Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, May 17, 2023
Table of Contents
- Sergey Lavrov’s talks with Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov and Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan
- Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming participation in the 31st Assembly of the Council on Foreign and Defence Policy
- Sergey Lavrov’s talks with Foreign Minister of Uzbekistan Bakhtiyor Saidov
- Ukrainian crisis
- Extension of the Black Sea Grain Initiative
- Elections in Gagauzia
- Update on the developments on the Armenia-Azerbaijan border
- Armed attack on humanitarian relief convoy in Myanmar
- Russia blocks the accounts of the Finnish Embassy and Consulate General in St Petersburg
- France performs its duties as UNESCO Headquarters host country in bad faith
- Report by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the events in Mali
- Continuing discrimination against Russian athletes
- Desecration of monuments to Soviet soldiers in Bulgaria
- International Day of Living Together in Peace
- World Day for Cultural Diversity for Dialogue and Development
- Day of Slavic Writing and Culture
- 7th Young Diplomats Forum of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation
- Statements by the Foreign Minister of Japan
- Domestic political situation in Moldova
- Results of Moscow visit by Secretary General of Asia Cooperation Dialogue
- CIA’s attempts to recruit Russians on Telegram
- Increased sanctions pressure on Russia
- Construction of a railway line to Nakhichevan
- Moldova’s potential withdrawal from CIS Interparliamentary Assembly
- Death of foreign nationals in Ukraine
- Armenia-Azerbaijan settlement
- Presidential election in Türkiye
- Russia-Türkiye cooperation
- US pressure on various countries
- Arrest of Robert Shonov
- Upcoming G7 summit in Hiroshima
- Russia-Georgia relations
- Russia-EU relations
- Depleted uranium ammunition in Ukraine
- Arctic Council
- Statements by US Ambassador to South Africa
- Common foreign policy of Russia and Belarus
- Extension of the grain deal
- Quota system for foreign citizens in Bali
- Escalation scenarios for Ukraine
- Legal status of Crimea
- Statements by Jens Stoltenberg
- Visa facilitation for travelling to Russia
- Lifting obstacles to the implementation of the grain deal
On May 19, Moscow will be the venue for a trilateral meeting and separate bilateral meetings between Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Foreign Minister of the Republic of Azerbaijan Jeyhun Bayramov and Foreign Minister of the Republic of Armenia Ararat Mirzoyan. Bilateral talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan on a peace treaty will be held separately.
The foreign ministers will review the prospects for normalising relations between Baku and Yerevan amid dynamic developments in the region. There will be an in-depth discussion on the progress in the implementation of what serves as the foundation for the process towards normalising relations, which are the trilateral agreements between the leaders of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia dated November 9, 2020, January 11 and November 26, 2021, and October 31, 2022, including restoring transport and economic ties, delimitating the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, preparing a peace treaty between the two countries, as well as promoting contacts between members of the public, experts and members of parliament.
Plans for the separate meetings between Sergey Lavrov and his Azerbaijani and Armenian colleagues also include a discussion on the most topical items on the bilateral and international agendas.
We believe the upcoming meetings will help Baku and Yerevan move towards the settlement of the differences between them, as well as facilitate the search for mutually acceptable solutions and, generally, help build trust between the parties and enhance stability in the South Caucasus.
On May 20, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will take part in the work of the annual Assembly of the Council on Foreign and Defence Policy.
The Council on Foreign and Defence Policy is one of the most recognised Russian non-governmental organisations, a major discussion platform and an association of experts on international affairs. The Foreign Ministry appreciates the level of cooperation with the Council and appreciates its contribution to understanding and interpreting the processes taking place in the geopolitical arena. During the upcoming Assembly, special attention is expected to be paid to the recently approved new edition of the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation and the goals of diplomatic efforts at the current stage of forming a multipolar world order.
Sergey Lavrov’s talks with Foreign Minister of Uzbekistan Bakhtiyor Saidov
On May 21-22, Foreign Minister of the Republic of Uzbekistan Bakhtiyor Saidov will make a working visit to the Russian Federation.
His talks with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will be part of his agenda in Moscow.
It is planned to consider the entire range of bilateral political cooperation based on strategic partnership and alliance, and also a number of topical aspects of trade, economic, cultural and humanitarian cooperation. The ministers will discuss these issues in the context of promoting the interstate dialogue this year.
The ministers will exchange views on the regional situation, taking into account the coordinated contribution to the development of cooperation and maintaining stability and security in Central Asia and in the border region.
It is planned to consider key integration processes in the Eurasian space and common problems for the states on the continent.
On May 15, we marked the fifth anniversary of the traffic opening on the automobile part of the Crimean Bridge, which has become the most comfortable link between the mainland and the peninsula. No ideological or political acts of subversion, extremist or terrorist acts, can upset the plans to maintain sustainable logistics connections. Advanced design solutions in building this bridge made it possible to eliminate the consequences of the Kiev regime’s subversion on October 8, 2022 as quickly as possible and restore the traffic on the bridge.
Vladimir Zelensky’s statement on May 13 sounds completely absurd against this background. He said Kiev “will have to spend a lot of time on Crimea’s recovery and work hard to restore everything that the Russians have destroyed there.” I cannot say that he was in his right mind when he said this. It seems to me he was under the influence of something at the time. This is yet another case when we encounter inadequate claims of the Kiev authorities to the now prosperous Russian territory. Representatives of different ethnicities and religions live there in peace and accord. They were waiting and striving for this for a long time and they finally got it. They would probably have no problems at all if it wasn’t for the scheming of the Kiev authorities.
Ukrainian nationalists have recently intensified the shelling of Russia’s territory.
Local residents will remember the Day of the LPR, which is marked on May 12, by a massive missile attack. It was conducted with French-British Storm Shadow long-range cruise missiles which London gave to the Zelensky regime. Their fragments were found on the explosion sites. The origin of these weapons does not cause doubts. Strikes are delivered not at military targets but at civilian facilities and residential neighbourhoods of cities to increase civilian losses. I would like to ask the humanists and human rights champions on Downing Street how they feel about this. As always, human rights organisations ignored these obvious violations of international humanitarian law by the Kiev regime. I am referring to Western human rights and humanitarian organisations. Russian agencies are focused on this all the time, publishing information, photos and videos and helping people. I am referring not only to those who are doing this by the call of duty. I am also talking about spontaneously established organisations and volunteer movements, about people who care, who are fighting on the humanitarian frontline.
After a relatively extended quiet period, Lugansk came under fire. Most recently, a polymer product plant, a meat processing plant, and a bus station have been attacked. So much for the West yelling and chest-thumping as it spouts about it taking care of civilians. Have we heard a single word of disapproval regarding Kiev’s actions or the slightest attempt to draw the attention (I’m not even talking about holding accountable) of those who fire shells into densely populated civilian infrastructure? Unfortunately, people were wounded. On May 13, the Orthodox Epiphany Cathedral in Gorlovka (DPR) came under fire. On May 15, another act of sabotage was committed in Lugansk with an improvised explosive device detonated in the central part of that city. Kiev neo-Nazis timed these barbaric attacks to coincide with Zelensky’s European “tour” on May 12-15, when he visited Italy, Germany, France and Great Britain. What was he doing there? His Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba said what, “he was gathering weapons for the war.”
While still claiming that it does not intend to supply Kiev with missiles whose range exceeds 300 km, the US seems to have decided to reassign this task to the UK and France. Clearly, they would never have dared deliver long-range missiles to Kiev without Washington’s approval. The recent statements by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Coordinator for Strategic Communication John Kirby to the effect that transferring 200 Storm Shadow missiles to Ukraine was a major contribution to the West’s overall effort to provide military support to Ukraine makes it clear that the Anglo-Saxons are pursuing a single mutually agreed and absolutely Russophobic policy which was previously seen in politics, economy and humanitarian sphere, but has, in recent years, graduated to an openly militaristic phase.
We took note of London's plans to boost supplies of long-range weapons, including an additional 400 Storm Shadow units and anti-aircraft missile systems and unmanned aerial systems, including hundreds of attack drones with a range of over 200 km, which were announced by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak on May 15.
Berlin has livened up as well and confirmed the provision of a major military aid package to the Kiev regime. In the coming months, Kiev will receive German weapons worth 2.7 billion euros. The Ukrainian forces will receive 20 Marder infantry fighting vehicles, 30 Leopard-1 tanks, four IRIS-T SLM anti-aircraft systems and hundreds of guided missiles for them, 200 reconnaissance drones, and over 100 logistic support vehicles.
Brussels is trying to keep pace. According to EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell, in the current situation the Kiev regime, as well as Ukraine will cease to exist as an independent state without Western aid, so there will be no end to the aid being provided to the Zelensky regime. This means that, according to the Western logic, the war will be fought to the last Ukrainian, as we have said many times. The European Union has already allocated 16 billion euros in military aid to the Kiev regime and trained over 17,000 Ukrainian servicemen. On May 13, 2023, the head of European diplomacy not only welcomed the delivery of long-range weapons to Ukraine but also urged countries to boost the supplies of these weapons. Just to remind you, this is their version of diplomacy, since it was said by the EU head of foreign affairs Josep Borrell. In reality, there is no such thing as diplomacy there. What we have are aggressive Russophobic actions aimed at carrying out their long-standing plans to, as they used to say, contain [Russia] and as they say now, to inflict a strategic defeat on our country.
The West has made its role in the conflict abundantly clear: Ukraine serves merely as a tool and Ukrainians as pawns it is ready to sacrifice in its standoff with Russia. The West has sacrificed literally everything on the altar of its morbid geopolitical ambitions. They are “exceptional”. Only they can govern everyone. Nobody has the right to take independent decisions, be it domestic affairs or foreign policy. The previous times of colonialism and imperialism have not receded into the past but rather are being converted to a modern format. This was the only reason for initiating the whole story. Its practical implementation and its result, as they see it, is inflicting strategic defeat on Russia. True, next they mention China and all others who will not obey them.
The European Union proved to be convincing in demonstrating that the Ukrainian crisis is a good way of replenishing coffers, although not national coffers but some others.
As it transpired, the notorious eurosolidarity and the help to Ukraine on resolving the grain issue have already brought EU business people a profit of over 20 billion euros from May 2022 to March 2023. This is how concerned they are about the needy. Do you remember how it all started? With the words that the hungry people must be certainly supplied with food, that they were not in Europe and that everything was done for their sake. As a result, in one year, 20 billion euros were made but not by the needy who could have bought the food they required for this money. Instead, the money went to those who were behind the rising tensions over food supplies in Europe (the EU and NATO). The EU paid the Kiev regime 26 billion euros for Ukraine’s 63 million tonnes of agricultural products and contrived to sell it 23 million tonnes of its own products for a total of 48 billion euros via “solidarity corridors.”
Elementary maths indicates who is fighting for money and for what kind of money and who is standing behind this whole story that looks like a global machination, and who is profiting from the escalation of the conflict. Just imagine – a couple of figures lead to a global revelation.
Westerners continue distorting the truth about events in Ukraine, including in Bucha in late March 2022. The Zelensky regime has turned this town near Kiev into a ritual place of political tourism for foreign guests. Members of the Helsinki Commission of the US Congress visited it, among others. They were accompanied by US Ambassador to the OSCE Michael Carpenter during their stay in Ukraine on May 5-6 of this year. Propaganda clichés about the alleged complicity of the Russian military in the murders of civilians came back to life once again in accordance with the previous manuals. However, there is a small nuance.
We have repeatedly emphasised that an honest and unbiased investigation into the situation in Bucha is necessary in order to establish what really happened there. It should answer simple questions about the identification of corpses, time and cause of death and traces of possible movement of bodies. All this is routine for any investigation of even a household crime. Ukraine is now stuffed with military instructors, specialists from various NATO countries, and tracking equipment of any scale and in all areas. So what happened? Why has all this information not been published for a year now? The answer is simple – it was a put-up job. This is why these questions remain unanswered. Our request to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to provide a full list of the Bucha residents who lost their lives during this period remains relevant. We have received no clear answer to this specific question up to now. We hear from time to time that all information is on social media and something has been published on the internet. I don’t know where or in what social media anything was published. There are official channels of interaction. If we address the UN via its Secretariat, we would like to receive the requested information from it. After all, the Secretariat itself referred to the situation in Bucha many times
All these actions by the Ukrainian authorities and their Western patrons show that the goals set must be reached, as our leadership has said more than once.
Extension of the Black Sea Grain Initiative
I would like to comment on the grain deal, as it is widely referred to. Actually, it is called the Black Sea Grain Initiative.
First of all, we confirm the extension of the initiative for two months announced by President of Türkiye Recep Tayyip Erdogan. It is one more chance to help ensure global food security not on paper but in real life and above all help the countries that need this most of all.
Second, our position of principle regarding the Istanbul agreements reached on July 22, 2022, has not changed. Imbalances in their implementation must be mended as soon as possible.
On May 14, 2023, Yevgenia Gutsul, a candidate from the Sor Party, won a runoff election in Gagauzia, Moldova’s autonomous region. In the evening of May 16, 2023, members of the regional People’s Assembly approved the relevant decision of the Central Election Commission of Gagauzia.
Russia respects the results of the vote in this autonomy. Russia and Gagauzia maintain close cultural, humanitarian, trade and economic cooperation, as well as ties in other spheres. We hope that the newly-elected leadership of the autonomy will continue to strengthen interaction with Russia and its regions. In turn, we reaffirm our readiness to expand ties with Gagauzia, which traditionally voices a friendly attitude towards Russia.
Unfortunately, Russian representatives were not allowed to monitor either the first election round on April 30, 2023, or the runoff election. At the same time, officials from diplomatic missions of other states, primarily members of the collective West, were granted this opportunity.
We can also see that Chisinau could not hide its disappointment with the fact that the people of Gagauzia rejected Russophobia and the neo-liberal agenda as something alien. There are calls to annul the election results, de-Russify the autonomy and increase Romanian influence there. The leader of Moldova has also made an absurd statement. Have Moldovan authorities cancelled the very word Moldova? Hasn’t this idea dawned on Maia Sandu? She voiced some absolutely incredible statements, explaining election returns in Gagauzia by the fact that everyone speaks Russian there. What language should the people of Gagauzia speak? Should they speak Romanian, which has replaced Moldovan because the leader of Moldova is a Romanian national and upholds the interests of another country in the sovereign state?
According to media reports, Moldovan law enforcement agencies are conducting searches at the Central Election Commission of Gagauzia, and have confiscated election documentation last night.
Moldovan authorities must respect the choice of the autonomy’s residents, who have resolutely rejected the policy of severing ties with Russia. This is not about politics or politically motivated issues here. What we have is a realistic assessment of the situation, knowledge of history and an understanding of realities, including in the context of the future.
Update on the developments on the Armenia-Azerbaijan border
Regrettably, both sides violated the ceasefire regime on the Armenia-Azerbaijan border near the village of Sotk in the Gegharkunik Province of Armenia on May 11-12. The situation has been stabilised.
We call on the Azerbaijani and Armenian parties to refrain from provocations and moves that cause tensions to escalate. We believe that all disputes should be settled politically and diplomatically.
We intend to promote this approach, including at the trilateral meeting of the foreign ministers of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia, which is to be held in Moscow on May 19.
Armed attack on humanitarian relief convoy in Myanmar
On May 7, 2023, an ASEAN humanitarian relief convoy, which included diplomatic officials from Indonesia and Singapore accredited in the Republic of the Union of Myanmar, was attacked in the south of Shan State. One of the vehicles was damaged. Thankfully, no local or international members of the convoy were injured.
Myanmar’s authorities blamed this terrorist attack on the “irreconcilable opposition” and armed ethnic groups. In response to concern expressed by ASEAN over the incident, the national authorities reaffirmed their commitment to strengthening ties with ASEAN, including in the humanitarian area, in keeping with the Five-Point Consensus coordinated in April 2021.
That attack is fresh evidence of the radical wing of the anti-government forces’ subversive activities in Myanmar. They are deliberately hindering efforts to distribute humanitarian aid and promote stability and socioeconomic development in the border regions of Myanmar.
Such violence against government officials and civilians, and this time also against diplomatic personnel, is rooted in the financial and material support provided to the Myanmar opposition forces, above all the self-proclaimed “national unity government,” by the United States and several other countries.
What is Washington’s policy? Regrettably, it is aimed, as usual, at undermining the efforts of the regional community to contribute to the restoration of peace in Myanmar. Considering the use of cross-border channels to deliver supplies to the militants, this could pose a threat to the security of adjacent states and Southeast Asia as a whole. The incident involving ASEAN diplomats has highlighted the danger of flirting with destructive forces and armed groups.
For our part, we will back ASEAN’s resolve to promote a political settlement in Myanmar, including in the humanitarian area. We strongly believe that the collective efforts of 10 ASEAN nations should be based on close cooperation with the Myanmar authorities.
Russia blocks the accounts of the Finnish Embassy and Consulate General in St Petersburg
The Foreign Ministry can confirm the fact that Russia has imposed restrictions on the accounts of the Embassy of Finland and the Finnish Consulate General in St Petersburg, mirroring the same restrictions imposed on Russian foreign missions in that country, where they are limited to using an account with a single bank. This is a done deal.
We have raised the question of lifting these restrictions with Finland many times, warning that we would have to reciprocate unless the situation was settled. However, the Finnish authorities failed to take any action.
This approach is unconstructive and runs counter the country’s obligations to provide for the smooth operation of a foreign diplomatic mission as per the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.
In any case, reciprocity will remain our guiding principle when it comes to the functioning of our missions, including their financial support.
It was quite surprising that when the conversation on this matter started in Finland, they failed to mention the actions they took regarding Russia’s diplomatic missions. That is what I call a short memory.
France performs its duties as UNESCO Headquarters host country in bad faith
In its commitment to confrontation, the collective West continues intentionally undermining mechanisms underpinning interstate relations and ignoring the diplomatic norms by using all kinds of dirty tricks. Paris followed in the footsteps of Washington by adopting bad visa practices. As a country hosting the UNESCO Headquarters, France failed to issue visas on time to several Russian representatives, preventing them from attending the 216th Session of the UNESCO Executive Board. Visa-related incidents of this kind with their obvious political bias are becoming a regular occurrence. The Russian delegation could not attend the 33rd session of the UNESCO Intergovernmental Council of the International Programme for the Development of Communication in November 2022 when the same straightforward method was used against it.
By doing this, Paris has intentionally failed to honour its obligations as a host country. These tricks are especially cynical considering that both events, among other things, were conceived as platforms for promoting equal interstate dialogue on defending the media and the plurality of views. This begs a question: Is this the way to promote a plurality of views, by cutting off those who hold dissenting views? This way, the only people left will be those who hold what they think are the correct views. By getting rid of all the alternate views and coalescing around a singular vision, this will be pluralism at its finest. Is this the way Paris views pluralism, may I ask? What a shame!
We call on France to stop abusing the trust the international community has placed in it, as well as the honour of hosting a UN special agency for pursuing its vested interests. This is how things stand. We also expect senior members of the UNESCO Secretariat to take all measures as per the international law to prevent situations of this kind from happening again. This message targets not only the UNESCO Secretariat, but also the UN Secretariat in New York where the UN has its headquarters. We keep track of all these developments and bring them to the attention of the UN Secretariat so that everyone knows the extent to which the regimes of the collective West undermine and ignore international legal norms and fail to live up to their own commitments, which runs counter to the interests of their own people.
Report by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the events in Mali
We noted a report released on May 12, 2023, by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, on the events in Mali. The document concerns “crimes” committed in March 2022 near the town of Moura in one of the central provinces of the country.
It is regrettable that OHCHR experts have essentially become involved in a misinformation campaign. Sadly, the report is not based on official information or the results of an investigation conducted by the Malian authorities but with reference to anonymous sources and some ostensibly trustworthy resources.
The goal of planting this sort of information is to persuade the international public that the Malian and foreign military personnel were responsible for the “killings” of local civilians. Certain Western countries and the media under their control are clearly content with these allegations.
There is a clear format specifically for this type of reports. There must be no anonymous sources or unidentified interviewees a priori. It is a document, not an expert’s private opinion, that must rely on trustworthy, credible and verifiable information. On many occasions in the UN, at the Secretariat and among the member states, we have noted attempts to globally spread misinformation that were eventually disavowed by life itself. We have learned to trust but verify. This is why we also noted this particular report.
We believe that this one-sided and non-constructive approach by the OHCHR risks undermining the reputation of this UN body and prompts questions about the Office’s impartiality.
We strongly urge UN experts to exercise their mandate in a depoliticised manner and strictly adhere to the principles of universality, impartiality, objectivity and non-discrimination, mutually respectful dialogue and cooperation.
Continuing discrimination against Russian athletes
We cannot help but draw attention to the continuing discrimination against Russian sports and Russian athletes by international sport bodies. After the recent resonating decision by the International Fencing Federation that did not allow leading Russian athletes to compete, without any explanation whatsoever, and thus essentially confirmed its own intention to exclude strongest athletes from international competitions, another “notable” act came from the International Weightlifting Federation. “Based on recommendations issued by the IOC,” the IWF developed its own “policy concerning participation of Russian and Belarusian athletes” and specific eligibility criteria for admitting our athletes to competitions.
We consider these demands yet another manifestation of the anti-Russia course dictated by pro-Western affiliations. It is segregation as it is, in one of its forms. There is no reasonable explanation as to why athletes, who have dedicated their lives to training and competing, who follow the fundamental rules of the Olympic movement and professional sports, cannot be admitted to competitions based on their nationality. And this is exactly what is happening.
To those who will attribute this to the geopolitical situation, I want to say: and when did it start? We have observed a similar attitude towards Russian athletes, in particular, for many years. There have been different excuses and circumstances but the segregation of our athletes has remained the same.
The excessive, unreasonable and humiliating requirements that continue to be artificially imposed on our athletes solely based on their nationality violate not only the Olympic Charter and the underlying principles of the Olympic movement, but also the International Weightlifting Federation’s Constitution, which expressly prohibits any discrimination, including on political or ethnic grounds. Moreover, in an attempt to maintain some balance, the IWF decided to establish a special monitoring body authorised to conduct checks, observe and pass verdicts concerning our athletes. The organisation’s policy now even includes considerable fines for any violation of the said requirements.
I wonder if the IFW has already purchased compasses to measure skulls? Or some other devices maybe? Would they be interested in the shape of ears and noses? Have they invented any rapid genetic tests for identifying ethnicity? Or a questionnaire to establish athletes’ political views?
Here is something I’d like to say to everyone who is planning such experiments at the IWF or similar agencies, and anyone considering replicating their experience. Similar experiments were already conducted 80 years ago. Athletes and figures of culture, science and education were asked to go through some tests and then use other venues and places where they would not have any chance to cross paths with people of other ethnicities. Many humanitarian, sports and educational organisations did not see anything wrong with that, from the moral or ethical perspective. Just some yellow signs stuck on people, so what? Later, however, this progressed to gas chambers and a global massacre, unprecedented by anything of the kind before. I hope it never will.
But the same things are happening today, almost exactly following those old patterns. Peoples, nationalities, and ethnic groups are being denied a dignified life. They are being sent to live in basements only because someone has decided that they are unworthy of living on the surface like other people. Entire nations, countries, nationalities, ethnic groups are told to play sports, create art and study history in places other than the rest of the community (international or continental community, etc.). All those who profess such logic should know that this is ordinary fascism and Nazism, only with the ‘neo’ prefix – an upgraded version, slightly tinted and powdered, but as ugly inside as 80 years ago.
The international sports organisation sunk so low as to openly propose the introduction of totalitarian shadowing with subsequent punitive measures. This is being suggested by those who pay lip service to freedom, democracy, tolerance (as they call it) and human rights.
What is particularly sad is that these unacceptable ideas and discriminatory demands have become possible due to a decision approved by the Executive Committee of the International Olympic Committee authorising international federations to decide whether or not to allow Russian athletes to participate in international competitions. What guided the International Olympic Committee in this case? Does the political situation depend on sports? Or should it be pegged to a certain athletic discipline? Is it that you can ski or run races, but you can’t lift weights? Is it that you can toss the ball over the net – and this is normal from the point of view of political diversity – but the geopolitical situation is not right for throwing a ball into the basket? This is absolute nonsense!
What is the worth then of the thousands of years we and you spent promoting education and personal development, cultivating culture? Messages to other civilisations were sent to outer space with descriptions of ourselves as we are in reality. The messages said we were men and women. Today, people in many countries think differently. Oh, I don’t even know. When creatures from other planets land here, how will they know who they are dealing with? They are certain to have read the message. Now it’s frightening, though it was funny in the past.
I talked to international officials and colleagues from other countries. They said this was a temporary aberration, a political factor, or a fad that would “pass.” No, it will not pass. It is one of those diseases that won’t blow over on its own. They have to be cured.
As for the international federations, they are so afraid to displease the overlords (mostly the North American ones, of course) that they would run ahead of the pack and “report” using fines, shadowing and disqualifications.
We are witnessing a full-blown crisis in the modern sports management system. The international sports officials are initiating their own dysfunction instead of performing their direct functions that consist in enabling equitable multilateral cooperation, functions stipulated by the charters of their federations. An important principle of international law is a ban on direct discrimination, and it must be respected by both public and private institutions. They must obey the rules in practice, not just put on a show of respect and do otherwise. All public and private activities should be based on these principles rather than exist in a parallel reality. But principles are one thing, and the current situation is quite another, and they will seek to squeeze into it. As a non-profit international organisation and leader of the Olympic movement, the International Olympic Committee also has a duty to take a non-discriminatory approach towards athletes. But our own example shows the opposite. Now you can see that the scope of their discriminatory approach includes athletes from other countries and ethnic groups.
The unlawfulness of using sanctions against Russian athletes is so obvious that this made it into a report by UN Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights Alexandra Xanthaki, who denounced them as contradicting the Olympic Charter and violating the universal and inalienable right to participation in cultural life without any discrimination, with sports being part of this life.
We hope that common sense will finally prevail in the minds of sports officials. But I fear that common sense is something over their heads now, and my hope is for their instinct of self-preservation. Instincts alone remain when what makes us human falls away. But the self-preservation instinct must work lest we face a revival of what was in the past. Yet I fear that we as a planet, as mankind, are within a half-step of something similar.
But let us go back to the diplomatic language. Diplomats would describe the current proceedings as a destructive policy that interferes with the development of international sports which cannot exist in a situation where certain countries and nations are periodically removed from the international sports agenda at the wish of someone lurking in the shadows. This is no longer about international sport; this is about something different. I am referring to segregation, unfair competition, and unsportsmanlike methods. If this is the case, then we should move on. I think this will be the case, when “special conditions” for athletes from certain countries are in place. Let’s assume that the one hundred metres race will measure 80 metres for athletes from the “beautiful garden” and 120 metres for “jungle dwellers.” But this is a case of absurd segregation.
Russian athletes have always meticulously observed all provisions of the Olympic Charter. They are ready and willing to participate in international competitions on a par with their colleagues and rivals from other countries. And we have repeatedly reaffirmed this.
Desecration of monuments to Soviet soldiers in Bulgaria
A wave of desecration attacks against monuments and burial sites of the Red Army soldiers who liberated that country from the Nazi plague swept across Bulgaria on May 12-14. The memorial to the Soviet soldier in Burgas and mass graves of our soldiers in the town of Bankya, Sofia region, and Sofia district of Lozenets have been vandalised.
The continual offensive attacks against the monuments commemorating the common history of Russia and Bulgaria are outrageous. The Russian Embassy to Bulgaria has sent a note of protest to the Bulgarian Foreign Ministry. The Bulgarian authorities were reminded of the need to investigate such incidents, hold perpetrators accountable and prevent such criminal attacks from happening in the future.
Once again, we would like the Bulgarian side to be mindful of its international legal obligations concerning preservation of military memorials and cultural monuments which are laid out in the Treaty of Friendly Relations and Cooperation between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Bulgaria of August 4, 1992 and the Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria on Cooperation in the Field of Culture, Education and Science of April 19, 1993. Compliance with the letter and spirit of these agreements is not just a legal requirement, but also a moral duty of a civilised country with regard to thousands of soldiers who fell in the battle against Nazism.
I wonder why things are like that. Much is being said about ethics and morality. For uttering just one word (perhaps with a double meaning) individuals and organisations get scratched from the agenda. They are presented with a black mark for the rest of their lives, and then repent, apologise, and compensate for the moral damage. This is for just for one or two words, a phrase, sometimes even a gaze (we’ve seen that happen as well). Things that happened 30 years ago may cause someone to file a grievance against another person about a misplaced hand or foot, or something in their eyes that caused objection.
Desecrating memorials in Bulgaria is not about feelings or emotions, a double meaning, or a downside. It’s not a matter of someone making an emotional assessment of another person. It is a matter of criminal behaviour, both under Bulgaria’s domestic legislation and under its international obligations, both under bilateral agreements and every other commitment that Sofia has officially pledged to comply with in the context of the spirit and letter of many international organisations.
The Western world is discussing who looked at whom 30 years ago and its implications today. Things that are unfolding before our eyes which cannot be qualified other than a crime are not causing any protest or a desire to start an investigation or to initiate legal proceedings. No one is even disapproving of them on a personal or expert level, or trying to discuss them within Bulgarian society or on international platforms. Why are we the only ones talking about it? Why is it that everything that has for decades been sacred for the people of Bulgaria and Europeans in general and is now being desecrated leaves everyone nonchalant? What has changed? I will provide an answer. There is an order for this. This is not just silent encouragement, but stimulation with money and political circumstances. When an entity accidentally receives grants for doing this, or the corresponding anti-figures (I can’t find another word for the vandals) receive explicit or indirect support, everyone comes to realise that this is a trend, a path littered with blood-curdling, but (as they believe early on) easy money and that this is the road to “success” that should be taken.
This political order has been formed in NATO-centric entities and has been implemented over the past years. Previously, they did not allow themselves to do this, because veterans and participants of WWII were alive. The people who survived while saving others and lost their comrades during this fight know the price of this victory. They were still alive when NATO started gearing up for such operations. Today, veterans are leaving us fast. Not just war veterans, but also those whom we refer to as homefront workers, victims of concentration camps and simply witnesses of that era, in a word, everyone who could uphold the truth and say they knew everything firsthand. Almost all of them are gone, making this possible now. But one must check with the constant values and with the things that cannot be cancelled or cut out of memory, things that will remain in historyhistory, the historical process, forever, primarily the Nuremberg Tribunal. When you run things by it, you realise in full measure the monstrous and blasphemous nature of the Western NATO-centric order to rewrite history and destroy monuments to heroes.
Turning a blind eye to systematic attacks against the sacred memory of the liberators of Europe is tantamount to encouraging revanchism and neo-Nazism, no matter what disguise they may use to cover it up.
Vandalism could have been more widespread were it not for the efforts of patriots in Bulgarian society. This deserves a separate mention. From May 7 to 10, Russophile associations in Bulgaria organised (just think of it) 24/7 guarding of the monument to the Soviet Army in Sofia. After all, warehouses with valuables such as medicines and food are guarded. Or, is it that unscrupulous individuals, thugs or crooks have set their sights on pillaging all of that and now you have to resort to borrowing the services of volunteers and people's police? These are monuments to our heroes who have ties with our Motherland and Bulgaria. People have to stand guard around the clock (just think of it) to keep vandals at bay.
Earlier, officials from the Bulgarian Socialist Party restored the memorial plaque that had been smashed in February.
As can be seen from the nationwide commemorative events dedicated to Victory Day, including numerous Immortal Regiment marches, Bulgarian patriots keep the memory of and cherish the common history of our countries and will not forgo it.
Unfortunately, a certain group within the political elite in that country is encouraging different sentiments and is not cutting these attacks short.
International Day of Living Together in Peace
On December 8, 2017, the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 72/130 declaring May 16 the International Day of Living Together in Peace. The resolution called on member states to mark this day in line with their own cultural customs and traditions, including by holding awareness raising events.
UNESCO and the United Nations Alliance of Civilisations have a special role to play in promoting the International Day of Living Together in Peace, which primarily aims to mobilise the international community’s efforts in the field of encouraging mutual understanding and harmony while preserving diversity and distinctions.
We consider it important to preserve the cultural and civilisational diversity of the modern world and support the work of the UN agencies in this area.
We believe that, instead of remaining on paper, these initiatives must be implemented and promoted in this context and as the international community sees fit. It is our opinion that we need to actively denounce any factors that can hamper this approach and must not remain silent on these issues. This serves to guarantee that a peaceful and unifying agenda will eventually come to dominate.
World Day for Cultural Diversity for Dialogue and Development
May 21is World Day for Cultural Diversity for Dialogue and Development, which was proclaimed by the UN in 2002 and focuses on the world’s cultural diversity and the role of intra-cultural dialogue to attain peace and sustainable development.
In 2001, UNESCO passed the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, which formalises the cultural diversity concept as a factor of development. This concept laid the foundation for UN efforts to create a regulatory framework. For example, it was reflected in the final declaration of the UNESCO World Conference on Cultural Policies and Sustainable Development (MONDIACULT 2022, September 28-30, 2022). During the event, ministers of culture from 150 UNESCO member states, including Russia, reaffirmed their commitment to protecting and encouraging cultural diversity as a foundation of the nations’ self-identification and as a fundamental principle of all UNESCO conventions and declarations in the field of culture. The same concerns other documents facilitating the development of cultural and creative industries as a condition for maintaining cultural diversity in the interests of building a more stable global community.
Considering the fact that culture ranks among factors of growth, we should perceive efforts to ensure its protection and to facilitate prosperity as a means of achieving a number of sustainable development goals. Russia is currently implementing various cultural programmes and projects that aim to ensure the comprehensive fulfilment of provisions of international regulatory documents on this issue.
Our traditional priorities aimed at achieving sustainable development include the protection of cultural and natural heritage, as well as cultural heritage landmarks in conflict zones, countering the trafficking in cultural artefacts, supporting cultural diversity and strengthening intra-cultural dialogue.
Although the Russian Federation is not a party to the 2005 UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, we are going to mark this date, which encourages cultural pluralism of all nations, consolidates dialogue and draws attention to the contribution of art to sustainable development and to promoting peace.
Day of Slavic Writing and Culture
On May 24, we celebrate the Day of Slavic Writing and Culture, which reminds us about the common roots of Slavic languages and is clear evidence of the inseparable historical ties and cultural integrity of the Slavic nations.
This year, the holiday will be marked as part of the Year of the Russian Language as the Language of Interethnic Communication in the CIS. The Russian language, which is the most popular means of interethnic communication in the CIS, is helping strengthen cultural dialogue, cooperation and mutual understanding among people.
The main event for the Day of Slavic Writing and Culture will be held in Moscow’s Red Square with support from the Russian Ministry of Culture and the Moscow Government. As usual, His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia will address the public during the official part of the gala concert.
The themes of the concert this year are the Year of Teachers and Mentors in Russia, the Year of the Russian Language in the CIS, and the 150th birth anniversaries of Sergey Rachmaninoff and Fyodor Chaliapin. Classical music by Russian composers, which will constitute the bulk of the concert, will be performed by Valery Gergiev, Denis Matsuyev, leading opera singers and the Russian National Youth Symphony Orchestra.
7th Young Diplomats Forum of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation
The 7th Young Diplomats Forum of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) will be held in Kazan on May 18-21 within the framework of the 14th International Economic Forum Russia-Islamic World: KazanForum 2023.
The OIC Young Diplomats Forum is a unique discussion platform for the staff at international foreign ministries attended by prominent public figures and politicians, diplomats, government officials, experts and business leaders. It is based on the concept of horizontal diplomacy.
The forum’s goal is to promote Russia’s foreign policy interests through the development of bilateral and multilateral economic ties between the participating countries and the establishment of trust-based contacts with young colleagues from the OIC countries, which will determine their countries’ future foreign policy agenda.
Since the first annual forum was held in 2016, it has been attended by about 160 young diplomats from over 35 OIC countries. The main theme of the forum is Diplomacy of the New Multipolar World. Discussions will focus on the challenges and factors of modern diplomacy against the backdrop of the development of a new international security architecture, the performance of the International Association of Young Diplomats, and some aspects of young diplomats’ field work.
The event will be attended by about 50 foreign ministry representatives and experts from 23 OIC countries. The sideline events will include the ceremony for admitting new members to the International Association of Young Diplomats, a meeting of the Kazan Diplomatic Club, debates attended by the students from Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University, and a video project on diplomacy.
The forum will also be attended by the winners of the Primakov International Contest of Research and Analytical Papers on the Middle East organised with the help of the Alexander Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund. The Kazan forum has been organised by the Council of Young Diplomats of the Russian Foreign Ministry and the autonomous non-governmental organisation, Academy of Youth Diplomacy, with support from the Ministry of Youth Affairs of the Republic of Tatarstan and the Tatarstan Investment Development Agency.
Maria Zakharova: It’s a long time since we were surprised by the Tokyo officials’ rhetoric and attempts to justify Japan’s participation in the anti-Russia campaign orchestrated by the West. They need to somehow justify their participation in this, including to their own public, given that Japan is not part of Europe, has no national borders or stable historical interests there, and certainly doesn’t need to protect Japanese people. They need to justify the plans of unbridled militarisation promoted by Fumio Kishida’s administration. They are using propaganda methods, citing the events in Ukraine as the argument. Not everyone knows geography very well now, so I will remind you about the basic facts. I assume that not everyone can see who these statements are designed for. Japan is located thousands of kilometres from Ukraine, and there is not even a sea they share. I am saying this for our British friends. This might interest them.
Our country has a right to take all the necessary steps to ensure its security and protect its sovereignty, both independently and jointly with its strategic partners. Moscow has maintained constructive cooperation with Beijing on this track for decades, which may be a secret, but I will disclose it. We have been doing this openly and transparently, as diplomats say, and based on mutual respect for each other and for our partners in the region.
The current Japanese government should remember the results of WWII and the restrictions on military activities set out in Article 9 of its constitution. It is a fact that such activities have recently accelerated, in connection with which Russia had to lodge many protests, including about large-scale military exercises Japan held with the United States and other countries, the testing of new missiles and other weapons, and dangerous manoeuvres near the Russian border.
We are closely monitoring the situation, and we will respond immediately and appropriately, in accordance with the national legislation, if new threats to the security of its border in the Far East emerge.
I would like to add that anyone in Tokyo who is really concerned about security and developments in the region should look at how the West is changing the strategic landscape and the traditional system of relations and at the attempts to rock and undermine the effective and acknowledged international ties by advancing ideas, policies and ideological precepts that are alien to and run contrary to the interests of people in the region.
Tokyo should look at the innovations that have transformed the region, which, although it had its problems, has increased its integration potential over the past decades and largely guaranteed a balance of forces thanks to a constructive and positive agenda. Regrettably, these achievements have been threatened by the latest interference by the United States, Britain and, consequently, NATO, in the affairs of the countries they do not share borders with. This above all has to do with Britain and NATO countries with which they didn’t have stable ties and in the security activities of which they were not involved. Quite to the contrary, in recent decades we have seen the addition of destructive factors to the region’s policy. The Korean Peninsula is a telling example. We are aware of the efforts and steps taken above all by Washington to create tensions on the peninsula. It is the homework I would suggest for the officials in Tokyo who are concerned about the balance of forces and security in the region: analyse what I have said now, at the very least, and see who is really destabilising the overall situation in Asia Pacific, Southeast Asia and the region as a whole.
Maria Zakharova: Please note that the citizens of Moldova have already provided their assessment. As we can see from media reports, the Moldovan government’s demand to ban the Sor party, which is now being considered by the Constitutional Court, caused outrage in Moldovan society. This question is not for us to answer. We just need to state the cold hard fact. The citizens of Moldova have already responded as they saw fit. As you may be aware, the issue is about an opposition party represented in the parliament of the republic. In other words, it is a political force that has the mandate of a certain portion of the country’s population.
It’s not about who likes who, or who is a member of which party. This is Moldova’s political landscape which has taken shape over many years. All of that went through democratic procedures and did not raise any questions. There were some irregularities, indeed. Any young democracy goes through several phases in its development. But it was a political process nonetheless. Has something broken in Chisinau? I think it is not something, but someone. To make matters worse, it broke in one direction, which is not in favour of realising the interests of the country’s own people, but the ideas and policies of other countries.
Clearly, if the person at the helm of Moldova has a Romanian passport and turns the Moldovan language into Romanian at the snap of her fingers, she will not stop there and will try to accomplish more on her “terminator” path.
People are outraged by yet another attempt by the government to clamp down on dissent and to push through the decisions that ignore their own citizens’ opinions. We have seen this before. Do you know where? I gave you examples, specifically, the renaming of the Moldovan language as Romanian and the ban on six Russian-language TV channels in Moldova. Does it remind you of anything?
It reminds me of similar experiments in Ukraine conducted by the US and NATO political elites. It was the same thing there and started with a ban on objectionable channels, first under the pretext of their affiliation with Russia, then the fact that they speak Russian, and finally they simply closed everything down. In case the existing Moldovan media outlets are gleefully rubbing their hands as they see a large number of television channels close down and their competitors leave, they should look at what happened in neighbouring Ukraine. At first, they closed down media outlets under the pretext that they spoke Russian and then they closed down everything. They left only one broadcasting source that is informed by Bankova Street. This is not a story of one country, but a systematic approach. Once they begin to mop up the media and political space in an unlawful manner ignoring logic, the historical context and realities, things will go downhill from there. That is how it will play out there. I have no doubt about it.
Is it any wonder then that the ruling party’s rankings have fallen over time from 38 percent to 24 percent? This kind of declining popularity must be described in honest terms. This did not happen because of “Russian propaganda” or because people in Gagauzia or Transnistria speak Russian. It happened because of the steps and moves that run counter to the fundamental interests of the people of Moldova of various ethnic and cultural backgrounds who speak Moldovan, no matter what other names this language may be given, or who speak Russian. Everything that is being done by the Maia Sandu-led government runs counter to the core interests of the people of Moldova.
Maria Zakharova: Indeed, Asia Cooperation Dialogue Secretary General Pornchai Danvivathana was on a working visit to Russia on May 15 and 16, 2023. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov received him, and Mr Danvivathana also had consultations with Deputy Foreign Minister Andrey Rudenko who is in charge of this region.
The meetings included a review of the key aspects in the work of the Asia Cooperation Dialogue (ACD), including efforts to make this platform more effective and outcome-driven by promoting sectoral cooperation and project activity. Asia Cooperation Dialogue Secretary General Pornchai Danvivathana thanked our country for its proactive role and initiative in strengthening the ACD’s institutional foundations.
Russia responded by reaffirming its commitment to expanding multifaceted cooperation within the ACD framework in Asia, primarily on transport logistics, as well as energy and food security. We discussed several specific proposals aimed at furthering our cooperation in education. They cover efforts to promote student and academic mobility, including by making wider use of digital technology. We also discussed the importance of the ACD reaching out to the leading regional associations and engaging in constructive and practical efforts in order to build a seamless, common Eurasian space for safe and mutually beneficial cooperation.
In this context, Pornchai Danvivathana had a meeting with MGIMO University Rector Anatoly Torkunov to discuss the prospect of Russia joining the ACD University Network. In addition to this, he met with Sergey Glazyev, who is Member of the Board - Minister in charge of Integration and Macroeconomics within the Eurasian Economic Commission. They exchanged views on the possible modalities for enabling the Eurasian Economic Commission to work with the ACD Secretariat.
Maria Zakharova: Launching this magical resource is a knowhow of the US spy agency. I have read a lot about what they do, but this is something I have probably only seen in the movies. Considering the staff shortages they are experiencing over there in Washington, drawing inspiration from motion pictures is all they can do.
First, this is a telling example of their thinking horizon. Second, this is also indicative of the fact that this unfriendly state is becoming increasingly proactive on this front. Its actions can be qualified as being hostile, in all evidence. This included aggressive spying, attempts to directly interfere in our domestic affairs and destabilise the situation in our country by acting from the inside and recruiting outcasts of all kinds. Unfortunately, there is nothing new about this approach. They have made no secret of their objectives and goals over the past years. The only difference now is that they rely on novel technological solutions.
Leaving aside the question of whether these actions are effective… I do not know how to frame it, in fact. This is not propaganda. Can you find a better word? You would not call this spying either.
Question: A recruitment effort.
Maria Zakharova: Come on, how can you call this a recruitment effort? We read books and watch films. This must be done in a diligent and careful manner, while this undertaking is more like putting up posters on the walls saying: “Who wants to sign up as an American spy, come to the hay barn. Time TBC.” This is ridiculous. A circus, a comic show – something along these lines. This would be my comment.
Joseph Goebbels-style propaganda, or McCarthy-era initiatives, or the worst of the Middle Ages – remember how they burnt witches, etc.?
In this case, the fact that they operate in the open without even trying to hide what they are doing is what puzzles me. What are we dealing with? Is it a lack of professionalism? Or are they just lazy? Can it be that the CIA is short of money? What is going on there? I do not know. Can it be that they now view conventional methods as ineffective and cancelled them by placing their bets on mass low-quality recruitment. Or maybe they have yet to decide what to do with all this? Might it be that they pulled all the stops already and their bets failed to pay off? I will not even try to get to the bottom of this.
We will not fail to offer an adequate response to this malicious activity, which includes spreading subversive materials. The Americans know that we will deliver on this promise. I think that you know this too by now.
Maria Zakharova: There is no question of our Central Asian partners supporting the anti-Russian policy pursued by the United States, the EU and their satellites. All of them – Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan – remain committed to friendship, neighbourliness, interaction, cooperation and our common historical roots. There is no doubt about it.
Everything is based on the principles of alliance and strategic partnership adjusted to the new realities. All bilateral agreements and obligations within the framework of integration associations such as the CIS, EAEU and CSTO are being implemented in full.
What Mr Galuzin had in mind when saying that some Central Asian countries were hinting at being ready to follow the Western restrictive measures was primarily the fact that they feared the threats of secondary sanctions against the background of the Western countries’ brazen and unlawful demands that they “report” to them.
You understand perfectly well that Washington, Brussels and London are in a state of insanity. They are openly pressuring all countries without exception, doing this at the public, private and individual levels.
We are sure that the Central Asian capitals are well aware that neither the West nor anyone else will compensate or wish to compensate them for the damage from imposing artificial restrictions on ties with Russia. They admit that they are under pressure. You can read about this in their media or learn it from experts. This is no secret because Washington openly demands that everyone follow the restrictions. Today, it went even further and demanded that they report to it. There is nothing sensational in this.
We proceed from the assumption that our partners are aware of yet another thing, namely that the potential losses from winding up ties with Russia would be immeasurably greater than the effect from the notorious secondary sanctions.
All kinds of things can be invented, but there are time-tested joint achievements we have arrived at as sovereign states that promote relations on the basis of mutual respect. They have survived the difficulties that the West repeatedly created for them. We have supported each other at challenging moments, and know how to oppose external threats.
Maria Zakharova: This issue is being discussed at the deputy prime minister level, so I will direct you to the Government’s press service for comments.
Maria Zakharova: I commented on this situation earlier today. My comment applies to these kinds of ideas, statements, and thought processes. Everything that meets the core interests of the people of Moldova is being destroyed. That’s all there is to it.
A head of state of sound mind renaming the language spoken by the people in their country and giving it the name of a language spoken in a neighbouring country defies reason. Most surprisingly, the election promises were of a completely different nature, like upholding sovereignty, independence, the identity of Moldova and its citizens, various ethnicities, and to uphold their interests, to name a few. Not much time has passed since the elections, but the events have taken a completely different turn.
These moves should be correlated with the interests of the country and its people. How will the people of Moldova benefit in the event that this idea is implemented? Will there be any upside? No, there won’t be any. The Republic of Moldova and its business people, operators, citizens, and economic and financial institutions will be hurt.
As a reminder, there are hundreds of agreements in the CIS that Chisinau is objectively benefitting from. They were not written for the benefit of some obscure organisation or just remain on paper. They are useful for Chisinau and the people of Moldova. These agreements were drafted, fine-tuned and signed over a long period in the interest of Moldova, among other countries.
They reflect the multilateral trade, economic, social and humanitarian relations that bind the CIS countries, including Moldova, and forgoing them will be detrimental to the people of Moldova, which is the main point.
Why would Maia Sandu need this? The answer is simple. She is acting not in the interests of her own people, but in the interests of those who stand behind her, who issued her Romanian citizenship papers and encouraged her and her government to break off regional relations with their historical neighbours.
Maria Zakharova: How interesting. Why don’t you care and why don’t you ask or focus on the fact that people are being killed with weapons that are supplied by the UK? You are the Reuters agency, which is traditionally affiliated with London and the Anglo-Saxon world in general. There is no need to pretend now that this is not so. People, including those you mentioned, are being killed with weapons supplied by the West. When you cover these events, do you ask this question to Westerners? Do you raise your hand at briefings in the White House, the State Department, in Berlin, Paris, Rome, NATO and the EU and ask questions as to which types of weapons supplied by the West to the Vladimir Zelensky regime kill people of different nationalities? No. For some reason, the fate of Africans does not bother you there.
Do depleted uranium projectiles come with artificial intelligence? Will they only kill certain ethnic groups? Will they affect only people with certain skin types? Will they “bypass” people with a different skin color or eye shape? Is this the latest development from British scientists? No. And they are still being used, according to the British side, which reported that they were being sent to the conflict area. They will not only affect those generations that will live there, but also those who will consume products from this region. Tell me, are you worried about the people of the African continent? Although, to be honest, I don’t know how people on the Asian continent are better or worse. I do not segregate people. Do you worry about them when you cover the UK supplying depleted uranium projectiles to the region? Are you worried about their health when they consume the grain and the products that will be cultivated there and will be exported, as the Western world tells us, to countries in need? No?! This is first.
Second, it is strange that you as the Reuters agency are not concerned with the fate of British mercenaries in the conflict zone. How many do you think are there? Do you have any statistics or numbers? I do. There are a lot of them, people representing Great Britain. They are mercenaries, instructors, and people coordinating hostilities on behalf of the Kiev regime. Do you separate UK citizens from African citizens? Are they better or worse if you don’t care about their fate? This is a very strange question. This suggests that the people who formulate questions like this for you still live under a colonial mentality, including the segregation of people and imperial thinking. You cannot divide people by nationality, ethnic principle, origin, etc.
In the same way, I believe it is unacceptable to segregate civilians: children and women are one thing, men are the other thing. Yes, people who fight, members of the armed forces, and soldiers certainly belong in a different category than civilians. But when we talk about civilians, segregation has neither moral nor legal grounds. So please, if you care so much about the people who are dying, ask more questions to those who are supplying weapons. I do not insist on this, but I can recommend addressing questions to authorities I mentioned. The weapon that kills people now, momentarily, instantly, and the one that will kill people in the future as a result of oncological diseases. Do not divide or isolate people by skin color, eye shape, skull shape, or by continent. Do not do that.
Maria Zakharova: This has been discussed many times. The West, in particular representatives of the EU and the United States, do not mention the fundamental documents recognised as such by the parties (both Baku and Yerevan), for one simple reason – it irritates them. It irritates them that these peace initiatives were developed with the participation of Russia, are being implemented and producing practical results. This is the logic that no one else has the right to a “palm of victory” or to receive a well-deserved positive assessment of their efforts, except for the “exceptional ones,” and this is what makes all the mediation that the West talks about, not mediation, but something more destructive. There are no constructive, real results that would indicate movement in a positive direction. Anything can be said. But it just does not work in practice. Hence the reluctance to mention anything about what has already been worked out with the assistance of Moscow.
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that this does not mean at all that we do not appreciate steps that will lead to constructive results. Whenever the sides make the right move or take a step leading to a settlement, normalisation, or a temporary easing of the situation, we always emphasise the positive trend and dynamics. You know and see this in a number of areas. If there are relevant results here – we will definitely appreciate them. But there are no results yet. We can see that the West really tries to “outbid” the agenda and to steal the credit for certain achievements. However, they still do not have any achievements of their own. We can see their anger turning into jealousy.
Maria Zakharova: There is no single reason. Because every provision in these documents came with a challenge that required solutions from the parties, from the mediator or collectively. I will not name a single main reason. And hardly anyone will do that.
Maria Zakharova: You are well aware of our traditional position: we do not comment on elections in other countries until they are over and the results are finalised. Moreover, we do not talk about our preferences, because this is the choice of the people of a sovereign country. This applies to all countries. Of course, there are situations where Russian observers are present either as part of international institutions or in an individual capacity. They can comment accordingly. We also release a statement on the outcome of elections. There is such a role in our diplomatic work. But before that... You know perfectly well our traditional approach.
Maria Zakharova: This is an interesting issue and approach because the situation is heterogeneous. There are issues on which we have common ground and work together. There are points on which we diverge from Ankara. This is a normal working process. We should not speak in general terms. Let us comment concretely on a part of our interaction. Then I will be able to provide information.
I can give you examples of our successful interaction. For example, the topic of Syria includes complex issues involving many parties. Recently we had a quadrilateral meeting. There are examples where even three or four years ago no one would have imagined that agreements could be reached on these issues and in these formats. You see, Moscow and Ankara show the will to resolve difficult issues, including those that many people consider unsolvable, leading to a constructive dialogue with specific results. Examples abound. In recent history, there have been dramatic developments and serious differences that many considered irreconcilable. Thanks to the diplomatic efforts and the wisdom displayed by the leaders of both countries, we have found solutions to problems that many thought could not be resolved. We have a lot of positive experience in our arsenal.
Maria Zakharova: The United States seems to have no particular calendar, clock, or schedule for exerting pressure. They compare notes with no one. This has been their sole way of pursuing their interests in the past few decades, with blatant pressure and all possible measures taken – primarily illegitimate sanctions that allow them to implement their policy. Most surprisingly, despite this failing to work and sometimes returning as a boomerang, they continue to stick to this logic.
Maria Zakharova: No, American representatives and diplomats have not approached us on this issue.
Maria Zakharova: Indeed, the G7 summit will be held in Hiroshima, Japan, on May 19-21. The themes, which include “the nuclear threat from Russia,” impart a phantasmagoric dimension to yet another political get-together of the collective West, and in Hiroshima of all places. Can you believe that? The combination of the boundless cynicism on the part of the Americans and the sad absurdity of the decisions made by the Japanese hosts is stunning. This is nothing short of a cynical mockery of common sense. Just think of it: Hiroshima will host a summit led by the United States which is the only country to have tested nuclear weapons on the people in this city. Shocking archival evidence was discovered to the effect that the Americans were not going to limit themselves to Hiroshima and Nagasaki and planned to continue to nuke Japanese cities throughout August, September and October 1945. Japan escaped this terrible fate of becoming a scorched desert only by surrendering on August 15, 1945. The country was destined to become an “unsinkable US aircraft carrier” with the ensuing consequences. Later, they ended up with their usual conclusion: nothing happened, it was designed that way and everything played out as planned.
Washington has never apologised for these unprovoked – except, of course, its ambitions to contain the Soviet Union and revenge – nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. All they did was express obscure “sympathy” and say something along the lines of war is a war. Everyone knew that, strategically, these bombings did nothing to stop WWII. No doubt, just like his predecessors, President Biden will not offer words of repentance upon arriving in Japan. We strongly advise them to do so, though. And there will be no need to stand there as a big boss and pontificate about providing a collective rebuff to the “Russian nuclear threat.” I strongly believe they should apologise to the victims of the American nuclear strikes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Once again, this goes to show their line of thinking and policies. I think their NATO allies – Britain and France as nuclear powers and Germany and Italy, which, by the way, have US nuclear weapons deployed on their territories – will join them in this anti-Russia rhetoric and the tacit failure to recognise their guilt in front of vast numbers of people. As a reminder, London is in the process of supplying neo-Nazis, i.e., the Kiev regime, with depleted uranium shells. This is nothing short of flat-out contamination of Ukraine’s territory, cynicism and criminal hypocrisy.
At some point, quite a while ago, the G7 was created to discuss important financial and economic issues and to coordinate positions on major global challenges. At some point, Russia was part of this association which was accordingly called the G8. But we were never allowed to discuss global financial issues, which was the privilege of the exceptional countries and their friends.
The G7 has lost its standing altogether which fact was further corroborated by the creation of the G20. This entity failed to meet the challenge of the 2008 crisis which was created by the United States and its fraudulent real estate market practices. Accordingly, there was need for real forces that could pull the planet out of yet another scam pulled off by the United States and bring relief to its aftermath. Now the G7 participants (to reiterate, they failed to meet the 2008 challenge) are drawing dividing lines in international relations trying to impose their will on others and coordinating pressure on objectionable countries. They engage in political propaganda and ways to exacerbate segregation by dividing the world into a beautiful “garden” and wild “jungle.”
In addition, the G7 has become a kind of headquarters and think-tank where, led by the Anglo-Saxons, they come up with utterly odious anti-Russia and anti-China decisions which are then imposed on the pro-American crowd of extras from among the countries of NATO, the EU and other Washington satellites. This is another foothold for developing and moving pro-American policies forward. I'm not talking about the American people, but about a certain portion of the elite. This does not reflect or take into account the polycentric world’s interests. They are trying to impose a narrative of their dominance and to show their superiority compared to the countries of the Asia-Pacific region, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America.
They need this to preserve the West’s global dominance and to fight their political opponents in order to stop losing economic competition. But to no avail. In fact, they continue to follow NATO’s Euro-Atlantic agenda. It is completely unclear who they represent, except the interests of the United States and the NATO-centric circle. Without taking into account global players such as Russia, China, and the BRICS countries, it is impossible to talk about them setting the tone in the economy. They are trying to use this tool to impose NATO’s agenda on various regions around the world, including, as can be seen from the geography of the summit guests, the Asia-Pacific region.
Why are the efforts to attract regional players to the G7 being ramped up? This is also part of the policy of the United States and its allies to build a system of network containment in Asia, bloc-based schemes, and erosion of those peaceful integration cooperation projects that exist there. All this is done under the guise of the Indo-Pacific strategy, among other things. All of that is fraught with the emergence of new dividing lines in the Asia-Pacific region, the risks of undermining the existing architecture of security and cooperation, which has made it possible to maintain peace and maintain stability in the region for decades on end.
The tasks formulated by Japan, the current president of the G7, are quite telling in this context. Nothing constructive is being proposed, including for discussion at the group's summit which will be held this weekend. The economic component is almost nonexistent. Indeed, how can it be discussed within the G7, when everything has come down to unilateral sanctions? They will have to condemn the United States which has severed all existing global economic ties. The Japanese cannot deal with this, no one will let them. The work focuses on maintaining solidarity in a fight against obscure “autocracies” (an interesting term) and maintaining a hegemonic “international order based on Western rules.” Probably, another anti-Russia statement is coming. There’s no way it’s not.
So, the constructive role of the G7 in global development and stabilisation is something that doesn’t exist. Everything is the other way round. Destruction, confusion and chaos. The G7’s decisions, including those directed against Russia and China, are, in fact, plunging international relations into chaos and dangerous unpredictability.
We encourage all members of the international community to look at these meetings and ask where these pseudo-leaders are trying to “lead” everyone. Do things that are discussed at the G7 summit meet the interests of global security, economic stability, sustainable development and the UN’s goals?
Maria Zakharova: As you may know, our diplomatic relations with Tbilisi were severed in 2008 at Mikheil Saakashvili’s initiative. Possible restoration is mentioned [by Tbilisi] together with political demands that contradict the new realities in the region. You are well aware of our stance on this.
We have never acted as the initiators of deteriorating bilateral relations with Georgia but have always supported a policy of normalisation. Our principled approach is to consistently facilitate the conditions for communication and contacts between Russian and Georgian citizens, despite the severed diplomatic relations. A vast number of people are willing to see this. We have repeatedly come back to this issue publicly at the urging of civil society. This has become a sort of ‘ritual’ to answer these questions, such as when air service will resume and when all of this will occur. We believe that trade, economic and humanitarian ties should not be hostage to politics, and that everything must be based on the rule of law. We believe that the decisions taken by Russian President Vladimir Putin on resuming air service and abolishing short-term travel visas to Russia for Georgian citizens fully fit into this logic.
As you know, Russians – along with the citizens of nearly a hundred other states – can enter Georgia without a visa. Our country is home to the largest Georgian diaspora abroad.
The Russian authorities received many requests for the resumption of air service and the suspension of visa requirements for Georgian citizens from members of the business and science communities, cultural and art figures, and public associations and organisations in Russia and Georgia, including the Russian-Georgian Business Council, as well as the Federal Georgian National and Cultural Autonomy in Russia.
The decision taken by the President of the Russian Federation aims to boost Russian-Georgian trade and economic relations, including through promoting contact between business communities, as well as the further development of tourism, where Russia is the leader, and also to provide an additional impetus to the long-standing traditions of Russian-Georgian humanitarian ties, creating more favourable conditions for cultural exchanges, tours by art groups, exhibitions, sports competitions, and contacts between research and educational institutions as well as youth organisations.
Once again, the number of requests we have received on this issue is unparalleled. This is in line with the interests we have heard about so much from members of civil society – I am talking about the general public, businesspeople, and others.
MariaZakharova: I believe those who published this stuff should comment on it. Our assessments of the malicious activity of the Westerners, in particular the leadership of the European Union, the Brussels bureaucracy, can be heard regularly.
It would be nice to ask them why they carry out such information attacks and publish such content, considering that they have always boasted of their openness. Let them show it in practice.
MariaZakharova: If by “pressure” you mean us drawing attention to this topic in the public space and elsewhere and also carrying out our political work, then this is true. We do not do this using “Western models” (threats, blackmail, and so on). We take a political approach. Indeed, we have expressed not just our concerns to the representatives of international organisations, but also provided specific facts and figures, considering that similar depleted uranium shells have already been used on the European continent in the recent past.
The corresponding British supplies to the Kiev regime will result in increased suffering for the civilians. We have commented on this many times, including during today’s briefing. The result will be obvious: environmental pollution with hazardous substances. But, as I have already said today, it is not just about local pollution in the area. It is also about food products that are grown in these territories. Has anyone in the UK thought about this? Of course not. They don’t care. This attitude is ingrained in the Western political thought:
“Apres nous, le deluge” (After us, the flood). This is what they abide by for several centuries. The logic is the same here. There are a number of international reports regarding such consequences. But who in Downing Street will read them? Now they are implementing the concept of countering our country, inflicting a “strategic defeat” and everything else in line with the anti-Russia frenzy.
The question of Ukraine using depleted uranium ammunition should be put not so much to us as to the Kiev regime, because people there, if they can be called that after all that they have declared, including confessing to terrorist attacks, should understand that when they talk about love and loyalty to the land they are trying to liberate, they are doing exactly the opposite. They are destroying it, because by polluting this land, they are taking it out of full circulation and posing a threat to people’s lives and well-being. These questions should be asked in the West: in London, Washington and Brussels.
Maria Zakharova: The future of the Arctic Council looks moot because of differences between its member states over the council’s future work and its role in international Arctic cooperation. The suspension of the council on the Western initiative has halted the achievement of the objectives set out in the Declaration and the Strategic Plan until 2030 adopted at the ministerial meeting in Reykjavik in 2021. New projects are not being selected, approved or implemented, which is reducing the council’s design component. Responsibility for this lies with Western countries and their predominant reliance on political considerations.
The continued use of this approach by Western countries will weaken and marginalise the Arctic Council. We will see if Norway, which has taken over the council’s rotating chairmanship, can revert this alarming trend. We make no secret of our analysis and vision of the situation.
Russia’s interaction with the Western members of the council is above all important for tackling common regional issues, many of which call for joint actions, such as adjustment to climate change in the region. Such cooperation helped regional countries effectively manage risks and challenges in the area of soft security, such as search and rescue at sea, oil spill and marine litter clean-up, emission reduction, and forest fires in the Arctic, because over the past 25 years since its establishment, the Arctic Council has become an important platform for coordinating collective solutions in this area.
That organisation of practical cooperation worked in the interests and current needs of people in the region. It really helped deal with a vast number of problems based on experts and people who live in the council’s area of operation. What have Western countries done to it? The same they are doing everywhere else: they shifted the focus towards political matters. It is not a constructive policy, which can halt development for some time in order to create new or innovative rules and fundamentals. No, Western countries have forced and are forcing such platforms to adopt a blocking policy without a future. This has not only happened at the Arctic Council. We see a similar trend in the Asia-Pacific Region, which we talked about today. The West is blocking all aspects of pragmatic and effective daily operation in the interests of regional countries’ residents and is replacing it with political trash or the promotion of its own interests, ruining everything that was created over decades before and without them.
Maria Zakharova: Before I answer your question, I would like to note that I have already replied to a similar question dealing with another country today. Unfortunately, the United States no longer has any other methods left. It has completely replaced diplomacy with pressure. This pressure serves as a way to promote and emphasise the US position or basic, vitally important interests. However, pressure as the only tool that completely replaces diplomacy, cooperation and dialogue is unacceptable.
You are asking why this amounts to pressure. They have no other methods. They have stopped negotiating long ago. Let us recall various White House representatives, from top leaders to experts, and their revelations. They represented various parties and ideologies, but they voice precisely this attitude towards their closest allies, not to mention those with whom they merely maintain relations. The Americans set themselves apart and do not abide by any rules or norms. At the same time, they dictate these rules and norms to all others. It is only possible to learn about these changing rules and norms when the game begins.
US diplomats, including top-level diplomats, are involved in such incidents all over the world. They are used to behaving this way. Some countries have the ability, strength and firmness to show them their place. In those cases, the Americans have to apologise. We have seen many such incidents. Some countries, primarily the closest US allies (this is a unique example) do not have this ability. This is why US ambassadors are pushing them around, dictating their terms and forcing them to write down exactly what they should do. It may be surprising, but there are countries that the Americans call Third World states or developing countries or countries transitioning to democracy. Washington does not treat them as full-fledged countries, although they act as such and uphold their national interests.
The South African leadership has repeatedly proved that no one has the right to push them around. This is not only because there is a country they don’t like and a country they do like. It is the principle that matters: one should not act in such a way.
Regarding all these squabbles, it is up to the South African authorities to comment on this. The Ambassador is accredited in their country. We have seen a public statement by the Office of the President of South Africa noting the unsubstantiated nature of accusations and expressing concern in connection with statements by the head of the US diplomatic mission in Pretoria because such actions undermine the foundations of cooperation and partnership between the two countries. It would be better to address the South African authorities if you have any additional questions.
The Russian Embassy in South Africa continues to follow this story and has posted commentary on this issue on its media resources on May 16.
Maria Zakharova: I would like to draw your attention to the outcomes of the talks and the news conference, both held today.
Our countries have been adopting programmes for coordinated foreign policy action since 1996. They cover two-year cycles because the two countries need to adjust their foreign policies and finetune the way their diplomatic services work in an ever-changing world. This is why the programmes are subject to these regular updates.
The current programme covers the period of 2022 and 2023, enabling Moscow and Minsk to support each other in ensuring and promoting their national interests on the international stage and closely coordinate their approaches at multilateral platforms, as well as their relations with third countries. Today, Russia and Belarus, our closest ally, share close or convergent views on almost all major international matters.
What sets the current programme apart is that it sets forth objectives dealing with foreign policy efforts to support and accompany the implementation of integration documents approved by the Union State Supreme Council in November 2021, including the 28 Union State programmes. The current programme also stipulates the commitment to create and expand a single scientific, educational and cultural space within the Union State.
The annual plans for foreign ministry consultations serve as an appendix of sorts to the foreign policy coordination programme. They provide for regular contacts on a wide range of matters at the level of the corresponding departments within our respective foreign ministries.
Efforts to draft a new programme are underway. It is expected to be signed at the joint meeting of the foreign ministry collegiums of Russia and Belarus in the fourth quarter of 2023 in Moscow. After that, it will be submitted for approval to the Union State’s Supreme Council.
As for the latter part of your question, I would like to emphasise that under the 1999 Treaty Creating the Union State, foreign policy coordination is one of the objectives of our integration with Belarus. This framework document proclaims that the participating states maintain their sovereignty, independence and other state attributes, except for the authority they transfer out of their own free will to the supranational level. In this context, a single foreign policy can only result from a voluntary decision by both countries forming the Union State. There is also a pragmatic element to this issue. Besides, having two votes on an international platform is probably better than a single vote, at least in some cases – this is a matter of quantity.
At this stage, we are exploring opportunities for making better use of the Union State’s potential for promoting coordinated approaches to major international issues.
Maria Zakharova: I already noted that our fundamental assessments of this agreement have not changed. We indeed state that the imbalances in its implementation should be corrected. To this end, experts will work on the permanent basis, as they have been all this time.
Maria Zakharova: According to the Russian Embassy in Jakarta, the Government of the Republic of Indonesia has not taken any decisions on introducing quotas on the number of tourists arriving on the Island of Bali.
Right now, there are about 40,000 citizens of Russia on Bali. Since the start of 2023, 15 cases of Russian citizens being deported for various violations of the law have been recorded. I leave it to you to judge whether this is a lot or otherwise. Fifteen cases in six months, given the presence of 40,000 Russian citizens.
Now let us discuss the assessments. We would like for there to be as few offenses as possible. You are concerned with the deportations, while I am concerned with offences. We always warn Russian citizens planning to leave on holiday abroad that they should buy medical insurance and obtain entry documents. After several years of the pandemic, much has changed in the border crossing procedure, including host countries’ demands and transit rules. We always ask people to study in good time the materials related to this or that country, locality, customs, and traditions.
We recommend that people access our information resources, such as the Foreign Ministry website, websites of Russian Embassies, our social media accounts, the Zarubezhnyi pomoshnik app, and much else. It is our wish that there be no offenses at all or violations of local laws or even customs, something that occasionally leads to deportations.
Question: The Washington Post published an article about Vladimir Zelensky trying to persuade his Western allies to strike at
Maria Zakharova: This has nothing to do with the negotiating process. The point is that those who stand behind Zelensky (his curators) want to escalate tensions in
It seems that nobody in the White House is even trying to conceal these plans. The wellbeing of
The Americans do not conceal these plans. They simply do not say what the real situation is and what stands behind it. They are saying that this is their vision of our planet’s development.
In reality, the inability to manage their own crises, take part in equal competition, and use diplomacy and the negotiating process – a sign of equality, do not leave them any other chance but to resort to pressure and illegal unilateral sanctions and fuel conflicts wherever they can. I analyse such statements in this context.
Second, Vladimir Zelensky himself is not healthy. I think this is obvious to everyone. No matter what they may say, the evidence of his closest entourage and the footage of his inadequate behaviour confirm this.
Question: The Presidium of Crimean Parliament has initiated the process of cancelling the 1954 resolution on Crimea becoming part of the
Maria Zakharova: Regardless of the legal assessments of the 1954 acts, the issue of
The will expressed by the residents of Crimea has become a lawful act on implementing their right to self-determination, considering that their basic rights were not observed when the peninsula was part of
A second point. I will allow myself a lyrical digression. This is probably a question for historians. They will review it. But I think what you mentioned – the cancellation of the 1954 resolution on
Question: Speaking in
Maria Zakharova: This is a long story. NATO officials made their first statements about
When I mention historical parts, I do not mean historical territories. This is disintegration of society as regards perception of
It all started with a trigger at the summit in
Now they are playing this manipulative game of “we will accept you – we will not accept you,” “the doors remain open or semi-open,” “you can make a step in our direction but don’t cross the threshold,” and “look into the window before we close the curtains or shutters.” This manipulative rhetoric is designed to keep the issue on the surface and promote the West’s destructive logic. Everything should be perceived in this context.
Now the regime is being used to escalate the conflict. The NATO countries are rendering full-scale support to the
Maria Zakharova: Russian visas for the purposes you have indicated (tourism, visits to the country, relatives, or friends) are issued promptly and with the use of all modern information and technological capabilities. There are no provisions for complicated procedures or over-subtle methods that can serve as a pretext for denying a visa or poking fun at people. We have done this for years in a rapid and dynamic manner.
We provide visa statistics. I don’t see getting a visa as a problem. We treat friends in a friendly way.
Maria Zakharova: I think we will be able to provide more detailed expert information somewhat later. At this point, I can only say that the existing irregularities in the implementation of this package deal must be rectified with the maximum speed.
Maria Zakharova: We have reasons for working. And I said as much.
The work will continue on the issues that are yet to be finalised and constitute a problem.
We proceed from the premise that it is mandatory to implement the parameters, which we have outlined and which have been jointly coordinated.
