Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, June 4, 2025
- Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming meeting with Foreign Minister of the Republic of Abkhazia Oleg Bartsits
- Foreign Minister of the Republic of Belarus Maxim Ryzhenkov’s upcoming visit to the Russian Federation
- Terrorist Nature of the Kiev Regime
- Ukraine crisis
- Accusations concerning Russia’s involvement in child abductions
- Serbian military deliveries to the Kiev regime
- Zapad 2025 Russian-Belarusian military exercise
- Swedish municipal authorities plan to expropriate the Russian Orthodox community’s church in Västerås
- Sponsoring an exploratory expedition to the area of the Khalkhin Gol battle
- Astana opening the Alley of Eternal Friendship of Kazakhstan and Russia
- Creating a section dedicated to the Great Victory on the Foreign Ministry’s website
- Russian Language Day
- The Global Digital Forum
- Certain statements by the Prime Minister of Slovakia
- The decolonisation of French Polynesia
- The involvement of the collective West in the terrorist activities of the Kiev regime
- Failure to extend a Russian journalist’s residence permit by German authorities
- Changes in the hiring of Russian citizens by foreign diplomatic missions
- Statements by European politicians regarding the Nord Stream pipelines
- Keir Starmer’s belligerent rhetoric
- Prospects for a trilateral summit between the leaders of Russia, the United States and Ukraine
- The launch of state monitoring of damage caused to Russia by foreign states and organisations
- The role of the UN in the Ukraine crisis
- The EU’s strategic document regarding the Black Sea region
- The Kiev regime’s attempts to derail the talks
- The death of the great composer Yevgeny Doga
- The anti-Russia statements by the Moldovan Foreign Ministry
- Russia-China cooperation in filmmaking
- US-China trade relations
- European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen receives the Charlemagne Prize
- The outcome of the presidential election in Poland
- The results of the second round of talks in Istanbul
- The election of Annalena Baerbock as President of the 80th UN General Assembly Session
- Russia’s role in Central Asia
- Russian-Finnish relations
- The settlement of the Iranian nuclear issue
- The effectiveness of Russia’s information work
Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming meeting with Foreign Minister of the Republic of Abkhazia Oleg Bartsits
On June 6, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will hold talks in Moscow with Foreign Minister of the Republic of Abkhazia Oleg Bartsits, who will be making his first working visit since his appointment in April.
The ministers will discuss a broad range of bilateral issues reflecting the allied nature of relations between the two countries and review regional and international developments focusing on security cooperation, the implementation of joint socioeconomic initiatives, and efforts to strengthen the Republic of Abkhazia’s foreign policy stance.
At the invitation of Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Belarus Maxim Ryzhenkov will pay an official visit to Moscow on June 9-10. The foreign ministers will review a broad range of bilateral and international priorities and discuss practical aspects of interaction between the foreign ministries of Russia and Belarus, including preparations for a joint session of the foreign ministries in St Petersburg in the fourth quarter. The ministers will review the status of the implementation of the 2024-2026 Programme for Coordinated Actions in Foreign Policy of the member states of the Treaty on the Creation of the Union State and the Plan for Inter-Ministerial Consultations for this year.
The parties will place great emphasis on matters of single and indivisible security in Eurasia, discuss preparations for the 3rd Minsk Conference on Eurasian Security, and sign a joint petition to foreign ministers of Eurasian countries concerning the promotion of the Eurasian Charter of Diversity and Multipolarity in the 21st Century.
They will also discuss diplomatic support for integration processes within the Union State and interstate cooperation at the CIS, the EAEU, the CSTO, the SCO, and BRICS with constructively-minded countries of the Global South and Global East, as well as approaches to managing relations with unfriendly countries and associations.
The ministers will exchange views on the settlement in Ukraine in the context of ongoing Russian-Ukrainian direct talks, among other avenues.
The programme of the Belarusian minister’s visit also includes a Q&A with Russian media outlets, a speech before Russian and Belarusian students at leading Moscow universities, laying wreaths at war memorials in Alexandrovsky Garden, and visiting one of Moscow’s war museums.
Terrorist Nature of the Kiev Regime
The Kiev regime and its EU Western sponsors have exerted considerable effort to derail another round of negotiations in Istanbul, thereby sabotaging the nascent peace process. They have resorted to their favoured terrorist methods.
On May 31 this year, at 10:50 pm, an automobile bridge was blown up on the Vygonichi-Pilshino railway section in the Bryansk Region as a passenger train travelling from Klimovo to Moscow passed beneath it. We must recall that children’s holidays had just begun. Who, if not the Kiev regime, would have known this?
As a result of the bridge collapsing onto the train, seven people were killed. Medical assistance is being provided to 118 injured individuals, including four children. Three of the children, among them a four-month-old infant, are in serious condition. Tragically, among the deceased are the mother of two wounded children and the train’s driver, Pavel Mishin, who managed to brake in time, thereby saving the lives of many passengers. We extend our deepest condolences to the families and loved ones of the victims and wish the injured a swift recovery.
On June 1 – let us note, International Children’s Day – at approximately 3 am, a railway bridge in the Zheleznogorsk District of the Kursk Region was blown up, causing a passing freight train (the locomotive and three carriages) to collapse onto the road below. The driver and his two assistants were injured.
Also on June 1, in the Bryansk Region, on the Unecha-Zhecha section, the railway track was blown up as a track-measuring train passed over it. Fortunately, there were no casualties, and the train sustained no damage.
The Main Investigative Directorate of the Russian Investigative Committee has classified the explosions targeting railway sections and bridge structures in the Bryansk and Kursk Regions between May 31 and June 1 – which caused the derailment of passenger, freight, and diagnostic trains – as terrorist acts. According to the Investigative Committee’s findings, the perpetrators acted on the orders of the Kiev regime.
Preliminary investigative measures have been carried out, during which fragments of explosive devices and other material evidence were seized. Witnesses, victims, and employees of Russian Railways have been questioned.
The reaction of the Ukrainian Nazis to these events was predictable as – monstrous gloating. This once again underscores the misanthropic essence of the Kiev junta. The terrorists, acting on the orders of the Vladimir Zelensky regime and guided by their perverse logic, planned everything so that their attacks would strike hundreds of civilians, including many children. They could not have been unaware that, as is traditional in our countries, children typically travel with their parents to Moscow or to visit relatives during the holidays.
There is no doubt that the organisers and perpetrators of these crimes will be identified and held criminally accountable.
On June 2, the second round of direct bilateral talks with Ukraine was held in Istanbul; the talks were resumed at Russia’s initiative.
As agreed on May 16, the Russian side presented the Ukrainian delegation with a detailed two-part memorandum outlining our vision of ways to achieve long-term peace and a possible full-fledged ceasefire. Kiev took a break to consider that document’s provisions. In turn, we received a draft of the Ukrainian version, which will also be studied in detail.
The results of this round have been announced. As a gesture of goodwill (I emphasise this again), the Russian side will hand over to Ukraine 6,000 bodies of fallen Ukrainian soldiers. This process will begin in the near future. Kiev was also asked to consider the possibility of brief pauses, also applying to drone attacks, for two or three days in different sections of the front to retrieve the bodies.
An agreement was reached on the exchange of all seriously ill and seriously wounded prisoners of war. The lists for such exchanges will be compiled on the basis of conclusions of permanent medical commissions that both parties will establish, without waiting for major political decisions. Such exchanges will take place regularly and routinely. The sides also agreed on the exchange of all young POWs under 25. That said, the total number of detainees to be exchanged under all agreements will be “capped” at no less than 1,000 on each side.
Our delegation received a list of 339 Ukrainian children who have lost contact with their parents or legal representatives due to various circumstances. The Russian side intends to thoroughly review their cases.
As we can see, Ukraine has failed to provide any proof confirming the “20,000 abducted children,” something the Kiev regime previously alleged. In fact, they insisted on this at every level. Now, however, Ukraine has not only failed to confirm its earlier claims. They have not even tried to provide documents to back this figure, 20,000. They have not presented any specific cases, or lists of those children, or any details on their parents or legal representatives looking for them. Why has the Kiev regime failed to provide any evidence when it had several years to do this? Because those were lies, just like about Bucha.
Moreover, as we have repeatedly stated, none of the children have been “abducted,” as Bankovaya Street claimed. Russia has been rescuing children from under fire, evacuating them from areas of active hostilities to safe places. Above all, I am referring to orphans and minors who lack parental care or legal representation.
Our country is making every effort to reunite these children with their families. This process is advancing steadily. According to Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova, as of today, 101 minors from 81 families have been reunited with their parents or blood relatives living in Ukraine or in third countries. Another 22 children from 15 families have returned to Russia from Ukraine.
The Russian side intends to take a responsible approach to fulfilling all the agreements reached.
No sooner had the second round of direct Russian-Ukrainian negotiations concluded in Istanbul than the occupants of Bankovaya Street commenced their commentary, underscoring what they portrayed as Russia’s supposed “lack of commitment to peace.” It was evident that the outcomes attained had profoundly frustrated certain figures in Kiev. The tone was set by Vladimir Zelensky, who resorted to offensive, outright vulgar remarks directed at our delegation – as is his custom. Just as before, he found the Russian delegation unsatisfactory. Yet the proposals put forward by our delegates met their approval. This, however, taught them nothing. And so, once again, he descended into hysterics over the Russian delegation.
These outbursts were interspersed with brazen threats to perpetrate further terrorist attacks against Russia. Our steadfast yet constructive position visibly unsettled the head of the Ukrainian Presidential Office, Andrey Yermak, who declared – and I quote verbatim: “The Russians are doing everything to avoid a ceasefire and prolong the war. New sanctions are now crucial. Rationality is not Russia’s forte.” With this mindset, he departed yesterday, June 3, 2025, for the United States, where he will endeavour to persuade the administration of President Donald Trump to adopt an even harsher approach towards Russia. This once again serves as unequivocal proof that Kiev remains entrenched in extreme aggression and shows no inclination towards sober decision-making.
I would remind the denizens of Bankovaya Street and their foreign handlers of the futility of escalating pressure on our country. We will respond to such provocations in kind. No one will be permitted to address us from a “position of strength,” let alone in the language of ultimatums. If Kiev believes otherwise, then it must be said that a clear-eyed assessment of reality and responsibility for the future of their country – or rather, what remains of it due to the Kiev regime’s policies – are not traits of the Ukrainian Banderite clique.
On June 3, the Investigative Committee of Russia classified the monstrous crimes – the blowing of the railway bridges in the Bryansk Region (May 31, 2025) and the Kursk Region (June 1, 2025) – as acts of terrorism. This is their essence. They accuse us of being “irrational,” but we will define them with precision: they are terrorists.
Official spokesperson of the Investigative Committee Svetlana Petrenko noted that “it is evident the terrorists, acting on the orders of the Kiev regime, meticulously planned their attacks to maximise civilian casualties.” This is their true nature.
The Investigative Committee, with the support of the Federal Security Service and the Russian Interior Ministry, continues its investigation. Both the perpetrators and the orchestrators of these attacks will be identified and held accountable.
Throughout the past week, civilians and infrastructure across multiple Russian regions remained in the crosshairs of Ukrainian militants.
On May 28-29, debris from Ukrainian UAVs damaged three residential buildings in Chekhov, Moscow Region, and a high-rise in southwest Moscow.
On May 28, in the village of Zvannoye, Kursk Region, a 36-year-old local resident was killed by the detonation of an explosive device left in a bag on a roadside. On May 29, in the town of Korenevo, enemy strikes destroyed a hospital’s emergency ward. Where are all these bleeding-heart international organisations, so vocal about human rights, universal values, and child welfare? Silence.
In the early hours of May 30, Kursk came under a mass UAV attack, leaving a 27-year-old driver wounded. On May 31, residential buildings in Rylsk and the Lgov District were struck by Ukrainian drones, injuring 14 civilians, including four children.
On June 1, a woman was killed and a 12-year-old girl riding a bicycle was wounded when a Ukrainian Nazi artillery shell hit a residential building in the Proletarsky village, Belgorod Region. Since May 27, at least 22 civilians have been injured in the region.
On May 30, the Banderites targeted civilians in Novodruzhesk, LPR, with a drone, injuring three elderly women. On May 31, as a result of shelling in Pervomaysk, one individual was injured and a bus was damaged. In Kremennaya, two civilians were injured by drone strikes. On June 1, Krasnodon was attacked with Storm Shadow/ SCALP missiles damaging residential buildings, social facilities, and industrial premises.
At least three civilians have been injured in DPR settlements as a result of shelling and drone attacks by Ukrainian Nazis since May 27.
The Kherson region was under constant Ukrainian attack. On the night of 27, an 85-year-old woman was injured, and the building of the central district hospital and an ambulance were damaged in an UAV attack on Alyoshki, while a local resident was injured on May 28. On May 29, two civilians were killed in an attack on Novaya Zburyevka village, and an ambulance that arrived at the site was shelled once more. Thankfully, the medics were not hurt. On June 1, two civilians were wounded when the enemy shelled Kherson villages.
On June 2, as a result of a massive attack by UAVs on energy facilities in the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, more than 700,000 Russians were temporarily left without electricity.
On the same day, UAVs hit civilian cars in the Bryansk Region, injuring two.
Like 80 years ago during the Great Patriotic War, the Kursk Region once again finds itself confronting the brown plague, this time in its modern Ukrainian manifestation. However, “Ukrainian” here is not used in its genuine, historical sense, but rather in the way it once referred to collaborationist elements – now compounded by extremist ideology. Residents of the Kursk Region have suffered appalling cruelty at the hands of Vladimir Zelensky’s neo-Nazi regime and foreign militants. The Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation has established that 313 individuals were killed and 794 injured as a result of their actions, including 26 children. According to local authorities, the whereabouts of approximately 576 residents of the Kursk region, including four children, remain unknown. Over 54,000 were recognized as victims of the invasion by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. The Ukrainian side continues to hold 34 Kursk residents who were forcibly taken. Testimonies from those previously abducted and subsequently returned through prisoner exchanges indicate that they were treated as prisoners of war, despite being civilians. These individuals were subjected to physical abuse, humiliation, threats of execution, and in some cases, placed in pre-trial detention. Why? Their only “crime” was being civilians. There will be justice. Accountability is being pursued in accordance with the law, as is already taking place.
Russian courts continue passing sentences to Ukrainian neo-Nazis and mercenaries for war crimes among others.
The following militants of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were sentenced in person to long terms of imprisonment: Roman Bura (16 years), Sergei Palaida (15 years), Alexander Maslinkov (16 years), Vadim Razgon (15 years), Vitaly Solodukha (16 years), Dmitry Sankevich (15 years), Nikolai Popovich (16 years), Valery Meshchersky (17 years), Dmitry Muntyan (16 years), Maxim Levchenko (16 years), Vladimir Nikolenko (16 years) for using weapons against noncombatants and Russian military personnel and obstructing the evacuation of the civilian population in the Kursk Region.
Azov soldier Dmitry Kucheryavy, who, together with his fellow soldiers, carried out a mortar shelling of Berdyanskoye village, DPR, in March 2022, was sentenced to 29 years and 4 months in prison.
British and Swedish mercenaries, Gary Bonini and Jonathan Quantz, who fought on the side of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, were sentenced in absentia to 14 years in prison. Both have been placed on the international wanted list.
The investigation has established the identities of the Ukrainian Armed Forces commanders involved in the HIMARS missile strike at civilian targets in Lgov on May 22, which wounded 16 civilians, including two minors. They are Rostislav Karpusha, commander of the 19th Missile Brigade “Saint Barbara,” and his subordinate division commanders Vadim Smirnov and Vladimir Kersan. Earlier, it was also established that Karpusha was involved in the missile attack against a boarding school in Sudzha on February 1.
Russian investigative authorities will continue to collect evidence to bring Ukrainian Nazis and foreign mercenaries to account for war and other crimes.
Notwithstanding the obvious terrorist nature of the Kiev regime, its European sponsors continue to encourage it to keep escalating the conflict, seeking out more and more resources for this purpose.
On May 27, the EU Council approved establishing a €150 billion fund entitled Security Action for Europe aimed at making urgent and large-scale investments in the European and Ukrainian military-industrial complex.
On May 26, the Dutch Ministry of Defense announced the transfer of the last promised shipment of F-16 fighters (24 aircraft) to Kiev.
On May 28, following Berlin meetings between the defense ministers of Ukraine and Germany, another round of military aid to the Kiev regime, amounting to approximately €5 billion, was announced to have been approved. These funds will be spent on financing the production of long-range weapons by the Ukrainian military-industrial complex, the supply of IRIS-T air defence systems and missiles for them (worth more than €2 billion), ammunition, and so on.
Just a few years ago, Berlin, Germany – the Germans – imported energy resources from Russia, buying them at a fair price. The arrangement benefited everyone, enabling the economy to grow, to advance research, upgrade industry, promote economic and social progress, develop education, science, culture and the arts – everything. Look where preaching peace with a clenched fist has led them now – the German economy is collapsing around unsuspecting Germans, and the prospects for their industry, science and production are obscure, to put it mildly. Business is fleeing Germany. On the other hand, official Berlin has new friends, the terrorists from Bankovaya Street.
In turn, Chancellor Friedrich Merz volunteered Germany’s funds to finance Ukraine’s continued access to the Starlink satellite system, as well as the purchase of long-range weapons systems made in Ukraine. He also reiterated the absence of range restrictions on weapons delivered to Kiev. According to him, this is the only way Ukraine can defend itself – by striking military targets outside its own territory. We know from experience how Vladimir Zelensky’s terrorist gang is “defending” itself by perpetrating almost daily UAV raids on residential areas and civilian facilities in Russia.
However, the unrestrained flooding of the Armed Forces of Ukraine with weapons has a flip side – and a rather gruesome side for the Kiev regime and its sponsors. There is increasing evidence that many of those weapons have vanished without a trace. In particular, the Americans have information about the embezzlement of $12 billion worth of financial assistance provided to Ukraine by Washington. According to them, about 30 percent of the weapons and military equipment sent to the Kiev regime never reached the armed forces, while a significant part of the missing weapons ended up in the hands of international criminal and extremist groups.
Amid Bankovaya’s scrambling attempts to replenish the army’s dwindling reserves, their campaign to recruit “volunteers” younger than the current mobilisation age (this is what they called it) has actually failed. According to deputy head of Ukraine’s presidential office, Pavel Palisa, only 500 individuals have signed up with military enlistment offices over the two months since the government started offering special contracts to people aged 18 to 24. This means young Ukrainians are not at all eager to die for this junta.
Do you know why? One of the reasons is that they know they will be disregarded. They do not matter, alive or dead. What did Vladimir Zelensky say when the Kiev regime was again offered to take back its citizens? Do you remember how they squirmed and slithered, and rejected the very fact that Russia offered them to take back Ukrainian citizens? And now what? What did Vladimir Zelensky say when it was announced that Russia was ready to hand over 6,000 bodies of Ukrainian servicemen to the Kiev regime? He disowned them. Now it is clear to everyone that these Ukrainians do not matter to Bankovaya, alive or dead.
Now, to patch up the holes, the Zelensky regime has imposed restrictions on border crossing. Indeed, they are prepared to use every means to force people to love their homeland.
Who is not allowed to leave Ukraine now? In particular, a pretty large group of 16-year-old university dropouts who lose their deferment from military service when they quit their degree programmes. What is this? This is a true genocide of the citizens of Ukraine on the part of Vladimir Zelensky and his gang. These young Ukrainians, along with recent school-leavers, are at risk of being summoned to the enlistment offices as soon as this autumn.
Meanwhile, the number of people fleeing from the Armed Forces of Ukraine has increased exponentially. According to various estimates, more than 25,000 Ukrainian military service members deserted from January to May alone, compared to 35,000 in the entire year of 2024.
Desertion from the armed forces and mass emigration have become commonplace for Ukraine. According to Ukraine’s Ministry of Economy, 104,000 individuals have fled abroad since the beginning of 2025, while between 600,000 and 1 million citizens of working age have done so over the past three years. The actual figures may indeed be even higher; nonetheless, we rely on verified data. Given Ukraine’s mounting battlefield losses, the country is unmistakably undergoing depopulation.
Ukraine’s war on its own history is descending into increasingly grotesque forms. As you are aware, Victory Day has already been abolished. Nearly all residential areas and streets bearing any connection to Russia have been renamed. Monuments testifying to our shared past have been demolished. A campaign has been launched against Alexander Pushkin (as if that were inevitable). Now, even Children’s Day has been targeted. On May 30 this year, Vladimir Zelensky issued an executive order shifting its observance from June 1 to November 20.
Allow me to elucidate the underlying motive. June 1 is the date on which this occasion is marked in Russia, Belarus, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, China, Vietnam, Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, and several other states. Western European nations predominantly observe Universal Children’s Day on November 20, the date on which the UN General Assembly adopted the Declaration of the Rights of the Child in 1959 and the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1989.
Through these actions, Kiev seeks to artificially construct a new reality in which Ukraine shares no ties with Russia but allegedly enjoys deep and enduring bonds with the West.
In truth, the specific date of observance is irrelevant. What matters is approaching this occasion with tangible achievements – genuinely safeguarding children’s welfare, defending their rights and interests, rather than exploiting the subject for political theatre, as representatives of the Kiev regime habitually do in a display of profound moral derangement at various international forums. The true measure of Kiev’s concern for children is starkly illustrated by the Alley of Angels in Donetsk – a harrowing memorial to the infants and adolescents brutally murdered by Ukrainian Nazis since 2014, when the Bankovaya Street clique attempted to crush Donbass by force. They failed, as they were bound to. Some captured Ukrainian militants have already fallen to their knees before this memorial, weeping and begging forgiveness from the memory of their innocent victims.
All of the aforementioned reaffirms the necessity of the special military operation to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine, and eliminate threats emanating from its territory. As the Russian leadership has repeatedly stated, all objectives will be fulfilled.
Accusations concerning Russia’s involvement in child abductions
The transfer by representatives of the Kiev regime of a list of 339 Ukrainian children who, as was claimed, had lost contact with their parents, to members of the Russian interagency delegation was widely covered following the talks in Istanbul.
Let’s take a really close look at these developments. Please note the outstanding comments made by Vladimir Medinsky. I would like to follow what he said up with numbers, facts, and quotes.
As you may recall, earlier Ukraine released a figure of 20,000 minors. You may think this figure was posted on social media or mentioned during a talk show. No, it was made public by Verkhovnaya Rada Commissioner for Human Rights Dmitry Lubinets on October 2, 2024. He also noted that “another 1.5 million children may be deported.”
The 20,000 figure became the centre piece of Ukrainian propaganda. It was occasionally adjusted in an effort to, apparently, improve credibility. Representative of the Kiev regime at the OSCE Yury Vitrenko mentioned 19,546 Ukrainian children. Most importantly, this narrative was successfully sold to the West. Accurate numbers didn’t matter, so the 20,000 figure was adopted as an actual figure. By the way, this figure can be found in the European Parliament resolution On the return of Ukrainian children forcibly transferred and deported by Russia (2025/2691(RSP)), approved (you won’t believe it) on May 8, 2025. Go ahead and read it yourself to see their lies.
The second point is clearly part of Kiev’s PR strategy. Kiev used the “child abduction” narrative to push illegitimate rulings on arrest warrants for our country’s high-ranking officials through the so-called International Criminal Court. This discredited the ICC even more, but also as evidence of the Kiev regime’s lies.
This narrative has been lingering for quite a while. They are fomenting the children’s issue on all platforms. They never stopped talking about thousands of abducted children. Not once have they presented any evidence or documents.
Still, the West fell for this story hook, line and sinker. As it keeps tirelessly working on the creation of another pseudo-justice body - a Special Tribunal - the Council of Europe even appointed former Icelandic official Thordis Gisladottir as the Council of Europe’s commissioner (imagine that) for Ukrainian children. Of course, with 20,000 Ukrainian children out there, the Council of Europe’s special representative must apply herself.
The Kiev regime has had plenty of opportunities over this time (they announced this three years ago, and finished counting by 2024), to hand over some lists and names, or indicate otherwise what exactly they had in mind, or make available a list of minors through intermediaries that are actively involved in various humanitarian processes. They could have handed over this information directly through any Ukrainian embassy in any country, or through an international organisation. But they failed to do any of that.
However, representatives of the Kiev administration made this story public during the Istanbul talks and through all media, including Western media, thus publicly demonstrating their “concern for children,” who they absolutely don’t care about, just like they don’t care about other people from former eastern Ukraine. Now we know that they don’t give a hoot about all Ukrainian citizens.
Here’s another quote. In November 2021, Vladimir Zelensky had the following to say speaking about residents of what was eastern Ukraine back then, “Not all representatives of human race are humans. There are species out there, too, that’s what I think.” Now, the Kiev authorities are weaponising the “children’s narrative,” making a show out of it. So, who exactly are humans in Zelensky’s book? Is it those whom the Kiev regime claims to care about while spreading tall tales about abducted children, or is it the “species” they’re willing to use however they please, sending them in meat wave assaults, slamming borders shut in their faces, and dragging people of any age into slaughter by all manner of means?
Now, I will say a few words about actual work that is being done. It’s important to understand that, in reality, not a single child has been “abducted.” To reiterate, Russia is rescuing children from under the shelling of Kiev’s artillery and evacuating them from combat zones to safety when necessary. The Armed Forces of Ukraine regularly target places with mass presence of children. In September 2024, the Ukrainians shelled a school in the town of Kamenka-Dneprovska, Zaporozhye Region, with 106 children in it. Luckily, no one was injured. On March 7, the Ukrainian militants shelled the grounds of an operating kindergarten in a frontline zone out in the Zaporozhye Region.
Do they have any questions, when firing missiles, about the ethnicity of the children, the kind of passports they hold, or who their parents are, or what letter their last names end with? Of course, not. Russia, on the other hand, is rescuing orphans and minors left without the care of legal guardians.
Operating within a legal framework and in accordance with international agreements, our country is doing everything possible to have children reunite with their families. This process is making great strides, something Kiev’s representatives forgot to mention in Istanbul. I noted in my opening remarks that thanks to the tireless work of the Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova, 101 minors from 81 families have reunited with their parents or blood relatives living in Ukraine or third countries. Other children have returned to Russia. The Kiev regime forgets to mention that, too.
To reiterate, the Russian side will approach the implementation of all existing agreements with utmost responsibility and will thoroughly review the list of names and the information we have received.
However, there’s a real possibility that children on the list may be in the West, not Russia. Remember, that’s exactly what happened a year ago in April 2024. I will refresh the memory of those who may have forgotten it. Chief of the National Police Ivan Vygovsky then admitted that 161 children they were trying to locate in Russia were found in Germany. Remind me, did the Kiev regime file a lawsuit or make a formal complaint against Germany concerning the missing children ending up in that country? I have a sense they didn’t. If something along these lines happens again, I think it will come as a real shock to those who follow this issue and these narratives.
I’d like to close this segment of the briefing with a quote from a famous Soviet writer and playwright Yury German. In his novel about Peter the Great, he wrote, “There is not a single scum out there that, when doing something vile, does not say they are doing it for the sake of the children.” I don’t think Yury German could have even imagined that, by the end of the first quarter of the 21st century, this phrase from his novel would so clearly and starkly describe those who are running the show in Ukraine. The Kiev neo-Nazis should have long realised that their push to use children in their PR stunts looks not only cheap and disingenous, but has become outright immoral and unethical.
Serbian military deliveries to the Kiev regime
We have taken note of the comments made by President of Serbia Aleksandar Vucic in an interview with the national broadcaster RTS regarding information, which the Foreign Intelligence Service of Russia made public of May 29, 2025, about the Serbian defence companies’ delivery of ammunitions to the Kiev regime, contrary to Belgrade’s official neutrality in this matter.
We have taken note of the Serbian President’s public assurance of the planned inspection of the country’s military technical cooperation with foreign partners aimed at revealing machinations with end user certificates. We hope that this measure will help identify and terminate questionable export transactions and prevent the delivery of military products to the wrong party.
We are convinced that Serbia is fully aware of the range of risks created by the delivery of Serbian military products to the Kiev regime, and that the authorities will take effective and sufficient measures so that nothing can tarnish friendly relations between our countries and the sincere feelings of the Serbian people, who are fully aware of the situation.
Zapad 2025 Russian-Belarusian military exercise
We have received several questions regarding the Zapad (West) 2025 Russian-Belarusian military exercise scheduled for September. Unfriendly countries have started an information campaign aimed at distorting the essence of these drills, and Poland has announced that it would hold “proportional exercises.”
Why does the annual Zapad exercise provoke so many propaganda attacks by our ill-wishers? What information support should we provide for these drills in response to these malicious allegations?
I said at the previous briefing that NATO had stepped up its activities against the backdrop of growing tensions in Europe, and that NATO countries continued to increase the scale of their provocative military exercises on the Russian border. The operational and combat training of the NATO’s Allied armed forces is focused on their use against Russia. The bloc holds about 50 drills involving over 300,000 troops on the Russian border aimed at enhancing the interoperability of brigades and divisions, improving operational plans, and testing new tactical methods and technical solutions.
Their anti-Russia focus is evident in the large-scale Steadfast Defender annual drills. For example, in 2024, these drills involved 90,000 troops from all member states and nearly 2,000 military vehicles, which trained to conduct large-scale offensive operations in Europe. It was the largest military drills held after the end of the Cold War. The US and NATO military commands in Europe actually make no secret of the fact that such activities are a rehearsal of a conflict against a “near-peer adversary,” that is, Russia. During these exercises, large groups of forces, including US troops, were transported towards the Russian border and carried out a provocative deployment of an Mk70 system with an intermediate- and shorter-range missile capability to the island of Bornholm, Denmark.
A similar exercise, Defender Europe 2025, has been held this year to train to conduct offensive operations, including missile, artillery and air strikes, airborne assaults, and water crossings.
It is obvious that all large-scale military activities of the NATO countries greatly increase the risk of military incidents and further destabilise security situation. We monitor all of them in the context of strategic deterrence and take them into account during our defence planning and operational and combat training.
One of the main methods of strengthening the defence space of Russia and Belarus is the build-up of the combat ability of the regional group of forces. The key element of this work in 2025 is the Zapad joint strategic exercise, which will be held simultaneously in Russia and Belarus in September 2025. It is an exclusively defensive exercise that is not directed against third countries. During these drills, our troops will train to conduct joint actions to repel aggressions against the Union State with the use of the regional group of Forces of Russia and Belarus and a coalition group of forces of friendly CSTO states (their joint drills will be held prior to the Zapad 2025 exercise).
Russia and Belarus have recently adopted a decision to reduce the scale of that exercise by almost a half from the planned 13,000 troops, and to shift the majority of the planned activities in Belarus from its testing grounds on the western border further inside the country. This is evidence of our countries’ commitment to dialogue and to reducing tensions in the region.
Regrettably, NATO has not taken reciprocal actions. On the contrary, Poland announced plans to hold the largest division-level drills in years. At the same time, NATO countries are looking for a suitable pretext to shift the blame for the aggravation of the situation onto others, presenting the Russian-Belarusian drills as preparations for potential aggression against NATO, which is ridiculous. Let’s compare the Defender and Zapad exercises.
- Frequency: The Defender drills are held every year, while Zapad is held every other year (it was not held in 2023 by a common decision of Moscow and Minsk).
- Duration: The Defender drills last from six weeks to four months, while Zapad lasts from one to three weeks.
- Number of participating states: Defender – 19 to 32 states, Zapad 2025 – two states (five, taking into account the preceding CSTO drills).
- Scale: Defender – 25,000 to 90,000 troops; the scale of Zapad 2025 is two to 15 times smaller.
- Territorial scope: The Defender will be held from the Arctic to the Black Sea, and not only in the training areas, with a focus on the Baltics, Extreme North and Eastern Europe, that is, in direct proximity to the border of the Union State. The Zapad 2025 exercise will mostly be held in the training areas and mostly deep inside Russia and Belarus.
- Focus: The Defender drills are focused on confrontation with a “near-peer adversary,” that is, Russia, and on training to conduct large-scale offensive operations. Zapad is a purely defensive exercise aimed at training to conduct joint operations to repel an aggression against the Union State; it is not spearheaded against any country. I believe you can draw your own conclusions.
As for the second part of the question, I suggest that you address it to the defence ministries of Russia and Belarus as the organisers of the Zapad exercise, which will determine the optimal scale of information coverage.
Hybrid warfare is now being waged without any rules whatsoever. It touches every aspect of life. The West has unleashed this campaign against history, culture, monuments, security, stability and development. At its core, it is also a confrontation with spiritual resilience. Even the Orthodox faith has not been spared.
We are closely monitoring the situation surrounding the Church of Our Lady of Kazan in the Swedish city of Västerås, following the announcement by municipal authorities of plans to expropriate the church from the local Russian Orthodox community on purported security grounds.
It is worth noting that the land for the church was legally purchased by the Russian Orthodox community in Västerås back in 2009. With the municipality’s consent, a church, chapel and guesthouse were later built on the site.
As the anti-Russia hysteria in Sweden has escalated at the state level, the church has increasingly come under media attack, culminating in baseless and absurd allegations that it serves as a surveillance post for Russian intelligence, supposedly monitoring a nearby regional airport.
Is this a rational approach? Nationalism, when it takes hold, strips people of everything – reason, conscience, critical thinking, even a sense of proportion. One cannot help but ask: are Swedish authorities aware that we live in an age of geolocation, satellite data, internet maps and public webcams, which people use for all kinds of purposes? This is not to suggest that any of these tools have been used in relation to the airport – only to highlight how illogical it is to fabricate a story about a church being built as a cover for espionage, when so many far more advanced means of observation already exist.
It is especially noteworthy that some of the very same municipal politicians who, just three years ago, nearly shut down this airport, and only backed down under pressure from local residents, are now suddenly concerned about imaginary threats to its security from worshippers at a Russian Orthodox church.
Leaving aside the wildly inappropriate and openly Russophobic rhetoric of certain provincial politicians, it is worth recalling that this is not the first time Sweden has shown disregard for the religious sensibilities of its citizens. With the consent of Swedish authorities, public events involving the burning of the Quran and desecration of other sacred texts have been held regularly in the country. In this case, under the pretext of so-called security concerns, the Västerås municipality is effectively denying the city’s Orthodox Christian community its right to freedom of religion.
We hope the Swedish authorities will rein in this wave of anti-Russia ardour and focus instead on genuine public interests, ensuring that this disgraceful local initiative is never implemented.
All people are different. Sweden, too, has its share of good and bad people; we hope the good will outnumber the bad, and the latter will learn and improve. As in any country. But this episode is a disgrace for Sweden. A shameful fabrication. As if no one remains who can speak up and say that this is unworthy of a country that professes to uphold the highest ideals of human rights, freedom of expression and freedom of religion.
Sponsoring an exploratory expedition to the area of the Khalkhin Gol battle
On May 16−28, the Mongolian Society of the Red Cross, the Embassy of the Russian Federation in Ulan Bator, and the Ministry of Defence of Mongolia sponsored the first stage of the annual Russian-Mongolian expedition entitled “Khalkhin Gol. The Greater our Glory-2025,” tasked with recovering the remains of Soviet and Mongolian soldiers, who had died in the fighting against the Japanese aggressors on the Khalkhin Gol River in 1939. The expedition includes a record number of participants: 30 specialists from 15 Russian regions and over 130 Mongolians.
Implementing this large-scale historical and humanitarian undertaking has become possible due to the agreements reached by the presidents of the Russian Federation and Mongolia during their meetings in Ulan Bator on September 3, 2024 and in Moscow on May 7, 2025.
The exploratory effort helped to discover the remains of 41 soldiers: 36 Red Army officers and men (two of them identified by criminologists from Mongolia’s Ministry of Justice and Internal Affairs) and five Mongolian servicemen. Information about the discovery of burials of seven Japanese soldiers was communicated to representatives of Japan conducting exploration in Eastern Mongolia.
The second stage of the expedition is scheduled for September 2025.
Astana opening the Alley of Eternal Friendship of Kazakhstan and Russia
On May 28 of this year, Astana, Kazakhstan, hosted the opening ceremony for the Alley of Eternal Friendship of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation.
Held in pursuance of the agreements reached by the presidents of the two countries during the state visit paid by President of Russia Vladimir Putin to Kazakhstan on November 27, 2024, the ceremony was attended by Minister of Culture of Russia Olga Lyubimova and Minister of Culture and Information of Kazakhstan Aida Balayeva.
The emergence of a new, vivid urban sight in the centre of the beautiful and dynamically developing capital of Kazakhstan has become an important event in allied relations and integration ties between the two states and a geographical reference point of sorts in the multi-faceted cooperation between Russia and Kazakhstan.
In their remarks at the ceremony, the ministers of culture laid emphasis on strong fraternal ties between the peoples of the two countries, their historical proximity, and spiritual unity. Both sides noted the need for continuing the implementation of joint projects that brought Russians and Kazakhstanis closer together, including in the area of culture and art.
Creating a section dedicated to the Great Victory on the Foreign Ministry’s website
As I announced at my May 15 briefing, the Foreign Ministry has created a special thematic section on its official website, as part of celebrations of the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War. The section also focuses on the huge amount of work done in this context by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Russian missions abroad, and the Ministry’s territorial divisions.
The section features numerous materials and publications on historical facts, celebrations at Russian missions abroad, Actions of Remembrance, and Eternal Regiment processions organised in different parts of the world. The website will record these forever, making them digital sources of truth that is impossible to distort.
The section has nine headings: Remembrance Actions, Photo Exhibitions, Immortal Regiment, Media News, Interviews, Videos, Articles by Ambassadors, Official Receptions, and Military Memorial Work. A sub-heading, Events Dedicated to Victory Day at Russian Missions Abroad, is also available.
To reiterate: We have made this special interactive section in order to record and preserve the historical memory of the great martial feat of valor committed by our people and our Red Army. We also highlight the contribution made by descendants of our heroes, the diplomats, who cherish the memory of their ancestors and the Soviet feat of valour and fight for historical memory at the international front. We will continue to add the necessary information to the page. We also invite everyone to peruse materials available on it.
I would like to remind you that we have posted over 7,000 publications on the Foreign Ministry accounts, publications ranging from large articles to educational videos dedicated to Victory and historical facts. They have been accessed by dozens of millions of users across the world.
June 6 marks the 226th anniversary of Alexander Pushkin’s birth. On this day, the entire world celebrates Russian Language Day. The works of this great poet and writer, justly considered as the founder of modern Russian language, blend the richness of authentic language with the elegance and perfection of cultivated thought. Pushkin’s writing embodies our national identity, the noble ideals of Russian mentality, honour, military glory and valour, shaping the spiritual and moral values for many generations of Russians. His ability to elevate the written word to universal dimensions ensures the enduring relevance of his works that continue to resonate deeply with readers today.
The Russian language is one of the six languages of the United Nations and, since the founding of the UN, it plays an important role in international dialogue. By resolution of the UN Department of Public Information, Russian Language Day has been observed since 2010 as part of the multilingualism and cultural diversity development programme.
The Russian Federation pursues a consistent and dedicated policy of protecting and promoting the Russian language around the world. We are committed to supporting the global interest in Russian language study and usage, and in an expanding the objective picture of Russia among international audiences.
Russia and its partners successfully implement consistent steps to launch an international Russian language organisation established in 2023 at the initiative of President of Kazakhstan Kassym Jomart-Tokayev.
It is noteworthy that Russian Language Day has evolved into a truly national celebration far beyond Russian borders. Supporters of the Russian language abroad organise festivities and themed campaigns highlighting the role of Russian in their personal lives and in global development. Schools, universities and cultural centres host literary recitations, Pushkin readings, festivals, and competitions. These celebrations are further supported by Russia’s diplomatic and consular missions, Russian Houses, alumni of Russian universities, and the Russian communities.
I would like to highlight that in 2025, our embassies organised a distinctive art exhibition, The Russian Alphabet in Marina Khankova’s Drawings. This exhibition forms part of a collaborative project by the Russian Foreign Ministry and the Russkiy Mir Foundation titled The Fairytale Code of the Russian Soul. The exhibition demonstrates the connection between the Russian language and our nation’s customs, moral values and principles. The artist illustrates Russian fairytales, legends, myths and epic stories, including those at the heart of Alexander Pushkin’s works. Her art pays homage to Russia’s renowned painters such as Viktor Vasnetsov and Ivan Bilibin.
All celebratory events will receive comprehensive coverage through the official social media channels of the Russian Foreign Ministry, Russian diplomatic missions, and cultural centres. Additionally, the Window to Russia multilingual information and service portal features a wide array of educational content about the Russian language and Russia.
As we approach Russian Language Day, a celebration of magnificent Russian culture that contributes to world heritage, it is impossible not to mention that the authorities of the Kiev, Chisinau and Baltic regimes, as well as some Western countries, are deliberately, methodically and violently destroying the Russian language, the Russian culture, and everything Russian, despite them being part of their own citizen’s lives, philosophy and mentality.
Take Ukraine, for example. After the 2014 state coup, inspired and sponsored by foreign countries, the Kiev regime took a course for total derussification that goes beyond simple restrictions – it is an actual war. They are barbarically eradicating the Russian language from interpersonal communication, educational institutions and public spaces. Man-hating laws are being enacted that severely infringe upon the rights of millions for whom Russian is their mother tongue. They prohibit and burn books. These developments are reminiscent of the darkest tragedy of the 20th century. These bonfires made of books represent blatant and outright Nazism. The Kiev regime, directed by its Western curators, is demonstrating its genuine and brutish nature to the world.
The most horrible thing is that their Western benefactors, who like to shout about human rights and values, either encourage this rampage or cynically turn a blind eye to barbaric Nazi campaigns while creating Russophobic mayhem in their own countries.
Under most contrived and ridiculous pretexts of “security” and “political correctness”, the “educated” Europe is prohibiting Russian schools, targeting Russian-language media outlets, and restricting cultural institutions. Apparently, human rights were only made for the selected few as the Russian language and Russian speakers, in their view, appear to be excluded from the legal protection.
These practices will not be tolerated. Protection of the Russian language today is not just a matter of cultural significance; it is a matter of preserving the identity of millions of people, and protecting our meanings and values. It is a matter of resisting outright Nazism. We will ring all bells and expose evidence to the world, calling upon relevant international organisations to formally assess this genocide against the language and culture. Because silence means complicity in a crime.
The Russian language was given to us so that we could speak up with eloquence.
The Global Digital Forum will take place in Nizhny Novgorod on June 5-6, which I mentioned earlier during the May 6 briefing. More than 2,000 foreign guests are expected to attend. The conference is slated to become a leading domestic platform for ICT cooperation with the developing countries.
I would like to separately mention the panel that is directly overseen by the Foreign Ministry’s Information and Press Department. ANO Dialogue will run a special session titled “Responsible Fact-Checking in the Post-Truth Era: New Opportunities for Cooperation.” Foreign journalists and fact-checking experts from Türkiye, France, and Ireland will take part in the discussion as well.
In November 2024, Moscow hosted the second international forum “Dialogue on Fakes 2.0” convened by ANO Dialogue Regions with the support of the Foreign Ministry. The event gathered more than 1,000 participants from 65 countries.
The presentation of a concept for an International Association for Fact-Checking, including a Code of Responsible Fact-Checking, was the forum’s key event. This global civic initiative was launched in response to an unending flood of fake claims, disinformation campaigns, and the biased “pseudo-fact-checking” widely promoted by the West. The association includes more than 55 experts from 20 countries as of today.
We regard this forum as a key event aimed at promoting the International Association for Fact-Checking.
We believe that holding the Global Digital Forum annually will boost the efforts to establish and deepen international cooperation in this particular area.
Question: What can you say about Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico saying that the European Commission’s idea to ban Russian energy imports to the EU was harmful?
Maria Zakharova: Indeed, speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Hungary on May 29, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico criticised the “economically harmful EU strategies,” such as terminating Russian energy imports.
This is hardly surprising. Russia meets two-thirds of Slovakia’s gas needs (around 4.7 billion cubic metres), 90 percent of its petroleum needs (around 4.9 million tonnes), and 100 percent of its nuclear fuel needs. Following Ukraine’s shutdown of Russian gas transit through its territory, Slovak authorities are looking at a loss of around €500 million this year from suspended gas exports to third countries. Slovak refineries are configured specifically for refining Russian crude, and retrofitting them to refine alternative petroleum types would take years. Furthermore, two-thirds of Slovakia’s electricity is generated at two Slovak nuclear power plants in Mochovce and Bohunice, which use nuclear fuel supplied by the Russian TVEL Company, and there is currently no viable alternative available.
In other words, the European Commission is effectively pushing Slovakia towards an energy collapse, as it imposes a total rejection of Russian energy resources and even demanding Slovakia to provide a step-by-step plan for this “economic suicide.” All of that is being done with much fanfare about human rights, European progress, and movement towards a “bright future.” Once again, the European Commission has demonstrated its fanatical determination to harm Russia and not Russia alone. They have long ignored the interests of their own citizens, not just the people of Slovakia.
Question: What can you say about renewed tensions between official Paris and the French Polynesian government regarding decolonisation?
Maria Zakharova: You must be referring to a recent debate surrounding the participation of a French Polynesian delegation during a UN Special Committee on Decolonisation (C-24) meeting in East Timor on May 21-23. As is known, the Polynesian government proposed hosting a regional session of the Committee in French Polynesia in 2027.
As you may be aware, according to the UN Special Committee on Decolonisation, French Polynesia is a non-self-governing territory. UN General Assembly Resolution A/RES/67/265 dated May 17, 2013 reaffirms the right of the people of this archipelago to self-determination and independence. However, “enlightened” Paris simply ignores this and certainly shows no willingness to accommodate the political forces in French Polynesia that advocate for a referendum on self-determination.
Everything they say about international law does not go beyond mere rhetoric. When they want to criticise others, pressure decisions, or exert influence they invoke human rights, international law, duties, and freedoms. What they have here is a real opportunity and the need to act on the will of the local population which is something they are entitled to under the UNGA resolution. And yet, nothing. Why bother?
The French authorities turn down cooperation on decolonisation issues, preferring to act as though the specialised UN body does not exist and General Assembly resolutions can be disregarded. This is yet another example of how France treats international law interpreting it to suit its interests whenever convenient. Double standards fit seamlessly into the “rules-based international order” that Western countries are so determined to impose on the international community.
Meanwhile, France is increasingly confronted with the growing discontent of the indigenous populations in its overseas territories. Just a year ago, mass protests in New Caledonia were making international headlines. The deep-rooted contradictions that drove the residents of the archipelago into the streets remain unresolved to this day. Forceful measures have since been employed followed by unrest in Martinique, where protests over socioeconomic problems escalated into riots and clashes with the police. Each time I look at the Elysee Palace, I get a sense that they are oblivious to their own problems.
As for French Polynesia, alongside the challenges its residents are facing, one must not forget the tragic chapters of its history as part of the French Republic. It is well known that these islands served as a testing ground for French nuclear weapons for over 30 years. Those familiar with the name of the place do not associate it with a tourist paradise, but rather with strategic, defence, and geopolitical reporting. The consequences of these tests for the local population and environment have remained unknown to this day.
A word of advice to the Elysee Palace, official Paris, and all their diplomats. Before lecturing others on how to govern their own affairs, to address their issues, or to act in international affairs, focus instead on your own issues, both international and domestic. These issues have been left unresolved for many years, and it is high time to address them. This is what you should focus on.
Question: Does Russia believe that the West was an accessory to last weekend’s attacks on Russian air bases and infrastructure? If so, which countries were involved? What will Russia’s response be?
Maria Zakharova: The West is an accessory to the Kiev regime’s terrorist activities.
Firstly, various countries of the collective West supply weapons [to Ukraine] specifically for committing terrorist attacks, without any conditions or restrictions on their use. They have long since stopped answering questions about whether it is morally or legally appropriate to provide weapons that are used for terrorism.
Secondly, they definitely help target the attacks by providing coordinates, as only Western countries and Western companies have such capabilities.
Thirdly, not a single terrorist attack that has been qualified as such following an investigation has ever been condemned. Nobody in the West has even so much as reprimanded the Kiev regime at the official level.
I remember a march held in Paris to commemorate the victims of an attack on a [French] media outlet headquarters. They actually convened a summit, [with European leaders] marching in unison along the streets of Paris, pledging to exterminate terrorism. Russia contributed to that unity, as Russian Foreign Minister joined the anti-terrorist rally. We extended our condolences, and reaffirmed that attacks on journalists were unacceptable.
Has Paris made any statements about the killings of journalists by the Kiev regime? None, on international platforms or in its national capacity. I am not even mentioning basic human sympathy, but they could have said something under their international legal obligations.
Fourth, the West provides political support [for the attacks], politically motivating the Kiev regime to take such steps. Every little private-club meeting attended by French President Emmanuel Macron or his envoys is immediately followed by a massive attack on civilian targets. These are just a few examples that prove the West’s involvement and complicity in the terrorist attacks carried out by the Kiev regime against the Russian civilian population, public figures, journalists and civilian infrastructure.
Question: The German authorities have refused to extend the residence permit of the head of the Rossiya Segodnya bureau, and demanded that he leave Germany by August 19. How would you comment on this?
Maria Zakharova: At this stage (I am not referring to any historical retrospective, even recent history, the last couple of years; I am only talking about the current period, a few months), RIA Novosti correspondents, journalists and editorial staff are not the only targets of pressure and discrimination by the German authorities. We have not commented on this yet, but now I will.
Channel One television network reporters have been facing a similar situation in Germany, except for a few minor differences. In this regard, when it became clear that this was not a coincidence or a technical problem, but a clearly formulated and systematically applied state policy towards Russian journalists aimed at preventing them from doing their job unimpeded, we decided to take countermeasures. Accordingly, similar, mirrored, symmetrical countermeasures will be taken against German journalists who are working, are accredited, and are based in the Russian Federation.
We kindly request the German Embassy to convey this message to Berlin and ensure that German tabloids and the German Journalists Association are informed about Moscow’s intention to take retaliatory measures against journalists from Germany. This should stop anyone in Berlin or other German cities from saying that German journalists have been targeted by some unmotivated action on the part of Russia when these measures are implemented. This is not true. We have repeatedly offered to resolve the situation amicably and warned that there would be consequences if this were not done.
As it is, we are beginning to develop (this will happen quickly enough) and implement retaliatory measures. Therefore, Berlin should not pretend later that they were not aware of the consequences.
Question: Amendments to the labour legislation of the Russian Federation regulating the employment of Russian or third-country nationals by foreign missions in Russia came into effect on January 1, 2025. Could you clarify the key changes that have been introduced?
Maria Zakharova: Indeed. Articles 341.1-1 and 341.2-1 of the Labour Code of the Russian Federation, introduced by Federal Law No. 498-FZ of December 26, 2024, On Amendments to the Labour Legislation of the Russian Federation, which is in force since January 1, 2025, establish specific regulations governing the employment of individuals assigned to diplomatic missions and consular posts of foreign states, international organisations and their missions located in the Russian Federation. These provisions also apply to diplomatic agents, consular officers and their family members residing with them in the Russian Federation.
To implement these regulations, on May 14, 2025, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation registered Order No. 6460 of the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation. This order designates the federal state unitary enterprise subordinate to the Foreign Ministry – the Main Production and Commercial Administration for Services to the Diplomatic Corps (GlavUpDK) – as the authorised body for temporarily assigning personnel under labour provision contracts.
From the moment GlavUpDK was granted these powers, the assignment of personnel to foreign missions may only take place under a labour provision contract concluded between GlavUpDK and the foreign mission.
Accordingly, foreign missions will need to align their employment practices for Russian or third-country nationals with the requirements set out in Article 341.2-1 of the Labour Code of the Russian Federation, including the reorganisation of employment relations with staff already hired, through the conclusion of labour provision contracts in accordance with this regulation.
For all matters related to the hiring of Russian or third-country citizens, foreign missions are advised to contact the GlavUpDK branch – Inpredkadry.
Question: September will mark three years since the explosions on the Nord Stream pipelines. As you have repeatedly commented during your briefings, investigations in most countries have either been closed or become a farce. Recently, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz made fresh statements on the matter. How would you respond?
Maria Zakharova: This is a monstrous affair. First, they imposed sanctions against our country. Then they escalated to secondary sanctions targeting those who engage with us. Now, they are sanctioning their own operators and citizens. Such sheer cynicism.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, in a bid to inject some vigour into their latest package of anti-Russian sanctions – since, evidently, their efforts lacked spark – have concocted a ban on repairs and further use of Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2, ensuring these pipelines remain inoperable. It is appalling.
I will not rank these points by importance but simply list them. First, German businesses, technologies, and economic operators – those who actually built these pipelines through their labour, investments, and dedication – are now barred from maintaining what they themselves created. Not von der Leyen, not Merz – ordinary people.
Second, the explosions on Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 have already caused an environmental catastrophe. If further ecological or safety risks emerge, will they also be ignored – since any other course of action would mean inviting sanctions?
Third, this seems to be a precursor, a final step before banning medical treatment for employees who worked on Nord Stream or preventing their children from receiving an education. Picture it: a father in Germany worked as an engineer on Nord Stream, and now his family must wear identification badges, sit at the back of classrooms, and be segregated. Germany has been down this road before. It defies commentary.
But we should not ignore another aspect here. I will not state the obvious – that this inflicts economic harm on Germany and the EU at large. The issue here is a grotesque lapse in logic, a misanthropic derangement. Let me reiterate the question: What about the investigation? They have mastered bans and churned out sanctions – fine. But the investigation?
In April this year, we detailed the investigation progress during our briefing. Bear in mind that in February 2024, Sweden’s prosecutor’s office and later Denmark’s police closed their investigations citing insufficient grounds. Oh, just some pipeline, some gas – poof, it blew up. Hardly worth bothering about, these Nordic nations seem to think. In September 2024, then-German Chancellor Olaf Scholz vowed: “We want to hold those responsible to account in Germany – if we catch them. You can count on that.” He promised the German public – and was not re-elected. At the time, he called the pipeline sabotage an act of terrorism and urged security agencies and the federal prosecutor to investigate without regard “for anyone’s interests.” Where are the results?
Scholz made that pledge in September 2024. Three months remain until September 2025 – nearly a year since these assurances were given. Or is this investigation filed alongside those into the Skripals, Novichok, Salisbury, and Amesbury? Is Merz even aware of those promises? Is there any coherence? Does anyone understand what is happening over there?
Question: Please comment on the statement by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer regarding the United Kingdom’s transition to “war-fighting readiness.” The head of government justified this move by citing a “threat from Russia.”
Maria Zakharova: This is, naturally, not entirely unexpected, given the rationale that has been propounded on Downing Street over recent years – and not just in recent years. The pertinent question is whether they might elucidate that this “war-fighting readiness” arises not from any intent by others to attack them, but rather from their own active participation in inflaming tensions on the European continent. And not solely there. Over the past 25 years, where have they not deployed forces? Whom have they not bombed as part of various coalitions? What they must do is acknowledge that these are their own plans for aggression – merely specify against whom. All this discourse on a so-called threat from Russia fails to withstand the slightest scrutiny.
During the presentation on June 2 this year of the updated British Strategic Defence Review, Keir Starmer emphasised the necessity for the nation to transition to a “war-fighting readiness.” He justified this by alluding to the emergence of “more serious, more immediate, and more unpredictable” challenges and threats – unparalleled since the conclusion of the Cold War. Within this context, he specifically mentioned “war in Europe, new nuclear risks, daily cyberattacks, growing Russian aggression in our [British] waters, menacing our skies.” This, notwithstanding Britain’s involvement in orchestrating the terrorist attack in the Black Sea – an act in which it participated directly, as Russia has publicly stated.
Britain has not only been complicit in this utterly unlawful act. It has also been – and continues to be – engaged in arming the terrorist Kiev regime with weaponry and intelligence to facilitate its terrorist activities. And yet, it professes to feel threatened.
In the Strategic Defence Review itself, Russia is labelled an “immediate and pressing threat” to London and its allies, framed in their customary jargon as a “full-scale invasion of Ukraine,” which allegedly “makes unequivocally clear” Russia’s “willingness to use force to achieve its goals, as well as its intent to re-establish spheres of influence in its near-abroad and disrupt the international order.”
This is nothing short of a “cacophony of noise.” Look who’s talking about the international legal order? Britain – the same Britain that bombed Iraq, participated in the anti-Iraq campaign, and attacked Yugoslavia, among other locations, alongside NATO’s mercenaries. And now this country dares to lecture others on some supposed legal order?
Everything pertaining to the commencement of the special military operation was preceded by seven years of appeals for peace and the implementation of the Minsk agreements. That was our priority – we invested years of effort to avert further escalation. Britain, meanwhile, did everything to reignite that escalation at a new level, forbidding the Kiev regime to negotiate in spring 2022. Therefore, everything stated in this quote is false.
Alongside Russia, this British “thriller” also features China (apparently, in London’s view, it too poses a threat), characterised not as a threat but as a “sophisticated and persistent challenge.” A challenge to what? British ambitions? Phobias? Their insatiable desire for dominance? That, regrettably, goes unstated. Iran and the DPRK are also getting in their way as “regional disruptors.”
This is despite Britain having no connection to that region whatsoever. Yet they presume to understand what occurs there and believe they have the right to comment. Nothing new here. The same old approach – brand, insult, withhold facts, and continue with their unsavoury conduct. We constantly hear London’s voice urging NATO and Western Europe towards anti-Russia campaigns.
I believe the reason for this heightened – or rather, fixated and performative – alarmism displayed by Keir Starmer lies in the Labour government’s endeavour to mask its own foreign policy blunders and score political points by fomenting global confrontation along Cold War lines. This is a self-publicity stunt – an effort to justify ballooning military budgets, enhance their party’s public appeal, divert attention from their dismal social and economic sphere, and, of course, further destabilise the European continent to make themselves appear less inadequate by comparison.
It is abundantly clear that the well-being and living standards of ordinary Britons are not among the priorities of Keir Starmer and his followers. Statements alone will not suffice – results will be expected. Yet the medieval penchant for witch hunts and the obsession with dominance, confrontation, and provocation remain deeply ingrained in the British political class.
What is obvious is that Britain, more than anyone else, needs a scramble on the European continent.
Question: Following the previous round of Russian-Ukrainian talks, President of Türkiye Recep Tayyip Erdogan suggested holding a summit involving Russian, US and Ukrainian leaders. What does the Russian Foreign Ministry think about prospects for this trilateral meeting?
Maria Zakharova: Issues of holding top-level meetings (summits) are within the remit of the Russian Presidential Executive Office.
Question: President of Russia Vladimir Putin has signed an executive order on conducting state monitoring of damage caused to Russia by foreign states and organisations. Does the Russian Foreign Ministry have any specific data on the scale of such damage?
Maria Zakharova: I would like to draw your attention to the fact that this Executive Order No 335 of May 19, 2025 instructs divisions of the Russian Prosecutor-General’s Office to conduct state monitoring of damage caused to Russia by foreign states, organisations and individuals.
The executive order states expressly that the Russian Prosecutor-General’s Office is responsible for conducting this work during one month, until June 19, 2025. It shall approve the monitoring procedure, compile a register listing data on the damage incurred and collaborate with other state agencies.
You should address this question to them, rather than us.
Question: If the UN starts playing a more active role in resolving the Ukraine crisis, in particular, if the number of various UN representatives and missions increases, or, perhaps, UN peacekeepers or UN forces will be deployed on the territory of Ukraine, should we see this as a positive or negative change?
Maria Zakharova: Outside the context of the situation in Ukraine, everything that you say does not appear out of nothing. Countries adopt decisions, and various mechanisms are used to implement actions and steps mentioned by you.
The UN Security Council should adopt certain decisions, and some other decisions will be coordinated using additional tools. All this is stipulated. But I would like to note once again that the UN Secretariat does not adopt decisions on these issues. Member countries make decisions and instruct the Secretariat, for example, to implement them.
One should not think that they will notify us about such things via a press release or the Secretary-General’s speech. These issues will be discussed. Member countries, including the Russian Federation, decide on the advisability of their discussion in the course of routine work, (I don’t even say about making decisions.)
I would like to say once again that this has nothing to do with the situation in Ukraine. I am just saying how this happens, and how this is done.
Question: How would you comment on the newly released EU strategic document concerning the Black Sea region, recently presented in Brussels?
Maria Zakharova: Indeed, on May 28, the European Commission and the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas, presented a joint report intended to serve as the foundation for the European Union’s updated strategy for the Black Sea region.
What stands out immediately is the tone of the document. Brussels appears to position itself – whether driven by an overextension of foreign policy ambitions or a limited understanding of regional geography – as a central actor in shaping policy for the Black Sea region.
I clearly recall how Liz Truss – then serving as the UK Foreign Secretary – remarked that it would be more convenient to move the fleet to the Baltic via the Black Sea. Even at the time, it was evident that something was amiss in their strategic thinking. As we noted back then, a simple glance at a map would have clarified the geographic realities. It seems a similar lack of professionalism is influencing the current approach to the EU’s strategy.
Coastal EU member states and candidate countries appear to have been presented with a fait accompli, having had no involvement in the document’s development.
Brussels’ stated priority in this context appears to be the “isolation” of the Black Sea region from Russia, an objective that defies both history and geographic reality. Russia has long held the status of a Black Sea power, with deep-rooted ties to the region stretching back centuries. One might recall comments from figures like Liz Truss, who, while serving in the UK, suggested that it would be more convenient to reach the Baltic via the Black Sea. If one were to follow this logic, perhaps the UK also considers itself a Black Sea power? This is geopolitical nonsence, but, regrettably, this is what is shaping real policy.
In essence, what we are witnessing is a deliberate effort to transform the Black Sea into a zone of confrontation, an approach the European Union is actively promoting in relation to the Russian Federation.
I’ve just answered a question regarding Keir Starmer’s recent remarks on militarisation and the supposed need to prepare for war. It seems we’re witnessing yet another wave of aggressive rhetoric, driven less by facts and more by misguided narratives. This appears to be an attempt to fabricate a new confrontation on the European continent, shaped more by imagination than by reality.
What is perhaps even more frightening than the geopolitical distortions or lack of understanding reflected in the document is the identity of its authors, Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas. Judging by the content, they appear fully committed to steering the region toward military confrontation. This is evidenced by proposals to expand military infrastructure, intensify planning, patrol and intelligence operations, and deepen regional cooperation with NATO, all under the pretext of addressing so-called “hybrid threats” and escalating perceived risks.
In this context, all deliberations about the Black Sea region serving as a vital link between the European Union and the countries of the South Caucasus and Central Asia ring hollow.
What exactly is being promoted? If the goal is genuine cooperation, stability, and prosperity, then the conversation must centre on peace, mutual respect, and inclusive dialogue. But if the intention is to “isolate” a country that has been an integral part of the region for centuries – a nation that has rightfully earned its place and recognition as a major Black Sea power – then such an approach contradicts the very principles of peace, stability, and development.
In reality, Brussels appears far less focused on fostering genuine transport and infrastructure connectivity with these regions and far more intent on using logistics and energy routes that bypass Russia to expand its presence in the Black Sea, potentially through military means, under the pretext of protecting infrastructure and commercial shipping. The European Union has already demonstrated how politicising economic processes can undermine entire sectors, and now it seems intent on transforming infrastructure projects into tools of regional destabilisation.
Were the public or expert communities in these countries consulted? Was there any survey or referendum conducted in the nations that Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas claim to represent? Of course, not. These strategic constructs are being developed in isolation from the actual interests and voices of the people in those countries.
I believe that the Black Sea states pursuing an independent and sovereign policy – not one dictated by the European Union – are well aware of the risks associated with the irresponsible course being promoted by the Brussels bureaucracy.
Question: You have already mentioned that the Kiev regime attempted to derail the talks. Nevertheless, many experts believe that we have adopted a tactics of small steps. Do you think this offers hope that we may eventually reach some meaningful agreements?
Maria Zakharova: Where exactly?
Question: In the talks with Ukraine.
Maria Zakharova: Do you consider these negotiations meaningless?
After the very first round, a thousand people from each side returned home. I am surprised to read the dismissive and disdainful commentary in some Western media questioning what exactly was achieved. A major exchange of detainees – a thousand for a thousand – was not only announced but fully carried out.
Given the utterly unconstructive (and that’s putting it mildly), terrorist nature of the Kiev regime, I believe this is an enormous result – if we’re genuinely talking about people’s interests. Of course, we all want this to be resolved as soon as possible. No country desires this more than ours. For seven years, we tried to reach out to the international community and emphasise the need to implement the Minsk agreements, which could have served as a genuine roadmap for resolving the internal Ukrainian conflict. That’s what we’ve always hoped for.
But you’ve seen how difficult it is to carry out even these rounds of talks because of the destructive and frankly unhinged stance taken by the Kiev regime. Every time – right up to a few hours before the talks are due to begin – there’s another tantrum: they claim they won’t attend, they won’t go, we sent the wrong representatives, they won’t talk to them, they were shown the wrong thing, or they weren’t shown something at all. It’s always something new. Either they weren’t shown or told something. Every time, it’s another round of hysterics.
In these circumstances, I believe the progress we have achieved deserves real recognition. Just look at who we’re dealing with. Even if Kiev can’t bring itself to endorse the agreements or speak positively, they could at least remain silent and begin implementing them. Instead, we get yet another barrage of insults, lies, and aggressive contempt.
Let’s not forget the context in which all of this is happening.
Question: On June 3, the Moldovan Foreign Ministry recommended citizens to refrain from travelling to Russia to avoid being subjected to “coercive measures” by the Russian authorities, including “arbitrary law enforcement practices” and “unlawful detentions.” How would you comment on this?
Maria Zakharova: Since we are on the subject of Moldova, I would like to begin with a very different matter.
On June 3, Yevgeny Doga, an outstanding composer who I am sure was dearly loved by millions of people around the world, passed away. His remarkable works included most iconic soundtracks to many popular Soviet films. The People’s Artist of the USSR died at 88.
Yevgeny Doga is a major figure in the history of Soviet, Russian, and certainly Moldovan musical culture. His work earned him international recognition, but most importantly, it earned love. His contribution to art cannot be overestimated, as his music was played in films and theatre productions, at Olympic ceremonies in Moscow and Sochi, as well as at the grandest concert venues in our country and abroad. His legacy includes dozens of orchestral and chamber music pieces. His waltz from the film My Sweet and Tender Beast is rightly considered a masterpiece of world musical heritage.
Since 1998, Yevgeny Doga has been a citizen of the Russian Federation. He often visited Moscow and lived here for long periods of time, actively participating in the country’s cultural events and emphasising his heartfelt connection with Russia. In one interview, he noted: “Most of my works were written in Russia. Russian musical culture comes with an extensive classical baggage, diverse folk music traditions, and a wealth of performing experience. My growth as a composer occurred under the influence of this rich culture, which became a lifelong source of nourishment for my creativity and harmonised perfectly with my ethnic and cultural background. This combination gives the music a special tone and makes it relatable for a wider audience.” This statement does not just describe Doga’s legacy or reflect his inspiring dialogue with Russian cultural tradition. It is so profound it should be inked in gold, written on the margins of every chapter in the unfinished interactive modern history book that talks about cancelling culture, Russophobia, “imperial ambitions to suppress national identity” and other crazy stuff.
This quote, these few phrases in fact encapsulate the essence of what Russia keeps talking about, what our country is all about: Russian culture, if anything, enriches the ethnic identity of anyone exposed to its grandiose heritage. A fantastic quote.
President of Russia Vladimir Putin expressed his condolences to the composer’s family and friends. In his message, he noted that “Yevgeny Doga’s inspired creativity, his educational and charitable activities contributed to a most vibrant chapter in the history of our multi-ethnic culture.”
With his passing, the world has lost an outstanding artist and a true master whose legacy is part of our cultural heritage, but we will never lose him as a person, as a creator, as the maker of immortal works.
In the last years of his life, Doga was approached by politicians of varying degrees of integrity who tried to enlist his support to promote their Russophobic views. Their names will hardly be remembered; the melodies written by the outstanding composer, a true representative of Russian culture, most certainly will.
We will not just remember him; our lives will be filled with his music, which will live forever in the hearts of millions of people, certainly including Russians. Why did I decide to start with this? Because I felt I had to say this out loud, to talk about our shared loss and pain, which is at the same time our shared accomplishment, our heritage. It is heartening to know that artists like Yevgeny Doga have contributed to and shaped our culture.
Back to your question, just think about it, the Moldovan authorities are prohibiting – or, under a far-fetched pretext, are indirectly tightening the screws, trying to dissuade their citizens from – travelling to Russia, to avoid some alleged coercive measures the Russian authorities might apply to them.
In diplomatic language, this is a set of unsubstantiated allegations; putting it bluntly, it is utter nonsense.
The Moldovan authorities, clearly mimicking their Western handlers, are turning everything upside down and accusing Russia of doing exactly what they themselves are doing. We do not engage in such activities.
Chisinau claims that Moldovan citizens arriving in Russia are allegedly at risk of legal abuse by the Russian authorities. In fact, the opposite is true. Let’s be honest: it is Russian citizens travelling to Moldova who face open discrimination upon arrival at Chisinau airport.
The situation has deteriorated to the point where even Moldovans returning from Russia – citizens of Moldova, whether ethnic Moldovans or members of other communities residing there – are being discriminated against by the Moldovan authorities simply for having visited Russia.
Russian citizens face degrading treatment during so-called additional screening, often carried out with undue zeal. Neither they nor their children are provided with even basic facilities – water, food, or the ability to contact the outside world. In many cases, they are then arbitrarily denied entry into the country. To make matters worse, staff from the Russian Embassy are not granted access to our compatriots to offer basic consular assistance, which is a right guaranteed under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
Within Moldova itself, there is open acknowledgment that this blatant legal arbitrariness is no longer merely a calling card of the current Chisinau authorities, but its proudest banner. Independent media, especially Russian-language outlets, are being shut down under spurious pretexts. Since February 2022, the broadcasting of 18 TV channels and more than 60 online platforms has been suspended. Pressure on political opponents is intensifying. Most recently, Moldova’s tax authorities froze the assets of Head of Gagauzia Evghenia Gutsul, as well as those of several opposition leaders. There are ongoing efforts to remove Ms Gutsul, a legally elected official, from office. This is a complete and utter abuse of power.
And yet the authorities there have the audacity to accuse Russia of imaginary violations. What unlawful persecution of Moldovans is there in Russia? Even Moldova’s recent elections proved otherwise: it wasn’t Russia that denied Moldovan citizens the right to vote. On the contrary, they were welcome to vote — and did so, as evidenced by the long queues at polling stations. It was the Moldovan government that failed to provide their own citizens in Russia with the opportunity to exercise their constitutional right to vote — something that is not only a right, but a civic duty.
And what are Moldovan citizens to us? They are hardworking, kind, honest, intelligent people. They are always welcome here. For many, Russia has become a place of study, work, or rest.
I am sure that this so-called warning from Chisinau was simply laughed off in Moldova itself. An enormous number of Moldovan citizens travel to Russia and know firsthand how they are received here. Yes, we have our procedures: border and customs controls, which apply to everyone — including Russian citizens. For example, there are regulations on bringing in and taking out currency. Every country has such rules. But to claim that Moldovans are being blocked from entering Russia is a new low for the administration of Maia Sandu.
Let me repeat: I am certain that Moldovans living in Russia, those who visit regularly, and those who remain in Moldova but have numerous relatives, friends and acquaintances here will not allow the Russophobic agenda of the Chisinau authorities to deprive them of the enormous opportunities that cooperation with Russia offers. They will not allow a wedge to be driven between the Russian and Moldovan peoples.
I would like to point out that on May 28 the Foreign Ministry sent a note to the Moldovan Embassy in Moscow suggesting that bilateral consultations should be held on the entire range of issues related to the cross-border movement of the two countries’ citizens. We proposed holding consultations to discuss issues of mutual concerns and complaints, if they have any. We have them, and we talked about them. Look at what happens to our citizens. What has the Moldovan side replied? Nothing. The citizens of Moldova should know what Maia Sandu think about them. They only make unsubstantiated accusations. When we propose making an expert analysis of their concerns and any other issues, they refuse to do so. Do they really care about Moldovan citizens? Maybe they will eventually write something in reply, but not so far.
Question: The world’s top-grossing animated film, Ne Zha 2 (Nezha: The Devil Boy Conquers the Dragon King), has recently been released in Russia. Will you watch it? China and Russia have been working closely together in filmmaking in the past few years. What can cooperation in this sphere do for strengthening mutual understanding between our people?
Maria Zakharova: Let’s begin with the official part of your question. As you rightfully said, Russian-Chinese cooperation in filmmaking has been developing gradually and progressively. This sphere of our relations is in the focus of our leaders’ attention. Last year, they specifically spoke about promoting cooperation in the film industry at the BRICS summit in Kazan. During the official visit of President Xi Jinping to Moscow in May 2025, our countries’ concerned agencies signed a relevant action plan until 2030.
That document stipulates a number of concrete projects and measures to promote our contacts in this sphere. They are substantial as it is, but we intend to further develop them.
In early May 2025, a large delegation of Chinese filmmakers led by Mao Yu, executive deputy director of China’s National Film Administration, visited Russia. The sides held the 18th meeting of the film cooperation subcommittee of the Russia-China Cultural Cooperation Committee and a roundtable discussion on new creative projects. Also, a Chinese Film Festival began in Moscow, St Petersburg and Kazan in May. I’d like to remind you that a Russian delegation of cinema workers led by Culture Minister Olga Lyubimova visited China in March 2025. Preparations are underway for a Russian Film Festival in China, which is scheduled for September 2025.
We are happy for the success of our Chinese partners in the film industry.
I look forward to watching the animated film you have mentioned. I’m sure that it is technologically impressive, but I also remember the traditional Chinese animated films. Nezha is a popular character of the Chinese myths and culture. I love old Chinese animated films about that character, and I believe that the new film will be a fine addition to the traditional Chinese films for children. I have always enjoyed watching these animated films. I hope the new film will be a nice surprise for me.
We congratulate the film crew on this result, which experts assess as striking. I will share my impressions later. I will watch the film by all means. I hope our audiences will like it too. Overall, we must do our best to promote the development of our film industries, especially considering our countries’ rich cinema traditions.
There are plans for several interesting film projects, and I think their number will increase. Films are a major factor in the strengthening of mutual understanding, neighbourly relations and friendship between our nations.
More than that, our cooperation in the film industry is a good, positive and extremely useful contribution to global culture and art.
Question: Recently, the United States accused China of breaching the Geneva trade and economic agreement. But the PRC Ministry of Commerce confirms China’s responsible implementation and support for the agreement, rejecting America’s ungrounded charges. Nevertheless, the US has introduced new restrictions against China, including a ban on exporting AI programming chips and cancellation of visas issued to Chinese students. How would you estimate this behavior?
Maria Zakharova: We have repeatedly (almost every time at briefings, in relevant statements and remarks) noted the illegitimate and discriminatory nature of Washington’s prohibitive measures that it introduces across the world, including against the PRC. When such frictions arise between the world’s two biggest economies (being part of a strong-hand strategy rather than anything lawful), they are fraught with major risks for global trade and economic relations and lead to disruptions in supplies, a decline in consumers’ purchasing power, and other negative phenomena capable of triggering wholesale economic recession.
Cancelling US visas of Chinese natural science students and banning the leading US universities, including the world-famous Harvard, from enrolling Chinese students is a new restriction added to the overall policy of containment and confrontation directed against China. As far as I know, the share of Chinese specialists in US hi-tech industries is rather high. Why are these measures being taken? At first, these people were invited, offered free tuition and promised promotions and prospects. But it all ended up in this. In fact, it’s ethnic segregation.
I have a concrete suggestion for Chinese students. They should not become discouraged, if faced with discrimination in the US academic sector. You can find better education opportunities in Russia. Russian education ranks high and is competitive on the world academic market. Chinese students are enrolled in Moscow universities and other leading federal and regional universities. There are universities that might be of interest to them in all regions of Russia. Chinese specialists use the knowledge they obtained in Russia on a wide scale. This is also obvious. They achieved much success in various areas. There is no need to despair. They should march forward and see alternatives. We are ready.
Question: How would you comment on awarding President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen with the Charlemagne Prize in Aachen on May 29?
Maria Zakharova: How can it be commented? I will just mention that over the recent years the prize nominees and winners included Vladimir Zelensky, Svetlana Tikhanovskaya and Emmanuel Macron.
This is the case when a teacher or doctor asks someone to continue the logical chain of several words. Just continue: Vladimir Zelensky, Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, Emmanuel Macron and… (obviously, suits well enough) Ursula von der Leyen. Such heroes.
Formerly, the prize was awarded to, for instance, Francois Mitterrand and Helmut Kohl. It was clear why. Their achievements were spectacular. I have named them. What achievements by Vladimir Zelensky can you name? Destruction of his people, destruction of his state, destruction of its history? Or take Svetlana Tikhanovskaya. What has she done? For what? For travelling from country to country, receiving money, assistance, and some support from them, relaying what she is told abroad, and calling for sanctions against the people to whom she belongs? I won’t talk about Macron now. This will take too much time. This is the question.
That very Ursula von der Leyen, who spend billions of euros to purchase US vaccine during the pandemic, having approved the transaction by a text message, and later could not account for it, and then the vaccines were destroyed to cover things up?
I’m appalled by a low level of the world EU/NATO leaders, a low professional level. I don’t even want to start talking about morality and ethics. Everything is clear. Especially given the lawsuits that Ursula von der Leyen had and has, and the court decision that qualified her transaction.
Shall we ask who is next? Something equally odious will be devised. Let’s imagine together – who?
Question: What can you say about the outcome of the presidential elections in Poland, where the winer is on the Russian federal wanted list?
Maria Zakharova: We can see how Russophobia and Russophobic propaganda have been spread for many years. The anti-Russian consensus has become a unifying subject for the Polish political elites.
Whoever wins the presidential elections in that country, we cannot see any prospects of bringing our bilateral relations to normal until Warsaw gives up its course hostile to Russia.
Karol Nawrocki, a new president elected on June 1, has so far distinguished himself in the context of Russian-Polish relations by only his active involvement in the campaign to demolish monuments to Soviet servicemen who liberated Poland.
Question: How do you assess the outcome of the second round of negotiations in Istanbul? What are the prospects for further negotiation process?
Maria Zakharova: Everything that needed to be said on this matter has already been addressed today. Our delegation remains engaged, maintaining contact with the Presidential Executive Office and the country’s leadership. They will continue to shape further steps in this direction and will keep you informed as developments unfold.
Question: Could you comment on the election of former German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock as President of the 80th session of the UN General Assembly? Deputy Permanent Representative of Russia to the UN, Dmitry Polyansky, noted that Baerbock received “an indecently small number of votes for someone set to lead the entire General Assembly.”
Maria Zakharova: Annalena Baerbock is a controversial figure. Her career has been marked by scandals in her home country, and her appointment to the UN presidency has already sparked controversy. Various factors contributed to this perception, ranging from career missteps to external influences. In her case, it is primarily a lack of professional experience and a limited understanding of the field she now represents and leads on the global stage.
Do you recall the crisis that marked the end of her tenure as Germany’s Foreign Minister? Many in Germany described it as a national embarrassment. The outcomes reflected this perception. I had the impression that the whole of Germany was concerned about where to assign her next, just to keep her out of domestic politics. These assessments come directly from German commentators and officials themselves.
Unfortunately, despite the largely ceremonial nature of this high-profile position, it is unlikely to improve her reputation. I anticipate a great deal of self-promotion accompanied by controversial statements rooted in a lack of expertise. Many remember her previous remarks about the need to change position “by 360 degrees” and references to “hundreds of thousands of kilometres” supposedly separating countries, along with numerous other questionable assertions.
Unfortunately, all of this has occurred during the UN’s anniversary year, commemorating the Victory over Nazism. We vividly recall how Annalena Baerbock praised her grandfather, who was associated with the Third Reich.
Regrettably, individuals lacking professional expertise, such as Baerbock, are assuming key roles during such a significant milestone in the UN’s history. This situation not only damages the image of the United Nations but, more importantly, undermines its effective functioning.
I would like to reiterate that the role of the President of the UN General Assembly is largely ceremonial, primarily focused on coordination and representative duties. The scope of authority is defined by the UN Charter (at least some kind of restriction will be placed on her) and established practices; after all, this position has been held continuously for over 80 years before her appointment. The resolutions adopted by the General Assembly reflect the collective decisions of the member states voting in favour of them. Additionally, the President’s term is limited to one year.
Question: The Foreign Ministry systematically and effectively upholds our country’s interests in Central Asia. At the same time, we see China becoming increasingly active in this region, as it continues to expand its platforms within the system of international relations. For example, a draft agreement on the procedure for forming and executing the budget of the Central Asia-China Secretariat, which will convene for a summit in the capital of Kazakhstan later this month, was released recently. How does this format affect Russia’s interests in Central Asia? And how does it affect Moscow’s contacts with Astana, Bishkek, Dushanbe, and Tashkent?
Maria Zakharova: During the talks in Moscow in May, the leaders of Russia and China agreed to keep on deploying the efforts aimed at ensuring stability and socioeconomic progress in the Central Asian region. This fundamental agreement is reflected in the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China’s joint statement on further deepening of comprehensive partnership and strategic interaction adopted on May 8.
Russia is making a substantial contribution to these efforts through consistently frequent bilateral and multilateral contacts with our Central Asian friends and allies at the top and high levels. Despite the challenging geopolitical situation, our interaction is effectively expanding across all areas, including trade, transport, science, education, and culture. Russia is among the Central Asian countries’ leading and key partners in the above and many other areas. The CSTO, the EAEU, the CIS, the SCO, and Russia-Central Asia mechanisms play a significant role in strengthening neighbourliness. Preparations are under way for the second summit in this format.
Question: Has the incident involving Finland’s allegations of a possible airspace violation by two Russian military aircraft in late May been fully resolved? Are there any mechanisms of Finland-Russia interaction that could minimise the number of such incidents?
Maria Zakharova: We interact by way of exchanging notes.
To answer the first part of the question, our country’s competent authorities are following the necessary verification steps. Once they are completed, information with official explanations will be sent - also via a note - to the Finnish side through diplomatic channels.
Question: In light of recent developments in the Middle East, does Russia see new opportunities for mediation between Iran and the United States in order to restore an equitable balance of power, being mindful of the mediatory role of the United States in addressing the Ukraine crisis? What initiatives can Russian diplomats come up with?
Maria Zakharova: Of course, we cannot but be concerned about the prospect of an escalation of tensions around Iran, or the situation slipping into a full-on confrontation, which we constantly hear and read statements made primarily by Western figures. All of that is fraught with dire consequences not only for the Middle East, but also for the world at large, especially so if you factor in deep dependence of the global economy on stable and uninterrupted supplies of energy from the strategically important Persian Gulf region.
Occasionally, we even hear irresponsible statements about attacking Iran’s nuclear power facilities which would lead to devastating environmental consequences - I don’t really want to dive deep into this subject, but it is related to your question - which would also affect neighbouring countries, which have repeatedly voiced their concerns in this regard. The whole world would be impacted, given the current levels of interdependence and trade.
It should be obvious to all that the way to the Iranian settlement goes through diplomacy.
We hold out some hope with regard to the ongoing mediated dialogue between Washington and Tehran, which could, short of boosting the level of mutual trust, at least rule out a potential resort to force that is dangerous for all.
Notably, Moscow is willing to support the parties in every possible way in their search for mutually acceptable solutions. We appreciate the positive remarks made by the Iranian government about the constructive role our country could play in Iran-US talks. Naturally, our Iranian friends are mindful of the valuable experience of interaction gained during the conclusion of the 2015 nuclear deal.
Question: As a spokeswoman for the Ministry, what’s your take on the effectiveness of Russia’s information efforts in the international arena amid lingering information warfare and the blocking of Russian media outlets internationally?
Maria Zakharova: The subject of your question is more than a subject or a question. It may well be a title of a book or a dissertation, a doctorate thesis, and possibly even claim the title of an academic research paper. Just imagine how much evidence I need to come up with before I can even begin to draw some kind of conclusions regarding effectiveness.
Much has been accomplished. I can share specific information about the expanding presence of our media in various regions of the world and the challenges facing Russian journalists. This is something we deal with literally on a daily basis.
Today, as you witnessed it, there was a question about the German authorities standing in the way of Russian journalists as they try to fulfil their professional duties.
I can give you a short answer: our media and our journalists are doing everything necessary amid enormous pressure. This, in truth, is what it means to serve a calling. Calling it just “work” doesn’t quite cover it, because it’s a form of true devotion. They are literally being forced to desist, labeled as “non-journalists,” bombed, killed, taken hostage, threatened, and sanctioned, and yet they still follow the path of their choice.
Speaking of effectiveness, it’s a synergy of all things, including the work of Russian media, international broadcasting, the efforts of individual journalists, and the powerful chorus of our state and public figures, who are acting as genuine educators on the global stage discussing traditional values, the philosophy of the future, and the preservation of civilisational achievements.
I prefer to look at it from a broader perspective. Russia’s voice is definitely being heard. Russia is being followed and supported. The resistance we face also speaks to the fact that our work is effective. But it doesn’t hold us back. It only gives us greater resolve in pursuing our objectives.
Additional materials
-
Photos
