Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, February 27, 2025
- Russian-American meeting in Istanbul
- Presentation of the Vologda Region
- Ukraine update
- Bosnia and Herzegovina’ court verdict on Republika Srpska President Milorad Dodik’s case
- The United States demands that India discharges tankers loaded with Russian oil by February 27
- The Third Caspian Economic Forum
- Russia’s UNGA resolution on combatting glorification of Nazism
- The second stage of the SCO chess tournament
- 55th anniversary of the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons entering into force
- Ladya: Spring Fantasy 2025 exhibition and fair of Russian folk arts and crafts
- Future of the World: New Platform for Global Growth open dialogue
- Days of Vientiane in Moscow
- 35th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the USSR and the Vatican
- Soviet diplomat Vasily Safronchuk’s 100th birthday
- European Commission’s attempts to pressure India
- Absurd accusations against the Russian House in Moldova
- Outcomes of Support Ukraine anti-Russia gatherings
- Upcoming second round of presidential election in Abkhazia
- Britain’s Russophobic policy
- Outlook for certain infrastructure projects
- Shutdown of Sputnik Azerbaijan
- US-sponsored resolution at the UN General Assembly
- Ukraine being sold off
- Possible peace talks on Ukraine
- Russian-US talks in Istanbul
- Relations between the United States and Great Britain
- Statements by Emmanuel Macron
- Russian-Bulgarian relations
- Israel’s actions against Syria
- Humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip
- Donald Trump’s steps with regard to the Gaza Strip
- Statements by certain German politicians
Russian-American meeting in Istanbul
In furtherance of a series of bilateral contacts at the top and high levels, an expert-level meeting is taking place today in Istanbul to explore pathways for resolving numerous irritants that persist in bilateral dialogue due to the groundwork laid by the destructive actions of previous US administrations.
These problematic issues have accumulated as a result of the unlawful activities of several preceding White House teams. All were bound by systemic personnel continuity and atavistic Russophobia. They deliberately erected impediments to the functioning of the Russian Embassy in Washington, thereby undermining the very framework of diplomatic relations between our nations. As you are aware, Russia was compelled to adopt reciprocal measures. The recognition that this state of affairs cannot continue indefinitely has now become evident to the new administration in the White House.
We have consistently affirmed that the deterioration of Russian-American relations was not our choice. Our actions have invariably been proportionate responses.
It is anticipated that today’s meeting will serve as the first in a sequence of such expert consultations, which may advance progress towards resolving differences with the American side and reinforcing confidence-building measures.
We underscore that commentary will be provided as news is received. The experts confront an immense volume of work. Let us therefore wish them success!
Presentation of the Vologda Region
On March 6, the Cultural Centre of the Foreign Ministry’s Main Administration for Service to the Diplomatic Corps will host a presentation highlighting the economic, investment, and tourism potential of the Vologda Region. This event will feature exhibitions that showcase the region’s social and economic achievements, alongside displays that emphasize its natural beauty and unique culture. Attendees will receive comprehensive insights into promising opportunities for enhancing international and foreign economic cooperation of this region of the Russian Federation.
The event will be attended by representatives from the diplomatic corps, business communities, federal and regional authorities, and media outlets.
Key statements will be delivered by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Governor of the Vologda Region Georgy Filimonov.
Ukrainian militants continue terrorising civilians and attacking civilian infrastructure in the Russian regions.
Archives from the 1940s released by the Federal Security Service reveal that Ukrainian Nazis are committing war crimes in the Kursk Region that are similar to Wehrmacht shooting and burning civilians alive during the Great Patriotic War.
On February 19, in the village of Kolykhalino, Belgorod Region, an enemy drone attacked a service bus, killing a civilian and injuring a woman. On the same day, two people were wounded by UAV strikes in the village of Oktyabrsky. On February 24, one person was injured in the village of Tishanka.
From February 18 to 24, two civilians were killed and at least 19 wounded, including two girls born in 2014, in the DPR as a result of Ukrainian drone attacks on residential quarters.
In the Zaporozhye Region, UAV strikes on civilian vehicles on February 18 and February 19 wounded a civilian and an ambulance crew member.
An eyewitness from the recently liberated town of Novogrodovka, DPR, told Russian servicemen that the Ukrainian military fatally shot four children who tried to escape. The Ukrainian armed forces opened fire on other civilians as well.
Russian courts continue to hand down sentences to Ukrainian neo-Nazis and mercenaries for war crimes.
Ukrainian military from the nationalist battalion Azov S. Budykov, A. Tokar and G. Matyushin, who fired at least 40 shots from a 122-mm D-30 howitzer at the village of Stary Krym from Mariupol between March 17 and 25, 2022, have been sentenced to long prison terms.
Member of Azov Battalion M. Melnikov, who shot a civilian with a hand-held machine gun in a pharmacy building in Mariupol in March 2022, was sentenced to 24 years in prison.
Georgian mercenary M. Gognadze was sentenced to 14 years in prison.
A criminal case against Azov members and commander of a mortar battery I.Nozhechkin and mortar gunner Ye.Yakovenko was remitted to court. The investigation established that in March 2022 in Mariupol I.Nozhechkin issued a criminal order to shell the village of Agrobaza, and his accomplice with his teammates carried it out. As a result, two privately owned houses with civilians hiding in the basements were damaged.
Gunmen S.Bochenko, V.Malchenko, S.Litvinenko, and S.Bilichenko from the 22nd Separate Mechanised Brigade of the Ukrainian army who were detained on August 13, 2024, were found guilty of committing terrorist attacks against civilians and Russian military in the Kursk Region. They were sentenced to 15 to 16 years in prison.
Ukrainian Nazis from the 64th Separate Rifle Battalion of the 44th Separate Mechanised Brigade P.Oleksyuk, S.Gorbachenko, Y.Andreychenko and G.Lyashenko, who terrorised local residents in the village of Snagost, Korenevsky District, Kursk Region, moved into private houses and repeatedly opened fire on Russian servicemen and civilians, were sentenced to the same prison terms.
Ukrainian pilots D. Shimansky and A. Morozov, who, according to investigators, in April 2023, violated Russian airspace in light A-22 planes in order to drop small bombs on an oil refinery in the Bryansk Region, but failed to accomplish the mission, face up to 30 years in prison. A. Morozov was detained near the border with Ukraine (his plane caught on a power line), and D. Shimansky was arrested in the Tula Region, where he landed. Both pilots cooperated with the investigators.
In Krasnogorovka, DPR, which was liberated by the Russian military, a booby-trapped cache of Orthodox icons and church utensils stolen by Bandera thugs from a nearby church was discovered. To cover up the traces of the crime, they tried to destroy it as our combatants were evacuating the valuables. This fact once again speaks volumes about the true moral character of the Ukrainian gunmen and commanders.
Russia’s law enforcement agencies continue to work to bring to justice Ukrainian Nazis and foreign mercenaries for war crimes, among others.
The newly declared by Washington course on achieving a peaceful settlement of the Ukraine crisis caught the European Union completely off guard. Everything was going well, or so they thought. They poured millions into the Kiev regime, which, as a tool used by the collective West, was trying to inflict a “strategic defeat” on Russia: people were dying, and civilian lives were lost. All of a sudden, the “main leader” - the United States - changed strategy and said peace talks were the order of the day. The EU scrambled to find an answer to what has become the main question for them: what are they supposed to do in case the United States stops providing military aid to Kiev and how to fund the Ukrainian forces’ combat operations going forward.
The February 17 emergency meeting of the leaders of Germany, Great Britain, Denmark, the Netherlands, France, Italy, Spain and Poland, i.e. the main suppliers of weapons to the Kiev regime, in Paris, was devoted specifically to these issues. They were joined by other representatives from the EU and NATO. But things didn’t move beyond discussions.
About the same picture was observed at a similar gathering, which was hastily convened by French President Macron on February 19. Its attendees included heads of Belgium, Greece, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, the Czech Republic, Finland, Sweden, Canada, and Norway.
Both events showcased serious disagreements in the Western camp, which was unprepared to properly respond to the rapidly changing circumstances and was unable to come up with a single approach now that the Trump Administration has charged Western Europe with addressing Ukraine’s security problems. The only thing the EU and NATO allies agreed on was to continue to provide further assistance to Zelensky’s regime without looking back at their US partners. However, the funding sources were not identified. Attempts by Scandinavian and Baltic lobbyists to seize Russia’s frozen assets and use them as a source of funding were met with stiff resistance from major European countries, with which this idea didn’t sit well, because, they said, if they go ahead with this plan, no one would ever seriously consider placing their assets with them.
On February 24, Kiev hosted the International Summit on the Support of Ukraine timed to coincide with the third anniversary of the start of the special military operation. Taking part in the summit were President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen and President of the European Council António Costa. They were accompanied by nearly all EU commissioners and leaders of the Western Russophobic community from the Baltic states, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Finland, Norway, Sweden and others. There was no US official delegation at the summit. Former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson was also spotted among the guests, the person who in 2022 made the Kiev regime give up negotiations and thus destined Ukraine’s citizens to destruction. He seems to have arrived to make sure that his idea of a war to the last Ukrainian is still alive and all Ukrainians have fallen victim to it.
The hawks who flocked to Kiev were tossing statements on allocating more military aid packages and pompously promised not to abandon Ukraine to its fate. It does not matter that many years earlier they did exactly the same first by pushing Ukraine’s residents to Maidan protests, to anti-constitutional coups, then civil confrontation and through a chain of provocations threw the nation into a conflict abyss. Ursula von der Leyen assured that as early as March, the EU will transfer another 3.5 billion euros tranche to the Nazi regime. The UK and Canada were predictably promising much bigger contributions of 5.6 and 5 billion dollars, respectively. Spain, Norway, Denmark and Sweden were trying to keep up with them and were ready to allocate around 1.8 billion euros collectively.
EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas was trying to outperform her colleagues in anti-Russia rhetoric. On February 24, she declared that NATO membership will be “the strongest security guarantee and actually also the cheapest one” for Ukraine, and the alliance will also benefit when “Europe’s strongest army,” as she called the Armed Forces of Ukraine, joins its ranks. She also demonstrated – apparently, for visual effect – the banner of AFU’s 36th Detached Marine Brigade that was engaged in battle in Mariupol and in the attack on the Kursk Region, which had been given to her as a gift. This is beyond cynicism, this is outright criminal immorality.
All this testifies to the fact that the “war party” globalists keep clinging to the policy of confrontation as they care exclusively about the interests of their “heavenly garden.”
Vladimir Zelensky has once again made statements concerning Ukraine’s hypothetical NATO membership. This began with a flurry of events and gatherings featuring identical participants, pre-fabricated speeches, statements, and utterly absurd slogans. The aim is to demonstrate that the situation is less dire than reality. All understand the truth. They pretend that matters can still be remedied, that not all is decided, that they might yet remain afloat – though given their calibre, such buoyancy is assured. The crux, however, is that their position remains untenable. In his address at the above-mentioned international summit in Kiev on February 24 of this year, Vladimir Zelensky stated: “If NATO membership remains closed to Ukraine and our people, we will have no choice but to build a NATO within Ukraine. We will ensure funding, deploy contingents, and develop defence industries to guarantee peace.” This “construction” project, the Bankova Street administration intends to finance at Europe’s expense. Notably, Western European regimes neglect to inform their citizens of this. Let us recall that this is where it all started. It served as the trigger that transformed Ukraine’s internal conflict into a continental security threat – the moment Ukraine began being fashioned into a NATO foothold. What peace can prevail if such ideas dominate?
Ukraine’s NATO membership would provoke abrupt and uncontrollable escalation of the conflict, with grave repercussions for global security.
We reiterate that a just and durable resolution of the conflict remains unattainable without the complete and irreversible eradication of the conflict’s root causes. Foremost among these is the West’s breach of its pledge to refrain from NATO’s expansion and the alliance’s absorption of geopolitical space up to Russia’s borders.
To coincide with this European bureaucrats’ visit, a fantastical performance titled “An attempt to restore Vladimir Zelensky’s legitimacy” was staged. This pertains to the Verkhovna Rada and its proceedings on February 24–25. I will refrain from comment, as the spectacle speaks for itself.
This show serves a singular purpose: to divert Ukrainian citizens’ attention from pending further reductions in conscription age thresholds.
The situation with the armed forces of Ukraine continues to worsen. Ukrainian citizens are not informed of this reality. Instead, they are shown only “salesmen” – Brussels bureaucrats promising funds and a bright future. They would do well to remove their rose-tinted lenses and observe the actual view outside their windows, rather than the “film” screened by NATO. Let them speak of the mounting personnel losses within the AFU. Yet an entirely different tactic is being employed.
Under pressure from the West, the Kiev regime is exploring measures to expand its mobilisation base by conscripting youths aged 18–25. In mid-February of this year, a new conscription format was announced: one-year “volunteer contracts” for those reaching adulthood. It must be understood that by signing these coercive terms, young men receive a one-way ticket. The choice offered to them reduces to deployment in six frontline infantry brigades. These are not drone operation training courses. They are not cyber warfare units employing computer technologies.
No. I reiterate, as this is critical: these are six frontline infantry brigades. To the layperson, for a civilian, this may not be clear. For those who have undergone military service or comprehend the role of an infantry brigade, it is evident that for the youths rounded up in Ukraine, this constitutes an immediate and horrific meat grinder. They will be sent to slaughter.
Amid this, “disposal units” from the Right Sector, as reported on social media, have escalated efforts – in Dnepropetrovsk, they have posted advertisements recruiting 14-year-olds to “kill enemies.” The war machine, propelled by Western handlers, aims to exhaust Ukraine’s blood and deprive it of future generations. To what end? To facilitate its plunder. Fewer thinking individuals capable of resistance are precisely what is desired. This is the objective.
Revelatory are the bribe amounts cited by a Verkhovna Rada deputy, paid by evaders to draft officers. While the state pays them $100 per recruit on average, the “street price” for exemption is $500. Escaping a conscription office costs approximately $3,000, while exiting a training centre demands $7,000. With the planned termination of mobilisation deferrals from February 28, these sums will surge.
Those unfortunate souls unable to bribe their way out and unwilling to perish for the Kiev regime frequently face execution by AFU blocking detachments. The extensive experience of “disposing” mobilised citizens across frontline sectors was recently detailed on Ukrainian television by a militant from the AFU’s 3rd Separate Assault Brigade.
The afore- and below mentioned facts demonstrate that the objectives of the special military operation were not declared in vain. As reiterated by the Russian leadership, they will be fulfilled.
Bosnia and Herzegovina’ court verdict on Republika Srpska President Milorad Dodik’s case
We share the justified indignation of the general public in the Balkans at the absurd conviction in the fabricated case of President Milorad Dodik of the Republika Srpska (Bosnia and Herzegovina) by a court in Bosnia and Herzegovina on February 26.
This is yet another instance where politics has triumphed over the law. As a result, the legally elected people’s representative was essentially found guilty of faithfully discharging the duties assigned to him by the Constitution, which was interpreted in a distorted manner as a violation of the “national legislation”, for which the puppet serving personalities of the Bosnian judiciary tried to pass off pseudo-laws invented by the self-appointed ‘High Representative,’ the German national Christian Schmidt.
The verdict in this case is manifestly unjust and cannot entail legal consequences. Clearly, it is aimed solely at eliminating from the political scene the leader of the Serbian populace of Bosnia and Herzegovina, whose principled patriotic position contradicts the Euro-Atlantic guidelines imposed by the West.
We support the efforts of the Republika Srpska authorities to protect the constitutional status of the Republic in accordance with the 1995 General Framework (Dayton) Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the fundamental principles of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country, the equality of the three constituent peoples and the two entities with broad powers.
The Russian Federation, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council and one of the guarantors of the Peace Agreement, is using all the political means at its disposal to prevent the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina from developing into a negative track, to neutralise threats to inter-ethnic dialogue, peace and stability in that state and in the Balkans as a whole, to attract additional attention from the international community and, through joint efforts, to bring the situation back on the Dayton track.
The United States demands that India discharges tankers loaded with Russian oil by February 27
The Foreign Ministry has taken note of the fact that the United Stated has recently requested India to discharge tankers loaded with Russian oil by February 27.
First, it is important to stress that India has not officially joined any illegitimate restrictive measures as initiated by the West against Russia’s fuel and energy sector, including the so-called price cap on oil. Considering that Russia and India share a privileged strategic partnership, as well as taking into consideration the interests of the domestic oil and gas industry, we believe that commenting on these statements coming from Washington would be ill-advised and counter-productive.
Once again, the Foreign Ministry emphasises and reiterates something we have said on multiple occasions. Russia firmly opposes and refuses to accept any unilateral measures designed to exert pressure on us, including in the energy sector. The Western sanctions policy boils down to neo-colonial-style attempts to use unfair competitive practices to gain an economic edge and get rid of any other players on the global energy market. Our efforts to promote energy cooperation are designed to ensure energy security at a global scale, while also supporting sustainable economic growth, addressing social matters and fighting energy poverty. We have been performing the obligations we have assumed in a diligent manner in keeping with international contracts and agreements.
The Third Caspian Economic Forum
The 3rd Caspian Economic Forum was held in Tehran on February 17-18, 2025. The Russian delegation was led by Deputy Prime Minister Alexey Overchuk. Participants included Prime Minister of Azerbaijan Ali Asadov, First Vice-President of Iran Mohammad Reza Aref, Prime Minister of Kazakhstan Olzhas Bektenov, and Deputy Chairman of the Cabinet of Ministers of Turkmenistan Hojamyrat Geldimyradov. Prime Minister of Tajikistan Kokhir Rasulzoda attended as a guest.
Six round tables were organised, addressing prospects for advancing cooperation in trade, industry, and agriculture; economic, customs, banking, and investment collaboration; joint initiatives among Caspian littoral states in transport, transit, and technical-engineering services; and partnerships in ecology, healthcare, tourism, and related fields. Delegations representing various Russian ministries and agencies took part in the discussions. Throughout these talks, several proposals were introduced to enhance constructive and mutually beneficial cooperation among the five Caspian states across a range of sectors.
Following the event, a joint communiqué was adopted, in which the heads of national delegations expressed commitment to enhancing collaboration among the Caspian states to expand trade volumes and reciprocal investments; welcomed Iran’s proposal to host meetings of ministers responsible for trade, economic, and transport cooperation in the Caspian Sea region by the end of 2025; recognised the high level of cooperation among Caspian states in oil, gas, and energy sectors, including green energy, and affirmed readiness to continue such efforts; and emphasised the necessity of further collaboration in developing freightage, transport, logistics infrastructure, and tourism.
Participants commended the Iranian side for the exemplary organisation of the forum and the hospitality extended.
The forum reaffirmed the Caspian states’ resolve to strengthen pentalateral engagement, marking a significant contribution to regional cooperation in the Caspian basin.
Russia’s UNGA resolution on combatting glorification of Nazism
A number of Telegram channel comments have come to our attention. They look like a choreographed effort (frankly, I’m loath to think so, but they were posted online to the minute a couple of days ago) and discuss the UN General Assembly resolution on combatting the glorification of Nazism and neo-Nazism.
As you may be aware, this resolution is a critical initiative condemning the glorification of Nazism in all its manifestations and is the product of 20 years of the Russian Federation’s work on the UN platform. It was first put forward in 2005. Back then, it was just a few paragraphs long and was supported by fewer than ten co-sponsors. Promoting one’s own agenda on international platforms takes time, no doubt about it. There’s no way to get what you want in one second. Over time and with a fair share of proactive and painstaking efforts going into it, the document was given a title that clarifies the thrust of the initiative which is combatting the glorification of Nazism. The text has taken on a comprehensive nature, which reflects our stance on manifestations of Nazism and neo-Nazism.
In particular, it conveys serious concern about the ongoing, in certain countries, war on monuments, including demolition and desecration, to those who fought against Nazism and fascism, in a word, monuments to liberator soldiers. Of late, this trend has become part of the Western countries’ national policies and is nothing short of a genuine pandemic.
The qualification of the SS and all its components, including the Waffen-SS, as a criminal organisation in accordance with the Nuremberg Tribunal verdict has been confirmed. Concurrently, deep indignation was expressed with regard to marches glorifying Nazis and their accomplices and torchlight processions by neo-Nazis and radical nationalists. The unveiling of memorials and renaming streets, schools and other sites after Nazi henchmen are part of the same trend. At the same time, concern is expressed about the attempts to elevate to the rank of national heroes those who, during WWII, fought against the Allies, collaborated with the Nazis, and committed war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Let me remind everyone - although we never stop talking about it – that the same document condemns certain countries’ attempts to ban symbols associated with Victory over Nazism. It is emphasised particularly hard that such actions desecrate the memory of countless victims of Nazism, negatively impact younger generations, and run absolutely counter to the UN member states’ commitments under the UN Charter. Moreover, the above actions are qualified as falling under Article 4 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which requires states parties to this international treaty to combat such occurrences, all the way up to criminalising them.
Thus, the unrelenting hard work that the Russian delegation put in over many years has resulted in the UN approving at all levels the approaches that are of fundamental value for our country and our like-minded partners. These approaches seek to preserve the historical truth and to counter attempts to falsify the WWII outcomes. Finally, the number of co-sponsors, which is an important consideration, now stands at 40. These countries come from all over of the world, and about 120 countries in all vote for it.
Importantly, in the beginning, the document was thematic rather than country-specific and did not mention any country specifically. Some countries immediately knew the text was targeting them. They have literally looked into a mirror, which further proves that they have such problems at the national level.
It is, therefore, not surprising that our opponents are fiercely opposing this document. It’s important for those of you who write on this topic. For 20 years, the United States, Canada, Japan, Great Britain, Switzerland, Australia, Norway, Ukraine and EU member states have consistently voted against it or abstained during voting on its text and have literally tried to force the Global South countries into not providing support to this document. Furthermore, for many of them, opposition to this text has become their primary objective - this would be funny if it weren't so sad - during human rights discussions at the UN.
In 2022, their attacks against the resolution took on a new form. Faced with the failing vote every year, the collective West countries came up with another tactic of “procedural provocation.” They planted an infamous anti-Russia paragraph on unacceptability of justifying “territorial aggression against Ukraine” and made it an objective of fighting neo-Nazism. They engaged every bit of transatlantic solidarity to support it.
What did they need it for? They wanted to force us into revoking this document. They dreamed about it, and later admitted it openly.
In other words, if the Western scenario were to come to fruition, Russia would then find itself among the countries that are trying as best they can to prevent the approval of the General Assembly’s text. Notably, this paragraph does not make the text of the resolution acceptable to our opponents. They are fully aware of the fact that the nature of the resolution will remain unchanged, and they continue to vote against the text anyway, even when their dirty provocative amendment gets voted for. Their goal is different and is to make sure that this text becomes nonexistent.
Considering this, Russia and its like-minded partners, chose not to fall into this obvious trap and not to take the bait.
We put this paragraph to a vote every year. Whenever it gets voted for, we use the procedure which allows us to officially distance ourselves from the fragment of the resolution that is unacceptable for us, which is included in the minutes of the UN General Assembly meetings. The minutes get archived by UN and are readily available on its online resources.
What does this tell us? It may be difficult for a layman to understand, but it is still worth focusing on today, as long as this topic was thrown into the media space. Neither Russia, nor other co-sponsors are bound by the text of this paragraph. Neither then, nor now was the issue about supporting it.
We are working to debunk this provocation. As a result, this paragraph, unacceptable as it is for the right-minded people, is losing support, and we rightly expect to see it eliminated in the near future.
These painstaking efforts have yielded results. In 2022, 63 countries voted for the anti-Russia paragraph, with 23 voting against, and 65 countries abstaining. Last time, in December 2024, the number of votes for remained the same, but the number of those who voted against almost doubled to 41 delegations, with 50 abstaining.
We are convinced that Russia must not give up its fight against the glorification of Nazism at the UN. If you think of it, where else are we supposed to fight against it but at the UN that came into being following victory over fascism and the defeat of Nazism. Victory does not always come at once. It is not always possible to get immediate results. How simple would that be, wouldn’t it? We must keep fighting no matter what.
There are times when you need to combine the desire to get instant results with hard work. We engage in a diplomatic fight for the interests of our country. But in this particular case, we are also bringing the international community together on this most important matter. We are not working on this resolution a week or so before it is put to a vote. We are not fighting against this amendment to the resolution an hour or so before the vote. We work on it every day. Did those who manufactured this media provocation, including, first and foremost, actors in the Russian media space, know about it? They did not even think about it. Do you want to help? Let us join our capabilities, potentials and resources. We will be happy to interact with you. I’m talking about the media resources that have taken up this topic in passing once. It took them 15 to 20 minutes to post the materials online, and they moved on. Do you want us to work together? We are all for it. Reach out to us. Or, even better, we’ll reach out to you. But, please, do not backtrack if we do.
For your information, all comments by representatives of the delegations of the Russian Federation and other countries during adoption of the resolution on the Western “amendment” are publicly available. Russian diplomats have repeatedly provided detailed comments to various media outlets, clarifying procedural aspects and substantive points related to approving our key initiative at the UN. In this regard, we are grateful to Russian journalists, bloggers and experts who cover this topic in a truly professional manner.
For our part, we will continue to make every effort to counter the “historical aggression” unleashed by individual countries against our country.
The second stage of the SCO chess tournament
On March 1 through 3, the second stage of the International Chess Tournament of the SCO Countries will take place in 18 countries and in over 30 Russian regions.
We told you about its first stage during our December 18, 2024 briefing. As a reminder, more than 3,000 people from more than ten SCO countries took part in it.
The tournament has a hybrid format with both online and offline participation opportunities.
Offline tournaments will be held in many Russian cities on March 1-3. More regions have joined the second stage, including the Amur, Orenburg, Samara, Novosibirsk, Volgograd, Rostov and Tyumen regions, the republics of Bashkortostan and Crimea as well as the Krasnoyarsk and Stavropol Territories.
The online stage of the tournament will be held concurrently on the myChess platform. Apart from Russian chess players, its participants represent 15 nations: Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Egypt, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, the PRC, Kyrgyzstan, Nepal, the UAE, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. In addition, participants from Venezuela and Italy will also join.
The third stage is scheduled for May 2025, and the finals for July 2025 as part of the first International School Sport Games of the SCO countries.
We invite all chess players and media representatives to take part in this landmark event.
55th anniversary of the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons entering into force
March 5 marks the 55th anniversary of the entry into force of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Throughout this time, the NPT has served as the foundation of the nuclear non-proliferation regime and a key element of the international security system. It has thus proved its relevance to the entire international community. Ensuring the continued existence of this Treaty is one of the priority tasks for maintaining global stability amid the breakdown of the existing system of agreements supporting the architecture of international security.
As a State Party to the NPT and one of its depositaries, Russia is firmly committed to the letter and spirit of the Treaty and strictly fulfils its obligations with regard to non-proliferation, disarmament and the peaceful use of atomic energy. We are making consistent efforts to move closer to the ultimate goal of general and complete disarmament, advocating equal and indivisible security for all states of the world. We support the IAEA safeguards system, which serves as the verification mechanism of the Treaty, and we also advocate the importance of maintaining its objective, depoliticised and technically sound nature. We promote unconditional access to the “peaceful atom” for all NPT-compliant countries.
We must remember that the Treaty was adopted in full awareness of the need to prevent a nuclear conflict. In this regard, it is particularly important that the five nuclear states have reached an understanding that there can be no winners in a nuclear war and that it must never be unleashed. It is essential that all the five nuclear weapon possessing states take practical efforts to eliminate actions that could provoke such a confrontation.
Ladya: Spring Fantasy 2025 exhibition and fair of Russian folk arts and crafts
On February 26 - March 2, the Expocentre Central Exhibition Complex will host the 37th Ladya: Spring Fantasy 2025 exhibition and fair of Russian folk arts and crafts.
We are often asked about our values and where they can be seen or read about. We invite you to visit Ladya to learn about the things we stand for, protect, and view as truly essential for us.
Over 700 craft organisations, individual artists and masters, as well as creative associations from 58 Russian regions, are expected to take part in the exhibition.
Today, Ladya is Russia’s largest exhibition and a major socially important cultural event that displays the national art and brings together world-renowned folk art centres, crafts enterprises and organisations, craftsmen and artists, as well as creative associations and folklore bands.
The fair aims to provide support for domestic manufacturers, and improve the artistic level and experts’ qualifications. With their help, we get to know each other better and learn more about our Motherland.
Children and adults can take part in entertaining workshops to learn how to make various clay toys, folk dolls, birchbark handicrafts, bast fibre items, fabric printing, leather embossing, and dot painting.
If you are looking to have fun while making the most of quality time with your loved ones, I recommend attending this event and bringing your children to the exhibition fair. It will give you the opportunity to share and demonstrate our country’s culture, emphasising the importance of cherishing and preserving it in every possible way.
I highly recommend visiting the event. You can find out more on the website of its organiser, Russian Folk and Arts Crafts Association.
Future of the World: New Platform for Global Growth open dialogue
The Russia National Centre will host the open dialogue, Future of the World: New Platform for Global Growth, on April 28-30.
The project’s key objective is to develop a set of initiatives and recommendations with a view to ensuring stable economic growth in the context of modern challenges and changes. The experts’ conclusions and recommendations will serve as the basis for subsequent activities and strategies aimed to advance the global economy.
During the discussions, the experts will focus on four main topics: Investing in People, Investing in Technology, Investing in Environment, and Investing in Connectivity.
Everyone is welcome to contribute ideas for discussion in an open dialogue format. To this end, it is required to submit ideas on the topic of ensuring the growth of the global economy in an essay format by March 9, 2025.
The text version of the briefing will provide contact details.
The authors of the best essays will be invited to the Russia National Centre to take part in the open dialogue on The Future of the World: A New Platform for Global Growth on April 28-30, 2025.
We invite everyone to present their vision of the future of our world, and the media to participate in the coverage of this event.
From February 26 to March 1 this year, a Lao delegation headed by the Mayor of Vientiane Atsaphangthong Siphandone will visit Moscow.
In this connection, starting February 27, the Days of Vientiane in Moscow will be held with the support of the Moscow Government’s Department of External Economic and International Relations. The events offer a unique opportunity to get to know Lao culture and learn more about its history.
Also, the Programme of Cooperation between the Government of Moscow and the Vientiane City Hall for 2025-2028 is to be signed.
The Moscow Chamber of Commerce and Industry has organised a business forum on the development of business cooperation between the two capitals, timed to coincide with the Days of Vientiane, as well as an exhibit and presentation of Lao products. The participants will discuss cooperation in culture, tourism, IT, energy, agriculture, and trade.
Days of Vientiane will be a major step in the deepening of relations between Russia and Laos, building a platform for further cultural exchange and strengthening business ties. They will continue the tradition of international events, such as the Days of Moscow in Vientiane held in 2024, and will serve as an important milestone in the city’s cultural life and a significant contribution to the development of international relations.
35th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the USSR and the Vatican
March 1, 2025 marks the 35th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the USSR and the Vatican. At that pivotal moment, when the world stood on the brink of transformative changes associated with perestroika and the end of the Cold War, two such disparate nations took a step towards each other, aspiring to leave behind misunderstandings and to foster dialogue and collaboration.
Over the years, Russia and the Vatican have amassed a wealth of collaborative experience in the fields of science, culture, education, historical and archival affairs, and healthcare. Today, the dialogue between the Russian Federation and the Holy See is of a constructive nature and is founded on the principles of mutual respect, a commitment to traditional values, and the preservation of civilisational identity.
We support the efforts of the Vatican and His Holiness Pope Francis in seeking peaceful resolutions to conflicts. In this regard, we value the Holy See’s measured approaches to the Ukrainian crisis and its endeavour to contribute to the resolution of various humanitarian issues in the context of the conflict surrounding Ukraine.
We are concerned by recent reports from the Holy See Press Office regarding the deterioration of the pontiff’s health. In this respect, we would like to extend our wishes for his swift recovery.
We remain open to further developing our cooperation with the Vatican on pressing issues on the international agenda, based on shared interests and the aspiration towards a more equitable world order.
Soviet diplomat Vasily Safronchuk’s 100th birthday
At the outset of February, we commemorated our professional holiday – Diplomatic Worker’s Day. We continue to acquaint you with accounts of our distinguished diplomats.
Today, we will speak about Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, UN Under-Secretary-General for Political and Security Council Affairs (1987-1992) Vasily Safronchuk, whose 100th birthday we celebrated just recently, on February 16.
Born in the Dnepropetrovsk region (Ukrainian SSR) to a peasant family, Vasily Safronchuk served in the military, concluding the war as a platoon commander, and participated in the liberation of Prague. Following demobilisation, he worked as a blacksmith at the Moscow Assembly and Welding Plant for several months before taking entrance examinations at MGIMO University. In 1947, he enrolled at MGIMO, graduating with honours. Following his postgraduate studies at MGIMO, he continued his academic pursuits.
In 1959, he commenced diplomatic service, holding successive posts as economic counsellor at the Soviet Embassy in London and Deputy Head of the Second European Department of the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs. After serving as the Soviet Union’s Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to Ghana (1967–1971), he was appointed Deputy Permanent Representative of the USSR to the United Nations (1971–1973). Further assignments included roles as Minister-Counsellor at the Soviet Embassy in Afghanistan (1973–1982) and First Deputy Permanent Representative of the USSR to the UN (1985–1986).
The pinnacle of Vasily Safronchuk’s diplomatic career was his appointment as UN Under-Secretary-General for Political and Security Council Affairs (1987-1992). While serving on a permanent basis at the UN Security Council, our colleague addressed issues of maintaining international peace and security in various regions of the world: the Middle East and Central America, Cyprus, Namibia, Angola, and South Africa. He actively participated in resolving issues related to the Iran-Iraq conflict and worked on the Geneva Accords pertaining to Afghanistan.
Upon retiring from diplomatic duties, Vasily Safronchuk remained active in public life. He published the book “Politics and Diplomacy,” which offers a scientific analysis of Russia’s politics and diplomacy in the era of globalisation at the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries. We recommend it to all those with an interest in our nation’s foreign policy.
Answers to media questions:
Question: Bloomberg has reported that during her visit to India, Ursula von der Leyen is expected to seek Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi’s assistance in enforcing sanctions on Russia. What would be your comment on these reports?
Maria Zakharova: Literally, what a shame for the European Commission and the aggressive West in general. They are now touring the world and visiting countries that are not part of their community begging that these countries adhere in one way or another to their anti-Russia frenzy.
We know very well, and we can see that the Global Majority, including India, of course, can see through this aggressive policy coming from Brussels. BRICS and SCO countries condemn the unilateral coercive measures and interference in the sovereign affairs of other states. We are certain that despite the attempts by Brussels to pressure other countries, our partners will continue following their sovereign path and maintaining mutually beneficial economic relations with our country. That said, what a shame for what some call the enlightened West to tour countries which they treat with so much disdain by referring to them as a jungle, while asking these same countries to support the civilised “garden” in its frenzy. What a shame!
Question: On February 19, Moldova’s Foreign Minister Mihai Popsoi said that his government decided to withdraw from the 1998 Russia-Moldova intergovernmental agreement on cultural centres. He argued that the Russian House in Chisinau has been relying on the agreement to “undermine the statehood and sovereignty of the Republic of Moldova.” What would be your comment in this regard?
Maria Zakharova: As of today, we have not received any official notifications from Moldova on its decision to terminate the 1998 intergovernmental agreement on the operation of cultural centres.
One thing to understand here is that all the allegations claiming that the Russian House in Chisinau subverts Moldova’s statehood in one way or another are totally absurd and amount to misinformation. These are fake claims.
What the Russian House does is carry out humanitarian, awareness and educational projects – nothing more. It serves as a focal point attracting so many people living in Moldova. As many as 80 percent of people there speak Russian. This centre serves as a platform for holding various events aimed at promoting people-to-people contacts and forging closer ties between our two nations. What is the problem with that? What could they possibly fail to understand here? These are all public events, open to everyone. They are announced in advance and people go there. There are photos and videos from these events. What is their point?
What makes the accusations against the Russian House coming from the Moldovan officials so cynical is that the current authorities have gone to great lengths to dilute and water down national sovereignty and the national identity of their people. No outside force could have done so much harm.
Let me give you an example. According to local experts, there are over 10,000 NGOs in Moldova whose operations are funded, either in whole or in part, by the West. They focus on making sure that the republic finds a firmer footing within the collective West’s orbit, i.e., sphere of influence. In fact, many Moldovan officials come from NGOs of this kind and hold foreign passports too. This is a blow to the country’s independence and its identity.
According to media reports, over the past three years these NGOs received almost $950 million from the United States alone. So what is their point regarding sovereignty? Does the Russian House prevent them from promoting their sovereignty in any way? Does it do it by holding exhibitions and concerts?
But who are the main donors? These include USAID, an agency famous for interfering in the domestic affairs of other countries – even the Americans now view it as undesirable, indecent and corrupt. There is also the Soros foundation too.
Moldova’s territory is increasingly used for holding military exercises with the participation of military personnel from NATO member countries. This is what undermines the country’s independence and its unique national identity.
The process to forcefully Romanianise Moldova continues unabated with more and more people from Bucharest joining the government apparatus. In February 2025, people of this kind were appointed to the positions of Deputy Governor at the National Bank and head of the National Institute of Justice. But it is the Russian House that stands in their way! Opinion polls have shown that over 60 percent of Moldovans oppose this Romanianisation policy.
Under the current government, Moldova’s debt skyrocketed to an all-time high. The authorities boasted about getting 1.9 billion euros from Brussels as part of the Growth Plan for the Republic of Moldova, while sweeping an important aspect under the carpet. In fact, most of this money – 1.5 billion euros – will come in the form of new loans that will have to be paid back with a hefty interest rate. As of today, the republic’s debt has almost reached $7 billion. This is what undermines its sovereignty, not the Russian House with its educational agenda and what amounts to an exclusively positive and inclusive humanitarian mission.
It is our hope that the national leadership demonstrates common sense and refrains from taking any steps to terminate the Russia-Moldova agreement on cultural centres or close the Russian House, since these steps run counter to the interests of a large part of the Moldovan population.
Question: What is your comment on the outcome of the Weimar+ meeting on February 12 and the “Paris get-together” on February 17, both meant to support Ukraine?
Maria Zakharova: We see the majority of statements about the same thing coming from Brussels and other European capitals. They are about escalating the conflict and thwarting any peace initiatives. This is the dominant “superstructure” crowning any event.
Brussels’ priority, aim, and goal is to prevent the Ukraine crisis from being settled peacefully. They openly say that they will sabotage any deal, initiative or negotiating process by any expedient. They are pretending that their non-involvement will undermine the negotiating process. This is not even about shooting oneself in the leg. This is about wanting to “stop the train by standing on the tracks.” Something like that.
It is still fresh in the world public’s memory how the EU and its individual members went about “making peace” in the context of the Ukraine crisis. What they were doing before.
Just recall that France, Germany and Poland were the guarantors of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych’s agreements with the opposition in February 2014. How long did their “guarantees” last? Less than 24 hours? A couple of hours?
For example, the UN Security Council approved the Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements in 2015. What did Ms Merkel say afterwards? What did Mr Hollande say later? They said that they were not going to implement it and only used the time to prepare the Kiev regime for war.
Brussels, instead of promoting a peace settlement, has repeatedly called for avoiding any talks with Russia, making war not peace, taking the matter to the battlefield, etc. They put forward ultimatums in the form of Zelensky’s “peace formula” and later his “victory formula.” The things they invented! They call this a “guarantee,” their contribution to and involvement in settling the crisis. We remember all this. It is impossible to remain the main champion of war in Ukraine and at the same time unashamedly demand a separate role for themselves in some or other peace negotiations. They should make up their mind after all.
It is only after the EU renounces its monstrous rhetoric, its militarist policies, its endless rudeness and its morbid Russophobia that we will be able to talk about anything like Brussels’ constructive contribution to Ukrainian settlement.
Question: Media outlets are currently focusing on Abkhazia in the context of the upcoming second round of the presidential election, which is scheduled to take place on March 1. How could you comment on this entire issue?
Maria Zakharova: We are keeping a close eye on the developments in Abkhazia. Russia and Abkhazia share long-standing friendly relations.
Our country provides this state, where most people also have Russian passports, with comprehensive assistance on a mutually beneficial basis.
Here are just a few facts: Sukhum International Airport has recently benefited from a large-scale upgrade, a telemedicine centre has opened at a local republican hospital, a programme for offering medical check-ups to all Abkhazian school students has been launched, and many other projects have been implemented. These measures will facilitate Abkhazia’s sustained development, and they will create more favourable conditions for accommodating Russian tourists.
Speaking of the current electoral cycle, Russia is sending its observers there at Sukhum’s invitation. They will work with their foreign colleagues for monitoring the election process.
Unfortunately, the domestic political situation has not yet stabilised completely in Abkhazia following the November 2024 civil unrest.
We assume that, on March 1, every citizen of this country will be able to vote unhindered for any candidate they like, and that the election process will be organised in accordance with the national law and generally recognised democratic norms, that law and order will be duly maintained, and that all political forces will recognise election returns. This is the essence of the democratic process, based on the rule of law.
Moscow hopes that the completion of the electoral cycle will enhance security and stability in the republic, and improve its wellbeing based on allied relations with Russia.
Question: Why does the United Kingdom voice such an actively aggressive position with regard to Russia? Earlier, the Biden administration essentially camped on a similar position. We have no territorial and economic disputes with the UK. How can one explain the UK’s animosity towards Russia?
Maria Zakharova: Who told you that we have no territorial or economic disputes with the UK? What do you mean by territorial disputes? You are probably addressing this issue in an old-fashioned manner: Do we have a common border, and are we neighbours? Why do you not think that they have a different opinion of this matter?
Why do you not think that they (London and all these Russia-hating elites) perceive the territory of our country as their own “fiefdom,” and why do you not think that they see Russia’s resources as something they need to acquire? In their opinion, we have no right to own these resources. Why do you not perceive the concept of territorial claims in precisely this context?
Indeed, you will not see this interpretation from the point of view of jurisprudence and law. But this is exactly how they treat this issue from the standpoint of historical truth: “What is ours should be ours and not theirs.” This is a colonial approach. They were never able to subjugate our country, to seize it by force, to destroy or conquer it. They have always wanted to do this very much. So, you should address this wording in a broader context.
Regarding economic disputes, why do you believe that we have none? If they are imposing sanctions, this means that mutually beneficial cooperation and partnership does not suit them. Consequently, they do not need this, although they were offered this. Go back to square one: They do not see the territory of Russia as a land that should be governed by our people and our nation. Their morbid mentality even denies us the right to manage our own resources.
Question: In this context, can the United Kingdom trigger a war with Russia in Ukraine?
Maria Zakharova: I do not quite understand what you mean. We have already said that they are an unfriendly regime, and they have been behaving as such.
Question: Can we expect the unfinished railway linking Kyzyl to Kuragino to become part of the Russia – Mongolia – China corridor? What do our Mongolian and Chinese neighbours think about this?
Maria Zakharova: The projects you have mentioned falls within the purview of the economic ministries and agencies within the Russian Government. You can refer your question to them.
As far as I know, the relevant stakeholders have only started to examine this topic. It is up to our financial and economic agencies, and only them, to give you a detailed comment in this regard.
Question: A spokesperson of Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry announced on February 24, 2025, that Sputnik Azerbaijan, the representative office of Rossiya Segodnya Media Group, will be closed. Baku has already closed the Russian House. Can you tell us what is going on here?
Maria Zakharova: We have been in touch with Azerbaijan on this matter.
In fact, we informed our colleagues in Azerbaijan about our position on what we view as a very important topic. It is important for us, just as it is for Baku. And we expect to see a constructive response. Hopefully, we will be able to come up with mutually acceptable solutions by working together.
We expect our partners to honour the allied nature of Russia-Azerbaijan relations as a guiding principle when making any further steps in this regard by refraining from harming our bilateral relations and the multifaceted ties bonding together our two nations and their people.
We have heard and understood the arguments they have put forward. Indeed, this is the law of the land, and we are not trying to dispute this in any way. That said, you can always find mutually acceptable solutions and opportunities for resolving and settling the situation. I do not see anything that could prevent us from respecting the law, while also maintaining a normal and mutually respectful relationship, offering a pathway to resolving this situation.
Question: The United States has refused to co-sponsor a draft of an anti-Russian UN General Assembly resolution on Ukraine. Washington went on to submit its own draft which did not accuse Russia of starting the conflict. However, Russia’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Vasily Nebenzya, said that the draft was distorted and perverted. As a result, the United States refrained from voting in favour of its own draft. Can you help us sort what they have been up to with all these Ukraine resolutions?
Maria Zakharova: The Foreign Ministry has released several written comments and offered oral explanations too. I will refrain from repeating them.
Question: Slovakia may well follow in the footsteps of the United States by demanding that Ukraine pay back the money it received. This is what Andrej Danko, Deputy Speaker of the Slovak parliament, said. According to his statement, Bratislava sent 3.5 billion euros to Kiev. What other countries could follow down this road? What will the authorities in Kiev have to do in this case?
Maria Zakharova: For the Kiev authorities, the question is not where these financial claims are coming from. This is a secondary matter, even if it is very important since it deals with condemning the Ukrainian population to debt servitude.
The primary issue and the central question here deal with preserving the Ukrainian population. How can this be achieved? After all, everything Vladimir Zelensky and his predecessors did and are about to undertake was supposed to serve their people. The people of Ukraine saw Vladimir Zelensky kneeling in front of them. However, it turns out that it is through his actions that the Ukrainian nation ceased to exist.
Today, Ukraine mobilises eighteen-year-olds, while the people from the nationalist battalions want to go as far as recruit fourteen-year-olds. This is the agenda they have. This is the number one topic.
As for the claims, what are you even talking about? All this is just about selling Ukraine and its people into inhuman servitude? What makes it inhuman? In the past, whenever slave trade happened, it would be later condemned by everyone as something unacceptable. Second, this had a local, rather than universal, dimension. Today, what we are witnessing in Ukraine can be described as slavery in 3D: they are selling the lives of people living in Ukraine today, as well as the lives of future generations. They leave behind contaminated soil. This answers the question on the way they treat their future generations. They are selling off Ukraine’s natural resources, including those that have already been discovered, as well as those that they expect to discover or could be found there later.
This is a new kind of slavery and Ukraine’s Western curators have been using the country as a pilot project for testing it on its people.
Question: Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has repeatedly stated that China supports all efforts to achieve peace, including the recent consensus reached between the United States and Russia. China also calls on all parties concerned to participate in the peace talks. Is Russia considering the possibility of holding peace talks that would include representatives of Ukraine in the near future, or at what stage will this be possible?
Maria Zakharova: This isn’t a stage that begins now, or began yesterday, or will begin tomorrow. We have been talking about negotiations all this time, underscoring that we have always viewed this path as a priority. And each time, we emphasise that it was the Kiev regime that decided to ban the negotiation process under pressure from its Western handlers.
If you are talking about our contacts with the Americans, I have already commented on them. The primary objective right now is simply to unblock them.
Question: Talks between the Russian and US delegations are underway in Istanbul. As it often happens, irritating factors are brought up on both sides, which each side needs to work to eliminate. In addition to the diplomatic missions’ operation, what other irritants does Russia want addressed, and what factors has the United States mentioned? Who represents Russia at these talks?
Maria Zakharova: I will answer this in general terms, because they are actually sorting out the details as we talk.
The main irritant is the fact that such contacts were entirely blocked until now. As you remember, there was no dialogue through any channel – no personal meetings, no phone calls, no interaction at the level of foreign ministers, nor at the level of experts. Our respective delegations did not meet at international organisations either.
Moreover, it has already come to the point where, due to the approach taken by the “Obama-Biden tandem,” even regular people in both countries were denied the opportunity to use basic consular services such as obtaining vital documents – passports, visas, and so on. For many, this is really an issue, especially when it comes to mixed-status families.
This was the main irritant. We had no way to simply communicate with each other. Because when people can communicate, they have a chance to find mutually acceptable solutions or achieve mutual understanding. When every channel is blocked, there is nothing to talk about.
Question: Could you tell us who represents Russia at the talks?
Maria Zakharova: We will do this a little later. Foreign Ministry officials responsible for Russian-US relations.
Question: President of Russia Vladimir Putin said that Russia is interested in Ukraine “eventually turning into a friendly neighbouring state.” In Moscow’s opinion, what could bring about this change? What if the new President of Ukraine is as hostile to Russia as Vladimir Zelensky?
Maria Zakharova: You know, it is most surprising that this question is asked by Reuters. Why? Because in everyone’s minds, Reuters is associated with the history of Britain, the British Empire. Today, it is a media outlet, a major media holding of the Anglo-Saxon world, which also includes Canada, and what we call North Atlantic.
You must be familiar with the history of the country where you work. Otherwise, you would not have been hired. You know the history of Britain and America, don’t you?
When the story began, they were part of a single state, but later they fought for years. And not only that, they were not just parts of one country – those nations were brothers, two branches of the same family, close relatives, friends, representatives of the same social groups. Yet, they fought a fierce war, not for a couple of years, but from 1775 to 1783. Another confrontation broke out at the beginning of the 19th century, in 1812.
I do not need to tell you the whole story. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, the birth of the United States was a tragedy for both England and the United States, as both had painful gloomy memories not only of the Anglo-American War, but also of its consequences. Those memories poisoned the relations between the two branches of the Anglo-American race for the next 150 years.
What do we see now? We are now seeing the closest alliance, which is also a strategic partnership, family relations, a strong bond, a tandem between London and Washington, with certain adjustments, of course.
England and the United States are the closest allies. This is not the first time in world history where countries, neighbours or formerly parts of a single state, at some point become parties to conflicts, but eventually leave these tragic stories behind them.
I will not expound on the history of Russia or go into detail now. I think you have heard the story many times, including from the President of Russia.
I would like to say again that the international community has experience, not only from recent times, but also in historical retrospect, of overcoming even the most severe crises. I just wanted to cite this particular example because you represent the media of a country that has gone through similar trials.
Question: President of France Emmanuel Macron declared that the EU countries, and not only them, were ready to send troops to Ukraine as a guarantee of signing a peace agreement. But people in the majority of European countries are dead set against sending any troops to Ukraine. What is Russia’s attitude to Mr Macron’s statement?
Maria Zakharova: Everyone is talking about President Macron’s statement. One has the impression that this is a meme of sorts. People start smiling at a mere mention of “President Macron’s utterances.” But there is a seamy side to it. His statements are controversial by their nature. He contradicts himself. The reason is that he occasionally indulges in wishful thinking.
I have just said, while answering another question, that, regrettably, Western Europe and the European Union have become incapable of guaranteeing anything on the European continent over the last 10 years. I have cited specific examples as a confirmation.
To speculate on this topic again, they should perhaps begin by giving us an example of their “successful guaranteeing” on some or other occasion. And then it will be clear what they basically mean.
Let us nevertheless advise them to think in terms of current on-the-ground realities rather than “hypothetically.” They ought to be based on their previous experiences and bear responsibility for what they say. Let us wish them to be that way.
Question: As you may know, March 3 is Bulgaria’s national holiday (the 147th anniversary of Bulgaria’s liberation after the fraternal victory in the Russo-Turkish liberation war). The Russo-Turkish liberation war is sacred to our countries’ history.
Thanks to the victory that brought Bulgaria independence, we continue to be grateful to the Russian liberator soldiers. We cherish the historical memory. We are preparing for March 3 celebrations.
In this connection, I cannot help asking you about this historically significant date. Are there any official congratulations between Bulgaria and Russia via diplomatic or any other established channels?
What is necessary, in your opinion, for the resumption of a normal Russian-Bulgarian dialogue at the official level and a positive development of bilateral relations? What would you wish the Bulgarian people in connection with this red-letter day?
Maria Zakharova: The Republic of Bulgaria’s national holiday – Day of Liberation of Bulgaria from the Ottoman Oppression – is inseparably linked with Russia. It is celebrated on March 3, when the Treaty of San Stefano was signed following the 1877-1878 Russo-Turkish war.
Won by our ancestors, this victory brought the Bulgarians the long-awaited liberation from the 500-year-long Turkish oppression and enabled them to restore the Bulgarian statehood with an active and disinterested assistance from the Russian Empire.
I think that it is enough for those wishing to understand the true spirit of this Russian-Bulgarian fraternity, the relations of mutual understanding, to come to the Shipka Mountain on March 3 and see how massive and truly national this holiday is. Therefore, we are sincerely grateful to a huge number of Bulgarian citizens that cherish the memory of Russian soldiers who died for the freedom of their country.
At the same time, we have seen, in recent years, persistent outside efforts to interfere in Russian-Bulgarian relations, the emergence of an anti-Russian Russophobic minority in Bulgaria, and vandalism with regard to our common monuments. There were all sorts of things. There were attempts to restrict or even ban the annual ceremonies on the Shipka. We know that Bulgaria was urged to transfer the national holiday to another date.
I hope that this will not happen because it is inadmissible to rewrite history. In recent years, Russian diplomats in Bulgaria have not received invitations to the official ceremonies held on March 3. Bulgarian officials make no mention of Russia in their remarks on the restoration of the Bulgarian statehood. There is no such thing as a rewritten history. History can only be truthful. Otherwise it is a lie. The practice of sending reciprocal congratulations on national holidays has been discontinued by the Bulgarian side.
I do not want to recount all the utterly Russophobic attacks we have witnessed in recent time. Instead I would like to use this occasion and congratulate our numerous Bulgarian friends and brothers on the upcoming anniversary. We sincerely wish them goodness and wellbeing.
We are linked by common traditional values and a rich cultural and spiritual legacy that should again become the key factor determining the nature and tone of Russian-Bulgarian relations. I know that this will be as I say.
Question: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently stated that the Israeli army will remain in the Golan Heights indefinitely, affirming Israel’s ongoing occupation of southern Syria. At the same time, Israeli strikes on Syrian targets persist. How does Moscow view Israel’s actions amid Syria’s political transitions?
Maria Zakharova: As we have repeatedly emphasised, our position on Syria is based on the strict adherence to its sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity.
We firmly believe that, given the current challenging circumstances, all members of the international community must act responsibly, uphold international law, and refrain from actions that could further escalate tensions in Syria. This applies to Israel as well, whose activities in the Golan Heights violate the 1974 Syrian-Israeli disengagement agreement.
We are deeply concerned about the Israeli Air Force strikes on military and civilian targets in the Syrian Arab Republic. Such actions clearly do not contribute to stabilisation and only exacerbate the already dire situation in that country.
Question: Israel continues to block the entry of humanitarian aid to residents of the Gaza Strip, which resulted in the deaths of six infants, according to reports from Hamas. How does Moscow view Israel’s actions, which contradict the ceasefire agreement reached with Hamas?
Maria Zakharova: The delivery of humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip continues, however with great difficulties. We have previously addressed this issue in response to a question from your publication, providing details about the assistance our country is offering to the Palestinian people. We have consistently urged all parties to adhere to the agreements signed on January 15 between Israel and Hamas.
At this moment, this is the information I have.
Question: US President Donald Trump has released an AI-generated video depicting himself and Benjamin Netanyahu vacationing in Gaza. In your opinion, will this not further exacerbate the situation in Gaza, which is dire as it is today?
Maria Zakharova: I believe I said a key phrase in response to the first question of this briefing (albeit in the context of another country): we need to take all actions to improve the situation rather than aggravate it.
This approach reflects the White House’s current tactics – provocation, shock value, and a deliberate challenge. Let’s see where this leads and whether it will ultimately contribute to improving the situation, as we hope.
I believe it is too early to make judgments or draw conclusions. We should allow some time before commenting with facts at hand. The current administration has been in the White House for only two months, so it would be prudent to wait a little longer before offering our comment.
First and foremost, the Palestinians themselves should have their say on such actions.
Question: Friedrich Merz, leader of the CDU/CSU bloc that won German elections, used to speak about supporting Ukraine, but recently mentioned the possibility of reconstituting relations with Russia, which he called a European country historically and culturally. Do you think his words should be taken seriously? Overall, what are Russia’s expectations from the incoming government of the Federal Republic of Germany?
Maria Zakharova: Please note that Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented on this yesterday. That’s the first point.
Second, we designate our place in history and the modern world ourselves. This place is enshrined in our Constitution.
Considering this, it is probably up to the people that voted for Friedrich Merz rather than us to comment on these assessments. Perhaps, this is his way to expand the “horizons of knowledge.” I don’t know. These questions are better directed at them rather than us. We have come up with our own self-identification and enshrined it in the fundamental law of the country. I see no point in making additional comments.
We do not need to look at ourselves through someone else’s eyes in order to identify ourselves. By the way, this is an important element of self-identification. We know our history, cherish it, and are ready to defend it. We know what we want future generations and our country to look like in the future. We can say that we agree with some assessments and disagree with others, but we do not need others to tell us who we are. We have articulated it perfectly well ourselves. I always talk about it, but I would like to emphasise once again that, among other things, we have enshrined it in our Constitution. We are a civilisation country.
With regard to the election outcomes, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented on them just yesterday. They show that Germany’s previous policies failed to work as expected, and the people want something different now. I will not go into the statistics of this vote. Our embassy in Berlin has already commented on them.
The statements made by the candidates were of political nature. Now is the turn of the government officials to make statements. We will proceed from what they have to say and, most importantly, from the concrete steps they will take with regard to our country, among others.
We have never sought conflict with anyone. The relations with Germany collapsed through no fault of ours. If “they” choose to adopt a different philosophy, we will be willing to consider concrete proposals coming from Berlin, if any.
To date, we have received no signals from the German side about its interest in normalising the dialogue between our countries.
