Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, June 29, 2022
Table of contents
- Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s visit to the Jewish Museum and Tolerance Centre
- Sergey Lavrov in the
- Sergey Lavrov to attend a G20 Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs meeting
- Update on
- The UN Security Council meeting on
- Ukraine’s withdrawal from nuclear security agreements with Russia
- Threats made by Vladimir Zelensky against Russian journalists
- Update on Kaliningrad transit
- The Netherlands disrupting a Russian representative’s participation in a high-level meeting of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs donor support group in The Hague
- The Bulgarian authorities’ unfriendly moves
- Persecution of compatriots in Latvia: public activist Vladimir Linderman detained in Riga
- Peter the Great monument to be unveiled in Serbia
- Sergey Rachmaninoff International Contest for Pianists, Composers and Conductors
- 78th anniversary of the liberation of Minsk from Nazi invaders
- Statements by Latvia’s former interior minister
- Developments around the Katyn memorial
- Grain exports
- Russia's response to the expulsion of Russian diplomats by Bulgaria
- Statements by UK Secretary of State for Environment
- Transit of goods to Kaliningrad
- Statements by certain G7 representatives
- BRICS gaining status
- Developments concerning Russian diplomatic property abroad
- The frozen gold and foreign exchange reserves
- Nord Stream 1 update
- Russia’s response to Western sanctions
- A few “new” US initiatives
- Russian-Azerbaijani economic cooperation
- North-South transport corridor situation update
- Russian-Greek relations
- Greek and Cypriot media assessments of the situation in Ukraine
- Expansion of cooperation with the Caspian states
- Certain statements made by Boris Johnson
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s visit to the Jewish Museum and Tolerance Centre
Today, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will be visiting the Jewish Museum and Tolerance Centre in
The Foreign Minister will meet informally with President of the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia Alexander Boroda to discuss efforts to counter anti-Semitism and preserve the memory of World War II, as well as the unacceptability of the revival of neo-Nazism, and the need to maintain interfaith and interethnic accord and dialogue between different faiths in
Sergey Lavrov in the
As we informed you earlier, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will be in
Plans include a meeting with President of the
In addition, Sergey Lavrov will chair a meeting of the United Russia General Council Commission for International Cooperation and Support for Compatriots Abroad, which will be held in
Other events include the Foreign Minister’s visit to
Sergey Lavrov to attend a G20 Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs meeting
I would also like to remind you that on July 7 and 8, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will attend a G20 Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs meeting in Bali in the
The discussion will cover current issues of strengthening the foundation of a multilateral approach in conditions of a polycentric international order, as well as efforts to enhance food and energy security. Special attention is expected to be given to economic recovery, eliminating the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals in the context of the changing energy policy and digital transformation.
Sergey Lavrov will also have a busy bilateral meeting schedule. On the sidelines of the Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs meeting, the Foreign Minister will be building contacts with his counterparts from several countries including
Almost the entire territory of the LPR, a considerable part of the DPR, all of the Kherson Region and big parts of the Kharkov and Zaporozhye regions, as well as the ports of Mariupol and Berdyansk in the Sea of Azov have been liberated from the neo-Nazis since the start of the special military operation. In the liberated areas, people are returning to a peaceful life, restoring the economy and industry, and rebuilding infrastructure. Companies are starting up again and schools, kindergartens, outpatient clinics and hospitals are reopening. The resumption of freight and passenger railway traffic between
As Russian leadership has stated more than once, our Armed Forces are striking only military facilities and using only precision weapons in the operation. A ceasefire is regularly established and humanitarian corridors are created for evacuating civilians from dangerous areas. Since the start of the operation, over 2,150,000 people, including over 340,000 children have left for
The Vladimir Zelensky regime is stepping up its anti-Russia misinformation campaign against this background. New fabricated excuses are being invented to accuse our country of killing civilians and destroying civilian infrastructure (this is what they are saying). Thus, they allege that Russian Armed Forces attacked a residential building in
Another outrageous provocation was the Zelensky regime’s attempts to accuse the Russian Armed Forces of striking a shopping centre in
I’d like to draw your attention to the materials submitted by the Defence Ministry of the
Maybe the Western public should ask their governments why they delivered and stored weapons in the direct vicinity of a shopping centre? This question hasn’t occur to you, has it? Nobody thought of this – not Western correspondents, nor Western NGOs, nor the humanitarians that are so concerned about the situation in
Emotions are still running high around the artificially created myth of the global food apocalypse, allegedly provoked by
Just look at the unreasonable and unacceptable statements by Foreign Minister of Germany Annalena Baerbock: “
I repeat:
What is the real obstacle to the export of Ukrainian grain? Right now it is the Ukrainian authorities that are responsible for ensuring the safe passage of merchant ships in their territorial waters by demining or by safe pilotage.
In addition,
The
The West continues to whip up tensions and artificially draw out the special military operation by providing
The West’s aggressive attempts to push its vision of the world order on everyone and the cynical use of the Ukrainian factor towards this end is yet more proof of the relevance of the special military operation’s goals, which, as the Russian leadership made clear, will be fulfilled no matter what.
The UN Security Council meeting on
An urgent meeting of the UN Security Council was convened by the Albanian chairmanship at the request of
In violation of established Security Council practice, the Western countries pushed through President Zelensky’s online participation in the meeting. His function is clear to everyone. He plays the role of showman, so his all-too-familiar face had to be seen by everyone this time as well. A week ago, Foreign Minister of the Central African Republic Sylvie Baipo-Temon was turned down as an online participant in the meeting. Is it racism? A representative of the African continent can’t get what the white man is entitled to? Are you okay? What century are you living in? How is it even possible that a white person can join a UN Security Council meeting online, whereas a representative of
Clearly,
On our part, yet again we gave a resolute and well-grounded rebuff to
Ukraine’s withdrawal from nuclear security agreements with Russia
On June 24 of this year, Ukraine announced its withdrawal from the 1996 cooperation agreements between its Ministry for the Protection of the Environment and Nuclear Security and Russia’s Federal Service for Oversight on Nuclear and Radiation Safety. It also terminated the 2002 agreement on the exchange of information and cooperation in regulating safety in using nuclear energy for peaceful purposes between the State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate of Ukraine (SNRIU) and Russia’s Federal Service for Oversight on Nuclear and Radiation Safety (now Rostekhnadzor).
In the past, to implement these agreements, Russia and Ukraine held regular bilateral meetings, seminars and consultations in both countries. They cooperated on different aspects of regulating nuclear and radiation safety, including lawmaking, licensing and oversight.
Cooperation in these areas was also conducted on a multilateral basis, for instance, in the CIS Commission for the Peaceful Use of Nuclear Energy and the forum of regulatory bodies of the countries using NPPs with VVERs.
There has been no practical cooperation on the said agreements in the past decade. Moreover, as of today, the SNRIU is not a member of the aforementioned international associations. Considering the foregoing, we do not see any real damage to Russia from Ukraine’s withdrawal from these agreements because they have long been dead weight and not at our initiative.
That said, these actions by the Zelensky regime are unfortunate. They show once again that the Kiev regime is going down a very destructive road of breaking all ties with Russia and wrecking the normative foundation of bilateral relations. This is all the fault of the Kiev regime and its Western handlers.
Threats made by Vladimir Zelensky against Russian journalists
In his nightly video address, a sort of “Good Night, Adults” [allusion to “Good Night, Kiddies!”, a children’s television programme], posted on Ukraine’s official media resources on June 28, 2022, President Vladimir Zelensky allowed himself to make barefaced threats against Russian journalists, promising to “punish” them for doing their job. In other words, the Kiev regime decided to subject members of the Russian media to punishment as retribution for faithfully carrying out their professional duties.
Since Vladimir Zelensky did not deem it necessary to give details of how he was going to make good on his threats, comparisons with the terrorist act by Ukrainian Nazis that was disrupted on April 25, 2022 come straight to mind as it targeted several prominent members of the Russian media, including Vladimir Solovyov, Margarita Simonyan, Dmitry Kiselev, Olga Skabeyeva and Yevgeny Popov. By way of reminder, the Ukrainian intelligence service, with the knowledge of their Western curators, had coordinated the planning and execution of that terrorist act.
There are such people who were unaware for eight years that there was this internal Ukrainian conflict in Donbass and that civilians were being killed there. Such people do exist. I will say this specially for them, and it may sound strange that the Ukrainian intelligence service maintains some sort of relationships with journalists. Many will say that this cannot happen in a country that claims to be democratic. We are allegedly inventing all this. It is an open and democratic system that espouses freedom of speech, pluralism and all forms of diversity. The Ukrainian intelligence service will confirm that they have nothing to do with journalists beyond official and legal contacts, to say nothing of attempts on their lives. This could be true, if we did not know how many journalists have been killed in Ukraine. Those assassinations have not been solved. The Western community often reproves Russia for failing, as they say, to fully investigate crimes committed against Russian public figures. That is, the perpetrators of the crimes were found and brought to trial, and they received the sentences which they deserved and which they are serving, but they still say in the West that the people who gave the criminal orders or the intermediaries have not been found. One is free to speculate on this as long as one wishes. I want to note that in a country that has been a protectorate of the West for many years the murders of journalists have not been investigated at all. Not even the killers were caught, let alone those who gave the orders or acted as intermediaries.
The Ukrainian intelligence service has been working closely with the journalistic milieu for a long time, masterminding horrendous provocations. They devised to kill Russian journalists. Just to remind you what they did with a person working on their territory. They threw pig’s blood on Arkady Babchenko or smeared ketchup on him to stage his “assassination”. Afterwards they fed this [story] to Pavel Klimkin, their Foreign Minister at the time, who referred to this information at a UN Security Council meeting, at least, he cited it as information that needed to be thoroughly investigated, linking it to our country. Later it transpired that it was a “harmless” special operation by the Ukrainian intelligence service and the journalist himself, who were in it together. They provided an entire “philosophical” justification, though nobody could understand why they did it.
As you see the Ukrainian intelligence service’s “ties” with journalists are twisted. We remember well how the Ukrainian intelligence service used the self-styled Ukrainian journalist Dmitry Gordon to achieve their ends. The man even takes pride in it. People can have very different sources of pride. This is his. We can only guess what the Ukrainian intelligence service might think up for Russian – though not only Russian – journalists. The logic is complete twisted, and that’s a fact.
In an attempt to intimidate our journalists with the specter of punishment, the Kiev regime is demonstrating a new level of lawlessness and misanthropy. This is not just cynicism or hypocrisy. It is nothing short of lawlessness. It is very symptomatic that Vladimir Zelensky’s video containing these threats was made public immediately after the Ukrainian President, speaking in the UN, tried to accuse our country of terrorism. This is how his mind operates. Those accusations were leveled by the head of state, a state where the military deliberately and systematically shells cities, uses civilians and civilian infrastructure as human shields, stages vile spectacles like those in Bucha, Kremenchug and Kramatorsk and sends terrorist groups to kill members of the media. Responding to the murderous histrionics of Vladimir Zelensky, I want to note that the crimes committed by the Kiev regime are being meticulously documented. This will also be added to the files. All those guilty will be held accountable and will receive the sentences they deserve under the law.
Vladimir Zelensky, do you hear me? Stop bullying people working in the media and threatening them. You are living in the 21st century, and what you believe you can do in your country is unacceptable in Russia and in the world you call civilised.
Official EU representatives promised to come up with the European Commission’s legally binding “recommendations” as soon as possible in order to resolve the situation artificially created by Brussels as it imposed restrictions on Kaliningrad freight transit. According to available information, Vilnius is reviewing these proposals. It points out that it will not succumb to the pressure that Russia allegedly exerts on Lithuania. I’m not sure who is putting pressure on whom. So far, we’ve been doing nothing but reading news from Lithuania and Brussels. In this regard, Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis’ remarks to the effect that “Russia should not get a diplomatic victory on the issue of sanctions” are quite telling. In that case, you should be more consistent and honest to the end. If you are talking about victories, then, gentlemen from Brussels and Lithuania, politicians and officials, you should acknowledge that you have unleashed a war. Or, have we misunderstood you?
This Lithuanian politician is unable to understand the most important thing. There can be no barriers to connectivity between two parts of Russia in principle.
We are closely following the developments and provide our comments as requested by the media and as more materials become available.
To reiterate, Russia is preparing a response which Lithuania will find painful and which we will follow through with if the situation with Kaliningrad transit does not get back to normal. We hope our “partners” will show some common sense, although this situation can in no way be called partnership.
A high-level meeting of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs donor support group is being held in The Hague on June 27-29. Contrary to its commitments as a host state, the Netherlands failed to issue an entry visa to a representative of Russia who was planning to travel to The Hague to attend this event.
We regard this obstructionist move as a deliberate attempt to limit Russia’s participation in the international organisations’ activities. This is not the first time that the Dutch authorities have shown their unwillingness to act properly as a country hosting international events as they extend their confrontational approach in bilateral relations to multilateral formats.
We condemn this practice.
The Bulgarian authorities’ unfriendly moves
On June 28, Bulgarian authorities stated that a total of 70 diplomatic and administrative and technical staff members of the Russian Embassy in Sofia and other Russian foreign missions must leave the country.
Clearly, we are talking about an attempt by the parliament that has lost credibility and the recently resigned Bulgarian cabinet of ministers to deliver a devastating blow to relations with Russia and the remaining mechanisms of bilateral dialogue. They thought it was necessary to destroy things that they had not destroyed over so many years on their way out walking lightly (but in fact heavily) and trampling upon bilateral relations.
This was not done in the interest of Bulgaria and its citizens. It was done on orders from external forces which, under false pretexts, are seeking to pit European countries against Russia and are cynically manipulating governments and politicians that are not independent. They are destroying everything that it took decades to create in Europe.
Of course, we reserve the right to respond politically and diplomatically, including asymmetrically.
We remain confident (and I want the people of Bulgaria to hear this) that no one can break the age-old ties of cultural and spiritual community that bind the peoples of Russia and Bulgaria. Sooner or later common sense will prevail.
We are confident that this was done on orders from outside and runs counter to the Bulgarian people’s will, desire and aspirations.
Persecution of compatriots in Latvia: public activist Vladimir Linderman detained in Riga
Latvian authorities continue their attempts to eradicate any forms of dissent using police state methods. At the same time, they are trying to intimidate their own population to such an extent that no one would dare voice any viewpoint differing from officially approved opinions. They are doing everything to prevent this. Let me tell you about an incident that speaks volumes about all those who have their own opinion regarding current developments.
Publicist and public activist Vladimir Linderman, a non-Latvian citizen whom local security services have been persecuting for several years, was arrested in an unprecedentedly rough manner. This is yet another episode of harassing undesirable persons. They raided a person who is hardly capable of actively resisting law enforcement officers. Over ten State Security Service officers broke into his home at night, beat him up and placed him in a so-called “prison quarantine.” They forbade him to see his relatives and legal counsel, and denied him medical treatment. These methods are typical of the most terrible dictatorships. This is totalitarianism at its worst. This ostentatiously brutal treatment is obviously meant to send a message that it is unacceptable to question the official position.
Latvian authorities have already opened about 80 similar criminal cases against public activists and people with a proactive civic position, including 19-year-old student Alexander Dubyago, imprisoned for a month after demonstrating a Russian flag, blogger Kirill Fyodorov, who has been held in Latvian torture chambers for three months, activist Aivis Vasilevskis, released on bond, and many others.
By resorting to such totalitarian methods to suppress the pluralism of opinions, Latvian authorities are deliberately reinstating the grimmest 20th century practices in their country.
You should not have blamed the Soviet Union, the Soviets and the Soviet government for this if you are creating the same situation. The Soviets have not been around for quite a while. You have become independent, you have joined NATO and the EU long ago. Brussels, as well as Washington and London, are ordering you around. Does your current behaviour reflect your own character, or is it something else?
Peter the Great monument to be unveiled in Serbia
Today, a bust of Peter the Great will be unveiled in an official ceremony in Sremski Karlovci, Serbia, as part of the celebrations of the 350th birth anniversary of the first Russian Emperor.
Members of a Russian delegation headed by Presidential Adviser Vladimir Tolstoy, representatives of Serbian authorities and public organisations, as well as compatriots living in Serbia, will attend the ceremony.
The initiative to create a monument came from the experts from the Russian Scientific Institute in Belgrade. Serbian sculptor and artist Ljubisav Srdanovic made the bust. The project was implemented with the support of the Russian Centre for Science and Culture / Russian House in Belgrade, an office of the Federal Agency for the Commonwealth of Independent States, Compatriots Living Abroad, and International Humanitarian Cooperation (Rossotrudnichestvo), as well as the Naslediye (Legacy) Social Projects Foundation from Volgograd.
Under a decision of municipal authorities, it is planned to install the monument on the Patriarch Brankovic Square, in front of the Karlovci Seminary building.
The history of Sremski Karlovci is closely linked with the name of Peter the Great. In 1698-1699, Sremski Karlovci was the venue of the first international peace congress with Russia’s participation. In 1724, Peter the Great issued a decree instituting the first Serbian secondary school, which became an important centre of learning in the Balkan region.
Sergey Rachmaninoff International Contest for Pianists, Composers and Conductors
On June 27, 2022, at the Grand Hall of the Tchaikovsky Moscow State Conservatory, the first Sergey Rachmaninoff International Contest for Pianists, Composers and Conductors, held from June 14 to 27, rounded up with a gala concert of the winners.
Musicians from Russia, Belarus, Brazil, China, France, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, Singapore and Slovenia participated in the contest which sparked great interest among the audience, as 6 million people watched the live streaming from more than 70 countries. There is a song that says, “This is not a song that can be strangled or killed.” And this is exactly right. You cannot just erase a culture, especially when it is a centuries-old culture that has given an incredible boost to developing local cultures across the world, and has given humankind brilliant composers, artists, authors, philosophers, thinkers and architects. This culture is unique in being a synergy of talents. It has never been known to segregate based on ethnicity or on any other basis, and has adopted the best features and offered opportunities for the realisation of the talents of those around the world who come to our country. Many things have become cultural heritage, be it UNESCO or golden chapters in the history of world culture. It was created by foreigners who came to our country and got a chance to earn world fame by engaging in creativity here alongside our masters and taking inspiration from the best things they saw at home and in Russia. This is the culture that certain people are trying to erase with their idiotic attempts to rip down playbills, pour paint over concert halls or deny visas. These people are coming up with this chimera and believe that they can somehow tweak world culture by forcing out the culture of our country. This can only be the result of total mediocrity and nonentities.
Another telling example is perfect to demonstrate the futility of the collective West’s attempts to isolate Russia, including in humanitarian affairs, and to cancel its culture. The impressive number of applicants wishing to compete in this prestigious creative contest indicate that the campaign to cancel Russian culture has failed. A total of 529 applications were submitted from more than 30 countries, despite intimidation by the Western regimes and even threats of physical violence. The best technological capacities of the Western world were charged against our country, with vast sums of money funding these efforts. It seems to me that the West has activated everything it can, seeking to achieve its goal no matter what, but it has failed.
The results of the contest once again confirmed Russia’s non-discriminate approach to evaluating talent, regardless of ethnicity or nationality.
It is symbolic that another landmark event took place on the same day, the opening of the Brother Ivan: Mikhail and Ivan Morozov’s Collection exhibition at the Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts. The collection returned to Russia after touring France. Remember how everybody was worried about whether the collection would return home, considering other precedents and the level of tension triggered by Washington when everything was being blocked? Even during the pandemic, 1.3 million people visited the exhibition in France, over six months. This is an outstanding record among international exhibitions and museums. The opening ceremony in Moscow was attended by ambassadors from Brazil, Colombia, Egypt, El Salvador, Syria and representatives of other diplomatic missions.
We believe that openness and de-politisation should be the main principle of international cultural cooperation, and that the creative power of art is capable of uniting people and presenting new masterpieces to the world.
You can review the list of contest winners on the contest’s website.
78th anniversary of the liberation of Minsk from Nazi invaders
On July 3, 1944, Minsk, the capital of Belarus, was liberated during the Minsk Offensive, which was carried out by the troops of the 3rd Belarusian Front (General of the Army Ivan Chernyakhovsky), 2nd Belarusian Front (Colonel-General Georgy Zakharov) and 1st Belarusian Front (Marshal Konstantin Rokossovsky), supported by the 1st Baltic Front (General of the Army Ivan Bagramyan). Independence Day of the Republic of Belarus is now marked on that day.
The Minsk Offensive was a key part of Operation Bagration, which was carried out in 1944 and was concluded with the crushing defeat of the Wehrmacht. Partisans provided unprecedented assistance to the Red Army by setting ambushes, destroying enemy headquarters and units and disrupting communication lines.
During the occupation of Minsk, which lasted over three years, more than 400,000 civilians died in the city and its environs, and up to 80 percent of houses were destroyed, as were nearly all culture and science facilities.
The battle for the liberation of Minsk began at dawn on July 3. Overcoming the fierce resistance of the enemy, Red Army units seized the centre of the Belarusian capital by 7.30 am. The city was completely liberated by the end of the day.
A 324-gun salute was performed in Moscow to celebrate that event. Over 50 large and small units were awarded the honorary Minsk title for their skilful and heroic performance during the Minsk Offensive.
One more fact: on July 17, 1944, German men and officers taken prisoner in the Soviet Union were paraded in Moscow. They included 400,000 German military personnel taken prisoner during the victorious Operation Bagration.
Victory in the Minsk Offensive created favourable conditions for the liberation of the whole of Belarus and the westward movement of the main Soviet forces. The Belarusian operation, including the Minsk Offensive, which was a major element, was critically important. It was a landmark event in both the Great Patriotic War and the Second World War as a whole. Its outcome predetermined the success of all the subsequent operations on the Soviet-German front.
Maria Zakharova: I believe that Russian officials have already commented on it quite explicitly. I regard it as a sign of ill health. I am sure that such statements are made for provocative reasons. Those who make them may be unaware of what they are doing, but such actions have always been regarded as provocation. They are the hallmark of Western mentality. There is hardly a period in history when the Western regimes have not staged such provocations. There are numerous examples even in recent history showing that absolutely all events that take place in the world are connected with the provocative actions of the West. This is their distinctive feature, for many reasons. I won’t enumerate them here because this would take too much time. But I would like to point out once again that provocations have long become part and parcel of the state policy of Western regimes.
Maria Zakharova: Indeed, the Republic of Poland’s flag was removed from the Katyn and Mednaya memorials. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that placing the Polish flag in Katyn and Mednaya was merely a gesture of good will on Russia’s behalf. It happened in a different environment and this decision did not come with any strings attached. I checked with our experts whether there were any documents creating an obligation for us to do that. No, there are no such documents. Let me reiterate that this was a gesture of our good will. What do we have now? In the current situation, with Warsaw officially taking an overtly hostile position towards Russia, while the Polish authorities are trying to surpass each other in their Russophobic frenzy, and they are doing this in public, seeking to shout each other down, we believe the presence of Polish flags on Russia’s state institutions to be inappropriate.
Poland is engaged in a targeted campaign to destroy all our memorials, as you have mentioned. This topic has been coming up daily in our statements over the past years. All this is happening despite the February 22, 1994, intergovernmental agreements setting forth the obligations for the parties to maintain memorials, preserve burial sites, tombs, monuments and other remembrance sites and to properly care for them. Poland failed to abide by its obligations. We have repeatedly pointed this out through diplomatic channels, our embassies, and during talks. We have also had to pay special attention to this topic in our public statements. These obligations arise from binding legal documents. Regardless of Warsaw’s provocations, and its declaration of war in 2014 against the monuments to Soviet liberator soldiers, as well as its tacit approval of the multiple acts of vandalism and dismantling of these memorials, Russia will continue looking after the burial sites of Polish nationals on its territory. Against this backdrop, we totally refuse to accept the recriminations on this subject by the Polish authorities.
Maria Zakharova: I shared my comment on this issue, including in the context you have mentioned, in my opening remarks.
Maria Zakharova: You will understand that several agencies are involved in the decision-making process. Usually, we are the ones who announce these decisions, since this is a matter of bilateral relations and national foreign policy. However, this is a comprehensive process involving several agencies. We will share the decision with you once it is taken.
Question: Going back to the statement by Latvia’s former Interior Minister…
Maria Zakharova: I suggest that we don’t. We have already said it all.
Maria Zakharova: Will the UK also subject the wheat to an interrogation? I think that they must do that. They must carefully record everything the wheat says during interrogation, call in witnesses, and hold a face-to-face confrontation between various wheat varieties, topping off the effort with a gene test to find the missing relatives, so that they can trace every single grain of wheat. What we hear and see in London is truly unbelievable. On the other hand, did this come as a surprise? Considering their foreign and defence secretaries, it is hardly surprising that the entire cabinet is like this. All these statements and accusations are infinitely absurd, and this is not the first time this has happened. We have had everything, with Salisbury, the Skripals, and Amesbury.
If the UK does have the capability (to carry out a full DNA analysis of wheat and grain), why not analyse the DNA of those who died in UK’s aggression against Iraq in order to reach a decision on paying out compensation to the country and its citizens. I am referring to the Iraqis, those who live there. Did this occur to anyone? There are hundreds of thousands of people, or even millions, according to some estimates. Before carrying out DNA tests, they need to count all the civilian casualties who died under UK shells. Or maybe this doesn’t count? They just left and forgot all about it. It may well be that the Foreign Office believes that Iraq shares a border with the UK. I may ignore what kind of maps they use, and their notion of geography, but as far as we can see, they do not share a border with Iraq, and nothing pointed to the fact that Iraq threatened the UK in any way. No matter how hard they tried to invent the story with the vial, someone has to answer for the invasion of this country, killing its people, for the occupation that lasted so many years, as well as the total destruction, from civilian infrastructure to statehood, etc. Someone has to answer for the fact that these actions paved the way to the emergence of ISIS, which became more than just a terrorist cell, but sought to establish the world’s first terrorist state. Let me remind you that ISIS spread its influence across several countries in the Middle East and North Africa, by creating cells and building terrorist and extremist networks, demanding a forceful response from the international community. In particular, by taking a stand on this issue and being proactive, our country has been able to stop all these threats from spreading and prevent the establishment of an actual international terrorist alliance.
All this resulted from the UK’s policy and its invasion of Iraq. What about DNA tests on this issue? If they have the capability, maybe they better start with themselves?
Maria Zakharova: I have just commented on this issue, and I have nothing more to add at this stage. As I have said, we are monitoring the situation, and we assume that they should heed the fact that, as they have told us many times, members of this integration association pass decisions by consensus. I am talking about sanctions, seen as mandatory for all member countries. They should elaborate a common position and a common legal framework, rather than a position reflecting the national flair of each country. They should explain statements made by Lithuania, the European Commission, the European Union and all other parties who are now actively discussing this subject in the West. They should, at long last, say something coherent on this issue, given that they are so proud of their like-mindedness, their solidarity and unity in their ranks.
Maria Zakharova: We have never referred to representatives of Western regimes as symbols at any event involving Russia; nor are we going to do this in the future. When Russian representatives attend various events, conferences, meetings of foreign ministers’ councils, summits, etc., they have a lot of work to do there. I saw how this G7 summit began, and, to be honest, this amounted to monkeying around. We can only speculate as to what they were doing behind closed doors. As you have probably noticed, this video also went viral. Instead of addressing serious issues of their energy security at the negotiating table, they were strolling around from one photo opportunity to another. What were they doing behind closed doors? They produce a declaration containing such provisions that I would have bet a week ago that G7 leaders could never have voiced such ideas. For example, they are asking China to influence Russia. All of a sudden, Western liberal regimes have admitted their own powerlessness. This could be called something superficial. However, the current global situation remains quite complicated, to put it mildly. They created this situation, primarily through their own machinations around Ukraine, their political irresponsibility and provocations. Arms supplies and the use of unilateral economic pressure and blackmail against the entire world have now aggravated this entire situation. They could have behaved more seriously, but it appears that this is what they are best at.
Maria Zakharova: It is a complex question. I think it is necessary to break down the details. I want to remind you that all BRICS member states have full sovereignty, their own foreign political interests and priorities and take part in various associations as nations. In our association, nobody tells anyone what to do, nobody forces the others to make a choice and never forces participation or non-participation in any format. Mutual respect and mutual benefit are the foundation for dialogue and development within BRICS. This is what distinguishes us from Western-type models. It is up to the BRICS member states whether to take part in multilateral events or not. Unlike the European Union or NATO, our association does not have any intra-bloc discipline or restrictions on contacts with other participants in international communication. Moreover, we consider it totally counterproductive, and we have always said that. I want to emphasise, BRICS has never set itself in opposition to anyone and consistently speaks for creating a more just, not pseudo-democratic, but a truly democratic and multipolar world order based on international law and a pragmatic balance of interests. As for the Western acknowledgement of BRICS, as you called it, we have never looked for it. It is a strange question. BRICS is a totally self-sufficient format that is interesting not only to political scientists. It evokes practical interest of countries that are active political players and financially and economically important ones. Therefore, it was formed on the basis of interest of the current member states in strengthening mutual contacts and promoting a common view of the future architecture of international relations. This structure does not have a hegemon that forces its interests on the others. The agenda is built based on the interests of all members of the group. So it evokes the interest of countries that want to become part of this format. We see the attempts of the United States and their allies to force a confrontational paradigm on the international community and to isolate certain countries. But the world is not limited to the collective West, as you know. It is much more diverse. The logic of the Cold War should give place to an equal and mutually respectful dialogue of sovereign states. In this case, BRICS serves as a great example.
Maria Zakharova: We have repeatedly commented on this, both with regard to our diplomatic property and to other countries. We proceed from the inviolability of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, namely Article 22. (Before you publish anything, it might be a good idea to find out what the Western countries that are discussing the Russian diplomatic property issue, think about the relevance of the Vienna Convention to them). This is what Article 22 says:
“1.The premises of the mission shall be inviolable. The agents of the receiving State may not enter them, except with the consent of the head of the mission.
2. The receiving State is under a special duty to take all appropriate steps to protect the premises of the mission against any intrusion or damage and to prevent any disturbance of the peace of the mission or impairment of its dignity.
3. The premises of the mission, their furnishings and other property thereon and the means of transport of the mission shall be immune from search, requisition, attachment or execution.
More recently, even raising this issue seemed unthinkable, given the accepted diplomatic canons and the concept of private property, which the “collective West” has always considered sacred.
Now, every hostile action by the West (you asked if we had a plan) will be followed by our prompt and proportionate – but not necessarily symmetrical – response. The decision will depend on what action they take against us.
As to specific examples of illegal confiscation of Russian diplomatic property, it is enough to recall the situation in the United States. This has been a major issue in our bilateral relations with the United States for many years. We will continue to seek its return.
According to the information available, many buildings and structures have become dilapidated. No Russian representatives (whoever we proposed, technical, diplomatic, or consular staff) were allowed anywhere near them. We have all the documents confirming ownership of the property. It was registered with the State Department as diplomatic property decades ago. I would like to stress that we are talking about property and diplomatic status. The bilateral diplomatic missions cannot truly return to normal functioning unless this problem is resolved.
As a reminder, the US authorities are denying our diplomats – as legal representatives of the owner – access to Russian diplomatic facilities in the US. The property in question is quite significant – suburban residences in the states of Maryland and New York, the Russian Trade Mission mansion in Washington, two Consulate General buildings in San Francisco, as well as the residence of the Consul General in Seattle, which were seized in a raid by the American authorities. Every request made by the Russian Embassy in Washington to inspect and service our properties, as well as the surrounding area, led to nothing but formal replies. The Embassy has sent over 520 such requests.
Again, I think, as a representative of a media outlet recognised by the Western regimes, you would do the right thing by finding out how they feel about the 1961 Vienna Convention, whether they still recognise it as a document or whether they have their own interpretation by now.
Maria Zakharova: We have said many times that we view the freezing of the assets belonging to the Russian Federation as an illegitimate move violating all possible international norms, as well as the principle of impartiality in global finance. We regard actions of this kind by the West as an infringement on sovereign property. This gives the world yet another reason to ponder whether the US dollar and the euro are reliable reserve currencies for international settlements, as well as to question the impartiality and sustainability of the current global financial order imposed by the liberal regimes, as they call themselves. We will interpret any attempt to use the funds belonging to the Russian state without its consent as an illegal and overtly unfriendly act by the corresponding country and its government, giving us the right to retaliate in order to protect our interests.
The refusal by the West to operate within the defined legal framework creates an extremely dangerous precedent for all the parties involved in today’s global financial architecture, demonstrating its inability to guarantee the sovereign status of state assets regardless of the geopolitical context.
We will use all the legitimate means at our disposal to restore full access to the national assets abroad, including those related to Russia’s gold and foreign currency reserves. At the same time, as we have seen in many other cases, the veneer of impartiality used by the Western democracy and their judiciaries quickly comes off when reality comes into play, i.e., when you start challenging the solutions and prescriptions imposed by their political leaders. Whenever they start walking the talk, the principles of justice, impartiality and unbiased treatment vanish. For this reason, we can hardly expect the relevant institutions in the unfriendly countries to act impartially and exercise a purely legal approach. We have seen this many times on a global scale, as well as in cases with specific corporations and companies. It should be remembered, however, that Western countries, their businesses and nationals own certain assets on Russian territory. There is nothing sensational about this. We have said so many times, so there is no need to present it as some kind of a breaking news story. We do not seek an escalation. We continue calling on the West to return to strict compliance with the principles they have been promoting regarding democracy, open economy, market competition, the inviolability of private property, independent judiciary, etc. If they no longer abide by all these principles, they need to recognise in all honesty that they are no longer bound by these obligations. We will take this into account and act accordingly. This question deserves an honest and public reply from them. If they believe that they can do anything if they need to, we can hardly agree with them, considering what we have been hearing all these years. What they say is now totally at odds with what they do.
Maria Zakharova: There have been no diplomatic contacts with Canada or Germany regarding the situation with the turbine for the Nord Stream 1 pipeline whose delivery was blocked by the Canadian authorities.
I suggest that you seek further clarifications on this matter from Gazprom.
Maria Zakharova: This question would be better asked to the state agencies responsible for economic and financial issues. In our view, if unfriendly countries have decided to impose restrictions on themselves and voluntarily reject Russian gold, we will find more pragmatic and far-seeing buyers. We can see this already happening with a number of other product categories.
In a historical context, in retrospect, this has always been the case. This is not the first time that Western regimes have big ideas like this and then are the first to lose, and try to win back their positions when they have lost the market and profit.
We are less and less concerned about any new and absurd talk or sanctions ideas coming from the “collective West.” These ideas are clearly unhealthy – the only possible explanation when countries act against their own interests. If they were “without fear and beyond reproach,” morally and ethically, if they were models in terms of upholding the values they champion, if we knew that no benefit, circumstances, financial or economic interest could change their views that are important to them – we would be taking them seriously, knowing they were doing this because they are bearers of a high moral principle.
What we see, though, is they take all their high ideals, values and promises, roll them up and shove them on the back burner in the twinkling of an eye when they need to make up for their losses or avoid missing benefits. We’ve been there before.
The United States has been goading the world for years with its invented story that the president of Venezuela was Juan Guaido, not Nicolas Maduro. They “lived” with this idea for several years, receiving Juan Guaido at their residences, inviting him to official meetings. Behind the back of the legitimately elected President Maduro, they decided on Venezuela’s future with some rogue, a man calling himself president while not being one. In one second, when they needed alternative energy resources, their previous decisions were pushed aside, forgotten and trampled (remember all their statements that they would never recognise the current government in Caracas).
Or take Cuba. Remember President Barack Obama leaving the White House? Knowing he had to enter something on the credit side on the foreign policy track (and he had nothing to offer, given how much trouble the United States had caused), Obama quickly “resolved” the Cuban problem (not him, perhaps, but rather his advisers). The embargo against Cuba lasted for many decades, with new sanction packages, stop lists, and statements about the persecution of Cuban leaders added every year. And so they launched an information blitz, all ideology forgotten. A fleet of planes carried business and finance representatives to Cuba, trying to present the change of policy as “long-term interests” of the United States and Cuba. The awkward handshake went viral on the internet, as Cubans showed Obama what they really thought of his outstretched hand. I think you know what I’m talking about. All the photos and videos can be found online. This is another example of how things change in an instant due to fleeting political interests.
No one is going to listen to their statements threatening new packages of sanctions, citing some lofty ideas about values and ideals – or take them seriously – anymore.
The West isn’t fit for the role of the arbiter of the fate of the world. It has no potential or moral right. We would like to once again point out that Russian leaders have a clear strategic understanding of the situation and what needs to be done, on a system-wide basis, to protect the Russian economy from external pressure. We are working persistently on the implementation of existing plans. If necessary, the government will adapt these plans to the changing conditions, as it has repeatedly stated.
Maria Zakharova: There is nothing new about either of the two US initiatives you mentioned. I have little appetite for commenting on decisions from an exclusive format like the Group of Seven, even though they resonate around the world, or to assess their claims that they are ready to spend billions of dollars and help attract private investment for the needs of the developing countries, considering the state of the countries who call themselves “developed Western” nations. These economies are depressed, and the economic and financial situation is deteriorating in them. The United States has huge amounts of dollars but is unable to pay off its own debt. Does this make any sense? Where am I wrong?
Unable to show any progress on the Build Back Better World initiative they announced one year ago, the G7 members probably decided to rebrand it to breathe new life into the idea of working together on economic measures to counter countries offering competing integration projects. These are the latest examples of Washington’s attempts at reshaping global trade, global and regional value chains to its liking in order to cement its privileged standing in the international division of labour and global economic governance. Over the past few years alone, there have been announcements on the Blue Dot Network and ‘economic prosperity,’ as well as several sectoral projects, for example, the partnership for the safety of natural resources. They launched these projects with the same fanfare.
All these initiatives seek to impose Western models in one way or another for influencing investment flows in infrastructure and value chains. In all these cases they talk about promoting “high-quality” standards as their key focus, guided by the principles of openness, inclusivity, transparency, economic viability, financial, environmental and social sustainability, etc. This is nothing but words. Just look at the actual picture.
In this context, the United States clearly seeks to impose its approaches to fighting corruption and labour laws with a human rights dimension, minority rights or other matters that lack any direct link to investment. By the way, gender equality is a priority for the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment.
Time and again, the Americans focus on political aspects and values, and their documents are filled with ideological cliches and opaque phrasing, which causes misgivings in some countries, and sometimes outright rejection. Just as clearly, the actual goal remains unchanged, consisting of containing the People’s Republic of China and countering the Belt and Road Initiative. In particular, the new partnership is expected to promote economic security for the United States and its allies as the “best alternative to Chinese money.”
If they have something to offer, there is no need to generate negative publicity on other projects. If what they propose is so attractive and beneficial, everyone would rush to get on board right away. However, if they start focusing on negative publicity by using all the means at their disposal to dissuade others from joining the integration processes and initiatives around the world, this means that there is something wrong with their project.
As for the future of this new US partnership, Washington’s inability to pay attention to details and implementation is another common feature of its projects. Since the preceding initiatives have failed to deliver, every time a new one is announced there is less enthusiasm among the analysts. This year, the response to the partnership has been muted compared to July 2021. The media and experts have been questioning the ability of the White House to mobilise the announced amounts – $200 billion in public-private investment over a five-year period from the United States and up to $600 billion together with the G7 partners to offer developing countries a viable alternative to the Chinese money. These are the same partners who do not know what to do with their own economies amid the energy crisis they created in their own countries. They are currently promising to divide the $600 billion among the G7 countries minus the US. Even they do not believe these fairy tales. All this is presented as an opportunity to offer developing countries a real alternative to the Chinese investment. Once again, it all comes down to countering China.
They can announce as many high-sounding projects as they like, but there is no getting away from a simple fact: the world is changing rapidly, with the United States and the West losing the relative economic and political dominance they have been enjoying since the second half of the 20th century. Multipolarity is on the rise in the new world order. This is why, without Russia, China and other key actors, the G7 will hardly be able to carry out major global infrastructure projects. Why announce them with so much fanfare? Just go ahead and carry them out! Is there anyone standing in your way? For some reason, they keep falling short when it comes to delivering on their promises. All that’s left is the publicity they generate. I am guessing that this time the initiatives will once again remain on paper, or they will deliver only on projects that promise tangible benefits for their initiators.
Clearly, the West is currently doing everything it can to retain the economic privileges it inherited. If the history of their colonial rule is any guide, it demonstrates that the West always seeks to benefit from what it presents as handouts to developing countries. We cannot expect them to suddenly adopt an unselfish attitude. In this case, it is not even about selfishness or unselfishness. The West fails to deliver on its promises and often creates an unbearable burden and obligations for the borrowers, which gives it an opportunity to interfere in their domestic policy and ensures that the borrowers abide by the foreign policy line dictated by their lenders.
In today’s reality, Western “assistance,” as they call it, is not the only source of funding for developing and emerging countries to promote economic growth.
Efforts to create alternative investment mechanisms have been gaining momentum, including within China’s Belt and Road Initiative, the BRICS New Development Bank, and other resources. And these initiatives do not limit countries in their ability to follow their own development path in keeping with their traditions, cultural and historical identity. Instead of seeking to create dividing lines, they promote fruitful international cooperation.
American politicians should better be focusing on the deteriorating social and economic situation in the United States, record inflation, high gas prices, spiralling government debt, and the fact that the country’s politics are becoming increasing polarised. In view of these results, or rather anti-results, presenting major international initiatives that have little, if any, chance of being implemented seems ill-advised.
Maria Zakharova: During a news conference following a working visit to Baku on June 23-24, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commended the level of partnership in the political, economic, cultural and humanitarian areas. In particular, he emphasised that our countries are methodically working on the implementation of all provisions of the Declaration on Allied Interaction between Russia and Azerbaijan, signed in Moscow on February 22, 2022.
The issues you have raised are being actively addressed as part of the Russia-Azerbaijan Intergovernmental Commission under the joint chairmanship of Prime Ministers Alexey Overchuk and Shahin Abdulla Mustafayev (the latest, 20th meeting was held on April 26, 2022 in Baku). Cross-sector contacts are also developing.
Today, on the sidelines of the 6th Caspian Summit in Ashgabat, the leaders of Russia and Azerbaijan, Vladimir Putin and Ilham Aliyev will meet and discuss these issues, among others.
Question: Is the North-South Transport Corridor becoming more relevant?
Maria Zakharova: We comment on the progress in this area on a regular basis. We have always emphasised that unblocking all transport and economic ties in the South Caucasus will strengthen positive trends and ultimately improve the situation in the region. The implementation of relevant agreements between the presidents of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia of November 9, 2020, and January 11 and November 26, 2021, will provide a comprehensive normalisation of relations between Baku and Yerevan.
Maria Zakharova: Announcing that eight employees of the Greek Embassy and Consulate General in Moscow were persona non grata was a forced response to the Greek party’s unfriendly actions, first of all, the unprecedented expulsion of 12 Russian diplomats in April. As we see it, the goal of this measure was to weaken the Russian diplomatic missions and to handicap their normal activity. Under a contrived pretext, they forced all Hellenist diplomats to leave the country. By “all” I mean the key employees, brilliant experts who had spent years serving the development of Russia-Greek relations. Moreover, the current Greek leadership went to the length of still further escalation by launching a media campaign and publishing the personal data of these people. We are not going to copy this unethical move, but response measures have been taken.
Mutual expulsions are not our choice; I want to emphasise that. It was not us who started this, but there has to be a response to such measures. As time goes by, I think common sense will prevail and the work of the two countries’ diplomatic missions will be normalised.
As for the Russian Embassy in Athens and the Consulate General in Thessaloniki, after the forced, unjustified layoff of employees, they continue to perform their tasks in full, including consular services, the issuance of visas and promotion of the interests of Russia and its citizens, according to their mandate.
With regard to the situation with the Greek diplomatic missions, you should ask Athens about it.
Maria Zakharova: We resolutely reject any attempts to interpret Russia’s actions in Ukraine as “revisionism.” Some people are quick to pin labels on things. They do not offer any real argument or they suggest a far-fetched argument, even though there is no connection here. They openly disregard our motives. Russian leadership has repeatedly explained the in-depth and real causes of the current developments in Ukraine. A more objective picture would come into view by analysing these arguments.
We believe that drawing any parallels between the special military operation in Ukraine and the 1974 developments in Cyprus is inaccurate. These are completely different stories with their own circumstances and context. Those who know history realise this. We have heard many populist comments. The same concerns speculations on certain changes in Russia’s official position on the Cyprus settlement that Russian Foreign Ministry statements often invariably reproduce. It appears that they overlook this, too, while inventing their own theories.
Also, the events in Ukraine have nothing to do with Syria. Regarding the situation in northern Syria and the role of Turkey, we urge our Turkish partners to refrain from steps that can lead to a dangerous escalation of tensions. We assume that military actions, without prior coordination with the legitimate Syrian authorities, would directly violate its sovereignty and territorial integrity. UN and Astana Format resolutions note the need to respect these tenets.
Regarding the situation in Ukraine, it has been developing for eight years, and it is impossible not to see this.
Maria Zakharova: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov provided detailed media comments the other day, and they are posted on the Foreign Ministry’s website.
We praise interaction with our partners on the Caspian track, including the high level of trust and mutual understanding between our countries on key items in the Caspian agenda. This includes the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Sea and the Convention on the Legal Status of the Caspian Region in such areas as environmental protection, the protection of biological resources and scientific research. It also includes working together to prevent or respond to emergencies (viruses and other diseases), and also cooperation in energy, transport, and other areas that promote a normal life for our countries on the Caspian Sea, as well as cooperation in the field of military interaction.
As a reminder, the 6th Caspian Summit is opening in the capital of Turkmenistan today, and President of Russia Vladimir Putin will take part in it.
Maria Zakharova: I have a question for the UK Prime Minister. If he is urging others to come to his country, he probably believes that everything is okay there, that there are no problems, and that life is good there.
Here is my question. Yesterday, Scotland announced that it wanted to hold a referendum on seceding from the UK. This means that the situation in Boris Johnson’s home is not so great. Perhaps he should first guarantee the rights of his own citizens and UK subjects, and then try to make everyone else happy.
Дополнительные материалы
-
Видео
-
Фото
 Русский дом.mp4)