Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, April 24, 2025

 

Table of Contents

 

1. Sergey Lavrov to take part in BRICS Foreign Ministers Council meeting
2. Sergey Lavrov’s visit to the Dominican Republic
3. Wreath laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Solider by heads of diplomatic missions accredited in Moscow
4. Ukrainian crisis update
5. Double standards of the UN Secretariat in the context of the Ukrainian crisis
6. NATO capacity building programme
7. Statements about Russia by Finland’s leaders
8. New Facts Concerning the Crimes of Japanese militarism
9. Humanitarian aid to Myanmar  
10. International Day of Multilateralism and Diplomacy for Peace
11. 80th anniversary of the meeting of Soviet and American troops on the Elbe
12. Volunteer initiative to produce audio guides for concentration camp museums
13. Victory Dictation 2025
14. 50th anniversary of the liberation of South Vietnam
15. 110th anniversary of Armenian genocide in the Ottoman Empire
16. Gromyko Young CIS Foreign Affairs Experts Competition
17. 10th Dobrovidenie 2025 International Folk Song Festival

Answers to media questions:

1. Ursula von der Leyen’s statements
2. Japan’s actions regarding the sovereign assets of the Russian Federation
3. Moldova’s hostile activities in Russia
4. Efforts by the Moldovan authorities to distance themselves from Victory Day celebrations
5. Baltic states withdraw from the Ottawa Anti-Personnel Mine Convention
6. Lithuania renews sanctions against Russians and Belarusians
7. Russia-China cooperation in culture, education and research
8. Possible scenarios for settling the Ukraine crisis
9. Ukraine’s EU membership prospects
10. US phobias
11. Iran-China-Russia meetings on the Iranian nuclear issue
12. Japanese leaders visiting the Yasukuni Shrine
13. Ensuring that payment mechanisms are resilient to external risks
14. Russian diplomats in Armenia
15. Russia’s role in settling the Iranian nuclear issue
16. Zvezda frontline correspondent Nikita Goldin dies
17. Actions by the United States in Yemen
18. Russia’s role in the Iranian nuclear deal
19. Efforts to militarise Nordic countries
20. Georgia update
21. Ukraine’s statements
22. Foreigners relocating to Russia

 

Sergey Lavrov to take part in BRICS Foreign Ministers Council meeting

 

On April 28 and 29, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will take part in a full-scale meeting of BRICS foreign ministers in Rio de Janeiro.

Held as part of Brazil’s chairmanship, the upcoming meeting will offer an effective opportunity for discussing in a detailed and meaningful manner the latest international developments, as well as efforts to settle crises and conflicts, and potential for improving global governance by enabling the Global Majority to play a bigger role in international affairs.

The ministers will review progress in carrying out the agreements reached by the BRICS leaders, and will also outline further steps for expanding strategic cooperation in the run-up to the 17th BRICS Summit, which is scheduled to take place on July 6 and 7 in Rio de Janeiro.

The agenda of the upcoming BRICS Foreign Ministers Council meeting includes a dedicated session for foreign ministers from BRICS partner states, titled The Role of the Global South in Strengthening Multipolarity. You will remember that the decision to create this partner category was adopted at the October 2024 BRICS Summit in Kazan as part of the Russian chairmanship.

back to top

 

Sergey Lavrov’s visit to the Dominican Republic

 

On April 30, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will visit the Dominican Republic as part of his trip to Latin America. We are marking 80 years of diplomatic relations with this country in 2025. In addition, this visit is timed to coincide with the opening of the Embassy of the Russian Federation to the Dominican Republic.

Sergey Lavrov’s visit is expected to include meetings with President of the Dominican Republic Luis Abinader and Foreign Minister Roberto Alvarez.

The agenda for these conversations with our Dominican partners provides for discussing avenues for expanding bilateral cooperation, including stepping up political dialogue, expanding trade, economic, investment ties, as well as relations in tourism, culture and humanitarian affairs, while also strengthening the legal framework governing bilateral relations.

The latest global and regional developments will also be on the agenda.

back to top

 

Wreath laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Solider by heads of diplomatic missions accredited in Moscow

 

Tomorrow, on April 25, heads of foreign diplomatic missions accredited in Moscow will take part in a wreath and flower laying ceremony at the Tomb of the Unknown Solider.

This will be one of the highlights in the programme of events prepared by our Ministry for foreign diplomats in 2025 as we mark 80 years of Victory in the Great Patriotic War.

This commemorative event will bring together representatives from all the regions of the world and will demonstrate that people around the world remain committed to preserving the memory about what happened during those years despite all the attempts at rewriting history.

back to top

 

Ukrainian crisis update

 

With every hour, with every second, with every day, it is becoming more and more evident that there is no negotiating an agreement with Vladimir Zelensky.

After the Kiev regime sabotaged the 30-day moratorium on strikes against energy infrastructure (we repeatedly mentioned this during our briefings, substantiating our statements with facts), with Ukrainian forces breaching the energy ceasefire 136 times, they also disrupted the 30-hour Easter truce announced by President of Russia Vladimir Putin. Easter is a holiday we hold sacred. Zelensky initially rejected Russia’s proposal for a 30-hour Easter truce. Later, apparently under pressure from his Western European handlers who continue to supply him with weapons, (and who must have told him to show some restraint at least for appearances’ sake), he supported it, but only in words.

According to the Defence Ministry, they recorded as many as 4,900 cases of Ukrainian forces violating it during the 30-hour period. In addition to thousands of artillery strikes, the Ukrainian Nazis used 90 drones and fired American HIMARS at the Kursk Region. Zelensky seems to be deliberately framing the Americans, among others, by using American weapons during the Easter holidays.

The attacks targeted Russian civilian facilities in the Belgorod, Bryansk, Kursk and Kherson regions, the DPR and Crimea in a blatantly cynical way. A woman and two young girls were wounded after those neo-Banderites attacked the village of Nechayevka in the Belgorod Region. They also shelled Donetsk and Gorlovka with 155 mm cluster munitions as well as other projectiles, injuring three civilians. The brutal attacks gave rise to blasphemous comments on Ukrainian social media. For example, one of the supporters – or accomplices – of the Kiev regime’s crimes described the fire at a petrol station in the Kalininsky district of Donetsk caused by a Ukrainian attack in the morning of April 20 as “the descent of the Holy Fire.”

The Russian army conscientiously observed the Easter truce. The numerous acts of terror committed by AFU militants on Easter Sunday, a holiday observed by Christians all over the world, have once again demonstrated that Vladimir Zelensky is incapable of negotiating (possibly due to unsound mind). Apparently, the armed gangs of neo-Nazis and mercenaries have lost all restraint. They do not seem to realise whom they are obeying, contributing to a fatal escalation of the war.

The images depicting Ukrainian men leaving the Divine Liturgy to escape from the man-hunters, the military enlistment officers, shared online, added a few finishing brushstrokes to the picture of the rampage of dark arts in Ukraine during Easter holidays. This is what’s happening in Ukraine – half-empty churches of the canonical UOC, seized by the schismatics, who are actually demon-possessed raiders. This is the picture of Easter 2025 in Ukraine.

Militants use these same churches where they hunt the last men in Ukraine to send them not to the trenches, but straight to their graves, to consecrate UAVs and receive blessings for their crimes against civilians. These are all parts of the whole, and none of them is actually out of step with the general picture. Everything aligns.

Here are more facts about the Kiev regime’s crimes. Ukrainian Nazis continued their  attacks on peaceful civilians, including women and children, in the Russian regions before and after the Easter truce.

On April 16, 2025, a 10-year-old boy was killed in the explosion of a Kolokolchik anti-personnel land mine planted by the Banderites in the village of Malomikhailovka in the Belgorod Region. On April 21, 2025, a woman was wounded in a drone attack on a house in the village of Dolgoye, and a civilian was injured in a drone attack on the Tomarovka-Krasnaya Yaruga road. On April 22, a Ukrainian drone attacked a car in the village of Kosilovo, wounding a couple and their children – a girl aged 16 and a boy aged 19.

On April 16, 2025, a girl born in 2017 was wounded in a drone attack on Donetsk, and an employee of the Novorossiya Railway was wounded in the town of Yelenovka. On April 18, 2025, a boy born in 2015 was killed in a night drone attack on the town of Volodarskoye. A man was killed in an explosion in the graveyard of Gorlovka. On April 22, 2025, seven civilians, including a 14-year-old girl, were injured in the Donetsk People’s Republic.

On April 17, 2025, an Orthodox chapel in the village of Zernovo was destroyed in a Ukrainian howitzer attack. What is Easter truce to Zelensky? It looks like a time of frenzy before the ignominious end of the satanic forces.

On April 18, 2025, two members of self-defence forces were killed by a bomb dropped from a drone. Three civilians were injured in drone attacks, including on civilian vehicles.

There is evidence that Ukrainian forces executed civilians in the town of Krasnogorovka, Donetsk People’s Republic, before its liberation by the Russian military in September 2024.

A criminal case has been initiated after Ukrainian militants killed three members of a woman’s family at the Kolmakov farmstead in the Kursk Region in January 2025.

Russian military investigators have identified the Ukrainian commanders implicated in the large-scale drone attack on Kursk on April 15, 2025. They are commander of the 14th Separate Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Regiment Colonel Dmitry Bondarovich, commander of the 383rd Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Brigade Andrey Dzyany, and his deputy Vitaly Sendzyuk. They are suspected of committing that crime and will be called to account.

Russian courts continue to pass sentences on Ukrainian neo-Nazis and mercenaries for the military and other crimes they have committed.

The court of the Donetsk People’s Republic has passed the verdict of guilty on members of the neo-Nazi Azov detachments, which has been designated as terrorist and extremist in Russia, namely, Vladislav Ruchka, Andrey Yaroshinsky and Dmitry Ignatenko. It has been established that in March 2022 these individuals, acting jointly with Andrey Barsky and Yury Dmitriyev, fired at least 200 howitzer rounds at a granary in Mariupol where civilians were hiding, which they were aware about. One person was wounded as the result. Vladislav Ruchka and Andrey Yaroshinsky have been sentenced to 24 years, and Dmitry Ignatenko to 23 years and nine months in a high security prison. Andrey Barsky and Yury Dmitriyev have previously been sentenced to 24 years and 24 years and six months and put on the international wanted list.

Ukrainian serviceman Alexander Chmil has been detained and eventually sentenced to 16 years in prison for the acts of terrorism he committed in the village of Zhuravli, Kursk Region, on August 27, 2024. He mined roads, hindered the evacuation of civilians, and engaged in acts of public intimidation with the use of weapons.

Ukrainian serviceman Sergey Yeremeyev has been taken prisoner and subsequently sentenced to 15 years in prison for repeatedly firing at civilians and Russian military personnel near the village of Vetreno, Kursk Region, in September 2024, hindering the evacuation of civilians and mining roads.

Four members of the 92nd Separate Assault Brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine – Sergey Safronov, Yaroslav Mazur, Dmitry Ogarenko, and Kirill Komarov – have been sentenced to prison terms ranging from 15 to 16 years for their involvement in terrorist attacks. In August 2024, they illegally crossed into Russian territory in armoured personnel carriers, opened fire on military personnel and civilians, and planted explosives on roadways. All four individuals were apprehended by Russian forces.

In addition, two foreign nationals identified as mercenaries – Joseph Philip McDonald from the United Kingdom and Gia Sagliani from Georgia – have been sentenced in absentia to 14.5 and 14 years in prison, respectively. Both have been placed on an international wanted list.

The criminal case against Oscar Charles Augustus Jenkins, an Australian national accused of serving as a mercenary for the Ukrainian Armed Forces and previously detained in the territory of the Lugansk People’s Republic, has been submitted to court.

Meanwhile, Western support for Kiev continues, both militarily and financially. Details have emerged regarding the list of military equipment Germany plans to provide to the Ukrainian Armed Forces under its recently announced €3 billion aid package; this, despite serious economic challenges within Germany. The planned deliveries reportedly include 300 guided missiles, 100 radar systems, 15 Leopard tanks, 300 reconnaissance UAVs, 25 infantry fighting vehicles, 14 artillery systems, and approximately 100,000 artillery shells.

Sweden is also expanding its military assistance to the Kiev regime, announcing its 19th and largest aid package since February 2022, valued at $1.6 billion. It was recently reported that Sweden has begun transferring its two ASC 890 airborne early warning and control aircraft. According to available information, one of the aircraft has already arrived in Ukraine and conducted test flights over the Lvov Region on April 21–22. This development suggests potential integration with F-16 fighter operations.

Norway has announced plans to increase its military assistance to the Kiev regime by $4.6 billion this year, bringing the total to $7.8 billion. The funds are expected to be directed towards the procurement of air defence systems, artillery shells, unmanned aerial vehicles, as well as the enhancement of Ukraine’s defence industry and naval capabilities. These efforts fall under the “capability coalition” initiative, co-led by Oslo and London.

Meanwhile, the Danish government is preparing its 25th aid package for Ukraine, valued at $960 million, to be distributed over the 2025–2026 period.

Lithuania intends to allocate $216 million for Ukraine’s military needs by the end of the year (who would have thought?). The country’s economy has long been in poor shape – effectively non-existent – so they scraped together what they could.

Meanwhile, the Latvian Ministry of Defence is preparing to deliver several hundred reconnaissance UAVs to Ukraine, with an estimated total value of €20 million.

All of this clearly reflects the desperate determination of the European hawks – if not vultures – to support the Kiev regime in its attempts to shift the situation on the ground in its favour. This is, quite evidently, a fundamentally unrealistic and self-defeating approach. Yet, choosing a different path would mean acknowledging the failure of the ideology of war itself. The prospect of a Russian victory deeply unsettles them. In an effort to prevent such an outcome, they continue to push the Zelensky administration to go on with military operations, regardless of the human cost. Ukrainian citizens are losing their lives, and it appears that not only Oslo, London, Tallinn, Riga, Paris, Rome, and Madrid, but even Ukraine’s own president, show little concern for their suffering.

Meanwhile, Kiev’s diplomatic apparatus has suddenly become more active.

We have taken note of the recent outbursts from the scandal-prone former Ukrainian Ambassador to Germany, who orchestrated his own dismissal from that position. He has now been appointed as Ukraine’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, a reference to Andrey Melnik. Despite his move to New York, he persists in offering practical advice to the forthcoming German government regarding the extent of support to Kiev. In an interview with the German newspaper Die Welt on April 19, Andrey Melnik claimed that the regime of Vladimir Zelensky could sustain a war until 2029, provided the Federal Republic of Germany transfers 30 percent of its military arsenal to the Ukrainian Armed Forces, including long-range Taurus missiles. Melnik further expects Berlin to legally commit to annual allocations of no less than 0.5 percent of its GDP – approximately €86 billion per his estimates – to finance Ukrainian militants. The Permanent Representative also believes that the EU, along with the G7, must allocate around €550 billion over four years for the same purposes, seize Russian assets, and offer security guarantees to the Kiev regime while securing its accession to NATO and the EU. Such rhetoric warrants a medical check-up rather than a platform at the UN. This episode vividly illustrates the prevailing mentality on Bankova Street: they believe that simply intimidating their Western European patrons is sufficient to make funds “flow like a river.” Unsurprisingly, this remains their modus operandi.

Hence, Bankova Street’s escalating demands for increased Western military and financial support to sustain the Kiev regime’s delusional, utopian fantasy of inflicting defeat upon Russia – whether framed as “strategic” or achieved “on the battlefield.” Notably, references to the latter have vanished from their discourse.

Consider developments in the corridors of global diplomacy. A second round of consultations between US representatives and their British, French, and German counterparts, alongside a delegation from Kiev, was slated for April 23, in London to address the Ukrainian crisis. Ostensibly framed as discussions on conflict resolution, Western media reports indicated plans to review a seven-point Washington initiative purportedly aimed at paving the way for a peaceful settlement. However, on the eve of the talks, Vladimir Zelensky – evidently after a “line” – categorically rejected any concessions and reiterated his legal non-recognition of Crimea’s accession to Russia. He theatrically declared a willingness to negotiate solely on terms of a ceasefire, and exclusively under his own conditions.

This schizophrenic approach by the Kiev regime underscores its utter inability to engage in negotiations, its disregard for accountability, and its determination to prolong the bloodshed “until the last Ukrainian,” irrespective of human cost. Why would they count casualties or show restraint? Vladimir Zelensky long ago ceased to view his own citizens as human beings. We witnessed this in Donbass; it has now spread to all regions of Ukraine. As for the funds – these are not his to earn. He did not labour for them. They are handed to him for free, ostensibly in exchange for Ukraine’s natural resources and territories – assets Zelensky himself did nothing to create.

Amid such circumstances, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff had to cancel their participation in the meeting. The foreign ministers of Great Britain, Germany and France followed suit. Essentially, if we call things for what they are, Vladimir Zelensky sabotaged the London round of the consultations, thus compellingly confirming Bankova’s intention to torpedo the nascent peace process at all cost.

They are doing exactly the same thing they did many years ago, when they ridiculed the Minsk agreements; the same thing they did with the 30-day moratoriums on strikes at fuel and energy facilities; when they sabotaged the peace talks in the spring of 2022, or when they abused the Easter truce just now.

Let’s read the Western media. They continue publishing materials on what is actually happening in Ukraine. On April 16, 2025, The Economist concluded that Vladimir Zelensky is increasingly monopolising his power in Ukraine. As they say, it is better late than never. The media outlet stressed that usurper Zelensky and his closest circle are unwilling to share control with either the government or the parliament.

I have a question for the Western journalists who seem to have started to see the light: what were Zelensky’s earlier plans? With US President Joe Biden who curated him before, Zelensky did not negotiate democracy. When Joe Biden flew to Ukraine to chair a government meeting, none of Western journalists questioned what was happening with democracy, the rule of law and what kind of example American liberal Democrats were showing to their sponsees on Bankova Street, or what they were teaching them. They did not ask if that was the beginning of the power grab, of the suppression of people’s will and negligence towards any form of legitimacy. No. The Western journalists gave a standing ovation. They enjoyed it. It was a wonderful and fun picture. Previously, they had similarly enjoyed the power grab during the Maidan protests, when protesters broke into government buildings and presidential offices, when they crushed municipalities, regional bodies of authority. Those people similarly received money from the West to commit their lawless deeds and bring about an anti-constitutional coup.

Now Western journalists are starting to see and talk about the fact that Vladimir Zelensky is usurping power in Ukraine. How about they give an example of at least one democratic act there? How about they show – if they can find it – at least one example of the laws being upheld and the rule of law being maintained under the capable guidance of the Western curators.

Now, Western media stress that those who showed excessive independence, enjoyed great support from the population or had direct access to Western leaders, were dismissed or relieved of their duties by Zelensky and his closest circle.

What happened in the past? A lawfully elected President of Ukraine (remember the first Maidan?) was declared illegitimate after the second round. The third round was announced for the right candidate to win – Viktor Yushchenko. Remember how during the second Maidan that became the last one for the modern Ukraine within its borders after receiving independence in the 1990s, the crowd funded by the West booed, whistled and demanded a punishment for the lawfully elected president, for the legitimate power and the law enforcers who tried to stop the havoc without weapons. Where were Western journalists then?

Meanwhile, with his popularity quickly fading away, Zelensky is making all kinds of erratic moves in an effort to keep the power he has usurped and to mop up the political field of potential competitors. Bankovaya Street plans to push through the Verkhovnaya Rada a draft law limiting the mayors’ terms of office to two terms, which may lead to longtime mayors of Kiev, Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk, and other major cities stepping down. This is how the Zelensky regime is gradually establishing total control over local authorities and getting ready for possible political turbulence.

As a reminder for those in Ukraine who are still able to use their brains, remember the Ukrainian negotiators in the spring of 2022? What happened to them? Some of them were shot and killed. So, stop now and think what will happen to you.

Bankovaya deciding to extend martial law and to mobilise more manpower in Ukraine until August 6 should be viewed through the lens of the regime trying to preserve itself.

In order to add fuel to this Russophobic fire, Vladimir Zelensky announced more sanctions on 18 legal entities and 130 individuals from Russia. Who needs that? How will it help the Ukrainian citizens overcome their problems? It won’t. The point is to keep things afloat and to go through the motions. Who is on this list? Who is declared an enemy of the Ukrainian people? I will tell you at the end who should have been included on that list. Now, I will go over the names of the people who are there for reasons that are absolutely unknown.

For example, Rossiya 1 television channel correspondent Alexander Sladkov, TV presenters Arina Sharapova and Andrey Norkin, and chief editor of the Ukraina.ru website Iskander Khisamov. Among the legal entities, there are the Other Ukraine International Civic Movement and Tavria TV and Radio Company.

Vladimir Zelensky thought that wasn’t enough. On April 18, he imposed restrictions on 20 more well-known figures of national culture and sports, including circus artist and cat trainer Yury Kuklachev, pop singers Yaroslav Dronov (Shaman), Nikolai Rastorguyev, Alexander Rozenbaum, Garik (Igor) Sukachyov, Alexander Pankratov-Cherny, Yevgeny Mironov, Irina Apeksimova, Oskar Kuchera, Vitaly Gogunsky, Nikita Dzhigurda, head of the Vaganova Academy of Russian Ballet Nikolai Tsiskaridze, and world ballet star Sergey Polunin, as well as rappers and athletes (fencers, gymnasts, and boxers).

On the same day, Zelensky imposed sanctions on 39 Russian researchers and businessmen, since these people make everyone’s life on Bankovaya Street unbearable. Who should have been at the top of the list of those who really threaten the survival of the people of Ukraine? It should’ve been Zelensky, who truly annihilates the citizens of Ukraine.

Commenting on the sanctions, Alexander Rosenbaum called them a case of “aggravated allergy to everything Russian.” Bankovaya is clearly becoming uncomfortable with the futility of their own efforts to ban the Russian language and culture, and their desire to destroy the Russian world. They are trying hard, but they just can’t. People keep speaking Russian, singing songs and watching programming in Russian, and reading books in Russian, too. People on Bankovaya are scared by the fact that the Ukrainians are speaking more and more Russian, listening to Russian music, singing our songs, and watching movies made in Russia. What are they afraid of on Bankovaya? Are they afraid that people will start seeing things for what they are? You, Zelensky, are killing them there. Make up your mind already. Are you afraid that people will start using their brains, or that you will have no more people left, because you are condemning them to unavoidable death?

In the year that marks the 80th anniversary of the Great Victory, the Zelensky junta is stepping up its efforts to combat the monuments to heroes of the Great Patriotic War. The desperate war on monuments continues unabated.

The destruction of the Marsovo Field mass grave of the Soviet soldiers who fell during the liberation of Lvov from the Nazi invaders in July 1944 was reported on April 23. More than 1,500 Red Army soldiers and officers were buried there. I think that was the last hill of immorality taken by the regime. What else can top that?

Officially, the Lvov authorities called these sacrilegious actions “exhumation work,” which they decided to carry out with the help of an excavator and other heavy-duty equipment. One can sense the hand of Bandera. They were unable to win on the battlefield and came up with a cowardly way to take revenge on our soldiers after they died. You will pay for that.

The above facts once again confirm the relevance of the special military operation to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine and to eliminate threats emanating from its territory. As has been stated by the leadership of our country, all its goals will definitely be achieved.

back to top

 

Double standards of the UN Secretariat in the context of the Ukrainian crisis

 

To ascertain the true state of affairs and to organise the work of the United Nations, its Secretariat must function effectively. It is obliged to remain impartial, refrain from taking sides in any conflict, and fulfil its duties. What do these entail? Strict adherence to the UN Charter and the execution of its mandated responsibilities: facilitating the coordination of member states’ activities within the UN framework; ensuring the proper functioning of relevant UN institutions and the Secretariat; and discharging its prescribed tasks honestly, consistently, and systematically while reporting on progress.

Regrettably, the UN Secretariat has pursued a policy of double standards regarding Ukrainian events since the anti-constitutional coup in Kiev in 2014. We heard no criticism of the Maidan authorities from the Organisation’s representatives during the eight-year war waged by the Kiev regime against its own citizens in the eastern regions of what was then Ukraine. Nor did UN officials urge Kiev to engage in direct dialogue with Donbass, as mandated by UN Security Council Resolution 2202, which endorsed the Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements. The Secretariat made no effort to hold parties accountable for implementing these agreements or to acknowledge their blatant violation by certain countries – primarily by the Kiev regime and its patrons.

Following the launch of the special military operation in February 2022, the UN’s stance on the Ukrainian dossier grew even more biased. It became routine for the Organisation’s representatives to systematically downplay the Kiev regime’s egregious breaches of fundamental international humanitarian law. These include using civilians as human shields; deploying military hardware and fortifying firing positions in residential areas; torturing prisoners of war and civilians; and executing non-combatants.

On rare occasions when data could not be concealed or reinterpreted, and when it indicated a degree of the AFU’s “responsibility” in violating international humanitarian law, the UN Secretariat would then conveniently recall the need to feign impartiality, avoiding direct terminology. Periodically, it issues appeals for restraint to “all parties to the conflict” – such as when infants are perishing. It calls for “independent investigations” and holding perpetrators accountable, while reiterating that it lacks precise information regarding which side conducted the shelling. Yet Russia is routinely accused of offences it did not commit. Curiously, in such instances, the Secretariat finds itself amply supplied with data, “facts,” and emotive rhetoric.

A similar pattern was observed following the staged incident in Bucha, the tragic events at Kramatorsk railway station in April 2022, the evacuation of civilians from the Azovstal territory in May 2022, the terrorist attack on the Crimean Bridge in October 2022, the inhumane crimes committed by the Kiev clique against civilians in the Kursk Region during the AFU’s incursion in August 2024, and the targeted killings of Russian journalists discharging their professional duties both on the frontlines and within Russia. The UN Secretariat made no effort to acknowledge these atrocities. It disregarded the Bucha fabrication. On the contrary, it propagated the narrative of Russia’s blanket culpability. Yet when the Kiev regime – which brazenly claimed responsibility – carried out terrorist acts on the Crimean Bridge, resulting in the deaths of civilians, the UN Secretariat again “noticed” nothing.

The litany of the Kiev regime’s outrages, met with inadequate reaction from international officials at the UN Secretariat, could be extended almost indefinitely.

Experience shows that the Secretariat’s representatives eagerly promote information fakes, planted by Kiev and its Western sponsors, and join in anti-Russia information campaigns. We observe with alarming regularity the Russian side being charged with allegedly deliberate strikes at Ukraine’s civilian and energy infrastructure. The latest instance was a statement by Stephane Dujarric, Spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General, regarding developments in Sumy in April, which contained insinuations and fabrications of an alleged series of assaults on Ukrainian cities “resulting in civilian casualties and large-scale destruction.”  

The UN staff is equally lacking in political understanding of the Ukraine crisis. Thus, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres tarnished his reputation with a series of biased remarks regarding the expression of will by residents of the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, as well as the Donetsk and Lugansk people’s republics. According to Antonio Guterres, “Russia's plan to annex four occupied regions in Ukraine would be an illegal move, a violation of international law, and should be condemned.”  However, this reflects a will of the long-suffering people who remember what was done to their grandfathers and great-grandfathers on that land; the people who suffered from provocateurs and Bandera followers after WWII and who are now fighting for their survival against Nazism among attempts to destroy those who have both memory and conscience.

Antonio Guterres’s and other high-ranking UN officials’ selective quoting of the UN Charter is bewildering, to put it mildly. They seem to be engaged in a kind of verbal acrobatics. Current UN officials have forgotten that their function is to be guardians of the principles enshrined in the Charter in their entirety, totality and interconnection. The principle of territorial integrity, which the UN staff keeps overemphasising, is applicable, under the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law only to the states conducting themselves in compliance with the principle of equal rights and self-determination and thus possessed of a government   representing the whole people belonging to the territory. Obviously, the Kiev regime, which came to power through a coup d’etat, does not meet these criteria. Both Vladimir Zelensky and his predecessors are laughing at the idea that they should represent the entire population of Ukraine and ensure its linguistic, legal and other rights. Yet it is not up to them to decide who can speak their native tongue and who is not allowed to.

In light of the new realities surrounding the Ukraine crisis, the UN staff timidly expresses their support for the Russia-US dialogue aimed at resolving it, yet they neither hear nor see Vladimir Zelensky deriding ceasefire or moratorium proposals. The Secretariat has once again issued statements indicating its readiness to facilitate potential future talks between Moscow and Kiev, should both parties request it. What if Zelensky continues to behave as he has? Will the UN Secretariat then withdraw its support for the peace process and revert to the Westerners’ rhetoric of “the battlefield?” Regrettably, the UN Secretariat staff have been consistently selective in applying the principle of territorial integrity, in particular, with regard to Ukraine, as they have done in recent years. They repeatedly overlook the fact that all of this must be cited and applied in its entirety and interconnectedness with ensuring the rights of the people residing in that territory. 

We believe it is obvious that the actions of UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and his subordinates are entirely at odds with Article 100 of the UN Charter. which requires impartiality from its staff and demands that they “refrain from any action which might reflect on their position as international officials responsible only to the Organisation.” The UN Secretary-Generals actions and statements also contradict Article 97 of the UN Charter, which designates him as “the chief administrative officer of the Organisation.” These functions do not empower the head of the UN Secretariat to make biased political statements in the name of the Organisation or to interpret the provisions of the Charter and UNGA documents.

Time and again, Antonio Guterres and his staff not only overstep their authority but effectively join the anti-Russia front. It is regrettable that UN officials prefer to act as carriers of the Western propaganda and exert pressure on member states. They should adhere to the letter and spirit of the UN Charter. In this context, it would be incongruous to discuss potential mediation in the Ukraine crisis by the UN Secretariat.

back to top

 

NATO capacity building programme

 

We have just now talked about Western support. It is mostly provided by NATO countries because that is where the logic and plan for its implementation, the logic of aggression, war and manslaughter was hatched.

The current activities of the North Atlantic Alliance are aimed at confronting Russia and spreading the bloc’s influence to the regions where no NATO member states are situated. This is being done to stir up trouble there.

NATO has actually revived the Cold War ideology and is building up its military presence on the eastern and western flanks. It is creating and expanding the relevant infrastructure near our borders.

The focus is on preparing for repelling the “Russian threat.” There are plans for the military development of the member states’ territories that border Russia, including preparations for hostilities and the establishment of forward-based depots of weapons and military equipment, as well as other infrastructure for the rapid deployment of coalition forces. They are not keeping this secret. These are not intelligence data but the action plans which they are discussing publicly.

Tactical NATO groups are being deployed in the member states that border Russia. Troops and equipment are being dispatched from NATO countries to the “eastern flank.” Home stations are being created for the Western groups of forces near our borders in the Baltic and Black Sea regions. The United States is building up its military presence in Europe. There are over 100,000 US military personnel and specialists there, including the 20,000 who have additionally been deployed there since 2022.

The bloc is improving its integrated air and missile defence. It has announced its plans for a “temporary” deployment of US intermediate- and shorter-range missiles in Germany in 2026, including advanced hypersonic systems. The bloc has reinforced its ballistic missile defence capability: the US Aegis Ashore Missile Defence System (AAMDS) in Redzikowo, Poland, reached operational readiness in the summer of 2024, complementing similar facilities in Spain, Romania and Türkiye.

During a “regional” summit held on January 14, 2025, NATO announced the launch of its new mission, the Baltic Sentry, allegedly aimed at protecting critical infrastructure. At the same time, NATO will control navigation in the Baltic Sea, focusing on the so-called “shadow fleet” Russia is allegedly using.

The Alliance is building up its military presence in the hope of achieving military superiority in the Arctic. There are about 50 infrastructure facilities of the United States, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Iceland in the region, including 22 airfields and 23 deployment stations. The bloc is modernising them, mapping out troop and equipment redeployment routes, and building forward-based depots of weapons and equipment in Northern Europe.

NATO is working to adapt the territory of its new members, Finland and Sweden, to its military needs and is holding joint military events there. It is considering the possibility of creating a forward base of NATO’s multinational ground forces and other coalition infrastructure in Finland, a country with which we peacefully cooperated during the past decades. We had many joint plans with it, from major interstate projects to border cooperation. Not any longer. NATO has poisoned that potentially peaceful country and is encouraging Russophobia and pouring weapons into it.

In July 2024, Canada, the United States and Finland signed the Icebreaker Collaboration Effort (ICE) Pact on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Washington. The pact is aimed at deepening their cooperation in the Arctic.

NATO is improving its comprehensive surveillance capabilities in the region, with a focus on our Northern Fleet’s bases. The bloc is planning to create a network of eight radars across Norway; the first of them is to become operational in 2025.

NATO is increasing the scale and number of the bloc’s and member states’ national military exercises. Their scenarios include both defensive and offensive operations and openly designate Russia as the enemy. In 2024, the bloc members conducted over 1,000 training activities. The Steadfast Defender 2024 multidomain exercise held across Europe from January to June 2024 was the largest military exercise since the Cold War. The exercise was conducted under a single plan (confrontation with an equally strong opponent on the “Eastern flank,” including Russia), included live firing and bombing exercises, involved over 90,000 troops, and was held in the land, sea and air domains of the majority of European NATO members. They also trained to redeploy troops from the United States and across Europe towards the Russian border.

The bloc does not plan to scale down its military training in 2025. It has already held large exercises in Bulgaria and Romania (January 13-February 26), Norway (February 4-8), and the Mediterranean (March 3-14). Plans include exercises in the Baltics and Poland (April-June) and in the Arctic (April 28-May 9) and provide for interoperability training in various operating domains and troop redeployment. The scenarios of the NATO countries’ numerous national and multinational exercises in Europe usually focus on potential confrontation with Russia.

NATO has not created any added value in terms of European stability and security. It’s exactly the other way round. Its geopolitical eastward expansion has resulted in a military conflict and the erosion of European security architecture. NATO’s fixation on confrontation with Russia and accelerated military build-up are threatening the security of Russia and the rest of the world.

The situation in Ukraine has been provoked by the West and has led to tectonic shifts in the global economy, logistics, and food and information security. The concerned countries have not formulated an appropriate response to the scheme created by the Biden administration and implemented by the Kiev regime.  

There is a growing risk of incidents in Western Europe, which might develop into a direct military conflict with the most tragic consequences for Europe and the world. Meanwhile, they are rapidly rewriting history and inciting a rapid Nazi and neo-Nazi ideology. It looks like the evil genie is being deliberately let out of the bottle to complete the brainwashing of people in the EU and NATO countries. NATO’s militarisation plans and the creation of new dividing lines won’t strengthen European security but will instead create huge risks.

All this had to do with the never-ending efforts of the NATO countries’ media and television to picture Russia as the aggressor. I have provided hard facts showing who is really engaged in militarisation for aggressive, destructive and immoral purposes.

back to top

 

Statements about Russia by Finland’s leaders

 

Russia has spent decades seeking to promote mutual respect and pragmatic cooperation in its relations with Finland. This included political dialogue, trade, cultural exchanges, joint energy and logistics projects, millions of border crossings, and so many marriages and families created over all these years. All this served as an ironclad foundation for our neighbourly relations. Or so it seemed. It could seem that our Finish colleagues appreciated this approach. Our relations may have had their ups and downs in the past, but finally we had everything in place for ensuring lasting peace, achieving understanding and promoting cooperation. Let me recall the way former President Sauli Niinistö praised Russia for the “direct and clear dialogue.” He also said that our relations were free from any problems. There were certainly no issues on our behalf.

However, with the start of the special military operation, Helsinki immediately turned into a mouthpiece for anti-Russia, Russophobic hysteria, despite the fact that, as Helsinki knows it all too well, the special military operation was a response to the Western-inspired project to exterminate Russians and Russian speakers on Ukrainian territory. All of a sudden, Mr Niinistö switched from talking about mutually beneficial cooperation to perorating about war crimes, aggression and lost trust. It turned out that all the talk about our neighbourly relations was akin to Finnish elites forcing a polite smile and pretending to act decently. They were merely putting up with what they now viewed as a dangerous neighbour, for geographical reasons.

Finland’s new President, Alexander Stubb, is an outspoken Atlanticist. He opted for continuing this absurd show by threatening to support Ukraine until it achieves victory. This kind of narrative is hard to counter. I think that what he meant is that Finland would support Ukraine until Russia’s victory, which means until there are no Ukrainians left. However, he could not say it as it is. Instead, he extolled Finnish so-called volunteers heading to fight against Russia. Then, as if out of nowhere, he said that people in Finland had to be morally prepared to rebuild relations with Moscow. It could be that the rounds of golf Alexander Stubb played at Mar-a-Lago did have a positive effect on his position.

In an April 16, 2025, interview with Suomen Kuvalehti, a Finnish general interest magazine, Alexander Stubb once again changed his tack when journalists asked him to clarify Helsinki’s position on its relations with Moscow. He said that rebuilding relations with Russia would become possible only after achieving peace in Ukraine.

It is high time that they start quoting Vladimir Zelensky who has been telling them that he had no intention to build any kind of peace, does not need anything of this sort and has no plans to launch any political process. But Alexander Stubb refrained from telling all this to the Finnish journalist and the audience in Finland. In addition to this, he noted that while this could happen, there had to be an understanding that our bilateral relations would never be the same again. He went on to accuse our country of having imperialism as part of its DNA. Turns out, Mr Stubb is also an expert in genetics. If this is not the case, he must recall that those who used to talk about genetics and racial supremacy in Western Europe were not educated in this subject and ended their lives badly.

He is now saying that it would take a long time before the people of Finland can once again trust Moscow. Does this mean that the President of Finland does not see any future for the country’s relations with Russia, so much so that he even cast doubt on whether bilateral economic cooperation made any sense? And this was not due to EU sanctions, but because Russia has a relatively small economy. At this point, I would like Mr Stubb to describe Baltic countries in terms of the size of their economies, as well as bring us the latest news from Germany’s and France’s economic frontlines. What about Portugal’s economy?

Where’s the logic, Mr Stubb? You keep switching between speaking from a position of strength and saying that the time has come to rebuild our ties, only to add that our relations would never be the same again. This is not politics but a populist hodgepodge. He fears his own voters. Mr Stubb followed in his predecessors’ footsteps by confusing, if not misleading, the people of Finland.

The actions by Finland’s senior government officials regarding Russia lack consistency and present a paradox, which is fraught with inevitable consequences. It is abundantly clear that Finland lost much more than it gained from shattering mutually beneficial cooperation with our country at the behest of the Finnish authorities. In fact, did Finland get anything other than challenges from its actions?

Finland’s accession to NATO has hardly improved its security, while facing a higher financial burden resulting from the need to increase military spending. There are clear signs of an economic crisis caused by EU’s insane and suicidal sanctions policy. The country is sinking into a military hysteria.

The Finnish authorities disrupted economic ties with Russia and pressured Finnish companies to withdraw from the Russian market. These companies continue piling up losses in the billions. People from our two countries cannot visit their families and friends on the other side of the border. These are just a few points from the ugly ledger listing the results of the anti-Russia policy by present-day Finnish authorities. And the list goes on.

What makes this situation ironic is that having destroyed the years-old cooperation framework, the Finnish authorities went on to recognise that there was little left of the past relations. I suggest that they keep talking and tell us who did it and why. However, instead of learning from their own mistakes, they continue to blame Russia. What a convenient posture, and it probably pays well too.

This begs a question: Who stands to benefit from turning Finland into an outpost of confrontation, especially considering what NATO has been doing recently? The answer is quite obvious. Those who have grown used to benefiting from conflicts without getting involved. Those who provoke these conflicts are the ones who benefit from them. I am referring to those sticking to this sickly and aggressive logic, those who have relied on the ideology of supremacy despite all the missteps of the past and the lessons of history.

Russia has always been ready to engage in dialogue and has proven this time and again by acting accordingly. However, you need to be sincere to engage in dialogue instead of relying on double standards, trickery and provocations. So far, there is only one thing Finland’s leadership has demonstrated. It showed that it is totally incapable and helpless when it comes to standing up for its national interests. Ordinary people in Finland will have to foot the bill – what a pity.

back to top

 

New Facts Concerning the Crimes of Japanese militarism

 

We regularly provide updates during our briefings regarding the crimes associated with this shameful chapter of world history.

This year, as we celebrate the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War, we wish to share new information concerning crimes committed by Japanese militarists during World War II – crimes which, as we have repeatedly emphasised, many believe should carry no statute of limitations. Legal proceedings aimed at bringing all perpetrators to justice are still underway.

The Prosecutor-General’s Office of the Russian Federation has officially announced rulings issued in December 2024 and January 2025 overturning previous decisions to rehabilitate 10 Japanese citizens:  Iwasaki, Takakuwa, Kohama, Tsuri, Nakata, Yamazaki, Matsuhashi, Kawamura, Tojo and Tamaoki. These individuals were charged with complicity in subversive and espionage activities, as well as committing felonies. 

Following a review of the original court decisions by cassation and supervisory authorities, it was determined that these individuals are not eligible for rehabilitation. Their guilt has been fully established.

back to top

 

Humanitarian aid to Myanmar  

 

As you know, a powerful 7.7-magnitude earthquake has ripped through the Republic of the Union of Myanmar. It damaged cities and became the most powerful earthquake in the past 95 years, causing large-scale damage to infrastructure and social facilities, primarily in the Sagaing Administrative Region and the cities of Mandalay and Naypyidaw.

According to official reports, the earthquake impacted 5,106 people in Myanmar; over 3,700 were killed and 129 remain missing. The Russian Embassy in Yangon has confirmed the death of one Russian national in Mandalay. He had been working as a teacher at a local secondary school.

Acting on the instructions from President of Russia Vladimir Putin, and as part of the humanitarian response to assist the friendly people of Myanmar, five Russian Emergencies Ministry’s Il-76 aircraft arrived in the country on March 29 and March 31, delivering essential equipment for search and rescue operations. Among the countries that deployed rescue teams, the Russian contingent, comprising 264 personnel, was the largest. It included specialists from the State Central Airmobile Rescue Team (Centrospas), the Leader High-Risk Operations Centre, canine teams, anaesthesiologists, and psychologists.

A temporary hospital was set up in Mandalay. Additional medical professionals also arrived, including a team from the Emergency Paediatric Surgery and Traumatology Clinic headed by Dr Leonid Roshal and four doctors from the Republic of Kalmykia.

In total, the Russian Emergencies Ministry conducted 10 flights to Myanmar, delivering 157.5 tonnes of humanitarian aid, including tents, mobile power stations, food supplies and essential goods.

Medical personnel from Centrospas successfully resuscitated two individuals who were admitted to the airmobile hospital in cardiac arrest. Russian specialists also rescued one survivor from beneath the rubble and recovered the bodies of 37 victims. Search operations covered an area of 130,000 square metres. The field hospital provided medical care to 508 people, including 94 children, and carried out 68 surgical procedures of varying complexity.

Chairman of the State Administration Council and Prime Minister of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar Min Aung Hlaing visited the Russian rescuers in Mandalay and expressed his gratitude for their contribution to the earthquake response efforts.

The work of the Russian search-and-rescue units was highly praised by international organisations, including the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA).

back to top

 

International Day of Multilateralism and Diplomacy for Peace

 

On April 24, the world community celebrates International Day of Multilateralism and Diplomacy for Peace, established under UN General Assembly Resolution 73/127 of December 12, 2018, submitted by Venezuela.

This day is to remind everyone of the importance of collective state efforts to solve global problems, prevent conflicts, and strengthen peace. Modern challenges include international terrorism and extremism, drug trafficking, organised crime, cyber threats and information wars, climate change and new pandemics.  Members of the international community can only cope with these challenges that undermine international stability by coordinating their actions and forging a new unity based on an awareness of their common responsibility for the destiny of the current and future generations.  

The UN plays a special role in these efforts. Since its inception, the United Nations has been a unique and currently indispensable mechanism for interaction between states. Due to its universal legitimacy (which, regrettably, is being undermined by the Western minority, but holds its ground nevertheless), exceptional competence, and maximal representativeness, the UN is capable of making a decisive contribution to maintaining international peace and security, promoting human rights, and incentivising progressive socioeconomic development.    

The UN Charter is of key importance for tapping the full potential of the United Nations. This document is justly regarded as the cornerstone of the contemporary world order (which the world minority is attempting to destroy) and a generally recognised code of conduct for all states. Its chartered goals and principles are supposed to ensure a peaceful and harmonious coexistence. The UN Charter’s postulates are an integral system and should be strictly observed in their entirety, totality and interconnection.

As is to be regretted, the UN-centric system of international relations has been in crisis lately. The reason is that certain Western countries, taking on faith their own exceptionalism and infallibility, have opted for unilateralism in their actions.  They increasingly often take advantage of their numerical superiority at the UN Security Council to push through decisions they favour. At the UN General Assembly, they use dirty tactics to mobilise support for their destructive initiatives. They have actually usurped the UN Secretariat (we focused on this earlier today), turning it into a vehicle of the collective West’s interests that are the interests of the world minority.

An even more outrageous concept of “rules-based world order” imposed on everyone by the Westerners is aimed at revising the international legal architecture and evolving alternative decision-making mechanisms in circumvention of the UN.  

As a responsible member of the international community, Russia works consistently to strengthen multilateralism, primarily by restoring the UN’s prestige and central coordinating role in world affairs.

The Group of Friends in Defence of the UN Charter is increasingly important in the context of collective efforts to this effect. It has proved its effectiveness as it promotes the interests of the Global Majority and counteracts the Western narratives.

We call on all countries to practice multilateralism as an inalienable element of a firm and fair world order and develop collaboration based on the principles of equality and respect for the UN Charter.

back to top

 

80th anniversary of the meeting of Soviet and American troops on the Elbe

 

April 25 will mark the 80th anniversary of the legendary meeting of Soviet and American soldiers at the Elbe River.

It became one of the most important symbols of the defeat of Nazi Germany by the Allies. On that day, which marked the culminating point of the military alliance between our country and the United States in World War II, the soldiers of the two armies shook hands on a damaged bridge near Torgau.

The Spirit of the Elbe is not just a figure of speech, but almost a proper name. It serves as a powerful example of how Russia and the United States can set aside their differences, build trust and work together on achieving a shared and noble goal.

Remembering these lessons of history has special importance today, when attempts to rewrite history and, using Biden’s team’s terminology, to cancel all things Russian, have become a dominant trend in certain countries of the collective West, a global minority. It is impossible to edit out the feat of the Soviet liberator soldiers. We can never forget about the shared aspirations that united our people and Americans in those years of terrible struggles and heavy losses. We remember it now and we always will.

In this context, it is heartening to see some of the good traditions restored. The current US authorities have approved a commemorative ceremony that the Russian Embassy in Washington is going to hold on April 25 in honour of Elbe Day at the memorial plaque at Arlington Cemetery.

Other events in the context of celebrating the 80th anniversary of Victory are being discussed with American veterans. We see this as a positive change from the previous US administration. Over the past three years, the Biden administration imposed unmotivated bans on such meetings and celebrations.

In addition, I would like to highlight the Encounter at the Elbe exhibition, which opened on April 23 in the Historical Truth room, the main exhibition building of the Victory Museum in Moscow. The display includes world-famous photographs, such as the one depicting 2nd Lieutenant William Robertson, commander of a US Army reconnaissance squad, and Lieutenant Alexander Silvashko, platoon commander of the 173rd Rifle Regiment.

In addition, visitors will see a unique map, Your War, presented by an American Guards officer to Petty Officer A. Tsygankov, with the charted path of the allies in Europe towards each other.

Other exhibits include awards, documents, drawings, mutual gifts and souvenirs, weapons, and military uniforms of Soviet and American officers, which authentically recreate the images of the allies, returning us to the minutes of sincere joy the soldiers felt when the fronts met and the end of the war in Europe became imminent.

The exhibition is complemented by video clips filmed by frontline reporters who witnessed these encounters.

The exhibition will run until May 18. We invite everyone to visit it.

back to top

 

Volunteer initiative to produce audio guides for concentration camp museums

 

In 2024, during our meetings, we discussed a school-based volunteer project focused on creating an audio guide for the Ravensbrück Concentration Camp Memorial in Germany. We are pleased to share that this initiative is still going strong. Congratulations to the dedicated team on yet another achievement.

A total of 70 school students, university students, and German language teachers from 11 Russian cities, three universities, and 13 schools contributed to the translation and narration of a documentary about the Dachau concentration camp, as well as an audio guide for the Salaspils Memorial in Latvia. Participants came from regions and cities across Russia, including the Amur and Orenburg regions, Yekaterinburg, Yelets, Lugansk, Moscow, Penza, St Petersburg, Tambov, Tyumen, and Yaroslavl.

At one point, project leader Yelena Serpionova highlighted the absence of a Russian translation for the documentary shown at the Dachau museum.

It is important to remember that Dachau, specifically the SS shooting range at Hebertshausen, was the site of the brutal execution of more than 4,000 Soviet prisoners of war. In 1944, 92 Red Army soldiers – members of the camp resistance and the Brotherly Union of Prisoners of War – were also executed at Dachau by firing squad. This underground union organised resistance across several concentration camps, carried out clandestine operations, and worked to save fellow prisoners.

As part of the project, participants translated into Russian and recorded a voiceover for the documentary about the Dachau concentration camp. The film is now available on a dedicated website, where volunteers have been sharing the outcomes of their work for the second consecutive year.

In the second phase of the initiative, schoolchildren and teachers translated and recorded an audio guide for the Salaspils Concentration Camp Memorial in three languages: Russian, English, and German.

The script for the Salaspils Memorial audio guide was based on the research of historian Vladimir Bogov, who dedicated a decade to studying the Nazi crimes committed at the Salaspils concentration camp. It is important to emphasise that Salaspils was indeed a concentration camp, not a “labour camp” as it is referred to by NATO representatives.

For many years, Vladimir Bogov actively challenged the narrative of “Soviet occupation” promoted by Latvian authorities, a narrative that has been deliberately embedded in public discourse. After his passing, his widow, Maria Bogova, director of the True History Foundation, compiled the tour script and entrusted it to the schoolchildren and teachers for translation and recording. The audio guide also includes the historian’s critical commentary on the current exhibition at the Salaspils memorial.

We extend our sincere thanks to everyone who has contributed to these projects: schoolchildren, students, teachers, sound engineers, historians, and translators. We hope your work continues to grow, and please know that you will always have our support in every possible way.

back to top

 

Victory Dictation 2025

 

On April 25, the international patriotic event Victory Dictation will take place around the world under the motto Know to Remember. This historical dictation focuses on key events of the Great Patriotic War.

As in previous years, Victory Dictation will be held at regional venues across Russia and internationally, and will also be accessible online at диктантпобеды.рф. If you are unable to participate on April 25, there is no need to worry – the dictation will remain available on the website and can be taken at a later time.

A series of online practice tests is now available to help participants prepare for Victory Dictation. These tests offer a great opportunity to review and refresh your knowledge of the key events of the Great Patriotic War.

All questions have been carefully developed by expert historians from the Russian Historical Society. Each test focuses on a specific theme, covering important dates, legendary commanders, major military operations, and other pivotal moments of the war.

We invite everyone to take part and put their knowledge to the test.

back to top

 

50th anniversary of the liberation of South Vietnam

 

On April 30, the people of Vietnam and their friends, including Russia, will mark the 50th anniversary of the Liberation of the South and National Reunification.

When Vietnam declared independence in September 1945, France refused to recognise it and launched a war, which lasted until its defeat in 1954. Soon after that, the United States decided to try its luck in Vietnam, which led to the longest and bloodiest armed conflict after WWII.

The Americans dropped a vast amount of bombs on recalcitrant Vietnam, using napalm and Agent Orange. Many citizens of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam feel the consequences of exposure to that chemical herbicide and defoliant to this day.

Despite the US huge military might, the heroic Vietnamese people did not surrender but came out victorious, defending their right to sovereignty, independent development and identity.

We have always been proud that our country made a substantial contribution to that victory and to rebuilding Vietnam’s economy after the war.

We cordially congratulate our Vietnamese friends on this landmark event. We sincerely rejoice in their impressive economic and social achievements, as well as in their growing prestige on the international stage. We are committed to continuing our mutually beneficial cooperation in many spheres.

back to top

 

110th anniversary of Armenian genocide in the Ottoman Empire

 

April 24 marks the 110th anniversary of Armenian genocide in the Ottoman Empire, one of the most tragic events of the first half of the 20th century.

Russia has always commiserated with the fraternal Armenian people on their tragedy. According to historical evidence, the Caucasus Army of the Russian Empire was instructed by Nicholas II in 1915 to open the Russian-Türkish border, which helped save at least 350,000 Armenians.

Moscow’s stance on those developments is an established fact. It is consistent and based on the traditions of humanism. Acting at the initiative of Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Sazonov in 1915, the leading members of the international community qualified the events are a crime against humanity.

Post-Soviet Russia was one of the first countries to recognise the genocide of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. In 1995 and 2005, the State Duma adopted resolutions condemning the genocide of Armenians in 1915-1922.

During his visit to Armenia in 2015, President Vladimir Putin took part in a memorial ceremony for the victims of Armenian genocide and expressed his heartfelt condolences to the Armenian people.

The commemorative events traditionally held in many Russian cities, including Moscow, are not only attended by representatives of the large Armenian diaspora but also people of other nationalities, who have a common desire to preserve the memory of those tragic events and to prevent the attempts to bury the past for populist considerations.

back to top

 

Gromyko Young CIS Foreign Affairs Experts Competition

 

The Gromyko Association for Foreign Policy Studies, acting together with the Foreign Ministry’s MGIMO University, the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and the Academy of Public Administration under the President of Belarus, is accepting applications for the Gromyko Young CIS Foreign Affairs Experts Competition 2025.

The competition is open for original unpublished scientific articles and analytical briefs, written independently by one or several authors aged up to 40 years, on a broad range of current international issues, including geopolitical processes, the outlook for integration in the post-Soviet space, international security challenges, the role of the UN, the preservation of historical memory and the struggle against the falsification of history.

The project was launched in 2018 with support from the Interstate Fund for Humanitarian Cooperation of the CIS Member States and has to date brought together about 3,000 young foreign policy experts from 11 countries.

This year, the selection stage will last until May 16. The forum of the competition finalists will be held on July 23 and 24 at the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences and MGIMO University. The events include the presentation of political reports by young researchers and the awards ceremony for the winners.

The applications, entry forms and contest entries will be accepted online on the official website of the competition until May 16, 2025.

back to top

 

10th Dobrovidenie 2025 International Folk Song Festival

 

On May 8-13, Moscow will be hosting the anniversary Dobrovidenie 2025 International Folk Song Festival. Just like tens of thousands of other events, it will focus on marking 80 years of Victory in the Great Patriotic war.

Dobrovidenie is a one-of-a-kind cultural project, established in May 2014 by Hero of the Soviet Union and cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova, People’s Artist of the USSR and Hero of Labour of Russia Iosif Kobzon, and Oleg Nilov, who is a member of the State Duma. The festival aims to preserve and promote folk singing, while also spreading national traditions and the genuine spiritual and moral values.

More and more outstanding and remarkable bands and solo performers specialising in folk singing and dancing have been joining this festival over the recent years.

Dobrovidenie’s geography covers all Russian regions, former Soviet republics and other countries, including China, India, Serbia and Moldova, helping forge stronger cultural bonds while steering clear of all momentary considerations. This tradition has been developing and taking root since 2014.

This year, the Dobrovidenie festival will bring together over a thousand talented performers from Russia and abroad, with Moscow’s best venues hosting their performances. The State Kremlin Palace will serve as the festival’s main platform by staging concerts by the State Academic Kuban Cossack Choir, the State Academic Omsk Russian Folk Choir, and the Pyatnitsky Academic Russian Folk Choir.

The festival will start with the presentation of the Dobrovidenie 2025 national folk art award.

Starting May 9, the festival will hold concerts for the participants in the special military operation by entertaining them in hospitals, at military bases and training ranges. These performances will continue through May 13. Let me note that the Dobrovidenie for Donbass project to support fighters involved in the special military operation was launched back in 2022. It organised several hundred performances by frontline concert teams, including in the special military operation zone.

On May 11, Dobrovidenie 2025 participants will perform at open-air venues of the Moscow Seasons festival on Tverskaya Square and Revolyutsii Square. There will be a thousand performers this year.

On the same day of May 11, Dobrovidenie’s combined choir will open the festival’s 10th anniversary edition. There will be performances by folk choirs, bands, soloists and accordionists throughout the day. They will perform popular folk and Victory songs. The television programme titled Play, My Beloved Accordion! will be recorded on the same day and will feature Dobrovidenie participants.

May 13 will be the festival’s last day when a concert will take place at the Christ the Saviour Cathedral’s Synodal Hall. Dozens of academic choirs and folk bands will demonstrate their art and skill.

We expect the 10th Dobrovidenie Festival to become a major highlight on Moscow’s and Russia’s cultural and public arena. The fact that it includes foreign performers will help forge stronger cultural ties, friendly and partner relations with the participating countries. Exchanges dealing with our singing cultures help promote dialogue among civilisations and strengthen mutual understanding between nations.

We invite everyone to attend these events, while the organisers invite Russian and foreign media to cover the concerts.

back to top

 

Answers to media questions:

Question: President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen said countries were lining up for an opportunity to work with the EU. “In a more and more unpredictable global environment, countries are lining up to cooperate with us,” she said. What can you say about this?

Maria Zakharova: The funniest part is that she said that “the global environment is increasingly unpredictable.” Who is behind that unpredictability? Hasn’t she and her Western predecessors contributed to it? Haven’t the EU and NATO countries cooked up this mayhem with their own hands starting from 2013-2014? She is from Germany, after all. So, why doesn’t she ask her German colleagues about them setting up the Maidan protests in Ukraine with their own hands?

First, they provoked an internal Ukraine crisis, followed by sanctions that ricocheted around the world and blew up in their face. Then, they plunged Ukraine into the abyss of civil war (a massacre, in fact, perpetrated by the Kiev regime against southeastern regions of Ukraine), turning it into a carnage of global proportions. So, who is making the world more and more unpredictable now? She is.

As for the countries waiting in line, she was referring to global trade and economic changes and trends. Clearly, Ms von der Leyen’s words about “countries lining up to cooperate with the EU” are a case of wishful thinking. The European Union is far from what it was 20 years ago. Its reputation as a once comfortable jurisdiction for investment and business was hopelessly undermined largely through the efforts of Ursula von der Leyen and her team.

Levying illegitimate unilateral sanctions, stealing foreign assets, Brussels corruption, and refusal, contrary to common and economic sense, to use Russian energy resources and a number of other commodities at reasonable prices speak of the EU and Brussels as an unreliable economic partner. This image is reinforced by the EU’s desire to impose additional fees on its partners under the guise of fighting climate change. That includes plans to launch a “carbon border adjustment mechanism” and to introduce measures to combat deforestation. At the same time, the EU is by far not a safe harbour, either. Its economy is in deep trouble which is evidenced by a drop in the manufacturing, the closure of energy-intensive companies, the relocation of production sites abroad, and the exacerbation of the “energy poverty” problem.

Haven’t the Germans told her that they were transferring their production sites and companies abroad? What line to Brussels she is talking about? On the contrary, the EU companies are lined up to re-incorporate their businesses, industries, and production in other countries, because they are fleeing the economic collapse in the EU. She cannot be unaware of that. She knows it and she is lying.

Do you think other countries and associations are oblivious to these realities and do not factor them in as they deal with the EU? Of course, they are aware of them. The whole world is trying to figure out how to solve this economic conundrum caused by destructive actions of the world minority, which set out to rule the entire universe trying not to get the attention of nurses from other galaxies. They are aware of all of that and discount it in their work.

At the same time, amid current economic turbulence, the countries find it quite natural to promote the interests of national businesses, to look for alternative markets, and to build new production chains. Here, expanding contacts with the European Union looks quite natural. However, the logic behind it is somewhat different. The EU is being viewed not as a long-term strong and reliable partner, but rather as a stepping stone, and the numbers speak for themselves.

In terms of purchasing power parity, the share of BRICS exceeded that of the G7 by almost 7 percent as of late 2024. So, draw your own conclusions. They are unwilling to discuss it with facts in hand, because the facts are against them.

back to top

 

Question: On April 18, Japan and Ukraine exchanged notes in Kiev to issue a loan of about 500 billion yen to Kiev to be repaid from special revenue from managing Russian sovereign assets that had been “frozen” by Western countries. How would you comment on such a move by Tokyo?

Maria Zakharova: We put the Japanese side on notice a long time ago telling them that participating in illegitimate experiments with the sovereign assets of the Russian Federation in any form - even as an intermediary performing purely technical functions - will be regarded by us as complicity in theft. Fully aware of our approach, Tokyo’s representatives never stopped to justify their actions by providing us with additional clarifications through diplomatic channels which come down to them telling us that the issue in not about the principal amount, but rather the interest, which is outside Japan’s jurisdiction. On top of that, they say that Japanese loan amounted to “just” 6 percent of the total G7 package agreed upon in October 2024.

Another clarification of that kind came literally on the same day - April 18 - when the above exchange of notes between Japan and the Kiev regime took place. Tokyo cynically expressed hope that these actions would not negatively affect its relations with Russia. If they believe they can play both sides and come out on top of the situation, they are mistaken.

I hate to break it to the Japanese, but these actions will inevitably impact our relations. We regard this step as extremely hostile and treacherous. It is unacceptable both legally and on a human basis. Japanese trying to soften the blow is absolutely out of place, unless, of course, Tokyo is willing to announce an increase in its state debt to our country by 500 billion yen, or $3.3 billion.

We will regard any transfer of domestic reserves or revenue generated from them to Ukraine as complicity in the crimes committed by the Kiev regime which will inevitably entail tough practical countermeasures, including asymmetric ones affecting the areas of Russian-Japanese bilateral relations that have so far remained more of less operational. The responsibility for the further degradation of bilateral relations remains entirely with the Shigeru Ishiba administration.

back to top

 

Question: The Federal Security Service of Russia (FSB) has cut short the activities of Mr Dmitry Rusnak, former operative of the Information and Security Service of the Republic of Moldova, who came to Russia to collect intelligence on Russian leaders’ plans with regard to Moldova and on employees of Russian security and other state agencies, involved in Moldova-related foreign policy activities. Given Chisinau’s hostile policy, how can we assess these actions? Will the Foreign Ministry summon the Moldovan ambassador?

Maria Zakharova: These actions – they have been exposed and cut short by the FSB of Russia – are yet another manifestation of the Moldovan authorities’ hostile line towards our country.  The forms of diplomatic response, including serving a summons on an ambassador, are determined with account taken of all circumstances in each particular case. If there is information we can share, we will certainly do that.

Indicatively, Chisinau constantly – and always without any proof – accuses Russia of interfering in Moldova’s internal affairs. The pro-government media are fanning “espionage passions” targeting the Embassy of Russia.  Three weeks ago, Moldova expelled three Russian diplomats under a far-fetched pretext. We retaliated by expelling three Moldovan diplomats.  And now it transpires that the Moldovan secret services are directly involved in collecting intelligence in our country.

This episode is a confirmation of the hypocrisy of Chisinau’s anti-Russian policy. All of this is being done in order to break off relations between our countries, make their own citizens’ life harder, and rewrite our common history.  

back to top

 

Question: On April 22, the Moldovan authorities showed that they again were going to distance themselves from celebrating Victory Day. Instead, Moldova will officially celebrate V-E Day. What is your comment?  

Maria Zakharova: They are distancing themselves from conscience, not Victory Day. They have made the distance between themselves and conscience so long that conscience is no longer in sight. It has been lost.

This comes as no surprise. Chisinau is a fanatic follower of the EU policy to rewrite history, glorify Nazism, and extol the collaborationists.

This is accompanied with the imposition of bans on all things related to Great Victory. In 2022, the Moldovan authorities outlawed the wearing of St George Ribbon and other Russian symbols, as well as the screening of films about the Great Patriotic War. Their pretext was that the symbolism of St George Ribbon was supportive of the special military operation.

Right now, they are deleting the holiday itself from their history. This is a holiday celebrated by the Moldovan people, the Moldovan war veterans, who paid with their lives for the victory and future life of the coming generations. The Sandu regime is stealing their holiday. This is not related to either the special military operation or even Russia. This is related to their systematic and cynical effort to destroy Moldova’s population. They are doing this economically, politically and ideologically. They are just tickled – I am referring to Maia Sandu and her regime – to torture Moldovan war veterans. It’s a perversion of sorts.

All of this is part of the overall anti-national policy directed at dismantling the sovereignty, history, and national identity and diluting these in the European neoliberal melting-pot.

What is the big idea? Maia Sandu is a citizen of Romania. She renames the Moldovan language to Romanian and calls Moldovans Romanians (this has been formalised at the legislative level). Now she clearly needs to “dock” Moldova with Romania, for which purpose it is necessary to strip Moldova of its own identity. The Victory, the Great Patriotic War and the war veterans are obstacles on this way, because they will not fit in into the history of Romania. This history is the history of Moldova and its people, aligned with our common history. Therefore, it is a must for them to break, distort and delete it. The Moldovan people should be sacrificed to the Romanian ambitions and the EU devilish plan in accordance with the scenario that is paid through the nose.

There are other facts confirming the existence of these anti-national designs. Let me give you a few examples.

The authorities are trying to manipulate the Moldovan people using one of the most sensitive issues – religion. On April 17 and 18, 2025, Archbishop Marchel (Markell) of Balti and Falesti was twice prevented from departing to Israel for the Holy Fire from the Chisinau airport without any reason or justification. Well, that was a truly outrageous blasphemy, an evil and cynical attempt to humiliate believers and insult religious feelings. The Moldovan people condemned this act as blasphemy and mockery of believers’ feelings. Fortunately, the Holy Fire was eventually delivered to Moldova on behalf of the Moldovan Metropolis of the Russian Orthodox Church.

On April 20 of this year, the Moldovan Ministry of Justice published a post on social media referring to Easter Sunday as “constitutional and useful for the public consciousness,” and recognising Easter cakes as “legitimate under the European Union laws.” The post was quickly deleted after Moldovans reacted with a flurry of outraged criticism and ridicule. Nevertheless, that post revealed the logic behind official Chisinau’s policy, which is to exterminate anything that does not comply with the directives from Brussels. Some Moldovan experts add bitterly that this policy would extend to the Moldovan people if it came to that. In fact, this is already happening. According to Maia Sandu, they are not Moldovans, but Romanians now.

Furthermore, the “European Moldova” project is distinctly directed against Russia, with numerous manifestations of this tendency.

With the Moldovan media landscape cleared of any independent media anyway, on April 18, 2025, certain outlets published insinuations about some Russian social network called Matryoshka allegedly designed to discredit the Moldovan government. But is it? No network whatsoever (a social network or a fishing net) could discredit the Maia Sandu regime more than she did already. The reports claim that this network is indoctrinating Moldovans about their leaders’ corruption and incapacity, as well as repressions against the opposition. Moldovans do not need any Matryoshka network or other social media to tell them that. They know they are not being brainwashed through social media. On the contrary, they are trying to raise these issues and discuss their concerns. However, they are not allowed to do this – on social media or on national television.

The policy of forced Europeanisation of Moldova leads to the opposite effect. What does Europe even have to do with this? Moldova is Europe. Why would it need Europeanisation? Moldova has always been part of the European continent. Now the Moldovans are being persuaded that they have never been part of Europe, so they need to be Europeanised. They are Europeans. How could they not be? What else do they need to Europeanise? If this is about economic standards, the EU must streamline its standards first.

According to an opinion poll published last week, more than 40 percent of people in Moldova continue to see Russia as an important economic and security partner for the country. At the same time, only 29 percent of respondents consider the European Union as their country’s economic partner, and less than 20 percent, a security partner. This result was achieved even though the country’s information landscape had been thoroughly mopped up, with only pro-Western media left to operate. In fact, the amount of money spent on funding those outlets could have raised the Moldovan economy to a new level.

We are well aware of what Maia Sandu is doing. We can say that she will never be able to “reassign” the Moldovan people, who are friendly to Russia, to another ethnic group. We have always been friends, and we will remain friends; we have interacted and will continue to interact. What the Maia Sandu regime is doing is only temporary, harmful and directed against the people of Moldova.

The European Union and its Chisinau satellites have not been able to “reassign” the Moldovan people, who are friendly to Russia, and never will.

back to top

 

Question: Last week, the Latvian parliament approved legislation to withdraw from the Ottawa Anti-Personnel Mine Convention. Prior to this, in March, the defence ministries of Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Poland had jointly recommended that their governments consider withdrawing from the agreement. What are the implications of these recent initiatives by European countries?

Maria Zakharova: We have already addressed this issue, but I will reiterate: according to our information, the recent joint statement by the Baltic states and Poland regarding their intention to withdraw from the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production, and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines – commonly known as the Ottawa Convention – is primarily aimed at fostering cooperation with US manufacturers of these munitions. This move, undoubtedly is made in the interests of NATO.

It envisions the Baltic countries and Poland as future hubs for large-scale production of anti-personnel mines. Funding for this initiative will be provided through the European Union, including mechanisms such as the Rearm Europe programme, while technical assistance will be supplied by the United States.

The production of these munitions is intended for the creation of minefields along NATO’s eastern flank, as well as for supplying the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

Rather than pursuing steps to de-escalate tensions, the Baltic States and Poland appear committed to a path of confrontation with Russia, further escalating tensions on the European continent. At the same time, there is a deliberate effort to rewrite historical narratives, erasing the lessons of the past and leaving current and future generations unaware of the dangers such actions once led to. Those responsible for such decisions in Western Europe, including Poland and the Baltic states, must recognise that European security cannot be built at the expense of common sense. Peace and cooperation cannot grow on mine-infested soil. Provocative actions along the borders of the world’s largest nuclear power carry serious, potentially catastrophic consequences for the European security. Through such choices, these actors position themselves as provocateurs.

back to top

 

Question: The Lithuanian parliament has extended national sanctions against Russian and Belarusian citizens until May 2026. An amendment to the legislation now stipulates that a Russian citizen’s residence permit in Lithuania may be revoked if it is determined that they have travelled to Russia or Belarus more than once within the past three calendar months. How would you comment on this?

Maria Zakharova: In the current political climate of the police totalitarian regimes of the Baltic states, the division of residents based on nationality has become a norm in both public policy and social life.

Vilnius, one of the most vocal proponents of anti-Russia sentiments, continues to escalate measures aimed at marginalising Russian-speaking residents, seemingly with the intent of forcing their departure from the country. Russia will continue to call for international condemnation of such racist practices, including at relevant international platforms.

back to top

 

Question: April 20 marked Chinese Language Day. Throughout Russia, various events were held to celebrate this event, showcasing traditional Chinese arts, such as calligraphy, paper-cutting, and wushu, which the public met with great enthusiasm. Growing numbers of Russian people have become interested in the Chinese language and Chinese culture in recent years. Could you share your thoughts on this? We know that you are fluent in Chinese. What do you think about the role teaching the Chinese language plays in improving relations between our countries?

Maria Zakharova: Education, in particular, teaching and learning Russian and Chinese, has a special place in Russian-Chinese humanitarian cooperation. One of the first theme-based projects held by our countries was devoted to the national languages. These projects have become an established tradition for our countries. The year 2009 was declared the Year of the Russian Language in China, and 2010 the Year of the Chinese Language in Russia.

Our countries signed a corresponding intergovernmental agreement in 2005 which we rely upon in our efforts to encourage teaching of the Russian and Chinese languages, and to promote cooperation in improving teaching methods. This area of interaction is an important part of bilateral relations and plays an indispensable role in reinforcing trust and friendship.

As you rightly noted, interest in Chinese culture, literature, and the Chinese language remains high in Russia. I know that more and more young people in China are interested in the Russian language as well.

Our countries are playing the leading role in preserving global stability and security, traditional and civilisational values, and historical memory. The dynamic and progressive development of Russia-China relations of comprehensive partnership and strategic cooperation across all areas, including politics, the economy, and humanitarian and scientific and technical sphere spurs the demand for professionals who are proficient in Russian and Chinese. We need more specialists capable of advancing our cooperation. Young people in our respective countries who choose to study Russian or Chinese have every reason to feel confident about bright career prospects and ample opportunities for fulfilling their potential.

The relevant agencies are working to create favourable conditions for advancing inter-university cooperation, increasing academic mobility, and exchanging best practices in the field of training. A total of 29 joint educational institutions at Chinese universities are operational in China, and more than 100 educational programmes with Russia’s participation have been opened. The Joint Russian-Chinese University in Shenzhen is operational.

Just like our Chinese friends, we believe it is the important to preserve and cherish the national language. I’m convinced that commemorative dates such as Chinese Language Day marked on April 20, and Russian Language Day marked on June 6 remind us of the importance of multilingualism and cultural diversity, contribute to supporting and developing the language as a national treasure and a means of international communication, and as an integral part of the world civilisation heritage.

As you are aware, our languages are not only a part of our respective rich national cultural histories, but are also the official languages of the United Nations.

back to top

 

Question: There was a Bloomberg report last Friday, followed by an Axios article earlier this week saying that the United Stated presented to its allies proposals on achieving a peaceful settlement in the Ukraine conflict, which included a de facto recognition of Russia’s control over Crimea, the DPR, the LPR, the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions, as well as Ukraine’s non-accession to NATO and easing sanctions against Russia. If these reports materialise, they would constitute a concession regarding Moscow’s demands. Is Moscow ready to make any concessions as part of a possible peace agreement, and if so, what could these concessions be?

Maria Zakharova: We may well dig deep into the history of this matter, but I do not think that I am the right person to spell out these terms.

Let me simply remind you that just a week ago Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov sat down for an interview with Kommersant. In it, he elaborated on this topic. And President Vladimir Putin took the floor in this very room almost one year ago to describe Russia’s negotiating position, as well as its fundamental approaches to the situation in Ukraine and continental security in general, and, accordingly, around the world.

Let me remind you that President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov have spelled out all our approaches and have been regularly reaffirming them in every detail.

Therefore, I believe that we must focus on present-day reality. In fact, Vladimir Zelensky has already rejected these plans as reported by the media and presented as leaks or something overheard in conversations with various diplomats.

Do we have to make up all these hypothetical scenarios all over again, if there is this unreasonable and inadequate person – or how should I call him? – who is camping on an “I do not agree” posture, just like in Mikhail Bulgakov’s The Heart of a Dog novel. Why even bother? He said it all. Vladimir Zelensky pointed out that Kiev would not recognise Crimea’s Russian status from a legal perspective. I do not even want to quote him on this point.

Let me draw the following conclusion: Vladimir Zelensky once again demonstrated that he lacks the political will for achieving peace and is unwilling to make any concessions to settle the conflict. But you can also frame this posture in a more straightforward way – he simply demonstrated his inability to show not just care but mercy for his people. This is the key takeaway from recent developments. He could not care less about what happens to them. His political ambition is all he cares about. If someone argues that Zelensky is thinking about Ukraine’s political future, not his political ambitions, this is the right time to shape, guarantee and secure Ukraine’s future. But this is not what he is after. He views people as expendable. All he wants is to stay in power and pursue his personal sickly ambitions, considering how inadequate he has become and all the resulting consequences.

You have referred to two or three sources when asking your question. In fact, there were hundreds of these would-be sources and leaks. This makes commenting them useless.

You can see that the dialogue with the United States continues. It is not easy, but at this stage our countries focus on finding lasting solutions. This is what leaders in Russia have been saying, and we are receiving the same signals from the other side.

Once again, if you want details on status-related matters and concessions, let me suggest that you go back to the June 14, 2024, remarks by President Vladimir Putin. I would like to stress that this is Russia’s fundamental vision rather than a negotiating position. Let me also remind you that people in these regions have fulfilled their right to self-determination as set forth in the UN Charter. Therefore, the present-day reality, international law and the situation on the ground must guide us in our actions.

We have been hearing about the solution resulting from the situation on the ground for all these years. This has now become a fact which will define our actions. I will not go over efforts to deal with the threats and address the conflict’s root causes. You will find these ideas in Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s interview with Kommersant. We have been regularly communicating on these matters, but the Minister once again spelled out this vision in great detail in his interview with this newspaper.

back to top

 

Question: Russia has consistently opposed Ukraine’s NATO membership. Where does Moscow stand now with regard to Ukraine’s EU membership?

Maria Zakharova: Why are you so concerned about matters of membership? Perhaps, you should be concerned, instead, about Ukraine not being in top condition? Why get all hypothetical? Look at what is happening to Ukraine.

I think as the guarantor of Ukraine’s progress and well-being -we remember public promises and assurances - the collective West must be held accountable before the Ukrainian people for embroiling Ukraine into all of that and making a mess out of that country. Guarantees were provided under which Ukraine was supposed to be a prosperous country. Let them stand before the Ukrainian people and answer these questions.

Importantly, the EU isn’t even hiding the fact that it has changed, and this change has nothing to do with changing the name, although, perhaps, we can, at this point, presume that the European Economic Community becoming the European Union also had a certain political angle to it, since they removed “economic” from the name and, accordingly, the economy from their list of priorities. Look at what the EU is busy with. It’s mostly politics. The economy has been put on the back burner. It is not even servicing the politics anymore, but is being blackmailed by politics within the EU.

Let’s take a look at what’s left of the economic component. After all, it is the economic part that is not related to minimising damage to the EU countries. It is related to raising funds and providing financial aid to the Kiev regime in order to (we are now back to politics as the EU’s “dominant factor”) influence the situation in the region, on the continent, etc.

In recent years, even before 2022, we observed the EU literally morphing into a NATO branch. Now, we can see this unfold in practice, as NATO is using the EU as a wallet and an opportunity to use financial flows under the guise of “aid,” and to mobilise the EU economies to serve NATO’s aggressive policies and ideology. We draw our own conclusions from this as well.

back to top

 

Question: The latest Pew Research Centre poll shows that the share of Americans with an unfavourable view of China has declined for the first time in five years amid Washington’s tariff policy. This may be due to an active influx of US Internet users, Tiktok refugees, into Chinese social media, as well as the streaming by American online stars, which revealed the true nature of China to the American people. Many people suddenly realised that China is not what the US media portrayed it to be. What, do you think, underlies this change? The poll also showed that 52 percent of the polled believe President Trump’s tariff policy will harm the interests of the United States. Only 24 percent support this policy. Is the US tariff policy defeating its own purpose?

Maria Zakharova: My answer will rely on media issues rather than economic metrics, or tariffs.

Sinophobia - you are saying the negative perception of China and the Chinese in the United States is decreasing - is subsiding. You are saying the Americans are now seeing China and the Chinese from a less aggressive and less biased perspective. We should keep in mind that these were unnatural processes connected with China’s allegedly aggressive attitude towards the United States (which is not true) or with historical phobias or unresolved complex issues of the past or issues arising from modern-day developments. Nothing of that happened. The anti-Chinese sentiment in the United States was created incrementally, as was Russophobia, and phobias with regard to other countries.

Make no mistake the United States is good at creating phobias against its allies, as well. I cited on several occasions an example of France pursuing an independent foreign policy and refusing to join the US reckless adventure to occupy Iraq and to destroy its statehood. Back then, France was portrayed as a boogeyman in US media. A disgusting media campaign was unleashed against France and the French. Not that it was horrible, but it was disgusting. American talk shows were discussing other names for French fries. These were not comedy shows, but actual discussions. After France chose not to break international law, people in the United States were making a case for not using the words associated with France, the French language, or French culture. French films in the United States were in trouble. The French people were ridiculed.

It was an artificially created negative perception of the nation. I remember well how disgustingly some elites or circles behaved towards Kazakhstan, when a movie was released in the United States, which went beyond ridiculing and disparaged Kazakhstan and its culture. In fact, it was a mix, a terrible pot of humiliating and unbalanced attitude towards a number of nations under blanket slogans or memes. Nobody could do anything about it. This thing was just in. I don’t remember exactly where it came from, but it was a horrible sight, because cinemas throughout the United States featured these posters. No one could do anything about it, because it was called freedom of speech or freedom of expression. These are all artificial, well-paid-for, and well-choreographed things made to serve specific purposes, such as create a favourable bargaining position, scuttle other people’s plans or economic or other projects, or just exert pressure.

Considering this, first of all, it is important to be mindful of the fact that the issue is about a phenomenon involving disgraceful media campaign directed against people of different ethnicities and nationalities, which is quite a commonplace occurrence in the collective West.

back to top

 

Question: Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told RT that Tehran is ready to expand trilateral discussions among Iran, Russia and China that addressed Iran’s nuclear programme in the last few months to include other issues. Could you explain the Russian Foreign Ministry’s view on this proposal?

Maria Zakharova: Russia and Iran maintain close and continuous coordination on a broad range of international issues of mutual interest. This collaboration is particularly evident in their engagement within the United Nations, the IAEA, and other international and multilateral platforms, including BRICS and the SCO.

Moscow, Beijing and Tehran regularly align their positions on regional developments, joint projects, and strategic areas of cooperation. These efforts are aimed at advancing the creation of a stable and inclusive multipolar international order, supporting sustainable global development, and addressing the complex challenges facing the international community today.

We are guided by the shared interest of our three countries in the steady expansion of relevant consultations, which continue to take place at various levels, both through direct intergovernmental dialogue and within the framework of specialised forums involving Russia, China, and Iran.

back to top

 

Question: Recently, a large group of Japanese political figures, including over 70 members of parliament, visited the Yasukuni Shinto shrine. This event sparked strong reactions from neighbouring countries. Notably, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea issued a sharply worded statement expressing its disapproval. How would you comment on this development?

Maria Zakharova: We have already addressed the issue of Japanese militarism today.

The Yasukuni Shrine remains a highly controversial symbol of Japan’s militaristic past. As is widely known, it honours, among others, Class-A war criminals who were sentenced to death by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. According to available information, on April 21, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, the chairs of both chambers of the Japanese parliament, and two current cabinet ministers sent ritual offerings to the shrine. The event was marked by a notable degree of ceremony and solemnity.

We strongly condemn this practice, which appears especially provocative in the year marking the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. We have repeatedly stressed that such actions by Tokyo deeply offend the sentiments of the peoples of neighbouring countries who endured immense suffering as a result of Japan’s brutal expansionist policies and military aggression in the first half of the 20th century. This gesture clearly reflects the broader trajectory of the current Japanese leadership, which seems aimed at accelerated remilitarisation rooted in an ongoing reluctance to acknowledge historical responsibility and a lack of genuine remorse.

We once again urge Japan to abandon attempts to whitewash the darker chapters of its past and to fully recognise and accept the outcomes of World War II.

back to top

 

Question: There have been reports that Russia is working on establishing an international mutual settlements system based on gold parity. How do Russia’s BRICS partners regard the possibility of creating a single currency backed by gold?

Maria Zakharova: In the context of the accelerated fragmentation of the global economy, our main task is to ensure conditions for the sustainable development of the association’s economies. The new geopolitical reality requires us to develop effective measures and further steps to enhance financial and economic cooperation.

De-dollarisation, which is clearly emerging as a global trend, was initiated by the Biden administration. It was not other nations that started moving away from the dollar in mutual settlements; rather, it was President Biden’s administration that effectively restricted access to the US dollar for a number of countries. This paradox is now acknowledged even by the current US leadership. In fact, it was the Biden administration that set this precedent and inadvertently spurred a broader global shift towards de-dollarisation.

I have been closely following the statements made by the Russian leadership on this matter. There have been a number of statements, including those made during the St Petersburg International Economic Forum. We said that we never abandoned this instrument; it was forcibly taken from us and blocked by representatives of the Biden administration, which they did out of anger, just to settle scores with us. So, we began to explore other mechanisms to be able to live and develop. It was strange to witness all of this. Joe Biden and the entire American liberal democratic crowd have done a lot of strange things.

All of this is now taking place as a result of growing mistrust towards the financial mechanisms established by Western countries, which is rooted in the way these very countries have chosen to utilise those mechanisms. In this context, not only BRICS members, but also many other nations, are actively seeking to develop more reliable alternative systems to shield themselves from disruptions, including those driven by the policies of American liberal democrats.

The member countries’ primary focus now is on creating conditions for the broader use of national currencies in mutual settlements. This is a challenging task. The structural transformation of the global financial system is not something that can be accomplished overnight. Nevertheless, all member countries remain committed to achieving tangible progress and are prepared to deepen cooperation in this area. They understand that, in the face of the chaos fostered by the Biden administration, it is crucial to establish stable foundations that support survival, sustainable development, and a return to normality.

Efforts to establish payment mechanisms that are resilient to external risks, primarily based on the use of national currencies, has been underway for quite some time. Preliminary results of this work are enshrined in the Kazan Declaration, adopted during the BRICS Summit on October 22-24, 2024, which outlines several specific projects: the cross-border payment initiative, the establishment of a settlement and clearing infrastructure and a reinsurance company, as well as the New Investment Platform. These initiatives are aimed at creating favourable conditions for the growth of trade and investment among BRICS countries.

We anticipate that their implementation will continue this year under the Brazilian presidency.

back to top

 

Question: According to media reports, Consul General of the Russian Federation in Gyumri Igor Titov visited the local office of the opposition bloc Mother Armenia this week. To what extent is this information accurate? How prepared is Russia to develop relations not only with the government but also with other political forces in Armenia?

Maria Zakharova: The meeting to which you refer constitutes an integral component of the routine work undertaken by the heads of our foreign missions. Russian diplomats engage with representatives across the entire spectrum of political forces in any given country with the aim of advancing bilateral ties across multiple spheres.

In the instance you cite, Igor Titov, ahead of the commemoration of the Great Victory, extended invitations to the leadership of all political factions within Gyumri’s Council of Elders to participate in a ceremonial reception at the Consulate General. Discussions also addressed the enhancement of cultural exchanges between municipalities within the consular district and Russian partners.

I have observed various publications speculating about an alleged domestic political subtext. Let me state unequivocally: there is categorically no domestic political subtext here. Everything is transparent and entirely consistent with the objectives and remit of establishing a foreign mission.

back to top

 

Question: Over the past week, Moscow has hosted three high-level delegations from the Middle East. First, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi visited the Russian capital and delivered a personal message from Ayatollah Khamenei to Vladimir Putin. This was followed by a visit to Moscow and a meeting with Vladimir Putin by Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. Subsequently, Sultan Haitham bin Tariq Al Said of Oman arrived for talks with Vladimir Putin. Does such intense activity by Middle Eastern states indicate that Russia, as Iran’s strategic partner, is emerging as a pivotal mediator in dialogue between Washington and Tehran concerning the broader resolution of the Iranian nuclear programme?

Maria Zakharova: I have already provided partial commentary on this matter earlier today.

Russia is actively striving to forestall another significant deterioration or crisis surrounding Iran and its nuclear programme. Our stance on this issue remains wholly consistent. We categorically reject any attempts by individual states to resolve emerging challenges through the use of military force and strongly caution all those contemplating such a course against embarking on this path, which risks severe destabilisation across the Middle East.

In our assessment, this reality is fully understood by all sober-minded neighbours of Iran, including the Gulf states. Like Russia, they share an interest in ensuring that the relentless escalation of tensions – assiduously stoked by Western actors under the pretext of purported threats linked to Iran’s peaceful nuclear programme – does not erupt into an active conflict, but is instead defused through agreements that duly safeguard legitimate rights and address mutual concerns among the involved parties.

The prospects for resolving issues surrounding Iran’s nuclear programme are discussed substantively and regularly with Tehran. This topic also features in our dialogue with numerous other states, including Qatar and Oman as referenced in your question. The Russian side endorses Muscat’s efforts to facilitate indirect dialogue between the Iranian and American negotiating teams.

That said, our bilateral relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran, as with other international partners, are not confined to a single issue. The agenda is far more comprehensive. On April 18 this year, talks were held in Moscow and comprehensively covered during a news conference. I encourage you to revisit those details.

The agenda rests on a robust foundation of historical ties, augmented by diverse cooperative projects spanning trade, economics, science, technology, culture, humanitarian affairs, and other fields. These initiatives are advancing dynamically and align with the mutual national interests of the parties.

I reiterate my earlier recommendation to consult the detailed exposition of approaches articulated by the foreign policy chiefs of Russia and Iran during their joint news conference following the Moscow negotiations.

back to top

 

Question: Our news desk has another piece of sad news. On April 22, our colleague, Nikita Goldin, who worked as Zvezda’s frontline correspondent, succumbed to his wounds following a March 24, 2025, strike by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. He was a young man, and doctors fought for his life for an entire month. Unfortunately, they failed. How would you comment on the continuing effort by the Kiev regime to hunt down Russian journalists?

Maria Zakharova: We express our heartfelt condolences to the victim’s family and friends.

Indeed, we learned this night that on April 22, 2025, Zvezda’s frontline correspondent Nikita Goldin died from the severe wounds he suffered during a targeted rocket artillery attack which was carried out by the Ukrainian Armed Forces on March 24, 2025. Doctors fought for his life for almost a month, but his wounds and injuries proved to be fatal.

Let me remind you that Nikita Goldin became the fourth fatal victim of the attack carried out using the US-made high-precision HIMARS missile system. He joins Izvestia correspondent Alexander Fedorchak, Zvezda cameraman Andrey Panov, and the crew’s driver, Alexander Sirkeli. The very fact that despite the shortages they are facing the Ukrainian Banderites decided to spend as many as two missiles to target a civilian vehicle carrying unarmed journalists proves that this attack was not an accident. These terrorists – since this is the only way I can call them, if not beasts – they knew whom they were targeting. They knew that they were targeting journalists.

Five journalists lost their lives since the beginning of this year alone as a result of these targeted attacks by the Ukrainian Armed Forces: Alexander Martemyanov (died on January 4, 2025), Alexander Fedorchak (March 24, 2025), Andrey Panov (March 24, 2025), Anna Prokofiyeva (March 26, 2025), and Nikita Goldin (April 22, 2025). Many people working for media outlets suffered wounds of varying severity, including Maxim Romanenko, Mikhail Kevkhiyev, Svetlana Larina, Isabella Liberman, Yury Sholmov, Mikhail Skuratov, and Dmitry Volkov. Overall, these terrorist attacks resulted in dozens of casualties and victims.

These data cover just the past few months. All these tragedies did not result from an unfortunate turn of events. These constituted cruel, intentional killings or assassination attempts with aggravating circumstances. The Kiev regime has been relying on its neo-Nazi fighters to hunt down correspondents and journalists by tracking them down and attacking them using all the weapons it has at its disposal. They have been doing this not only along the frontline, but also in the middle of peaceful cities – this is how they carried out the bombing attacks targeting Darya Dugina and Vladlen Tatarsky.

We will not allow the Vladimir Zelensky clique to avoid responsibility for these bloody crimes. The investigative agencies are doing everything to hold the perpetrators accountable.

As diplomats, we will work on the diplomatic front to make sure that the relevant international organisations and human rights entities respond to these atrocities accordingly. This primarily refers to UNESCO Director General, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media. We will raise these issues at all multilateral platforms and alert the wider international community, including in the context of the World Press Freedom Day, which is marked on May 3.

We will raise this issue during the upcoming meeting of the UN General Assembly Committee on Information (April 28 – May 9, 2025). Those who carried out these terrorist attacks, as well as the people in the Office of the Ukrainian President who made these practices an everyday reality must realise in all clarity that they will not avoid retribution for these killings.

Many would argue that we cannot bring these journalists back to their mothers alive, so why even mention this? We must not only talk about it, but we must do so with facts in hand and at all international platforms. This way, we ensure that their names go down in history.

But if we do not talk about it, or if we scale down our efforts, even for a single day, history will not remember them. This would be a wrong history with the wrong names, while these victims will be forgotten. No one will know that they existed. But our diplomats, our permanent representatives in international organisations, our ambassadors and consular workers will not let this happen.

We are holding exhibitions, preparing statements and distributing reports – we are doing everything to enable our journalists to take part in international conferences on their own. We regularly talk about the history of journalism in Russia and its mission to fight lies and misinformation and the way our journalists have been doing this. Therefore, we will use all the available means to inform the international community about their hard work and make sure that international organisations include this information in their documents.

back to top

 

Question: How would you comment on the statement by Yemen’s Houthi movement that civilians are being killed as a result of the increasing US attacks?

Maria Zakharova: Our assessments of the large-scale military operation launched by the United States against Yemen’s movement Ansar Allah (the Houthis) are well known and have been brought to the notice of the public on many occasions.

I remind you once again that they were set out in detail in a press release following the telephone conversation between Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio on March 15. I reiterate that the Russian side insists on the need for an immediate cessation of violence and calls on all parties involved to exercise restraint and avoid any steps that could lead to further escalation and an expansion of the armed confrontation area. We believe that the path to ensuring long-term stabilisation in that part of the world and a lasting settlement of the protracted Yemeni crisis lies in negotiations seeking compromise solutions to the existing problems that are acceptable to all, with due regard for the legitimate interests of all leading Yemeni political forces, including Ansar Allah.

As for the strikes by the US armed forces against the Ras Isa oil terminal on the night of April 18, according to the latest data, they resulted in the deaths of more than 80 people and injury of some 230. We consider such actions to be unjustifiable and unacceptable.

In this regard, I would like to draw your attention to the statement by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres published on April 19. In his statement, he expressed concern over the US attacks on the Ras Isa seaport, which resulted in numerous civilian casualties. He noted that five humanitarian workers had been injured and port infrastructure had been severely damaged. The Secretary General also expressed concern over the possible pollution of the adjacent sea area as a result of an oil spill.

In coordination with our regional partners, primarily Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Oman and Iran, Russia will continue its vigorous efforts to bring the situation in Yemen back to normal.

back to top

 

Question: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov announced Moscow’s readiness to assist the United States and Iran in restoring the nuclear deal. How does Russia see its role in this process, and what could it do to this end?

Maria Zakharova: First, I have already commented on this issue today. Second, detailed comments in this regard were provided at a joint news conference following talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on April 18, as well as during my briefing on April 9.

I can once again confirm that Russia is ready to assist in resolving this problem and in reaching mutually acceptable agreements between the countries.

But I have already said a great deal about our practical work today.

back to top

 

Question: This year, Scandinavian countries, specifically, Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark, are implementing unprecedentedly massive militarisation projects. Apart from swelling their defence budgets, they also buy powerful weapons. I guess, what this could lead to and why they are doing this are rhetorical questions. But I would like to ask you what the Foreign Ministry is doing, and what it can possibly do in order to alleviate projected future risks?

Maria Zakharova: Today, I have already commented on this matter in the context of NATO’s common destructive efforts. I have also said a lot about Nordic countries in Europe. I can add that the Russian side closely follows Western European military preparations, including those in northern European countries, as well as the rapid integration of Finland and Sweden into NATO. These processes were quite active prior to their accession to NATO. They were merely using the special military operation as a pretext. In reality, we said even before this process that they were coordinating military plans and regulations, and that it was necessary to draw the relevant conclusions.

Overwhelmed by Russophobic complexes, the authorities in Helsinki and Stockholm made decisions on joining NATO without any meaningful consultations with their own public and under obvious outside pressure. All of them are quite eager to criticise referendums in other countries, but they do not criticise their own referendums because they do not hold any. It is therefore impossible to say that these decisions are well-thought-out or completely sovereign.

As we have stated more than once, considering the above-mentioned actions of our formerly good neighbours and partners, Russia will use all available means to guarantee its security and defence capability amid NATO’s aggressive aspirations. Many decisions have already been announced, and they are consistently implemented.

As for our country’s diplomatic efforts on this track, we, honestly speaking, have long been doubting the ability of the military-political leadership of numerous Western countries, including Nordic European countries, to adequately perceive our signals about the unacceptability and danger of escalating tensions in our common Baltic and Arctic regions. 

By way of example, I have just mentioned President of Finland Alexander Stubb. We can hear absolutely “disjointed” rhetoric from him when he contradicts himself all the time.

To facilitate the effective use of diplomatic tools, it is necessary to make sure that the relevant well-reasoned signals should, at least, reach their addressees, and, at best, be perceived by them. The incumbent political elites in Copenhagen, Oslo, Stockholm and Helsinki have renounced communication with us, having proclaimed their doctrinal goal of inflicting “strategic defeat” on Russia. Regarding diplomatic signals, it is absolutely clear that “radio receivers” in these capitals are tuned to the waveband of aggression, the madness broadcast from Brussels and Russophobic intoxication emanating from London.

Until recently, they used to receive signals from Washington rather clearly. Their frequency has now started to malfunction. They are at a loss. It appears that they are jamming music from Washington at the moment, but we’ll see what will happen next. What does this mean? This means that they have lost common sense and their own sovereignty.

As long as this paradigm persists, there is no prospect of a substantive, mutually respectful and result-oriented diplomatic dialogue with the northern Europeans. This is not our fault. As I said, we have always been ready for dialogue. Something wrong is happening with their “radar stations” and “antennas.”

back to top

 

Question: A representative of the Georgian Dream party recently said that by 2030 Georgia will not only be fully prepared to join the European Union, but will in fact become a member. How would you comment on this statement, and how might it affect relations between our countries?

Maria Zakharova: First and foremost, those aiming to join the European Union – whether by 2030 or any other date – should consider whether there will still be something viable to join by then.

Second, let’s not forget: the United Kingdom never leaves something of value without reason. Where there are genuine opportunities and resources, the British are always among the first to act. In this case, however, they were the first to leave the EU. Why? Because the internal crises within the EU have become increasingly evident, and the future of the bloc is looking more and more predictable, and not in a promising way. For those thinking seriously about their national economies, there may be little to gain from participation. That is all. Such decisions are the sovereign choice of each nation.

As for our relationship with Georgia, we have repeatedly addressed these matters, despite the existing political differences and the absence of formal diplomatic relations. Nevertheless, we are building our bilateral ties on a foundation of mutual respect and mutual benefit. Dialogue is ongoing, and we are actively working to enhance cooperation in both business and humanitarian spheres. Step by step, we are moving towards the normalisation of our relations, a process that serves the interests of both the Russian and Georgian peoples.

Our actions have consistently demonstrated our goodwill and genuine interest in fostering these ties. However, those considering EU membership would do well to look beyond the slogans and examine the actual figures and outcomes. Words on a wall do not always reflect reality — one must look closely to see what, if anything, truly lies behind them.

back to top

 

Question: On April 21, the New York Post wrote, citing sources in the Trump Administration, that Ukraine is secretly ready to give up territories in favour of Russia on the condition that this happens de facto and not de jure. How does the Russian side assess such reports?

Maria Zakharova: I have just commented on the question from Reuters.

The Kiev regime has denied all this. Why would we go back to this topic? The question is not about what de jure and de facto mean. The Kiev regime is incapable of reaching agreements and is inadequate. That is the problem.

back to top

 

Question: The information about Russia circulating within the EU is monstrous and, alas, tragic in terms of conveying the truth about our country to the Western public.

A compelling argument in Russia’s favour, and its appeal, would be the widespread publication of statistics on relocation to Russia not only by compatriots, such as Soviet Germans, but also ethnic Germans and native residents of Western countries. Regrettably, disparate figures roam the internet

Could you provide such official statistics on key categories: countries, periods, numbers, and so forth?

Maria Zakharova: Over 1.2 million individuals from more than fifty countries participated in the state programme to facilitate the voluntary resettlement of compatriots living abroad to the Russian Federation between 2006 and 2023. These include compatriots from Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine, Germany, and the United States.

Regarding Germany, for instance, over 15,000 ethnic Germans (including German citizens) have relocated to the Russian Federation in the past five years. In 2024, more than 30,000 individuals (31,700) arrived under the programme, including approximately 2,000 from European Union countries: 700 from Germany and 600 from Latvia.

On repatriates: the statistics vary due to differing categories and legal frameworks governing their resettlement – programmes, laws, and so forth. For those classified as repatriates (individuals reconnecting with their historical homeland), 3,000 people received the relevant certification in 2024. Of these, 1,800 are already in Russia and may settle in any region, including Moscow and St Petersburg.

I must clarify: this does not refer to labour migration, refugees, or political migrants. We are speaking strictly of repatriates and compatriots participating in the aforementioned programme.

Why don’t these figures feature in leading Western publications? Because they shatter the myth of a “barbaric Russia” that everyone purportedly flees. No – people come to us. Those who wish to leave, do so. Many have returned, yet against this backdrop, others arrive from various nations. The numbers speak for themselves.

Why do they come? Answers vary. Some feel drawn to the nation’s history, its prospects and future; others seek to develop businesses with no viability in their home countries. Some aim to preserve their identity, refusing to let their children be labelled “it” or transformed into “quadrobists.”

Others are motivated by personal convictions, lifelong aspirations, or disillusionment with the falsehoods propagated by the collective West. We do not engage in contrived enticements or erect Potemkin villages.

We respond to requests that have already gained mass traction, expanding opportunities even by introducing new categories. These include individuals who are neither compatriots nor repatriates – native citizens of their countries who simply wish to safeguard their families (particularly large ones), preserve faith, religion, and traditional values. Government bodies and public organisations now actively address this emerging category.

Consider the efforts of Duma Deputy Maria Butina in aiding this new category, which has emerged only in recent years.

All data are available on the websites of the Russian Ministry of the Interior, the Federal State Statistics Service, and the Russky Vek (Russian Century) portal.

Western journalists will not seek these figures; they flee from the truth, fearing it. They are not paid for this truth – they are paid for other narratives and they pursue nothing more.

We now know the term for this, and its price tag via the United States Agency for International Development: millions of dollars allocated to fund “strategic silence.” Hence the horrifying caricature you encounter in Western media.

While the European Union wallows in the swamp of Russophobic falsehoods, Russia builds, creates, and advances. We remain open to those who arrive lawfully, with pure hearts, to contribute respectfully to our nation. For all such individuals, our doors are always open. I believe Alexander Nevsky aptly articulated this principle.

back to top

***

I suspect we will revisit this topic. Yet one cannot help but anticipate the approaching great holiday of Victory, our shared historical triumph. With each day, it permeates our hearts, homes, and souls.

Let me reiterate: we will delve deeper in due course, but every day truly unfolds in the shadow of that monumental event – the 80th anniversary of Victory.

With greetings for the holidays upon us and those ahead! All the best, and prosperity to all!