Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, November 30, 2022
Table of Contents
- Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming talks with Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan Jeyhun Bayramov
- Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming talks with Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Turkmenistan Rashid Meredov
- Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s participation in the Primakov Readings Eighth International Forum
- Presentation of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia)
- Ukraine crisis update
- Statement by NATO foreign ministers
- Moldova update
- Australia’s accusations against Russia of cyberattack on Medibank insurance company
- Imangali Tasmagambetov's appointment as CSTO Secretary General
- Russian Language Week in Berlin
- Opera Boris Godunov premieres at La Scala
- Opening the historical documentary exhibition The Great Patriotic War: June 22, 1941-November 19, 1942
- International forum on the 50th anniversary of the World Heritage Convention
- The 2022 Moscow Karate Universe International Competition
- First Youth Arctic Games in the Republic of Komi
- Statements by the President of the Federal Republic of Germany
- UK Court ruling on a referendum in Scotland
- The idea of a Russia-Kazakhstan-Uzbekistan gas alliance
- Postponing a Russia-US meeting on the new START treaty
- Discussion of a price cap for Russian oil
- NATO weapons deliveries to Ukraine
- Hungary’s decision regarding the accession of Sweden and Finland to NATO
- Interaction between the Russian Foreign Ministry and the NATO Secretariat
- The Arctic Council’s prospects
- The future of the OSCE
- The military operation of Türkiye in Syria
- Free deliveries of Russian fertilisers
- Russia’s efforts to facilitate a meeting between the presidents of Türkiye and Syria
- Western criticism of draft Russian legislation
- EU plans to confiscate Russian assets abroad
Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming talks with Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan Jeyhun Bayramov
On December 5, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will receive his counterpart from the
The foreign ministers plan to review a package of issues on the further development of bilateral relations under the Declaration on Allied Interaction signed by President Vladimir Putin and President Ilham Aliev in
On December 6, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will hold talks in
The officials plan to discuss key topics of bilateral cooperation and pressing regional and international issues, as well as interaction between the two countries in multilateral formats (the CIS, Central Asia+
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s participation in the Primakov Readings Eighth International Forum
On December 6-7, the Moscow World Trade Centre will host the Primakov Readings Eighth International Forum. This year, its topic is “Transformation of the World Order: The Eurasian Dimension.”
The Primakov Readings enjoy leading status among the socio-political forums on international issues, which are held in
Sergey Lavrov is expected to take part in the forum’s morning session on December 7. He will share his assessment of current world events, outline
Presentation of the
On December 7, the Cultural Centre of the Foreign Ministry’s Main Administration for Service to the Diplomatic Corps (GlavUpDK) will host a presentation of the economic, investment and tourism potential of the
Representatives of
The presentation is expected to give additional impetus to the expansion of the regional institutions and companies’ foreign relations and economic ties.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Head of the
We would like to highlight a commemorative date for modern
Unfortunately, neither the former nor the current authorities in
As if on cue, a number of Western countries have started peddling the issue of the “Holodomor” in
It is asserted that the “famine imposed” [on Ukraine] allegedly sought to “politically suppress” the Ukrainian people’s national self-consciousness. How did this happen? Did people of any other nationality suppress the Ukrainian people in the Soviet Union? Was Ukraine not governed at the time by ethnic Ukrainians or people whose ancestors had lived there for centuries? What about the leaders of the Soviet Union who reckoned themselves among ethnic Ukrainians or came from Ukraine and who allegedly were overseeing those projects? This is absurd. This might go down well in the parts of the world where people have no idea what Ukraine and the Slavs, for that matter, are, although it is still beyond my comprehension how it is possible, considering the level that the media and communications systems have reached. A couple of clicks can turn up any document on any historical era. Who is the target audience? To consider assertions like this as a hypothesis or a theory, you would need to throw out all historical documents related to that period. This is impossible.
We would like to remember again that not only Ukraine and Ukrainians went through this tragedy in the 1930s but many other regions and peoples in the Soviet Union as well. It was largely caused by a massive crop failure. Western countries largely contributed to the famine as they insisted that the USSR give them grain to settle foreign trade obligations. Today, we have a similar situation, what with the West taking food from Ukraine to replenish their own stocks in exchange for weapons and dragging the conflict into a “black hole.” This situation is to the advantage of transnational corporations and the defence industry in the Western countries, in particular considering that loans extended to the Kiev regime in words or according to documents, are returned to the banks that issued them, if they are issued at all.
The United States and its NATO allies are encouraging hostilities in Ukraine without regard for the increasing losses by the Ukrainian armed forces or for their own economic and social problems. However, the Kiev regime needs even more [weapons] supplies. The other day, in his interview with Politico, Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba insisted that NATO boost the production of weapons to ensure that they are supplied to Ukraine without interruption. Then they need to clarify that the supplies go to the Kiev regime, not to Ukraine. “If this does not happen, we won’t be able to win.” Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council Alexei Danilov echoed his words, calling yet again on their Western partners to supply Ukraine with missiles with a range of over 800 kilometres to respond to the strikes by the Russian Aerospace Forces at Ukraine’s energy system facilities.
The Kiev regime does not try to hide its plans to “liberate” Crimea by force. Former commander of the Joint Forces Operation in Donbass Mikhail Zabrodsky directly stated this in an interview with The Economist. He said that the peninsula was to be returned by 2023. Many in the Kiev regime dream about a date with the Crimean Republic. Vladimir Zelensky said that next spring he would swim in the sea off the southern coast of Crimea, and adviser to the head of his office Mikhail Podolyak promised to give an interview to Ukrainian journalists in Yalta in six months. No need to wait; come, take a swim. If you want to give an interview, bring Ukrainian journalists. Welcome. I can tell the head of Vladimir Zelensky’s office that he will have enough time to give an interview in Yalta if he comes. Bring a larger group of Ukrainian journalists, so everyone can see. What’s the problem? Don't hold yourselves back.
The Ukrainian and Western journalists have always had the opportunity to visit the Republic of Crimea, but they haven’t done it in eight years. They span tales, made up stories but never went to Crimea or Donbass where the picture doesn’t fit into their mainstream portrayals. Similarly, journalists and residents of Crimea were not allowed to go anywhere, so they cannot talk about the truth of what was going on. Speak up but mind what you say.
At the same time, Zabrodsky’s revelations, along with documents found during the special military operation, convincingly indicate that Kiev was seriously preparing for a large-scale offensive in the spring of 2022. Or did we get something wrong again? Did we translate it wrong? The Kiev regime’s representatives need to make a decision on what they say and how they say it. Then we can line everything up in a logical chain.
This once again confirms the existence of the real threat to the security of Russia (and the region as a whole) and the justification for the actions taken to protect the safety of the people living in that territory. As Russian leadership has repeatedly said, the threats will be eliminated and the tasks of protecting civilians from the pro-fascist Kiev regime and the demilitarisation and de-Nazification of Ukraine will be achieved.
Statement by NATO foreign ministers
We could not leave without a comment a statement by the foreign ministers of the NATO countries adopted by the NATO Council session in Bucharest on November 29-30, 2022.
The wording of this statement shows that NATO is not interested in a political or diplomatic settlement in Ukraine. To justify its own existence, NATO continues the line of whitewashing the Kiev regime and demonising Russia, a policy that was adopted immediately after the state coup in February 2014. The NATO countries are trying to blame Russia for the crimes and atrocities committed by the Armed Forces of Ukraine with total connivance of Kiev’s Western sponsors. We are being accused of disrupting global food supplies although it was Moscow that suggested real ways of solving the problems that did not emerge through our fault. Moscow is consistently advocating their implementation despite the sanctions restrictions imposed by Washington and Brussels.
There are blatant attempts to make Russia responsible for the incident with a Ukrainian missile that fell on Polish territory. Do you remember how the Kiev regime began shrieking that it was a Russian missile, an attack on Poland, on NATO, and that everyone must launch procedures to defend the bloc?
The fog dissipated in the morning and someone on Bankova Street turned into a pumpkin. It transpired that the missile was not Russian. It was unclear whose it was but there was only one missile, not two. Warsaw came out and started reassuring everyone that they needed to look into this and calculate everything. It was necessary to backpedal on the disinformation that could have made the situation much worse for everyone. The people of Poland and other EU countries began talking about this. They asked their leaders what they were doing if they were pushing our continent to a global disaster in this way.
Now NATO officials gathered for a meeting. Even though the situation was nothing like the way it was presented from the very start, Russia was still blamed for it. The idea was already hot. They have invested money, effort and technology in it for many years. The statement does not contain a word about this widely advertised investigation announced by the Polish authorities. Poland is a NATO member. Where is the investigation? What is going on? You haven’t conducted it yet, have you? Did you conduct it but refrained from publishing the results? What’s the problem? Do you need more time? The announced investigation is being conducted with the NATO allies. So, what does the adopted statement say? Is there a paragraph that all political theses must be confirmed by the results of the investigation that has not yet been conducted? This is not the theatre of the absurd; it is a pantomime. Kafka, Platonov – I can cite names of many authors who attempted to describe the absurdity of events but could not find the right words to turn it into a philosophic concept. This is why they wrote dystopias or utopias.
All-round support for the Kiev regime has been voiced again. It is emphasised that the values shared by NATO member countries are allegedly being defended in Ukraine. Which values? Please formulate them. At least, we will come to understand them. Proceeding from what we see, it appears that NATO’s values include the neo-Nazi ideology and people with swastikas who installed the portraits of collaborators next to Ukraine’s national symbols. Is it these values they are talking about? This is precisely what the Kiev regime has been preaching for more than a year. We see no other values. As for democracy, freedom of speech, pluralism, and human freedoms and rights, there have never been any. The previous decades have proved that.
A special emphasis is being made on NATO’s “open door” policy. Fourteen years later, they remembered in Bucharest a notorious formula voiced at the NATO summit held there in 2008 regarding Ukraine and Georgia’s prospects for the NATO membership. This is not a bad reference to those events. We have talked about the precarious character of such statements many times. In 2008, similar statements led to the aggression by the Saakashvili regime against South Ossetia and later to nurturing a nationalist regime in Ukraine, which since 2014 has consistently been annihilating the population in Donbass and its civilian infrastructure, and has been oppressing Russian-speaking people up and down Ukraine.
Given that, the statements regarding the allegedly defensive nature of NATO sound bizarre and cynical. I don’t know who has encircled NATO but I know who this organisation has encircled. In reality, it turns out that NATO’s pledge to continue providing assistance to Ukraine as long as needed only shows that the policy of continuing to escalate the conflict in that country and destabilising the situation in Europe remains the main objective of this tool of the collective West.
The perilous policy of this pseudo-defensive organisation which ever since the barbaric shelling of Yugoslavian cities in 1999 has brought only pain, suffering, destruction, false values and manipulation of public opinion deserves the strongest condemnation.
In this connection, I would like to draw your attention to the official briefing by NATO Spokesperson Jamie Shea on May 25, 1999, where NATO’s position was clearly formulated. We found an extract [from that briefing] on the NATO website. It is still there. Hopefully, they will not remove it quickly.
Question: If you say that the (Yugoslav) Army has a lot of back-up generators, why are you depriving 70 percent of the country of not only electricity, but also water supply. You say you (NATO) are only targeting military targets?
Answer: Yes, I'm afraid electricity also drives command and control systems. If Milosevic really wants his citizens to have water and electricity, all he has to do is accept the NATO terms and we will stop this campaign. Until he does, we will continue to attack targets that supply his army with electricity. (Earlier, the NATO spokesman directly laid down the terms for the residents of that country). If this will have consequences for the population, this is their problem. Water supply and electricity are being used against the people of Serbia, we have "cut them off" forever or for a long time for the sake of the lives of 1.6 million Kosovars who have been driven from their homes and whose lives have been seriously damaged. Not everyone will like this difference, but for me this difference is fundamental.
Twenty years ago, NATO stated its position regarding civilian infrastructure, electricity and water for the civilian population and its own interests. In 1999, the US-led NATO said that, if someone did not accept their terms, then it would be impossible for them to use vitally important water and energy. Are there any more questions about defence issues and their love for humanity? Shall we talk about “values” with documents in hand? Their memory is quite selective when it comes to remembering these documents. When we suggest discussing various documents, historical facts and comparing their statements that we heard and witnessed, they shy away from a discussion and try to talk their way out of the situation, saying that we should forget about history, that those events are now history, and that history begins today. People thinking in line with this logic have no idea of what moral values are. They can only think about momentary benefits linked with the current favourable situation. They are unable to think differently.
We are closely monitoring developments in Moldova.
We have noted with regret that the West is using Moldovan authorities to draw the country into its anti-Russia campaign. They have used this scenario in Ukraine to sweep the media environment, whip up Russophobia, encourage it to abandon the neutral status, and promote rapprochement with NATO. All of that was accomplished through politicians who were financed by the West.
We have drawn attention to the degradation of media freedom in Moldova. It has banned the broadcasting of Russian news and socio-political programmes. This is extremely important, because Russophobia is being encouraged in the country. Only the networks that are actively promoting Russophobia are allowed to operate there, while the channels that balanced, to a degree, that abnormal situation are shut down. This is being done to clear the space for a certain ideology. Anything that can hinder this process is being eliminated. This is not a domestic political matter. This story will have much more dangerous consequences than the despotism of transient authorities supported by foreign forces. They are not acting in the interests of their people; they are pursuing a policy that suits their Western handlers, who are not doing this in their own interests either but as part of a geopolitical puzzle. Fines are routinely imposed on Russian-language television channels. The oversight agencies, whose powers are regularly expanded, exert pressure on the opposition media and dissenting journalists on a daily basis. At the same time, grants are awarded to the “upright” media outlets through a network of Western-controlled NGOs. As a result, the Russophobic trend has become predominant in the Moldovan information environment.
On November 24, 2022, Moldovan parliament, dominated by the ruling Party of Action and Solidarity adopted a declaration condemning the Holodomor in Ukraine in 1932-1933 and recognising it as a deliberate genocide of the Ukrainian people. We have noted more than once the unacceptable nature of political speculation on the memory of millions of victims of the famine that affected many ethnicities in the Soviet Union and was not an ethnic weapon. What about the fact that Western countries accepted only grain from the Soviet Union as payment for its foreign transactions? Did the Moldovan resolution provide an assessment of that?
Chisinau probably does not know what else to do to draw the Moldovans’ attention away from domestic socio-political problems, and to whip up Russophobia, which Moldovans refused to accept for years. The pro-Western Moldovan authorities cannot settle these problems for a simple reason: they are leading the people down the wrong path, which people are aware of. Besides, the authorities need to explain the disparaging correspondence of several politicians that was released on the internet. The standard solution is to blame it all on Russia, which, according to President Maia Sandu, who is a citizen of Romania, has left Moldovans without heat and light. Who has done this? Russia, which has helped Moldova for years by sending supplies and giving jobs to Moldovans in Russia? Jobs are what allowed these people to send money to their families in Moldova and to support the Moldovan economy for the past 30 years. Is Romanian citizen Maia Sandu not aware of that? What has she done for her people? This is not a rhetorical but a practical question. Russia has helped Moldova with its deeds. But what are the current Moldovan leaders, who hold foreign passports, doing for the people? Nobody knows. Their activities have only led to destruction and catastrophic consequences. This is only good for talking with their Western handlers, whose financial support the current authorities need to keep the situation under control. But the results are evident.
We find this situation deeply regrettable. But we can also see that the attempts to promote the image of Russia as an enemy are not working on the friendly Moldovan people. This policy is probably focused on the future, when young people, who are not aware of this, will be taught to only take cue from the social media, messengers and video hosting services. This can happen. But today the situation is different. Today the people of Moldova remember that in the 1990s Russia fought single-handedly – let’s be honest about this – against international terrorism, which took advantage of the huge funds, weapons and political support of the West to attract terrorists to the North Caucasus. We stood our ground, unsupported. In the process, we developed a new country in terms of law, politics and system of government. These two processes went on simultaneously. Despite our own problems, we helped Moldova and its citizens. Do people in Moldova know this? Of course, they do. They know and remember this, and I am sure that they will never forget it. Moldovans are aware of the true meaning of things, which is why they are demonstrating their negative attitude to the Russophobic policy of their pro-Western authorities, which are doing everything in their power to complicate Moldovans’ lives.
We hope that Chisinau will eventually accept the truth and find the strength to step off the flawed path, which has been set for the Republic of Moldova in the West and is leading to a complete loss of its sovereignty and the impoverishment of its citizens.
I would like to ask the Chisinau authorities why they are doing this. To please the United States? It will forget and betray you. You are not the first and, unfortunately, not the last victim. It will wipe the floor with you and ditch you.
Australia’s accusations against Russia of cyberattack on Medibank insurance company
This November, Australia picked up the baton in the anti-Russia media campaign. This is the only explanation for the unsubstantiated and politically motivated accusations made by Australian police against Russia of launching cyberattacks on the Medibank insurance company. As expected, no evidence was provided and no investigation was conducted. After all, what for? As always, the blame is cast on our country as the “highly likely” responsible party. And it is enough. The lack of evidence does not stop Australian media from hyping up the story from a certain angle.
We strongly condemn this kind of practice. At all international platforms and during bilateral contacts, we consistently explain that all incidents must be investigated by authorised and competent bodies. It is technical specialists who, upon analysing all data, can draw conclusions and establish the responsible parties and issue respective decisions. We have repeatedly informed Australian officials about a specialised body in Russia that deals with such matters, the National Computer Incident Response Coordination Centre. We have provided a detailed explanation of its main duties and principles of operation directly during our contacts with the diplomatic corps in Moscow. We have done it publicly and issued many statements to this effect. We have handed over the templates required for setting up constructive cooperation, all to make sure that, should Australia, for example, have the slightest suspicion about malicious activity coming from our country, it could promptly express its concerns, contact its colleagues in Russia and do everything so that technical specialists, who are not involved in any political battles, could start working together to identify and hold accountable perpetrators or to prevent new crimes.
As far as we know, Australia has not used this channel. I wonder if Australian media will report that. Will they ask their own politicians why they did not use the official channel to clarify what happened with their company? Those who prefer living in an imaginary world where Russia is to blame for everything should probably even begin their weather forecasts by saying that rain, storms and hail are Moscow’s underhanded schemes. But if they come down to earth, Australian media might remember that they could ask their own officials (I hope asking questions is still permitted in Australia) why nobody used this channel. Unfortunately, I can predict the outcome. It is highly unlikely they will get answers from their own authorities.
I can express our point of view. We understand the actual goal pursued by Canberra. The goal is not to identify the real perpetrators but to fulfil a political order, which is to publicly scold and shame an undesirable state. If they prefer to look for a black cat in a dark room after the cat has left, they can go ahead. The hackers will sleep peacefully, knowing that Canberra is busy with absolutely unnecessary things and is putting its efforts into something different than it should. It is obvious.
Imangali Tasmagambetov's appointment as CSTO Secretary General
At the CSTO Collective Security Council meeting in Yerevan on November 23, the leaders of the CSTO member states decided to appoint Imangali Tasmagambetov, a representative of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as Secretary General. He will take over on January 1, 2023.
We are confident that Imangali Tasmagambetov’s managerial and diplomatic experience, as well as his professionalism, energy and creative approach will effectively serve to achieve the goals of the CSTO.
We would like to wish him rewarding work in his new capacity for the sake of the CSTO’s progressive development and greater prestige. We intend to provide comprehensive assistance and support for his tenure.
Russian Language Week in Berlin
From November 21 to 25, the Russian House of Science and Culture in Berlin hosted the annual Russian Language Week, a conference on teaching the Russian language attended by about 100 teachers, linguists, literary critics and translators from 14 European countries. The event also featured lectures, seminars and workshops by experts from leading Russian educational institutions such as Moscow State University, St Petersburg State University, Pushkin State Institute of the Russian Language, and People’s Friendship University.
Also as part of the Russian Language Week, a series of events to honour the 200th anniversary of Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s birth (marked in 2021) was held at the Russian House of Science and Culture. The celebrations ran through November 23-25, co-sponsored by the Russian Ministry of Culture and included a meeting with researchers of the author’s literary legacy, Dostoyevsky for All Times, as well as the opening of the exhibition Dostoevsky amid His Characters: 200th Birth Anniversary, prepared by the Vladimir Dahl State Museum of the History of Russian Literature.
The “contribution” of the German side deserves a special comment as Germany in fact tried to hamper the holding of these landmark events with unfriendly moves. You ask how could they do this, and why would they? Absurd as it sounds, the Senate of Berlin, which fully supported the Russian Language Week events in previous years, denied support this year. Some of the invitees were given hinted warnings to avoid any contact with the Russian side. As if Dostoyevsky could harm them. Furthermore, the German embassy in Moscow denied visas to a number of Russian participants representing Rossotrudnichestvo and Russian cultural and educational institutions, including respected experts on Dostoyevsky and his legacy. We consider this demarche as yet another manifestation of Berlin's biased anti-Russian policy aimed at undermining every component of Russian-German relations, including humanitarian ties. For our part, we will continue to strongly resist the “cancel culture” campaign against Russia that is gaining momentum in the West and to work, on a systematic basis, to promote the Russian language, culture and education abroad, including in Germany.
There’s something I would like all of us to think about. Do you think Dostoyevsky will be eventually banned? Or will this transitory insanity be limited to scheming against the people involved in holding events dedicated to his memory and celebrating anniversaries? Will this remain a local incident, or will it devolve into a new phase? Will his books be banned, his name erased and his works removed from libraries? We have seen certain theatres cancel productions based on his books; we have seen the posters torn down – not by vandals, but by people with official authority. I don't have an answer to these questions. I just hope that it won’t come to this. This is my prediction. Because otherwise, that’s the line. A global green light to this kind of attitude towards global art and culture. And this will mean that civilisation is beginning to crumble.
Opera Boris Godunov premieres at La Scala
The decision of the Milan Teatro alla Scala was surprising and joyful at the same time. On December 7, the theatre will open the 2022-2023 season with the premiere of the opera Boris Godunov by the great Russian composer Modest Mussorgsky.
The leading role will be played by renowned Russian singer Ildar Abdrazakov, who was awarded the title of Merited Artist of the Russian Federation by President of Russia Vladimir Putin in 2021.
As we know, the leadership of the Italian Republic and La Scala have faced unprecedented pressure from Ukraine and its diplomatic and consular missions in Italy which demanded that the theatre’s repertoire be changed and spoke for the total cancellation of Russian culture on the Apennine Peninsula.
Let me remind you that Russian people of culture and art not only created, but have inspired millions of people with their works. They have also educated, not using their examples, but by teaching, publishing works and giving workshops. They were invited to theatres, they took part in directing ballets, operas and plays all over the world. Among them were citizens of the USSR, despite the ongoing competition of the two systems. The things we heard about ourselves! Including in the context of the situation in Afghanistan. How is it possible to remove it all from our common cultural heritage? Many generations of singers, actors, artists, ballet creators and performers were raised and educated by our Russian (or Soviet) experts who put their hearts into it. What shall we do with them? Cancel these people too? Ban them? Those who taught, mentored and those who studied and learned?
The decision taken by the Milan theatre, contrary to the anti-Russia course imposed in the Western countries, shows the Italians’ cultural sovereignty, wisdom and forward-thinking approach, which confirms their respect not only for their own cultural and historical heritage but for the culture of other peoples. In both Russia and Italy, culture is considered to be a common good and a treasure that belongs to all of mankind and cannot be cancelled to please immediate ambitions and enforced ideological guidelines.
This step lays a foundation for continuing fruitful exchanges in the cultural and humanitarian area between our countries.
On November 29, 2022, the historical documentary exhibition The Great Patriotic War: June 22, 1941 - November 19, 1942 opened at the Exhibition Hall of Federal Archives in Moscow. The opening ceremony included speeches by Head of the Federal Archival Agency Andrey Artizov; Deputy Federation Council Speaker Konstantin Kosachev; Lieutenant General Vasily Trushin, Chairman of the Military Science Committee of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and Deputy Chief of the General Staff; and Konstantin Mogilevsky, Board Chairman of the Russian Historical Society.
The current exhibition continues the 2018-2021 exhibition cycle Munich-38: On the Brink of Disaster; 1939: World War II Begins; September 1, 1939 - June 22, 1941: On the Eve of the Great Patriotic War.
The Federal Archival Agency and the Russian Historical Society, together with departmental archives of the Defence Ministry, the Foreign Ministry, the Federal Security Service, the Foreign Intelligence Service and the Interior Ministry, as well as Moscow and St Petersburg archives and archives of the Republic of Belarus, are implementing this project at the President of Russia’s instructions. The exhibition’s stands feature about 400 documents from supreme Soviet state and party agencies, the country’s Foreign and Defence ministries, intelligence reports, military maps, photos, newsreels, etc. Many of these documents are genuine.
The Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation presented over 160 archive records highlighting the first, and most difficult, phase of the Great Patriotic War, that is, from the invasion of June 22, 1941 through November 19, 1942, when the Red Army launched its counteroffensive near Stalingrad. Some materials are part of the main display, and all documents are posted on the website of the Boris Yeltsin Presidential Library.
International forum on the 50th anniversary of the World Heritage Convention
This year marks the 50th anniversary of signing the Convention Concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage (World Heritage Convention) in 1972. This is the flagship international-law document of UNESCO, and it ranks among the most widely recognised multilateral treaties in the cultural and humanitarian sphere.
To commemorate this important date and in connection with Russia’s outgoing presidency of UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee, the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Tatarstan are preparing for an international forum on the World Heritage Convention’s 50th anniversary, to take place simultaneously in St Petersburg and Kazan.
About 1,000 delegates from Russian regions, friendly states in the CIS, Asia, Africa and Latin America, including the concerned ministers, managers of World Heritage sites, and representatives of non-governmental expert and youth organisations, are expected to attend.
The forum programme will include several speakers: Head of the Republic of Tatarstan Rustam Minnikhanov, Russian Minister of Culture Olga Lyubimova, Russian Minister of Natural Resources and Environment Alexander Kozlov, and high-ranking foreign guests. A number of themed conferences on the management of cultural and natural landmarks, industrial and religious heritage, the restoration of Palmyra in Syria and the Great Silk Road project will be offered. Saint Petersburg Mining University will host sessions on nature management and the preservation of natural heritage. The delegates are to pass a concluding document after the forum.
Representatives of national foreign ministries will meet on the sidelines of the main events, and they will discuss multilateral interaction within the UNESCO framework. The consultations are to involve executive secretaries of national commissions for UNESCO affairs in the CIS member states, heads of specialised departments of national foreign ministries and representatives of the CIS Executive Committee.
The 2022 Moscow Karate Universe International Competition
On November 24-27, 2022, Moscow hosted the 2022 Moscow Karate Universe International Competition with over 300 athletes, including current Olympic champions, and world and regional champions from 18 countries who are the best in this sport.
Teams from Azerbaijan, Belarus, Iran, Egypt, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Russia, Serbia, Tunisia, Türkiye and Uzbekistan won the championship. Most medals went to Russian and Iranian karate experts.
On the final day of the competitions, President of the Russian Karate Federation Sergey Tsoy received a certificate promoting him to ninth dan black belt, signed by President of the World Karate Federation Antonio Espinós Ortueta. President of the Azerbaijan Karate Federation Yashar Bashirov presented the certificate.
The extremely well-organised tournament took place in an atmosphere of honest rivalry, friendship and mutual respect. Once again, this confirmed Russia’s traditionally impressive potential in organising major sport competitions. There were no scandals, and no one hinted at foul play or string pulling in favour of some competitors. This was a real sport festival and an outstanding event of world and international sport. This is the best way to preserve the traditions that the entire world risks losing in the context of the West’s outrageous role in destroying world sport and distorting its essence.
We would like to note that, despite the attempts of Western countries to fence Russia off from world sport, and the unprecedented measures by the authorities of certain countries to prevent their athletes from taking part in the competitions in Moscow, Russian karate remains a member of the huge global karate family.
First Youth Arctic Games in the Republic of Komi
On November 24-28, 2022, the Republic of Komi hosted the First Youth Arctic Delphic Games, a qualifier for establishing a national team to compete at another stage of the International Delphic Games.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov sent greetings to organisers and participants at the event. The competitions involved over 600 young people between 10 and 25 years old who vied for awards in ten categories.
The beauty of the Republic of Komi and its unique culture became a powerful source of inspiration for the contestants. The results of the competitions and the festival programme are posted on the International Delphic Committee website.
We consistently support initiatives aimed at expanding international cultural and humanitarian cooperation to unlock the creative potential of young people.
Maria Zakharova: With this statement, the President of Germany confirms what the Russian party has been saying throughout the special military operation by the Russian Armed Forces in Ukraine: the leading Western countries, including Germany, are interested in prolonging for as long as possible the combat activity as part of the special military operation.
Berlin and other capitals, while consistently pumping the Kiev regime with weapons of all kinds, are trying to inflict as much damage on Russia as they can using Ukrainian soldiers and at the expense of the Ukrainian people’s wellbeing. To them, Ukrainians are no more than expendables used to implement their geopolitical project to contain our country. We feel nothing but pain. The West has cynically deceived the people of Ukraine, the Kiev politicians and the country’s public opinion, telling them about a “better tomorrow” and drawing them into it under the curatorship of the West. And after luring them into the trap, it keeps throwing more wood into this fire.
Unfortunately, the residents of the neighbouring country that is akin to us have become hostages of the hegemonic ambitions of the NATO countries and the current Ukrainian authorities, who are completely controlled by them. Frank-Walter Steinmeier’s honesty is remarkable and indicative: the West has stopped concealing its true attitude towards Ukraine even in word. He looks at the country solely as a stage to fight Russia, a testing ground for their weapons and a source of cheap food. It has become obvious for everyone. Achieving peace and stability anytime soon is not part of the plan. This is what Frank-Walter Steinmeier said.
Maria Zakharova: We always consider the political structure of independent, sovereign countries as a solely domestic affair of the state, in which we never interfere, through political statements or actions. Like other European countries, we are following the process and analysing it. Not only at the state level, but at the private, too. It causes a stir and, of course, draws attention.
We note that against the backdrop of the economic recession that has engulfed the United Kingdom and London’s inability to come to an agreement with Brussels on post-Brexit issues, the prospect of the Kingdom’s regions gaining greater independence is causing more commotion among the British elites.
We believe that these issues will be dealt with based on international and British law (I do not know how much it corresponds to their actions) with taking into account the democratic and transparent will of the people of Scotland.
It will be a good test for the United Kingdom in terms of how London feels about the idea of a referendum, the citizens’ will, a plebiscite not in name but in deed. We heard that they have a clear position on which referendums are good and which are not. Let us see what will happen there, how they will treat it, organise the process and give people the opportunity to express their will.
Maria Zakharova: Several official representatives from Russia and Kazakhstan have spoken at length about this initiative and noted its relevance.
As a reminder, the idea is to harmonise the interaction between the three largest owners of natural gas reserves in foreign markets and to meet current domestic market needs taking advantage of each other's comparative advantages.
This matter certainly requires careful study by the competent ministries of all interested parties, and consideration for their national interests.
Maria Zakharova: My explanations are unlikely to be any different from the text version, but I can do it since you’re asking.
The Russian side’s decision to postpone the next session of the Bilateral Consultative Commission under the US-Russia New START Treaty previously scheduled for November 29 - December 6 in Cairo, was made at the political level, taking into account the extremely negative situation in Russian-American relations, which was created by Washington and continues to degrade.
We have encountered the highest level of toxicity and hostility from Washington in all areas. Nearly every move the United States has made with regard to our country as part of the full-blown hybrid war unleashed against Russia, is dictated by some compulsive urge to harm Russia wherever possible.
This situation is naturally affecting the sphere of arms control, which cannot be taken out of the overall context or considered in isolation from geopolitical realities. What kind of distorted logic combines telling Russia about restraint, transparency and predictability in military matters, while at the same time supporting the Kiev regime in the killing of Russian citizens, our military personnel and civilians in Russian regions, supplying Ukraine with increasingly destructive and deadly weapons for this and dispatching American instructors, advisers and mercenaries to that country?
As regards the Treaty on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (New START) proper, here, too, we have noted the never-ending attempts by the United States to shift the balance it stipulates in its own favour. In particular, one manifestation was America’s completely illegitimate removal of a significant part of its strategic offensive arms from the New START-accountability limit. Washington said they were converted, or they just renamed them to exempt them from the requirements. We have been working on this with the American side for a long time, and even managed to achieve some progress, but the problem remains unresolved.
At the same time, it was clear from what US officials said that the US delegation was going to Cairo to push through the resumption of inspections, not to discuss any of Russia’s concerns and problems we have identified. The United States also stubbornly continued to evade admitting that their actions had undermined the New START verification mechanism. It was Washington and its restrictive measures against Russia that effectively made it impossible for Russia to exercise our inspection rights under the treaty. The United States openly dismissed our well-founded objections and concerns and demanded the immediate resumption of inspections on Russian territory.
We continue to regard the START Treaty as an important tool for ensuring predictability and preventing an arms race. It continues to serve the interests of both parties. In particular, an uninterrupted system for exchanging notifications on the status of strategic offensive arms between the parties plays a crucial stabilising role.
We expect sincere efforts from the United States to create acceptable conditions for holding a BCC session in 2023 and returning to the full implementation of all New START provisions.
Maria Zakharova: I believe that it is not a “ceiling” but a “bottom.” We have pointed out on many occasions that the adoption of a price cap for Russian oil is an anti-business measure, which will disrupt the supply chain and can seriously complicate the situation on global energy markets.
The Russian Federation will not supply oil to countries that support this anti-Russia initiative. The consequences will be destructive for all parties. We have pointed this out many times.
The differences between the EU countries on a price cap for energy resources is proof that this initiative has nothing in common with economic realities. A price dictate and the creation of a buyers’ cartel will also create an extremely dangerous precedent for international trade, which is so far based on market principles.
Europe, the EU countries, are gradually coming to see what the United States is doing and what its actions are aimed at.
The United States is aiming at two centres in their efforts – China and Russia, which they cannot challenge. In fact, there is a third centre, which is actually the first one. A look at the destructive effects of US actions towards the EU shows that the United States now regards the EU as a frenemy. They would like to ruin it as a market, a territory of opportunity and a major player and centre of power. They cannot do this openly with statements, political pressure or blackmail, because it would amount to admitting that Washington is using such measures because it does not want economic competition. In fact, this is what’s happening now. The EU countries have started asking themselves where people like Ursula von der Leyen and Josep Borrell are jointly leading them. They are clearly moving them away from prosperity, peace and stability on the European continent. All this increasingly suits the interests of the other player, the United States, which is forcing its will through Brussels officials who promote a pro-American policy.
Many oil producing countries have spoken out against a price cap because they know that today it is aimed against Russia (although it would indirectly affect all of them), and tomorrow it could be adopted against any other country for political or other reasons.
Maria Zakharova: We regularly bring to the attention of the OSCE and the UN’s specialised platforms our position that the sending of any type of weapons to the special military operation zone by Western countries is unacceptable, our position relies solely on data from official sources. This has also been publicly stated on several occasions.
Maria Zakharova: Thank you for caring about Russian-Hungarian relations. It’s very pleasant.
In recent decades relations have been developing dynamically, based on healthy pragmatism and mutual benefit, while considering each other’s interests, the same way we call on everyone to build relations: based on international law.
At the same time, Russia respects the sovereignty of Hungary and believes that this sovereign state can decide domestic and foreign policy issues on its own. This differs from the NATO-centric world order or Western-style world order. They have a command-administrative system: if the chief says it, then everyone must obey. And the chief speaks in a way that (as is usually the case in the West) discourages any desire for discussion.
Our approach is different. Look how we act at the CIS, CSTO, SCO and BRICS. We base our approach on the fact that every state is sovereign and has the right to build its own foreign and domestic policy. If we can combine efforts without prejudice against each other's interests and do it together, that's great. We will do so. We do not dictate anything to anyone. We do not require anything from anyone; we are only fulfilling what was agreed on. This is the difference.
Maria Zakharova: After NATO’s basic refusal to have a serious dialogue on the Russian initiative on security guarantees at the beginning of this year, there have been no contacts between the Foreign Ministry and the NATO International Secretariat.
Maria Zakharova: In accordance with the founding Ottawa Declaration of 1996, the Arctic Council does not work with military security issues. In this context, we would consider it incorrect to directly link the prospects for the council with Sweden and Finland joining NATO.
At the same time, we cannot ignore the fact that after Finland and Sweden join the alliance, all Arctic Council member countries, except Russia, will be members of the North Atlantic bloc. This could lead to increased militarisation in the Arctic, which, in turn, would mean a significant increase in tensions and security risks in the high latitudes.
Maria Zakharova: Tomorrow, on December 1, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will give a news conference on this matter.
Given that your question concerns his quote, let’s wait until tomorrow. I think we will hear a lot of interesting things on this issue.
Maria Zakharova: We maintain close contact with our Syrian and Türkish partners to prevent an escalation in the north of the Syrian Arab Republic in view of Ankara’s declared plans to conduct a surface military operation on Syrian territory. We believe that this step would lead to the further deterioration of an already difficult situation in this Syrian territory, and would have a negative impact on the situation in the region in general. We assume that increasing coordination between Ankara and Damascus is in the interests of ensuring reliable security in this border area.
In order to prevent a major escalation, meetings at the interdepartmental level are being held, including within the Astana process. This issue, in particular, was discussed in detail during the regular 19th International Meeting on Syria in Astana on November 22-23, 2022. The meeting’s concluding statement clearly says that achieving permanent security and stability in the northeast of the Syrian Arab Republic is only possible through the preservation of the country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Meanwhile, we are making efforts to promote a dialogue between the self-proclaimed Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria and the Syrian government to return the areas to the east of the Euphrates to the common space of the Syrian state. The US’s illegal military presence remains the main obstacle. The Americans support the separatist sentiments of some Syrian Kurdish leaders and are openly pursuing a separation from Damascus in these areas, which are temporarily out of the control of the official Syrian government and which are rich in oil and other natural resources. We have repeatedly expressed this. During our contacts with Kurdish representatives, we consistently advance the idea that it is counter-productive and short-sighted to count on an alliance with Washington instead of building normal interaction with the central government of the Syrian Arab Republic. We will continue this approach.
Maria Zakharova: Yesterday, November 29, 2022, UN Secretary-General Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said the first shipment of Russian fertiliser (20,000 tonnes) from European ports was shipped from the Netherlands to Malawi via Mozambique.
Maria Zakharova: We have commented several times that the organising of summit meetings is the responsibility of the Presidential Administration.
Maria Zakharova: I commented on this question in detail earlier.
Maria Zakharova: Indeed, decades ago we tried to hear something constructive in this criticism. We tried to analyse the negative background on Russia. What did we find out? First of all, this negative background is almost the 100 percent reaction of the West. But it cannot be like this. There can be no out-and-out criticism of everything that is happening. Something good also happens, right? Without bias. There is no such thing as only the "bad." When there is only "bad," it is not criticism but engaged propaganda, the use of information and public reaction for political purposes.
Second, we have come to understand that there is no sense within this engaged viewpoint. It is important to the West to keep a certain level of negative reaction to what is happening in our country, always and on any occasion. Increasing or slightly decreasing it, but never "changing the record." No matter what we do, no matter how we do it, everything only provokes one reaction – a negative one. But it can't be like that. There are some things that, according to the "canons" of the West, are right, normal and good. However, there is no reaction to them at all.
At a certain point we understood that it has nothing to do with criticism, it is not criticism. You asked "what is the reaction" and "what is the attitude"? That's exactly how it is treated, in an appropriate way. Not as criticism that should be analysed, but as a biased point of view and Russophobic propaganda. And there is only one reaction to this: to present one’s position and engage in debunking fake stories. In short, "the dogs bark, but the caravan moves on."
Question: The EU is working on a legal framework that would make it possible to seize the property of Russian companies and the Russian state abroad. The EU member states are also planning similar measures at the national level. What are the Foreign Ministry's plans in this regard? What is Russia planning to do to hold onto foreign assets?
Maria Zakharova: The leadership of the European Union has been hatching plans for a few months to develop a legal framework for the seizure, theft, or confiscation of the assets currently frozen on the territory of the EU, belonging to Russian individuals and legal entities that have been targeted by the EU’s unilateral sanctions. Let me remind you that they are sort of uncomfortable with expropriating someone else's property without at least a semblance of legality; maybe wary of having the same done to them one day. So they are hastily trying to come up with something. Firstly, if they do this, there is a high risk of a massive wave of lawsuits filed with the national courts in the EU member states, which, unlike the EU Court of Justice, which has been openly declaring the primacy of political expediency over the law for a long time, can pass a non-compliant ruling. Secondly, this would jeopardise whatever is left of the reputation of the European Union as a guarantor of the basic principles of a market economy.
Violating the sanctions is qualified as a criminal offence at the EU level, along with terrorism, drug and arms trafficking, money laundering, corruption, sexual exploitation of women and children. What they are proposing is an absolutely fraudulent scheme, which amounts to stealing. The persons on the sanctions list are required to voluntarily declare their assets in the territory of the European Union. Failure to provide the relevant information, in full or in part, will automatically be treated as a criminally punishable attempt to circumvent sanctions and may lead to the subsequent confiscation of the assets. As a reminder, we are talking here about unilateral restrictions adopted by the European Union in circumvention of the UN Security Council, which makes them illegitimate from the international law perspective. This means what we are dealing with is double lawlessness.
Brussels, blinded by the current anti-Russia frenzy and Russophobic hysteria, is failing to realise that such pseudo-legal stunts, if implemented, will finally blow the European Union’s reputation as a reliable jurisdiction for doing business. They believe that no one else sees this. With remarkable overconfidence, they are sure they are in the right, and assume everyone thinks the same way and supports this bashing. Therefore, they believe that their unauthorised and illegal actions are seen by the world as the norm.
Billions of people living in various regions have reacted negatively, not seeing this as a legitimate action. They have this attitude already, when these actions do not actually concern them. But when – if – the European Union does implement its plans, a massive wave will rise in the world, which will lead to unpredictable consequences. I assure you that Brussels will find reasons to extrapolate such actions to other countries as well. This will destroy the foundations of the current world order. The very provisions of international law that the world has consistently developed and adopted will be undermined.
Let me remind you that the Western world actually put in a lot of effort into some of its parts back then. And it is the West that is undermining them now. In particular, economic laws.
This will obviously discourage foreign economic operators and investors from doing business in the EU, where any legal guarantees of the inviolability of private property can be trampled on in the blink of an eye. This process is already underway. With the economic situation deteriorating and the EU losing control at home and failing to counteract the destructive measures taken by Washington, European companies are relocating to the United States. Europeans prefer not to talk about this openly, even though it is one of the biggest problems on the continent.
Once again, we are warning that if the EU actually goes so far as to appropriate the property of Russian citizens and enterprises or the country’s state reserves, a proportionate response will inevitably follow from the Russian side. I can’t say now what it will be – mirrored, symmetrical, or asymmetrical. It will be reciprocal and tangible. It won’t be limited to words. And Brussels will be fully and solely responsible for the consequences, including the impact on the interests of European business.
I have the impression that after someone blew up their gas pipeline, and they didn’t even have the guts to say anything, apparently, the willpower of the Europeans (I mean the EU countries) had been completely crumbled. A piece of their civilian infrastructure is blown up, and they don’t say a thing. Given the pace of previous investigations we have seen in Western countries over the past decades, they could have come up with something about the gas pipeline already. After all, they somehow managed to come up with explanations for whatever was happening in the world until now, detailing their approaches to the most difficult situations with pinpoint accuracy. Now, they have a facility blown up on their territory that was vital for the citizens of those countries. And they can’t even mumble a few words.
