were left in the 20th century. You won’t come across them in any single programme. Many leaders speaking about themselves in the international context seem to be afraid of them, while many generations agreed that this was the most essential concept for humanity.
Please forgive me for elaborating, but I would like people, especially those involved in political activities and aspiring to play an international role, to understand how many mistakes and even crimes have been committed over last decades, above all by the West. A lot of important basic notions have disappeared from the international vocabulary. They work on various elements such as artificial intelligence and environmental nuances, while basic areas and notions seem to disappear.
It feels like everyone is embarrassed of them and considers them outdated. But there is no way around it. There will be no success without a focus on peaceful coexistence, because this is what is in great demand now.
Look at how many people on our planet are starting looking for these words in global politicians’ speeches every day. Many have already figured out all the concepts and are ready to deal with any details in the international arena. The main thing is that the fundamentals, peaceful existence and friendship, do not go away. These are idealistic things, but these are the ideals that should be pursued, and not exclusivity, division, segregation, new types of dominance, the roots of which grow from the past.
Question: As close neighbours, we are concerned about Russia’s and Mongolia’s development now. Both Russia and the United States are actively promoting economic and cultural cooperation in Mongolia. At the same time, Mongolia is under strong pressure because of its friendship with our country, in particular, in the financial sphere. What do you think about this and about the uncertain trade?
Maria Zakharova: Our leader and the leader of Mongolia have said a lot about Mongolia recently. I will not repeat it. Everything was said clearly.
Question: Recently, a number of comments has been made both by the Russian Foreign Ministry and the Presidential Executive Office about Russia making changes to its nuclear doctrine. What changes are being made? Will the final document be published?
Maria Zakharova: Detailed comments on this matter have already been given by Russian officials, primarily by President of Russia Vladimir Putin and representatives of the Russian Foreign Ministry.
This work is being carried out mainly due to those global and regional challenges to international security that are multiplying as a result of the unacceptable and escalatory actions of the United States and its NATO allies. For our part, we warn Western countries that such a line carries serious strategic risks. We hope that Western leadership’s common sense will prevail and they will drastically change their destructive policy.
Question: I get the feeling that the West is primarily to blame in the current situation in Ukraine. Is Russia genuinely willing to negotiate with such a West, or are these statements merely for show while Russia remains focused on achieving a military victory?
Maria Zakharova: I hope your interest in this topic dates back further than 2022. I trust you’re aware that it was Russia that initially proposed the Minsk Agreements and consistently advocated for their implementation. You can look up any speech on international affairs by President Vladimir Putin or Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov since 2014, and you’ll find numerous statements emphasising the existential importance of fulfilling the Minsk Agreements. Are you suggesting that we are now relying on force? Yes, after former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Francois Hollande admitted they never intended to implement them. Meanwhile, the Kiev regime was being supplied with weapons, military equipment was stockpiled in Ukraine, and continuous exercises were held. By early 2022, attacks on Donbass intensified significantly. Indeed, at that point, the guns “spoke,” and the military took over.
Where were you for those seven years? I doubt you were consistently sending questions to France and Germany – to their heads of state or foreign ministries – asking why they weren’t doing more to pressure the Kiev regime to implement the Minsk Agreements. Many seemed to think it wasn’t a serious issue, but it certainly was.
As for the idea that we believe the West is entirely at fault: even after the special military operation began in the spring of 2022, we still responded to calls for peace talks. But it was the West that blocked them. First, former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson convinced Vladimir Zelensky not to proceed with negotiations in the spring of 2022. The talks were halted. Later, the United States pressured him to legally forbid himself from engaging in talks with Russia. That’s the answer to your question. We have always supported peace.
But when all options were exhausted, even then, we were ready to respond, and we did. This is the reality, and you should see and recognise it.
As for the claim that our actions were merely declarative: Russia was the driving force behind the creation of the first Minsk Agreements in 2014. Six months later, these agreements laid the foundation for the second Minsk Accords, which were initialled, approved, and signed by all parties. The Normandy format was established to oversee their implementation. This demonstrates that our approach was not just declarative, but pragmatic and concrete. In practical terms, we worked to the very limit to pursue peaceful resolutions.
You might be aware that all of this occurred alongside the influx of millions of refugees from Ukraine into our country. Europe has only recently, in the last two years, realised what it’s like to receive large numbers of people fleeing Ukraine. We faced this back in 2014, and we provided everything – without time limits – to those seeking protection, whether they wanted to stay temporarily or permanently. We offered jobs, schools, kindergartens, and housing. I know this firsthand; when I visit my relatives in the Moscow Region, I see how those who arrived from Ukraine in 2014–2015 are living in the neighbouring area. This speaks to the issue of declarative actions. Is it merely declarative that, for seven years until 2022 (and of course beyond that), we consistently provided humanitarian aid to regions like Donbass, which had been financially cut off from mainland Ukraine?
At the time, The Guardian reported and portrayed these events as if we were delivering something as serious as tanks. Do you remember what those white humanitarian trucks were actually carrying? Textbooks, heaters, medicine, blankets, clothing. Yet, The Guardian was quick to suggest that Russia was sending military equipment, and they never issued an apology. You want to talk about declarative language? There’s no need. We act in practical ways. We understand the true cost of wars and victories. We paid too high a price in the past not to value these words.
In response to the previous question about what we hope for and who we would like to work with when someone is elected in any given country, I may be stepping beyond my official role. However, as a citizen of our country, as the daughter of my parents, and the granddaughter of grandparents who lived through the war, I can tell you this: we want peace and genuine friendship, not just words. We have demonstrated this on our part many times.
Question: Not so long ago, the Armed Forces of Ukraine declared that they would form a number of new brigades. These brigades will be trained in Europe. The thing is that some of these will be manned by local Ukrainians liable to conscription. What is your comment?
Maria Zakharova: They were doing that right from the start. The only difference is that originally Ukrainian embassies recruited citizens of other countries in violation of all conventions on diplomatic relations and contrary to international law. Mercenaries were hired through Ukrainian embassy websites that also carried on agitation.
But one should start with other things. We know what is to be done with these facts: the Russian military are sorting them out on the ground. We tell everyone as much at international organisations. One should start by stating that Ukrainian citizens and foreign mercenaries were trained at camps in Poland and the Baltic states long before 2014. It is they who became the motive force of the Ukrainian maidans and later that of the [banned] nationalist battalions, such as Azov and similar units, which committed atrocities in Donbass and tried to attack Crimea. Thank God, the people of Crimea took the appropriate measures. This is where these processes began. We talked about this. Again, in reply to the previous question I will say this: The West saw nothing or said that all of this was a figment of our imagination, for these camps were intended for “rest and recreation” or for “practicing martial arts.”
What has this led to? I think the Europeans are still unaware of what the United States and the Anglo-Saxons are luring them into. They are yet to realise what “pest” they have created with their own hands in the person of the terrorist Kiev regime. As you rightly said, the “battalions” to be manned by Ukrainian citizens in West European countries will attack, I assure you, those countries as well. They ate their fill, weathered the worst, and got cure (in all senses). They will lash out the way all West-created international terrorist organisations did. Some cases in point are al-Qaeda and ISIS, which also received support from the West. The same thing will happen here.
I have already quoted the foreign minister of a Gulf country, who said that he was looking at the European continent with a tragicomic grin, because he saw that Europe, for the first time in its history, had given birth to an international terrorist group. Previously, there were instances of this kind solely in Northern Africa, the Middle East, and Afghanistan. Europe did succeed in creating a terrorist monster that would operate throughout the world. Today, you can hear statements made by African states that corroborate what I have said. But they will strike at Western Europe, too. They always come home to roost.
Additional materials
-
Photos
