Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, March 6, 2025

Table of Contents

 

1. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s talks with OSCE Secretary General Feridun Sinirlioğlu
2. Ukraine update
3. Hungary’s reaction to Kiev’s attempted attack on TurkStream pipeline
4. French court’s ruling regarding attack on the Russian Consulate General in Marseille
5. The situation around the Estonian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate
6. Situation with the Estonian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate
7. Public rally in Berlin involving the terrorist organisation Russian Volunteer Corps (RVC)
8. Korean Peninsula update
9. Approving the Gaza reconstruction plan at the emergency Arab League Summit in Cairo
10. Anti-Russia insinuations in Romania
11. Event organised by the non-governmental organisation Information Group on Crimes Against the Person on the sidelines of the 58th Session of the UN Human Rights Council
12. Made in Russia festival and fair in Abu Dhabi
13. 55th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Russia and Botswana
14. March 8: Women diplomats 

Answers to media questions:

1. Rearming Europe
2. Effort to distort the historical truth in Hollywood
3. Emmanuel Macron’s statements on Russia
4. Statements by Moldovan politicians
5. The Chinese economy and its global role
6. US trade wars
7. Unrest in the Serbian parliament
8. Bans imposed by the Kiev regime against journalists and cultural figures
9. Ukraine update
10. Russia-China relations
11. Settling the Ukraine crisis
12. Russia’s position on settling the Ukraine crisis
13. A proxy war in Ukraine
14. Security guarantees for Ukraine
15. Ukraine’s possible EU membership
16. Presumable terms for a peace deal with Ukraine
17. Lifting sanctions imposed on Ukraine
18. US trade wars and their global economic impact
19. Russia’s retaliatory sanctions against Japan
20. Creating a mechanism for banning the use of specific munitions
21. Europe’s armament era
22. The Ukraine plan as devised by the UK and France
23. Baltic states do not get invitations to the London summit
24. Latvia’s, Lithuania’s and Estonia’s destructive influence on decision-making in the EU
25. Baltic states stand to benefit from the Ukraine crisis going on
26. Future peace deal
27. Resolving issues related to paying out military pensions
28. Talks between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump
29. Situation with Konstantin Nikulin
30. BRICS International Alliance for Strategic Projects
31. A would-be plan to destroy Russia
32. EU’s support for the Kiev regime
33. Western group-photo mania
34. Euphoria with Donald Trump becoming President
35. Attempts to pitch Russia and Western Europe against each other
36. International recognition for Crimea and historical regions
37. Organising press tours
38. Launching construction of a monument to Ilham Aliyev
39. Sessions of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference and the National People's Congress of China
40. Russia-Myanmar relations
41. Greetings on International Women’s Day

 

 

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s talks with OSCE Secretary General Feridun Sinirlioğlu

 

March 11 will see talks between Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov and Secretary General of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe Feridun Sinirlioglu (Turkiye), who will arrive in Moscow on a working visit.

In recent times, high-level personal contacts with the leadership of the Organisation have been confined to brief discussions on the sidelines of various ministerial engagements, including OSCE Ministerial Council meetings.

The planned meeting will address both current issues under the Secretary General’s mandate and the general state of affairs in the OSCE, which continues to endure a profound existential and institutional crisis, preventing it from playing any meaningful role in upholding regional security. This situation will persist until Western countries cease exploiting the Vienna platform for their own interests and violating the Organisation’s principles, thereby undermining it.

Russia has never shied away from joint, mutually respectful work for the benefit of all OSCE participating states, while openly addressing the problems that have arisen both within the Organisation and in the region under its purview. We anticipate a constructive and substantive exchange of views.

back to top

 

Ukraine update

 

Ukrainian militants persist in their campaign of terror against civilian populations and critical infrastructure in Russian regions.

On February 27 of this year, the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) used an unmanned aerial vehicle to strike a civilian vehicle in the city of Graivoron, Belgorod Region, resulting in the death of one civilian and the injury of another. Over recent days, no fewer than six additional civilians in the region have sustained injuries from recurrent artillery bombardments and UAV attacks.

On February 28, in the village of Malaya Lepetikha, Kherson Region, a Ukrainian drone struck an ambulance transporting a woman and child to hospital for urgent medical care, killing both. In the same village, a separate UAV attack targeted a local paramedical and midwifery station, wounding one civilian and leaving two municipal workers concussed. Artillery strikes on residential areas in the town of Alyoshki and the village of Rybalche claimed two further civilian lives.

This segment of our briefing is addressed directly to the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas, who – I cannot fathom what she had ingested or how she felt – dared to assert at the Munich Security Conference that Russian civilians do not perish at the hands of the Kiev regime. Weekly, through these briefings, and daily via the updates provided by the Foreign Ministry’s Ambassador-at-Large on the Kiev Regime’s War Crimes, Rodion Miroshnik, we document the atrocities of the Kiev regime, with particular emphasis on crimes against civilians, children, women, and civilian infrastructure. To what depths of depravity, moral bankruptcy, and hypocrisy must one descend – as demonstrated by numerous Euro-Atlantic and EU representatives – to wilfully ignore such evidence? Let it be known: while funds channelled through the American agency ostensibly for international development (USAID) have purchased what that entity terms “strategic silence,” we will counter such EU-endorsed silence with strategic voice.

In the Donetsk People’s Republic, sustained shelling of Gorlovka since February 26 has left one civilian dead and 11 injured, including a child born in 2016. Throughout February, AFU forces launched 537 artillery strikes on the city – the shortest month of the year – employing long-range heavy artillery systems. Over 80 individuals suffered injuries of varying severity, with three fatalities recorded. On February 28, a teenager born in 2010 sustained injuries from a PFM-1 mine (Leaf Mine) explosion in Makeyevka.

As Russian forces suppress enemy fire, servicemen continue to examine the liberated village of Russkoye Porechnoye, Kursk Region. Regrettably, more bodies of local residents tortured to death by Ukrainian neo-Nazis have been discovered at the site.

Alexander Bastrykin, Chairman of the Investigative Committee of Russia, said on March 2 that Ukrainian armed gangs had attacked 34 regions of the Russian Federation since February 2022. These are regions outside the zone of the special military operation. The UK, Canada, Germany and some other Western countries supply the Zelensky regime with the most lethal weapons. AFU’s criminal acts claimed 652 civilian lives including 23 children in border and rear regions of Russia, while 2,980 people, including 169 children, were wounded.

There is no conscience, no mind, no soul, no heart, and no humanity in those who do not know it all and pretend not to know it. It’s impossible not to know. We have been talking about it every day for several years. We submit all materials to international organisations, and we translate them into different languages of the world. Our ambassadors and representatives regularly talk about it on international platforms. Responsibility must be taken for all this.

Russian courts continue to sentence Ukrainian neo-Nazis and mercenaries for their war crimes.

Georgian mercenary Shalva Iasashvili was sentenced to 13 years in prison.

AFU pilots Dmitry Shimansky and Alexander Morozov, who were planning terrorist attacks in Russia in April 2023, were sentenced to 26 and 22 years in prison, respectively.

The Russian law enforcement agencies will continue efforts to bring Ukrainian Nazis and foreign mercenaries to justice for war crimes and other offenses.

On March 2, London hosted a European summit with leaders of 14 countries – Great Britain, Germany, Denmark, Spain, Italy, Canada (don’t be surprised that Canada was there, although the summit was European. Everything is mixed up in this “Euro-Atlantic house”), the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Finland, France, the Czech Republic, Sweden, as well as the heads of the European Commission, European Council and NATO Secretary General. The absence of unbridled Russophobes from the Baltics was conspicuous. Apparently, they summoned only those who are still capable of lashing out for the needs of the bungler from Bankova Street. These countries have not produced anything for many years and are unable to give anything to impact the situation one way or another.

Ironically, after Zelensky’s fiasco at the meeting in the White House on February 28, the “get-together” in London – albeit planned in advance – offered him some comfort, as it was a meeting of unconditional supporters of the Kiev regime. Now it has come down to the support of the Kiev regime to the last Ukrainian.

Among the key results of this gathering is an agreement to maintain the flow of military aid to Ukraine. In addition to the 5.6-billion-pound loan for AFU’s military needs promised to Vladimir Zelensky the day before, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced the first package to be financed under the agreement on British credit support to Ukraine (up to 3.5 billion pounds), signed in July 2024. It provides for the production of more than 5,000 multipurpose Martlet missiles for air defence systems by Thales UK. A Ukrainian manufacturer will produce the launchers and mobile command centers. The contract is worth 1.16 billion pounds with an option to increase it by 500 million pounds.

The summit participants agreed on a number of principles that they intend to adhere to with regard to Ukraine. Along with continuing military supplies, they confirmed their intention to increase sanctions pressure on Russia (despite the fact that they themselves are already “crunching” under the pressure of their own sanctions and our counter-sanctions) so as to ensure the participation of the Kiev regime in the “peace deal” and to strengthen its defence potential after the end of the conflict in order to deter “aggression” in the future.

However, judging by Keir Starmer’s statements, the meeting organisers failed to achieve their main objective – to consolidate the supporters of Zelensky’s regime. There was no queue of those eager to join the ranks of the coalition wishing to defend Ukraine and guarantee peace to it. It seemed that everyone was concerned not so much with saving the agonising regime in Kiev as with preserving transatlantic solidarity, which used to glitch in the past and has now “begun to smoke.”

Now, let us get to the news. You may remember that what we had before were the so-called Vladimir Zelensky’s peace plans, followed by what they called plans to “defeat a scourge” or “overcome mischief.” This time they threw in some kind of an initiative concocted by France and the UK and resulting from the would-be summit in London on March 2, 2025. It sets forth a plan for Ukraine as drafted by France and the UK. Essentially, this document comes down to ensuring that European troops can be safely deployed in Ukraine as a peacekeeping force of sorts. Of course, all this comes out of nowhere and is totally irrelevant. There are no legal grounds for making this happen or legally binding decisions to this effect. Nothing. Seems like they scribbled this paper on the go. The plan was basically released the moment it was conceived and drafted. They suggested announcing a one-month truce to stop hostilities in the air, at sea and strikes targeting energy infrastructure. The plan provides for using this pause to consolidate the ceasefire regime through talks which could pave the way for a peace agreement. The drafters said that they would submit the plan to President of the United States Donald Trump in order to secure his support. Just as before, it seems that it will be offered to Russia as a done deal, an ultimatum. This goes to say that they have failed to learn from the past.

In reality, we are dealing with a clear effort to get a respite for the agonising Kiev regime and its armed forces at any cost in order to prevent the front from crumbling. This terrorist regime will then use this pause, with the help from its allies in the West, to beef up its own military capabilities, followed by an attempt to turn the tables. This much is clear to everyone. Under this scenario, the conflict is poised to resume and become even more devastating. They have not even tried concealing this agenda. Everyone understands perfectly well what this is all about. Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel and former President of France Francois Hollande helped them clarify this vision by saying that they used the Minsk agreements, as well as talks on fulfilling them, for the same purpose in their time. In fact, they used them for pumping the Kiev regime full of weapons.

Let me reiterate something we have said many times already. What we need are firm agreements to finalise the settlement. Otherwise, all we get are respites and efforts to regroup, something which is absolutely unacceptable since it would have an opposite result. An effort to deploy armed units in Ukraine would be totally unacceptable.

We have been hearing lately from all corners that the EU is about to create some kind of a European military force and form foreign contingents under European flags, about undertaking peacekeeping operation, creating coalitions of the willing, you name it. Russian senior government officials have set forth our position on this matter. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has talked about this many times. We have seen and heard a lot.

However, there is something that requires mastering one’s courage in order to understand what it means. I am referring to a statement by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. She discussed rearming Europe and called on the willing – this is how they refer to each other – gathered in London at the March 2, 2025 summit “to put Ukraine in a position of strength” and turn it into a “steel porcupine.”

We have seen and read so many horrible things, only to find out that it can get even worse than that. Do you know how to say “steel porcupine” in German? Stahlstachelschwein. You heard me right. This is not a word trick of any kind, but an actual translation. It literally means “a spiked pig.” Excuse me, Ms Ursula von der Leyen, did we get you right? Do you want to turn the Kiev regime into a spiked pig?

I think that the Kiev regime has long turned into a spiked pig, or a steel porcupine, for that matter, and has long been acting from what they call a position of strength. The problem is that they wore down their knees since this position consisted of kneeling.

Look closer at this wording and give it a serious thought. What it means is that the West does not have any independent role for Ukraine other than acting as a spiked pig, or a steel porcupine, you name it. Euro-Atlantic structures will be the ones to decide on Ukraine’s status instead of the people of Ukraine or its representatives elected by the people of Ukraine. It will be up to European Commissioners and EU foreign policy representatives, NATO senior executives, and representatives from countries lacking any historical or geographical links to Ukraine and which do not have any obligations within international structures regarding Ukraine. I am talking about people like Ursula von der Leyen. They received this delegated authority, and they believe that they are the ones to determine what happens to Ukraine.

I will ask one rhetorical question. What happens with democracy now? What about the freedom of choice, something those European commissioners, high representatives, officials from Brussels have been grandstanding for? Apparently, it is quite possible to foster a dictator, as was done in Ukraine, and then tell him what to do from abroad. A unique situation. Or not so unique after all – this has happened repeatedly in the history of the West.

On February 27, in an interview with the Ukrinform news agency, Chief of the Ukrainian Defence Ministry’s Main Intelligence Directorate Kirill Budanov blamed Russia for the actual failure of the forced mobilisation in the country. According to him, Russia was allegedly conducting a campaign to discredit the policy among Ukrainians.

Do I understand Mr Budanov correctly? Ukrainians are happy about the mobilisation policy, unless they accidentally stumble upon some “information materials” from Russia and may suddenly “change their minds” and refuse to join up? Do we understand correctly that the whole of Ukraine is literally applauding and voting for this forced mobilisation? Are they lining up for conscription, persuading others to relinquish their draft notices to them, picketing in front of the territorial recruitment and social support centres to be invited to join up sooner? Do we understand Mr Budanov correctly? The only problem is Russia dissuading them about the high purpose and benefit of this process. This is not even delirious ramble. I don’t know what it is. This comes from frustration and helplessness.  In an absolutely dead-end situation, they are ready to say anything, to make any excuse to relieve themselves of responsibility.

We would like to recommend that Kirill Budanov take a closer look at the social media and other online sources, which are full of testimonies and evidence of Ukrainian enlistment officers hunting their citizens to make up for the growing losses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

According to the Russian Ministry of Defence, the Kiev regime effectively recruits about 28,000-33,000 people every month. At the same time, their losses significantly exceed the number of new recruits. In November 2024, they lost 60,805 people; in December 2024, 48,470. In January, their losses reached 51,960 and in February, 38,920 people. Where would you think the new recruits are increasingly dying? On the battlefield? There is slaughter on the battlefield in Ukraine indeed, and they are being sent to certain death, but no. Cases of recruits dying on the enlistment office premises have now become frequent in Ukraine. Ukrainian journalists have recently uncovered about 40 incidents, but not a single condemnation or conviction of the perpetrators. Is this Russia’s fault, too? No. Mr Budanov, keep looking into this “mirror.” It is your reflection you see. You see yourself and are horrified with yourself. We have nothing to do with it.

In the face of a chronic manpower shortage, the bloody Zelensky regime is ready to call up anyone they can find. We have already talked about his intention to lower the enlistment age to 18 years. Now there is a new trend. Authorities across Ukraine are revising the grounds for exemption from service, with journalists and artists now in their sights. Ukraine’s Ministry of Culture announced that it no longer gives them permits to travel abroad as of March 3. Their motivation has to do with many of them failing to return to the country by the designated date. Why don’t they return to Ukraine? Let’s think about it together. Probably, there is some secret. We wouldn’t call into question the “democracy” in Ukraine, the country’s well-being, or transparency of constitutional processes. Electoral cycles are held regularly. Ukraine is doing fine. Why don’t people want go back there? No one wants to die in Vladimir Zelensky’s meat grinder for the rotten, corrupt and criminal Nazi regime in Kiev.

These cases, and many other facts, once again confirm the relevance of the special military operation to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine and eliminate threats emanating from its territory. All the goals set by our country’s leadership will definitely be achieved.

back to top

 

Hungary’s reaction to Kiev’s attempted attack on TurkStream pipeline

 

On February 28, Ukrainian armed forces used drones to attack Russkaya Compressor Station servicing TurkStream gas pipeline, which provides uninterrupted supplies of Russian gas to Eastern European countries, including Hungary.

This move caused righteous indignation with the Hungarian authorities. They assessed such actions by the Kiev regime as an encroachment on their country’s sovereignty. The Hungarians, the official Budapest, had the strength, courage and wisdom to say so at a time when Berlin, which is claiming things and talking endlessly about war and peace, including security for all, failed to muster enough strength to say out loud that blowing up the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines, which were used to primarily deliver Russian resources to the Germans, was a blow to their economy, security and energy safety. This is a compelling example of a nation building its own character, and a country writing its own history.

The European Commission has been notified about Ukraine flagrantly violating the European Commission’s guarantees not to attack critical energy infrastructure facilities that are used to deliver energy to the EU.

For our part, we have repeatedly drawn the attention of the international community to the irresponsible and deceitful duplicitous position of Brussels, which is covering up provocative and extremely dangerous actions by Mr Zelensky, which imperil EU’s energy security, and to pathetic cowardice of the European capitals. They are incapable of even uttering a word in defence of their own security, but instead pontificate about security guarantees for Ukraine, among other things. Your energy arsenals, those very energy capabilities and flows that brought light, heat and prosperity to the European Union, are at risk. Not a word has been said about this at any meeting of the ministers of energy, foreign affairs, defence, or representatives of EU special services, or, summit meetings for that matter. Only a few countries in their camp are still able to stand up for themselves. The rest are all gone.

back to top

 

French court’s ruling regarding attack on the Russian Consulate General in Marseille

 

There’s more on hypocrisy. On February 24, the Russian Consulate General in Marseille was attacked with improvised explosive devices. Due to sheer luck, the staff and visitors escaped unscathed. One of the petrol bombs fell very close to a playground.

A video surveillance tape from the Consulate General helped the French law detain the criminals and take them into custody.

On February 27, in a matter of just three days (which is not bad), the local court handed down a non-appealable sentence to two French citizens. This is where we run out of “good” news. They were sentenced to eight months of (you might think, imprisonment, some kind of a convict penal settlement, a Fort Boyard of sorts, but no). This, too, must be taken with a fair share of stoicism, because, frankly, there’s no other way to take it. All they got was eight months of house arrest with a restraining order to stay away from the Consulate General’s building and not to own firearms for five years. All they got was just eight months of sitting at home and not being able to go back to the scene of the crime, as criminals usually do as we know from the classic literature. That’s one powerful legal system right there.

Normally, we don’t comment on other sovereign nations’ court rulings. Unlike the French, who keep taking potshots at the Russian justice system which they find entirely wrong and very much unlike the one they have in the West, which it is, and this is an entirely true statement.

Frankly, in this particular case, it is simply impossible not to be surprised or outraged, because this is an unprecedented verdict. All these two individuals who plotted and perpetrated a terrorist attack using incendiary mixtures got was several months of house arrest.

I have a question in this regard. If they sit quietly at home, don’t throw things out of the window, and don’t set their neighbours on fire, will they get a chance to be released on parole? This entire situation is nothing short of a hilarious joke.

 We are talking France here, a country that has lived through numerous terrorist attacks. I’m reminded of the French president-led marches in the streets of Paris. Back then, the international community supported the French in their push against acts of terror. Presidents, foreign ministers, including Russian representatives, took part in these marches to support France and to prevent terrorism. What we just witnessed is an act of unadulterated terrorism, which, as it turns out, exists in France. Why wouldn’t it, if the French citizens now know that all they’ll get for perpetrating an act of terror is a few short months of house arrest.

The French judiciary chose to turn a blind eye to true intentions of the terrorists, who, as it turned out, were under strong influence of pro-Ukrainian propaganda. In the context of a sweeping anti-Russian campaign launched in France at the instigation of the authorities, we regard such an in-your-face act of putting up with the individuals who jeopardised the safety of the people, Russian diplomats and, more broadly, the Consulate General, as an encouragement to commit more such illegal acts.  Do not think that we are concerned about such attempts repeated exclusively against the Russian Consulate General and Russian diplomats. They will be repeated against others. Because those who are sitting on the fence pondering life choices between peaceful life and legitimate protests, or using illegal extremist methods to advance their own ideas will see that the “justice” system is enabling such behaviour, and, of course, they will decide in favour of extremism and use it against anyone coming their way. They see the absolute flippancy with which the French law enforcement system treats such crimes and will draw their own conclusions.

The wrong idea that you can get away with anything comes not only from a sense of being certain of one’s impunity, but also from punishment that is out of proportion to the gravity of the offence.

Once again, we call on the French authorities to take exhaustive measures to ensure safety of the Russian missions, as well as their staff and families, in France.

back to top

 

The situation around the Estonian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate

 

Official Tallinn continues to ramp up pressure on the Estonian Orthodox Church, the country’s largest religious denomination.

On February 19, 2025, Estonia’s parliament held the first reading of amendments to the national law on churches and parishes, drafted by the Interior Ministry. As repeatedly emphasised by the Estonian government itself, the goal of these amendments is to make it impossible for the Estonian Orthodox Church to function in its current form. Under the proposed changes, a religious organisation cannot be affiliated with an individual or entity that has “significant influence in a foreign state” if that state is deemed a threat to Estonia’s security, supports “military aggression” or acts contrary to internationally accepted principles of international law.

By this logic, all US companies should, in principle, leave Estonia, given the United States’ numerous violations of international law– violations that are now openly acknowledged.

It appears that Estonian authorities are seeking to legally cement their irreversible decision to revoke the residence permit of Metropolitan Eugene of Tallinn and All Estonia, who was expelled from the country in February 2024. The bill includes a provision stating that “a clergyman or a member of a religious organisation’s governing body cannot be a person who has been denied a visa or residence permit renewal, or whose visa or residence permit has been annulled for the stated reason within the past 10 years.” This clearly suggests that the law is being tailored to fit specific cases – a blatant example of politicising the legal system.

The consequences of non-compliance have already been made explicit by Estonia’s Interior Minister Lauri Laanemets, the key proponent of the government’s discriminatory policy against canonical Orthodoxy in Estonia. He stated that Estonia will not engage in dialogue with the Church but will take it to court to impose a ban on its activities.

It seems ironic that Estonia sought independence from the Soviet Union under the banner of freedom of belief and religion, only to now resurrect some of the most repressive practices from its Soviet past.

These legislative initiatives violate not only Estonia’s own Constitution – specifically Article 40, which guarantees freedom of conscience, religion and expression – but also a range of international legal commitments Estonia has voluntarily undertaken. These include the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (December 16, 1966), the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (December 21, 1965), the European Convention on Human Rights (November 4, 1950), the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities (February 1, 1995), the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (December 12, 2007), and the Treaty on European Union (February 7, 1992).

And the list goes on. Estonia joined all these agreements as a sovereign, independent state.

These foundational documents emphasise the need to respect freedom of thought, conscience and religion, prohibit discrimination based on religious affiliation, and protect individuals from persecution for their beliefs. Yet, it is precisely these principles that the Estonian government is now violating.

back to top

 

Situation with the Estonian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate

 

According to OSCE documents (Guidelines for the Review of Legislation on Religion or Belief, 2004), laws related to national security and terrorism on religious grounds should not be used against religious organisations that do not engage in criminal or violent activities. Furthermore, state security should not serve as a justification for restricting legitimate religious practices.

Additionally, the OSCE Policy Guidelines on Freedom of Religion or Belief and Security emphasise that dialogue between the state and religious communities should be founded on the principles of upholding religious freedom and respecting religious groups.

I have just one question: has Estonia ceased to be a member of the OSCE? No, I regularly see Estonian representatives at OSCE platforms and summits – they sit there, display their flag, have a nameplate at the table, and make statements. So, if you believe you have the right to participate in the OSCE, perhaps it’s worth remembering that along with rights come obligations – to uphold everything you have committed to within the organisation.

We are compelled to note that the Estonian authorities are so averse to engaging in dialogue with their own civil society – including the Estonian Orthodox Church – that they are willing to act in the very manner they attribute to so-called totalitarian regimes, disregarding both legal and moral norms.

Once again, we call on the international community to take notice of the Estonian authorities’ unlawful and discriminatory actions. We will continue to demand that Tallinn upholds human rights, respects freedom of religion, and ceases its persecution of canonical Orthodoxy in Estonia.

As for conscience – let alone freedom of conscience – it seems there is little left to discuss.

back to top

 

Public rally in Berlin involving the terrorist organisation Russian Volunteer Corps (RVC)

 

On March 1, a blatantly anti-Russian provocation took place in the heart of Berlin, with the approval of German authorities. This event was orchestrated by a group of political activists – Russian émigrés operating under the supervision of European intelligence services.

Two of the three organisers of this propaganda event are officially designated as foreign agents in our country and were among those requested by Western states in the prisoner exchange on August 1, 2024. The German authorities continue to exploit this “operational resource” in hostile actions against the Russian Federation, further escalating their antagonism.

The neo-Nazi terrorist organisation Russian Volunteer Corps (RVC), which is banned in our country, played a role in organising this event, held near the Russian Embassy complex in Germany. In 2023–2024, with the support of the Kiev regime and Western military advisers, the RVC carried out attacks on civilians in the Bryansk, Belgorod, and Kursk regions.

On March 1 in Berlin, members of the RVC openly distributed recruitment leaflets targeting Russian expatriates, featuring clear references to Nazi symbols and ideology. The German police made no attempt to intervene, seemingly doing so deliberately. Meanwhile, the group’s leader, who grew up in Germany but does not hold German citizenship, has long been officially banned from entering the country. This indicates that German authorities recognise the criminal nature of his political activities, yet his case remains active, and they continue to turn a blind eye.

The Russian Embassy in Germany twice requested that the German Foreign Ministry not authorise this provocative event. Both times, the Russian diplomatic mission’s official notes were blatantly ignored.

This once again confirms that the German authorities deliberately enabled this spectacle. It is also clear that one of the event’s objectives was to publicly legitimise the RVC, a terrorist organisation, in Germany. By engaging with such a group, Berlin is playing with fire – one that could easily spread to its own doorstep.

We strongly urge the German authorities to consider the risks of supporting such organisations. History has shown that Germany’s experience in this regard has been anything but fortunate.

back to top

 

Korean Peninsula update

 

We have been following the developments on the Korean Peninsula with a sense of concern and anxiety. Unfortunately, the escalatory trend persists there. It results from the unrelenting and never-ending joint military manoeuvring by the United States and the Republic of Korea. Titled Freedom Shield, this large-scale military exercise by South Korea and the Unites States may lead to a new round of escalation. Just today, we learned that during these manoeuvres, a South Korean Air Forces fighter jet accidentally dropped eight bombs on a residential neighbourhood in Pocheon. According to the available information, about seven people suffered in this incident, and several buildings were destroyed. We express our condolences to all the victims, while reiterating that sabre-rattling never ends well, especially when a settlement can be reached by peaceful means.

Russia has emphasised many times that by undertaking these military drills the United States and its regional allies make the dangerous spiral of confrontation spin even faster, which could pave the way for a major conflict on the peninsula, including a nuclear one.

Still, we do hope that public statements by President of the United States Donald Trump and Chairman of State Affairs of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Kim Jong-un materialise and lead to practical steps as a constructive contribution to reinforcing stability and ensuring lasting and solid peace on the Korean Peninsula and across Northeast Asia.

Against this backdrop, we believe that the measures Pyongyang has been taking to strengthen its own defence capabilities, counter the external threats the country is facing and defending its sovereignty have been well-grounded and appropriate.

back to top

 

Approving the Gaza reconstruction plan at the emergency Arab League Summit in Cairo

 

On March 4, 2025, the League of Arab States held an emergency summit in Cairo and approved a reconstruction plan for Gaza. Its key element consists of enabling Palestinians to stay there while carrying out the plan.

This roadmap provides for offering emergency assistance to over 2 million people living in Gaza, primarily for building new housing, restoring and developing infrastructure, and building up the economic capacity of this Palestinian territory.

It is essential that the Arab countries come to a consensus regarding the framework for Gaza’s post-crisis revival and its parameters. This could open the path not only to improving the humanitarian situation, but also to promote international cooperation as a tool for turning this sector into a territory of peace and stability. We hope that this is how the situation unfolds.

Today, ensuring a lasting ceasefire and putting civilians out of harm’s way is what matters the most. The objective to free the hostages who are currently held in Gaza requires an urgent solution. Russia calls on all sides, including the Palestinians, the Israelis and external actors, to coalesce around the Arab plan and work together in a coordinated manner on fulfilling it. Important events will help achieve this goal, such as the extraordinary session of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) Council of Foreign Ministers in Jeddah on March 7, as well as the Gaza reconstruction conference, which is expected to take place in Egypt soon.

Moscow believes that consolidating international efforts for improving the humanitarian and economic situation in Gaza would open a pathway to advancing towards a political settlement. Relaunching the Middle East Peace Process and addressing all matters dealing with the final status is the only way to stop this cycle of confrontation which has caused so much serious damage to the peoples of Palestine and Israel.

Russia has been consistent in its position on this matter and has not changed it: a political solution must result from decisions respecting international law and provide for a two-state solution with Palestine within the 1967 borders and a capital in East Jerusalem living side-by-side with Israel in peace and security.

The current agenda also includes the need to revive as quickly as possible mechanisms for settling crises situations through multilateral cooperation, including the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This cooperation must result from external actors coming to a consolidated position. The Middle Eastern Quartet of international mediators as formed by Russia, the United States, the EU and the UN, and involving the key Arab states, just as Russia has been suggesting for many years now, could offer a framing for this process. Regional countries must play a decisive role in devising approaches to overcoming challenges in the Middle East.

Russia reaffirms its commitment to working closely with its Middle Eastern partners, including the Arab states, Palestine, and Israel, as well as the international actors involved in the Middle East Peace Process.

back to top

 

Anti-Russia insinuations in Romania

 

The statement from the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, published on March 4, was met with anxiety in Bucharest. The statement exposed the futile attempts by globalist European bureaucrats to suppress the growing demand for defending national interests in many EU states by citing the scandalous presidential election campaign in Romania as an example.

In a defensive response, the Bucharest establishment erupted in a flurry of criticism, accusing Russia of carrying out hybrid actions to undermine democracy in Romania. It is really hard to imagine doing more damage to democracy in Romania than that done by the Romanian political elite itself. Furthermore, we were accused of trying to influence the course and results of the electoral process in Romania. How could we have done that, I wonder? Did we withdraw candidates for the highest office in Romania from the race? Did we cancel the results? Of course not. They did it all themselves. What do we have to do with it?

The claims that Moscow is harbouring plans to undermine the foundations of democracy in Romania do not stand up to criticism either. The local elites have been doing this successfully on their own, and in general, they have no compunction about using whatever means it takes to keep power. Anyone who follows the developments in that country must have fresh memories of what happened during last year’s election campaign, which ended with the annulment of the results just before the second round. The whole world could not believe its eyes. How could this be happening?

A country that professes democracy simply cancels the election results before the second round of voting. But haven’t we seen this before? Wasn’t it the West that showed the world that it was acceptable to manipulate democratic processes in a similar situation in Ukraine? Only they didn’t cancel the second round of voting, but announced the third round. So, everyone realised it was a possibility.

Why did Romania cancel the second round? Because it became clear that the candidate they wanted to be president was not going to win.

As for Bucharest’s obsession with finding a “Russian trace” in Romania’s domestic political squabbles, this is nothing new either.

We have repeatedly deflected these groundless speculations and will clearly state once again: Russia does not have a tendency to interfere in other countries’ affairs. It is no good passing the buck to others. What is happening in Romania are Romania’s problems. The country is struggling with a crisis of the political system, with its democratic institutions and processes ousted by unscrupulous manipulations. We have nothing to do with it.

Instead of taking an unbiased view on the situation and drawing the right conclusions based on their own analysis, the ruling circles in Romania stubbornly continue pushing for escalation on the Russian track.

This was once again evidenced by the groundless decision that the Romanian authorities announced on March 5 to declare the military attaché of the Russian Embassy in Bucharest and his assistant undesirable persons. This unfriendly step will most definitely not go unanswered. Who have they harmed? Obviously, themselves.

back to top

 

Event organised by the non-governmental organisation Information Group on Crimes Against the Person on the sidelines of the 58th Session of the UN Human Rights Council

 

The Russian non-governmental organisation Information Group on Crimes Against the Person, with the support of the Russian Foreign Ministry, will hold a videoconference event on March 7, 2025, titled “Crisis of Freedom of Speech. Persecution of Journalists and Public Activists in Europe” on the sidelines of the 58th session of the UN Human Rights Council (Geneva, February 24 – April 4, 2025).

To reiterate: the event will commence at 1 pm Moscow time on March 7, 2025, in Geneva, where the current session of the UN Human Rights Council is underway from February 24 through April 4, 2025.

The discussion will feature prominent journalists, public figures, and commentators from multiple countries, including those who have personally encountered neoliberal censorship and oppression by the collective West. Participants are expected to exchange views and assess the state of free speech, media independence, and journalist safety in certain European countries.

We have been invited to endorse this initiative. Consequently, I extend this invitation to you. Those who are interested and not indifferent to this issue are encouraged to participate (the event will be broadcast in Russian and English).

back to top

 

Made in Russia festival and fair in Abu Dhabi

 

Information on the concluded event. From February 21 to 25, 2025, the Made in Russia festival and fair was held with resounding success in Abu Dhabi. It was organised by the Russian Export Centre with active support from the Embassy of Russia in the United Arab Emirates. High-ranking UAE officials attended the opening ceremony.

This marked the first large-scale event of its kind on Emirati soil, introducing local audiences to the extensive range of goods showcased by 80 enterprises from 30 regions of our country – Russia.

Significant interest was generated by the Business Contact Exchange, which facilitated direct dialogue between representatives of Russian and Emirati business communities.

The cultural programme featured performances by Russian artistic ensembles and an exhibition by digital artists. A virtual reality zone catered to gaming enthusiasts.

Concurrently, the Talent Summit, a scientific and educational forum, took place in Abu Dhabi from February 23 to 25, 2025, with participation from senior officials of Russia and the UAE. Experts from the Sirius Federal Territory presented diverse opportunities and methodologies for identifying and nurturing young talents.

A long-term objective of the Forum is to establish a permanent platform for exchanging expertise and ideas between Sirius and Emirati institutions in education, science, innovation, and culture.

The festival and forum, which sparked considerable public enthusiasm, vividly demonstrated the traditionally friendly nature of our bilateral relations, injecting fresh momentum into their further development across trade, economic, cultural, and humanitarian spheres.

back to top

 

55th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Russia and Botswana

 

Today, on March 6, we celebrate 55 years of diplomatic relations between Russia and Botswana. The foreign ministers of the two countries exchanged messages of greetings on his occasion.

Over that period, our countries have established and developed relations of friendship and mutual respect, maintained constructive foreign policy interaction at the UN and other international platforms, accumulated substantial experience of mutually beneficial partnership in trade and the economy, and developed a solid legal framework.

The training of skilled personnel for Botswana is a major sphere of our cooperation. Hundreds of necessary specialists have been trained in various spheres, such as medicine, mining and telecommunications. They are using the education they received in Russia to promote the national economy.

We hope that multifaceted cooperation between Moscow and Gaborone will continue to develop. We congratulate our Botswanan partners on this landmark event and wish the people of Botswana well-being, prosperity and success.

back to top

 

March 8: Women diplomats 

 

I cannot but mention the upcoming holiday, which we all love and celebrate, March 8.

I don’t know what the women who pioneered this holiday thought, but it has acquired unique importance in our country, because it celebrates women’s rights and the special role women play in our country and society, which our men always mention with respect.

I regard it as a harmonious holiday. Why did I decide to emphasise this today? The reason is that we have received many questions asking if we had women diplomats in our history.

I don’t think this is a relevant question today, but we will talk about this later. Right now, I will provide the statistics.

Diplomacy was considered a purely male profession in our country for a long time, which is not quite true. Women diplomats have been upholding the interests of our homeland and headed our missions abroad since the establishment of the People’s Commissariat of Foreign Affairs.

The first name that comes to mind in this connection is Alexandra Kollontai, a prominent official and politician and the Soviet Union’s first woman ambassador. Her diplomatic career began in 1923. In the 1930s, she held the posts of plenipotentiary representative and trade representative in Norway and Mexico, helping establish and develop economic ties with these countries. In 1930-1945, she was our envoy in Sweden and also member of the Soviet delegation at the 16th-18th sessions of the League of Nations. She worked energetically to neutralise the influence of Hitler Germany in the Scandinavian Peninsula and facilitated the signing of the Moscow Peace Treaty with Finland in 1940. In 1944, she took part in the talks on Finland’s withdrawal from the Second World War.

There were also other successful women diplomats who represented our country on the international stage, namely, Ambassador Zoya Mironova, who had been Permanent Representative of the Soviet Union to the UN Office and other International Organisations in Geneva for nearly two decades (1966-1982), and Zoya Novozhilova, who was our ambassador to Switzerland in 1987-1992. There have always been women on the foreign ministry’s staff, including prominent translators/interpreters, members of our archives department, and country experts.

Women play an increasingly important role in the diplomatic service of modern Russia. Over the past few years, women accounted for nearly half of the mew personnel. Women head four foreign ministry departments: the Department of History and Records (Nadezhda Barinova), the Third Asian Department (Lyudmila Vorobyova), the Department for Partnership with Africa (Tatyana Dovgalenko), and the Department of Information and Press is also headed by a woman, as you know.

There are successful women ambassadors among our diplomatic staff, such as Valentina Matviyenko, who was Russia’s ambassador to Malta (1991-1994) and Greece (1997-1998), Olga Ivanova, our ambassador to Mauritius (2004-2011), Lyudmila Vorobyova, ambassador to Malaysia (2010-2015), Indonesia and Papua New Guinea (in conjunction, 2018-2024), Eleonora Mitrofanova, who was appointed ambassador to Bulgaria in 2021 after serving at UNESCO, and Irada Zeinalova, who has recently joined the ministry’s staff and was appointed ambassador to Mauritius in 2024.

back to top

 

Answers to media questions:

Question: How would you comment on recent statements by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and other European politicians regarding continued support for Ukraine through the rearming of Europe, against the backdrop of the United States announcing an end to weapons supplies to the Kiev regime?

Maria Zakharova: The European Union’s confrontational approach towards Russia remains unaltered.

Russophobia persists as the raison d’être and driving force for the current, effectively lost, generation of self-appointed EU elites, who long ago ceased to identify with the interests of their own citizens, their nations, or ordinary Europeans.

For years, we have witnessed this trend: without the slightest hesitation, they are prepared to sacrifice the well-being of their population, the principles of democracy, electoral processes, and freedom of speech. All is thrown into the furnace: press freedom, journalists’ safety. All to cling to power. They peddle a rules-based order founded on their terms (might makes right). Everything is forgotten. Everything is trampled underfoot.

On the one hand, we observe a rhetorical shift towards realism from Washington. Many in the global community have found hope in this inclination to voice appeals for peace and political-diplomatic conflict resolution. One might expect this theme to resonate with those in the European Union or Europe who traditionally champion peace, legality, democracy, and freedom.

Yet no — it seems such words have only provoked indignation, awakening their basest instincts. Evidently, they desire no peace whatsoever.

They do not want a peaceful Ukraine at all. They give it no thought. Ursula von der Leyen recently laid bare the future she envisions for that country: the role of a Western-armed “steel porcupine” (intended as a “spiked pig”). This unfolds against the backdrop of depleted European arsenals and Washington’s declaration of revised military aid to the Kiev regime.

Hence, attempts by EU leadership and certain member states to proclaim a new long-term course for the EU development: a trajectory of rearmament and accelerated militarisation of this once-peaceful European project. All while lacking the financial resources so recklessly squandered on multi-billion-euro corruption schemes for untested anti-COVID vaccines, mitigating the consequences of self-imposed anti-Russia sanctions, and perpetuating the EU industry’s dependence — dictated by Brussels under Washington’s orders — on exorbitantly priced and unstable American LNG.

This signifies a policy of unchecked borrowing for military purposes, condemning future generations of Europeans to debt bondage at the expense of pressing socio-economic and humanitarian needs, and the collapse of all previously announced initiatives.

The current floundering and efforts by EU elites to pre-emptively torpedo not yet peace initiatives, but even their precursors, are profoundly illustrative. This gruesome war face, previously concealed behind smiles or concerned expressions, now lays bare their exposed fangs. Such conduct must inform our understanding of the true motives and intentions of the thoroughly discredited “collective” Brussels.

These are neither Munich-style conferences on policy and security, nor any semblance of constructive engagement within the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

It seems they have mutilated and violated the very concept of security. Now, in place of “security,” we have simply “peril.”

back to top

 

Question: The Academy Awards ceremony recently took place, and notably, Jesse Eisenberg’s film The Real Pain won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor. This film, already seen by millions and set to reach even more viewers, contains blatant distortions of historical truth. How would you comment on the broader issue of historical distortion in cinema, and what steps can be taken to counter it?

Maria Zakharova: There are multiple ways to combat the distortion of historical truth. First and foremost, by fostering knowledge of our own history and creating content that reflects historical reality – films, audiovisual materials, and other works that effectively communicate historical facts to diverse audiences using modern information technologies. We must also challenge and debunk misinformation, exposing the falsehoods that are repeatedly presented as truth.

I have seen a report on this and couldn’t believe it at first. We double-checked, and it turned out to be true: even well-documented historical events, such as the 1944 Warsaw Uprising – about which extensive records, eyewitness accounts, and documentary evidence exist – can still be manipulated and distorted. It seems that, as the saying goes, even a hare can be taught to play the drum, and they’ve managed to do just that.

For those who may have forgotten, let me remind you: the rescue of surviving Polish Jews from persecution by the Nazis and certain anti-Semitic factions of the Home Army (Armia Krajowa) only became possible with the arrival of the Red Army. That is a historical fact.

We discuss this on a regular basis. Right now, I am replying to this question not simply to point out yet another example of the rampant “fake” mentality spreading across the West, but to ensure that our audience understands the decades-long struggle we have waged to defend and preserve the memory of our heroes.

We also want to illustrate, in practical terms, the techniques used to manipulate historical narratives and the ways we can safeguard younger generations. It is crucial to engage not only students but also educators and cultural influencers in our country, raising awareness of the mechanisms behind ideological brainwashing.

This is a concrete issue, and I am sure we will discuss it in greater detail later in the future.

back to top

 

Question: I would like to follow up on what you have already said on Emmanuel Macron’s statement. What would be your comment regarding his yesterday’s statements which could be viewed as directly threatening Russia, including with nuclear weapons?

Maria Zakharova: We will make sure to examine Emmanuel Macron’s yesterday’s statements in every detail. The Foreign Ministry will release a statement on this topic on its website.

What I can say is that Emmanuel Macron’s yesterday’s statement can be described as a series of misleading messages. I doubt that there is any truth in what he said. He focused on security guarantees for Ukraine. However, the President of France did not say a word about the fact that a peace settlement would be impossible without taking into account the legitimate security interests for Russia and Europe in general, without trying to divide it in any way. He did not say a word about the principles governing European society which reaffirmed its adherence to indivisible security. Macron sought to give a conceptual framing of some kind to his yesterday’s statement.

As for Ukraine, Emmanuel Macron must know that the root causes of the Ukraine crisis stem from the fact that the West has been intentionally ignoring Russia’s interests for years, trying to undermine our country’s defence capabilities and simply use Ukraine as an outpost for inflicting what they call a strategic defeat on Russia – they have been talking about this all the time.

On the one hand, Emmanuel Macron tried pinning the blame for the aggression on Russia. On the other hand, for some reason, he seems to have forgotten that it is the Western political leaders who are to blame for their constant and never-ending stream of statements on their intentions to either contain us or inflict a strategic defeat on us, to use their words.

We have said it many times, but let me say it once again – in 2007, President of Russia Vladimir Putin addressed the Munich Security Conference with a remarkable speech in which he offered a very coherent vision, crossing all the t’s and dotting the i’s, with facts in hand, saying that European security in general is under threat and that the game should not go too far. We talked about our concerns and interests, and warned that the unhinged and unrestrained NATO expansion policy and bringing its military infrastructure closer to our borders despite all the promises not to do so – that all this is unacceptable for our country and runs counter to the fundamental principles of indivisible security. Let me reiterate that the Europeans have reaffirmed these principles many times.

Emmanuel Macron definitely knew all there was to know about the root causes of the Ukraine crisis and what led to it. Why? Among other things, because his predecessor – I am referring to former President of France Francois Hollande – was a guarantor under the Minsk package, a framework that was supposed to create a path to a political and diplomatic settlement.

Emmanuel Macron was categorical when he claimed that it was Russia that failed to abide by the Minsk agreements, but this does not stand to any criticism. How so? It was his predecessor, then-President of France Francois Hollande, who said that he did not intend and was not going to honour them. They were simply trying to win some time to supply more weapons to Ukraine and prepare it for further aggression.

This is what then German Chancellor Angela Merkel said too. How could Emmanuel Macron and his entourage fail to notice this? Hollande and Merkel did not make any secret out of their statements. And these are not indirect quotes. This is what they told the media and the general public. These words are on record, you can listen, read and watch them.

Of course, he did raise some specific matters by accusing Russia of manipulations in Romania and Moldova. This goes beyond unreasonable and is totally absurd. What does Russia have to do with all this? Was it Russia that reformatted the Moldovan language so that it resembles the Romanian? Or do leaders in Chisinau hold Russian passports? Of course, not. Everything was changed to the Romanian language in Moldova. And Moldovan leaders hold Romanian passports. They now started referring to Moldovans as Romanians.

In Romania, they have been cancelling election results without Russian influence or pressure by simply arguing that the election was wrong in some way, and that even when held under Romanian law, the election failed to produce the desirable outcome. This is how they cancelled the first round of voting, as we have already said today.

And there are so many misleading and contradictory things in Emmanuel Macron’s statements. Once again, I would like to highlight that Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov offered his take on this matter today during his news conference with Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade of the Republic of Zimbabwe Amon Murwira. We will soon release a detailed review of Emmanuel Macron’s statements.

back to top

 

Question: On February 27, the Moldavian Healthcare Minister claimed that if the Soviet soldiers hadn’t liberated Moldavia during WWII, the Moldavian people would have been much happier today. What’s your take on this?

Maria Zakharova: You know, this is an outlandish narrative, a scary one. Had the Soviet soldiers - some of them were ethnic Moldavians, others were people of different ethnicities, but also lived in Moldavia - not liberated Moldavia, there would be no Moldavia, or Moldavians today. Back then, no one drew lines of that kind, because people had one Motherland, one country. No one ever segregated anyone by ethnicity.

What we are witnessing now is the Chisinau government literally destroying Moldavia’s cultural identity. They are doing what the Soviet soldiers prevented Nazis from doing. Soviet soldiers defended ethnic and cultural identity of Moldavia, and the current authorities in Kishinev are destroying it. They are renaming Moldavians to Romanians, and the Moldavian language into Romanian. They are making smooth and occasionally rough moves to destroy their own country which can be seen from their economic performance. Chisinau also has a geopolitical and geostrategic plan.

Now, with regard to whether they would be a happier nation today. You know, there is something hiding behind their creepy logic. Let me break it for you. Every time I think what the people from that generation, who fought for Moldavia against the Nazis, who rebuilt the country, experienced the evacuation, and worked on the home front, those who did not live to see today, would say had they seen all this. This is what stands behind the lawless state of affairs in Moldavia. There’s no one from that generation to stand up in defence. Is it what the Healthcare Minister was hinting at? This is an ugly thing to say.

Everything that has to do with Victory in the Great Patriotic War makes the current Moldavian authorities possessed. It’s not a nervous reaction, or some morbid emotion, but exactly a state of being possessed. Everything is done to belittle, or to cancel the importance of Great Victory. In 2022, Moldavia banned the wearing of symbols of Victory, including the St George ribbon, and cancelled the screening of military-patriotic films.

Now, they have taken up the songs that have always been beautifully sung in Moldavia in Russian, Moldavian, and even Romanian. On March 3, a musical ensemble from Israel was literally forced to apologise. For what? For performing the internationally renowned song “Katyusha” during a music festival in Chisinau, just because it allegedly was an act of Russian propaganda, and because this song was performed during the Great Patriotic War. That’s an incredibly powerful imagination.

However, the people of Moldavia - we never doubted them, and those who really love Moldavia and know Moldavians always knew that they would not let anyone take advantage of them - launched flash mobs where they sang this song in different languages, including Moldavian. This is a dignified response of good citizens.

The attempts to falsify the history of Moldavia and the history of World War II and the Great Patriotic War have taken on proportions of a national disaster. The Moldavian Ministry of Education has developed a new textbook of Romanian and world history, in which historical facts were put upside down, especially in the section devoted to the 1941-1945 Great Patriotic War.

The authors provide justification of Ion Antonescu’s army participation in the war on the side of Nazi Germany. Its defeat at Stalingrad was described as a “disaster” (it’s a direct quote from this “textbook.”) Red Army soldiers are called “occupiers,” and Romanian Nazi collaborators “administrators.” Chisinau is using this biased approach to describe modern history of Moldavia.

Here’s a recent example. March 2 marked the 33rd anniversary of the Transnistrian conflict. The event in Chisinau was held under bellicose slogans, with calls for ramping up militarisation. It looked more like a military parade. Russia was accused of unleashing the conflict.

The cynicism of the situation lies in the fact that right from the beginning of the Transnistrian conflict, Russia was actively looking for ways to settle it. Thanks to our country, the shooting phase of the conflict between Chisinau and Tiraspol was put to an end.

The official authorities in Chisinau do not like it. Perhaps, this is why we started hearing calls for withdrawing Russian peacekeepers from the region and militarising Moldavia by the hands of the West. All of that is planned to be done at the expense of the citizens of that country.

We have repeatedly issued warnings to the effect that this is fraught with increased tensions in the region and greater chances for a return to military scenarios to resolve the conflict. As a guarantor and mediator of the Transnistrian settlement, Russia sees its goal, first and foremost, in reliably ensuring peace on the Dniester River and in bringing the negotiating process out of the deadlock as soon as possible.

Within Moldavia itself, politicised views on historical events and attempts to distort them are not popular. The question is whether the Moldavian government will muster enough strength to get off the false path that is imposed on them and to remember that they are the grandchildren of the victorious soldiers of the Great Patriotic War.

Earlier today, I answered the question about Western-made feature films about World War II and the 1941-1945 Great Patriotic War, which not just put everything upside down, but simply incorporate fake narratives.

This is another “story” told from yet another angle. These lies make their way to gain a foothold in the minds of the people who don’t know history or don’t know it well enough.

I see Moldavians putting up resistance and defending their own history and the history of their heroic forefathers.

back to top

 

Question: On March 5, China published its 2025 Government Work Report, which says that in 2024, the country’s GDP grew by 5 percent year-on-year, while China contributed about 30 percent of global economic growth. This year’s GDP growth target is also 5 percent. China plans to continue to enhance the implementation of its “Artificial Intelligence+” strategy and the development of a new type of production resources. What is your assessment of the Chinese economy’s stability and its role in the global context, especially given the slowdown in global economic growth? What impact do you think China’s technology initiatives will have on international cooperation?

Maria Zakharova: China, which is the world’s largest economy by purchasing power parity and second largest when measured by nominal GDP, continues to be the most important driver of global growth. We are guided by a belief that economic growth, burgeoning trade and higher living standards in any country meet the interests of the international community and humanity as a whole.

New technologies, in particular, artificial intelligence, play an important role in promoting global progress. We are sincerely pleased with our Chinese friends’ accomplishments in this field. Modern AI capabilities open up new prospects for high-quality growth. Scientific and technical advancements always entail certain problem-solving, setting new objectives and addressing security in various fields. This seems a natural course of events to me. If all the details are carefully considered, and fundamental principles are respected, I think we can only be happy for countries like China, which promote science and technology, achieve good outcomes and create really advanced solutions.

On a broader scale, we support equal access to new technologies for all, as this promotes universal security and faster economic growth along with the bridging of the digital divide between countries. We are ready to build mutually beneficial partnerships with China and other friendly countries in the field of new technology initiatives and artificial intelligence.

back to top

 

Question: The United States recently doubled import duties on Chinese goods from 10 to 20 percent, accusing Beijing of not doing enough to stem the flow of fentanyl into the US. In addition, America imposed a 25 percent tariff on imports from Mexico and Canada. In response, China initiated legal action against the US under the WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism, Mexico prepared a retaliatory package, and Canada threatens to take similar steps. What is Russia’s assessment of the United States’ steps and the potential global implications?

Maria Zakharova: This has actually become a regular subject brought up here. When has the situation been different in recent years?

The West has always invented barriers, obstacles, sanctions, stop lists, or restrictions against anyone viewed as a rival – China in particular. How many times have we said that they cannot stand the competition? Apparently, because they realise that they are losing this race. Therefore, they resort to all kinds of blunt sanction tools. They start with sanctions, then switch to duties and tariffs, and so on.

Trade relations between Russia and China should be viewed in the wider context of our comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation, which are not prone to opportunistic changes. For almost 15 years, China has been our largest foreign trade counterparty. In recent years, Russia ranked fourth or fifth on the list of China’s leading trading partners. Positive dynamics prevail in our foreign economic relations: by the end of 2024, bilateral trade reached a new record level. We hope that Russia-China cooperation will continue to grow steadily in 2025, despite external pressure and turbulence in international politics and the global economy. It is supported by both parties’ political will and the conditions created through their leaders’ personal involvement and the smooth operation of intergovernmental mechanisms.

Moscow and Beijing do not support the logic of protectionism or trade wars, which contradicts the WTO norms, and without a doubt, will use every opportunity to protect their legitimate interests. In this regard, expanding bilateral cooperation fully aligns with the two countries’ comprehensive national development goals and has a general stabilising effect on the global economy.

Russia and China are strengthening coordination at relevant multilateral platforms and have similar views on key international issues, such as the need to democratise global economic governance, the unacceptability of illegitimate sanctions, trade barriers and protectionism, and the developed countries’ failure to fulfil their financial obligations towards developing economies.

This model of equal and mutually beneficial cooperation between the two powers is also attractive to other Global Majority countries that share our views and approaches to building a more just and democratic world.

back to top

 

Question: What is Moscow’s attitude to protests in the Serbian parliament? The protests were led by the pro-Western opposition, including members of a parliamentary group for friendship with Ukraine. According to the Government, the West encourages a “colour revolution” and D Day protests have been planned for March 15.  

Maria Zakharova: Serbia is a democratic and independent state and should address its internal problems on its own.

I am more concerned about international relations and whether Serbia has withdrawn its UN vote on anti-Russian resolutions.  So far, I have seen no reports in this regard. Hopefully, this will be done, given Belgrade’s statement that this was a mistake. Accordingly, there will be certain statements.

You say a parliamentary faction, a “group for friendship with Ukraine” has staged riots somewhere? Let me remind you again that Serbia has voted for anti-Russian resolutions. And later called this a mistake. But a mistake can be corrected by recalling the vote and writing a relevant letter. I do not know whether or not this has been done. This is, in fact, a good reason for our comment.

back to top

 

Question: As of March 3, the Ukrainian Ministry of Culture stopped issuing “letters of assistance” (permits to leave the country) to journalists and cultural workers, including actors, singers and artists. This was done because many of them failed to return home after visits abroad. Why, in your opinion, did the Kiev authorities take this decision? Will it be effective?  

Maria Zakharova: I said this in the introductory part of the briefing. This is a crisis of the genre, if they cannot scrape up enough even of those whom they allure by their seemingly “free contracts.” But we understand what methods they use in an attempt to recruit 18-year-old teens for slaughter in Ukraine.

There is nothing more to add, aside from emotions. I think this is already clear even to the Ukrainians themselves: Zelensky has chained them to the pillory of his corruption, doused them with blood, and is tormenting the people of Ukraine. It will be even worse, if we don’t stop this bloodthirsty maniac.

back to top

 

Question: Vladimir Zelensky is inconsistent in all his actions, starting from talks with the Russian Federation and up to interaction with the United States. We should not look for logic there, of course, but I would like to know your opinion as to why this politician behaves the way he does? As a diplomat you are sure to have certain professional secrets. How should we associate with Zelensky in this case?

Maria Zakharova: You say that there is no need to look for logic. But it does exist. And it is simple. It is about preserving his own rule. He is sick with ambition. Ukraine is plunged in corruption on a global scale, with international figures and elites involved. Moreover, he is neglecting his duties as the head of state and a responsible statesman. These are long overdue matters that have gone beyond legitimacy. But no one is able or going to respond because the main thing is to keep Zelensky in power.   

The law enforcement system in Ukraine has been split into parts and destroyed piecemeal. It has been inactive for years. This began much earlier than 2022. The state governance system has been shattered, corrupted and denationalised under the guise of embroidered shirts, pasted braids and forelocks. The Ukrainian government machine has been denationalised. It has incorporated nationals of other countries. The Ukrainian Government has been filled with God knows who, occasional rogues from other countries or foreign security service personnel under the guise of “efficient managers.”

Instead of democratic processes, the people of Ukraine were offered endless protests that came to be known as “maidan.”  But these protests only served to divert attention from finding solution to the problems the Ukrainian people faced. It was some sort of a “democratic gum:” it looked like the jaws were munching, like there was salivation, but no real food got there. This is what the people of Ukraine have been fed with for years.

This also served as a background for the dissemination of Russophobia, training of militants, delivery of weapons, bribery, forgery, preparation and orchestration of coups d’etat. So, we have answered the question about the logic of what is going on today.

This man is not only ambitious in a morbid way, he is also a drug addict. In Ukraine, people said so for years. But no one believed. Later, this became obvious during his foreign travels, when he behaved inadequately because of the addiction rather than emotions, tiredness, or chronic diseases.

Question: But how should we associate with him?

Maria Zakharova: Is there anyone who associates with him at all?

back to top

 

Question: In a recent statement, China’s Foreign Ministry said that China and Russia have developed a powerful internal driving force in their relations as two major powers and their relations cannot be subject to any third-party interferences. In your opinion, what gives our bilateral relations this internal driving force? This year, China and Russia will come together to mark the 80th anniversary of Victory in the War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War. What will this mean in terms of preserving peace and stability in today’s world?

Maria Zakharova: Let me repeat the key points one more time. Russia and China are two major neighbouring countries. The two nations developed their relations over several centuries, as well as since the establishment of the People’s Republic of China 75 years ago. These ties have now entered a new era and have a status of a comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation.

This is not a stale, but a dynamic framework for generating momentum in promoting state-to-state cooperation for sustainable development and defending the core national interests of our two countries. We are not interested in aggression, destruction, or a destructive agenda. Instead, our agenda focuses on creativity, cooperation, and mutual assistance. Our states, as well as the international and global agenda have benefited from our interactions.

What makes our relations so vibrant is the ability to effectively blend our historical traditions of friendship with mutual trust, based on the unconditional respect of each other’s political cultures, sovereignty and territorial integrity, while sharing close or convergent approaches to key global issues.

The leaders of our two countries have stressed many times that Russia and China have gone far beyond the conventional Cold-War-era alliances in terms of the quality of the relationship they have forged. This sets these ties apart from the Western concept of a so-called rule-based order, even if it all comes down to ‘might makes right’ for them. This rules-based order hinges upon a strict hierarchical framework and dictate in military and political affairs, finance and economics, and even culture and humanitarian affairs.

On the contrary, Russia-China relations are not bloc-based or confrontational. They do not target any third countries. We are not seeking to build any military or political alliances. Our own benefit is the primary purpose of our friendship, but it ends up benefiting the world in general. It must be said that we are ready to counter any attempts to disrupt our bilateral ties with a lot of firmness and resolve by engaging a dual counteraction mechanism.

In fact, the Russia-China nexus has been a major stabilising factor in global affairs and has made a meaningful contribution to promoting democracy within the system of international relations and building a multipolar world order with greater justice for all. Our two countries have also been stepping up their ties within multilateral organisations and forums, primarily the United Nations, the SCO, BRICS, the Group of Twenty, and APEC.

We appreciate China’s position on Ukraine and recognise its efforts to find a political and diplomatic path to resolving this crisis. Russia stands together with Beijing in advocating a multipolar world order with greater justice for all. It is up to the countries of the Global South to shape its foundations. We view building an inclusive and indivisible security architecture for Eurasia as an important step in this direction. We also agree that identifying and addressing differences which tend to bring about crises must serve as a key tool when searching for lasting solutions to these conflicts across our continent.

We can see, and have stressed many times, that this high level of political trust, state-to-state and people-to-people ties are strong enough to resist any outside pressure and cannot be sacrificed for the sake of momentary political considerations.

As for the 80th anniversary of Victory in the War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War, 2025 is a special year for our country. The people of Russia and those living across all the former Soviet republics are marking the 80th anniversary of the Victory by the Soviet people in the Great Patriotic War.

The topic of achieving Victory over fascism and militarism and working together to preserve the memory of this war for countering any attempts to distort the history of these events – all this will dominate Russia-China contacts at all levels, including the highest level, throughout this anniversary year. Leaders from many friendly countries will gather in Moscow in May for these celebrations. President of the People’s Republic of China Xi Jinping is expected to be among them.

In accordance with President Vladimir Putin’s decision to raise awareness about the decisive contribution by the Red Army to defeating the Japanese troops in the Far East, Khabarovsk will host large-scale commemorations in early September, including a military parade, to mark 80 years of defeating militarist Japan.

We expect high-ranking officials from friendly Northeast Asian countries which took part in fighting the Japanese invaders on the battlefield, to attend this event.

The President of Russia has received an invitation from President of the People’s Republic of China Xi Jinping to attend commemorations in Beijing marking the anniversary of the Victory of the Chinese people in the War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression.

We all know that the USSR and China were the primary targets for Nazi Germany and militarist Japan, accordingly, and our two countries had to bear much of the brunt from their invasions.

Having suffered all the unprecedented hardships resulting from this arrogant invasion, and having experienced all the horrors of that war, the people of the Soviet Union and China closed ranks in waging an uncompromising struggle against aggressors. They suffered uncountable losses on their path to Victory and were the ones to lay the foundations of the post-war world order.

With Nazi Germany and militarist Japan defeated, the aspirations by the adepts of the human-hating Nazi ideology to achieve global dominance crumbled, along with their attempts to enslave entire nations and deprive them of their national culture, identity and traditional values.

The war brought about a new system of international relations based on international law and paved the way for the establishment of the United Nations Organisation.

Western countries have been seeking to distort the history of World War II by diminishing the role of the USSR and China in achieving Victory in a bid to revise the very foundations of the post-war world order, disrupt global governance mechanism and establish a new framework, the so-called rules-based order. It is quite common for this order to be established by force.

We are witnessing increasingly frequent attempts to rehabilitate Nazism and racial supremacy, glorify Nazis and their accomplices, and revive other practices dealing with racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

Governments in most European countries have fully backed the large-scale effort by the Kiev regime to discriminate against and destroy its own people on ethnic and religious grounds. This brought about the worst security crisis in Europe since World War II.

Russia and China recognise all the dangers associated with these developments and have been working together to preserve the history of this past war, counter efforts to distort it and revise its outcomes.

back to top

 

Question: Representatives of Russia and the United States have spoken of readiness for peace talks on Ukraine. Specifically, Russia has expressed its willingness for negotiations at high and highest levels. President Donald Trump has also addressed this, stating after the recent White House incident that he received a letter from Vladimir Zelensky proposing immediate talks. Against this backdrop of discussions about potential negotiations, are there plans for contacts between Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and his American counterpart Marco Rubio, or at the expert level? If so, when might these occur? And when does Russia believe Ukrainian representatives should or could be involved?

Maria Zakharova: You likely seek a global scoop, expecting me to divulge everything in a nutshell.

It is evident that Russian-American contacts, which were effectively strangled by the previous US administration, are undergoing recalibration.

The Russian Federation’s Ambassador to the United States, Alexander Darchiev, has been appointed. He will spearhead efforts to rebuild these ties on the ground.

The issue of a peaceful settlement is multifaceted and requires, as you rightly noted, detailed expert-level discussions. We continue to await the US administration’s appointment of an official representative to initiate negotiations and the formation of their negotiating team. Subsequently, we will designate counterparts from the Russian side.

Regarding Ukrainian participation: while speculation and fantasies abound, facts and realities prevail. First, Vladimir Zelensky’s term has expired, casting doubt on his legitimacy. Second, his own decree prohibits negotiations with the Russian leadership. Until these issues are resolved, settled or otherwise eliminated, all Ukrainian statements on the matter remain entirely unsubstantiated.

Another point. Could you clarify if I might have overlooked something? Has the Ukrainian side produced any concept for a peace settlement or negotiation process? We observe only hollow memes saturating public discourse — vague formulas of “victory,” “tragedy,” or “peace,” devoid of substance. Have you heard anything concrete?

I have just commented on the March 2 London gathering. Did you detect any mention of peace there?

Yesterday, President of France Emmanuel Macron appeared before the cameras, speaking solely of supporting Ukraine’s military efforts — not a word on peace.

Prime Minister of Denmark Mette Frederiksen likewise declared solidarity with Ukraine, essentially asserting that “war is preferable to peace.”

Where, among those backing Vladimir Zelensky, are calls for peace, dialogue, settlement, diplomacy, or political resolution? None of the Kiev regime’s sponsors — in every sense of the word — utter such arguments.

Yet you ask me how Ukraine might be involved in or connected to peace talks. What should it be connected to? Having been connected to bare wires, it now convulses uncontrollably.

back to top

 

Question: Recent meetings between Russian and American representatives have taken place, with participation from the Russian Foreign Ministry. What advantages does the Russian side have in these discussions to, as you mentioned today and as President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov have repeatedly emphasised, address the root causes of the conflict and secure firm agreements that align with Russia’s interests? What kind of agreements, in the Foreign Ministry’s view, should be acceptable to Russia, if this can be discussed at the moment?

Maria Zakharova: Rather than focusing on specific negotiations, we should consider Russia’s overall advantages in this historical context.

Our strength lies in the fact that truth is on our side. This is the most powerful advantage – it uplifts, it gives strength even in the most difficult situations, and it helps find the right path. History has repeatedly shown that even when no way forward seems possible, if our cause is just, a solution emerges. And in this case, there is no doubt that the truth is on our side. More precisely, we stand for the truth. We are fighting for it. We are not merely clinging to it to weather a difficult moment or, as we used to say, “holding onto the red banner” for support.

We are defending a truth that has been trampled upon – distorted, twisted and violated. We strive to restore it to its original form. We are fighting for the truth, for fundamental notions of humanity, for historical facts and for those who gave their lives in its name. This is our undeniable advantage – one that cannot be outweighed by anything.

As for Russia’s position on conflict resolution, it is well known and remains unchanged. There is no need to dance around the issue – I will say what needs to be said. Right here in this very hall, on June 14, 2024, President of Russia Vladimir Putin clearly and comprehensively outlined Russia’s fundamental stance on the broader situation and the path to its resolution. That remains our approach. Everything is already laid out.

back to top

 

Question: We are receiving reports, including from Washington. Today, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the conflict in Ukraine is essentially a proxy war between two nuclear powers – Russia and the United States. How can we incorporate the proposals made by President Vladimir Putin into our discussions with the American side in this context?

Maria Zakharova: It has been repeatedly stated by the White House that, had it not been for the previous American administration, the situation would be entirely different, and that the outbreak of this conflict is the work of Joe Biden and his team. You can call it whatever you like or quote anyone you wish: proxy or not. We have used the term “hybrid” war, a multi-faceted conflict.

I won’t delve into Marco Rubio’s comments right now, but I want to emphasise our position, which is being increasingly confirmed.

Indeed, we have been subjected to a hybrid war. Many dismissed it, saying “you can’t be serious.” The then Chancellor of Germany Olaf Scholz supposedly found it amusing that the Russian-speaking and Russian population in Donbass was being subjected to genocide by the Kiev regime. But that’s exactly what it was.

This is a hybrid war, rooted in the revival of Nazism as an ideology and the use of various instruments with clear elements of genocide. The goal was to force a specific ethnic and socio-cultural group to either flee their territories or conform to completely unlawful demands. The parallels to the Ost plan are striking. However, this has taken on a new technological dimension, incorporating aspects of trade wars and the redistribution of spheres of influence and markets. This is what we have been calling it.

I repeat once again, this is being increasingly confirmed, as more political and state figures are speaking out, exposing the falsehoods and outright lies of the West, which has blamed Russia for everything. They are now saying that it is the West that is responsible. And all of this serves to further confirm that we are right.

back to top

 

Question: Regarding the situation in Ukraine and future negotiations, what might security guarantees for the remaining part of Ukraine from the Russian Federation look like, and how could the Americans and Europeans be involved in their implementation?

Maria Zakharova: This is an amazing situation. This is precisely the case where Ukraine could secure its own safety by returning to the foundations of its statehood, as outlined in the 1990 Declaration on its state sovereignty. This would involve adopting a neutral, non-aligned, and non-nuclear status, renouncing Nazi ideology, and upholding human rights, particularly for ethnic Russians and Russian-speaking citizens, as well as for all other ethnic groups.

This is the true security guarantee. They have been seeking it elsewhere, but those whom the Kiev regime and the state of Ukraine turned to for security guarantees – the West – betrayed them. They exploited Ukraine’s naivety, foolishness, and gullibility, using the country primarily against itself. The solution was always there, right in front of them, with the key lying nearby. The guarantees I mentioned could be exactly what was needed.

back to top

 

Question: What does the Russian Federation, the Foreign Ministry and other Russian entities think about Ukraine’s prospective EU membership?

Maria Zakharova: Ukraine’s EU membership is what gave start to it all. Unclean methods used by Ukraine’s official authorities with regard to their own people, and their playing several fronts at once have resulted in Ukraine imploding. 

All of that could have been avoided, if that matter was treated seriously with deep understanding of causal links existing between their own history and national interests, rather than irresponsibly, as they did, swayed by fleeting considerations. Even provocations wouldn't have been enough to trigger a series of coups in Ukraine.

Dallying, making up unviable scenarios, and failing to factor in its own interests and geopolitical and economic realities plunged Ukraine into the abyss of everything that it is now going through. Why go back there? There is more to it than what Russia thinks about it.

I can talk at length about the EU mutating into NATO’s economic arm more recently. But, again, there’s more to it than that. You asked about what we think about it. What’s the point? Will EU membership be a cure-all for Ukraine? Will Europeans chip in to rebuild Ukraine? Will they integrate it into the European space? As someone from Western, Northern Europe, you are perfectly aware of what the EU does to new or aspiring members. It is definitely not about making the newcomers feel comfortable. It is about pumping out their resources for the benefit of the established EU members. Everyone should be clear about it.

back to top

 

Question: The Icelanders don’t want it, but the elite and the politicians do. So, the answer is no? Is Russia opposed to Ukraine’s EU membership?

Maria Zakharova: I think this question is out of place, and it’s not because I’d rather not answer it, but because it is irrelevant. Talking about Ukraine’s membership in any economic integration associations at this point is just that, talk. What is there to discuss? The country has collapsed. Each day, people are yanked out of their homes to be gobbled up by bloody monster Vladimir Zelensky. Here, you suggest speculating about a lofty matter of how they are going to integrate into the Western economic system. They don’t have an economy of their own to speak of. Their entire economy is based on financial injections, corruption, handouts or, sure enough, loans. What is there to integrate?

They keep divvying up their resources, but are still unable to do so. Again, your question is about subtleties of diplomacy, and who stands where with regard to opportunities and economic interconnections. Ukraine is being ransacked by everyone and their uncle. It has brought itself into this plight completely forgetting about its sovereignty, genuine independence, national interests and history.

back to top

 

Question: If Russia reaches a peace agreement with Ukraine, with US mediation, then what conditions or guarantees will Russia need to sign this document? Will anti-Russia sanctions be lifted?

Maria Zakharova: We do not comment on the issue of lifting sanctions; nor do we discuss it. We did not impose them on our country, and we have always noted that they are of a destructive and unlawful nature. First of all, they impact those who conceived and imposed them. Why? Because we impose counter-sanctions, we do respond.

It is therefore absolutely pointless to discuss this issue. You should address these questions to those who imposed such sanctions. What are their plans? What do they want? How do they intend to rectify the situation that they created? We do not have to reply to this question.

We have always noted that any sanctions are not legitimate, unless they have been endorsed by the UN Security Council. Everything else is a weapon of trade and hybrid wars, pressure, interference in domestic affairs; this serves to demolish the fundamental international law framework and to impair interstate collaboration and cooperation. Our well-known position is quite clear.

Going back to your first question, we are noting all the time that it is necessary to eliminate the root causes of the crisis. If you think that one can press a button, and the screen will show a set phrase “The guarantees have worked,” this never happens. If you think that there is some kind of a device that can be activated and will guarantee something, this does not work either.

As we have seen, international law agreements, both bilateral and gentlemen’s agreements are ignored. For example, this includes NATO’s non-expansion to the east. Although all this was discussed, NATO continued to expand. This the real price of guarantees.

Today, I have already listed the root causes and ways of eradicating them. All of them (our basic perception of the situation) are contained in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s remarks of June 14, 2024. This amounts to a real, long-term and natural guarantee.

Today, the European Union nations, their presidents and prime ministers are trying to appoint themselves as guarantors and parties to the negotiating process; and they are also stating that they can guarantee something. What can they guarantee? They were unable to guarantee the safety of the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 pipelines that provided them with natural resources in the form of natural gas for their own prosperity. They were unable to guarantee their own safe energy well-being. Nor could they guarantee an investigation of this terrorist attack.

How can they claim the right to guarantee the security of the region, the continent and some other country, while making such futile attempts? They are unable to guarantee their own energy security; nor can they provide any other guarantees. At the same time, they believe that they can rule the entire world.

back to top

 

Question: There is growing concern in the United States about a possible trade war with Canada, China and Mexico. From Russia’s perspective, how will such a trade conflict affect world markets and Russia’s trade with these countries?

Maria Zakharova: I would say it is a bit premature to talk about a full-scale trade war. Indeed, we are seeing another round of tariff escalation. This is obvious. We see that Beijing, Mexico City and Ottawa have announced retaliatory measures or declared their readiness to do so. As far as we know from official reports, the countries concerned continue to interact in order to settle American trade claims. That is, they are engaged in some kind of dialogue.

At the same time, we can see that this is not a new technique or tactic for the current administration in the White House. Similar ultimatums to trading partners were put forward during Donald Trump’s first tenure. Counties often made concessions or negotiated, not wanting to lose access to the American market. Perhaps they will follow the same scenario now.

In any case, the violation of international trade agreements by one of the world’s largest countries will have a negative impact on the global economy. This unilateral and unjustified move to hike tariffs runs counter to the WTO rules. It will spur on protectionism and further undermine the multilateral trade system. If trade tensions escalate further, all countries will be dealing with instability on global markets for most industrial products, food products and energy resources, disrupted production and supply chains and transport and logistics routes.

I believe that one way or another, this move will affect everyone. However, we are less dependent on the North American market, as we have redirected our commodity flows to friendly countries. In fact, the anti-Russia sanctions facilitated the transition.

back to top

 

Question: Why has Russia banned the Japanese Foreign Minister and eight other Japanese citizens from entering the country? Why now? What new unfriendly moves by Tokyo have prompted this step?

Maria Zakharova: We do not publicly comment on the details of decisions on personal restrictions against foreign citizens. As a rule, we never do this. There are exceptions when we see the same steps in relation to us, but in this case, we stick to the non-publicity rule.

However, we would like to remind you once again that since the start of the special military operation in Ukraine in February 2022, the Japanese government has been pursuing an unprecedentedly unfriendly policy towards our country. As part of the anti-Russia measures, Japan put Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on the sanctions list on March 1, 2022. As a tit-for-tat response, we added then Japanese Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi to the Russian “stop list”.

The recent step with respect to the Japanese Foreign Minister was taken by the Russian side as part of the implementation of countermeasures adopted in connection with Tokyo’s continued hostile course, which includes new sanctions packages and direct logistical and military-industrial assistance to the Kiev regime. If Japan persists in maintaining this foreign policy line, we will be ready to develop additional countermeasures.

We are guided by a strong belief that the resumption of a full-fledged interstate dialogue and mutually beneficial cooperation with Japan will only be possible after the Japanese authorities completely abandon their attempts to damage our country’s economy and security, or to harm its citizens.

back to top

 

Question: Initial ceasefire steps could involve prisoner releases and an aerial truce – banning missiles, long-range drones, and bombs targeting energy facilities and non-military infrastructure, alongside an immediate maritime ceasefire. – Vladimir Zelensky.

It remains unclear whether Vladimir Zelensky genuinely intends to take such steps. To my knowledge, Ukraine refuses to reclaim its prisoners of war unless they belong to units like Azov. Russia’s Commissioner for Human Rights, Tatyana Moskalkova, published a list in December 2024 of 630 captives Kiev has declined to retrieve. What is their fate? Has Ukraine shown any willingness to reclaim them?

Given Vladimir Zelensky’s statement on banning missiles and other weapons, could an international mechanism be initiated to prohibit munitions verified as used by the AFU?

Maria Zakharova: Regarding proposals for an international mechanism banning specific munitions, I can only surmise that the current state of disarmament and arms control frameworks offers little prospect for such measures at this stage. You are well aware of the positions held by relevant parties.

Question: Regarding the list of 630 Ukrainian prisoners of war: has Kiev taken any initiative to reclaim them since the December 2024 report? Are there steps toward exchanges?

Maria Zakharova: I will make an inquiry.

back to top

 

Question: You previously mentioned the “steel porcupine” in this context.

Maria Zakharova: That was not my wording. I merely quoted Ursula von der Leyen. Frankly, such inventiveness eludes me.

Question: Ursula von der Leyen proclaimed an era of armament: “We urgently need to rearm Europe... The member states need more fiscal space to do a surge in defence spending.”

Maria Zakharova: Had she not squandered billions of euros on the vaccines that she destroyed later, there might have been funds to spare. Now, all scramble for resources.

The aggressive rhetoric is unmistakably clear. The so-called admirers or idolaters of the liberal dictatorship harbour a mission, an aspiration, a dream to plunge the European continent into the depths of crises, or, ideally, to ignite turmoil across the continent.

They do not contemplate peace. Such aspirations are absent from their agenda. They are fixated on war. Their discourse revolves around battlefields, coercive methods, and achieving peace through suffering, tears, and might. What they conjure is beyond my comprehension, yet it is apparent – they do not conceal their aggressive, militaristic, and destabilising convictions.

These individuals pose a threat to Europe. They are perilous for peaceful, ordinary people as well. They propagate a destructive ideology, attempt to manipulate public consciousness, and disseminate falsehoods. Now fixated on weaponry – even nuclear arms – they embody peril.

back to top

 

Question: French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer have devised a plan for a temporary truce in Ukraine, lasting a month, which would cover air, sea, and energy facilities. Does it make sense to accept a temporary and partial ceasefire at this point? How does Russia view this plan?

Maria Zakharova: This plan has not been officially communicated to anyone; we only know about it through media reports. All these manipulations with terms like “truce” or “temporary ceasefire” – let them be part of their own discourse. We understand perfectly well all their intentions.

Let me reiterate that we rely on their own admissions. Typically, such terms mask a desire for a breather – a chance for rearmament, in order to resume hostilities with renewed strength. Russia remains steadfast in its position expressed by President Vladimir Putin in June 2024.

We need a lasting peace, not mere pauses or temporary respites that the enemy seeks to exploit for rearmament. What we need are legally binding agreements and mechanisms that will ensure that the crisis does not resume or repeat.

back to top

 

Question: You previously mentioned that the Baltic countries were not invited to the Sunday summit in London, referring to it as a luxury for the “rich countries.”

Maria Zakharova: I didn’t say “rich”. What I meant is that there’s nothing left to take from them. They clearly have nothing to offer. I believe they might have decided to save on coffee, so they wouldn’t be lingering in the corridors and eating extra sandwiches. I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s the case.

back to top

 

Question: What is the influence of Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia on decision-making within the EU, as estimated by the Russian Foreign Ministry?

Maria Zakharova: Their influence is destructive. We always made it clear.

This is a destructive and aggressive minority that neglects the national interests of their countries and instead serves as an instrument of North Atlantic liberalism, living on handouts from Western agencies, on grants, or controlled from the outside through blackmail. That’s all to it.

If they truly cared about their people and their countries, they would uphold human rights, respect democratic norms and principles, and value the diversity within their nations, be it cultural, ethnographic, ethnic, or linguistic. They would foster good relations with their neighbours, engage in trade, develop their own industries, and nurture cultural and humanitarian ties.

They failed to appreciate the goodwill Russia showed towards them. Our business people, tourists, and citizens visited their countries, spent money on vacations, and bought real estate there. This was a natural source of income for them, not handouts or the sale of national interests. It was income derived from offering services. And yet, they failed to preserve or appreciate that. Am I wrong? Isn’t that the truth?

back to top

 

Question: I completely agree with you. What do you think they gain by continuing the conflict in Ukraine?

Maria Zakharova: What do they gain? They have already lost and squandered any potential advantage. Their direct benefit would be to have a neighbouring state abounding in resources, opportunities, and funds, and striving for a peaceful development of relations. Yet, they failed to secure that. In Ukraine, there is nothing left to gain. They merely played a role in NATO or the Council of Europe, for which they were paid, and doing only what was expected of them.

Now, they were not even allowed to sit at the table. They were told they’re not needed and should wait elsewhere. Perhaps it’s to avoid spending money on tickets; after all, the EU covers the costs. Why waste an extra 20-30 thousand euros to bring a delegation from one of the Baltic countries?

What kind of statehood is there? Everything has long been bought with Western grants and squandered.

back to top

 

Question: Does Russia plan to include the release of prisoners convicted for supporting Moscow in Ukraine in the draft of a future peace agreement?

Maria Zakharova: It’s counterproductive and premature to discuss this at the moment. No negotiations have started in this format, and there are no documents on the table. We won’t indulge in speculation.

This is a meticulous process that won’t be handled through public discussions. Let’s not even attempt to address this topic. It serves no one’s interests and, more importantly, could harm the process.

Question: He mentioned it for the first time, so it became interesting.

Maria Zakharova: I will repeat once again. If there is information we can share, we will certainly do so. However, discussing something in theory that doesn’t yet exist in practice is both unethical and inappropriate. In this case, it is also counterproductive.

back to top

 

Question: I would like to begin with good news. On Monday, Russian military pensioners started receiving pensions. On their behalf, I want to thank Russia’s Foreign Ministry and you personally for your involvement.     

Maria Zakharova: I think this gratitude can be referred to Russia as a whole and all the authorities and arms of power that handle this matter. There is not just one person or organisation in this regard. This is a joint effort.

back to top

 

Question: Purely hypothetically, talks between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin…

Maria Zakharova: The answer is negative. Neither hypothetically nor pathetically, and nor in any other fashion. We do not comment on this, because these are talks between heads of state. This is a prerogative of the President’s Executive Office. 

It is useless to engage in speculations. This will not help anything.

Question: But can we surmise that the talks will touch upon the status of Russian speakers in the Baltic states?

Maria Zakharova: Yes, you can. You can do whatever you want. I am talking about myself. As for you, you certainly can do it. But we in this case do not comment on talks between heads of state, let alone talks that are yet to be announced.

back to top

 

Question: Russian citizen and former riot policeman Konstantin Nikulin, who was arrested in Lithuania and sentenced to life imprisonment, has spent the last 15 years in custody for an alleged involvement in a shooting attack on the Medininkai customs checkpoint on July 31, 1991. He did not plead guilty, there were no ballistic tests, the incriminating evidence was lost, and the whole thing doesn’t hold water. Some reports say that the attack was launched by SAS, UK to reinforce the US negotiating position at the talks between George H. W. Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev, impel Lithuania to secede, and later bring about the disintegration of the USSR. Could this be discussed at the top level?

Maria Zakharova: We do not comment on these talks in any way. As for Konstantin Nikulin, he was indeed indicted on illegitimate grounds in Lithuania within the framework of a highly politicised case.  There were numerous violations with regard to assessing the actual facts as well as their legal qualification. No actual inculpatory evidence was provided, and neither was eyewitness evidence taken into consideration.  

We defend Konstantin Nikulin’s rights on a regular basis in cooperation with his lawyers. The Foreign Ministry and the Russian Embassy in Lithuania have kept this issue under special scrutiny. 

We always make every effort to cut red tape when it comes to meeting Mr Nikulin’s requests. We are in constant contact with him, with Russian diplomats visiting him at his prison camp every month. On our insistence, the prison administration has improved the conditions of his confinement. The Russian Embassy has got Lithuania to conduct the necessary medical checkups. And we urge them to give him timely medical assistance. 

The Russian competent agencies have repeatedly requested Mr Nikulin’s transfer to Russia under the Russian-Lithuanian agreement on transfer of persons sentenced to terms of imprisonment of June 25, 2001. Regrettably, the Lithuanian side has turned us down.

As for the prospects for his release through other mechanisms, this matter brooks no publicity.

back to top

 

Question: BRICS has existed since 2009. Last year, our country’s chairmanship of the association was successfully completed. At the same time, there are emerging organisations that are making attempts to affiliate themselves with the BRICS activities and implement their own projects, flying the flag of the association. In particular, media reports circulated about the activities of a certain autonomous non-profit organisation, International Alliance for Strategic Projects BRICS. Does Russian Foreign Ministry support that organisation’s activity?

Maria Zakharova: We have no direct relation to that entity. I cannot say anything in this regard.

back to top

 

Question: According to Zbigniew Brzezinski, former national security adviser to the US President, “The new world order will be built against Russia, on the ruins of Russia, and at the expense of Russia.” 

As soon as Vladimir Putin changed the nuclear doctrine from a retaliatory strike to the possibility of striking terrorist sponsors, the U.S. presidential election saw a dramatic change in leadership. Instead of the heiress of the hostile Joe Biden, the “benevolent” Donald Trump took the lead. The threat of a strike against Russia with heavy missiles has temporarily disappeared. But we do understand that the U.S. goal has not changed - the strategy has changed. Peace between Russia and other countries will lead to a stronger Russia and the collapse of the dollar, which the U.S. will never voluntarily accept. The elite of Europe and Ukraine are America’s subordinates that follow all its orders. Just look at the way they are destroying their economies and refusing gas at the behest of the United States, and how blindly they are doing it.

Maria Zakharova: I beg your pardon, but we are here for questions, not declarations. Could you please specify what you are asking?

Question: Don’t you think that everything leads to the execution of the plan of Zbigniew Brzezinski, advisor to the US President, to destroy Russia and its people?

Maria Zakharova: If everything had gone according to their plan (I don’t know who exactly you are referring to, but someone apparently hating us intensely), we would no longer exist. But we are. Therefore, not everything is going according to their plan.

back to top

 

Question: European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has called on the EU countries to increase their defence spending by 1.5 percent of GDP in order to accumulate €650 billion for its rearmament. She has also proposed taking out loans to accelerate military aid to Ukraine. Will this help Brussels replace Washington as the supplier of the Ukrainian army? Or will borrowing funds for launching an arms rate bankrupt the EU?

Maria Zakharova: To begin with, those who take such decisions in Brussels are sponging off the European taxpayers, the common people and workers. This situation has changed in some EU countries because people there refuse to be robbed and don’t want their money to be used to kill so many Europeans.

Second, you have presented it as a formula. Will Brussels replace Washington as the supporter of the Kiev regime? Let’s keep to the point. They are not supporting the Kiev regime but destroying Ukraine and killing Europeans, as well as people from other countries and continents. That is what this money is being spent on and what they are accumulating it for.

The question should have been formulated like this: will they accumulate enough money to kill more people? This is the essence of your question. The issue is not about Ukraine’s national identity or territorial integrity. It is about manslaughter. That is what they are accumulating money for. If they wanted Ukraine to prosper, they would have allowed it to develop. Nothing hinted at Ukraine’s future collapse when it seceded from the Soviet Union. It was a developed and prosperous country with a good future. But they flooded it with their grants, USAID, Soros’s projects, and plans for corrupting and plundering it. That’s why it went downhill. And this is what they are accumulating money for.

Will they replace the United States? There are not enough people left in Ukraine for that. They should abandon memes and stereotypes and take a sober look at reality.

This is absurd, a new version of the emperor’s new clothes. Everyone can see the reality but nobody dares speak the truth. Think about it: the EU countries urge Zelensky every day to call up more Ukrainians. But they also accept Ukrainian citizens who leave their country, grant citizenship or residence permits to them, and pay benefits to them. What do they really want? What is their logic? If they want this self-slaughter to continue, why create preference conditions for them? If they want mobilisation to continue in Ukraine so that Ukrainians can defend themselves, as they put it, they should not accept Ukrainian immigrants and should not pay them for doing nothing. What is their logic? What they are doing their best to create is chaos, disorder, and possibly a new fire in the European continent. Peace is not a frequent guest in Europe and should be taken good care of. That is what Russia has been calling for.

If you look at the history of Western Europe, you will see that its fabric is made of wars. If you look at the history of some of its countries, you will see that it is a long chain of expansionist moves. If you imagine history as a tape and put it on fast forward, you will see that they always attacked somebody. They attacked Russia, each other, North Africa, and even their would-be friend, the United States. They attacked their own, the Mediterranean countries, and Latin America. If you look at the history of Western Europe over the past thousand years, you will see that its policy has always been aggressive. That is what it is. They have been united in an integration structure so they stop acting like this. But they have come undone.

back to top

 

Question: Argentine President Javier Milei has deleted all joint photographs with Vladimir Zelensky from his social media following a dispute between the Ukrainian leader and Donald Trump. What likelihood exists that this trend will persist, leaving Vladimir Zelensky increasingly isolated internationally and reduced to a pariah?

Maria Zakharova: You know, this resembles children covering their eyes and believing themselves invisible. Their approach to photos is the same. They remain trapped in a century-old mentality, when photography itself was novel. All labour under the illusion that a photograph signifies victory — that refusing to pose or allowing others to capture images constitutes defeating someone. Tearing up a photo becomes, for them, a sacred ritual.

For some reason, they are now scrubbing these images and deleting them, despite the concept of an internet cache, which preserves everything indefinitely. Observing this process, everyone can’t help but laugh. To my mind, this reflects a form of pathological infantilism and hypocrisy.

back to top

 

Question: In your view, is there excessive euphoria regarding President Donald Trump coming to power and his statements, and might this impede the Russian Foreign Ministry’s work?

Maria Zakharova: On the matter of euphoria: I would frame this differently. We maintain realism. I speak for Russian state institutions and representatives. Our perspective is wholly realistic. These processes were analysed beforehand, and we comprehend current developments.

Regarding your observation: this is less euphoria than a long-overdue urge or aspiration to hear rhetoric distinct from the stale, grating, rustling, hissing worn-out record of slaughter, wars, and aggression. People encounter fresh lexicon. They yearn to welcome it, hoping the insanity indoctrinated into them — the grotesque “philosophy of destruction” propagated by American liberal Democrats — will fade. This, I believe, is your reference. That is how I would derive this process, without applying the term “euphoria.”

There is no harm in the public embracing altered rhetoric. It signifies healthy human responses – a natural reaction. Another matter is that realism must undeniably prevail.

back to top

 

Question: Is there consideration that the United States seeks to distance itself from the Ukraine conflict, which it itself instigated, and shift primary responsibility onto Europe to provoke a full-scale military confrontation between Russia and European nations supporting Kiev?

Maria Zakharova: Observe Western Europe itself. Presently, there is no pressure, reprimand, or threats from the United States. Americans – both officially and informally – speak of the need to explore pathways out of this crisis.

Meanwhile, proponents of the American liberal dictatorship ideology, previously “installed” in Europe (Ursula von der Leyen and others), persist in their bellicose trajectory. Their objective is to “ignite Europe.” No one doubts this; they openly admit as much.

Yesterday’s statements by President of France Emmanuel Macron, alongside incessant aggressive remarks from EU high foreign policy representatives, are exceptionally aggressive.

The Russian Foreign Ministry will shortly issue a comprehensive statement regarding Emmanuel Macron’s declarations. Read it. You will find your answer there.

back to top

 

Question: Ahead of the anniversary of Crimea’s reunification with Russia, how does the Foreign Ministry evaluate the progress in international recognition of Crimea’s status as part of Russia in recent years? What diplomatic measures are being taken to secure international recognition of the Kherson Region’s status as part of Russia, based on the experience with Crimea?

Maria Zakharova: In its daily work, the Foreign Ministry focuses intensely on raising global awareness about the irreversible and legitimate reunification of Crimea with the Russian Federation, emphasising the recognition of this reality and the respect for the freedom and political choice of the Crimean people. We consistently advocate for our position through bilateral cooperation and at various international platforms.

Recent years have clearly demonstrated that, despite the collective West’s attempts to isolate Crimea as part of Russia, there is an increasing interest from foreign businesses and socio-political circles in fostering cooperation. Many international guests have witnessed firsthand the tangible results of Crimea’s comprehensive development, the protection of Crimeans’ rights, and the peace and stability on the peninsula. More and more international political, business, and cultural forums are being held in Crimean cities.

The past year saw significant progress in building cooperation between Crimea and countries from the Middle East, the Asia-Pacific region, Latin America, and Africa. The Global Majority is accepting the current realities, even if not always openly or with formal declarations, yet everyone understands the situation. I believe this momentum will continue to grow.

Regarding the second part of your question, it would be incorrect to focus solely on the Kherson Region. While I understand your specific interests, our diplomats work to defend the interests of the Russian Federation as a whole, without isolating any of its constituent regions. At the same time, each region is addressed focusing on its unique characteristics.

We believe that the international community will eventually recognise the status of the Donbass republics and the Novorossiya regions as part of Russia. The situation on the ground will be a key factor in this process.

Regarding Crimea, we believe that its experience provides a clear and effective model, which should be fully utilised at this stage. This includes the accelerated restoration and continued development of the new Russian entities, even in the face of sanctions imposed by our opponents.

back to top

 

Question: Does the Foreign Ministry plan to organise press tours for foreign journalists to the Kherson or Zaporozhye regions, or to Donbass, so they can witness the situation firsthand and report objectively on the development of these regions?

Maria Zakharova: We regularly organise press tours across the country. There are specific circumstances in some areas that have martial law in place, but journalists do visit them. However, for security reasons, we do not disclose these plans in advance. But this work is underway.

back to top

 

Question: Sergey Sobyanin took part in a ceremony for laying the foundation for a monument to Heydar Aliyev in Moscow on Tuesday. What is the Foreign Ministry’ assessment of the importance of this cultural project for Russia-Azerbaijan relations?

Maria Zakharova: Our country honours the memory and has a lot of warmth and respect for this outstanding, extraordinary, and talented person and statesman who acted as a prominent public figure back when our respective countries were part of one country. In 2023, Moscow and many other cities held commemorative events on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of his birth.

The upcoming installation of the monument to Heydar Aliyev will come as an important cultural and humanitarian event for both our countries. This is not the only project we have. I hope there will be more of them.

back to top

 

Question: Sessions of the 14th NPC and the 14th National Committee of the CPPCC are being held in China. How does this major political event affect the political situation in Beijing? How does the Russian Foreign Ministry assess its impact on Russia-China relations?

Maria Zakharova: This event is part of China’s domestic political life and is of national importance for this sovereign and independent state. I will not provide a detailed comment on it, since this is the prerogative of our Chinese colleagues.

We look forward to establishing closer coordination of foreign policy steps taken by our respective countries in the international arena and to stepping up joint work to uphold the principles of a just and democratic international order based on international law, and forming an open and indivisible security system in Eurasia.

We wish members of the National Committee of the CPPCC and deputies of NPC effective and productive work.

back to top

 

Question: Russia-Myanmar relations have strengthened notably in recent years. The Prime Minister of Myanmar’s current visit is conducted at a high level, we can see that. Two consulates general are about to open in the Russian Federation. We would like you to share with us the main strategic tasks that define bilateral relations with Myanmar, including in the context of ensuring stability in the Asia-Pacific region.

Maria Zakharova: Much was said on March 4 during the meeting at the highest level. Considering this, my answer to your question will be short.

We see good prospects for expanding trade and economic cooperation, and cultural and humanitarian ties. We look forward to effectively implementing major joint infrastructure projects in Myanmar, expanding cooperation in industry, agriculture, and energy, including the construction of a low-capacity nuclear power plant in that country.

We are interacting closely with Myanmar on matters of the dialogue-based partnership with ASEAN. Last year, Myanmar took over the functions of ASEAN coordinator for the next three years. We see the energy and enthusiasm Nay Pyi Taw is displaying is this position. We will continue working as a team to promote unity and the central role of the ASEAN G10 in regional affairs and formation of architecture of equal and indivisible security in Eurasia.

***

I would like to wish all women a happy March 8. We share this holiday with men, don’t we? Where would we be celebrating it without them? Happy holiday!