Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, November 2, 2024

Table of Contents

1. Statements made by the Foreign Minister of Ukraine
2. Prisoner of war exchange
3. Kiev regime’s sabotage of the prisoner exchange process
4. Publication of the list of 29 Ukrainian marines
5. Units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and territorial defence that have been “forgotten” by the Kiev regime
6. Ukrainian coordination headquarters for prisoner exchange
7. Decision by the Head of the Chechen Republic
8. Decision issued by the President of the Czech Republic

Answers to media questions:

1. Kiev regime’s refusal to exchange POWs
2. Mediation by third countries
3. Ukrainians relocating to Russia
4. Latest statements by Polish Foreign Minister
5. False claims by the Kiev regime
6. Puppet nature of Zelensky regime’s
7. Number of Ukrainian POWs Ukraine refuses to exchange
8. Ukrainian national detained to stand trial
9. Ukrainian POWs’ trials held in secret

This interaction wasn’t scheduled. It is provoked by the statements that we heard coming from the Kiev regime. The fact is that the “Foreign Minister” of Ukraine, Andrey Sibiga, said something about Ukrainian POWs on social media. He linked all of that to the October 30-31 “summit” in Montreal, Canada, which focused on returning Ukrainian prisoners of war. This event was attended by representatives from over 45 countries, including Foreign Minister of Canada Melanie Joly, Foreign Minister of Ukraine Andrey Sibiga, and Foreign Minister of Norway Barth Eide. They (for some reason, these Western countries) discussed ways to return Ukrainian POWs to Ukraine. Following this meeting, Sibiga posted a comment on social media saying that the past week one country had allegedly expressed a desire, during that meeting in Canada, to become “a protecting power in accordance with the Geneva Conventions to help Ukrainians in Russia.” He also said - at least the Western media cited him as saying - that three neutral countries had expressed their willingness to act as “protectors of Ukrainians in Russia”.

We received a large number of questions today. We decided to answer all these questions at once and share with you what this is all about. Why would the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry discuss the fate of Ukrainians and POWs in Canada? This is not a rhetorical question. It appears to make no sense and to be unanswerable only at first glance. In fact, there is an answer, and the answer has been provided earlier.

This is a staged political show which they need to put on, because Ukraine is seeing the first signs of social unrest. People are asking questions: where are the POWs who were supposed to be exchanged? Without answering this question and keeping the actual state of affairs under wraps, the Kiev regime is creating a semblance of ongoing international efforts, which, from the point of view of the people on Bankovaya, are supposed to put Russia under some kind of pressure. Now, let’s look at the facts, because we have seen the lack of integrity, rude behaviour and insolence of the Kiev regime, which subsequently morphed into extremism and terrorism. That could still be viewed as logic, albeit a morbid one. What happened today is beyond good and evil. It is nothing short of absurdity.

POW exchanges take place routinely according to an established arrangement. You yourself witnessed them and received reliable information from Russia, the Kiev regime, and everyone else involved in this process. There are corresponding mechanisms in place that include the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation and the appropriate mechanisms with the involvement of the Russian Defence Ministry. There are the established channels and authorised persons who deal with these matters.

In 2022, Moscow and Kiev reached agreements on the exchange of prisoners of war with the assistance of international mediators. More than 45 exchanges have been carried out since then and about 3,000 servicemen from each side returned home.

What is happening now? The Kiev regime is sabotaging the process, which was institutionalised and was producing results. Why is that? It’s because they are now focused solely on exchanging nationalist battalion members. They are interested in units and servicemen whom we describe as extremist, terrorist, and nationalist. Who are they? These include Azov, Aidar, Right Sector, Kraken, and Donbass, as well as foreign mercenaries who took part in hostilities against Russia as part of the Foreign Legion (Polish Volunteer Corps, Georgian Legion, Kastus Kalinouski Regiment, Belarusian Volunteer Corps, Russian Volunteer Corps, Karelian National Battalion, and Siberian Battalion).

I reiterate that their interest lies primarily in prisoners of war from nationalist and extremist battalions and units, or foreign mercenaries. Conversely, the Kiev regime shows no interest in members of the Ukrainian armed forces themselves, namely their own citizens, conscripts, and ordinary servicemen.

In the context of negotiations between the Russian Defence Ministry and the Coordination Headquarters for the Treatment of Prisoners of War, established in Ukraine under the auspices of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ukrainian Defence Ministry, we consistently advocate for the resumption of constructive dialogue and the intensification of prisoner exchanges. We emphasise that this interaction is humanitarian in nature and not intended to secure any political advantage.

We further assert that, for the Kiev regime, this process is politically motivated. They exploit it as a media tool to promote their interests, evidently avoiding genuine, result-oriented efforts in favour of endless international political performances.

For example, this year, the Russian Ministry of Defence submitted proposals to the Coordination Headquarters for the Treatment of Prisoners of War to transfer 935 Ukrainian prisoners of war to Ukraine as part of exchanges. How many of these individuals has the Kiev regime claimed? They agreed to accept only 279. You can do the math – the Kiev administration has disregarded the fate of nearly 700 individuals who could have been reunited with their families in Ukraine. Or perhaps the Kiev regime harbours an aversion towards them?

Meanwhile, they continue to visit Canada and travel globally, ostensibly to urge and negotiate international mediation efforts and, as Andrei Sibiga stated, patronage of Ukrainian citizens in Russia.

There exists a concept known as "political tourism," which refers to visits and business trips that yield no practical results. Its purpose remains unclear. The Kiev regime's political tourism is even more egregious, as it is predicated on the blood of its citizens, its servicemen – not those who have harboured hatred for years, nor the thugs ready to shoot indiscriminately, but those forcibly conscripted under the guise of saving Ukraine, thrust into these "meat assaults." They exhibit no concern for their fate. Simultaneously, to distract the mothers, wives, fathers, children, and prisoners of war in Ukraine, they proceed to the "stronghold" of Russophobic nationalism – Canada – and claim to have assembled a "team" of countries. Perhaps the representatives of these states, well-intentioned as they may be, are being misled to create the illusion of some effort being exerted.

There exists a straightforward path: if they wish to reclaim their POWs, all necessary channels are institutionalised and operational. They simply choose not to pursue it. Concurrently, they persistently demand the inclusion of nationalists and mercenaries in exchanges, against whom Russian law enforcement possesses ample evidence of serious crimes, including shooting civilians, robbery, and sexual assault (concerns about which the West typically voices, yet disregards in this instance).

We have heard both publicly and during these "vigils" in Montreal that Russia is allegedly refusing to include Ukrainian Marines in the exchange lists. This is categorically false. We are prepared to publish a list of 29 Ukrainian Marines returned by the Russian side during exchanges. Why is this information being concealed by the Kiev regime? This raises significant questions. We will indeed publish this list.

Moreover, Russia has repeatedly proposed to exchange a considerably larger number of Marines, notably from the 36th Separate Marine Brigade which surrendered in Mariupol in 2022. Their relatives in Ukraine are likely to be unaware that their loved ones, held as prisoners of war in Russia, have been proposed for exchange by the Russian side. The Kiev authorities simply withhold this information and deceive them. The Kiev regime exhibits no interest in the exchange and return of these citizens – its own servicemen.

We are aware that the command of the Ukrainian Defence Ministry routinely excludes servicemen from certain units of the Ukrainian armed forces from exchange lists, deeming them unworthy of exchange, traitors who abandoned their positions in defiance of orders and voluntarily surrendered, as well as those conscripted into territorial defence forces. They deliberately choose not to reclaim them.

This also pertains to those conscripted into the territorial defence forces. Notably, I wish to focus on the 36th Detached Marine Brigade once again. They participated in the combat operations in Mariupol in 2022 and indeed voluntarily surrendered at the Azovstal plant. However, this is just one example.

I propose that we undertake this work on behalf of Ukrainian journalists and their media outlets. It seems they are prohibited from discussing it. Therefore, it falls upon us to do so. Let us identify all the units deemed by the Kiev regime ineligible for return to Ukraine.

Military Unit 3041 (Chernobyl NPP protective force) refused to fulfil their mission, voluntarily laid down their arms, and surrendered in 2022. The Kiev regime does not wish to repatriate them. Ukrainian servicemen from the 102nd (conscripted from the Ivano-Frankovsk Region), 111th (from the Lugansk Region), 126th (from the Odessa Region), and 118th (from the Cherkassy Region) detached territorial defence brigades have been prisoners of war for over a year.

Their relatives should be aware that Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrei Sibiga travelled to Montreal at their expense. Meanwhile, he could have easily utilised the existing mechanisms from Kiev to resolve this issue. However, they remain indifferent to the plight of their citizens and they do not care about Ukrainian prisoners of war. Their priority is to reach Montreal and address their own concerns, perhaps to solicit more funds or "stash" their money at some accounts. Then they feign concern for Ukrainian prisoners of war, claiming they are eager to "cobble together" this very international coalition. This problem could be resolved immediately, but they choose not to. They disregard their conscripted citizens, forcibly sending them into these "meat assaults," tearing them from their families.

Under these circumstances, the Kiev regime seeks to maintain a genuine media blackout to justify all their actions. This is why they propagate "tall tales" on international platforms, within various international organisations, at specially convened roundtables and symposiums, asserting in official materials that Russia allegedly refuses to agree to exchanges.

Today, I have provided specific facts and figures. These are the individuals the Kiev regime has rejected. These are their citizens and servicemen. When you hear claims that Russia is unwilling to conduct exchanges and release their people, know that this is false. The figures and facts speak for themselves.

The Coordination Headquarters for the Treatment of Prisoners of War has, regrettably, become a mere tool in the hands of Ukrainian "politicians," the group entrenched on Bankovaya Street. Why have they turned a functional mechanism into a mere "noise-maker"? To avoid engaging in real exchanges (they have no need for these individuals) and to perpetually create the illusion of activity (such as the Montreal meeting), substituting genuine efforts with this international legal "claptrap," continually disseminating misinformation in Ukrainian society that the "international community will soon come to the rescue" and resolve the POW issue.

I wish to reiterate that Moscow has never abandoned this work and dialogue regarding prisoner exchanges. The authorities on our side and our appointed representatives are actively engaged. They have consistently worked in line with the objectives set by the country's leadership at the highest level. Our position remains unchanged and widely known, including in Ukraine. However, Ukrainian society must recognise how it is being deceived once again by the Kiev regime, Mr Zelensky, and the entire "cabal."

I observed that a few hours ago, head of Chechnya Ramzan Kadyrov disclosed that he had received over two thousand letters from residents of Ukraine, requesting him to rescind his earlier order not to take Ukrainian servicemen prisoner. Mr Kadyrov has officially announced that this order has been revoked, and those who wish to surrender to Russian forces will live.

However, the citizens of Ukraine must understand (when they write and send their appeals) that their own leaders are essentially leaving them to the mercy of fate. Even when the Russian Federation offers to exchange these individuals, they are rejected.

The people of Ukraine have been driven to such desperation that they are willing, using their personal data and feedback, to write appeals to constituent entities of the Russian Federation (notably to Ramzan Kadyrov) in an attempt to resolve the plight of their loved ones.

President of the Czech Republic Petr Pavel announced that he had legally authorised the dispatch of 60 individuals to Ukraine. This indicates that the President of the Czech Republic seemingly has no regard for his own citizens. From the Czech perspective, it appears these are 60 "dispensable" individuals. This is the reality of the situation. Subsequently, the Czech leadership and representatives of the Kiev regime will feign concern for the fate of prisoners of war on international platforms.

back to top

Answers to media questions:

Question: You mentioned that some prisoners of war are considered traitors by Kiev. Are these POWs willing to return, knowing the consequences they might face as traitors, even being shot?

Maria Zakharova: We cannot speak on behalf of each individual. I have cited the figures – approximately seven hundred individuals proposed for exchange were ignored by the Kiev regime which has shown no interest in considering or discussing them, let alone accepting them. The individuals proposed for exchange who have made their own decisions and requested this, are being denied their constitutional and legal rights by the Ukrainian "leaders," the Kiev regime. I believe it would be futile to discuss morality and justice in the context of Bankovaya Street, given the numerous stories and variations that have already emerged.

The existing mechanisms are under the scrutiny of our country's Defence Ministry and the Commissioner for Human Rights in Russia, Tatyana Moskalkova. We are responding to statements made by diplomatic and foreign policy missions. Since the "meeting" in Montreal, we have heard pronouncements from the foreign ministry heads of these countries. Accordingly, we address this information jamboree (for lack of a better term) through diplomatic channels and similarly from the Russian Foreign Ministry. This is not merely an event under a non-existent motto or slogan but is, in fact, a false flag operation. It is the complete opposite of reality.

There are Ukrainian servicemen whom our country has proposed for exchange, yet the Kiev regime has rejected them. Instead, they organise "meetings" worldwide, feigning the need to gather a "community" to pressure Russia and to "patronise" the Ukrainian prisoners of war on Russian soil.

I will not delve into specifics. They lost their conscience long ago and likely have no shame remaining. The international community, represented by the Western patrons of the Kiev regime, chooses to ignore their treatment of prisoners of war and their conditions. We uphold international humanitarian law concerning individuals classified as prisoners of war. They do not require "patronage." The Kiev regime should simply fulfil its obligations to its citizens – those who, in fact, placed their trust in it and were defenceless against these oppressors, who forcibly removed people, men, from their homes and apartments. You have all seen the hundreds, thousands of videos circulated globally. Yet, for some reason, the Western minority overlooks this. Simultaneously, they organise such "meetings" to express sympathy for the Kiev regime and concoct tall tales about how to "patronise" Ukrainian servicemen who are Russian prisoners of war.

back to top

Question: Am I correct in understanding that there have been no requests from the countries mentioned by the Ukrainian Foreign Minister to act as patrons of Ukrainian citizens?

Maria Zakharova: I am not aware of any such requests.

Today, the Chair of the Federation Council Committee on Foreign Affairs, Grigory Karasin, stated that we remain open to dialogue.

Furthermore, I would like to add that if there is an inclination on anyone's part to mediate, it would be prudent for these mediators to approach the Kiev regime with the facts we have presented today.

I wish to reiterate that we have never declined any offers of good offices. We are always appreciative of those who show compassion on the battlefield. Such high ideals are commendable, especially when individuals are not compelled to "head to the battlefield" in the words of the former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, but when instead people speak of the necessity and existence of a humanitarian dimension, of peace, and of political and diplomatic means of resolving conflicts. We have consistently valued such efforts and intentions.

However, I would like to emphasise that mediation is required to persuade the Kiev regime to reclaim their citizens, whom it currently rejects. I have provided the specific brigades, their names, and their numbers. This is more than a mere statement criticising or disavowing the comments of Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrei Sibiga. These are concrete facts that Ukrainian society needs to engage with.

If mediation is actually necessary, it should occur between the Kiev regime and the Ukrainian citizens. This is where there is a total lack of mutual understanding. People in Ukraine have been deceived for years, first through depleting their forces and mobilising Ukrainian men, lowering military draft age, sending people to death, and then refusing to accept those who surrendered or were taken captive, not revealing the truth to people, and pretending like they care. Therefore, they should travel to Montreal – this is where international mediation is necessary for the Kiev regime to finally fulfill its constitutional obligations to the Ukrainian people.

We have observed “mediators” in Ukraine’s internal political scene, those who arrived from abroad, on multiple occasions. All “Maidans” took place with their involvement. Foreign ministers from various countries, particularly Western ones, assumed the role of mediators between the Ukrainian people and their government, leadership, and the ruling elite.

This is a glaring example. Let them establish contact between the forcibly mobilised citizens of Ukraine and the Kiev regime, and make attempts to explain the government’s stance to the Ukrainians.

We have not heard any such statements or intentions from foreign countries; our only source of information comes from social media posts by Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrey Sibiga.

We, for our part, have provided specific figures. The Kiev regime should clarify its position not only to the international community, since it has set this as a task, but also to its own citizens.

back to top

Question: While addressing a UN Security Council meeting, Permanent Representative of Russia to the UN Vasily Nebenzya said that 5.3 million refugees moved from Ukraine to Russia during the first year of the special military operation alone. Moreover, as those people themselves told our publication, many of them relocate to Russia after a certain period of living in the EU countries. Why do you think Ukrainian citizens prefer Russia, despite the special military operation?

Maria Zakharova: The point is that Ukraine, through the NATO interference, has literally been torn apart by its own internal affairs which have pitted groups of Ukrainian society against each other. This process has been ongoing for years. These are artificially provoked and staged “Maidans” that grew into actual political actions led by the US secretaries of state, the foreign ministers of Germany, Poland and France, as well as the ambassadors of NATO countries. They set people against each other, those who were seeking friendly, fraternal and historical relations with their neighbours, including Russia and other nations. And still, they did not refuse to integrate into the pan-European space and interact with other regions of the world. These people were pitted against those who believed that Ukraine should solely be embraced by the Western community. This was done through intentional and deliberate efforts, including through disseminating fake information. As a result, people no longer felt at home in Ukraine, realising that they would find not simply a temporary refuge but their true home in Russia, which protected their rights.

You mentioned [this occurring since] the start of the special military operation, citing Permanent Representative of Russia to the UN Vasily Nebenzya. To remind, since the beginning of the special military operation, a vast number of people have sought our protection and support, or have relocated here as they realised that their real Motherland is Russia, and not the country that has mistreated them for years while pretending to be their homeland.

Since 2014, millions of people have sought Russia’s protection. They arrived and stayed here, received citizenship, made efforts to improve their lives, and returned to Ukraine to wait it out, believing everything would work out. But they were still aware that they were not welcome there but erased and disregarded.

We sent vast amounts of humanitarian aid. Remember the way we were ridiculed when first vans with humanitarian aid arrived in Ukraine? Western media claimed that was the beginning of the invasion; they were talking nonsense about “transferring weapons” while we were sending textbooks, medications and power generators for people there to keep warm. Russia was protecting them, delivering food and water, providing jobs and spots in kindergartens and schools, as well as the entire social package, rights, and opportunities. As for Western countries, things happened just like in a renowned fable by Ivan Krylov – with the summer over, they started deporting Ukrainian citizens and discontinuing social support programmes and priority employment. Western Europe had nothing more to offer to Ukrainian citizens there. Certain European countries refused to accept them at all.

All this was needed in order to inflict a ‘strategic defeat’ on Russia: they used Ukraine and its citizens as a tool, showing them at rallies, using them as protesters near Russian embassies, setting them against our compatriots, and destabilising the work of businesses, companies and organisations that were oriented towards Russian markets. They needed Ukrainian citizens, including as a free labour force. Those who fit in and more or less met the qualification requirements stayed there, while the rest are being driven out from Western Europe.  

We will not talk about children; this is a separate issue as to what happened to kids who disappeared and where they were. I believe that over these past years, we have supported our motto “We don’t abandon our own” through practical steps and actions, no matter what it cost us.

back to top

Question: Reports have emerged saying that Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski proposed that Ukraine buy weapons from Poland on credit, while previously they were supplied for free. What do you think is behind such a cooling trend in relations between Poland and Ukraine now?

Maria Zakharova: Do you think that everything else provided to Ukraine was done for free? Ukraine has been in bondage for decades, paying with its mineral wealth, the land that is given over for growing GMO foods, with all kinds of experiments conducted and soil exported, and finally, with its citizens.

Remember the Generalplan Ost developed in the Third Reich: Slavs were supposed either to be used for slave labour or exterminated if they did not fit. Isn’t it what the West is doing with the Ukrainians now? Those who are fit to provide services to Western Europe, Canada and the US will be kept, while the “unsuitable” (as NATO views them) will be disposed of. These are the similar ideas that emerged 80 years ago.

Moreover, future generations will have to pay for the West’s crimes with their money and particularly with their resources (they will actually have no money). Ukraine used to be a rich and free country washed by seas, with amazing arable lands and vast opportunities for everything such as agriculture and livestock farming. Ukraine was always considered a breadbasket, a land that boasted natural resources. Now all this has already been put under control, having been sold directly to Western transnational companies or through loans, as they view it in the West, putting the country into bondage for centuries with its people lacking the right to their own resources.

back to top

Question: Additionally, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine Andrey Sibiga stated that Moscow allegedly denies international observers and medical personnel access to prisoners of war and civilian hostages. How can you comment on this?

Maria Zakharova: This is the same very lie. This is why he had to leave for Montreal. He had to make a statement somehow and come with something. They collected fake information, drafted guidelines, and started telling stories. I am citing real figures and names of brigades, from which Ukrainian servicemen were taken prisoners – those who gave up and were surrounded. They all were taken [captive] in a different way.

Are they saying they are unable to monitor them via international observers? They even refuse to take them and listen to them. They are either interested in cutthroats and monsters who can be engaged in other directions simultaneously, or foreign mercenaries for which the westerners pay to them via these loans. They have to report to the West somehow for mercenaries. Who will Zelensky report to for Ukrainian citizens who were pulled away from their wives, mothers and children? He told them lies on numerous occasions, and treats them like a doormat.

This is why this is an absolute lie. We have the commissioner for human rights, who is in touch with her Ukrainian counterpart. When allowed, the latter starts to fulfil his humanitarian functions, but then the situation “changes”. They do not care about the people; they are expendables for them. This is obvious.

back to top

Question: There is someone behind the decision not to bring back prisoners of war like in the case with the Gaza Strip hostages. Do you think the United States might be behind this? Because they do not care about them just like about the prisoners in the Gaza Strip, where the war is ongoing and people being killed.  

Maria Zakharova: Which independence of the Kiev regime can we talk about? They get out of control only when they need money or something else, resorting to the topic of nuclear weapons, for instance. Vladimir Zelensky demanded that he be provided with a nuclear bomb otherwise they will assemble it themselves. He was given $50 billion in exchange. Only in this case can we talk about them getting out of their western sponsors’ control.

As for other issues, the Ukrainian regime is totally dependent on western decisions; they do not belong to themselves. There have never been any precedents when the government prohibited itself from any communication with the other party with regard to peace talks or holding any talks at all – because no state or state officials tie their own hands with their nation’s destiny at stake. Then it became clear that, first, the British insisted on having no talks; then the Americans made them sign a corresponding executive order. This is why they are totally under the US and Anglo-Saxon influence. 

back to top

Question: Can you cite the latest number of prisoners of war Russia and Ukraine have?

Maria Zakharova: These figures are within the competence of our Ministry of Defence. I have provided them to you. They were declared for an exchange. I cited a specific figure which Russia was ready to provide to Ukraine for a swap. I hope you will have enough courage to write about this.

Let me repeat once again in case you failed to record. This is important. A total of 935 Ukrainian prisoners of war were declared for a swap, only 279 were taken. If you, as Western journalists and human rights activists, are concerned about the destiny of Ukrainian citizens then ask the Kiev regime and their foreign and other ministers as well as diplomats as to why they abandoned 700 servicemen.

I see you smiling. I hope this is not a grin and you genuinely care about this subject.

back to top

Question: I would like you to clarify whether the swap of servicemen and the swap of civilians differ from each other or negotiations are held only with regard to prisoners of war?

Maria Zakharova: I have never heard of any detentions of civilians. If you imply civilians who face criminal charges then this is not about the detention of civilians but rather about crime and punishment.

As regards prisoners of war, I have already mentioned mechanisms that exist between Russia’s Ministry of Defence and the corresponding agency under Ukraine’s Ministry of Defence. Issues dealing with civilians are in the competence of the commissioner for human rights. There might be different situations. There is a commissioner for children’s rights, who is also in touch with the Ukrainian party, international officials and the UN with regard to children, search for them, bringing them back to parents, and measures to resolve social issues. We have already held three briefings involving Russian Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova (1, 2, 3).  I believe we have had enough questions for another briefing; I think we can think about holding it.

For each direction there are commissioners as well as mechanisms to resolve all of these issues.

Question: The thing is that there are no Russian civilians, only prisoners of war in Ukraine, whilst you have more civilians than prisoners of war here.

Maria Zakharova: Which civilians are you referring to? Are there a lot of Ukrainian civilians in Russia? What do you mean?

Question: Those living in new regions, or occupied territories.

Maria Zakharova: We have regions of the Russian Federation. You can call them “new”, as you wish. We call them our regions.

Who are you talking about? Those who are facing criminal charges against or even sentenced as involved in criminal cases, do you refer to these people as civilians?

Question: Yes.

Maria Zakharova: Commissioners for human rights are taking care of their destinies. But do not say that they are under detention; they are in custody as part of criminal or administrative proceedings. As for the Kursk Region residents, we can say that they are being detained by representatives of the Kiev regime in regions which the latter has occupied by force, without due process of law.

This is not the case with Ukrainian civilians in our territories.

back to top

Question: Several proceedings have been made close court in Rostov-on-Don recently following statements made by Dmitry Gordon. If these proceedings remained open, would it have been easier to find new terms for their swap?

Maria Zakharova: Does the United States hold some proceedings behind closed doors? We also do sometimes. This is normal, with every country having its own procedures. You have proceedings held behind closed doors, so do we. Any country has such proceedings.

What we speak about now is that the Kiev regime does not bring back their civilians declared for a swap, let alone show any interest in their fate. You have mentioned holding the proceedings behind closed doors, which otherwise could be helpful somehow. Almost 700 people have been declared. Bring them back. But they do not do this. What are you talking about? Why are you steering the conversation away from the subject matter? Almost 700 Ukrainian prisoners of war could be brought back to Ukraine. What does this have to do with closed or open court? What can be more open or closed? What do you want [me to say]? Their names?

Question: This is the only chance to see them. Their lawyers claim they have no access to certain Ukrainian defendants.

Maria Zakharova: I have just said that some 700 people were ready to be brought back to Ukraine. Ukrainian authorities do not take them.

This is why we are having this conversation with you today, to let you know about this so that you could ask this question to the lawyers you have been referring to or Ukrainian representatives you are communicating with. Why don’t they take them back?

It is seemingly much more interesting to ask questions, give news conferences and interviews telling about Russia conducting trials behind closed doors and the destiny of Ukrainian citizens becoming unknown.

Here we have seven hundred people that we provided for a swap to the Ukrainian party. Nobody is taking interest in their destiny, calling them different names. Representatives of the Kiev regime are unwilling to bring them back to their motherland.

I totally understand why you are asking this question. You have a right to it. And I have a right to say that by asking such questions you are steering the situation away from the urgent problem that can be resolved – not through Montreal, but between authorised structures and officials of two countries. Does the Kiev regime need international mediation? We have never declined this. But there are specific destinies of a large number of people that the Kiev regime should not disown. These are their civilians; most of them were mobilised rather than recruited. That’s the point. I understand that it is uncomfortable to learn about it, but it is something to be confronted.

back to top