Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, March 27, 2024

Table of contents

 

1. International response to the Crocus City Hall terrorist attack
2. Reproachful statements by Estonian foreign minister
3. Interpol’s readiness to support investigation of the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall
4. Ukraine crisis
5. The Moldova update
6. The UK Foreign Office replies to Russia’s request concerning the Skripals  
7. One more example of neo-colonial practices of the Western countries concerning Kyrgyzstan
8. Influx of Ukrainian food into Romania that fails to meet EU standards
9. 210th anniversary of the Russian Army’s Foreign Campaign
10. Support programme for Russian peoples’ national literature

Answers to media questions:

1. Russia-France counterterrorism collaboration
2. Ban on Russian-language media in Moldova
3. Some aspects of the Armenia-Azerbaijan settlement
4. The Kiev regime’s terrorist practices
5. Moldova’s involvement in the Ukraine crisis
6. Recognition of Ukraine as a terrorist state
7. Lack of common sense in US officials’ statements
8. Russia-Japan relations
9. Attitude of the Chinese to the terrorist attack at the Crocus City Hall
10. Turkish assistance to investigation into the terrorist attack in Russia 
11. Armenia-BRICS non-governmental forum
12. Debates on lifting death penalty moratorium in Russia 
13. Condolences over the terrorist attack at the Crocus City Hall 
14. France’s role in destabilising the South Caucasus
15. Azerbaijan’s arms supplies to Ukraine
16. Fake Western media stories about the terrorist attack at the Crocus City Hall
17. Potential replacement of the US Ambassador to Russia
18. Statements by Australian diplomats 
19. Goals and objectives of the special military operation
20. Dmitry Medvedev’s statement on Ukraine
21. Role of the SCO in fighting terrorism
22. Counterterrorism in today’s world

 

International response to the Crocus City Hall terrorist attack

 

I would like to begin with a terrible tragedy that we have experienced and are still experiencing - the horrendous and bloody terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall.

All these days and even now, dozens of countries located on various continents are sending words of support in connection with the March 22, 2024 tragedy. We have never emphasised who was the first, second or third to send us words of support, to offer their condolences for the attack’s victims, their families and friends and unconditionally condemning the terrorist attack. We appreciate sincerity and support rather than analyse who did it faster than others. It is important that the whole world is sympathising with us and rejecting any manifestation of terrorism, without dividing it in accordance with any double standards or a far-fetched scale and new criteria.

We immediately started receiving words of support from Belarus, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. This happened virtually during the first 60 minutes following the terrorist attack. The leaders of dozens of states, including Bolivia, Venezuela, India, Iran, China, Cuba, Pakistan, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Syria, Türkiye and South Africa (I cannot list them all) have sent official words of encouragement to Russia. I want to reiterate that we received words of support not only from countries as such. We have received extremely powerful support from the entire world, including ordinary people who wrote sincerely (from the bottom of their heart), as well as empowered ministers, prime ministers and heads of state. We are grateful to everyone, regardless of their status and position, for the words of encouragement and sympathy, addressed to this country and its people. We are grateful and will remain grateful forever. People have responded to our grief; they did this in different ways by sending letters, messages and by recording videos. They came to our embassies all over the world to write down messages in books of condolences. Yesterday, ambassadors and charges d’affaires from all countries queued at the Foreign Ministry on Smolenskaya Square and entered messages in the book of condolences.

Skyscrapers in Dubai and Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates were painted in the colours of the Russian tricolour. Spontaneous and heartfelt memorials sprang up near Russian embassies, and little children with hand-drawn Russian flags came there. They brought toys and flowers. Parents brought their children and told them about the tragedy that befell our country and its people. We find this precious; I would say that we find every word, sign of solidarity, a manifestation of sympathy and a resolute gesture unconditionally rejecting terrorism as a method to be priceless. Memorials honouring the victims of the Crocus City Hall tragedy sprang up in dozens of cities all over the world and not only near our embassies but in various public areas, too. I am confident that these memorials will not be temporary. They will dismantle some of them, but others will stay on forever. People are bringing flowers, candles and soft toys to Russian diplomatic missions. Everyone is grieving together with Russia and sympathising with us for this common grief. Nicaragua, Republika Srpska, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Abkhazia solidarised with Russia and declared a day of mourning.

The UN Security Council condemned the terrorist attack in Krasnogorsk and honoured the memory of the deceased with a moment of silence. UN members urged all states to cooperate actively with Russia for bringing to account everyone involved in this horrendous tragedy. Following an initial and rather incoherent statement, allegedly made on his behalf by the UN Secretariat’s officials, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres later condemned the attack in the most resolute manner.

The response of countries of the collective West to the terrorist attack (that killed and injured hundreds of civilians, including women and children) speaks volumes. This outrage was unequivocally branded as a terrorist attack. What was the initial response of the collective West countries? They started choosing words in order to avoid making direct assessments and to make it clear that they are not evaluating the tragedy in our country in line with the very same standards used to judge themselves. Subsequent developments are more than telling.

After realising that the Global Majority’s response is different, they understood that they would no longer be able to “sit it out” and to “juggle with words.” The Anglo-Saxons and their European allies began to make restrained statements condemning terrorists. They followed a path trodden by the “Skripals’ case,” “Novichok” and incidents involving the Nord Stream pipelines, without waiting for the results of the investigation and more or less verified official reports. They immediately found the culprit. This time, they found it inappropriate to accuse Russia. They realised that they would then turn into real global outcasts. The Kiev regime stepped in on their behalf. No one could think that these minutes and days someone would blame Russia for the grief that befell it. Such people surfaced on Bankovaya Street. I am talking about the regime of Vladimir Zelensky and the Kiev-based neo-Nazism; the collective West has been providing political and media support to this well-paid and armed regime for many years. Consequently, they told it to do this extremely dirty work once again and to blame our country. For 24 hours, Western representatives made different statements saying that they were watching, that they were not ready to make the relevant assessments so far or that they were simply feeling sad, while responding to the condemnation of terrorist attacks, words of encouragement and condolences to the victims. As I have already said, the banned ISIS terrorist organisation was selected as the culprit.

I would like to inform those who have “suddenly” forgotten that high-ranking German officers admitted preparing another act of sabotage against Russia two weeks ago. The media published a recording of the conversation between four persons. They were high-ranking and empowered representatives of the German armed forces who discussed the best options for destroying civilian Russian infrastructure, specifically, the Crimean Bridge. We will discuss this issue today in more detail. Following the publication of this recording, no one in Berlin was able to officially explain to German citizens and the entire international community the reasons why Germany considers it possible to discuss acts of sabotage, terrorist attacks and extremism at state level. These outrages were to be perpetrated by proxies, just as they planned it on the territory of other states. Today, we will also talk about the response of the international community to terrorist attacks perpetrated by the Zelensky regime over all these years. 

To divert suspicion away from the collective West, from Washington, London, Berlin (as I have said, Berlin almost expressly discussed the possibility of committing terrorist attacks in our country), Paris and other NATO countries, they needed to find some explanation, anything at all, and quickly. That’s where they decided to use ISIS. So to speak, they pulled that ace from their sleeve.

Just a few hours after the attack, the Anglo-Saxon mainstream media (CNN, the New York Times, and many others) began to peddle their versions, which essentially boiled down to this: the Islamic State was fully responsible. According to the Western mainstream media reports, the United States obtained intelligence as far back as early March that Wilayat Khorasan (IS-Khorasan is the terrorist group’s subdivision in Afghanistan) was planning an attack in Moscow. However, it is extremely difficult to believe that a group of 4,000-6,000 people (according to the UN) has such extensive capabilities. Even if it does, it would be advisable to wait until the investigation is completed. But no, once again, we’ve seen this linkage between the Western political establishment, including special services, and the Western media.

Also, they gave extensive consideration to the perpetrators of this barbaric crime, clearly with the purpose of inciting interethnic discord, dividing peoples and setting them against each other. What a familiar colonial-era modus operandi. Unfortunately, it is only too recognisable. This tactic of planting falsehoods in the information landscape, straight from their handbook, brings back the last few decades, when it was used many a time.

White House spokesman John Kirby’s statement, made in Washington shortly after the attack, raised eyebrows even at home, not only outside the United States. At first, he said he needed “more time, and we need to learn more information” on the Crocus City Hall attack for the pieces of the puzzle to fall into place. Finally, one would think, someone sees reason – we need to wait for at least some preliminary examination results, for interrogations and investigative actions. But no, after just a couple of hours, the pieces must have clicked together. The White House and the State Department declared that Ukraine had no role in the attack. What grounds or what information did they have to draw this conclusion? This was absolutely unclear. One thing was clear though. They started finding excuses for the Kiev regime in order to get themselves off the hook. Everyone is perfectly aware that there is no independent Kiev regime without Western financial support or military aid.

When asked whether the United States knew about the attack in advance, Mr Kirby referred the reporter to the State Department. Think about it, this is important. To answer the question of who was behind the terrorist attack in Russia, it only took the State Department and the White House a couple hours. They immediately said who was responsible. But when the White House was asked whether the Biden administration or the US intelligence community had officially transferred relevant materials to Moscow, they couldn’t answer that question. They referred the journalists to other agencies. How can this be? This is their area of responsibility and competence. Why were they not ready to answer for their own actions, while being quick to write a “prescription” for a case they had absolutely no knowledge of, given that they had no facts on hand (at least, the United States never said they had any).

Let me remind you that on March 7, the US Embassy urged its citizens to avoid shopping malls. The embassies of other NATO countries did the same, which indicated that their intelligence services had some information about possible attacks.

The apparent synchronicity between the condolences extended by the Western governments and Washington’s statements has not gone unnoticed: US satellites published them (mostly on social media) only after getting a clear go-ahead from their Big Brother. A few NATO countries stood out though. Sweden, a newcomer to NATO, confined itself to a brief comment that they were “following the developments” in the first hours after the attack. Only when they caught on to the general tone of other comments did Stockholm express its condolences in a manner more befitting the situation. In the same vein, Moldovan officials managed to get out a few meager words only after harsh condemnation by opposition politicians and the Russian-speaking diaspora. Moldovan nationals could have been there – not only Moldovans by passport, but by ethnic origins or kinship. But the authorities in Chisinau could not find a few words of sympathy.

Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis published a totally outrageous post in response to the attack: “Let's not lose focus.” It isn’t “focus” that they can lose. They do not want to lose the aim. But then that should have been the way to say it. Ireland, Canada and New Zealand tried to remain silent, delaying their response as long as they could.

As I said, the Zelensky regime was the only one that accused Russia of involvement in the Crocus attack. Later they said they were misunderstood and they didn’t mean what they said. No, we got it perfectly right. We saw and we saved every video, audio, and screenshots of messages posted online or shown on television during those hours. We saw officials representing the Kiev regime, and others, who call themselves Ukrainian journalists (in fact, they are not even propagandists, but simply troubadours of terror), spend hours ranting about Russia’s guilt and the country’s leaders’ role in the terrorist attack, under headlines like “Moscow is killing its own citizens.”

As a reminder, American liberal Democrats have been financing the terrorist activities of the Kiev crime ring for a long time, not a year or two, or even five. It began under the Obama Administration, when Joe Biden, who is now President of the United States, was Vice President. In ten years, Ukraine has been transformed by the West into a centre for the spread of terrorism. However, ignoring this “dancing on the graves” organised by Ukrainian propagandists, people from all continents are extending their heartfelt condolences to the families and friends of the victims, wishing a speedy recovery to the injured and strongly condemning this terrible attack against innocent civilians.

We are thankful to everyone worldwide who responded with compassion to the tragic terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall. Heads of state and government, heads of government agencies, international organisations, non-profit organisations, religious groups, and concerned citizens have all shown their sympathy in the face of this terrible tragedy. In moments like these, the true nature of a person is revealed. However, we cannot overlook the monstrous and misanthropic remarks made by Ukrainian professional propagators of terrorism. The actions and statements of the Kiev regime adepts underscore their moral decline and ugly Nazi nature. Unfortunately, the mainstream Western media fail to shed light on this dark side of modern blatant neo-Nazism in Ukraine, which is rooted in hatred towards all things Russian. They are not ridiculed in caricatures, nor are they held accountable by international human rights organisations, or subjected to “cancel culture” for their reprehensible statements and actions. Instead, they are rewarded with even more financial support. But for what purpose? As George W. Bush once remarked, to enable them to kill even more Russians. It appears that the representatives of the White House and the current Biden administration have embraced this notion, deeming it a beneficial arrangement.

I cannot help but mention the incident in Vilnius on March 24, where an unknown person armed with a knife broke several lanterns at a makeshift memorial at our Embassy dedicated to the victims of the Crocus City Hall terrorist attack. While doing that, he yelled Nazi and Ukrainian slogans in Lithuanian, including the phrase “Glory!” But instead of “Ukraine,” he substituted it with “ISIS” (“Glory to ISIS”). It is evident he was influenced by the rhetoric emanating from the White House. It’s important to note that the Islamic State is a terrorist organisation banned in Russia.

The assailant managed to escape once the police arrived at the scene of the crime. This underscores the importance of maintaining a concerted effort by all the healthy forces of the international community to combat global terrorism, rather than following NATO orders. Russia stands firm in its support for all initiatives aimed at combatting terrorism and condemns such acts in every form and context, regardless of where terrorist attacks are committed. The deliberate killing of civilians to achieve any goal is utterly unacceptable.

The Foreign Ministry extends its heartfelt condolences to the families and friends of the victims, and wishes a speedy recovery to all those injured. We are confident that those responsible for this heinous terrorist act will be identified and brought to justice.

We encourage everyone to visit the Foreign Ministry’s social media accounts to witness the outpouring of solidarity from around the world, both from ordinary people and government officials, heads of state, and foreign ministries of other countries. The Foreign Ministry’s Telegram channel features images capturing impromptu memorials, videos, summary clips, and more. We thank those who have not remained indifferent, made this tragedy part of their lives, and stood in solidarity with us during this difficult time. The entire world is grieving.

Tragically, this terrorist attack also claimed the life of one of our colleagues, Tatyana Repina, who worked as Class 1 specialist at our Department of Linguistic Support. We mourn deeply with her family and friends.

back to top

 

Reproachful statements by Estonian foreign minister

 

We frequently address the Russophobic behaviour exhibited by numerous political figures in this country, as well as in other Baltic states.

The following statement was posted on the website of the Estonian Foreign Ministry: “Yesterday’s assault on the concert hall in Moscow starkly illustrates that Vladimir Putin’s regime is fixated on conquering neighbouring countries and orchestrating hybrid operations instead of prioritising the wellbeing and safety of its own people.”

Furthermore, the Estonian Foreign Ministry delved deeper, saying that “this wouldn’t be the first instance in history when Vladimir Putin has exploited terrorist attacks in Moscow, resulting in civilian casualties, to justify his military agenda.”

Certainly, no one can match Vladimir Zelensky in such matters, but this can be regarded as an attempt. It seems like a handbook was distributed to those who are relatively behind in their overall development. Who among them could have uttered such words? Both the Estonian Foreign Ministry and Vladimir Zelensky himself belong to the category of those capable of expressing or endorsing such sentiments. Yet, they indeed described the tragedy in Moscow with these very words.

Even prior to this incident, we harboured no illusions regarding the lack of common sense and conscience on the part of the Estonian foreign minister. However, his recent statements prompt questions about his mental adequacy. We frequently mention concerns about Vladimir Zelensky’s well-being and the reasons behind them. It’s common knowledge that he heavily relies on psychotropic drugs and illicit substances. Therefore, the Estonian Foreign Ministry should consider having their leader undergo testing after making such a statement.

It's worth noting that within Estonia itself, genuine sympathy and compassion were expressed towards our people. Despite potential intimidation or prohibitions, they laid flowers at Russian embassies in the Baltic countries. We deeply value this display of solidarity. Thank you.

back to top

 

Interpol’s readiness to support investigation of the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall

 

We have noted the statement of Secretary-General of the International Criminal Police Organisation (Interpol) Jurgen Stock, published on social media, saying that the organisation is ready to provide support in the investigation of the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall.

This way, the Secretary-General, as head of Interpol, on behalf of the international police community, reaffirmed the inviolability of the fundamental principles of the organisation envisaged in its Charter. It is Article 2 of the Interpol Charter that calls for ensuring and developing police cooperation as broad as possible. This way, coordinating information exchange on the detection and investigation of crimes is a key task of Interpol. Therefore, it would be strange not to receive such a statement from the organisation.

At the same time, it would be good to know how Mr Stock’s words correspond with the Interpol Executive Committee’s 2022 controversial decision to introduce restrictions on information exchange with the Russian Federation, a key member of Interpol, which is clearly harmful for the international police community. Perhaps some of this is wrong. This decision and this statement clearly contradict each other. Of course, we support what Mr Stock said about Interpol being ready to assist the investigation via information exchange. It is a great statement that corresponds with the Interpol Charter. However, in this case the organisation has to do something about its 2022 statement.

These measures reaffirm once again that the West is insistently involving Interpol in its political game aimed at disconnecting the Russian Federation from Interpol’s information resources and further excluding it from the organisation. Let me remind you that Article 3 of the Charter prohibits the organisation to undertake any intervention or activities of a political character, which allows it to connect the law enforcement agencies of the 196 member countries even when there are no diplomatic relations.

back to top

 

Ukraine crisis

 

Almost the entire world strongly condemned the terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall. Next, the Westerners joined in. Only one country on the planet acted against. I am not sure I can say “government.” Let us say the Kiev regime. The Ukrainian social media posted cynical, inhumane and malicious comments.

By the way, I have a question for American internet giants and platforms. Have you still not decided to delete misanthropic posts calling for the killing of Russians? Do you think this is normal? It turns out that you are in solidarity with the terrorists who kill civilians at the concert hall. You do the same thing, but in the information environment. I am asking American internet platforms. All these years, you have encouraged extremists to believe that even if you shall not kill, you can still kill Russians.

It seems that the death, pain and sorrow of innocent people gives some people cannibalistic satisfaction. This does not only apply to the Kiev regime, but also to all those who consider it possible to justify the murder of Russian citizens, Russians, and Russian speakers.

This is dangerous, especially if we recall the numerous bloody crimes that today’s Bandera followers have committed against the civilians in Donbass and other Russian regions. We will elaborate on this today.

The reaction of Vladimir Zelensky’s regime was instantaneous. First, it quickly disavowed this crime, trying clumsily to shift the blame for it onto Russia and its leadership, and started spreading statements accusing Russia and its leadership. It was done so clumsily that the idea of a “Ukrainian connection” began to grow strong in the mass world consciousness. Please remember, this was not said by the Russian leadership, not by the Russian Foreign Ministry, or by the Russian special services. In the early days, we have not connected what has been happening in Crocus City Hall to Ukraine. It was the Kiev regime that spoke about this (though, in my opinion, no one asked) and, of course, Washington and London.

The connection was spread by the Kiev regime’s Western curators. Washington and London, right in the first hours after the terrorist attack, began to repeat that Ukraine was not involved like a mantra and speak about the “responsibility” of the terrorists of the Islamic State banned in Russia. This is all called “the thief’s hat is on fire.”

In the past, the Ukrainian special services, such as the Security Service of Ukraine and the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence, have repeatedly admitted publicly to preparing and committing high-profile terrorist attacks against Russia and its citizens.

I have a question. Why then did Washington and London not find it necessary to disavow these terrorist attacks? Why did they not say that the Kiev regime was crossing the line? Why did they not provide military, material, political, information, or moral support? They have not done it even once. Today we will show some specific quotes.

On March 25, Head of the Security Service of Ukraine Vasily Malyuk spoke about the details of resonant murders and assassination attempts on prominent social and political figures of Russia and Ukraine, such as blogger Vladlen Tatarsky, Verkhovna Rada ex-deputy Ilya Kyva, writer Zakhar Prilepin, and employees of local administrations in the DPR and LPR among many others. Do you know what it is called? Confession. An official representative of the Kiev regime, security officer, directly stated that his regime was involved in murdering civilians.

As Director of the Russian Federal Security Service Alexander Bortnikov noted in an interview with the Rossiya 1 TV channel on March 26, “Kiev is behind the terrorist attack in Crocus City Hall. Its intelligence services were preparing a ‘window’ for the terrorist to cross the border with Ukraine and planned to greet them as heroes.”

We believe that everyone involved in this tragedy will be identified and face the strictest punishment possible for what they have done. This is a matter of law enforcement agencies. There is also a question from us.

Ahead of the briefing, we received a lot of questions on how the Kiev regime could carry out things like this, how it has been plotting and carrying out things like this, and was imbued with this ideology. If anyone still has doubts, let us recall direct quotes from their statements. Yes, the list is huge. We have selected a few.

On February 24, 2022, former Acting President of Ukraine, ex-secretary of the National Security and Defence Council Alexander Turchynov said, “We are ready to destroy the Russians wherever possible. It is necessary to beat the Russians not only in Ukraine, but also beyond its borders, on Russian territory.” This was his official statement. He did not refute it.

On May 19, 2022, Advisor to the Head of the Presidential Office Mikhail Podolyak said, “I am for the Kharkov, Lugansk and Donetsk regions to completely forget the word “Russians.”

On August 22, 2022, Ukraine’s Ambassador to Kazakhstan Petr Vrublevsky said, “We are trying to kill as many of them [Russians] as possible. The more Russians we kill now, the less our children will have to kill. That’s all".

On December 7, 2022, former (back then, current) Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council Alexey Danilov noted, “Russia must disappear from the world map as a military-political entity.”

On December 13, 2022, former (back then, current) Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council Alexey Danilov said, “Everything will burn until the entire Moscow burns down.”

On May 18, 2023, Advisor to the Head of the Presidential Office Mikhail Podolyak said, “Yes, Ukraine does hate you [Russians]. We will pursue you. All the time, everywhere. Ukraine will get each of you, and it does not matter in what way − legally or physically.”

On May 21, 2023 Head of the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defence Kirill Budanov said, “These are people with a modified psyche who must be brought to fair responsibility. We believe that physical elimination is the only fair responsibility.”

On June 3, 2023, Alexey Danilov, then Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine, said: “The renegades who think they can speak Russian on the Ukrainian airwaves have no place not only on television but also in politics and in Ukraine in general.”

On June 15, 2023, advisor to the head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Mikhail Podolyak said: “There is only one plan. It is the harshest advance with the killing of a maximum number of Russians.”

On July 14, 2023, then commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian Armed Fores Valery Zaluzhny noted: “It is up to us to decide how to kill this enemy. In war, enemies can and must be killed in their own territory. If our partners are afraid to use their weapons, we will use ours. And as many as we need.”

On August 2, 2023, then Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council Alexey Danilov said: “We [i.e. Ukraine and Poland] share the same European history, millions of family and friendly ties and the only goal – to destroy the Moscow beast.” It was the Ukrainian official in charge of national security who said this.

On March 15, 2024, Vladimir Zelensky said: “Today we held important military meetings. We have pinpointed the most vulnerable spots of the enemy where we can inflict the largest possible damage. And we will do it. The more the Russian state loses and the higher the price of its aggression becomes, the sooner we will see a just end to this war.”

The above are only a few of the direct quotes that confirm the intentions of the Kiev regime and its officials to kill Russians and Russian speakers, to kill Russian citizens wherever possible, thereby inflicting “losses” and “damage” on our country, as they put it. The essence of these statements is obvious: the physical extermination of Russians, Russian speakers and Russian citizens. They regard this as their priority goal and objective, and it began long before 2022.

Ukrainian authorities have never limited themselves to words alone. For many years now, they have been using and continue to use terrorist methods against political and public figures and journalists both in Ukraine, in Russia and in other countries. Journalists from other countries have fallen victim to their terrorist blows. Here are some of the examples.

On April 15, 2015, former deputy of the Verkhovna Rada (Party of Regions) Oleg Kalashnikov was killed at the door of his apartment in Kiev. Next day, on Aprill 16, 2015, journalist Oles Buzina was shot dead near his apartment house in Kiev. The murderers have not been called to account yet. On July 20, 2017, prominent Russian and Ukrainian journalist Pavel Sheremet was killed in a car explosion in Kiev. On August 31, 2018, Head of the Donetsk People’s Republic Alexander Zakharchenko was killed in a café explosion in Donetsk. On August 20, 2022, journalist and political analyst Darya Dugina died in a car explosion in Moscow. The Federal Security Service of Russia has established the complicity of the Security Service of Ukraine in her assassination.

On March 6, 2023, our services thwarted an assassination attempt on Konstantin Malofeyev, the founder of the Tsargrad television channel. On April 2, 2023, military correspondent Vladlen Tatarsky was killed in St Petersburg. It was established during the investigation that the explosion in which he died was masterminded by Ukrainian security services. On May 6, 2023, writer and journalist Zakhar Prilepin was injured in a car explosion in the Nizhny Novgorod Region. Other terrorist attacks, which did not have any military significance, targeted the Crimean Bridge on October 8, 2022, and on July 17, 2023.

There is also ongoing shelling of the cities and villages in the Belgorod Region, the Donetsk and Lugansk people’s republics and the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, as well as acts of nuclear terrorism against the Zaporozhye and Kursk nuclear power plants. All kinds of Kiev officials have proudly reported them when asking their Western handlers for more money. For many years now, the Mirotvorets website had been posting the personal data of those whom the Kiev regime regards as legitimate targets. And later they cynically tick off the names of those they have killed. Kill and take pride in this – this is the pattern of the Kiev regime.

What about the Western champions of democracy and human rights? Can you give me a single quote of them condemning such acts? Have they called Zelensky or his predecessors down at least once? You can’t, and neither can I. There is only the deafening silence of the Western handlers, who continued to provide Zelensky with money and weapons, and who were never embarrassed to support the Kiev regime.  

In May 2022, Prime Minister of Belgium Alexander De Croo said: “Russia is a direct threat to the security of NATO and to the European way of life.” One click, and the money was dispatched to the Kiev regime.

On September 28, 2022, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that the US saw no reason why Kiev cannot strike the territories which had joined Russia. And more money was sent to Zelensky.

On March 19, 2023, then French Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs Catherine Colonna said: “We must help Ukraine to remain on positions of strength and to make Russia understand that it has chosen a dead end in the military and diplomatic sense. Inficting military defeat on Russia is the most reliable way to peace.” More funds transferred to Zelensky.

On April 23, 2023, President of France Emmanuel Macron (he is such a talker) said: “Our goal is to help Ukraine keep up its resistance at all costs, to prevent Russia from winning and the conflict from growing.” What is this if not Macron’s call on the Kiev regime to do anything, including commit extremist and terrorist crimes?  “At all costs,” he said. Most importantly, he is saying this to collect more money. Macron is actually knocking on every door to collect more money. What for? To help the Kiev regime “prevent Russia from winning, at all costs,” as he said.

May 30, 2023. Then-Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom James Cleverly: “Ukraine does have the legitimate right to defend itself. It has the legitimate right to do so within its own borders, of course, but it does also have the right to project force beyond its borders to undermine Russia’s ability to project force into Ukraine itself.”

They know what Ukraine’s armed forces, its defence system, etc. are like. They understand perfectly well what methods they suggested the Kiev regime should use all these years – methods of terrorism, extremism, the murder of ordinary, peaceful citizens, and the destruction of civilian infrastructure.

May 31, 2023. German government spokesman Steffen Hebestreit: “The German government considers the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ strikes on targets on the Russian territory with Ukrainian-made weapons to be legitimate... I provided not an assessment of the [drone attack on Moscow] itself, but an assessment from the standpoint of international law. International law considers such strikes legitimate.” The German government spokesman did not say that the strikes are targeting civilian infrastructure, that this is terrorism in the proper sense of the word.

And now a masterpiece, one of the fundamentally important quotes characterising the West’s approach. Literally on the eve of the attack on Crocus City Hall, UK’s former Prime Minister, former Foreign Secretary (she has held many positions over the past 10 years, I do not even want to list all of them) Liz Truss made a statement. What did she say? This is more than a quote. This proves the Anglo-Saxons’ involvement in the terrorist activities of the Kiev regime. She said, “I want to see the US give maximum support to Ukraine and enable it to use all weapons and all tactics, including planes, long-range weapons, etc.” “All tactics.” What can they be? Terrorist ones.

Ukrainian neo-Nazis do not stop shelling Russian cities. On March 20-24, five people were killed, and 33 people, including one child, were injured as a result of strikes on the Belgorod Region.

On March 24, the Kiev regime carried out the most massive shelling of Sevastopol. Two people were killed, and 11 people got wounds of varying severity. Civil infrastructure, including more than 65 apartment buildings and private houses, several social facilities, gas supply facilities and more than 40 cars, were damaged.

Russian law enforcement agencies have been carefully recording all these atrocities. The persons involved will definitely be identified and brought to justice.

Based on the evidence collected by the Investigative Committee of Russia, Russian courts continue to pass sentences on Ukrainian militants who have committed grave crimes against civilians.

In the Donetsk People’s Republic, a court sentenced ten militants of the Azov neo-Nazi unit to various terms of imprisonment. From March 7 to April 15, 2022, they shelled a residential area on the western outskirts of Mariupol, which caused the death and injury of several civilians.

None of the Ukrainian criminals will be able to escape punishment. They will be identified and punished to the fullest extent of the law.

The 20th Ramstein-format meeting of the Ukraine Defence Contact Group, which was held on March 19, yielded the worst fruits ever. Most Western representatives came to the meeting “empty-handed” (as the Kiev regime officials themselves noted). Only Germany and the Netherlands expressed their readiness to transfer weapons and military equipment worth €500 million and €350 million, respectively, to the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

Accustomed to various types of assistance, Kiev was really irritated. On March 21, Vladimir Zelensky called the volume of artillery that Ukraine received from its allies a humiliation for Europe. He was echoed by Deputy Prime Minister Olga Stefanishina. On March 22, she complained that in January-February, the country received only “10 percent of the planned funds necessary for the state to survive,” and that Ukraine never received “military assistance, which was planned for almost a year within the Ramstein format by more than 50 countries.”

More and more countries and political figures are becoming aware of who they sponsor and what they give money for – for terrorism and extremism. We started talking about this a long time ago. I understand that this is unlikely to ever cause a global revision of editorial policy in Western media. However, this is true. We regularly talked about this even before March 2024 and cited a lot of facts indicating the terrorist activities of the Kiev regime. This was not obvious only to those who just ignored these facts.

The prospect of being flat broke frightens the regime of Vladimir Zelensky. He is a nobody without Western help.

Against the backdrop of a discussion in Europe about sending troops from a number of EU countries to Ukraine, Kiev has already begun to prepare for meeting foreign “investors.” This is how they view their “business project.” From a military and political standpoint, it would be more logical to call them interventionists. However, given that Washington constantly calls developments around Ukraine and the Kiev regime a “good bargain” and a “profitable investment” in killing Russians, then investors are likely to come there.

On March 20, the Verkhovna Rada committee on the organisation of state power, local self-government, regional development and urban planning recommended the government to rename five towns and 104 villages in the country as part of the efforts to do away with the Soviet past. They will prosper, of course, after that.

Thus, the town of Chervonograd in the Lvov Region was proposed to be named in honour of the Uniate-collaborator Andrey Sheptytsky. I will remind you who he was. He was the one who warmly congratulated Hitler on the occasion of the Nazi occupation of the capital of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic on September 19, 1941.

The port city of Yuzhny in the Odessa Region was decided to be renamed Port-Annental. What is it? This was once the name of a nearby village of German colonists.

The village of Nadezhdovka in the Odessa Region will be reincarnated into Champagne, according to the plan of these “ideologists.”

Apparently, the new Ukrainian collaborators, following the example of their predecessors, are preparing to welcome French and German soldiers, who will obviously be garrisoned in villages with names that sound sweet to their ear.

I believe that the pinnacle was the decision that owners of luxury cars in Ukraine will now be exempt from tax. The car brands were even named. Apparently, this is how they are getting ready to meet new “commandant’s offices.”

The oppression of canonical Orthodoxy continues in Ukraine. I would call it the destruction of the Orthodox Church and a blow to all believers. In Cherkassy Region, the Ukrainian Security Service (SBU) notified Archpriest of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church Boris Brodovsky of “suspicion” of committing criminal offence for his publications in social media, in which he referred to fighters of the Azov nationalist battalion as Nazis. The archpriest was charged for this, despite the fact that these fighters even have Nazi symbols on their chevrons. The SBU conducted searches and arrested employees of the Union of Orthodox Journalists. New criminal cases were registered against monks of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra and Pochaev Lavra. The Kiev City Council continues to confiscate lands of Kiev-Pechersk Lavra for transfer to a reserve.

On March 25, SBU head Vasily Malyuk said in an interview with the Ukrainian TV channel ICTV that clergymen of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church were being criminally prosecuted. According to him, more than 80 cases have been initiated against that clergy and 37 “suspicions” have been announced. Twenty-three priests have received court verdicts on charges ranging from state treason to inciting inter-religious hatred.

Every year, the US State Department publishes reports on the oppression of religious freedom. They have experts there, and a lot of people are involved in preparing these reports, constantly monitoring the situation. Will they see any of this? Can they comment right now, without waiting for the next report? No. After all, everything is going according to the US plan.

On March 5, the Verkhovna Rada Committee on Humanitarian and Information Policy recommended that Parliament adopt in the second reading a bill that would ban the Ukrainian Orthodox Church altogether. What about the US State Department? Has anyone said anything? Maybe there was some publication or some high-ranking State Department official recorded a video with an appeal to the Kiev regime? No, nothing of the kind has happened. These plans are yet to be implemented. We do not rule out that some external forces have intervened.

On March 25, head of the international human rights company Amsterdam & Partners LLP, Robert Amsterdam (who can hardly be suspected of pro-Russian sentiments) commented in social media on the letters he had sent to the Verkhovna Rada in connection with the possible adoption of the above-mentioned draft law. In particular, he noted that a country that bans political parties, restricts dissenting media, postpones elections and seeks to ban the largest church denomination has lost the ability to understand political responsibility.

Seems a bit mild to me. But still, it is an interesting statement against the backdrop of the dead silence of all other Western supervisors of the Kiev regime. The only point I have to make. The head of the international human rights company, Robert Amsterdam, should have sent his letters not to the Kiev regime, but to those who sponsor it. He should have sent them to the US State Department, the White House, the Foreign Office, Downing Street, and the Elysee Palace. The money is coming from there.

Once again, we call on the relevant international organisations to strongly condemn Kiev’s ongoing inhumane repression of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, to force it to stop this arbitrariness and to prevent the adoption of the above-mentioned anti-church bill, which not only contradicts the Constitution of Ukraine, but also constitutes a gross violation of human rights and freedoms, affecting the feelings of millions of Orthodox believers.

Western supervisors continue to demand that the Kiev regime expedite the adoption of the law on tougher mobilisation.

On March 21, Admiral Rob Bauer, Chair of the NATO Military Committee, who was in Kiev, said: “You need people to replace the dead and wounded. And that means only one thing – mobilisation.” At the same time, on March 24, Commander of the Ukrainian Ground Forces Alexander Pavlyuk complained that Ukrainians are hiding from military enlistment officers and calling them “men hunters.”

Cases of physical violence against enlistment officers have become more frequent in Ukraine. On March 21, a man in Novovolynsky, Volyn Region, attacked military enlistment officers, who were going to forcibly recruit him, with a knife.

A court in Lvov sentenced a person who said that he would rather assume criminal liability, instead of going to war and killing Russians, to three years in prison.

The number of draft-dodgers has now soared greatly, almost ten times over. According to the Prosecutor-General’s Office of Ukraine, over 9,000 criminal cases have been opened against them; over 2,600 of these have been submitted to courts. At the instigation of the Kiev regime (this is its ideology), a real hunt has been launched against Ukrainian men. Border guards are authorised to use drones and to shoot to kill draft-dodgers illegally trying to cross the border.

Where is all that “civilised” Europe? In its time, Europe persecuted the authorities of the German Democratic Republic (GDR) for measures against those climbing over the Berlin Wall. Europeans called GDR authorities uncivilised and demanded that they swear allegiance to genuine freedom and democracy. So, what can we see today? Where is democracy nowadays? Does it exist in Ukraine or somewhere in the EU? Gentlemen, why are all of you keeping silent today? However, you can hardly be called gentlemen; you are rather slaves of your own man-hating ideology. Why are you not criticising the Kiev regime? Why are you not raising this issue at the UN Human Rights Council, the OSCE and other international organisations? I understand that Western actions have totally paralysed the OSCE, but there is always a chance to act heroically. For many years, all of you advocated freedom and democracy. So, why are you overlooking the monstrous dehumanisation now underway in Ukraine?

This is no longer about democracy, freedom and human rights, but rather about an absolute moral and ethical collapse.

The Zelensky regime continues to fight history and the memory of those who sacrificed their own lives in the name of a common victory over Nazism. On March 21, 2024, the media reported that the staff at the World War II Museum in Kiev decided to dismantle a high relief depicting the Battle of Kursk. The local cultural bigwigs believe that it symbolises “Bolshevik propaganda in monumental art.”

In reality, contemporary pro-Bandera supporters are terribly afraid of anything that reminds people about the demise of their ideological idols in the Third Reich and their own unenviable future plight. This is why they are fighting their own memory and monuments to Soviet soldiers so furiously; this is why they are desecrating these soldiers’ common graves. Instead of explaining their own ideology, they have started insulting everyone else. They have no power over human memory. I want to upset them. People remember and will continue to remember those who had delivered humankind of the Nazi scourge, as well as those who had ruthlessly killed hundreds of thousands of absolutely innocent women, old people and children, destroyed peaceful cities and villages, sown terror and chaos everywhere, and who starved people.

 The above-mentioned facts confirm the topicality of the special military operation’s objectives aiming to de-Nazify and demilitarise Ukraine and to eliminate threats emanating from its territory. The Russian leadership has repeatedly noted that these objectives will be accomplished.

back to top

 

The Moldova update

 

The Moldovan leadership continues to air a standard set of accusations against Russia, including its alleged “hybrid warfare” and efforts to “undermine Moldova’s European path

As they explain it, Russian citizens, allegedly seeing Chisinau’s European integration “successes” and impressed by a “free” and “democratic” Moldova, are beginning to doubt their country’s “imperial model of development.” According to the Chisinau rulers’ logic, Moscow is bound to respond by trying to throw Moldova off the “European path” by any means. One has the impression that the Moldovan authorities have “intercepted” several “post packages” intended for Vladimir Zelensky and are making good use of them. Where are they getting all that nonsense from, anyway?

We suggest considering what citizens of Moldova think about the “European integration project” promoted by Maia Sandu and her team. According to recent opinion polls:

- almost 60 percent of Moldovans believe that their country is going in the wrong direction;

- 62 percent disapprove of the decisions to appoint nationals of Romania to important public positions;

- over 60 percent are sure that the government’s steps to reform the justice system have failed to reduce corruption and are in fact aimed at establishing control over Moldova’s judicial system;

- more than 70 percent of Moldovan respondents describe the situation in the country during Maia Sandu’s tenure as a “rollback” or “stagnation;”

- almost 60 percent believe that Maia Sandu receives an obscure income and does not deserve to be re-elected for a second term.

These figures speak for themselves. They clearly demonstrate how far removed the leaders of the republic are from the interests of their own people.

In the run-up to the next autumn’s presidential election, amid their rapidly falling popularity ratings, the Moldovan authorities are looking for support elsewhere rather than in their own country, from the Moldovan citizens and voters. Perhaps, they are doing the right thing. Apparently, foreign money will be provided for them to be “re-elected.”

On March 21, the pro-Western majority in the Moldovan parliament approved in the first reading a draft law on mail voting in the pilot regime. There is one subtle nuance though: this option is only available for the Moldovan citizens residing in the United States and Canada. The many-thousand-strong Moldovan diaspora in Russia, based in over 20 Russian regions, will not have this opportunity.

This is not the only instance of the Moldovan government discriminating against its own citizens.

On February 26, the Moldovan Ministry of Culture decided to exclude Russia from the list of countries expected to host the Mărțișor events, a Moldovan traditional festival celebrating the beginning of spring.

Fortunately, they were unsuccessful. On March 22, Russian Moldovans held the Mărțișor-2024 festival of Moldovan culture in Moscow. The celebration, attended by representatives of Moldovan organisations from more than ten Russian regions, included an exhibition of handicrafts and traditional attire, the tasting of traditional food, and concerts by Moldovan performers and bands.

This proves that Russian citizens see perfectly well something other than the self-proclaimed “European integration successes” of Maia Sandu’s team.  These “successes” are so thin on the ground that no one in Moldova seems to notice them.

We will continue to comment on developments in Moldova, not least because the Maia Sandu regime endlessly uses the words “Russia” and “Russians” in the pejorative sense to incite hatred towards Russia among the Moldovan people. Never in modern history have the Moldovans shown anything but openness and friendship towards Russian citizens, Russian speakers, ethnic Russians or representatives of our multicultural and multi-faith country. They are open to being friends and building ties. We will continue to be guided by this.

We will offer a strong rebuff to the lies peddled by the Maia Sandu regime. The President of Moldova is not so much hurting Russia or the feelings of her own citizens, who are unwilling to become the same aggressive, uncultured mass, into which the Zelensky regime is attempting to turn the Ukrainians. Her strikes are much more painful, for she wants to destroy the Moldovans’ love for their culture, homeland, soil, and true heroes. This is what she is trying to engineer.

back to top

 

The UK Foreign Office replies to Russia’s request concerning the Skripals  

 

This is hard to believe but the Foreign Ministry has received the UK’s reply to its request concerning the Skripals, almost six years since. Russia continues to take efforts to clarify the circumstances of the incident involving Russian citizens Sergei Skripal and that his daughter Yulia Skripal, which took place in Salisbury in March 2018. 

During all this time, the Foreign Ministry sent dozens of diplomatic notes but received nothing but perfunctory replies. Now, however, for the first time since mid-2018, the Foreign Office has sent at last a diplomatic message in response to yet another note dispatched by the Russian Embassy in the UK. With some reservations, it can be regarded as something like a belated reaction. He who expects from a promise a lot must wait for three years or maybe not, as the saying goes. In this case, it took twice as long.

The message says that Yulia Skripal took into account [the embassy’s] offer of consular assistance and declined it. Looks like the recent fakes concerning Princess of Wales Kate Middleton. The UK media community and tabloids were trying to outdo each other as they churned out stories to the effect that she was either devoured by the reptiloids, or sacrificed by the Illuminati, or fell victim to the matrimonial intrigues of her husband. The same is being done to Yulia Skripal, who allegedly took the above decision.

The Foreign Office assures us that Ms Skripal has the contacts of the Consular Department of the Russian Embassy in London. Just in case. As for our demand to announce the official results of the investigation into the Salisbury incident, the British diplomats replied that they would not comment on this topic because the relevant legal procedures were still in progress.

We see that they are in no hurry anywhere. After 13 years of judicial torture Julian Assange was granted another reprieve on March 26.  The High Court has decided they can “wait” a little bit more. The Skripal case drags on for a “mere six years.” Is that long [by their standards]? In the US, they have been looking for a man who killed President John Kennedy for over 60 years. Moreover, they are unable even to declassify the documents related to this crime. We are not old yet. We will wait.

The British authorities say nothing at all, not a single word, about the fate of Sergei Skripal.  We are totally at a loss about the reasons for their silence. We want to ask the British whether he is alive. Can you say at least this much?  

We regard the contorted British reaction as a failed attempt to justify themselves for the unexplainable and unlawful years-long concealment of the truth about the Russian citizens. This is yet another case of manipulating information. We will consistently go on pressing for their providing an exhaustive information on the fate of the Russian citizens, who disappeared without a trace in the UK six years ago. The British must clarify all the episodes of the Salisbury incident, and, in general, we will insist on fairness in this case.

back to top

 

One more example of neo-colonial practices of the Western countries concerning Kyrgyzstan

 

We have taken note of the arrogant and tactless “lecturing” from the US Embassy and diplomatic missions of several other Western nations (including the United Kingdom, the EU, Canada, France, and Germany) in Bishkek, following the adoption of the updated Law On Non-Profit Organisations by the Kyrgyz Parliament on March 14, 2024, aimed at regulating the operations of non-government sector organisations.

In a blatant disregard for diplomatic decorum and interstate ethics, these self-appointed guardians of democracy sought to dictate to a sovereign nation which laws it may enact, thereby laying bare their entire neo-colonial agenda. The Western countries have compromised the operations of non-government organisations engaging with them.

Such actions can only be described as blatant interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state.

It’s worth noting that in December 2023, the European Commission adopted the widely discussed Defence of Democracy Package, which mandates the registration and oversight of foreign agents operating within EU member states. Specifically, individuals from countries not favoured by Josep Borrell’s “blooming garden” are subject to “democratic accountability” and registration in the “Transparency Register.” Why offer advice to others when the European Union itself is experiencing some issues despite its perceived prosperity?

back to top

 

Influx of Ukrainian food into Romania that fails to meet EU standards

 

In light of recent media reports highlighting the supply of Ukrainian food to Romania that fails to meet the required quality standards set by the European Union, we would like to note the following: Romania has emerged as a significant transit and sales destination for agricultural products from Ukraine in recent years due to its geographical proximity and market dynamics. Consequently, this has resulted in the saturation of the local market with cheaper and often lower-quality foodstuffs.

Between 2023 and early 2024, Romania witnessed an unprecedented wave of protests by farmers, marked by the repeated blocking of customs posts using agricultural machinery. Leading Romanian news outlets regularly featured reports uncovering the substandard quality of grain, corn, rapeseed, and other produce arriving from the neighbouring country. Similarly, leaders of local agricultural producer associations voiced concerns over this issue. However, the Romanian government has failed to take any decisive action to safeguard the interests of its farmers.

It is not surprising, considering the longstanding tendency of Romanian authorities to avoid conflict with Brussels. This stance, aimed at supporting the Kiev regime’s sale of Ukrainian products, contradicts Romania’s national interests. It’s only a matter of time before this approach backfires on them.

back to top

 

210th anniversary of the Russian Army’s Foreign Campaign

 

These days we mark the 210th anniversary of the triumphant conclusion of the Foreign Campaign of the Russian Army of 1813-1814. Following the defeat of Napoleon’s Grande Armée during the Patriotic War of 1812, Russian forces, bearing the banner of freedom for the nations and peoples of Europe from Napoleonic tyranny, embarked on a journey of thousands of kilometres from the scorched walls of Moscow. After intense battles, they reached the French capital, which capitulated to the mercy of the victors on March 31, 1814. We suggest honouring this event with well-researched historical narratives.

The Paris Peace Treaties and the Congress of Vienna delineated the political and diplomatic trajectory following a quarter-century of incessant wars that ravaged Europe. Thus, less than two years after the grandiose announcement of the campaign against Russia by French propaganda, France was defeated. Shortly thereafter, Emperor Napoleon abdicated the throne.

As we revisit this illustrious chapter in Russian history, juxtaposed with the ignominious one in French history, we honour the memory of our heroic ancestors, finding strength and inspiration in their valorous deeds. We’d like to advise the contemporary Western leaders and the emerging “Napoleons” who once again harbour intentions of sending troops eastward to remember the lessons of history and not to forget how the aspirations of their predecessors to inflict a strategic defeat on our country always ended.

back to top

 

Support programme for Russian peoples’ national literature

 

Russia continues implementing the support programme of the Russian peoples’ national literature, under which unique books in 69 languages of the Russian peoples have been published since 2016: Poetry, Children’s Literature, Prose, Literature of the Peoples of Russia, Artistic Essays, and Folk Wisdom.

Today, work is underway to publish collections representing literature by language groups. For example, the anthology Poetry and Prose of the Finno-Ugric and Samoyed Peoples was released in 2023, which includes the original poetic and prose works by 106 authors, written in 13 Finno-Ugric and Samoyed languages of the peoples of Russia, their literary translations into Russian, and short essays on the history of national literatures, as well as the authors’ short biographies.

There is a website of the national literature of the peoples of Russia, which contains unique texts and their translations included in the series Modern Literature of the Peoples of Russia, which reflects how diverse the literature in Russia has been since the second half of the 20th century until today.

The programme’s implementation is part of Russia’s contribution in achieving the goals of the UN Indigenous Languages Decade. It helps to digitalise the linguistic and cultural heritage of the indigenous peoples, expand language diversity in the cyberspace, as well as study and preserve languages and publish books in rare languages.

back to top

 

Answers to media questions:

Question: President of France Emmanuel Macron said France had offered Russia to strengthen cooperation in countering terrorism. “We have started contacts at all levels, both technical and ministerial, in order to be able to offer our cooperation based on the information that we have, and which may be useful to the Russian side,” he said. How would you comment on this statement and how sincere do you think it looks?

Maria Zakharova: Before assessing President of France Emmanuel Macron’s sincerity, let me speak briefly about Russia’s position on countering terrorism.

Russia has consistently spoken in favour of promoting international cooperation in countering terrorism, extremism, or any other forms of radicalism. We truly had our sincere sympathy for France, which has suffered numerous terrorist attacks in recent years, and tried to maintain professional dialogue on this topic both with Paris and other Western capitals. We did this both bilaterally and within international organisations, despite their double standards and hidden agendas, or attempts to divide terrorists into “bad” and “not so bad” ones, and sometimes even “not bad at all” ones. We saw the West endlessly dividing terrorists and extremists “us” and “them”, into “moderate” and “radical” ones. We conducted this anti-terrorism and counter-terrorism dialogue, even despite the fact that every time Western capitals threw dirt at us for conducting a counter-terrorism operation in Syria at the request of official Damascus.

Until 2022, the Russian-French Interdepartmental Group on Countering New Threats and Challenges operated effectively, and contacts between specialised agencies were maintained. However, after the special military operation was launched in 2022, the French side decided to practically freeze all cooperation in this area. It is better to ask Paris whether it was done under Washington’s pressure or not.

As for President Macron’s recent statements, the Foreign Ministry has not so far received any specific requests or proposals from the French side, including as part of the abovementioned bilateral cooperation on countering international terrorism.

A similar incident took place several weeks ago, when President Macron announced some peaceful talks initiatives. When journalists asked President of Russia Vladimir Putin about this, he explained at a news conference that he knew nothing about these initiatives. Instead of explaining its initiative aimed at Russia, Paris decided to prolong the effect and has now announced cooperation in the fight against terrorism. We have received nothing on this from the French.

I cannot say why. Perhaps it is connected to the fact that the French Foreign Ministry is now led by someone who has never been a diplomat or worked on international relations theoretically or on practice. So, they simply do not know how to work. Usually, if a head of state proposes something, then diplomats pass specifically tailored materials on. These can be in the form of notes or any other: verbal or non-verbal requests. Perhaps they simply could not coordinate under the leadership of the newly arrived unprofessional diplomat and do not understand how communication between states occurs. It is hard to tell. But it would be nice if someone in Paris asked what was happening on the Quai d’Orsay.

I cannot but ask a practical question: what kind of terrorists and terrorism in general is the French leader talking about? The other day, he announced that he would send troops to Ukraine. Moreover, it is not clear whether they are French or not.

If Paris is interested in peace, in the fight against terrorism and all things evil, first of all it has to stop providing military and financial support to the criminal Kiev regime, which uses terrorist methods when carrying out regular attacks against civilians, civilian facilities and infrastructure in Russia. Otherwise, there is a feeling that our French colleagues see a certain “correct” terrorism, to which the French foreign policy department is ready to turn a blind eye, allowing it to kill Russian civilians and others, and “wrong” terrorism, which it is ready to fight.

It does not work like this. This way can once again lead to where their NATO partners have gone many times. We saw what was going on and how ISIS, a banned organisation, was forming, or how they were toying with anti-Soviet activities and accidently created Al-Qaeda, which then itself began to devour its creators.

The heinous terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall was carried out by radical Islamists. However, as President Vladimir Putin emphasised, the investigation has yet to establish the true masterminds behind this crime. I repeat, the perpetrators of the terrorist attack tried to hide in Ukraine of all places. Maybe President Macron will offer us cooperation in the fight against Ukrainian terrorism? I am afraid not. After all, France has supported and justified Ukrainian terror against the civilians of Donbass since 2014, without ever uttering a word of objection or pushing back the Kiev regime, which did it.

Today France is increasing the supply of weapons the Ukrainian extremist and terrorist regime uses to kill people living in Russian regions. A recent interview with Head of the Ukrainian Security Service Vasily Malyuk, who was proudly talking about Ukraine’s terrorist activities, is also noteworthy. We understand very well that Ukraine lost its sovereignty a long time ago. It has turned into a puppet of the West, and lives on scraps handed to it. So, maybe the French president should put aside his duplicity and start calling a spade a spade? Then we will understand what exactly he means.

back to top

 

Question: On March 21, the Moldovan authorities suspended the broadcasting of the bilingual Russian-Moldovan Canal 5 television channel and the Maestro FM radio station. What can you say about this?

Maria Zakharova: We have commented on this situation many times. This step came as another manifestation of official Chisinau’s policy of suppressing freedom of speech and destroying democratic foundations. These actions aim to eradicate dissent.

Moldova has provided an assessment of these actions by the authorities and called these steps undemocratic and illegal. Moldovan experts pointed out that its journalist posed a number of uncomfortable questions to President of Moldova Maia Sandu before the television channel was shut down. One of the questions was about controversial bidding for allocating commercial space at the airport of Chisinau, which raised suspicions of corruption. We rely on the Moldovan experts’ opinion. These questions led to the closure of the channel. There are 13 such channels in Moldova. The Canal 5 you mentioned became the 13th television channel whose broadcasting was suspended by the “democratic” Moldovan authorities.

Let’s go over the broad and sad state of affairs with the freedom of speech in the republic:

- On December 19, 2022, six Russian-language television channels saw their licences revoked for allegedly “inadequate coverage of the domestic developments and the Ukraine conflict.”

- On October 30, 2023, a decision was made to suspend the licences of six more television channels on grounds of them allegedly “promoting foreign interests.” Given that Ms Sandu is a Romanian citizen and has turned the Moldovan language into Romanian, she shouldn’t be saying that it’s illegal to promote foreign interests in Moldova. Maybe someone else can do so, but definitely not her;

- on September 13, 2023, Head of the Sputnik Moldova news agency Vitaly Denisov was expelled from the country;

- fines are regularly imposed on Russian-language television channels.

In all, the Moldovan authorities have blocked over 60 Russian and Russian-language resources. Under the pretext of countering “information warfare,” “hybrid attacks” and “disinformation,” the Moldovan government has introduced political censorship. They turned political censorship into a punitive tool. The Chisinau regime deprives citizens of their basic values such as freedom of speech, pluralism of opinion, and access to alternative sources of information. All of that is being done in violation of Chisinau’s international obligations to ensure freedom of the media and journalists’ rights.

We hope that these repressive policies of the Moldovan authorities will be properly assessed by international human rights organisations and truly independent non-governmental organisations that uphold the principles of democracy and freedom of speech in deed.

There is a representative on freedom of the media at the OSCE, Teresa Ribeiro, a citizen of Portugal. What does she say on this subject? Does everything add up for her? Or does she still engage in “quiet diplomacy” amid high-profile crimes against the media?

back to top

 

Question: Azerbaijani and Armenian media are debating the potential escalation of tensions on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, including the unsettled enclave issue. In addition, a number of regional experts continue to talk about the threat of a military operation by Baku to secure the Zangezur Corridor to Nakhichevan. What is the Foreign Ministry’s take on the situation?

Maria Zakharova: Our position is well known and consistent. We urge the sides to exercise utmost restraint with regard to this matter and to avoid aggressive rhetoric. All territorial disputes and mutual claims should be settled exclusively by political and diplomatic methods. These issues, including returning and exchanging enclaves, should be addressed by the bilateral Armenian-Azerbaijani Border Delimitation Commission. We are ready to provide maximum assistance to this work, since Russia possesses unique cartographic materials and expertise.

Similar principles apply to unblocking roads between Armenia and Azerbaijan. Please note that we do not use the term “Zangezur corridor.” We are talking about the route linking western Azerbaijan with Nakhichevan through the territory of the Syunik region of Armenia.

There is the Trilateral Working Group of the Deputy Prime Ministers of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia, which is a well-established mechanism for working out compromises. At its latest meeting on June 2, 2023, the parties were close to adopting a comprehensive and mutually beneficial solution to unblock transport and economic routes in the region.

We urge our partners to show political will and resume interaction within the established trilateral formats, including the Trilateral Working Group.

back to top

 

Question: Clearly, the investigators have not yet been able to establish those behind the Crocus City Hall attack. Still, from the information currently available, does the Russian Foreign Ministry believe there are any leads that might suggest who’s responsible? At this point, who or what does the available evidence point to?

Maria Zakharova: You have heard what we just discussed, haven’t you? The Western media (this is not a reproach to you personally) is insistently calling on us (also through their questions) to do what the Western media, information and political community is accustomed to – to start pointing fingers without having all the facts. We will not do that for a number of reasons. First, because we have been suffering from the same kind of attitude. In the absence of facts, we are being endlessly pointed at, with guilty verdicts handed down to us in a matter of hours or days, and immediately enforced.

In this regard, we can only speak of obvious facts. And the first one of those is the true nest of terrorism, a hotbed that has been cultivated in Ukraine for years through uncontrolled financial injections, arms supplies (with no one being able to count them or account for where they were going), and corruption schemes now being exposed by the US justice and law enforcement. We have been pointing this out with facts in hand. We were not just expressing concern; at some point, we started sounding the alarm as loudly as we could. That should have set the alarm bells ringing not only in Ukraine, but also in Europe and around the world.

When all of these factors are combined – uncontrolled arms supplies, unlimited financial infusions and corruption schemes – one has to expect trouble. The weapons end up on black markets, and drug cartels run rampant. Arms trafficking inevitably paves the way for other types of crime, including international crime. In Ukraine, extremism was being nurtured on nationalist grounds to spite Russia. Russophobia was being specifically instilled in them. In that environment, this time bomb was bound to detonate. They began with the physical elimination of public figures, the murder of journalists, politicians, etc.

In my opinion, one of the most vivid manifestations of their terrorist mindset was the murder of Ukrainian negotiator Denis Kireyev, who was killed in Kiev when he returned from another round of meetings with the Russian delegation. Just because. Full stop. This was not just some “deep-down process” in foreign-funded extremist associations in Ukraine, or an “internal process” in the country’s special services (I’m not sure they are controlled by anyone at all). The case involved heads of official state agencies. Yet, no one on Bankovaya Street or abroad uttered a word of condemnation. They simply stated that it happened.

If a country’s top officials speak about killing a representative of its official delegation with their own hands as if it was normal, it is a signal to the international community that something has been wrong with this regime for a long time. This was just the tip of the iceberg. Later, we talked about the multiple terrorist attacks that the West never bothered to control or condemn, and even sponsored some. The money was pouring in like water, and the US President’s family was involved in those schemes. Those “projects” created a breeding ground for extremism and terrorism in Ukraine.

We spoke about this at literally every briefing. This is an undeniable fact. This is not just a lead – it is proof that the above has led to the manifestations of extremism and terrorism we are seeing in our country, as well as in neighbouring states. We have been sounding the alarm for years.

Second, a number of statements by Western countries (I quoted some of them today) came to our attention. They go beyond being inciting or provocative, and directly call on the Kiev regime leaders to use any and all methods to destroy everything that is Russian. This was said in different languages and by different people, but the message remained the same: the more damage the Kiev regime inflicts on Russia, the better it is for the West.

EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell’s latest statement tells us that this is not about love for Ukraine, but about upholding the interests of the West. What is the interest of the West? They have been saying all along it was about strategic defeat of Russia, destabilisation inside our country, change of leadership, blocking the state democratic procedures, in a word, all kinds of activities that were supposed to contribute to this.

These are not some fabricated quotes or leaks, but direct quotes from the statements made by the leaders of Western states, as well as the EU and NATO agencies. They gave Ukraine the mandate to do certain things, and delegated the dirtiest work to the Kiev regime. The latest statements (I quoted Liz Truss and others today) opened all doors and encouraged the Kiev regime to use all methods. I understand why they did it. They didn’t want or were unable to provide the same level of financial support, but they still needed Kiev to be as destructive as it was when they provided it with global funding. What’s left is extremism and terrorism. How can one not see and analyse this? This is the environment, the field, the reality in which the terrifying terrorist attack took place in the Crocus City Hall on March 22.

This is where the law enforcement agencies come in. The perpetrators have been detained and arrested. What we need to do next is to hunt down the masterminds who organised and financed it. The level of the attack is quite serious. This is a multilayer plot that involves killing many people. It’s about intimidation, and pitting people of different ethnicities and religions against each other. It is a massive and destructive terrorist operation, and the people behind it must be found. It is up to law enforcement agencies to say who they are. However, the environment, the grounds and the pattern in crime that we have seen before indicate the availability of a motive and evidence that betray – in line with what US President Biden and former Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland said – the plan to destroy the Nord Stream pipelines. It’s not something that we came up with, it’s what they said not mincing the words.

Why haven’t Western journalists ever asked how to qualify this from the point of view of the US and international law? Could this be qualified as a direct threat to perpetrate a terrorist attack? Why didn’t anyone tie this in with the terrorist attack at the Nord Stream pipelines? Why do the Western media ignore it and keep saying “ISIS” like a mantra? How can this be? Nothing happened? No, it did. This information has also been factored in. Law enforcement must say what they think. They provide everything they get and what can be made public without disrupting the investigation.

I’ll say it again. The White House, the State Department, then the government of the Federal Republic of Germany and all Western media were enthusiastically repeating Washington’s officially announced stance that ISIS was behind the March 22 terrorist attack in the Crocus City Hall. Who is behind it? Who is controlling it? Who has always cast members of terrorist groups, including ISIS offshoots, as moderate groups? These are the same Western countries that are now talking about inflicting a strategic defeat on us.

We discussed President Macron making a statement to the effect that it would be good for everyone to unite in order to look for the people behind the terrorist attack and share information, including with our country. As a reminder, in 2015, Russia proposed pooling the efforts to create an anti-ISIS coalition following the example of the Allies during WWII. President Putin made a statement at a UN General Assembly session in New York. We got nothing out of it other than the West acting counter to our plans.

Russia started fighting ISIS at the request of Damascus. However, what we got after that was a series of terrorist attacks and threats. I personally witnessed threats coming from foreign countries (during the talks, too) that we would regret that we did it. We were fighting ISIS. Nothing else but ISIS. We were not going to change regimes or “develop” new territories. That was never part of our agenda. We responded to the request of a friendly state, which, on its own territory, was “choking on blood” because of the actions of international terrorists, ISIS.

Our assistance was addressed directly to Syria. It was supposed to work in the interests of everyone who spoke about the terrorist nature of ISIS. What we got in response was opposition from the West and those whom they once again goaded into opposing us. The Westerners, the White House, the State Department, the Elysee Palace, the Bundestag, the Bundeswehr, the Foreign Office and everyone else screaming over each other it was ISIS. However, they should recall who created it. Who funded it, how it was run from within, and what was their relationship with Western intelligence services? It’s an interesting subject to discuss.

The West has run into an impasse. On the one hand, they keep saying it has nothing to do with Ukraine, even though they have spent many years trying to turn the Kiev regime into a terrorist regime. On the other hand, they yell that it’s ISIS, even though the Westerners are behind it, just like they are behind Al-Qaeda (directly, indirectly, and financially). How did al-Qaeda come into being? Exactly the same way (they replayed it with the Kiev regime) as a force that was supposed to oppose the Soviet Union. True, later it began to sting its creators. Pro-Western politicians were brought to Ukraine and then gradually radicalised with money, weapons supplies, and certain terms and conditions. Western curators did that.

back to top

 

Question: On March 21, Defence Minister of Moldova Anatolie Nosatîi publicly admitted that Moldovan mercenaries are fighting in the so-called International Legion of Ukraine. Moreover, he wished them to “successfully complete their mission.” Could you comment on this?

Maria Zakharova: This is about who is behind whom and who pushed whom to do what. The Moldovan minister’s statements show the hypocrisy of official Chisinau. On the one hand, the Moldovan leadership assures that it respects the principle of neutrality enshrined in the country’s Constitution, since the overwhelming majority of citizens are in favour of preserving it. On the other hand, it is speeding up the republic’s militarisation under the pretext of European integration turning the country into a part of aggressive anti-Russia European periphery and openly wishes victory for the Kiev neo-Nazis. Another country and people are being sacrificed and placed on the altar of NATO madness, openly wishing victory to the Kiev neo-Nazis.

I would like to remind you that the Criminal Code of the Republic of Moldova prohibits mercenaryism. However, none of the Moldovan “legionnaires” who returned from Ukraine were ever brought to justice. They openly give out interviews where they say that “Russians are not human,” and Russian-speaking citizens of Moldova are potential traitors. It turns out that mercenaryism is formally punishable, but if mercenaries fight on the side of the Nazi Kiev regime, then the anti-Russia elite in Chisinau turns a blind eye to this.

We have said many times that all of this contradicts the true interests of the Moldovan nation. Maia Sandu’s policy is aimed to destroy Moldova. It is not even about Russia about destroying the country. As a Romanian citizen, this is how she formulates her position in life.

Public opinion polls show that today about 60 percent of Moldovans are against the republic joining NATO (only 28 percent are in favour), and two-thirds do not support increasing military assistance to Ukraine and do not believe that Russia can be defeated on the battlefield.

back to top

 

Question: If direct evidence that Ukrainian special services were involved are identified during the investigation, will the issue of recognising Ukraine as a terrorist state be raised on international platforms?

Maria Zakharova: The Russian Federation raises the issue of the Kiev regime’s terrorist nature at the UN Security Council regularly. I think you know this, including from our representatives’ speeches. These are not unfounded statements, but facts that we have been presenting all these years: murders of public figures, destruction of civilian infrastructure using heavy weapons, and targeted attacks on civilians. The water blockade of Crimea and mining of power lines are also facts of terrorism. This is how they are qualified in international law. We talk about this all the time.

The issue of how to qualify it must be connected to the facts that the investigators will establish. But the Russian Federation regularly calls the Kiev regime terrorist, backing this up with concrete facts. The rest is best left to our law enforcement and judicial authorities.

back to top

 

Question: Spokesperson for the United States Department of State Matthew Miller said the Americans would again share intelligence with Russia about a potential terrorist attack on its territory if they obtain it. Earlier, John Kirby said Washington would not assist Russia in any way in connection with the Crocus City Hall terrorist attack. You called this statement immoral but Miller actually repeated it. Both continue to vindicate the Kiev regime. How could you interpret this in the context of Russian-US relations?

Maria Zakharova: These two statements contradict each other. One of them said they would share this information and the other said they would not. There must be something fundamentally wrong there. It is impossible to hear how literally every day US President Joseph Biden talks out-of-touch nonsense that nobody can decipher even in the US. This is not because he does not know his geography – this was always typical of American presidents – or lacks some specific information. He is completely divorced from reality. There are several statements like this per day. US Vice President Kamala Harris has become notorious for talking nonsense and making ridiculous quotes.

What do you want from people who must provide them with information? They do not know themselves what is wanted from them. On the one hand, they must serve those who expect them to promote Russophobia. But, on the other, these guidelines led them into a deadlock. As soon as they started to wry their faces once again, reluctant as they were to talk about sympathy for the Russians, they realised that they would look like global pariahs. They started shifting their narrative, assessments and phrasing. The White House is suffering from a bipolar disorder. Russophobia remains front and centre. The whole world already sees that this policy line has led them into a dead end. They have started contradicting themselves, including on the record, and violating American laws and international law.

We will not even try to understand what they are going through in detail. The only answer is that they are in a global contradiction with themselves.

back to top

 

Question: The Foreign Ministry of Japan abstained from explanations why Japan refused to congratulate President Vladimir Putin with his re-election. How can this affect interstate relations? Were there examples of such gestures in diplomatic practice?

Maria Zakharova: This is some joke. First, they are surprised at what they qualify as Russia’s unfriendly steps and then they make statements that can only be described as aggressive and abnormal.

Nobody is even surprised at this conduct by Tokyo. It is consistently dismantling what is left of our bilateral ties without stopping at violating even elementary diplomatic ethics.

The Japanese Government has been pursuing an openly hostile policy towards Russia for more than two years now. It is multiplying illegal sanctions and cultivating Russophobia in Japanese society. Japan is aggressively building up its military activities in cooperation with the United States and its allies, and providing direct military and technical assistance to the Nazi regime in Kiev. I think Tokyo has things to do in its own region. But no, it is involved in the situation around Ukraine.

This policy line was on full display in the context of the Presidential election in the Russian Federation. Sometimes, it reaches the point of absurdity. Thus, Japan tried to use the election to peddle its illegitimate, revanchist claims to the South Kuriles. Its Foreign Minister Yoko Kamikawa described the voting at the elections as unacceptable. We would like to recall at that point that our national sovereignty over this territory is an absolutely irrefutable, irreversible and objective historical fact resulting from the outcomes of World War II. There may be no further questions about it. This issue has been settled once and for all.

We hope the Japanese people will be wise enough to realise that Tokyo’s Russophobic policy is detrimental and harmful for their national interests and to return to the principles of neighbourly relations, mutual respect and mutual benefit before it’s too late.

For many years, we tried different ways of shaping our relations with Japan in the context of Russian territories, including the islands I mentioned, and discussed economic cooperation and undertaking projects in various sectors. There was a plethora of interesting development programmes, and they were all feasible if not for Tokyo’s moves to impose sanctions against our country, which derailed all these efforts.

back to top

 

Question: The Crocus City Hall attack has presented Russia with more serious counterterrorism challenges. Vladimir Putin held a meeting on Monday to discuss measures to be taken after the incident in the Moscow Region. How will Russia strengthen security? How does Russia intend to continue its antiterrorist work and effective antiterrorist cooperation with neighbouring countries and international organisations?

Maria Zakharova: I will not repeat what I have already said on this subject. I am grateful to everyone. You represent China Media Group. You have millions of subscribers in China. I would like to take this opportunity to ask you to convey our words of gratitude to the people in your country. The Chinese leadership is aware of our view.

I would like to address all citizens of China now, and thank them for all the support we felt. We saw that people took time out of their day to come and lay flowers outside our Embassy and write words of sincere sympathy for our country in the book of condolences. We saw Chinese political and public figures express support for Russia on social media at this difficult moment. I am grateful to my colleague, the spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry of China, for what she wrote on social media. We are grateful to the leadership and to every citizen of China for the sincere response that we saw and heard in those hours and days, that were tragic not only for our country, but for the entire planet. Please be sure to extend the most sincere appreciation to your large audience on my behalf. It is very important for me. I am speaking not only for myself, but also for a great number of Russians who feel this support, who realise that their pain is shared and felt as their own by millions of people on Earth.

Why is this important? Because there exists a different ideology. There is the divide and rule policy, and cancel culture where entire countries and peoples get ostracised, and there is glorification of aggressive, destabilising and unconstructive elements. It is important to feel that we are not alone in our striving for greater justice, and standing up for truth and good. What happened was a dreadful blow to us, and it was invaluable to be given words of sincere solidarity and support at that difficult moment.

It is our view that the fight against international terrorism in all its forms and manifestations should be based on the unconditional condemnation of such crimes, on the uncompromising fight against this evil without any excuses or double standards.

However, there were others, who warned against “losing focus,” apparently referring to other problems they considered to be more important than civilian deaths – like cancelling Russia, for example. The collective West – guided by its own selfish considerations, driven into a dead end by its unrestrained Russophobia and too busy trying to preserve its slipping geopolitical dominance – has in fact distanced itself from any real and constructive international antiterrorist cooperation. Washington and its vassals are politicising and blocking any necessary joint action on this track. We have different paths to follow.

We are confident that global terrorism can only be defeated through a collective response, by joint efforts of all responsible participants in international affairs. In this regard, we will continue to increase cooperation, both bilaterally and at multilateral organisations, with those who take the same approach, including our partners in the SCO and BRICS.

At the same time, we would like to note that our emergency workers, law enforcement officers and ordinary citizens demonstrated remarkable cohesion after the attack. They were ready to put up a united front against this threat. This, as our President Vladimir Putin noted on March 24, showed the maturity of Russian society and its readiness to firmly defend its interests.

back to top

 

Question: The Türkish media report that Ankara has shared with Moscow some data on the terrorists who attacked the Crocus City Hall. What assistance is Türkiye rendering to the investigation?

Maria Zakharova: I can’t comment on the investigation. This is the prerogative of the law enforcement agencies.

back to top

 

Question: Yerevan will host the first Armenia-BRICS international forum dedicated to Armenia’s economic cooperation with this union. How does Moscow assess Yerevan’s cooperation with BRICS against the backdrop of its pro-EU leanings?  

Maria Zakharova: As far as I understand, the case in point is an initiative advanced by several NGOs that thought it important and interesting to hold this forum. It is a highly relevant topic, given Russia’s current BRICS chairmanship.    

We welcome any civil society commitment in various countries that at their level want to be non-government vehicles of interesting international projects. This concerns the topics you have mentioned and, in principle, our approach to other tracks. We always give assistance to NGOs that ask us for help.

We will only welcome whatever is of benefit for the people of Armenia from the Western and EU presence.  The main thing is that there be no “blood-thirsty wolf” or “saber-toothed tiger” under the EU’s “lambskin.” This is the great problem and main threat. It is under this guise that they infiltrate internal affairs and economic projects of developing countries involved in a “democratic transit” just as they are picking up speed in their development.     

No one wants to dissuade them from pursuing what brings wellbeing and prosperity. The important thing is that wellbeing and prosperity be real rather than yet another attempt to enslave a country with credits and make it a servitor of the capitalists and transnational corporations. Their method is to destroy the existing age-old principles and traditions of a national culture from within and throw a country back to the accompaniment of the sirens’ songs about “all the good things” and “strides towards development.” This is the only problem. There should be real benefits, not empty promises. The West is a menace because it cheats and deceives, not because it churns out empty promises or lets others down. Though promising prosperity, they are in fact bloodsuckers that destroy what was bearing fruit before.

back to top

 

Question: After the terrorist attack on the Crocus City Hall, the Russian public has resumed the debate as to whether or not to lift the moratorium on capital punishment that has been in effect since the 1990s. Do you believe that the threat of capital punishment is effective in fighting international terrorism?

Maria Zakharova: I think that this internal discussion should be held by professionals. Non-specialists in this area ought to hold off on participating in this discussion out of respect for people whose relatives have died or are not yet identified, because it is too painful for those aggrieved. It is causing pain to the hearts of people who are lamenting the death of their near and dear. It is necessary to be extremely cautious lest we hurt their feelings.

The discussion should be held by professionals. Each person can and must have an opinion of their own on this subject. But we must also spare the feelings of those who are going through this awful tragedy, whose emotions are running high, with whom we empathise, and whose pain we share as if it were our own.   

We can say a lot about international cooperation. I will certainly return to this topic later. Each person has a position, and I am no exception in this regard. But I have explained why I would not like to answer this question in detail.

back to top

 

Question: You have already answered our question. We would like to extend condolences to the families and friends of the victims on behalf of the team and ourselves, and wish a speedy recovery to the injured. This was a great tragedy indeed.

Maria Zakharova: Thank you very much. Be sure that your voice will not be drowned out by numerous other voices. This is a case where everyone’s voice counts and matters, even though hundreds of millions of people on the planet have spoken.

Question: I would also like to extend condolences on behalf of our team and myself over the monstrous terrorist attack on March 22.

Maria Zakharova: Thank you.

back to top

 

Question: French Prime Minister Gabriel Attal accused Russia of wanting to “punish Armenia” for joining the International Criminal Court, as well as of approving of Azerbaijan’s actions during the antiterrorist operation in Karabakh in the autumn of 2023, and criticised the Russian peacekeeping contingent. As we can see, the French side’s attacks have become more frequent …

Maria Zakharova: I would rather distinguish between aggressive attacks and wet fantasies. What you said is the second category.   

Question: Still, they have been raising this subject increasingly often. They seem to be focusing on the region. Given the general tension, fraught with provocation, and the terrorist threat, how far do you think can the French go in their attempts to destabilise the South Caucasus, and what will Moscow’s reaction be?

Maria Zakharova: This is a case where one should definitely avoid extrapolating or attributing the qualities obviously present in France’s political leaders to the entire French nation. We can see this in the French citizens’ reaction to President Macron’s anti-Russia statements, always different and sometimes directly contradicting each other. We get feedback from the French, from busy people who have things to do. The people who’ve achieved a lot with hard work, are saying that they are ashamed to hear the absurdities that their leaders utter. One is always tempted to call the entire nation some names, in particular, because of Emmanuel Macron’s actions. But the people are not like this. I think the same is true of the situation in the South Caucasus.

Even French parliamentarians are not aware of every statement made on behalf of France’s leadership – let alone the public. The people have never been asked to give their approval or disapproval.

It would be naïve to think that France is ready ensure the security of the South Caucasus, or is capable of doing it. If the country had such capabilities, it would have used them in countries where it had contractual obligations.

We have brought this up repeatedly. It would be even easier for France to act in regions where the country has been present for decades, viewing those countries as its colonies, and continued to pursue its interests there in the post-colonial period, through neo-colonial policies. They still speak the same language and have old contacts and connections there. But they couldn’t do it.  

It was France’s obligation to do this in Africa, because it was paid for it. African counties generously paid France for its presence there. But the French missions in these countries failed miserably. That was not due to political incoherence; it happened because the Republic abandoned its allies and partners, countries where its contingents were deployed, not out of friendship or love, but for profit. The system collapsed. France abandoned them at the most critical moment for those countries. And they urgently began to look for a replacement, other partners to help them address their existential security issues.

I don’t like cross-questions, when representatives of one country regularly ask questions about the other. I am talking about the situation in the South Caucasus in general.

For Paris, the future of the South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, and neighbouring countries, too, because it’s easy to draw borders on a map, but far less so in the economic or humanitarian sphere) is only a tool, a bargaining chip, one of the ways to achieve its own prosperity and preserve its reputation, including amid the hybrid war with Russia and failures on the African continent.

France’s presence in the South Caucasus is an attempt to gather intelligence, monitor the regional states and prevent the implementation of the peace agreements (including economic ones) that have been reached between the countries.

How come? Peace and prosperity are achievable in the South Caucasus while the EU is suffering economic failures? No way. The process absolutely needs to be sabotaged under the guise of helping – a typical Western tactic. No one is even hiding this. If their true goal was peace and security, France would make every effort to ensure that the agreements reached between Armenia and Azerbaijan since 2021 through Russia’s mediation were implemented. But they are on a collision course.

back to top

 

Question: Please accept my condolences and the condolences of our editorial staff.

The other day, Russian and Armenian Telegram channels reported the delivery of one more batch of Azerbaijani weapons to Ukraine. The Defence Ministry of Azerbaijan has tried to refute that fact, but the recent ruling by the Commercial Court of Kiev on the lawsuit initiated by the Defence Ministry of Ukraine against [arms trader] Ukrspecexport has confirmed the fact of the delivery. In addition, it appears that the grain corridor had been used to deliver weapons to Ukraine by sea, which would have been impossible without Turkish assistance. What can you say about the delivery of Azerbaijani weapons to Ukraine? 

Maria Zakharova: I love questions about cross-cutting issues. But they are quite balanced in this case.

I would like to point out again that the relevant agencies thoroughly check all information about arms deliveries to the Kiev regime and discuss it with the countries in question. You are aware of this. We have done this with several countries. We discussed these issues at the bilateral level, and when we failed to get our position across to our partners behind the scenes or through diplomatic channels, we made the issue public and acted on that track. It is a matter of principle for us.

In this instance, we will distinguish countries based on one and only principle: Will their actions create a threat to Russian citizens or could their activities under contracts result in damage to our civilian infrastructure and our citizens, who can potentially become victims of the terrorist Kiev regime? It is a matter of principle for us. Therefore, we discuss everything we see in public space and beyond it in detail with the countries concerned.

Please note that Azerbaijan has officially refuted that information. I would like to repeat that we maintain close contact on this matter with Azerbaijan and all other countries, excluding Western countries, which not only announce their arms deliveries publicly but also proudly. When it comes to involvement in a hybrid war against Russia and we see information about arms deliveries, we analyse every piece of relevant information. We hope we will never see such information implicating Armenia. This would be atrocious.

back to top

 

Question: After the terrorist attack in which children, women and innocent people died, the Anglo-Saxon media tried to circulate false information about the relations between Russian security services and the perpetrators of the crime. What has been done to expose these allegations?

Maria Zakharova: We have seen a great number of fake stories about our country, wrong interpretations and bias. It is impossible to give a detailed answer to your question without discussing each particular case.

We have provided the examples of articles that proliferated false information about Russia, and we make other relevant materials public on our website and during our briefings, where we debunk such information and provide facts to expose such lies. We will continue to do this.

If you want to draw our attention to a particular article or a series of articles, please send this information to us and we will examine it.

But if you are referring to Western media in general, [I can assure you that] you will not find a single publication that has not been systematically promoting anti-Russia narratives, as they say, in the past decades. It is my duty to read various Western sources. In the past decades, I have not come across a single normal (not positive but normal), objective and adequate story about Russia, not a single article that simply mentioned facts of our development, economic growth or decline, crises or solutions to them. None at all. The Western media do not write about the pace of our housing construction, our healthcare development, the international or national sports, art and humanitarian events held here, our exhibitions and the reform of our education system. Not a word about that. They only publish negative news. If they write about a theatre performance, it is because of a scandal. If they write about arts, it is because we have somehow “departed” from Western “standards.” If they write about education, they do so from anti-state positions and for the purpose of undermining our citizens’ patriotic views of their country. They do this all the time. Not a single event in our country has been presented in the Western media as a normal course of life with its ups and downs, problems and achievements. This is what I call concrete applied Russophobia.

Therefore, I believe that the current case can be regarded as an exception to the rule. The West has eventually mustered the courage (although not immediately and only under pressure from the Global Majority) to express condolences and sympathy over the terrorist attack in Moscow and to condemn it. In the past (I remember all the previous cases very well), the media did not utter a word of sympathy when Russia was accused of all mortal sins at the official level. I believe that no other country in the world faced (at least regularly) such demonisation before.

Question: I would like to express our condolences to the Foreign Ministry of Russia over the death of a staff member [in that attack], as well as to the Russian Federation as a whole, to the Russian people and to more than 200 ethnic groups living in Russia.

Maria Zakharova: Thank you.

back to top

 

Question: On behalf of the editorial board, we express our condolences to the families and friends of those killed in the terrorist attack.

Will the Foreign Ministry raise the question of replacing the US ambassador to Russia in the wake of the terrorist attack?

Maria Zakharova: We should first wait for the results of the investigation, the outcome of the probe, after which law enforcement and judicial authorities will make their decisions, including political, if needed. But they will do so only after the investigation has been completed and law enforcement agencies release the facts. The political response will follow.

I would like to draw your attention to President Putin saying that the investigation should be free from politicisation and comply with legal provisions and regulations. It should be free from politics. This is exactly how we should go about it. Political steps will be made if necessary after we get the results of the investigation.

back to top

 

Question: Has the message from the Australian embassy that questioned the outcome of the election and Russia’s territorial integrity been removed from Telegram? Will there be any sanctions in response to this attack?

Maria Zakharova: I haven’t checked it to see whether the post has been deleted.

Australia’s Charge d’Affaires Jeremy Guthrie was summoned to the Russian Foreign Ministry on March 22. He was in no uncertain terms apprised of the importance of complying with Article 41 of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations which lays foreign diplomats under obligation to respect the laws of the host state and to refrain from interfering in its internal affairs. We demanded that the diplomatic mission delete that post and take exhaustive measures to prevent this from ever happening again. I checked it this morning, and it was still there. I don’t have any updates to offer. I will need to check it again. It was still there as of the evening of March 26 and as of this morning.

Australia’s statement is part of the general policy pursued by the collective West to discredit and delegitimise the presidential election in our country. The Australian authorities showed unprecedented zeal and decided to make a mark by posting this position on the social media used by the embassy.

We took note of this move and will take it into account in our relations with the Australian Embassy and more broadly with Australia as a regime. This kind of behaviour will not promote bilateral relations, which have been utterly spoiled by the current Australian authorities and continue to degrade through their own fault.

We will come up with a proper response, including asymmetrical.

back to top

 

Question: Permanent Representative of Russia to the United Nations Vasily Nebenzya recently stated that “the objective of the special military operation to demilitarise Ukraine has been achieved”. What is the status of the implementation of the plan for demilitarising Ukraine?

Maria Zakharova: The goals and objectives of the special military operation have been formulated, proclaimed and made clear by our country’s leadership which will provide the assessment of the extent to which these goals and objectives have been achieved.

back to top

 

Question: Speaking at the youth festival, Dmitry Medvedev said the concept claiming that Ukraine is not Russia should sink into oblivion, as should the attempts to ignore public opinion, which accurately considers Ukraine and its people part of the pan-Russian civilisation. What does the Foreign Ministry plan to do in this regard? Perhaps, Russian citizens could help achieve the set goals? Are there any factors that stand in the way?

Maria Zakharova: Your question should be addressed to Russia’s Security Council and [its Deputy Chairman] Dmitry Medvedev. Since you are asking about the help that our people could offer, you should hear about the steps that are expected or needed to advance this matter from the agencies that have come up with this concept and this vision. Your question is definitely best directed at them.

Question: Will the Foreign Ministry respond to this in any way?

Maria Zakharova: Our foreign policy is defined by the President. There are doctrines that we are implementing. Sure enough, some foreign policy and Security Council decisions are taken collegially. I assure you that the Foreign Ministry is doing everything that is required of it.

This is a general answer, since we act as coordinators in implementing foreign policy. So, I’m going to refer you to the original source for this particular question.

back to top

 

Question: On March 25, the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation published a statement of solidarity with the Russian competent authorities on its website and expressed its readiness to provide any assistance in the investigation of this terrible terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall. How do you assess the SCO’s current role in the fight against international terrorism? And can we say that the importance of such anti-terrorist structures will only increase in the foreseeable future?

Maria Zakharova: First of all, we would like to thank our partners at SCO RATS for support and readiness to provide all the necessary assistance.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation has gained strong reputation as an influential multilateral association whose activities are aimed at ensuring peace, security and stability.

The fight against terrorism and extremism is a priority area of activity for the SCO. It makes a significant contribution to the development of the international anti-terrorist and anti-extremist cooperation. We have a well-developed legal base in this sphere, as well as effective cooperation mechanisms and impressive practical results. Relevant SCO conventions on combating terrorism and extremism, which represent the gold standard of interstate interaction in this area, are of special importance.

Above all, I mean the SCO Convention on Countering Extremism, adopted in 2017, which is aimed not only at decisively stopping any manifestations of terrorism and extremism, but also at their broad prevention. This is the first anti-extremist interstate agreement in the global practice, which is open for other countries to join. It is also unique, because it aims at preventing the radicalisation of society under the influence by terrorist and extremist ideology, as well as non-admission of unfriendly countries’ interference and the use of terrorists and extremists by these countries for political purposes. We consider it important to continue to jointly promote this Convention as an experience of our countries’ cooperation in the fight against extremism, primarily at the UN.

Countering today’s challenges and security threats requires comprehensive measures and is impossible without well-coordinated international cooperation. This is especially important in today’s conditions. Reality proves this.

Russia supports more vigorous SCO’s activities in the field of security and welcomes the promotion of its capabilities and cooperation with other countries, which are showing more and more interest in this regional platform.

back to top

 

Question: Are there still channels between Russia and Western countries to fight terrorism together?

Maria Zakharova: I would like to note once again that we maintained efficient cooperation with Western countries and had corresponding channels until 2022, including regular consultations on counter-terrorism and anti-terrorism issues. They were constructive and politically unbiased in general. They served as an effective platform to discuss anti-terrorism and other new challenges and threats.

After 2022, all these formats were scaled down at the Western partners’ initiative. This is first.

Second, you are asking about how it could be or will be now. How can you even imagine this? How can we build a counter-terrorism dialogue with the countries that declare the need to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia? They call on each other to use all possible tools for this, and are using the entire state as an instrument for implementing this aggressive policy, having crossed all borders and burned all bridges, from the moral or ethical point of view, or regarding their own obligations under national and international law? How can we discuss sensitive issues with them now?

If they want to share information, we will thankfully accept it. If they want to revive this cooperation, they should begin with reviewing their own approaches and stop creating a new terrorist cell at the heart of Europe. Before that, it was Kosovo. Now, the scale is different: they are using Ukraine for this. This will be their contribution to the efforts against terrorism in the world. Stop supporting Vladimir Zelensky’s terrorist regime.

back to top

 

Question: Many of our patriotic compatriots and many honest citizens of Western and Central Europe asked to directly convey that they mourn deeply and sincerely together with Russia and its people. They believe that it is impossible to intimidate Russia and its peoples. And the just world that Russia is fighting for, is getting closer. We stand together. Together we can be an invincible force. Victory will be ours. I was asked to tell you this.

Maria Zakharova: I would like to thank you and all the participants in today’s briefing for your words of support for Russia and the Russian people, as well as for your zero tolerance of terrorist methods. I will say it again. This is extremely important for all of us.

back to top