Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova on the sidelines of the Fourth Eurasian Women’s Forum, St Petersburg, September 20, 2024

Table of contents

 

1. The Fourth Eurasian Women’s Forum
2. Opening of the High-Level General Debate Week of the 79th UN General Assembly Session
3. Developments in Lebanon
4. Ukraine update
5. Report on Atrocities by the Kiev Neo-Nazi Regime in the Kursk Region  
6. The Russian Foreign Ministry’s report Terrorist Crimes Committed by the Kiev Regime
7. Release of a booklet on Zaporozhye NPP
8. Developments in Moldova
9. The provocative military activities by the US and the Republic of Korea on the Korean Peninsula
10. Anti-China laws adopted in the US
11. Progress of German investigation into the terrorist attacks on Nord Stream
12. 10th St Petersburg International United Cultures Forum
13. International Organisation for the Russian Language
14. 20th Olympiad for Foreign School Students
15. The 80th anniversary of Bulgaria’s liberation
16. Genocide of children in the Nazi-occupied territory of the USSR

Answers to media questions:

1. The EU’s theft of profits from Russia’s “frozen” assets
2. Civic responsibility
3. France-Armenia cooperation
4. The West’s reaction to the escalation in Lebanon
5. Attempts by the European Parliament to influence the situation in Venezuela
6. Institutionalisation of the Bürgenstock process
7. Yerevan Council of the Elders’ delegation’s visit to Donbass
8. The European Union’s economic future
9. Kosovo Serbs’ legal status
10. Russia’s initiatives in ICT security
11. Economic and political dimensions of Russia-Armenia relations
12. Statements by the President of Belarus
13. Escalation of tensions around Taiwan
14. Portugal’s anti-Russia actions
15. A common alphabet project for Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Türkiye and Uzbekistan
16. Visits by NATO intelligence agencies’ representatives to Azerbaijan
17. Armenia-Azerbaijan relations
18. Investigation into the deaths of Russian peacekeepers
19. Ukrainian military personnel’s involvement in the training of terrorists in Syria
20. ICRC visit to Russia
21. Russophobic attitudes among EU officials
22. Building a multipolar world
23. Potential contacts between the leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia during the upcoming events in Russia
24. Preparation for a 3+3 meeting
25. Armenia’s diversification of arms import sources
26. Attempted state coup in Armenia
27. Russia-Syria relations
28. Russia-Iraq relations
29. Exchange of delegations between Russia and Iraq
30. US peacekeeping initiatives during the UN General Assembly

 

The Fourth Eurasian Women’s Forum

 

We are delighted to welcome you to our briefing, which is being held on the sidelines of the Fourth Eurasian Women's Forum. This landmark event brings together outstanding and accomplished women from around the globe, all of whom make a unique contribution to the development of various spheres of our lives.

Over its nine-year history, the Eurasian Women's Forum has demonstrated its relevance and significance. During this time, we have witnessed fruitful discussions on key topics of concern to women: the role of women in society, leadership qualities, women's entrepreneurship, education, healthcare, and many other issues.

The Eurasian Women's Forum has firmly established itself as a business platform for sharing experience, finding new solutions, and developing collaborative initiatives. The previous forums featured panel events promoting women's leadership, strengthening the role of women in society, advocating for gender equality, developing effective measures of state support for women in business, and fostering a favourable environment for realising women's potential across the board.

We would like to express our special gratitude to Federation Council Speaker Valentina Matviyenko, the initiator and creator of this unique project, for her enormous contribution to establishing a platform for productive dialogue on women’s roles and opportunities in the 21st century.

This year’s forum is even more extensive, having already hosted various thematic and strategic sessions, meetings, and discussions addressing contemporary challenges and threats, as well as topical issues in high technology, international cooperation, the environment, and many other important areas. Yesterday, it featured the session Women in Technology: Developing Artificial Intelligence organised by the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, the Information and Press Department of the Russian Foreign Ministry and the Russian Ministry of Digital Development, Communications and Mass Media.

Thank you to everyone who organised and participated in this major forum.

back to top

 

Opening of the High-Level General Debate Week of the 79th UN General Assembly Session

 

On September 24, the High-Level General Debate Week of the 79th UN General Assembly Session will open in New York. It would be no exaggeration to say that this will become one of the year’s most significant international political events. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will lead the Russian delegation.

As usual, the Minister’s schedule will be quite packed. On September 28, he will address the delegates of the UN General Assembly. His remarks will become the central element of this work. Sergey Lavrov will also take part in a number of high-level multilateral events, including those under the auspices of the CSTO, BRICS, the G20 and the Group of Friends in Defence of the Charter of the United Nations. Additionally, he is set to hold a series of bilateral meetings, including a conversation with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.

The session will take place amid increasing international tensions. The crisis around Ukraine remains a crucial factor affecting the international situation. Western countries are using this crisis as a battering ram against Russia. For these purposes, they continue to saturate the Kiev regime with weapons and money. They voice pseudo-peaceful initiatives and strive to persuade as many countries as possible to support them. They have now started openly supporting and carrying out terrorist attacks directed against civilians and infrastructure.

The destructive stance of the West, in the context of Ukraine, is an inalienable part of the collective West’s “crusade” against the assertion of an equitable multipolar world order and the emergence of new centres of political and economic influence in Asia, Africa and Latin America. These countries exhibit an increasingly strong desire to make a meaningful contribution to overcoming global challenges. They demand that their interests be taken into account and resolutely reject the neo-colonial approaches of former colonial powers. This is evidenced by their rhetoric and actions, as well as their contribution to the international agenda and efforts to resolve regional and international crises. They are demonstrating that they no longer need any patronage and can independently play a leading role. 

The ongoing tectonic shifts directly affect multilateral diplomacy, primarily at the UN. Unfortunately, the prestige of the UN has been tarnished in recent years. This can largely be attributed to the attempts of Western countries to use all UN tools and platforms to settle accounts with “undesirable” states, impose a destructive concept of a rules-based world order and replace international law.

In these challenging conditions, the Russian delegation’s main tasks at the UN General Assembly Session will include efforts  to reinstate and strengthen the UN’s role as a guarantor of regional and global security, uphold the goals and principles of the UN Charter in their entirety and interdependence, expand cooperation with the Global Majority, advance the initiative of President of Russia Vladimir Putin on forging the Eurasian security system and combating the neo-colonial actions of Western countries.

back to top

 

Developments in Lebanon

 

We are deeply concerned about the dangerous developments in the Republic of Lebanon. On September 19, the Israeli Air Force conducted a number of mass strikes in some districts in the south of Lebanon.

Earlier, on September 17 and 18, Lebanon was subjected to unprecedented terrorist cyber-attacks that resulted in the deaths of dozens of people, including children, and left thousands wounded. This is unprecedented in the history of the international community. It has never happened before. Yes, there have been terrorist attacks that, unfortunately, have claimed more lives, but this represents a completely new kind of terrorism that combines both scale and the use of new civilian technologies for terrorist purposes. We extend our sincere condolences to the families of the victims and wish a speedy recovery to those injured. We reiterate the importance of establishing all the circumstances surrounding these events.

We express our solidarity with Lebanon and strongly condemn the terrorist acts of armed aggression committed against that country and its citizens, which have resulted in the deaths of civilians and the destruction of social infrastructure. The increased risk of a full-scale armed confrontation in the Middle East due to these events is a cause for special concern.

We have noted the Israeli statements about “a new phase in the military campaign with a refocusing on the northern area.” We believe that the beginning of a large-scale military operation in Lebanon would have devastating effects on security throughout the entire Middle East. Such a catastrophic scenario must be avoided.

Once again, we insistently call on the parties involved to exercise maximum restraint and cease hostilities. We are ready for close interaction with regional and international partners to reduce tension and stabilise the military-political situation.

back to top

 

Ukraine update

 

The Kiev regime and its Western patrons continue to push the highly dangerous topic of granting Ukraine permission from NATO to use Western long-range missiles for strikes deep into Russian territory.

Judging by public statements, the Zelensky regime raised this issue again on September 11, during a gathering of its allies in Kiev under the guise of the Crimean Platform. The outgoing NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg voiced his support for this dangerous scheme during an interview with The Times on September 17. According to him, Ukraine's use of long-range missiles supposedly will not draw the alliance into conflict with Russia. Moreover, Stoltenberg believes that each NATO country will decide independently on the use of weapons supplied to Ukraine, without directives from the alliance. He admitted that such decisions “are not without risk,” but added that "there are no wars without risk.”

In my view, such statements can only be made by someone who is either completely subservient or under immense pressure to the point of saying anything, , or someone who has no understanding of the consequences of such actions. Furthermore, this individual seems to completely lack a sense of responsibility expected of the organisation he represents. He is leaving NATO, so perhaps he feels free to make any outrageous comments. After all, he will not be held accountable for these words. Although, to be fair, he has never been accountable, given that for all of his NATO chants, strategies and concepts are written by the Americans.

We want to remind the hawks on both sides of the Atlantic that they are playing with fire and have lost all sense of reality. As President of Russia Vladimir Putin said: “If this decision is made, it will mean nothing short of direct involvement – it will mean that NATO countries, the United States, and European countries are parties to the war in Ukraine. This will mean that NATO countries – the United States and European countries – are at war with Russia. And if this is the case, then, bearing in mind the change in the essence of the conflict, we will make appropriate decisions in response to the threats that will be posed to us.” The conflict unleashed through the West’s fault may well assume quite different dimensions, fraught with dangerous consequences for the entire world. As for Jens Stoltenberg and those who wrote that statement for him, they cannot be fully unaware of what such statements may lead to.

We have long been speaking about the terrorist essence of the Kiev regime. Now we have more and more evidence not just of its involvement, but of its direct perpetration of terrorist acts. That is a fact. There is also more and more evidence of the Kiev regime’s direct involvement in the international terrorist movement.

We have noted recent reports by the Turkish and Syrian newspapers Aydinlik Gazetesi and Al-Watan on holding talks by Ukrainian emissaries, including personally Chief of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ukrainian Defence Ministry Kirill Budanov, with the terrorist organisation Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham regarding the recruitment of fighters in the Syrian province of Idlib for joint preparations for attacks on Russia. According to reports received by the media from Syrian sources, 250 instructors from the Ukrainian Armed Forces have recently arrived in Idlib to train terrorists from the above organisation.

The Ukrainian terrorist hydra is growing, killing both Ukrainians and mercenaries, while threatening the security of the entire world. The lives of mercenaries are of little concern: they are criminals of all stripes, but they attack civilians. Having analysed the social media of the detained Ryan Routh, who attempted to assassinate Donald Trump, journalists came to the conclusion that representatives of the Kiev regime most likely involved him in recruiting foreigners, including from Afghanistan, to replenish the brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

The Kiev junta’s cooperation with the international terrorist syndicate was confirmed on September 9 to the French Contre-Poison by Mohammed Ramadan, a representative of the Strategic Framework for the Defence of the People of Azawad from Mali. He acknowledged that the group had united its efforts with the Kiev regime against Russia.

Bankovaya Street has long been betting on terrorism, threatening the entire world with unpredictable and extremely dangerous consequences. Judging by the photos of the Kursk NPP taken from a distance of several kilometres using a reconnaissance drone of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and later published in the Ukrainian media, Kiev has not abandoned the idea of ​​​​attacking this civilian infrastructure facility.

All these facts prove the true essence of Vladimir Zelensky’s regime, which lacks even slightest connection to democracy and legality. They have moved from a nationalist agenda and dictatorship to direct terrorist activities. Behind all the crimes of the Kiev regime are, first of all, the United States and Britain.

Several days ago, the US Department of Defence Office of Inspector General released a summary of oversight reports on security assistance to Ukraine. It says that the Pentagon trained a Ukrainian Armed Forces unit that “may have committed gross human rights violation.” If the Pentagon admits that, imagine what its instructors were really doing. This resulted in a violation of the Leahy Law, which prohibits the US State Department and the Department of Defence from providing military assistance to foreign military and police units that do not respect human rights. It is unclear why it was necessary to wait for this report, because only a crazy person does not know about human rights violations in Ukraine. For ten years, the entire world has been watching not just human rights being violated there, but all ideas about the legality and morality of the Kiev regime’s behaviour collapsing. And then, the Pentagon saw the light. The report does not say which Ukrainian unit is being referred to, but it does not matter. The Ukrainian Armed Forces have long since turned into a Nazi army committing monstrous crimes against civilians.

Russian law enforcement agencies continue to obtain evidence about Bandera followers forcibly shipping to Ukraine the Kursk Region residents who failed to evacuate which is reminiscent of what German Nazi occupiers did when they deported Soviet people into German slavery. The template is the same. There is abundant witness testimony gathered by the Russian Red Cross headquarters in Kursk about the Ukrainian Armed Forces creating makeshift concentration camps near the Russian border, where, at gunpoint, they place the locals who for various reasons were unable to flee unsafe areas. One Ukrainian POW informed the authorities about an impending Banderite attack on a passenger train in the Kursk Region. More facts of Ukrainian Nazis executing or cruelly treating civilians in the Kursk Region continue to be documented.

We keep seeing more Nazi symbols and insignia on helmets, daggers, and chevrons of enemy combatants, who fled the battlefield, were killed, or captured in the Kursk Region. Evidence has been documented by, among others, foreign journalists who illegally entered Russian territory.

Regrettably, reputable Western media and non-governmental organisations refuse to acknowledge multiple documented instances of the Ukrainian military wearing neo-Nazi symbols on our territory, or the atrocities committed by them. No matter how hard they try, they are unable to retouch them and the truth, especially of these proportions, keeps coming through. The Banderites continue to pose for photos before Western reporters, openly expressing admiration for their ideological idols from the Third Reich and flaunting Hitler’s henchmen chevrons.

The Kiev regime continues to terrorise the civilians in the Russian regions.

On September 11, the media got a hold of footage captured by a Russian reconnaissance drone showing Ukrainian IFV firing shots at civilians who were trying to cross a field in an attempt to flee from Ukrainian Nazis in the Kursk Region.

Our military have documented the shooting by Ukrainian Armed Forces of two civilian women and a dog from the village of Zhuravli in the Kursk Region who were trying to evacuate on foot. This represents an outright degradation of human moral values and everything what this world is all about. I won’t even mention ethics. The objective observation footage  provided by a Russian drone shows bloodied female bodies lying on the road with the dead animal and a cart with their belongings lying next to them.

The first quarter of the 21st century is coming to an end: mobile communication has become a modern convenience, people travel by air from point A to point B across the globe, and can now dive into oceanic depths. There are capabilities out there for storing vast amounts of information. We have ways to find out how people lived thousands of years ago. Yet, we see those who claimed to be leaders of the planet transform life on Earth into hell using proxies acting under foreign flags, just like they did centuries ago. This is called dehumanisation.

On September 14, Russian investigative authorities documented a horrendous war crime in the village of Goncharovka, Kursk Region. Ukrainian militants raped and shot a woman who worked at a local school upon discovering her son was a member of the military.

On September 15, in the village of Veseloye, Kursk Region, Ukrainian terrorists used a US-made bomb to wipe out the building of a local school, calling it retribution for Russia obliterating a military communications institute in Poltava. That is, in response to a strike on a military target, Kiev neo-Nazis destroyed a civilian site.

On September 13, Ukrainian Nazis purposely used a drone to attack a privately-owned vehicle in the Zaporozhye Region, injuring a 22-year-old resident of the village of Tarasovka. While he was on his way to a medical facility, the drone attacked again killing the man. Similar strikes in Vasilyevka killed one civilian and injured three more.

On September 14, a direct hit by a shell killed a woman in her home in the village of Bezlyudovka, Belgorod Region. In the village of Voznesenovka, an explosives-laden drone flew through the window of a standalone house causing a blast injury and concussion to a female civilian. On the same day, an artillery attack injured three people on the Shebekino-Belgorod Motorway. Ten civilians were injured, with one in extremely critical condition, following the attacks on residential buildings and civilian vehicles in Belgorod on September 16.

All these crimes are on the hands of the Kiev junta and its Western masters. Russian law enforcement agencies are documenting every one of them. All those involved will be held accountable to the full extent of the law.

Russian law enforcement agencies continue to work on bringing to justice war criminals, including mercenaries fighting for the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

The Investigative Committee of Russia has initiated criminal proceedings against the servicemen of the 61st Separate Motorised Rifle Brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, V. Panchenko and I. Dmitrakov, on account of terrorism, abduction of three civilians, and looting in the Kursk Region. Both of them were captured and handed over to the investigative authorities. Criminal proceedings have been initiated against Major-General of the Ukrainian Armed Forces Dmitry Krasilnikov for war crimes committed under his command in the Kursk Region. He is accused of ordering missile strikes, using UAVs to blow up residential homes, civilian infrastructure, and vehicles, as well as mining evacuation routes. Many civilians were killed or injured as a result of these actions. Dmitry Krasilnikov was placed on the wanted list.

Commander of the airborne assault company of the 36th Separate Marine Brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces S. Taranyuk was sentenced to 29 years in prison for the orders he had issued in March 2022 which had led to the execution of three civilians in Mariupol. His comrade-in-arms, commander of the first platoon of snipers of the same brigade A. Malovichko, was sentenced to 24 years in prison for killing a civilian in Mariupol on March 14, 2022.

Nazis from the Azov regiment’s rapid response battalion, E. Nazarovsky, A. Sinelnik, and M. Sukhanyuk, were sentenced to 27 years in prison each for targeting residential buildings in Mariupol in March 2022 from a mortar that killed four civilians.

None of the Ukrainian criminals and their accomplices will escape punishment.

The above facts confirm the importance of the goals of the special military operation to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine, and to eliminate threats emanating from its territory. Without a doubt, all these goals will be fulfilled.

back to top

 

Report on Atrocities by the Kiev Neo-Nazi Regime in the Kursk Region  

 

On September 23, the International Public Tribunal on the Crimes of Ukrainian Neo-Nazis will present its report entitled Atrocities by the Kiev Neo-Nazi Regime in the Kursk Region at the Rossiya Segodnya International Multimedia Press Centre.  

The International Public Tribunal on the Crimes of Ukrainian Neo-Nazis and their Accomplices was created at the initiative of foreign and Russian public figures and journalists during an international conference held by the Civic Chamber of Russia on March 1, 2022. The tribunal has recorded a considerable amount of data on military crimes perpetrated by Ukrainian neo-Nazis and their accomplices. Currently, it is focusing on the Kursk Region of Russia.

The report is based on testimonies of victims in the Kursk Region and will be available in Russian and English.

Taking part in the presentation will be Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation Tatyana Moskalkova and Foreign Ministry Ambassador-at- Large on Crimes Committed by the Kiev Regime Rodion Miroshnik.

We invite representatives of Russian and foreign media outlets to attend this function.

back to top

 

The Russian Foreign Ministry’s report Terrorist Crimes Committed by the Kiev Regime

 

On September 12, the Foreign Ministry posted on its website the report Terrorist Crimes Committed by the Kiev Regime.

The report systematises detailed information on numerous terrorist crimes committed by the Kiev regime from early 2022 to the first half of 2024.  Its contents  convincingly attest to the fact that a situation exceeding the framework of effective international law has emerged in Europe over the past two years, where the military-political leadership of a European country openly uses terrorist methods against a neighbouring state. We see this “European” country, Ukraine, using terrorist methods not only against its neighbour, Russia, but also countries on other continents.

The report contains data on the Kiev regime being implicated in masterminding numerous terrorist attacks meant to stir public unrest, split Russia, discredit the authorities, create an atmosphere of fear and panic, and encourage interethnic strife, xenophobia and nationalism in this country.

The report focuses on the most notorious terrorist attacks planned and launched by the Kiev regime, Ukraine’s use of terrorist and other prohibited means and methods of warfare, and Ukrainian military and political leaders’ ties with international terrorist groups.  

Facts included in this document as well as the Foreign Ministry’s reports On the Kiev Regime’s Unlawful Acts with Regard to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), its Priests, and Parishioners (July 2023), The Situation Involving the Glorification of Nazism, Diffusion of Neo-Nazism and Other Practices that Contribute to Fueling Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (September 2024), The Human Rights Situation in Ukraine (May 2024), and the Final Report by the Parliamentary Commission on Investigating the Kiev Regime’s Criminal Acts with Regard to Minors  (June 2024) provide an irrefutable proof testifying to the inhuman nature of the Kiev-based neo-Nazi junta.

back to top

 

Release of a booklet on Zaporozhye NPP

 

2024 marks the 40th anniversary since the first power unit of the Zaporozhye NPP (ZNPP) was launched. This event should have taken place in completely different circumstances. There should have been a celebration, speeches, interesting and exciting events. But the situation is different, though we still have some facts to acknowledge regarding this anniversary.

To mark this occasion, the Foreign Ministry and Rosatom State Corporation have released a booklet that highlights key moments in the ZNPP’s history, starting with the USSR Council of Ministers’ decision to build it in 1977 and concluding with the return of the station to the Russian nuclear family. These booklets were circulated during the 68th session of the IAEA General Conference, which opened on September 16 in Vienna.

We believe that this publication, which you can find on the Foreign Ministry’s website, will be useful for understanding the history of the ZNPP and the current situation at the plant in the context of ongoing provocations from Ukraine.

We emphasise that Russia is doing everything necessary to ensure the stable operation of the plant and to mitigate threats to its security posed by the Kiev regime.

back to top

 

Developments in Moldova

 

The pro-Western leadership of Moldova continues to instil aggressive Russophobia in the republic, persistently but unsuccessfully trying to convince ordinary Moldovans that our country is the source of all troubles and misfortunes.

On September 11, 2024, Parliament Speaker Igor Grosu said that Moldova had been fighting the Russian hybrid war aimed at instilling fear, mistrust of the state and institutions, and sowing discord and hatred since the early 1990s. This is nonsense. However, we must comment on this, because it is a statement made by an official. In fact, the Moldovan leadership is accusing Russia of what they themselves are doing: undermining the political and economic sovereignty and security of Moldova, and dismantling its national identity. Here are some recent examples.

Attacks against freedom of speech continue. On September 10, the licence of the company that owns the Canal 5 TV channel and the Maestro FM radio station was revoked. In total, 16 Russian-language TV channels and over 60 internet websites have been blocked in Moldova since the end of 2022.

On the sidelines of the forum, we held meetings with representatives of Moldova who came here to take part in the event. They say that they have to secretly search for, listen to and watch Russian media, which are completely blocked in their country, reminiscent of the Great Patriotic War.

The authorities are consistently driving the country into debt slavery. On September 17, a regular meeting of the so-called Moldova Support Platform was held in Chisinau, following which it was announced that 385 million euros would be allocated to the republic. However, it is important to realise that the lion's share of the West's aid consists of loans. This is how the West prefers to offer assistance. Future generations of Moldovans will have to pay for this debt. In total, according to statistics, during the presidency of Maia Sandu, Moldova's public debt has grown by 58 percent to $6.3 billion. For a country with a population of 2,438,000, according to the interim census conducted in April−July, such figures are a huge indicator.

Moldova’s leadership continues to engage in irresponsible games with security. According to recent reports, Romania is planning to transfer the mobile maintenance stations for F-16 fighter jets received by Bucharest to Moldova for subsequent deployment at the Marculesti airfield. Experts regarded this as further confirmation that Chisinau is laying the groundwork for providing Moldovan airfield infrastructure to accommodate aircraft transferred by the West for the needs of the Ukrainian armed forces. At the same time, the militarisation of Moldova is actively underway, involving a number of Western countries, including Germany, France, Poland and the Baltic states. We once again strongly urge Chisinau to refrain from irresponsible steps that could turn Moldova into a participant in the conflict in Ukraine.

The Moldovan authorities continue their discriminatory policy towards their own citizens, dividing them into “loyal” and “not so loyal.” I was surprised to learn that it is extremely difficult to enter Moldova, and I am not talking about compliance with Moldovan legislation in terms of the visa regime or migration rules, but about politically motivated detentions of persons travelling to Moldova. Moreover, I was shocked that it is difficult for Moldovan citizens to leave the country. This is not because of expired passports or debts, but for political reasons. This is astonishing. I have already commented on the decision of the Central Election Commission of Moldova of September 14, which planned to open only five polling stations for Moldovan voters in Russia to vote in the presidential elections on October 20, while over a hundred polling stations will be available for them in the United States and Western Europe.

Indeed, this is an admission of their own dishonesty. To say nothing of their commitment to democratic principles. Democratic principles and Maia Sandu? They are poles apart. They show little regard for the rule of law.

The Sandu team’s disconnect from the Moldovan people has become a meme in Moldova. A fresh example is an initiative by one of her cabinet ministers, who decided to run a poll to find out in what language his fellow citizens read his Telegram posts. It transpired that 70 percent read them in Russian. I have a piece of advice for this minister. They had rebranded the Moldovan language as Romanian and “coped” with the problem. Why not call the Russian language Romanian to finally settle the language issue? They say the experiment was hastily phased out.

We see that the residents of Moldova are sick and tired of the European integration experiments the current authorities have conducted on them. They are consolidating to oppose the interests and values that they are being forced to accept. For Moldova Without the EU marches and local farmers’ protests are held in various parts of the country.

Neither do the Moldovans believe the anti-Russia tales being spun by the authorities. This is confirmed by the fact that a large Moldovan delegation had arrived to attend the Eurasian Women’s Forum in St Petersburg and was most active as a participant.

back to top

 

The provocative military activities by the US and the Republic of Korea on the Korean Peninsula

 

In recent time, the United States and the Republic of Korea have been increasingly active militarily on the Korean Peninsula. The allied armed forces drill both combat skills during field exercises, including gunnery in areas adjoining the demilitarised zone and in the Yellow Sea close to the Northern Demarcation Line, and air, naval, and landing operations. They also simulates the deployment and use of their strategic and tactical nuclear forces against an eventuality of a full-scale military conflict on the peninsula.

On top of that, Washington, Seoul and Tokyo are creating a trilateral military cooperation system, hatching plans for regular trilateral inter-service drills. In parallel, South Korea is resuscitating the “UN Command,” a rudimentary and purely nominal structure that is actually controlled by the Pentagon. The defence ministers of the three countries hold meetings to prepare the ground for the “coalition’s” possible mobilisation and assignment of roles in a hypothetical conflict with the DPRK.

To justify their aggressive intentions, the West has invented “threats” allegedly posed by Russia and the DPRK. Its conceptual approaches ascribe to both countries what it calls “illegal military cooperation.” Pray, what “illegal military cooperation?” Now this shibboleth migrates from one Russophobic get-together to another.

I wonder if Washington’s support for the Kiev regime’s terrorist activities is a legitimate “story?”  And what about Washington’s involvement in escalating the conflict in the Middle East? And its occupation of a large part of Syrian territory, where it supports “moderate terrorists?”  

These actions are nothing short of hostile and undermining the already fragile state of the truce. Implementing the revanchist plans to change the status quo on the peninsula is provoking an uncontrolled escalation of military tensions. We hope that the United States and South Korea understand the risks involved in their continued attempts to foment military hysteria and settle the scores with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which has the same kind of sovereignty as all UN member countries and the same legitimate right to self-defence.   

back to top

 

Anti-China laws adopted in the US

 

The United States of America is systematically trying to destabilise situation in various places on the planet. China, which has had impressive economic development in recent decades and become a leader in many sectors of the global economy and even turned into an important driver of sustainable global growth, is also put under pressure by the US. However, instead of fair competition and constructive and equal cooperationWashington and its satellites are using illegitimate methods of financial, economic, and technological containment, as well as various protectionist tricks and politically motivated restrictions, trying to maintain their fading dominance in global affairs, even if it is the US who suffers from all these measures.

For our part, we continue to build Russian-Chinese cooperation based on the principles of respectful, equal and trusting partnership, and resolute mutual support on issues that are key to both sides. This is the value of the Russian-Chinese strategic link, which is not directed against third countries and is not subject to the influence of external circumstances.

back to top

 

Progress of German investigation into the terrorist attacks on Nord Stream

 

In a few days, it will be two years since the terrorist attacks on the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines. All of this happened near the coast of Denmark and Sweden. Civilian infrastructure was damaged; our country, investors, and operators in Germany and other countries were affected.

On the eve of this date, a letter from the Permanent Missions of Denmark, Germany and Sweden on the progress of the German investigation into the terrorist attacks on Nord Stream was distributed to the UN Security Council. It explains why Denmark and Sweden are talking about the German investigation together with Germany: because they curtailed their own investigations, saying that they were unable to investigate anything. The letter contains nothing new about Berlin’s investigation.

Everything can be summed up in repeating general points that the investigation is allegedly being carried out impartially and independently, in accordance with the fundamental principles of the rule of law and Germany’s international commitments.

The Western countries still refuse to cooperate with the Russian side and continue to deceive the international community and their own citizens instead of providing clear answers, to say nothing about Russia’s numerous requests sent to the leadership of Germany, Sweden and Denmark being disregarded. They did not share information their investigative bodies had on this issue; and, as a result, the international community remains in the dark. It could have been done via the UN, Security Council, or the Secretary-General, but nothing was submitted to them.

The current Germany’s demarche was apparently prompted by Russia initiating a discussion of the circumstances surrounding the explosions at the Nord Stream pipeline in the UN Security Council on August 20 and starting work on the next draft statement by the Security Council President on this topic.

There is no doubt that the Security Council members representing the collective West will wave this letter without substance during future discussions to counter any attempts by the countries of the World Majority or any country that want to know the truth, to somehow get closer to it.

Let me remind you that this was an outrageous crime and an outright sabotage against a critical pan-European energy infrastructure. The sabotage was classified as a terrorist attack on September 28, 2022. A criminal case was opened in the Russian Federation on an act of international terrorism (Article 361, Part 1, of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The Russian competent authorities continue their investigation.

Those who ordered the terrorist attack on the Nord Stream gas pipelines had a very specific objective. I would like to remind you that this objective was articulated by Washington, specifically by President Joe Biden and former State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland. Their aim was to sever mutually beneficial energy ties between Russia and Europe – something they had been systematically working towards for years.

Over the past two years, the international community only has only grown more convinced that the attack was premeditated and coordinated from a central point of authority. This was an act of aggression, not just against Russia, but primarily against Europe. During this period, attempts to manipulate the facts, backing them with the absurd Anglo-Saxon theory that Russia was responsible for the attack, have failed. Even the theory’s proponents did not truly believe it.

We can see how the West is trying to avoid taking responsibility for this terrorist attack. I repeat, only someone out of touch with reality could believe that two amateur divers, who allegedly arrived there by rowboat, were responsible for these explosions. In truth, one thing is clear: Germany possesses important information about this terrorist attack. On the one hand, they share this information with journalists, but on the other, they withhold it from the UN Security Council.

Additionally, there is the conspicuous refusal of Western politicians, especially German ones, to comment on a Wall Street Journal article, despite insistent public demand, alleging that Valery Zaluzhny, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, ordered the demolition of the Nord Stream pipelines in September 2022, against the wishes of both Vladimir Zelensky and the CIA, who had demanded the operation be called off.

In their efforts to inflict a “strategic defeat” on Russia, the United States and its allies have long abandoned any limitations on the methods, scale or specific means used. They now openly resort to terrorism.  Russia intends to complete the investigation into the terrorist attacks on the Nord Stream pipelines. We will do everything in our power, including using multilateral platforms, to reveal the truth to the public. Our efforts include a meeting of the UN Security Council on the sabotage of the Russian gas pipelines, scheduled for September 26, 2024.

back to top

 

10th St Petersburg International United Cultures Forum

 

The 10th St Petersburg International Forum of United Cultures took place on September 11-14. The event was held at an unprecedentedly high international level, with representatives of 80 countries, 50 official delegations, and six international organisations visiting the city.

On September 12, President of Russia Vladimir Putin addressed the forum participants. The speech by Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia was a significant event.

The outcome of the forum has been prominently documented in the summary by its Chair – Russian Deputy Prime Minister Tatyana Golikova, which notes that the formation of a multipolar world leads to greater interconnections between people and expanding interaction between cultures and civilisations. The document points out that there is no alternative to building relationships between nations based on mutual respect and understanding of each other’s culture as an essential part of the world culture and a multipolar world order.

Themed forum meetings with the participation of recognised experts on topical issues in arts and creativity confirmed the relevance of a unifying agenda as well as the willingness to find joint solutions to the global challenges of our time.

As a follow-up to the Declaration of the 9th St Petersburg International Forum of United Cultures (November 16-18, 2023), the participants agreed on joint initiatives to preserve and promote cultural heritage, and develop intercultural dialogue based on the principles of mutual understanding and mutual respect.

Heads of the official foreign delegations sent messages of greetings on the occasion of the forum’s 10th anniversary, emphasising the paramount contribution of the Russian culture in the world heritage, the significance of the forum’s years-long activities, and the relevance of further meetings.

In addition, in the context of Russia’s chairmanship of BRICS and the CIS this year, relevant industry events took place on the sidelines of the forum.

The main outcome of the BRICS Culture Ministers’ Meeting was the adoption of a declaration that reflects the intention of the BRICS countries to boost cultural and humanitarian cooperation.

The CIS Culture Ministers’ Meeting focused on the aspects of preparations for the celebrations to mark next year’s 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War.

The cultural programme’s highlights included a concert of united cultures by artists from BRICS countries, a festival of BRICS culture, a performance by music groups from CIS countries in Peterhof, and the second Hermitage Awards ceremony.

back to top

 

International Organisation for the Russian Language

 

Russian has always been the language of interethnic communication for hundreds of millions of people across the globe. 2023 was declared the Year of the Russian Language as the Language of Interethnic Communication in the Commonwealth of Independent States. It was only symbolic that the presidents of Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan signed the Treaty on Establishing the International Organisation for the Russian Language on the sidelines of the CIS summit in Bishkek on October 13, 2023, hence implementing the idea of President of Kazakhstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev.

The leaders unanimously agreed that the Organisation must act as an independent international mechanism designed to protect and promote the Russian language globally, including as a means of access to world cultural treasures and a key both to mutual understanding and communication as well as to the most extensive international cooperation in all its diversity.

The Organisation has international legal standing, is not limited to the CIS space, and operates institutionally outside the Commonwealth. It is open for any countries to join that share its noble goals and principles. Russia and other founding countries of the new organisation would certainly welcome and support the accession of new members.

The new Organisation aims to serve the goals of developing and promoting friendship, good-neighbourliness, mutual understanding, and mutually beneficial cooperation, including the efforts to support and promote Russian as a language of interstate communication and a communication tool, as well as its use as a means of access to global knowledge bases and data in the field of culture, literature, and history. Its activities, among other things, will contribute to strengthening the status of the Russian language as an official or working language of international and regional intergovernmental organisations and structures. We expect the International Organisation for the Russian Language to help effectively address tasks of supporting high-quality education as well as training the Russian language teaching and academic personnel.

Preparations for the Organisation’s first Ministerial Conference are underway. I am confident that the International Organisation for the Russian Language will become a flagship project not just for the CIS countries and nations, where Russian is a part of the cultural code and a true value of the people, but also for those living in many other countries who traditionally use it to access the achievements of world science and culture. Let me remind you that the Russian language is one of the six official languages ​​of the UN.

back to top

 

20th Olympiad for Foreign School Students

 

The Pushkin State Russian Language Institute is now accepting online applications for participation in the 20th International Olympiad in Russian for Foreign School Students, named after the renowned Soviet and Russian linguist Vitaly Kostomarov.

The Olympiad was established by the Pushkin State Russian Language Institute jointly with International Association of Teachers of Russian Language and Literature. The Olympiad is organised with the support from the Russian Foreign Ministry, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, and the Federal Agency for the Commonwealth of Independent States, Compatriots Living Abroad, and International Humanitarian Cooperation (Rossotrudnichestvo).

The event aims to promote the status of Russian as a language of international communication, maintain and increase foreign citizens’ interest for in-depth study of Russian, promote the motivation of foreign school students to study Russian and take studies in the Russian Federation, and provide extensive knowledge about the country of the studied language, Russia.

Senior students of foreign schools, including those with Russian as the language of instruction, as well as individual participants aged between 14 and 18 can take part in the Olympiad. Registration is open on the Education in Russian website until September 22.

We would like to invite all students to take part in this exciting event.

back to top

 

The 80th anniversary of Bulgaria’s liberation

 

Eighty years ago, in September 1944, the Red Army liberated Bulgaria from Nazi invaders. This landmark event has remained deeply embedded in the hearts of the majority of the Bulgarian people.

Today, we witness Bulgarian pseudo-historians obtaining Western grants and selling their talents for handouts. They are yielding to pressure and trying to impose a new interpretation, one that is out of touch with reality, on society, claiming that the Soviet Union had an “occupation role.” Not only is this assertion unfounded, but it also represents a form of neo-mythology unfolding before our very eyes.

At the same time, Bulgaria provides military and military-technical assistance to the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev. It ignores columns of torch-bearing hoodlums marching in Ukraine and the Baltic states, as well as in the streets of Sofia. Bulgarian authorities have become directly involved in desecrating, defacing and destroying monuments dedicated to anti-Nazi fighters.

With this in mind, we would like to recall some key historical facts.

When the Great Patriotic War began, the Bulgarian government adopted a dual position with regard to the Soviet Union. Without severing diplomatic relations with Moscow, Sofia allowed Germany and Italy to deploy their forces, including air force units, U-boats and warships, within its borders and to use its airfields and ports.

The Red Army’s decisive victories in 1943 prompted Nazi Germany’s satellite states to prioritise their quick withdrawal from the war. In an effort to expedite their decision-making process, the governments of the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States issued a joint statement on May 13, 1944. This document addressed Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Finland, indicating that these nations could still reduce their casualties and facilitate an Allied victory by withdrawing from the war, ending their deleterious cooperation with Germany, and resisting Nazi forces by all available means.

In the spring and summer of 1944, the Soviet government repeatedly urged Bulgaria to terminate its alliance with Germany and adopt a neutral stance. The Bulgarian government declared its neutrality only on August 26, 1944, but it did not impede the redeployment of retreating German forces through its territory. By late August 1944, the Red Army encircled and destroyed the main elements of the joint Army Group South Ukraine during the Jassy-Kishinev operation, liberating Romania and advancing to the Bulgarian border.

At that time, 30,000 German officers and soldiers remained deployed on Bulgarian territory. On September 5, 1944, the Soviet government issued a note stating that Bulgaria was at war with the Soviet Union due to its previous hostilities against the USSR. It proclaimed that, henceforth, the Soviet Union would be at war with Bulgaria.

On September 8, 1944, advance units of the Red Army’s 3rd Ukrainian Front, commanded by Marshal Fyodor Tolbukhin, crossed the Romanian-Bulgarian border without firing a single shot. An order issued by the commander of Soviet forces stated, “The people of Bulgaria are welcoming the incoming Red Army units in a friendly manner. I emphatically demand a polite and friendly attitude towards the Bulgarian population, who are awaiting the Red Army as their liberator.” At 12 pm, the Government of Konstantin Muraviev announced that it was at war with Germany. Later that evening, the Soviet Union agreed to consider Bulgaria’s request for an armistice.

In the early hours of September 9, an uprising led by the Fatherland Front erupted in Sofia. The Government of Konstantin Muraviev was overthrown, and a new government headed by Kimon Georgiev Stoyanov was established. On September 10, 1944, the Soviet high command declared a cessation of hostilities, which had virtually not taken place, on the grounds that the Bulgarian government had declared war on Germany and requested an armistice with the Soviet government.

After aligning with the Soviet Union, Bulgaria deployed its army against the Nazis and their collaborators. The country issued an order to withdraw Bulgarian units from Greece and Yugoslavia. On October 28, 1944, an Armistice Agreement was signed between the governments of the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States, on one side, and the Government of Bulgaria, on the other. An Allied Control Commission for Bulgaria, comprising representatives of the three Allied powers, was established for the entire duration of the agreement.

During the Paris Peace Conference in 1946, Bulgaria found a reliable ally in Moscow during the negotiations of a peace treaty. With the Soviet Union’s direct and consistent support, members of the Bulgarian delegation successfully avoided any revision of national borders. As a result, Bulgaria became the only member of the defeated coalition not to incur territorial losses. It also became possible to reach a mutually acceptable solution on the issue of reparations, reducing the previously stated amount by nearly 50 percent.

Ahead of the 80th anniversary of overthrowing the fascist junta in Bulgaria, the Central Archive of the Russian Federation’s Ministry of Defence and the Russian Military Historical Society published archival documents concerning the liberation of Bulgaria by Soviet forces. These documents shed light on the relationship between Soviet troops and the population of Bulgaria. The collection contains combat reports, award certificates, appeals by the Red Army’s high command to the local population, personal letters, coded messages, documents of the Bulgarian high command, and more.

We will always remember the immense and irreplaceable losses our Motherland endured in the struggle to liberate Europe, including Bulgaria, from the Nazi scourge. We are grateful to our numerous Bulgarian friends who continue to honour the heroic feat of Soviet soldiers.

Is it possible to express gratitude for love? Can we thank people for remembering the truth about their ancestors and for cherishing the memory of those Bulgarian citizens who fought alongside Soviet forces to liberate the world from Nazism? Is it possible to say ‘thank you’ for this? I believe, the answer is ‘yes’ when we consider the etymology of the word ‘thank you.’ May God save all who cherish the memory of those days and heroes, and who will never betray this memory.

back to top

 

Genocide of children in the Nazi-occupied territory of the USSR

 

Militants of the Kiev regime continue to flaunt and parade Nazi symbols for Western media cameras, doing so on soil drenched with the blood of children and Soviet soldiers, millions of whom sacrificed their lives in the fight for the liberation of these same territories.

Red Army soldiers were not the only ones to shed blood in the Kursk, Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, in Donbass, as well as in Ukraine, now reoccupied by the Nazis, whose leaders are based on Bankovaya Street in Kiev.  The Nazis subjected the local population to genocide, killing thousands of civilians, teenagers, and children. They let them die of starvation, recruited them for hard labour in concentration camps or ghettos, or subjected them to inhumane “medical experiments,” such as bleeding children to use their blood for treating retreating German troops.

Militants from the Azov terrorist unit, with Wolfsangel’s (Wolf’s Hook) and Totenkopf’s (Death’s Head) tattooed on their bodies, have borrowed not only the symbols but also the methods from their Third Reich idols. Their crimes in Mariupol are well-documented, and their names will remain forever tainted, regardless of what “rebranding” their curators from Washington and London resort to in order to absolve them of guilt. These crimes are carbon copies of what was perpetrated in these same territories 80-85 years ago.

Today, it is more important than ever before to remember the history of the Great Patriotic War (World War II), which includes both the feats of valour committed by Soviet soldiers and the crimes perpetrated by Nazi monsters. Knowing just a few facts is not enough. It is necessary to study this period and read archival documents or memoirs left by those who went through the war or concentration camps. This is particularly important now that we are preparing to celebrate the 80th anniversary of Great Victory.

I would like to draw your attention to a recently published unique book entitled Genocide of Children in the German-Occupied Territories of the USSR. I mentioned it in my September 17 Telegram post. 

The collection includes reminiscences contributed by people who went through this horror, as well as previously unknown memoirs written by victims of Nazism, primarily young-age genocide survivors.

Prepared for publication by the International Union of Former Juvenile Prisoners of Fascism, this book generalises terrible, yet highly valuable, documentary material, including eyewitness testimonies on the genocide of Soviet citizens in the occupied territories of the Soviet Union, archive documents, and content about crimes committed by German forces and their accomplices.   

Incidentally, children were often kidnapped and turned over to Germans by collaborationists (members of the local police force), who are currently glorified in Ukraine. 

Let me cite some figures. Each of these conceals the inconceivable misery of millions of families, the unbearable suffering and torment. According to various estimates, civilians make up one-half (14 million) of the total number (27.7 million) of victims put to death by the Nazis.   

One in every six members (or over 15 percent) of the 18-million death camp population was a child. More than 2.5 million Soviet children perished as a result of criminal actions committed by Nazis and fascists. Just think of this figure. It amounts to the entire population of some European countries.

Only one in every ten young-age death camp prisoners managed to survive. Many hundreds of thousands of children who survived in the occupied territories became disabled both physically and morally.

Let me quote from some reminiscences:

P.D. Morozov, born 1936, tattoo number 149759, native of the Vitebsk Region: “...They stretched a string at a height of one metre and made us jump over it. This was their method to ascertain children’s physical capabilities at Auschwitz. If you succeeded, you were sent to Camp Hut 7, where you stayed until the next check. If not, you went to the “bath.” We knew that people were gassed there… I managed to jump over it.”  

I.L. Klyuyev, born 1938, former prisoner of Lublin (Majdanek) concentration camp: “There was a major punitive expedition, during which the German troops captured some residents of my native village and some people from neighbouring villages <…> One day later, we were in Vitebsk, and a month later – at Majdanek… Only two members of our five-member family managed to survive – myself and my elder brother. Our father and mother died, as did my twin brother Vasya. He was burned together with our mother in the crematorium at Majdanek…”

M.V. Kharyuk, born 1936, former Salaspils prisoner, liberated at the Konstantynow-Tuchingen camp: “...In the evening, members of our family, along with other residents of the village of Lipovka, Verkhnedvinsky District, were herded into a barn and burned alive. My mother, grandmother, 13-year-old brother Anton, and 8-year-old sister Maria perished in the fire. As for me, I was sent to the Salaspils death camp near Riga.”

G.G. Samokhina, born 1933, one of the few survivors from the Prizreniye asylum the Nazis created in Makeyevka for children whose parents had been killed or sent for hard labour in Germany: “It was unbearably hot outside on one of the days. A barrel containing the blood of slaughtered animals was brought to the asylum. There were dead flies floating in it. This liquid was cooked and served for breakfast. By 11 am, everyone was poisoned. Many of us, particularly small children, died. <…> One day, I saw a wardress open the pantry door for a man; after a while, he emerged from it, carrying something wrapped in a piece of cloth.   Seeing that the pantry door remained ajar, I rushed there in the hope of finding something to eat.  I peeped inside and saw piles of children’s bodies as high as myself.”

V.Z. Budyukhina, born 1937, tattoo number 69149: “Prison-camp filtrations were excruciating both physically and morally. The Nazis sought to instil the feelings of uncertainty and hopelessness in children’s souls. They wanted to destroy our identities, paralyse our will, and crush our reason.” The same is being done to the citizens of Ukraine and to Europeans.

The collection is available online and on our social media. Repost this, inform people, share quotes. This is a civic duty for everyone who values the word “peace.”  A monstrously hard read, this content must nevertheless reach everyone. It should always be remembered and never forgotten.

These crimes have no statute of limitations. The memory of the victims of Nazism is sacred.  We will continue to tell the truth and cite the facts and testimonies about the crimes of Nazism in the past and the crimes committed by adepts of this macabre man-hating ideology in the present. 

back to top

 

Answers to media questions:

Question: According to the European Commission, the EU has approved 1.4 billion euros in aid to Ukraine from the proceeds of the frozen Russian assets, to be used for arms purchases. How would you comment on this news?

Maria Zakharova: The European Union has lost all independence. I have just quoted a girl who survived a Nazi concentration camp: “The Nazis wanted to destroy our identities and paralyse our will.” This is what has happened to the European Union. Their minds have been suppressed and their will has been paralysed, so that they could continue to march in lockstep with the confrontational policy which is suicidal for the EU.

It is obvious that the West continues to make new hostile anti-Russia decisions in order to distract the European populations from its misguided and criminal steps, which have led to the collapse of their economies, previously prosperous and thriving.

It has long been clear to everyone that ordinary European citizens are the hardest hit by the EU’s opportunistic policy, illegal anti-Russia sanctions and multibillion-dollar arms supplies to Ukraine. The European economy and industry are degrading, and this is not happening because people have stopped working. This is because their regimes have led them to this. Household incomes in the EU countries are dwindling rapidly; factories are being shut down or relocated to more prosperous regions. And yet, the European Commission stubbornly continues to redirect financial resources towards the Kiev regime’s terrorist objectives instead of supporting its own manufacturers and entrepreneurs.

Having driven themselves to bay, the EU advocates of “defeating Russia on the battlefield” are hoping to improve their own financial standing just a little by stealing Russia’s sovereign assets and then “legalising” the stolen money. What we are witnessing is a textbook money laundering scheme, where they will launder the illegally acquired assets through the purchase of weapons for Ukraine.

The pro-American EU leaders have failed to mention the most important point – this will not make life in the EU any better because the main beneficiary of this entire criminal scheme will be the United States, as always, and not the American people, but major defence companies.

The main goal of the United States is to prevent its competitors – the European Union, Russia, and China – from gaining any political or economic autonomy.

We will continue to compete with the United States within the international legal framework, even though America is not taking this well. The European Union can no longer compete with the United States at this point, not with its economy in ruins.

Without exaggeration, the cases of grand theft of Russian assets will render any respect for or trust in the European Union, that the international community still has, entirely null, throwing Europe even further on the fringes of global processes.

back to top

 

Question: There are almost daily picket protests outside state authorities, central media outlets and foreign embassies; you just said people have had enough. Is such popular support helping the Foreign Ministry? If the Foreign Ministry and Russian citizens have similar goals, is there a way we could join forces and make our joint actions more coordinated to achieve these goals as soon as possible?

Maria Zakharova: I believe that this is a manifestation of civic responsibility and civil society – as long as such initiatives remain in full compliance with the law, of course. If these protests are held in formats prescribed by federal and local laws, if no law is violated, they are certainly an important element in the expression of the general will, and civic engagement of public groups and associations.

I would not think of this as some help to the Foreign Ministry. We are all working towards the same goal. These acts are better described as expressions of our people’s opinion and their desire for justice, as well as our anger over what we see happening. And we are seeing another international terrorist attack on our country.

These things are manifested in many ways. Some of the facets include civil initiatives and rallies. Civil society can act in a variety of ways including rallies, signature collection, fundraising, and collecting donations. In Moscow, people regularly donate for the residents of Donbass. These humanitarian initiatives become cultural events, where people sing songs and make holographic projections on the walls of certain embassies.

Everything that is within the law is possible and necessary because it is a way of expressing strong emotions.

back to top

 

Question: The outgoing foreign minister of France, Stephane Sejourne, who visited Yerevan the other day, has accused Russia of putting pressure on Armenia, promised to develop military-technical ties with it, and hinted that the EU would preserve its observer mission in Armenia. What does the Foreign Ministry think about this?

Maria Zakharova: The Foreign Ministry believes that if you’re leaving, just leave. And when your service was mediocre, you should leave without any fuss. This is the first point.

Second, it is surprising that our Armenian allies, brothers, partners, neighbours and friends, meaning Armenia’s political authorities and officials, have not reacted to that statement. The French minister made it in Armenia. If anyone said this in Russia about our friends, those who regularly stood up and risked their lives for us and our people, we would have found a way to bring such persons down a peg and to remind them that our history precludes such a humiliating attitude by a third party.

The French minister is an absolutely incompetent diplomat who has demonstrated his incompetence once again. He doesn’t know our history or traditions. I believe that what he said about Russia was incompetent and silly, and what he said about the host country, Armenia, was disrespectful.

On the other hand, we have pointed out on numerous occasions that the Western agenda in the region is absolutely destructive. Their only goal is to set regional countries against each other. They are not promoting their development or helping them deal with their problems. They are not ready to make any sacrifices to help settle conflicts. They are only trying to pit countries against each other, humiliating, insulting and destroying. That statement was just another manifestation of this.

Saying what he said was doubly inappropriate after the crushing fiasco of a major international event in Paris, which has shocked many countries and which the attending heads of state have denounced as disrespectful and humiliating. That person should have analysed and corrected his mistakes.  

back to top

 

Question: Speaking about the events in Lebanon, in particular, the reaction of the West, they have expressed deep regret. However, thousands of people who are not directly connected to Hezbollah have been affected. Yet nobody has called for finding the guilty parties, or for investigating the matter. What does that Western reaction signify? Is an all-out war possible in the region?

Maria Zakharova: I will begin with your second question. The Foreign Ministry has posted a detailed comment on its website.

We consider this to be another act of hybrid warfare against Lebanon, which has affected thousands of innocent people. We believe that those behind this high-tech attack deliberately sought to incite an escalation, take confrontation to a new level and provoke a major war in the Middle East.

We strongly condemn this unprecedented attack on friendly Lebanon and its citizens with the use of non-conventional weapons, which constitutes a gross violation of its sovereignty as well as a serious challenge to international law. We extend our most sincere condolences to the families of the victims and wish a speedy recovery to the injured.

Russia has always tried to apply its capabilities in that sphere to prevent a major conflagration in the Middle East. The region has seen so much suffering and bloodshed, and so many lives have been lost that another aggravation with the risk of a big war could provoke a global catastrophe.

You have asked why the West is underreacting. It is clear why the United States is underreacting. It can see that its Middle East policy has failed again. This is no time for victorious reports or fancy election events. There’s no reason to bestow decorations on each other. They are travelling across the region, trying chaotically to bring together and improve, but all to no avail. I am not being sarcastic. I am just placing it on record that the United States has again failed to impose American ways on regions that have no connection to America, the regions that have their own traditions and history.

As for why Europe and the EU remain silent, it’s a big question. A big war – if it starts in the Middle East – would have catastrophic consequences for the European Union. It will lead to a migration tsunami and the export of weapons, terrorists and extremists, which will create new challenges and problems in Europe. 

Europe is still struggling to overcome the consequences of Western experiments, in particular, in Libya and Syria. For the past 10 years, Italy has hosted an annual Mediterranean Dialogue held to discuss the consequences of Western manipulation, violations of international law, interventions, and the like.

This is not how they formulate the issue, of course. They don’t ask who is to blame or suggest ways to prevent a repetition. Just imagine a conflagration in the Middle East. Where will the migrants flee? They will flee to Europe via the Mediterranean, namely Greece and Italy (Türkiye has found a way to deal with such challenges). The EU has acknowledged its impotence to protect its borders and protect the migrants’ human rights in accordance with European standards. They should raise the alarm. But as a girl who has survived in a concentration camp wrote, the will has been paralysed, and the mind is unable to respond.

Why hasn’t the West called for an investigation? As a popular saying attributed to different persons goes, the main thing in an investigation is not to expose yourself. This is probably why Europe has not called for an investigation.

The West’s complicity in the escalation in the Middle East is obvious. It is rooted in their incompetent policies, the enforcement of their kind of democracy and ultra-liberal values that are alien to the region’s peoples, the supply of weapons, and endless U-turns in approaches to problems. The White House offers one thing under one president and its direct opposite under another president. And this keeps going on.

Look at how they played with Iran, now offering it a deal and then terminating it, only to revitalise it again. They are playing a similar game with the Palestinian-Israeli settlement, offering solutions based on money or military force. An investigation is clearly necessary. The fact that the West has not demanded an international investigation, which they usually do, is evidence of their complicity in the crime.

back to top

 

Question: Yesterday, you commented that the European Parliament had suggested issuing an international arrest warrant for President of Venezuela Nicolas Maduro and recognising opposition leader Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia as the head of state. Have you anything else to add?

Maria Zakharova: I would like to specify: This highlights an attempt by a group of deputies to force through a resolution urging that the legally elected and legitimate President of Venezuela Nicolas Maduro be brought to account (in connection with alleged human rights violations in that country), rather than a document of the European Parliament. They voiced an absurd proposal that has nothing to do with common sense, logic and legality in order to lobby it. The news was hyped to indicate that an arrest warrant or the relevant decisions had already been approved. Quite possibly, these are elements of one and the same media attack. The initiative of this group was needed to create a fake story about an alleged warrant for the arrest of Nicolas Maduro and to publish it in Venezuela’s media outlets for destabilising the situation. This amounts to Jesuit-style tactics, rather than hypocrisy or human meanness.

This group has decided to recognise Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia as an allegedly legitimate president of Venezuela. They want to do this, although he wrote, before hiding in Spain, that he did not want to be president and agreed with the verdict of Venezuela’s Supreme Court which ruled that Nicolas Maduro had won presidential elections on July 28, 2024.

Why is an odious group of European Parliament members doing this? First of all, they are doing this in order to use the issue for destabilising the situation in Venezuela. I am absolutely convinced of this.

I believe that this was a Western political order, and that it should have become part of a media campaign. One no longer has to prove that the European Parliament has become an odious organisation.

If the European Parliament’s deputies want to investigate persons in Latin America or bring them to account, they should also see that the situation in Lebanon is much closer to Europe. What does this mean? This situation poses a direct geopolitical threat to them. It is potentially much more dangerous than the situation in Latin America; one has to cross the Atlantic Ocean in order to reach that region.

A certain group of deputies at the European Parliament cares about a remote region called Latin America. At the same time, this group of deputies or some other group have failed to launch an investigation of terrorist attacks on the Nord Stream gas pipelines under the auspices of the European Parliament. The attacks took place in the zone of responsibility of the European Parliament’s countries, specifically, Sweden, Denmark and Germany. Speaking of investors, this implies numerous citizens and companies from countries represented in the European Parliament. They do not care, and they are not interested. Environmental damage, caused by the terrorist attack on the Nord Stream pipelines, affects the whole of Europe. They should have reviewed all this, including the terrorist attack, international terrorism, energy security, environmental protection, ecology and human rights. The European Parliament’s members should have focused on these issues, but they did not. The European Parliament usually addresses all these issues. For some reason, it did not pay attention to them.

back to top

 

Question: Kiev and the West are actively working to institutionalise the Bürgenstock process, holding events within the framework of its “tracks.” How would you comment on the participation of Secretary of the Security Council of Armenia Armen Grigoryan in a videoconference on “Food security in the context of the Ukraine’s peace formula?”

Maria Zakharova: My answer to this question has two parts. First, let us talk about the Bürgenstock meetings. We have commented many times on the peace formulas of various Bürgenstock meetings held under the auspices of alleged negotiation initiatives. Our position does not change. Their only goal is to put together or prevent the collapse of the anti-Russia coalition. This has nothing to do with the task of political and diplomatic settlement of the situation around Ukraine.

Every international journalist, political scientist and ordinary person understands what will prove that the West’s intentions regarding political and diplomatic initiatives are serious. As soon as the Westerners stop supplying weapons to the Kiev regime and sponsoring Bankovaya Street’s terrorist activities, this can be perceived as a signal for a political and diplomatic settlement. Everything else would either strengthen the anti-Russia Western link, or be regarded as an attempt to involve other members of the international community in their gambles, or elements of the White House’s electoral programme, or maneuvering, including projection onto our society in order to sow endless talk. In fact, this has nothing to do with peace.

We provide the Armenian side with regular updates and maintain contacts with it. I believe that Yerevan is aware of our position and is guided by realistic assessments of these gambles. We thought that they understood perfectly well that these meetings have nothing to do with finding a political settlement and establishing peace. But, apparently, not everyone gets it.

All participants in these meetings should understand that it is impossible to resolve this conflict without Russia. This makes them a priori meaningless and fruitless. By the way, similar assessments were made by representatives of a number of Western countries during the Yerevan Dialogue international forum organised by the Armenian authorities on September 9−11.

I would like to build the second part of my answer based on an interesting fact. You said that the Secretary of the Armenian Security Council had taken part in a videoconference on food security. If people are interested in food security, they should proceed from the food security situation in their own country.

Let me remind you that Armenia receives 90 percent of its cereals from Russia. Perhaps it would be better to have a videoconference with Russia to discuss food security? This would be honest and respectful. Why engage in scheming behind the backs of those who feed you and ensure food security?

back to top

 

Question: How would you comment on the delegation of the Yerevan Council of Elders’ visit to Donbass?

Maria Zakharova: We more than welcome the delegation of the Yerevan Council of Elders’ recent visit to the LPR and DPR. We believe that this is an important contribution to the cause of peace and genuine respect for human rights. We think that the meetings with the leadership and broad public circles of the new Russian regions allowed the representatives of Armenia to form their own impression of the events of the Ukraine crisis. This is especially important because of the increasingly frequent contacts of individual Armenian politicians and officials with the Kiev regime.

Special emphasis during the trip was placed on education and culture. The parties discussed how important it was to protect traditional values. They managed to have an in-depth discussion on how Armenian children can participate in youth projects in the new regions of Russia. I would like to highlight the humanitarian component, in particular the transfer of medicines and other materials needed by regional medical institutions by Armenian guests. This is the true spirit of Russian-Armenian relations. There is no manipulation here. There is openness, frankness, honesty, truthfulness and love of people for each other. We can only welcome contacts like these.

back to top

 

Question: How would you comment on the report by former President of the European Central Bank Mario Draghi “The future of European competitiveness” published in early September?

Maria Zakharova: On the one hand, I have already commented [on this topic] today and said a lot about the EU’s lack of independence, which is the cause of their losses in a variety of areas.

As for the report, we can speak of a team of authors headed by Mario Draghi, which dwells on the stagnation of the EU economy. The forecast for the future is disappointing. There is no sarcasm, no gloating, no desire to say that “this is what they deserve.” For one simple reason: we were building a common Europe. And the fact that it shoots itself in the foot or in the head every day was neither Russia's goal nor its benefit. And we certainly do not see it as a reason for gloating. It is a statement of fact.

Specific recipes contain nothing new; many of them echo a number of analytical and programmatic documents published in the EU over the recent months, including the July preliminary policy guidelines by Ursula von der Leyen for the future members of the European Commission.

Along with the obvious macroeconomic objectives, including raising labour efficiency, support for innovatory development, decarbonisation and reduction of energy costs, there are also direct indications of forced build-up of the EU countries’ military-industrial complex and actual establishment of an effective control over the deposits of critically important raw materials in third countries. Naturally, if there is a need for the deposits of critically important raw materials and control over them in third countries, then, from the EU point of view, control should also be imposed on the routes by which they are to be delivered to the EU. It’s all indicated there.

As Mario Draghi put it, inaction would make the EU to seek a compromise solution and choose between maintaining the wellbeing, environmental protection and “preserving freedom.” That’s the alternative.

At the same time a significant role in remedying the situation is will be played by the future European Commission led by its new old President Ursula von der Leyen, who had worked tirelessly for the previous five years to either create or exacerbate most of the problems mentioned. Now she is to solve them. So, the future of the EU economy is in safe hands. As well as the control over the defence orders will obviously be more interesting than yet uninvestigated corruption schemes in relation to multibillion contracts on purchasing vaccines against COVID-19.

There is no doubt that we will have the opportunity on many occasions to return to the report contents, its recommendations, possible parameters and effects of their implementation.

The report also reads that reducing the cost of energy is a major task for the European Union. But how can they do that if they have given up cheap energy? It is technically possible to deliver this cheap energy via the remaining gas pipeline, but they cannot allow themselves do it because they need to find a special way out of the situation. They cannot even investigate. They could have got some income from the insurance companies that insured the Nord Stream, if they investigate. But they prohibit themselves even this. They are gripped by self-censorship and fear, because they have lost autonomy under the pressure from their Western handler.

back to top

 

Question: President of Serbia Aleksandar Vučić has unveiled a set of measures to defend the Kosovo Serbs. The document maps out certain focus areas designed to counteract Pristina’s discriminatory decisions with regard to Kosovo Serbs. What is your comment?

Maria Zakharova: Let me remind you that the so-called “Republic of Kosovo” with its sham independence has been created by the West as a result of the barbarous dismemberment of Serbia following NATO’s 1999 aggression. The sponsors of the “Kosovo project” have worked for the subsequent 25 years to legalise the secession of this originally Serb land from the Serbian state.  The present stage – after Albin Kurti’s takeover in Pristina – is the culmination of this process. Albanisation has acquired threatening proportions: the Serbs are being ousted from Kosovo and attempts are being made to erase all traces of their age-old heritage.  I will not mention local corruption and crime, because they come naturally to this quasi-state that was proclaimed in a bandit manner and lives accordingly.  

There were some hopes associated with the European Union. But the negotiating platform it has created is now discredited, showcasing as it does outrageous behaviour demonstrated by Kosovo Albanians and the endless humiliation of the Serbs by the EU and the West.  What was originally palmed off as an effort to create conditions for a constructive dialogue has become a tool to make a cynical mockery of the Serbs. The Brussels functionaries and the Americans, their backers, have deadlocked the settlement with their own hands.  They have sought to exculpate their Pristina bandits for years by inventing an alternative to international law – UN Security Council Resolution 1244 – in a bid to solve the Kosovo problem at the expense of the Serbs, who have suffered enough as it is.  Thus, they have given Albin Kurti a free hand to mop up non-Albanian northern Kosovo and eliminate the administrative, municipal and commercial entities uncontrolled by the Kosovo Albanians.

The Serb leaders could not and should not have remained indifferent. It became obvious that the Western guarantees did not work. Promises of prosperity and accession to the EU are just empty verbiage designed to make Belgrade waver and accept the Western terms, including those that concern Kosovo. The EU and the United States are unable to be “honest brokers” and ensure the implementation of the 2013−2015 Brussels basic agreements. They have created this quasi-state and continue to indulge it, leaving no chance for a fair outcome. All of this is being done to the detriment of peace and stability.

Under these circumstances, President Vučić’s initiative goes to say that this is the only possible step forward in the eyes of Belgrade. We fully support their demands and welcome the intention to submit a request for bringing the Serbian military back to Kosovo in full conformity with UN Security Council Resolution 1244. In January 2023, NATO denied this legitimate right to Belgrade, claiming that there was no need for this measure.  What NATO has to do with things of this kind is not clear. If there is a need, it is felt by Belgrade and no one else. The subsequent developments showed that the need did exist and was pressing. The NATO-led Kosovo Force demonstrated a lack of professionalism in a crisis and, in a breach of its mandate, could not or did not want to ensure safety and equality of citizens.

It is only by restoring the status quo and returning to the essence of the Brussels agreements that the international community can create the grounds for further productive dialogue. Mr Kurti’s illegal unilateral decisions must be repealed, including those on abolishing the Serbian administrations, closing the banks and post offices, taking over businesses, replacing Serbs with Albanians at the bodies of local self-government, justice, and law enforcement, bringing to power illegitimate mayors at northern municipalities, banning the circulation of the dinar, and many others mentioned by President Vučić.       

As before, they key prerequisite for normalisation is for the Kosovo Albanians to fulfil their obligations under the documents they have signed, primarily the commitment to establish a Community of Serb Municipalities of Kosovo that should have wide-ranging executive powers, direct channels for communications with Belgrade and effective tools to defend the rights and interests of the Serb population in the Autonomous Province of Kosovo.

back to top

 

Question: The latest events show that devices containing Western components are making their users vulnerable. Is Russia planning to take any action in this connection, so as to protect domestic users?

Maria Zakharova: This is not just our intention; we are already taking these measures. Western corporations have accumulated key manufacturing capabilities in the ICT sector. They hamper the transfer of the latest technologies to developing states and countries implementing a sovereign policy, so as not to undermine their own monopolies. What does a monopoly mean for them? Having a monopoly means that you can exert pressure and to manage specific processes. US intelligence agencies and those of their allies call the shots, including regarding IT processes and private IT companies in the United States. They are using this resource to interfere in domestic affairs and conduct electronic espionage. Microsoft has started transferring e-government systems of independent countries to the cloud so as to control their national information space.

In these conditions, our task is to develop mechanisms for international collaboration that would make it possible to guarantee the sovereignty and security of states on the basis of the UN Charter and to meet demand for a secure and independent digital environment. For this purpose, it is important to guarantee that IT giants bear legal responsibility under national law for their products and services. Companies must be prevented from inserting dangerous components in their software. This is exactly why we suggest that the international community create universal legally binding tools in the sphere of international information security.

back to top

 

Question: During his latest visit to Yerevan, Alexey Overchuk discussed bilateral trade statistics that exceed earlier indicators several times over. This highlights active, close and fruitful economic collaboration between Moscow and Yerevan. However, we are witnessing an opposite situation on the political track. For example, Armenia is drifting away from the CSTO and closer to the West. How can you explain this glaring contrast?

Maria Zakharova: Overall trade volumes are quite good. In the first six months of 2024, they totalled $8.3 billion and exceeded the year-end results for 2023. This facilitates Armenia’s sustained, record-high economic growth (10.4 percent in the first six months). Armenia is the main beneficiary of Eurasian integration. In 2023, its EAEU partners accounted for 37 percent of the republic’s foreign trade, and exports to EAEU states soared by 41 percent. By the way, the Armenian leadership realises this, as proved by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan who said on September 18, 2024, that Armenia was not planning to scale down its trade or to severe economic ties with Russia and the EAEU.

Some aspects do surprise me. One gets the impression that the EAEU and the CSTO are two different countries. EAEU countries are also members of the CSTO. Understandably, there are certain nuances, but we have a basic idea of the situation. The same countries form the core in both the EAEU and the CSTO. What does this mean? We discuss this issue all the time. The West is trying to pressure Armenia’s international policy. This is what we have been hearing from the West. We did not create this discourse. Western countries are saying openly that they must lead Armenia in another direction, resubordinate it to their own institutions, include it in certain entities and reduce its potential for collaboration. Western politicians, including officials, leaders of various countries and bloc associations, have said all this. Unfortunately, this is reflected in Yerevan’s political rhetoric.

Speaking of the CSTO, it appears that certain political forces in Armenia are deliberately spreading misinformation that the main reason for this is that the Organisation has failed to defend Armenia. All this is not true.

We have repeatedly discussed the efforts of Russia and the CSTO in great detail and shared our assessments of Armenian authorities’ decisions. We believe that claims being voiced by Yerevan from time to time are absurd because they do not conform to facts. Under this pretext, the Armenian leadership has started curtailing political dialogue. You have noted aptly that, for some reason, Yerevan is downsizing inter-agency cooperation with Russia and permanently talking about “freezing” its CSTO membership. In stark contrast, Armenia has started drifting towards the West. This amounts to certain manipulative attitudes. You have noted correctly that the economy shows that people, companies and businesses are interested in forging closer and stronger ties. In turn, the political superstructure is doing something opposite. This may not end very well. The Armenian line has some contradictions.

We are convinced that this does not meet the interests of the Armenian nation. We always advocate resuming full-scale bilateral cooperation and reversing from manipulative rhetoric to real full-fledged collaboration, including when working within the CSTO.

Let me repeat that history knows many examples when this way of manipulating information, all these campaigns and misinformation were needed to conceal one’s own mistakes and political calculations. But facts speak for themselves. Others should not be blamed for mistakes made by Armenian politicians.

back to top

 

Question: President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko said that the Americans and Ukrainians could be planning an escalation against Belarus. He stressed that an attack on Belarus would mean the beginning of a third world war. Has the Belarusian side sent any relevant signals to the Russian Foreign Ministry?

MariaZakharova: These public signals did come from Minsk. You have quoted them, after all.

President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko’s warning statement is justified and timely. We are paying due attention to the incoming information about the activation of Ukrainian forces in the area along the border with Belarus, our ally. We are aware of the constant provocations coming from the Ukrainian side, including its use of drones,  deployment of considerable Ukrainian  forces there, and infiltration  of terrorists into the Republic, who are in receipt of supplies and financing from Ukraine. Kiev’s hostile steps are forcing Belarus to use its Armed Forces to ensure the security of the Republic and its citizens.

We have to take into account the fact that Vladimir Zelensky is capable of the most reckless and cynical steps, what with his army suffering obvious setbacks in the special military operation zone, as he has demonstrated time and again. He said directly that, in order to “solve a problem” where it was not solved on the one hand, he would create a problem on the other. Why not play the Belarusian card this time over? It is clear that Kiev coordinates all its actions with Washington, where everything is regarded from the point of view of electoral processes and pre-election alignments. In line with this logic, we do not rule out an escalation.

In this context, the growing provocative activity of NATO on the borders of the Union State is of particular concern. On August 28-30, the Arsus Vilkas exercises were held in Lithuania, and from September 3 to October 8, the Namejs-2024 comprehensive drills are taking place. Military organisational development and intense training of military personnel is being pursued by Warsaw.

In this connection, we would like to once again remind all hotheads that the Military Doctrine of the Union State, updated in 2021, provides for the joint defence of the common borders of our integration union. This was also repeatedly stated by President of Russia Vladimir Putin. The document says that the member states are determined to ensure the Union State’s military security by using all available forces and assets. As is common knowledge, a joint Regional Grouping of Troops (Forces), as well as Russian advanced defence systems and tactical nuclear weapons, are currently deployed on fraternal Belarusian soil. The practical implementation of any aggressive scenarios in respect of Minsk is fraught with disastrous consequences not only for neo-Nazi Ukraine, but also for its patrons.

back to top

 

Question: China has decided to sanction nine US companies for selling weapons to Taiwan. On September 18, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said that by acting this way the United States has grossly violated the One China policy and the provisions contained in three China-US joint statements, while also meddling in China’s domestic affairs, causing serious damage to its sovereignty and territorial integrity. What is your assessment of the fact that the United States sold weapons to Taiwan so many times and sought to escalate tension in the region? What are its goals?

Maria Zakharova: We can see that Washington and its satellites persist in ramping up tension in the Taiwan Strait, stand in the way of China’s peaceful unification and encourage separatist sentiment among the people of Taiwan. They have been proactive in reinforcing their military and diplomatic ties with the island and open about backing Lai Ching-te’s new administration, while also supplying weapons to Taiwan.

It is obvious that by acting in this provocative way while allegedly seeking to preserve what they refer to as a status quo, and by violating the One China policy despite the fact that they had recognised this principle, the Western countries undermine regional stability and international security in the Asia-Pacific Region. This amounts to openly pressuring Beijing.

Russia’s principled position on the Taiwan issue remains unchanged. It has been set forth once again in the Joint Statement by the Leaders of Russia and China resulting from President Vladimir Putin’s state visit to China on May 16 and 17, 2024: “Russia reaffirmed its adherence to the one-China principle, recognised that Taiwan is an inalienable part of the People’s Republic of China, opposed any form of Taiwan independence, and firmly supported China’s measures to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity and achieve national reunification.”

back to top

 

Question: The Foreign Ministry has recently condemned Portugal for transferring six Russian Kamov helicopters to Ukraine. Following this logic, we can well expect Russia to take retaliatory action. What would be your comment in this regard?

Maria Zakharova: As we have already said, we view this as yet another hostile step targeting our country with Portugal and other EU countries following this trajectory in what can be described as an obedient and thoughtless manner.

We keep track of all the unfriendly actions undertaken by EU capitals, and Lisbon is not an exception. We will take them into consideration in our bilateral relations. We never forget anything, but this has nothing to do with rancour or resentfulness. As for retaliatory measures, we tend to refrain from creating publicity on these matters, but we will make sure to keep you updated.

back to top

 

Question: According to TRT, a Turkish television network, a commission established by the Organisation of Turkic States approved a draft version of a single alphabet for its member countries. It has been working on this undertaking since 1993. This means that Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Türkiye agreed to adopt a single Latin-based alphabet.

What do you think about this undertaking from a political, diplomatic and historical perspective? Could it affect the cultural and humanitarian ties Russia has been developing with members of the Organisation of Turkic States?

Maria Zakharova: As far as I know, this whole process dates back to the 1990s and is directly linked to the region’s emerging cultural, humanitarian, ethnic and linguistic diversity, which took a long time in the making. Notions such as the national identity, and the unique and distinctive nature of every Eurasian nation have always been relevant.

This topic is not an exception. It is up to the corresponding countries to voice their opinion on the draft version of the alphabet, especially for those where the effort to reform the language of their titular nation is underway. This is a challenging process, which takes a lot of time and effort. This is what we hear from those who have been through it. Therefore, they are the ones who are in charge here.

back to top

 

Question: At the previous briefing, I asked you about a visit by a high-ranking US intelligence official to Baku. After that, Chief of UK’s Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), Richard Moore, visited Baku. What would be your comment regarding these increasingly frequent visits to Azerbaijan by high-ranking NATO intelligence officials? Does Moscow view this as a threat of any kind?

Maria Zakharova: We have recently offered our take on the Western policy for South Caucasus when we discussed the trip to Baku by Patrick Prior, head of the Europe Eurasia Regional Centre at the US Defence Intelligence Agency. This time, MI6 Chief Richard Moore visited Baku.

Visits by representatives of an aggressive military bloc do nothing to improve regional stability or security. As we know, the West has been focusing on destabilising countries across the Russian neighbourhood instead of forging closer ties with them.

We will continue to discuss the risks of strengthening interactions with NATO in our contacts with our partners in Azerbaijan and elsewhere across the CIS. They risk losing part of their national sovereignty and face internal political turbulence and strife.

back to top

 

Question: Several Azerbaijani NGOs have sent an open letter to the managers of key agencies responsible for monitoring and enforcing anti-Russia sanctions in the United States and the European Union. They expressed serious concern regarding activities by the Republic of Armenia, which have created favourable conditions for Russia to circumvent international sanctions imposed by the West because of the conflict in Ukraine. It is noteworthy that Azerbaijani authorities finance and collaborate with these NGOs. Given the unique political situation in Azerbaijan, it is unlikely they would act without prior official approval. What are your thoughts on this anti-Armenian and essentially anti-Russian stance taken by Azerbaijan’s NGOs and authorities?

Maria Zakharova: I sincerely hope that a time will come when Azerbaijani journalists will take an interest in the Russia-Azerbaijan agenda, and Armenian journalists will focus on the Russia-Armenia agenda. I am referring to a broader and more significant process, rather than my own comfort. If someone visits Yerevan, people from Baku will not be inquiring about it. We respond to all questions, but I genuinely hope this time arrives, for the benefit of the region and all those—friends, allies, and partners—with whom we enjoy wonderful relations. Everyone should live in peace; no one should catch others red-handed or play their trump cards with the aim of provoking each other.

The ongoing disagreements between Armenia and Azerbaijan should not damage relations between Baku, Yerevan, and Russia. We understand the motivations behind this situation and who is orchestrating it. Mutual disputes do not serve the interests of either Armenian or Azerbaijani society. In this case, the West has only one interest: to destabilise the region and undermine our country's interests in the South Caucasus. We will directly convey our assessments regarding this appeal from the aforementioned NGOs to our Azerbaijani partners.

back to top

 

Question: Exactly a year ago, on September 20, 2023, several Russian peacekeepers, including Captain First Rank Ivan Kovgan, Deputy Commander of the Russian Peacekeeping Contingent, were killed in Artsakh. Open sources provide no information indicating that the perpetrators of these murders of Russian peacekeepers in Azerbaijan have been prosecuted or sentenced. History seems to be repeating itself: a Russian helicopter crew was killed in November 2020, and Azerbaijani authorities did not punish anyone for the downing of that helicopter. The helicopter was shot down in an area far from the war zone, within the territory of the Republic of Armenia, where no hostilities or even minor skirmishes had been reported during the entire 44-day war. However, a helicopter belonging to the peacekeeping contingent, clearly marked, was shot at point-blank range in broad daylight, resulting in the deaths of everyone on board. Have Azerbaijani authorities provided any explanation for their failure to prosecute the murderers of the Russian peacekeepers and the Russian helicopter crew?

Maria Zakharova: The offices of the prosecutors-general and investigative divisions of both countries maintain close mutual contacts on this issue. The circumstances surrounding the deaths of the peacekeepers are being investigated in accordance with the criminal cases initiated in Azerbaijan and Russia. We expect that trials will commence soon. I believe that progress on this issue will be quite revealing, and we hope the information regarding it will certainly be made public.

back to top

 

Question: According to Russian media reports, Ukraine’s Main Intelligence Directorate (MID) has established cooperation with Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, a terrorist group based in Idlib, Syria.  Reportedly, 250 Ukrainian military instructors are already stationed there, teaching Hayat Tahrir al-Sham how to make and upgrade drones. It is also rumoured that Kiev has supplied them with a number of drones and is trying to recruit local militants for redeployment to Ukraine. Given Idlib’s location and the current military-political realities, it would be interesting to know if Moscow discussed this issue with Ankara. After all, neither the drones, nor the numerous Ukrainian instructors could have joined the terrorists in Idlib without Turkish assistance. Similarly, militants from Idlib can only reach Ukraine if aided by Türkiye, as was the case during the 44-day war in Nagorno-Karabakh in 2020.

Maria Zakharova: We coordinate the process of comprehensive settlement in Syria with our Turkish partners, both bilaterally and within the existing collective mechanisms, primarily the Astana Format. On the whole, we are satisfied with Russian-Turkish collaboration in this area. At the same time, there are persisting problems in the Idlib de-escalation zone regarding the implementation of the agreements contained in the Russian-Turkish Memorandum of September 17, 2018, and the Supplementary Protocol of March 5, 2020. Among other things, I am referring to the need to withdraw the militants operating in the Idlib de-escalation zone, which are uncontrolled by the official authorities.

According to incoming information, the Ukrainian security services maintain close cooperation with these terrorist groups. In particular, MID emissaries visit the zone for contacts with leaders of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (formerly Jabhat al-Nusra), a group included in the UN Security Council Consolidated List. The Ukrainians want to recruit local radicals for participation in hostilities against the Russian forces in the special military operation zone and for terrorist attacks, including in the territory of the Russian Federation. Reportedly, Ukrainian special units are involved in assaults on Russian military facilities in Syria, which is only possible in close contact with terrorists operating in Syria.

Earlier, we repeatedly cited facts testifying to Kiev’s cooperation with various terrorist groups around the world, cooperation aided and abetted by Western secret services. We have here the Zelensky junta’s criminal intent to “tame” the radicals and channel their destructive energy into a campaign against Russia.  

We regard this state of affairs as confirming the Kiev regime’s true terrorist nature, which is becoming increasingly obvious to the Global Majority. We believe it is necessary to reiterate that any flirtation with terrorists is not only a direct threat to peace and stability but also creates serious risks capable of destabilising the situation in the Middle East and in other regions of the world.  This can only add to the global terrorist potential. Therefore, we have a global problem on our hands.

back to top

 

Question: Representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said they would visit the Kursk Region if Kiev and Moscow reach an agreement on this. However, according to Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin regards this as a provocation. On what conditions would Moscow accept the ICRC’s proposal? Which humanitarian effort will Moscow not see as provocative but as important and worthy of support?

Maria Zakharova: We have taken note of Russian and foreign media publications regarding the visit by ICRC President Mirjana Spoljaric to Russia on September 16−18.

They cite comments by the press service of the ICRC Regional Delegation in Russia and Belarus regarding the committee’s readiness to visit the areas in the Kursk Region that have been affected by the Ukrainian attack. They also note that the situation in the region was on the agenda of Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s meeting with Mirjana Spoljaric.

In this context, we urge everyone to take their guidance from the information provided in the official Foreign Ministry statements on the results of the meetings with the ICRC President held by the Foreign Minister and his deputy, Sergey Vershinin, on September 17, 2024.

These meetings with Mirjana Spoljaric focused on the numerous violations of international humanitarian law committed by the Ukrainian forces, and on protecting and ensuring the humanitarian needs of civilians in this context. We provided detailed explanations regarding the criminal activities of the Kiev regime and the real reasons of its Western supporters.

At the same time, we would like to emphasise that no ICRC initiatives on organising humanitarian access to the Kursk Region were discussed during the ICRC President’s meetings at the Foreign Ministry. As for the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry’s initiatives to organise visits by representatives of international organisations to the Russian territory, they are obviously a cynical and, most importantly, foolish provocation. Comprehensive comments on this matter have been provided, in particular, by the Presidential Executive Office.

back to top

 

Question: On September 17, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen officially announced that Prime Minister of Estonia Kaja Kallas had been designated High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. You commented on her appointment by saying that “the West is choosing convenient and controllable amateurs.” Does Moscow think there are any professional politicians left in the EU? Who would Moscow like to see in the top positions in the EU?

Maria Zakharova: One of our traditions is that we don’t comment on appointments, internal affairs or political processes in other countries and associations if they have no relations to us and do not interfere in our affairs. But in this case, the policy of the European Commission and now the EU is targeting Russia. Every single decision they have made is connected with their Russophobic views. This is why we comment on them. This is important to note.

We have not abandoned our traditions, but we respond to attacks, defamation, insults, humiliation and lies about the Russian people. We will continue to do this.

As for whether there are professional politicians left, if you mean the leaders of EU countries, we don’t see a new Charles de Gaulle among them. We have not seen a leader of his stature, neither now nor in the past years. I don’t understand why there are none, when the main feature of a truly great leader is an understanding of national interests and the ability to implement them. What are national interests? They are the will of the nation, along with its history, traditions and culture, and in their entirety, the current requirements and development outlook in the interests of the country. What leaders can we expect to see in the EU if all of the above has been suppressed by the Anglo-Saxons and rooted out through NATO structures?  Valentina Matviyenko said yesterday that they are steering elections by means of the second round, which they use to eliminate rivals. There are politicians and public figures in the EU who have devoted their lives and are risking them in the interests of Europe, their countries or the common European home. Many of them travel to Russia to attend the congress of the International Russophile Movement or events devoted to multipolarity. Many of them stand for upholding relations with Russia. They have been harassed in their own countries only because they considered it necessary to speak not about quasi-reality or surrealistic information but about hard facts. So, such people do exist, but they are not allowed to take the lead.

Presidential candidates have been shot at in the United States. This is evidence of the crisis of Western democracy, an ultra-liberal deadlock and ultra-liberal dictatorship. This is evidence of not only an economic and political crisis but also a civilisational crisis. They should take a closer look at the development path and the way out of their deadlock proposed by Russia. It is based on traditional values, history, remaining in touch with reality, respect for the interests of the people, working for the future, and prudence. This is what we discuss at numerous forums and venues.

Russia has never refused to engage with EU politicians on the basis of equality and mutual respect, even with those whose views and approaches differ from ours. It is another matter that they have succumbed to Washington’s pressure. I believe that the most striking and indicative example is the explosion of the Nord Stream pipelines in the territory of EU countries, where they are not even allowed to ask questions. As to who did it, the answer is self-evident.

back to top

 

Question: On September 12, President Vladimir Putin answered a media question on the possible strike targeting territories deep inside Russia. He said: “If this decision is made, it will mean nothing short of direct involvement – it will mean that NATO countries, the United States, and European countries are parties to the war in Ukraine.” We have no doubt whatsoever that the United States and NATO are one hundred percent certain that they would not face any retribution and can benefit from impunity, and this is why they have been acting this way. On September 17, 2024, Deputy Chair of the Russian Federation’s Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, recalled the retaliatory actions by the USSR and present-day Russia regarding the West and the United States.

What has Russia been doing from a practical perspective to prevent a Yugoslavia-style scenario, which boils down to bombing cities, followed by a Maidan uprising, and the country breaking apart into smaller states?

Maria Zakharova: You have asked a question of a global nature which relates to the entire state and state policy in general. I represent the Foreign Ministry. What I can say in this regard is that this is a broad subject and we could dedicate an entire report to examining it. In fact, several papers have already explored this issue – you can refer to the Foreign Policy Concept where you will find an answer to your question. It sets forth everything we must do. Still, let me highlight the key points in this regard.

We are building a multipolar world order. You heard me right: I did not start the list with our efforts to find like-minded parties or engage in collective efforts on this track. I believe that we can even say that Russia stands at the vanguard of this process. We have done a great deal to pave the way to a multipolar world. Some of its aspects have already materialised, while others are still in the making.

We are not alone in these efforts, and it is not that we are operating in a sealed environment. In fact, our partners, the Global Majority, have been on our side, and this forum confirms this point. We have been working with countries in bilateral settings, as well as undertaking collective efforts within international organisations. I believe that Russia’s BRICS chairmanship serves as a perfect illustration in this regard. It includes a plethora of events, and has brought about tangible outcomes, agreements, and proposals. Preparations for the summit are in full swing. All this demonstrates that the multiple efforts we have been undertaking to build a multipolar world order have been effective. The effort has been paying off.

Without touching upon other matters, I can say that everything you mentioned can be fulfilled without rejecting or forgetting other aspects such as the need to reinforce security within our borders, promote science and culture, and develop defence manufacturing. This includes foreign policy cooperation with other countries and their people, building a multipolar world order and demonstrating resolve when countering the West with its sick hegemonies and personality disorders.

Question: In your opinion, how can the people of Russia facilitate the emergence of a multipolar world?

Maria Zakharova: The people of Russia are currently on the frontlines, be it along the line of contact, countering a terrorist attack in the Kursk Region, or in the rear – they are working at defence manufacturing factories in multiple shifts, organising international economic and legal forums (such as the Eurasian Women’s Forum), as well as operating within civil society by promoting people-to-people ties through public diplomacy and strengthening the very fabric of international relations.

I have talked at length about the Russian language today. In fact, this is also a matter of acting at the interstate level, and Russia has been front and centre in this regard. This covers what we do in education and science, as well as what our cultural figures and creators do. Our country has reached what is called an inflection point – a historical moment, a consolidation, and we can really feel this. It is our hope that we can maintain this forward-looking momentum despite all the challenges and tragedies and without betraying our expectations.

back to top

 

Question: Russia is scheduled to host several major events in October, including the CIS and BRICS summits. President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev and Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan may attend them. In this context, does Russia have any plans to arrange a meeting between the leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia, and has Moscow held consultations with the two parties on this matter?

Maria Zakharova: It is up to the Presidential Executive Office to comment on contacts at the highest level. This is how responsibilities are allocated between us.

back to top

 

Question: Iran’s ambassador to Armenia has recently stated that there is already a date for the upcoming 3+3 foreign ministers’ meeting in Türkiye. However, he refrained from sharing this information. Can Russia confirm that there is an agreement to this effect? When will this meeting take place? And what items will be on its agenda?

Maria Zakharova: What I can say regarding the foreign ministers’ meeting in this format is that we are working on it. I think it would be advisable for all countries to announce it together once they reach an agreement. Therefore, I will tell you as soon as I can. That said, I can confirm that we are working on arranging this meeting.

back to top

 

Question: Armenia used to buy weapons from Russia. However, Yerevan has now started buying weapons from other suppliers, including India and France. In addition, it has recently reached an agreement on arms supplies from South Korea and is negotiating a similar deal with Japan. Considering Armenia’s status as a CSTO member, how will these weapons be integrated into the CSTO’s framework and standards?

Maria Zakharova: I am not an expert when it comes to weapons standards. If your question is about specific details and technicalities, the way you framed this question seems contrived and even far-fetched to me.

But if you are talking about a political trend, I would agree with you, since this is what we have been saying all along. These so-called experiments with Western countries and NATO, especially in this region, invariably lead to escalation rather than facilitate conflict resolution. Therefore, once you buy Western weapons, there is always a question of what will come next. Will it bring peace to the region or the country that buys the weapons or, on the contrary, will this serve as a pretext for further escalation?

back to top

 

Question: A few days ago, Armenia announced that the country’s authorities had prevented an attempted coup and that the perpetrators had allegedly undergone three months of combat training in Russia before trying to seize power in Armenia. Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan also said he was disappointed in the CSTO and did not rule out possible changes in Armenia’s relations with this organisation. How will Moscow react to such statements from Yerevan?

Maria Zakharova: Certain officials and media outlets in Armenia have been trying hard to twist its Investigative Committee’s statement about the foiled coup and the attempt to find a Russian trace there. These interpretations are absurd and do not hold water. It is an entirely fabricated story.

We have repeatedly stressed that, unlike the West, Russia never interferes in the domestic affairs of other countries. It is regrettable to see certain groups in Armenia resort to the hackneyed Western tactics, fanning Russophobic sentiments and trying to find some mythical Russian threat – something the West has been doing all the time in the past decades, and before that, too. I cited some figures today. Armenia buys 90 percent of its grain from Russia – nearly all of what the country consumes daily, which ensures its food security. Why not place this at the forefront of our interaction? Why not give priority to economic matters? Why are the existing problems not being addressed in a mutually respectful manner? The answer is simple. It would make much more sense to resolve problems at the negotiating table than to push them aside. If the opposite is being done, it means they are not interested in finding solutions. What they want is to evade responsibility for their misguided actions and make others responsible.

It is not the CSTO or Russia that Armenia should distrust. This is totally absurd because we supply food to the country; we promote bilateral trade and remain its closest ally in every respect. They need to be wary of the West and its satellites, which have long specialised in inspiring colour revolutions.

Look at what those Western masterminds have done in Georgia. They easily abandon those they called friends and partners yesterday. As soon as the state begins to assert its national interests and pursue its own goals and objectives, the West sheds its sheep’s clothing, displaying the wolf’s face underneath.

We do not rule out that consultants from Western intelligence services are behind this clumsy and sloppy pseudo-bombshell. Their goal is to prevent any improvement in the context of our bilateral relations, especially with the planned Russian-Armenian meetings at the highest and high levels coming up.

Look at the number of employees at the US embassy in Yerevan. About 2,000 people are posted there. Can you imagine that? Many of them do information work. Now look at the information landscape in Armenia. It is becoming increasingly anti-Russian. We must put two and two together – the legions of US diplomats specialising in information work posted to Armenia and the deteriorating information landscape. Not only that, but there has been a wave of openly anti-Russia publications, Western-financed anti-Russia media outlets, and artificially implanted Russophobic sentiments.

back to top

 

Question (retranslated from English): Does Russia have relations with the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria? Is there any work underway that can facilitate interaction between the AANES and the central government of Syria?

Maria Zakharova: First of all, I would like to note that the Russian Federation in its foreign policy strictly adheres to the norms and principles of international law based on the UN Charter. In terms of its state-to-state relations, Russia is working with the Syrian Arab Republic and its internationally recognised government.

As for the Administration of North and East Syria, which you mentioned, this self-proclaimed entity emerged during an active phase of international terrorist aggression against Syria, after Damascus lost control over part of its national territory and foreign forces invaded those areas. This administration was never recognised by the official authorities.

At the same time, taking into account the requests for Russian assistance in establishing a dialogue between the Syrian Government and the self-proclaimed authority of the region east of the Euphrates aimed at restoring Syria’s unity as soon as possible, our representatives have actively contributed to the organisation and conduct of such intra-Syrian contacts.

However, as we have repeatedly noted, the AANES is under direct pressure from the United States, whose military contingents are present in areas controlled by this entity. For years, the Americans have been employing their preferred tactics of consistently derailing every agreement reached, including those achieved with Russian mediation.

back to top

 

Question: My question is about the Kurdistan region. Does Russia have any relations with the Kurdistan region in Iraq? Also, do you have any plans to improve them?

Maria Zakharova: Russia shares traditionally friendly ties with Iraqi Kurdistan as an integral part of a single Iraqi state. The Consulate General of the Russian Federation has been operating in Erbil, the capital of the Kurdistan Region, since 2007, and has been quite successful in its efforts. We have been promoting exchanges of delegations and maintaining effective business contacts. We share a mutual commitment to further expanding these ties.

back to top

 

Question: My last question is related to Russia’s high-ranking officials. Is there any plan for Mr Vladimir Putin, the Russian President, or Mr Sergey Lavrov, the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, or any other high official from Russia, to visit Iraq in the context of the conflicts in the Middle East or in Iraq?

Maria Zakharova: I do not have any specific data to share with you. I would like to remind you that Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s latest visit to Erbil took place in October 2019, and he visited Baghdad in February 2023. Prime Minister of Iraq Mohammed Shia' Al Sudani travelled to Russia on an official visit in October 2023. There is a lot of momentum in our contacts. I have just listed the recent meetings.

back to top

 

Question: The United States Ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, said on Tuesday that during the upcoming General Assembly meetings Washington would focus, among other things, on stopping wars and conflicts, including in Ukraine, Sudan, Haiti, and the Middle East. Meanwhile, Bloomberg cited its own sources when it reported about serious talks among Ukraine’s allies on the eventual scenarios for finding a negotiated solution to the conflict and how this can be achieved. What would be your comment regarding these statements by Washington and media reports? Have Western representatives tried raising these issues with Russia? Have you received any requests from them to have meetings with Sergey Lavrov during the UN General Assembly meetings?

Maria Zakharova: There will be many bilateral meetings. Let me remind you that Sergey Lavrov has regular meetings even with representatives from countries that we refer to as the collective West. They are the ones who impose sanctions on our country. We are now in the scheduling phase and will make sure to keep you updated on the upcoming meetings.

As for initiatives to find a political and diplomatic solution to the conflict, there are over 30 proposals to this effect.

We expressed our gratitude to everyone who shared their vision, that is except Chancellor of Germany, Olaf Scholz, considering the major personal would-be contribution he made to escalating the conflict on the ground. We heard his monstrous lies that it was Russia’s initiative to stop gas supplies, and we heard his nationalist, Russia-hating rhetoric. No matter what he suggests, he will never have our gratitude. He has yet to purge the sin he committed by provoking escalation in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. We do not refer to it as a Russia-Ukraine conflict, in fact, since we understand that this is a hybrid war the West is waging against our country.

His personal involvement goes beyond politics and must be viewed in the context of Germany’s historical responsibility for the crimes it committed against other ethnic groups and nations in the 20th century, including Russians, Ukrainians and Belarusians. Germany mounted a frontal attack against us at the time, but has now opted to attack us via a proxy; however, the results it seeks remain unchanged – it wants Russians and Ukrainians to die. Today, they are hiding behind the backs of Ukrainian nationals and using the Kiev regime as their proxy.

There are also false initiatives, such as Vladimir Zelensky’s would-be peace formula. In fact, it has nothing to do with peace.

That said, we are grateful to those who have treated these efforts as an attempt to find an effective political and diplomatic solution, and we remain in touch with them. As for the other proposals I have already mentioned, responding to them does not make any sense. We can see through their intentions. We understand that it all boils down to duplicity. This is just another lie, hypocrisy, and tactical games.

As for the question of Washington focusing during the General Assembly meetings on stopping wars and conflicts, I can say that ten years ago, when President of the United States Barack Obama took the floor at the UN General Assembly, he said that the world had become much safer than it used to be. But look at what is going on today. Why would you even listen to US representatives? They have an election coming up. Just wait and see the kind of rhetoric they will come up with down the road. Every year, they add something new and make U-turns compared to their earlier statements. I would advise you against relying on statements by US political figures. The only thing that matters is what they do, not what they say.

How can we discuss crisis settlement while they are supplying weapons to the conflict zone? How can they even think about contributing to peace-building efforts if they are the ones who started it all in Ukraine and keep making the situation there worse? How can they talk about their contribution to settling the conflict in the Middle East if they are the ones who did everything, with all these mistakes, their criminal miscalculations and their cynical approach, to make sure that the situation remains deadlocked and make this impasse even more profound? These statements are totally groundless and devoid of any substance.

back to top