Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, November 21, 2024
Table of Contents
- Third meeting of the Interdepartmental Commission for Caspian Cooperation
- The upcoming joint meeting of the Collegiums of Russian and Belarusian Foreign Ministries
- Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming meeting with participants of the Dialogue for the Future research and educational programme of the Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund
- 43rd meeting of the Council of the Heads of Constituent Entities of the Russian Federation at the Foreign Ministry
- Sergey Lavrov’s participation in the joint meeting of the CSTO Foreign Ministers Council, Defence Ministers Council and the Committee of Security Council Secretaries
- The adoption by the United Nations General Assembly of a resolution on cooperation between the United Nations and the CSTO
- The Ukraine crisis
- Moldova update
- The Russian Military Peacekeeper Day
- Suspension of Russian gas deliveries to Austria
- Yet another anti-Russian hysteria in Sweden
- Russian media reaction to UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azoulay’s draft report on the safety of journalists
- The 2nd Dialogue on Fakes 2.0 international forum
- The 105th birth anniversary of outstanding Soviet diplomat Oleg Troyanovsky
- 60th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Chad
- Aggressive statements by the Estonian Foreign Minister
- NATO opens missile defence base in Poland
- Statements by the leader of Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance
- Interview with Russian Ambassador to Moldova Oleg Ozerov
- The anti-Russia narrative in Western media
- Josep Borrell’s statements
- Peace initiatives to settle the Ukraine crisis
- China’s eight actions for global development
- The West waging a hybrid war against Russia
- APEC and G20 summits
- Internal political situation in Georgia
- Western policy towards Russia
- G20 Declaration
- Interaction between Russia and the West in the legal sphere
- Legal assistance for Russian citizens abroad
- The outcome of the climate conference in Baku
- Abkhazia update
Third meeting of the Interdepartmental Commission for Caspian Cooperation
Today, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will chair the 3rd Meeting of the Interdepartmental Commission for Caspian Cooperation at the Foreign Ministry. Its participants will include heads of the corresponding Russian ministries and agencies, representatives from three Russian coastal regions – the Astrakhan Region, and the republics of Dagestan and Kalmykia, as well as members of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation.
The event participants will discuss a wide range of matters related to asserting Russia’s national interests in the Caspian Sea region, as well as prospects for expanding and deepening cooperation among Caspian states.
The upcoming joint meeting of the Collegiums of Russian and Belarusian Foreign Ministries
On November 21 and 22, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will pay a working visit to Brest in the Republic of Belarus to attend a joint meeting of the Collegiums of Russian and Belarusian foreign ministries.
Held since 2000, these annual meetings serve as an effective mechanism for synchronising and bringing into step the efforts of both countries on the international stage.
During the upcoming event, the officials will continue to coordinate their approaches to working with countries of the Global Majority, also known as the Global South and East, within multilateral formats, with an emphasis on the SCO and BRICS. They will also address joint efforts to counter the aggression by the collective West on the judicial and legal fronts, as well as in terms of sanctions.
The meeting is expected to result in the adoption of a corresponding resolution and the approval of a plan of consultations between the two foreign ministries for 2025. In addition, the ministers are expected to sign a joint statement reflecting their shared vision regarding the Eurasian Charter of Diversity and Multipolarity in the 21st Century, as well as a bilateral declaration on enhancing the role of international law and on the guiding principles for designating unilateral coercive measures as illegal methods and using countermeasures to mitigate and compensate for the negative consequences of such measures.
Sergey Lavrov’s agenda for the visit includes a meeting with Foreign Minister of the Republic of Belarus Maxim Ryzhenkov to exchange opinions on bilateral cooperation and the international agenda, as well as on foreign policy coordination at multilateral platforms.
They will pay special attention to their respective diplomatic efforts to support integration processes within the Union State, including preparations for a meeting of the Supreme State Council of the Union State in early December 2024, which will mark the 25th anniversary of the Treaty on the Establishment of the Union State in 1999.
During his visit, Sergey Lavrov will visit the Brest Hero Fortress memorial complex and lay flowers at a monument to its defenders who were the first to bear the brunt of the Nazi onslaught and exemplified courage, fortitude and self-sacrifice in the name of defending our common Fatherland for several generations of our citizens.
On November 25, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will hold a traditional meeting with the participants of the annual research and educational programme Dialogue for the Future of the Alexander Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund.
This platform allows young experts from Russia and other countries to engage in an open exchange of views on various aspects of international relations.
This year’s programme will be devoted to the role of BRICS, the SCO and other institutions in the development of the multipolar world. Over 40 representatives of public and political circles from the CIS and other countries will discuss current issues of international politics and the situation in some regions with the minister. Young experts will have the opportunity to receive answers to questions of concern to them. It will be an interesting discussion.
On November 26, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will chair the 43rd meeting of the Council of the Heads of Constituent Entities of the Russian Federation at the Foreign Ministry held at the ministry’s mansion. This year the focus will be on the regions’ agrarian diplomacy. The meeting will be attended by governors and senior staff of the Presidential Executive Office and federal bodies of executive authority.
They will discuss ways to increase the regions’ contribution to strengthening Russia’s positions in the global agricultural market and enhancing its role as a guarantor of global food security, in close cooperation with BRICS partners.
The participants will also exchange views on the relocation of citizens from unfriendly countries to Russia in the context of the implementation of Presidential Executive Order No. 702, dated August 19, 2024, On Providing Humanitarian Support to Individuals Sharing Traditional Russian Spiritual and Moral Values. They will discuss the regions’ positive experience of accepting immigrants and promoting their social adaptation, as well as the information, legal and organisational measures needed to ensure systematic implementation of the executive order.
On November 28, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will attend the joint meeting of the Foreign Ministers Council, Defence Ministers Council and the Committee of Security Council Secretaries of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO). The event will be hosted by Kazakhstan in Astana before a regular session of the CSTO Collective Security Council, scheduled for the same day.
The participants will exchange views on the military-political situation in the CSTO region and discuss the results of cooperation within the CSTO and the further development of the collective security system. Special attention will be devoted to preparations for the joint celebration of the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945).
The Kyrgyz Republic will also report on the priorities of its CSTO chairmanship in 2025.
The participants are expected to approve a number of documents submitted to the CSTO Collective Security Council and adopt decisions aimed at strengthening allied relations and foreign policy coordination, as well as improving crisis management procedures within the CSTO and providing supplies to the CSTO Collective Forces.
On November 18, during its 79th session, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution on cooperation between the United Nations and the Collective Security Treaty Organisation.
The document notes that the CSTO’s potential enables it to respond properly to a wide range of challenges and threats within the organisation’s assigned area of responsibility. It commends the member states’ practical efforts to counter terrorism, organised transnational crime, and illicit drug trafficking, as well as illegal migration, and to provide natural and man-made disaster response and recovery efforts.
The CSTO’s significant contribution to expanding its peacekeeping potential and strengthening the regional security and stability system was highlighted separately. Both organisations were encouraged to continue to study possible avenues for enhancing cooperation in the area of peacekeeping. For its part, the CSTO is ready to join UN-sponsored peacekeeping operations.
The General Assembly welcomes the efforts of the UN and CSTO secretariats to coordinate and cooperate in areas of mutual interest and invites the UN Secretary-General to continue to hold regular consultations with the CSTO Secretary General.
A number of delegations once again tried to politicise the adoption of the resolution. As a result, the document, which is usually adopted by consensus, was put to a vote, the outcome of which has, in fact, showed rejection of such opportunistic games and support for the efforts to further expand ties between the United Nations and the CSTO, which will mark the 20th anniversary of its observer status in the UN General Assembly on 2 December. We will continue to support the sustainable development of the partnership between these two organisations.
Tonight, on November 21, the Kiev regime’s attempt to carry out a terrorist attack using fixed-wing drones against targets in the Russian Federation was foiled. According to the Defence Ministry reports, duty air defence facilities intercepted and destroyed two Ukrainian drones over the territories of the Rostov and Volgograd regions. We will get back to discussing the Kiev regime’s terrorist activities and its sponsors later. Let us begin with what caused the outrageous aggravation of the situation in this region.
Twenty years ago, on November 21, 2004, the Orange Revolution broke out in Kiev, which deepened the split in Ukrainian society. The ensuing events showed that Ukrainians had different views on their country’s future. In fact, it was a rehearsal for the February 2014 bloody putsch preceded by street protests staged by the opposition on November 21, 2013 over disagreement with President Yanukovich’s decision to postpone for several months the signing of an association agreement with the EU because of Ukraine’s commitments under the CIS Free Trade Agreement. In reality, these were well-choreographed and paid-for from abroad mass riots seeking to overthrow the legitimate authorities. The very first days of Euromaidan showed clearly that we were witnessing another colour revolution, the favourite brainchild of the United States, Britain and their NATO allies. The West and the Ukrainian national radicals acted crudely and cynically based on “whoever is not with us is against us” principle. Bringing the Ukrainian elites to heel in order to siphon resources from Ukraine and turning it into a hotbed of instability and a staging ground for attacking Russia, and destabilising the situation in the region was at stake.
But these dates were ignored by the West which is celebrating a different anniversary. Kiev and its handlers have deployed considerable efforts to mark November 19, which is the 1000th day of the beginning of the Russian “aggression.” This is a case of classic black PR and classic Western approach: ignore the root causes, origins and preconditions, and focus instead on the convenient wording and then carry out the event as planned. Not everything went according to the plan, though. For example, Austrian Foreign Minister Alexander Shallenberg went as far as to say that on November 19 they marked the “millennium” of Russia’s aggression. Something in went wrong the “orchestra.” All they managed to accomplish was to stage a provocation (also on November 19) with the Ukrainian forces firing long-range US-made ATACMS missiles into a facility in the Bryansk Region. According to the Defence Ministry, the air defence systems shot down five missiles and damaged one.
If Kiev indeed maintains a team of chroniclers, we would like to remind them of several sombre anniversaries that ought to be recorded in their historical accounts. November 17 of this year marked 3,870 days since the enactment of the order dated April 14, 2014, regarding the "anti-terrorist operation" in southeastern Ukraine. This date signifies the start of Kiev’s civil war against the peaceful residents of Donbass, who rose to defend their legitimate rights, language, culture, ancestral historical memory, and, which is critically important, the legitimate authorities that the Kiev regime sought to dismantle. Consequently, they deployed troops there, acting as proxies of the West, which orchestrated a state coup in Ukraine with their financial backing.
Furthermore, November 20 marked 3,855 days since May 2, 2014, when Ukrainian Nazis perpetrated a barbaric act at the Odessa Trade Unions House, where they brutally murdered those who did not endorse the bloody anti-constitutional armed coup in Kiev and opposed the coming to power of nationalist radicals and their oppressive policies. Approximately 50 individuals perished in the fire and at the hands of the Banderites, with several hundred more sustaining injuries.
Another date that seems to have been overlooked by the West – it does not have a chronicle yet – just prior to November 19 of this year, when the West collectively "commemorated" the thousandth day or the millennium of the "Russian aggression."
On November 17, in the Kursk Region, a Ukrainian drone attack on a civilian vehicle resulted in the death of the editor-in-chief of the regional Narodnaya Gazeta newspaper, Yulia Kuznetsova, who was transporting archival materials and intended to write a report on the situation in the Russian border area. The newspaper's layout designer and a police officer accompanying her sustained injuries. We have previously provided detailed commentary on this incident. A criminal investigation has been initiated in response to this terrorist act. The incident went unnoticed in the West; there were no comments or articles addressing it.
On November 20, exactly six months had passed since the expiration of President Vladimir Zelensky's term of office. This, along with the aforementioned dates, received no attention from either Kiev or the West. The figurehead of the Kiev regime continues to issue criminal orders that lead to widespread disorder and the loss of innocent lives.
The Kiev regime persists in its campaign of terror against Russian civilians, subjecting non-military sites to relentless shelling and drone attacks.
From November 13 to 21, over 530 Ukrainian drones were intercepted and neutralised across nine Russian regions. During the same period, Ukrainian Nazis launched 423 munitions at residential structures in the Belgorod Region and executed 289 UAV assaults (excluding the attack from the previous night). Two individuals were killed and 37 wounded. There has been a surge in the deployment of explosive devices from drones targeting civilian facilities, including passenger vehicles. For instance, on November 18, drones from the Ukrainian Armed Forces targeted a bus on the Nikolskoye - Yasniye Zori route, resulting in casualties. On the night of November 20, the Banderites used multiple drones to strike a food processing plant in the village of Alekseyevka, causing damage to one of the workshops and power lines.
Between November 12 and 15, residential areas in Gorlovka (Donetsk People's Republic) experienced further bombardment, including the use of cluster munitions, which injured 24 individuals. On November 18, a drone attack on a minibus taxi injured 10 people. On November 19, UAV strikes wounded five civilians, including a teenager born in 2007.
The shelling of Energodar in the Zaporozhye Region continues unabated. A civilian was killed during yet another assault on the city's residential sector on November 13.
All those implicated in these and other atrocities committed by the Kiev regime will undoubtedly be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.
Russian judicial authorities continue to convict Ukrainian neo-Nazis and foreign mercenaries for war crimes.
The Investigative Committee of Russia has instituted criminal proceedings against Lithuanian neo-Nazi Valdas Bartkevicius, who has invaded Russia as a member of a regular unit of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU). He is charged with desecrating and damaging a monument to Soviet soldiers killed during the Great Patriotic War in the village of Kazachya Loknya near Sudzha in the Kursk Region. This anti-hero is fond of bragging in public about his “feats of valour.” According to media reports, he is not only a pervert, who sneers at the memory of the dead, but also an ordinary thief and plunderer involved in forays into shops and private houses in Sudzha. In March of this year, Bartkevicius “distinguished” himself by bringing a bucket of excrements to an impromptu monument set up by Vilnius residents in memory of victims of the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall near the Russian Embassy in Lithuania. An international arrest warrant has been issued for the criminal.
On November 13, Mikhail Shvets, driver of a machine-gun squad from the Azov special operations unit, who is serving a 22-year imprisonment term for killing and attempting to kill civilians, was sentenced to another 26 years for murdering a civilian in Mariupol in March 2022.
Denis Kapustin, leader of the terrorist group known as the Russian Volunteer Corps (RVC), and another four RVC members – Kirill Kanakhin, Alexander Galanov, Anton Zyryanov, and Alexei Ogurtsov – were sentenced to life imprisonment in absentia for invading the Bryansk Region in March 2023. They were proved guilty of firing at two civilian vehicles and killing two passengers, as well as wounding a grown-up man and a ten-year-old child. International arrest warrants have been issued for the criminals.
Vladimir Shilov, a Ukrainian nationalist and the ex-commander of the Dnieper paramilitary unit, has been sentenced to 9 years imprisonment in absentia for public calls to kill citizens of Russia and for falsely accusing the Russian Armed Forces of alleged wrongdoings in Bucha and Gostomel.
Criminal proceedings have been instituted against the Armed Forces of Ukraine for shelling and damaging, in mid-November, of a cultural heritage site – the Church of St Demetrius of Thessalonica – in the village of Kazachya Loknya, Sudzha District, Kursk Region.
Reportedly, the Investigative Committee of Russia has instituted, since 2014, over 5,500 criminal proceedings for crimes committed by Ukrainian armed units, passed 450 sentences, approved 800 indictment orders, and completed about 70 investigations into crimes involving foreign mercenaries. The Ukrainian militants have caused damage worth nearly 60 billion roubles to Russian regions.
Russian law enforcement bodies continue their work to bring Ukrainian Nazis and foreign mercenaries to account for military and other crimes.
Let us now discuss a separate page from a psychiatry textbook, specifically regarding Vladimir Zelensky’s “plans.” Against the backdrop of significant casualties suffered by the Armed Forces of Ukraine and increasing demoralisation among Ukrainian neo-Nazis Vladimir Zelensky announced his new far-fetched project, termed the “Resilience Plan,” at the Verkhovna Rada on November 19, 2024. This ten-point plan, which includes several addenda, closely resembles his “peace” and “victory” plans, which spell trouble only for the Kiev regime. Zelensky also revealed that a detailed presentation of the plan would take place in December. This appears to be yet another collection of fantasies aimed at ensuring the self-preservation of the increasingly illegitimate Ukrainian president and his hold on power. Zelensky himself is not making secret of it. He openly stated in parliament that there would be no elections before the end of the war, citing Ukraine’s Constitution and legislation, which expressly prohibit elections in wartime. No one in the world has demanded elections from Ukraine. This spells disaster for the country, the pro-Nazi Bonapartist stated. Zelensky is anxious about his plummeting approval ratings and the risk of a military coup following setbacks in the war, rising war fatigue, and the Ukrainian people’s awakening to the realities of their situation and the precariousness of their circumstances. In response to these challenges, he appears prepared to further tighten control within the country. It seems that a ministry for the unification of Ukraine, proposed during his announcement of this plan, will obviously address this issue. In effect, this agency will seek to unify a country where Zelensky has finished off all citizens.
It is already clear that, regardless of the specifics of the “Resilience Plan,” its primary aim is to mobilise Ukrainian resources to sustain hostilities and “inflict a military defeat” on Russia.
As The Times has noted, by promoting his “Resilience Plan,” Zelensky aims to alleviate despair in Kiev following Donald Trump’s re-election as President of the United States and to reassure the public that he can preserve the country at a time when the United States could stop supporting Ukraine.
On November 13, 2024, the so-called mayor of Mariupol appointed by the Kiev regime, Vadim Boychenko, addressed a meeting of the Association of Ukrainian Cities and was compelled to acknowledge that the residents of Mariupol who had left the city were now returning at a remarkable rate. Naturally, he attempted to distort the reasons and implications of their exodus from Ukraine. He fabricated elaborate stories and evaded calling things by their proper names. The residents of Mariupol fleeing the war zone were not welcomed back by their former country, which had failed to provide them with even basic living conditions. In effect, they were regarded as sub-humans; this phenomenon has become widespread in Ukraine.
Boychenko lacked the courage to identify the main reason for the return of the Mariupol residents. The city is being rebuilt and is quickly resuming peaceful life. This plan is working. Work is underway to build housing, medical, social, educational, sports, cultural and leisure facilities in Russia’s Mariupol and other regions that have reunited with Russia. Churches are being restored, and memorials and parks are being renovated. The transport and power supply networks are functioning smoothly. Since the beginning of 2024, 45,400 square metres of roads have been resurfaced in Mariupol, an increase of 40 percent compared to 2023.
In this context, we have taken note of reports shared on Ukrainian social media inferring that the French company Neo-Eco discontinued a project to restore the buildings destroyed during hostilities in Gostomel, the Kiev Region, after the local authorities demanded that their foreign partners transfer 20 million euros to their account for “independent” project management. The French builders might be clueless as to where the funds will actually go (or perhaps, not so clueless after all, given that they refused to do what the Kiev regime and local authorities wanted them to), but we have no doubt that the money will be stolen, given the rampant corruption in the country.
The Pentagon is hastily trying to transfer the remaining amounts of US military aid to Kiev before Donald Trump’s inauguration. Moreover, the package has miraculously ballooned of late. Just two weeks ago, the White House mentioned $6 billion; the next thing we know, the figure is up to $7 billion. On November 12, Pentagon spokesman Patrick Ryder announced a $9.3 billion package, including $4.3 billion approved for the current fiscal year, $2.8 billion available after re-evaluation and about $2.21 billion still accessible through the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. In short, Washington is scraping together whatever resources they can find to prolong the agony of its Ukrainian puppets and continue the hostilities not only this year, but also during the next.
I also have a theory of my own: what they are doing is mutual cover-up. The Biden family has shady financial interests in Ukraine. I do not rule out that the money that flows from Washington to Ukraine will then end up in the US bank accounts held by US citizens – not ordinary citizens, but those responsible for sending this kind of aid to Vladimir Zelensky.
The evidence above once again confirms the relevance of the special military operation to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine and eliminate threats emanating from its territory. All its goals will certainly be achieved.
We are following the developments in Moldova, whose leaders continue to churn out absurd and absolutely unsubstantiated accusations against our country.
On November 19, Moldovan Foreign Minister Mihai Popșoi told Euronews that Russian propaganda was greatly contributing to the spread of the narrative that “we will never really be part of Europe, that we are second-class.” Popsoi’s opponents in Moldova immediately pointed out the obvious inconsistencies in his statements.
First, the Moldovan authorities have thoroughly purged the country’s information landscape of any opposition, above all from Russian-language media. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, to air any alternative viewpoints. On November 5, the authorities revoked the licence of the ITV television network after having suspended the channel over a year ago. On November 18, nine channels were fined for alleged violations during the coverage of the recent presidential election and the “EU referendum,” which ended up grossly falsified. In fact, the crackdown followed because those channels had the imprudence to criticise the country’s leadership and give air time to opposition politicians. In total, since 2022, Moldova has shut down 14 television channels and blocked over 60 websites. What kind of Russian propaganda are they talking about inside Moldova then? Popșoi admitted that they had mopped up their information landscape.
Secondly, the Moldovan leadership has discredited itself through its incompetent decisions, both at home and in the eyes of its Western sponsors. They did it all by themselves, without any outside “help.”
The government has been pushing ahead by taking and carrying out decisions which spell disaster and could be devastating for the country. The Moldovan society is polarised, while the country’s social sector and its economy are in dire straits. Against this backdrop, the authorities decided to revise the 2024 budget by increasing defence spending by 0.5 percent while cutting social spending by 3.7 percent. What does this have to do with Russian propaganda? This has been an official move on Chisinau’s behalf.
Let me share several other facts with you. There is in fact the third point which I personally find impossible to understand. Mihai Popșoi said that they are being told that Moldova would never become part of Europe. And he had been feeling sad. This begs the question on how, and whether, Mr Popșoi studied geography in school. After all, Moldova has been in Europe for a long time.
The aggressive effort to impose a neo-liberal agenda on Moldova is in full swing. It is designed to sow confusion and tell people that their future lies with Europe, even if it remains unclear what Europe actually means in this context, while Moldovans have always been European. The citizens of Moldova are Europeans, which means that they are already part of Europe. Their achievements and their history demonstrate that they have made a major contribution to the European civilisation. Why are they listening to anyone? I am referring to those who are telling the people of Moldova tales about some kind of a mythical Europe as some kind of a destination. But the people of Moldova are already there. What they must avoid is being relegated to the European periphery. There is an effort to impose a neo-liberal narrative, as they now say in the West, while about 80 percent of people in Moldova hold traditional values. On November 12, 2024, the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance released a report advising Chisinau to expand the LGBTI agenda. Could there be anything more important for Moldova? Let me remind you that Russia views this movement as an extremist undertaking which is banned in our country. In particular, this deals with creating a legal framework to enable same-sex couples to be recognised and to protect their rights. There is a firm belief among experts that the Moldovan authorities will have no qualms implementing this destructive agenda for the Moldovan society.
Most people in Moldova are against forging closer ties with NATO, while the country’s leadership is trying to put the republic on this path. They have designated preserving the status of NATO’s trusted partner as their priority. But what will be Moldova’s role in its relations with NATO? Maybe Russophobia? What else? In reality, political observers have pointed out that this meant forcing the country to serve as a logistics hub for the Ukrainian Armed Forces. There have been media reports on EU’s plans to allocate over 30 million euros as part of the EU-Ukraine solidarity corridors project to carry out a major renovation effort within Moldova’s railway network in order to reduce the burden on the existing rail links with Ukraine. You will understand that improving overall security or food security is not at stake here. They are doing this to further escalate the situation in the region.
Against this backdrop, the publication by the Moldovan government on its website of a draft directive governing the exchange of organs and cells used in transplants has caused quite a stir in the Moldovan civil society. But what states will be involved in dealing with organs coming from Moldova? The Republic of Moldova will work with other states. Let me remind you that Moldova joined Eurotransplant, a European organ database, in 2022. In this context, political observers, journalists, and political researchers have been comparing this situation with Ukraine where organ trafficking has reached an unprecedented scale. We have raised the issue of organ trafficking in Ukraine many times during our briefings. They are now coming for Moldovan organs. Do you know why this is happening? Follow me on this. Anyone? In fact, they may run out of Ukrainians for getting the organs they need. After all, Vladimir Zelensky has been using Western funds to massacre his own population. At the same time, this flourishing garden, the infamous Golden Billion, wants these transplants. They have now found a new victim. What do they need to have more organs from Moldova? I suggest that we answer this question too. Do you have an idea? From a Western perspective, what they need is to unleash a conflict in a way that it escalates and paves the way to combat action. This is what they did in Ukraine. By the same token, they will be getting these organs in a similarly uncontrolled manner. It was Vladimir Zelensky who instituted these practices. What a terrifying story, but here it comes again. This was the way they acted in the Balkans. Even the Western leaders could not tolerate this anymore and confessed to what happened with illegal organ transplants when the West tried to dismember Yugoslavia.
They use politicians and senior government officials (with Romanian passports) to fulfill this agenda under the guise of what they call a European project.
This has nothing to do with Russian propaganda. Accusations against our country of spreading malicious narratives must stop because they are groundless. We do know that the West is behind all these allegations and accusations against Russia. But we are there to counter this narrative. We will be diligent, patient and determined in exposing these lies every time we face them, one at a time. The people of Moldova do not believe in the matters someone is trying to impose on them. They know who poses a threat to their country and who is its friend.
The Russian Military Peacekeeper Day
On November 25, our nation will commemorate the professional holiday dedicated to the Russian Federation's military peacekeepers. This date marks the occasion in 1973 when the Soviet Union dispatched 36 military observers to the UN's Second Emergency Force for the first time, facilitating the ceasefire between Egypt and Israel following the Yom Kippur War. Since that historic event, the deployment of Russian peacekeepers in UN missions has become a well-established practice.
Presently, Russia is engaged in seven United Nations peacekeeping operations, ranging from Western Sahara and South Sudan to the Middle East and Cyprus. In these missions, eighty-six Russian personnel from the military and police forces are actively participating.
The endeavours of the Russian Blue Helmets are consistently lauded by the United Nations Secretariat and significantly enhance our nation's standing on the international stage. Russia ranks among the top ten contributors to the financial resources of peacekeeping missions.
Our training centres deliver superior education to both Russian and international peacekeepers, under programmes certified by the UN Secretariat. In October 2023, specialists from the global organisation visited Moscow and granted a certificate of compliance with United Nations standards for the Russian course of training staff officers, specifically for UN mission requirements, at the Combined Arms Academy of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation located in Naro-Fominsk. Previously, in October 2021, the UN military observer training course achieved similar accreditation.
Moreover, annual courses convened at the Peacekeeping Training Centre of the Russian National Institute for Advanced Training of the Russian Interior Ministry (in Domodedovo, Moscow Region) are dedicated to preparing police officers for UN peacekeeping operations.
Collaboration in the realm of peacekeeping remains a primary focus for the CSTO. The Organisation's peacekeeping forces operate on a continuous basis, with each member state contributing national contingents. We take particular pride in the fact that the backbone of CSTO peacekeepers is composed of personnel from the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.
The CSTO peacekeeping forces have demonstrated their efficacy and capability to swiftly stabilise situations and curtail the spread of disorder, as evidenced during the joint operation conducted in January 2022 at the request of the Kazakhstani authorities. Building upon this experience, the Organisation has adopted enhanced crisis response mechanisms at the highest level.
The annual Unbreakable Brotherhood exercise, the latest iteration of which transpired in 2024 in Kazakhstan, involved the participation of over 2,000 servicemen and more than 500 pieces of military equipment. This exercise aims to bolster the operational effectiveness and cohesion of the CSTO peacekeeping forces. Representatives of the Russian Armed Forces actively shared their insights, acquired during the special military operation, with their allies. International observers are habitually invited to witness these exercises.
To standardise the training of peacekeepers, the CSTO maintains an effective centre for peacekeeping instruction at the Army's military training and research centre, the Combined Arms Academy of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation awarded the Order of Zhukov. The training is conducted with consideration for United Nations criteria and requirements, facilitating the potential future participation of CSTO peacekeepers in United Nations missions.
The CSTO's contribution to United Nations peacekeeping was acknowledged in the resolution concerning cooperation between the two organisations, adopted during the 79th session of the UN General Assembly on November 18, 2024.
Suspension of Russian gas deliveries to Austria
We have taken note of yet another piece of mind-blowing state-level fake news. I am referring to the odious statements Acting Federal Chancellor of Austria Karl Nehammer made at an emergency news conference on November 15, 2024, regarding the suspension of Russian gas supplies to Austria’s OMV utility. He made ungrounded accusations against Russia, saying that Vienna rejects blackmail, will not be “brought to its knees” and will continue to support the Kiev regime despite Russia halting natural gas deliveries.
I would like to remind you about some facts and repeat what everyone should know, including in Austria. Gazprom Export has notified OMV that its gas deliveries to Austria will be suspended on November 16, 2024. The decision was taken following the arbitration court’s decision in favour of OMV in the case it initiated in January 2023 for under-delivering gas to Germany via Austria in 2022. In particular, the Austrian concern complained that Russian gas deliveries decreased in September 2022. OMV expected to use the 230-million-euro arbitral award to offset payments under long-term contracts with Gazprom.
I would like to put things right on this topic. It is common knowledge that there were objective reasons for the decline in gas deliveries in September 2022 – the bombing of the Nord Stream 1 gas pipeline and the suspension of gas transits through Poland via the Yamal-Europe pipeline. However, the Austrian concern and the arbitration court disregarded them, which is not surprising. Austria is very well aware of the provisions of the Presidential Executive Order No. 172, dated March 31, 2022, On the Special Procedure to Allow Foreign Buyers to Meet their Commitments to Russian Natural Gas Suppliers. It sets forth a clear payment mechanism for Russian pipeline gas deliveries to unfriendly countries and requires these payments to be denominated in roubles. Vienna has been complying with that procedure until recently. That executive order also said that gas deliveries would be suspended if a foreign customer has not made payment by the agreed date. The use of the arbitration award to offset OMV’s payments under other contracts would inevitably lead to non-payment under them, meaning that the Russian pipeline gas would be taken for free.
We regard this as unfair and malicious behaviour on behalf of the Austrian concern. Our negative attitude to this is more than justified. We are not going to engage in charity in this case.
Yet another anti-Russian hysteria in Sweden
Fantastic news came from Sweden. I think everyone took note of the stir in the media covering the disruption of two telecommunication cables in the Baltic Sea.
The German and Finnish authorities reacted instantly and declared that it was likely “a hybrid action and we also have to assume that, without knowing by whom yet, that this is sabotage.” Are they referring to the United States?
The Swedish authorities, on their part, have announced that the ongoing investigation was a “top priority,” and have so far refrained from providing comments. On the face of it, we should be glad to see the Swedish authorities act that prudently, but we can’t. Local Russophobes are doing their job for them yelling from every available source that it is highly likely that Russia is behind the damage done to the telecommunication cables. The best part is them saying that Russia usually does so using Chinese-flagged ships. This is what just one Russophobic piece had to say.
Do you think Swedish Russophobes are alone doing that? You wish. The “heavy artillery” has pulled up, and the German Bild has published an article claiming that a certain Chinese cargo ship with a Russian captain is to blame for everything. What do you think about such a multi-move conspiracy? Both Russia and China are to blame.
They also brought up an incident that happened a year ago, when the Hong Kong-registered vessel NewnewPolarBear damaged the Finnish-German gas pipeline Balticconnector with its anchor. Back then, they also looked for the “hidden hand of Moscow.” Sure enough, they found nothing, but forgot to let everyone know about it.
I think this story goes along the same lines. We expect that the Russian-Chinese hysteria unleashed by professional Russophobes will quickly die down. Unlike the investigation into Nord Stream explosions, this probe will be seen to conclusion. I wonder why those who are writing about this cable incident haven’t written anything about Nord Stream explosions. Why not write in the same materials that more than two years have passed since the Nord Stream incident, but no one, not a single country that was hit hard in that incident, has provided any information neither to the UN, nor to the international community, neither in the form of an investigation, nor in the form of a package of evidence, and has not exchanged data with Russia? They have no interest in any of that.
Nevertheless, right-minded people - there still are some in the West, particularly in Sweden - admitted the obvious. They say that considering heavy shipping traffic in the Baltic Sea, such incidents are inevitable for a number of objective reasons. This is not emphasised or highlighted in materials or publications, or reports carried by the Western media. Several hundred such incidents happen every year, and the causes are known well: it is human factor when anchoring a vessel, improper use of underwater trawl or the trivial wear and tear of equipment.
One can try to look for the “hidden hand of Moscow” in everything, but there are things such as logic, facts and objective data after all.
Here’s my point. The EU and NATO countries should know better than investing billions in Kiev’s terrorist regime. They should instead be investing in their own scientific and technological progress which will help avoid many problems, and there will be no need to blame anyone - Russia, China, or aliens - for anything that goes sideways.
At the previous briefing, we commented on the UNESCO Director-General’s draft report on the safety of journalists. The issue evoked a broad response. The Russian media as well as journalists’ unions heaped us high with letters demanding that UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azoulay stop hushing up the Kiev regime’s crimes against Russian journalists. The letters came from major outlets such as Channel One, VGTRK, Rossiya Segodnya, NTV, RT television network, and the Izvestia Multimedia Information Centre, followed by a joint statement by the Union of Journalists of Russia and the Union of Journalists of Moscow.
We were asked to forward these letters to the addressee and make sure that Ms Azoulay actually reads them. The journalists are also calling for a demarche to UNESCO’s leadership during the 34th session of the Intergovernmental Council of the International Programme for the Development of Communication (IPDC), which opens in Paris today.
The Russian media are expressing outrage at Ms Audrey Azoulay’s disregard for the deliberate killings of Russian war correspondents by the Zelensky regime, even though reports about these deaths have been repeatedly published and brought to the attention of the UNESCO Secretariat, both through official channels and in the public space, so that no one tells us later that we failed to advise the UNESCO Director-General. Russian media operators are also outraged by the blatant manipulation of statistics included in the Draft Report on the Safety of Journalists and the Issue of Impunity for 2022-2023. It lacks information about the Russian media personnel, who got killed while performing their professional duty. This notorious and ill-balanced product is based on unreliable data obtained from biased Western NGOs and uses a “methodology” built upon non-transparent criteria. This actually makes the report a source of misinformation and the fakes that UNESCO is urging everyone to fight.
We are solidarising with the views expressed by the Russian media outlets. For our part, we would like to say that the unacceptable attitude to our legitimate demands, as demonstrated by the UNESCO Secretariat and UNESCO Director-General Audrey Azoulay, is undermining the intergovernmental status of UNESCO as a UN specialised agency. Audrey Azoulay’s deliberate disdain for official information submitted by member states violates the principles of equidistance and neutrality, which should guide the Director-General and the Secretariat in accordance with the UNESCO Constitution. This is a discriminatory approach that runs counter to the values and ideals of UNESCO. Also, it is highly damaging to its prestige and efficiency. This will result in the definitive devaluation of the mechanisms of humanitarian cooperation that have taken shape in UNESCO’s areas of concern over many decades.
In its current form, the said document is absolutely unacceptable. It is a source of fakes. In a more detailed format, our grievances with regard to performance by Audrey Azoulay and the Secretariat she heads will be brought to the attention of UNESCO member states during today’s IPDC meeting.
The 2nd Dialogue on Fakes 2.0 international forum
Yesterday, on November 20, Moscow hosted the 2nd Dialogue on Fakes 2.0 international forum, organised by the Dialogue Regions autonomous non-profit organisation, with the support of the Russian Foreign Ministry.
Over 1,000 people from 65 countries, including fact-checking experts and specialists, media and business community representatives from China, Belarus, Kazakhstan, the United States, Venezuela, Azerbaijan, Switzerland, Nigeria, Australia, Türkiye, Peru, Uruguay and many others, took part in the forum.
The forum’s business programme included seven packed thematic panel sessions and roundtable discussions. Their participants focused on key issues related to combating fakes and efforts to rewrite history, monitoring and recording media leaks, as well as compliance with digital hygiene standards. They also touched upon issues linked with the development and widespread introduction of AI technologies and ways of exposing and marking generative content, including deepfakes.
The Russian Foreign Ministry shared its extensive experience in countering misinformation and promoting truthful narratives. Discussions included the hybrid war waged against our country and the states of the Global Majority by the collective West, Western methods of censoring, blocking and deleting dissenting content, as well as Russian countermeasures for dealing with this aggressive approach. We noted that the creation of a system of honest and unbiased fact-checking, based on joint efforts of experts, specialised organisations and civil society, which would exist outside Western “digital dictate”, is exceptionally relevant today.
The forum’s organisers presented a concept of the Global Fact-Checking Network. Its members are already assuming voluntary obligations under the responsible Fact-Checking Code, which contains clear regulations and parameters for objective fact-checking. This initiative will make it possible to pool the efforts of all those who sincerely share core values, support free access to objective information and are ready to cooperate in promoting the truth. The forum participants signed a memorandum of intent on establishing the International Fact-Checking Association, with the TASS news agency acting as a strategic partner and participant.
The Code’s text is already posted on the forum’s website, and a form for submitting membership applications will be posted soon.
I am confident that all truly responsible parties to global information processes, primarily those from Global Majority countries, will actively support this initiative. This will enable us to counter destructive Western actions using our own constructive agenda. Indeed, the West has become carried away in playing with the rules-based world order. Our position is clear and unequivocal. We offer an effective and constructive alternative that upholds the truth and facts.
The 105th birth anniversary of outstanding Soviet diplomat Oleg Troyanovsky
On November 24, the outstanding Soviet diplomat, Oleg Troyanovsky would have been 105 years old.
A career diplomat, he inherited an interest in foreign policy from Alexander Troyanovsky, his father and the first Soviet ambassador to the United States.
His diplomatic career began at the USSR Embassy in Great Britain.
At a difficult time, when the Cold War was picking up momentum, Oleg Troyanovsky defended our country’s interests in the key foreign policy sectors.
After 9 years as the Soviet Ambassador in Japan (1967-1976), he was appointed the USSR’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations (1976-1986). Oleg Troyanovsky was active in promoting our country’s position in difficult debates on most complicated issues. “A virtuoso of the diplomatic art” is how The New York Times paid homage to him in an article dedicated to the end of his UN ambassadorship in early 1986.
Oleg Troyanovsky worked hard to improve Soviet-Chinese relations while serving as the USSR Ambassador to the People’s Republic of China (1986-1990). It was largely due to his efforts that the normalisation of bilateral relations became possible and a number of important events, including Mikhail Gorbachev’s visit to Beijing, took place.
His foreign policy career continued even after his resignation in 1990, when he became the head of the United Nations Association of Russia. Mr Troyanovsky showed himself as a brilliant professional and top-notch diplomat at all high diplomatic posts he held. He was a responsible and principled superior and an able organiser.
For his great contribution to strengthening this country’s foreign policy positions, he was awarded two Orders of Lenin, three Orders of the Red Banner of Labour, and many other USSR orders and medals. He was a winner of the Lenin Prize (1960), Merited Professional of the Diplomatic Service of the Russian Federation, and Honorary Doctor of the Diplomatic Academy of the Foreign Ministry of Russia.
In his memoir entitled Through the Years and Distances. A History of One Family, he shared unique details or his work, including as an interpreter and secretary to the Soviet judge at the Nuremberg Trials. The book is a source of valuable information about the events and well-known personalities of the recent past and present time. It is also a practical aide for career diplomats in their everyday work.
60th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Chad
November 24 marks the 60th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Chad.
Our nations have fostered enduring relationships founded on friendship and cooperation. Building upon the accumulated experience from previous years, proactive measures are being undertaken to ensure the full realisation of the potential within Russian-Chadian relations under current circumstances.
An active political and diplomatic dialogue is maintained, inclusive of interactions at the highest level. In January of this year, President of the Republic of Chad Mahamat Idriss paid an official visit to Moscow. Discussions between President Vladimir Putin and the Chadian leader delineated pathways for enhancing constructive cooperation across various sectors. In June, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov embarked on a working visit to N'Djamena, engaging extensively with both the President and the Foreign Minister of Chad on the bilateral and international agenda. On November 9, in Sochi, during the Ministerial Conference of the Russia-Africa Partnership Forum, Special Representative of the President of the Russian Federation for the Middle East and Africa, Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov convened with Fatima Aljina Garfa, Minister-Delegate to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, African Integration, Chadians Abroad, and International Cooperation of Chad. On this occasion, a memorandum concerning political consultations between the foreign ministries of the two countries was signed.
The principled stances of Russia and Chad align on several contemporary global political issues, including the advocacy for a more equitable multipolar world order and the imperative to uphold the fundamental tenets of the UN Charter. Moscow and N'Djamena are committed to sustaining close and productive coordination within international frameworks.
Our shared priority is the augmentation of trade and economic cooperation. Additional collaborative initiatives are underway to initiate mutually advantageous business partnerships in promising fields such as mineral resource exploration and development, energy, and infrastructure.
There are opportunities to expand bilateral cooperation in the military and military-technical domains, grounded in existing intergovernmental agreements.
Education holds a significant place within Russian-Chadian relations. In the current academic year, the number of state-funded placements for Chadian citizens in Russian higher educational institutions has increased from 207 to 300. This represents one of the most substantial quotas of Russian state scholarships allocated to sub-Saharan countries.
The high level of cultural cooperation is evidenced by the organisation of the International Forum of Chadian Students, currently being held in Moscow at the Peoples' Friendship University of Russia.
We are confident that through joint efforts, we will secure the progressive development of the entire spectrum of constructive Russian-Chadian relations, benefiting the peoples of both nations and contributing to peace and stability on the African continent.
We extend our congratulations to our Chadian friends on the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Russia and Chad and wish the citizens of the Republic success, prosperity, and well-being.
Question: Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna said the other day that Europe should be ready to send troops to Ukraine to ensure the success of any peace deal brokered by Donald Trump. How would you comment on that statement?
Maria Zakharova: We see that NATO countries are reinforcing escalation with the death of Ukrainian citizens. They have become skilled in that. Estonia, just like the other Baltic regimes that are part of the bloc’s radical wing, often makes aggressive and provocative militant statement regarding Russia, and with an openly nationalist slant. This time, the foreign minister of Estonia, with an army of barely 4,000 people (which is hardly big enough to make anyone stronger), is urging the other bloc members to take part in a reckless scheme that is evidently doomed to failure.
They are probably unable to understand that the deployment of NATO troops in Ukraine would amount to the bloc joining the war against Russia. We have pointed this out many times. Didn’t they hear or read this? This would have disastrous consequences not only for Europe but for the world as a whole.
As for “ensuring the success” of a peace deal, they have only been ensuring it with their mentality of “fighting to the last Ukrainian.”
They must admit that despite talking about peace deals, peace talks and peaceful contacts, it is the NATO countries that are preventing the Kiev regime from holding talks with Russia.
The first to do that in the spring of 2022 was Great Britain, which sent its Prime Minister Boris Johnson (or did he do it of his own accord?) to Kiev to convince it to break off the talks, which it promptly did. In the autumn of 2022, the United States somehow convinced Zelensky to prohibit himself from negotiating with Russia. If they really want “peace talks,” they should tell the Kiev regime to lift the ban, yet they continue to keep it from doing that. Why? The reason is that they are using Ukraine as an tool and a method of inflicting a “strategic defeat” on Russia.
Second, what deals are they talking about when they welcome and applaud the decision of some NATO countries to allow Kiev to deliver long-range strikes on Russia? How can this go together?
These are irresponsible, aggressive and provocative statements, just like NATO activities in general.
Question: How would you comment on the official inauguration of the US-NATO missile defence installation in the Polish village of Redzikowo, alongside statements by Polish officials asserting that this facility will aid in countering Russia?
Maria Zakharova: This represents yet another overtly provocative manoeuvre within a sequence of profoundly destabilising actions undertaken by the United States and their NATO allies within the strategic domain.
It aligns with the enduringly destructive custom of advancing NATO's military infrastructure towards Russia’s borders, which clearly jeopardises strategic stability. Coupled with other detrimental military-political and military-technical measures designed to project US capabilities thousands of miles from American soil to exert pressure on Russia and certain other nuclear states, this naturally escalates strategic risks and, consequently, elevates the overall level of nuclear threat.
The recent "revelations" by Polish Defence Minister Radoslaw Sikorski that the Redzikowo base "will be capable of intercepting Russian missiles," as well as similar declarations by Polish representatives and NATO officials, reaffirm our long-standing assessments. We have consistently observed, highlighted, and articulated that this facility evidently possesses the potential to undermine our deterrence capabilities, and its anti-Russian orientation is overtly acknowledged. These statements further illuminate the reality that previous discussions regarding the purported focus of NATO missile defence on countering threats from beyond the Euro-Atlantic area were merely a propaganda front for the ambitious endeavours of the United States and its allies to secure a decisive military and strategic edge in their confrontation with our nation. Such assessments have been comprehensively made, not solely at the political echelon. Academic and practical conferences have been organised, proposing a wide-ranging discourse, encompassing scientists and public figures, to expose the fallacies inherent in NATO's approaches.
The aforementioned US-NATO "long-delayed construction," which has persisted for nearly a decade, with complete disregard for Russia's security apprehensions, has been subject to our meticulous scrutiny throughout these years – primarily in terms of formulating compensatory countermeasures in advance. Given the nature and scope of threats posed by such Western military installations, the missile defence base in Poland has long been designated as a priority target for potential engagement, which, if necessary, can be addressed with an extensive array of the latest armaments.
Question: Bundestag member and leader of the Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance party recently remarked that the next German administration should earnestly contemplate the restoration and commissioning of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. How would you respond to such a suggestion?
Maria Zakharova: We have noted these statements. I believe this reflects the perspective of any sensible individual on planet Earth. It evidently resonates with the vast majority of Germans. Why is it that something leading to a significant downturn in the German economy – namely the sabotage, demolition, and terrorist assault on Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 – is not being investigated? Why is it not being restored? Why is Germany not receiving Russian resources? These are the inquiries Germans are attempting to pose to each other, yet when they approach the German government (we are aware of the remarks made by German Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz that Russia has supposedly ceased gas supplies), they are met with deception. This matter is being raised at various levels. Their local deputies and public figures are discussing it.
Russia, including within the framework of the UN Security Council, has advocated for an international investigation into this terrorist act and for holding the perpetrators accountable. The German side has consistently evaded doing so. Periodic declarations by the German authorities of their intention to identify and penalise those responsible, more than two years on, remain hollow.
Regarding the recommencement of the remaining pipeline, the Russian side has reiterated that it is technically feasible to resume supplies should the German side express such a wish.
Question: On November 16, Russian Ambassador to Moldova Oleg Ozerov said in an interview with Radio Rossiya that Moldova’s development largely depends on cooperation with Russia, in particular, on gas supplies. On November 17, the Moldovan Foreign Ministry accused him of “spreading false and manipulative statements.” Could you comment on this?
Maria Zakharova: This was an excellent interview, fully in the vein of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Our ambassador spoke about bilateral relations with love and respect for the Moldovan people, who are friendly to Russia, and his statements were grounded in real historical facts.
Talking to the media is standard diplomatic practice. We never discourage ambassadors or foreign diplomats accredited in Moscow from interacting with the media. Everyone takes advantage of the media: they talk to reporters and publish articles. What is the problem with that? Does Chisinau have a different understanding of democracy?
We urge the Moldovan authorities to avoid inventing things and finding faults where there are none. We suggest they re-read or re-listen carefully to this interview without insinuating anything. However, we will respond, citing facts, on a regular basis to disavow their lies, if they prefer it this way.
Question: What is the Foreign Ministry’s attitude to ex-politicians’ continuous presence in the Western media landscape, promoting anti-Russia narratives? Are they scoring points, working on US orders?
Maria Zakharova: Do you mean Western politicians? All of them are affiliated with various lobby groups and PR agencies. Moreover, they have the concept of a ‘revolving door’ in politics. In this case, the revolving door refers to a hiring policy that is guided by a candidate’s personal loyalty rather than their professionalism or competence. We see this in the United States all the time. This is normal for them because they are affiliated with lobby groups or even with the deep state sometimes (lobbying, distribution of money, PR campaigns). This is their usual practice. None of these people are experts; they do not act as objective observers. In fact, they are the “monstrous propagandists,” in the worst sense of the word, propagating the one and only Russophobic idea (in our case). They never discuss details of bilateral interaction, historical background, or future opportunities. They churn out Russophobic content. I will not give any names. I think you know them.
There are others, who do not fall into the category that I just mentioned. These people reach out to the Russian media because they are deprived of opportunity to express their views in their own media. The first category has the red carpet rolled out for them everywhere – meaning money, opportunities, and air time in the West – while the others face a closed door. These people come to the Russian media because they do not want to lose their qualifications as journalists, scholars or other kind of experts.
The Western media may use different schemes, but their policy depends on whether the person is loyal to a certain political group.
Question: EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Josep Borrell said that the Western rules-based world order has been “hanging by a thread” due to the war unleashed by Israel. He came close to using the words “ethnic cleansing” to describe Israel’s actions in Gaza, accusing it of attacking journalists. He also said the debate on imposing trade sanctions against Israel was about to begin. What would be your comment on this matter?
Maria Zakharova: We believe that this statement amounts to an acknowledgement by the EU, however partial, incomplete, insincere and forced, of its misguided Middle East policy in their rules-based order as they call it.
Russia has exposed the EU for the double standards it uses when devising its position on this region, in particular for the Gaza Strip. On the one hand, they rely on a specific set of principles when assessing the situation in the Gaza Strip and what has been happening there. However, a totally different set of criteria comes into play when they look into the situation in Ukraine. The fact that the two situations are quite different is not the point here. This is a question of method. It must be unbiased and proceed from a single set of principles. But this is not what we are seeing. Brussels has been using what it calls Ukraine’s rights to defend itself as a justification for perpetrating any terrorist attack, murder, or kidnapping civilians, or having the terrorist Kiev regime’s fighters and mercenaries use sexual violence against women.
Josep Borrell can find a way to justify anything. I can describe his recent statement as a swansong which turned into a peacock screaming. We can see the extent to which Western Europe has become divided on this issue. In fact, European capitals have not been seeing each other eye to eye on the Middle East settlement, while Brussels is expected to play an increasingly diminished role in these matters. It seems that the EU’s incoming foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, will focus on the confrontation with Russia. She got the job to zero in on this topic and to keep peddling a Russia-hating narrative. Facilitating the Middle East settlement in any way would not be a priority for her.
Question: The Ukrainian Armed Forces have used ATACMS missiles for the first time when carrying out a strike against the Bryansk Regions, while President Vladimir Putin signed an executive order to approve an updated version of the nuclear doctrine. It is titled Basic Principles of State Policy of the Russian Federation on Nuclear Deterrence. The United States announced yet another military aid package for Ukraine. All this points to further escalation between Russia and Ukraine.
On the other hand, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that the Friends of Peace group on the Ukraine crisis is expected to hold its first meeting in November. What does Russia expect from this meeting? And what does Russia think about efforts of the countries in the Global South to find a political solution to the Ukraine crisis?
Maria Zakharova: On the first part of your question, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov offered a detailed comment on this matter by stating that this signals a new round of escalation on behalf of the United States. This could also bring about unpredictable consequences. The Minister called for taking a very close look at the Basic Principles of State Policy of the Russian Federation on Nuclear Deterrence and to draw respective conclusions.
As for the peace initiatives, we are grateful to the countries, political and civil society leaders who came forward, and even more importantly, have been sincere in seeking to bring about a settlement in Ukraine. Our country is open to negotiations and is ready to consider any initiative, as long as it is realistic and deprived of any political bias. Any xenophobic and disrespectful attitudes are out of the question here. We will not accept anything unless it takes into consideration our interests in terms of settling this conflict. Let me reiterate that taking into account our national interests, the situation on the ground and guaranteeing that the corresponding agreements are fulfilled are instrumental in this regard.
Question: President Xi Jinping said in his opening remarks at the G20 summit that “there should be more bridges of cooperation, and less ‘small yard, high fences,’ so that more and more developing countries will be better off and achieve modernisation.” He also outlined China's eight actions for global development. What signal did President Xi’s statement give the world which is faced with a choice between division and cooperation? How important do you think these China’s eight actions are?
Maria Zakharova: The Chinese leader’s idea of focusing on the positive agenda and building bridges of cooperation is more important than ever for the Global Majority countries. This is especially obvious because the world is in a state of turbulence, facing unprecedented challenges, and is being pushed towards another catastrophe. Incidentally, the idea that our collective efforts, in particular, with the Global South countries, are more effective than individual actions has been set out in the final Declaration of the summit.
In this context, we share the Chinese President’s ideas on the importance of creating a non-discriminatory environment for international economic cooperation, promoting multilateralism, supporting developing countries, and expanding the Global South countries’ access to innovations and technologies.
We have a positive view of China’s Belt and Road initiative and believe that it has huge potential if aligned with the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), including within the framework of creating a Greater Eurasian Partnership, the flagship initiative of President Vladimir Putin. We always pay substantial attention to the statements made by our strategic partners.
Question: The foreign ministers of Great Britain, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland and France announced on Tuesday that Russia’s “escalating hybrid activities against NATO and EU countries” are “unprecedented in their variety and scale, creating significant security risks.” How would you comment on that claim?
Maria Zakharova: I believe that it’s the other way round. These countries (and not only they) have launched a “hybrid war” against Russia and are applying devious methods of economic, political and military pressure.
They have been waging a fierce propaganda campaign to demonise Russia for years. They are using numerous arguments about the “Russian threat” to justify the accelerated militarisation of Europe and growing defence spending to their people, even though they are not doing this in the interests of their defence industries but in the interests of the United States, while they could address European security and other issues.
The European establishment needs the argument about the mythical Russian “hybrid activities” to explain their own criminal mistakes, which have created a socioeconomic crisis and undermined living standards in Europe. They don’t want to give an honest reply to these questions, which is why they are using the time-worn cliches.
While doing this, they keep the biggest truth secret – that the escalation of confrontation with Russia will not make life easier in Europe. We believe that ungrounded and irresponsible confrontational rhetoric can only accelerate escalation.
Question: What is your assessment of the results of the APEC summit held in Peru and the G20 meeting in Brazil, in light of Russia’s trade and economic interests?
Maria Zakharova: Trade and economic issues have always been the focus of attention of both associations.
The Russian delegation contributed clauses on the need to continue the work on creating a free, open, fair, non-discriminatory, transparent, inclusive and predictable trade and investment environment to the text of both final documents. These modalities of international trade imply countries’ commitment to maintaining stable and predictable supply chains and renouncing restrictive measures. This is an essential point for Russia.
There are large sections in both declarations that address the World Trade Organisation. They reaffirm that the WTO should remain the core of the multilateral trade system. Together with our constructive partners, we also achieved the inclusion of a paragraph on the need to expedite talks to resume the work of the WTO dispute settlement system, which has been blocked by the United States. The WTO Appellate Body is a key tool designed to ensure a fair settlement of trade disagreements arising between countries. You probably know that the mechanism is now paralysed due to the US actions. The situation is fraught with growing protectionism in Western countries’ foreign trade policies, including where they use it under the guise of protecting the environment.
Russia, as well as the countries in the Global South and East that share this stance, are trying to repair this imbalance to bolster their own competitiveness. These efforts are aimed, among other things, at ensuring that the global competitive environment is regulated by market rules, not by power pressure or endless sanctions. We succeeded in achieving the necessary balance in the declarations, which took into account the interests of this impressive group of economies. This will allow Russia and the others to effectively contribute to the development of approaches to future international trade policies and global governance institutions.
The APEC Leaders’ Declaration also underscored their commitment to further promote integration in the Asia-Pacific region through the pursuit of the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific. For Russia, it is important that this agenda now includes not only trade integration, but also trade facilitation in a key region of the modern world.
Taken together, all these achievements at the APEC and G20 meetings open up opportunities for exporting Russian goods to promising emerging markets.
As for the G20 summit outcomes, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov covered this issue in detail during a news conference in Rio de Janeiro.
Question: Protests continue in Georgia after the parliamentary elections. Moreover, their leaders, opposition politicians, often accuse Russia of interfering in the election campaign and supporting the ruling party, Georgian Dream – Democratic Georgia. How could you comment on these allegations and overall developments in Georgia?
Maria Zakharova: We strongly refute all these groundless accusations. I would like to remind those who make such statements that we do not even have diplomatic relations with Georgia. Russia is mainly developing trade, economic and humanitarian ties with this South Caucasus country. We share common history and culture, as well as close person-to-person contacts with the people of Georgia.
Of course, Russia cannot be indifferent to what is going on near its borders and how trade and financial relations with our neighbours, sometimes with relatives, are built, given the close ties between us. Still, we do not interfere in other countries’ internal affairs. This is what the West has been actively doing at all the stages of their election campaign, by almost making Georgian voters to vote in the parliamentary elections the way to suit the West. But does the West behave differently, for example, in Moldova? Everything is the same there.
Despite colossal pressure, the Georgian people spoke out in favour of stability and traditional values. Even such biased institutions as the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights confirmed that the elections were well organised and held in a competitive environment. However, the US and the European Union continue to do everything to destabilise the situation. They need chaos and are destabilising the situation in the Caucasus by all possible means to change the government in Georgia so that it works for the West instead of its own country and people.
Parliamentarians of EU member states are attending protests in Tbilisi again. Why? These are internal affairs of Georgia. Why should anyone dictate anything to them? This is an old nation and an old civilisation. They can figure things out themselves.
Brussels is again threatening to punish Georgia for taking its sovereign course, for people doing what they thought was right at the elections and voting the way that was closer and more understandable to them, the way they wanted to do it. This is being done under the West’s pressure put on the Georgian people in order to make them adopt internal laws aimed to counter the historical development process in Georgia, impose liberal values (which are anti-values) and destroy Georgia’s identity. The people of Georgia are being denied the preservation of their own identity.
This is a situation when God marks the crook. The West is doing this now to hide its own crimes. I am confident that the Georgian people will not succumb to provocations and will figure out who really poses a real threat to their country. I am absolutely sure that after going through a difficult history, Georgia and the Georgian people will be able to protect their identity.
Question: Global media outlets are discussing a video showing President of France Emmanuel Macron shaking hands with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at the G20 summit. Additionally, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz phoned President Vladimir Putin the other day. What does the Foreign Ministry think about these gestures of Western leaders? Does this show that the West has modified its line with regard to Russia?
Maria Zakharova: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has already commented on formal protocol aspects on November 19, 2024 at a news conference on the outcomes of the G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro. He noted that it was normal practice for people to greet each other at joint events or when they are acquainted. This amounts to norms of protocol.
Barring formalities, we are essentially witnessing this policy of sitting on two chairs all the time. For example, Boris Johnson used to state his alleged love for Russia, noting that he adored it and also quoting Russian classics. Later, he did everything possible to exacerbate the situation in the Ukraine conflict zone. Let us recall other, American, politicians who said they adored the people of Russia, who congratulate them on holidays each year, while discerning between the state, the country and the nation. After that, they delivered weapons, subsequently deployed against this nation, and they used neighbouring nations to fight our country and put fraternal nations at loggerheads.
We can see the French President’s contradictory statements and actions virtually every day. I believe that this is a well-known policy of sitting on two chairs.
Question: What is your opinion of the G20 call for ending the war in Ukraine and the US decision to allow Ukraine to strike Russian territory?
Maria Zakharova: The Declaration, passed in Rio de Janeiro, was drafted with active involvement of Russian experts, and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was also directly engaged in this process. He commented on the pace of the work and on our assessments in great detail. We agree with this wording. We have approved the Declaration. We welcome all constructive business-like initiatives helping establish a comprehensive, equitable and lasting peace and meeting all goals and principles of the UN Charter, in the interests of facilitating peaceful, friendly and neighbourly relations between nations.
I would like to draw attention to the Russian Minister’s news conference once again.
We have repeatedly commented on the US decision, and I have said everything, while replying to your colleague today.
Question: What is the current situation regarding legal assistance between Russia and Western countries in the realm of mutual extradition of individuals suspected of criminal activities? Have there been any alterations in this domain since the start of the special military operation, and are Western nations attempting to politicise this area?
Maria Zakharova: In the wake of the initiation of the special military operation, manifestations of Russophobia in Western nations, particularly within the European Union, have escalated to such an extent that the law enforcement agencies in these countries appear poised to forego cooperation with Russia, to the detriment of combating international crime.
We have previously addressed this matter, but let me reiterate. The majority of Western European nations have declared their cessation of providing legal assistance to Russia in any criminal cases.
According to the Prosecutor General's Office of Russia, during 2022, foreign competent authorities rejected 89 Russian requests for legal assistance in criminal cases (for context, there were 43 rejections in 2021), and 71 Russian extradition requests were declined (compared to 35 in 2021). Of the total refusals received in 2022, 42 were issued on political grounds.
In 2023, 66 Russian requests for legal assistance were rebuffed, 34 of which were on political grounds, and extradition was denied for 114 Russian requests, 38 of which were refused on political grounds.
This year, 27 Russian requests for legal assistance (7 on political grounds) and 67 requests for extradition have been refused, 14 of them on political grounds and 19 for "other reasons" (seemingly, this is the manner in which our European neighbours choose to obscure the political undercurrents of their decisions).
Some states have completely disregarded Russian requests. For instance, despite our numerous inquiries, the United States of America has yet to provide information on 155 Russian requests for legal assistance, and the United Kingdom has not responded to 31.
Western capitals are neglecting their obligations as outlined in international treaties. By failing to extradite criminals to the Russian Federation and withholding the requested information on criminal cases, these countries are effectively acting in the interests of international criminal entities. There is no other way to interpret this. They might not wish to do so, but are instead guided by political motives. Nonetheless, they are effectively "adding fuel to the fire" of the global criminal community.
We wish to remind that among those whose extradition has been refused on political grounds are individuals accused of murder, unlawful acts against minors, inflicting grievous bodily harm, engaging in terrorist activities, and other offences.
In this context, we wish to underline that the Russian Federation remains committed to fulfilling its international obligations in the realms of extradition, legal assistance in criminal cases, and law enforcement cooperation.
We urge all nations to engage in anti-crime efforts on an equitable, depoliticised basis and to earnestly fulfil their international obligations under the relevant treaties. Not because it is a necessity for us, but because it is essential for everyone.
Question: Do Russian foreign missions render consular services to the persons declared by Russian law enforcement authorities wanted and subject to measures of restraint in absentia (wanted foreign agents Artur Smolyaninov, Alisher Morgenshtern, etc.)?
Maria Zakharova: I have already said in a different context that we do not comment on personalities or individual cases. This is a matter for lawyers and law enforcement agencies. This is their competence.
I can say in general that the current legislation does indeed provide for certain restrictions on receiving consular services in Russian foreign institutions by persons who are being prosecuted. I will underscore it again that I do not link it to the abovementioned persons. This is beyond our competence.
Thus, Article 15 of the Federal Law On Procedure for Leaving and Entering Russian Federation establishes grounds for temporarily restricting a Russian citizen's right to travel abroad, in particular, if he or she is a suspect or has been held as a defendant – until a judgement is rendered in a case or a court sentence enters into force, and if he or she has been convicted of an offence – until the sentence is served (executed) or until he or she is released from punishment. In such cases, the citizen is denied a passport for travelling abroad and may be issued only a certificate of return to the Russian Federation.
Moreover, the Federal Law On Citizenship of the Russian Federation does not allow renunciation of Russian citizenship by a citizen who has been charged by the competent authorities of the Russian Federation as a defendant in a criminal case or who is facing a court judgement of conviction that has entered into legal force and is subject to execution.
In such event, initiation of a criminal case by Russian competent authorities does not prevent notarial acts with respect to the relevant persons (e.g., certification of a power of attorney) or civil registration (e.g., registration of the birth of a child).
Question: How would you evaluate the interim results of the Russian delegation’s participation in the UN climate summit in Baku, including the visit by Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin and the full parliamentary delegation to Azerbaijan’s capital?
Maria Zakharova: We commend the outstanding organisation of the 29th session of the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP29), held in Baku from November 11 to 22, 2024. Russia’s extensive participation in the event reaffirms our country’s steadfast commitment to fostering collective efforts in addressing climate change.
During COP29, Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Mikhail Mishustin addressed the summit of world leaders on climate action, met with President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev, and held talks with Prime Minister of Azerbaijan Ali Asadov. We would like to highlight the warm and gracious hospitality extended to our delegation by the Azerbaijani side, a tradition that continues to be a source of mutual appreciation.
We are confident that hosting the UN Climate Conference in Azerbaijan will further elevate Baku’s standing on the international stage. We look forward to strengthening cooperation on climate initiatives with Azerbaijan and all interested nations.
Question: Last week, Sukhum witnessed dramatic events. How would you evaluate the current situation in Abkhazia? Is Russia engaged in any mediation efforts? Is there evidence of foreign involvement in these developments?
Maria Zakharova: We are closely monitoring the evolving situation in the Republic of Abkhazia, one of our closest allies and partners. As highlighted in the Foreign Ministry’s comment on November 15, we gave a comprehensive assessment of the internal political crisis in the country and outlined potential ways to resolve the challenges at hand.
Moscow acknowledges the agreements reached between the Abkhaz authorities and the opposition, which have successfully averted further escalation of tensions. The priority now is to create the necessary conditions for holding early presidential election, expected to take place by February 19, 2025. It will be up to the people of Abkhazia to elect a leader capable of ensuring the republic’s security, stability, and progressive development. We remain committed to our strong allied relations with Abkhazia. Russia will continue to serve as a guarantor of Abkhazia’s sovereignty and independence.
Дополнительные материалы
-
Фото
 Русский дом.mp4)