Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, May 20, 2025
- Sergey Lavrov’s working visit to Yerevan
- Fourth Meeting of the Interdepartmental Commission on Caspian Cooperation
- Sergey Lavrov to speak at the High Level Conference at the Foreign Ministry’s Diplomatic Academy, Historical South Russian Lands: National Identity and Self-Determination of Peoples
- Sergey Lavrov to attend 33rd Assembly of the Council for Foreign and Defence Policy
- Africa Day
- Turkish Foreign Minister’s visit to the Russian Federation
- Sergey Lavrov’s meeting with Robert Floyd, Executive Secretary of the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organisation
- Sergey Lavrov’s participation in the 13th International Meeting of High Representatives for Security Issues
- International socio-political hearings on shaping a framework for equal and indivisible security and cooperation in the Eurasian space, and the meeting of the General Council Commission of the United Russia Party on International Cooperation and Support for Compatriots Abroad
- Ukraine update
- Presidential elections in Romania
- Economic and social consequences facing EU countries if they say no to Russian energy imports
- Campaign against Russian language teachers and Russia-friendly NGOs in Bulgaria
- Day of Slavic Literature and Culture
- The 23rd International Likhachov Scientific Conference
- 30th anniversary of the Joint Declaration on the Foundations of Friendly Relations between the Russian Federation and the Kingdom of Cambodia
- EAEU Day
- Statement by the founder of Telegram Pavel Durov regarding the French authorities’ attempts to influence the outcome of presidential elections in Romania
- The second EU-Ukraine Defence Industry Forum
- About the language of the Russian and Ukrainian delegations used during their talks in Istanbul
- About Ukraine’s readiness to conduct dialogue and key obstacles still hamper a full-scale peace settlement
- About the Russian Foreign Ministry assess the actions of the Israeli side (large-scale ground operation in the Gaza Strip)
- About the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen words during talks with US Vice President JD Vance that this week would be crucial for the future of Ukraine
- How does the Russian Foreign Ministry view the statement by the Secretary of Stateof State Marco Rubio that US Congress could tighten sanctions on Russia soon unless there is progress on Ukraine
- About the news reports over the activists that unfolded a poster on Yerevan’s Kievsky Bridge with an offending message targeting President Vladimir Putin
- About a possible impact of the direct communication between President Putin and President Trump
- About an invitation of the President of Russia Vladimir Putin to the presidents of Arab countries to meet on October 15
- What will the Russian Foreign Ministry do to prevent provocations and ensure the freedom of navigation in the Baltic Sea and straits zone
- About the President`s of Russia Vladimir Putin Executive Order No. 1478 On the Coordinating Role of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia in the Conduct of the Unified Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation
Sergey Lavrov’s working visit to Yerevan
On May 20-21, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will undertake a working visit to Yerevan. He is scheduled to engage in comprehensive discussions with Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Armenia Ararat Mirzoyan, and is anticipated to confer with Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and President Vahagn Khachaturyan.
These engagements will build upon the agreements achieved at the highest level on October 8, 2024, as well as the outcomes of Ararat Mirzoyan’s visit to Moscow on January 21 of this year. The agenda includes deliberations on a broad spectrum of bilateral cooperation issues, collaboration within Eurasian integration frameworks, and the coordination of positions in international fora, particularly at the United Nations. The foreign ministers will exchange detailed views on matters of regional security, including prospects for Armenian-Azerbaijani and Armenian-Turkish normalisation processes. The signing of the Plan for Inter-Ministerial Consultations for 2025-2026 is also anticipated.
Sergey Lavrov will deliver an address at the Russian-Armenian University to the faculty and students of branches of Russian higher education institutions and members of the expert community, and will also meet with compatriots at the Russia House.
In keeping with tradition, a wreath will be laid at the Eternal Flame by the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.
We expect that this visit will contribute to strengthening political and interagency dialogue between our countries, fostering greater mutual understanding and the identification of mutually acceptable solutions on matters of interest to both sides.
Fourth Meeting of the Interdepartmental Commission on Caspian Cooperation
On May 22, the Russian Foreign Ministry will host the fourth meeting of the Interdepartmental Commission on Caspian Cooperation, chaired by the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. The session will be attended by heads of the relevant Russian ministries and agencies, representatives of three Russian coastal regions – the Astrakhan Region, the Republic of Dagestan, and the Republic of Kalmykia – as well as members of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation.
The meeting will address a wide array of issues concerning the development and enhancement of Caspian cooperation across various sectors, along with certain aspects of the Commission’s own activities.
On May 23, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will take part in the High Level Conference organised by the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Historical South Russian Lands: National Identity and Self-Determination of Peoples. The conference at President Hotel is expected to be attended by heads and representatives of friendly countries’ embassies, and international organisations accredited in Moscow.
During the event, representatives of Russian government bodies and high-level experts will have a substantive discussion on the economic, ethnic, cultural and linguistic aspects of the South Russia regions, as well as the history of their development. The Minister will share Russian assessments of the current situation in and around Ukraine.
We believe that this conference will make a significant contribution to the understanding of the South Russia regions’ identity and their significance in the country’s history, and will provide a platform for Russian and foreign participants to openly exchange opinions on the subject.
Sergey Lavrov to attend 33rd Assembly of the Council for Foreign and Defence Policy
On May 24, Sergey Lavrov will take part in the annual assembly of Russia’s oldest non-governmental organisation, the Council for Foreign and Defence Policy. This year, the organisers of the meeting have chosen a topic for discussion that speaks for itself: A Time of Trials: War and Peace in the 21st Century.
The Council for Foreign and Defence Policy brings together international scholars, diplomats, economists and military officers to discuss current issues on the domestic and international agenda. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs highly appreciates the constructive relations with the leadership of the Council.
Speaking at the Assembly, the Minister will share his assessment and vision of the current global situation and will hear the opinions of leading Russian experts on the most important aspects of Russian foreign policy. A partial livestream of Lavrov’s remarks will be available on the Foreign Ministry’s online platforms.
On May 25, the world annually marks Africa Day, an international holiday celebrating African nations’ unity, their victory in the struggle for independence, as well as their aspirations for freedom, peace and prosperity.
On this day in 1963, the newly-founded Organisation of African Unity was announced in Addis Ababa, the capital of Ethiopia, marking the beginning of Africa’s progressive movement towards political and economic integration. Today, the organisation’s good traditions are being carried on by the African Union, which speaks for the entire continent, cementing its highly influential role in global affairs.
During the Soviet era, our country made a substantial contribution to liberating African nations from colonial dependence, selflessly and consistently assisting the continent’s young states in strengthening their sovereignty, developing their economies and training local personnel. Today, our relations are moving along an upward trajectory. Building a truly strategic partnership with Africa is one of Russia’s foreign policy priorities.
As is traditional on Africa Day, a gala reception will be held on behalf of Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, attended by members of the African diplomatic corps accredited in Moscow.
Turkish Foreign Minister’s visit to the Russian Federation
On May 25-27, Foreign Minister of the Republic of Türkiye Hakan Fidan will pay a working visit to Moscow, where he is to meet with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
The foreign ministers will exchange views on regional issues, specifically focusing on the situation in Syria, Libya, the South Caucasus and the Black Sea region. They will consider the prospects for expanding trade and economic cooperation under the current conditions and review the schedule of bilateral contacts at the highest and high level.
On May 27, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will meet with Robert Floyd, Executive Secretary of the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organisation (CTBTO).
The meeting will provide an opportunity to discuss the full range of issues related to cooperation between the Russian Federation and the CTBTO. Robert Floyd will be visiting Russia from May 24 to 28. As part of his visit, he is also scheduled to participate in the opening of training courses for Russian-speaking operators of International Monitoring System (IMS) waveform stations, as outlined in the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). These courses are being organised by the Russian Ministry of Defence in Dubna, in accordance with the standards of the CTBTO Provisional Technical Secretariat.
On May 28, in Moscow, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will participate in the 13th International Meeting of High Representatives for Security Issues. He is scheduled to deliver a speech at the plenary session on the topic: Shaping an Architecture of Equal and Indivisible Security: Challenges and Opportunities for the States of the Global South and East.
On May 29, in Perm, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will participate in international socio-political hearings dedicated to the initiative proposed by President Vladimir Putin on the formation of a framework for equal and indivisible security and cooperation in the Eurasian space.
The forum is organised by the Russian parliamentary group Eurasian Dialogue, with the support of the political party United Russia, the Office of the Governor of the Perm Territory, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. The event will bring together prominent political and public figures, diplomats, and business representatives from dozens of countries around the world.
Also on this day in Perm, a field meeting of the Commission of the General Council of the United Russia party on International Cooperation and Support for Compatriots Abroad will be held under the chairmanship of Sergey Lavrov. The meeting will focus on promoting the development of external relations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, including through the use of party, parliamentary, and public diplomacy.
As is widely known, on May 11, President Vladimir Putin proposed immediate resumption of direct bilateral peace talks in Istanbul on May 15 without delay or preconditions, talks that were disrupted by Kiev under Western pressure in the spring of 2022.
The Kiev regime reacted in its typical hysterical manner. Adhering to a policy that is detrimental to its own people - one that prevents long-term and sustainable peace - and staging a political show, Vladimir Zelensky continued to hurl public accusations that are far removed from diplomatic etiquette, against the leadership of our country and the Russian delegation.
While doing so, the head of the Kiev regime took an inordinate amount of time to decide on Ukraine’s participation in the talks proposed by the Russian president. He endlessly consulted with his European handlers, who openly sought to prevent the resumption of direct dialogue with us while also attempting to pin the blame on Moscow for allegedly torpedoing the talks.
However, they failed at it. The only thing they managed to accomplish was to try to exert psychological pressure on our delegation, which, as announced by President Vladimir Putin, arrived in Istanbul on May 15 and was getting ready for talks with Ukrainian representatives. The people on Bankovaya Street naively believed that postponing the talks might force Moscow to walk away from them altogether. In the end, the show staged by Zelensky ended in an utter abject failure. He was forced to appoint his delegates and to send them to negotiate with the Russian delegation on May 16.
The results of the nearly two-hour talks are well known. The head of our negotiating team, Presidential Aide Vladimir Medinsky, provided a detailed account of them. Important agreements were reached, including the largest prisoner exchange in three years - 1,000 for 1,000 - and the submission of written proposals by both sides for a future ceasefire. The possibility of a future Russian-Ukrainian meeting was outlined as well. Importantly, the prisoner exchange idea was initiated by Russia and put out by the leaders of our delegation. No one from any other side should even try to claim credit for this.
Yesterday, on May 19, President Vladimir Putin held a long telephone call with his US counterpart Donald Trump. The leaders of Russia and the United States had a candid and informative exchange of views about the current situation surrounding Ukraine and possible paths towards political resolution of the conflict taking into account the outcomes of the discussions in Istanbul.
The Russian side reiterated its commitment to achieving a final and fair settlement. In this regard, Moscow will propose that Kiev work on a memorandum regarding a future peace treaty. When moving towards conflict resolution, the sides must realise that this goal cannot be achieved without addressing its underlying causes. Numerous details will have to be agreed upon, principles of settlement formulated, timelines for a peace agreement established, and possible temporary ceasefires put in place should corresponding agreements be reached along with other parameters. We are ready to continue talks with Ukraine on these matters. President Trump was fully receptive of this approach.
Now, the ball is in Kiev’s court. This is a crucial moment for decision-making, given the hysterical and contradictory statements, steps, and actions we have observed all along. Zelensky’s earlier speculations about a desire for peace must be backed by real actions. We do not expect sound judgment coming from Bankovaya, but we hope that the instinct for preserving what remains of statehood will prevail, forcing Kiev to adopt a constructive stance.
Immediately after the talks, Zelensky and his European backers called for ratcheting up anti-Russia sanctions. The same old tune to the effect that Russia cannot be trusted and must be “punished” for not complying with the 30-day ceasefire ultimatum, which Kiev and its EU sponsors tried to peddle as a step towards settlement started playing again. Russia does not respond to ultimatums. This has been repeatedly stated by the Russian leadership and the Russian people through their actions. Meanwhile, their mantra about impracticability of holding talks during the war does not hold water.
They are not interested in peace. They pursue a different goal which is to give the Ukrainian Armed Forces, at any cost, a respite to rebuild their military capacity and to continue confronting Russia.
That brings to mind the Westerners’ narrative that no talks are possible during wartime. So, who is waging war? Who commits daily crimes against civilians? Let Paris, Berlin, London, and collective Brussels keep this in mind, and I will be there to make sure they don’t forget.
On May 14, Ukrainian nationalists launched drone strikes on the administration building in Kamenka-Dneprovskaya, Zaporozhye Region, injuring two employees. On the night of May 15, militants used UAVs to launch 13 attacks on Melitopol. All drones were shot down by air defence. One of them detonated in the village of Akimovka killing a civilian.
On May 15, kamikaze drones attacked Kamenky Khutor village in the Bryansk Region injuring three civilians.
On May 15, Ukrainian nationalists launched precision rocket strikes on the Protection of the Holy Virgin church and a hospital in the village of Tyotkino, Kursk Region. The church burned out, and the hospital building was destroyed.
Since May 15, dozens of daily attacks by the Ukrainian Armed Forces on residential areas and civilian vehicles in the Belgorod Region, three civilians have died and at least 14 others have been injured.
In the Donetsk People’s Republic, there have been at least six casualties during this period caused by shelling and drone attacks. One civilian died.
In the towns and villages of the Kherson Region, four civilians died from Ukrainian Armed Forces’ attacks, and four more were injured. Blocks of flats and other civilian buildings were damaged. For example, in the early hours of May 15, due to enemy drone attacks in the village of Chongar, a state-of-the-art outpatient clinic which served 2,000 patients, including 250 children, burned to the ground.
So, who is behind this bloodbath? Perhaps, there are sensible people in France, Germany, Britain, and across Western Europe that will call things by their proper names? These are the NATO countries that daily sponsor the Kiev regime with money and weapons that are used specifically to target civilians and civilian infrastructure.
Russian courts continue to hand down sentences to Ukrainian neo-Nazis and mercenaries for their military and other crimes.
Oksana Shevchenko, detained by Russian law enforcement in 2024, has been sentenced to 10 years in prison. Acting on the SBU’s orders, she participated, in 2023-2024, in plotting an assassination attempt targeting Head of Crimea Sergey Aksyonov with the use a radio-controlled explosive device.
Mercenaries fighting on the side of the Ukrainian Armed Forces M. Demetrashvili, A. Pichelaouri, and T. Goguadze from Georgia, as well as Hector Joel Urban Perdomo from Colombia, received 14 years in absentia. All legionnaires are on international wanted lists.
Ukrainian military personnel A. Froklin and A. Shulgan, who were earlier detained by Russian servicemen, have been sentenced to 15 years in prison. V. Kirpichenko, A. Priymachuk, D. Pisachenko, S. Shapoval, A. Borimsky, and D. Yaremov, who blocked villages in the Kursk Region and hindered the evacuation of civilians, were sentenced to 16 years in prison. It has been established that A. Froklin, A. Shulgan, V. Kirpichenko, S. Shapoval, A. Borimsky, and D. Yaremov repeatedly opened fire on them and the Russian troops.
The investigation into mass killings of civilians by Ukrainian neo-Banderites in the village of Russkoye Porechnoe, Kursk Region, is ongoing. As of today, 24 people have been confirmed killed in this village. Some of them were tortured before they were killed.
The Kiev regime continues to try to create an alternate reality where Russian Crimea is portrayed as “occupied” territory in need of being “liberated.” In his address on May 18 marking the 81st anniversary of the deportation of Crimean Tatars from Crimea, Zelensky couldn’t resist being an actor this time again and drew absurd parallels between the tragic events of 1944 and the Russian spring in Crimea and Sevastopol in 2014.
Zelensky’s lamentations over the suffering of the Crimean Tatars come across as hypocritical. On the anniversary of the tragedy, no fewer than four Ukrainian fixed-wing UAVs attacked Crimea. Weren’t the people of that very ethnicity there at the moment? On the one hand, he mourns their hardships throughout history, while on the other hand - at this very moment - he orders criminal drone strikes on civilians, including Crimean Tatars. Fortunately, no civilians were injured in the attack, because all UAVs were shot down by Russian air defences. In the early hours of May 19, 26 enemy drones were downed over Crimea. So much for Kiev regime “caring” about the residents of Crimea it claims to be liberating.
In reality, the people of Crimea liberated themselves, expressing their will openly during the March 16, 2014 referendum to join the Russian Federation. That was their true liberation from oppression and ideological enslavement. As a reminder, 96.77 percent of those who voted, with a turnout of 81.36 percent, voted in favour of reuniting with Russia. This was a real blessing for all ethnic groups in Crimea. The Presidential Executive Order of April 21, 2014, on measures for rehabilitating repressed peoples and state support for their development, put an end to the political exploitation of ethnic issues. Respect for national traditions and the cultural heritage of all peoples without exception lies at the heart of Crimea’s development and prosperity. We encourage everyone to visit Crimea and see it for themselves.
The Zelensky-led regime gets exasperated was it wages a war against historical memory, including the memory of the heroic sons of the Ukrainian people. In Kharkov, a memorial plaque dedicated to Soviet military commander Pavel Rybalko - a native of the Kharkov Region who took part in liberating Ukraine from Nazis - was dismantled. In Kiev, Banderites decapitated the statue of the renowned Soviet biologist and plant breeder Ivan Michurin. In Odessa, they smashed a memorial plaque honouring General Leonid Bocharov, who participated in the defence of Odessa and Sevastopol. The criminals perpetrated their vile act under cover of night. They wouldn’t have dared do it in broad daylight. In the city of Akhtyrka, Sumy Region, they destroyed a commemorative inscription on a monument to the heroic Soviet soldiers who liberated Soviet Ukraine from Nazi occupiers. Reportedly, authorities in Irpen, Kiev Region, are preparing to demolish a mass grave of Soviet soldiers who died liberating the Ukrainian SSR from Nazis. There is talk of the Kiev regime targeting the Eternal Flame. Their conscience has long since been “extinguished.” Now they want to extinguish the Eternal Flame, so it reminds no one of anything. Once again, the Nazis revealed their depraved nature, but they will not be able to erase historical truth. It will be preserved, and monuments and other memorial sites will be restored. Those responsible for these crimes will be held accountable.
All of these facts confirm the relevance of the special military operation to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine, and to eliminate threats emanating from its territory. All of its objectives will be achieved.
Presidential elections in Romania
An overwhelming number of questions have been raised regarding the concluded presidential elections in Romania. We might have confined ourselves to stating this as an internal matter of Romania had certain Russophobic forces within the country not inexplicably chosen to invoke Russia. Since we have been drawn into the matter – we will respond.
The electoral saga concluded on May 18, 2025, which began in 2024, stretched over many months and was replete with high-profile scandals. It laid bare the catastrophic erosion of public trust in Romania’s incumbent authorities and their policy of slavish adherence to Brussels’ directives at the expense of national interests. The consequences of this approach are evident: a profound domestic political crisis in Romania and deep societal polarisation.
This electoral episode has also exposed another acute problem – the crisis within Brussels itself. Even when it became apparent to all, including children, that Romanian democracy was faltering – with completed election rounds being annulled, rivals swept aside, and arbitrary “novelties” imposed in violation of codified procedures – the “collective Brussels” persisted in feigning normalcy. Even when the “elder brother” in Washington, dispatching a high-ranking delegation to the Munich Security Conference, admonished the “younger brother” in Brussels over this disgrace, it provoked neither contrition nor recognition of the grotesque democratic deficits plaguing the so-called European Union. Naturally, their conduct was utterly misguided. They have made themselves a laughingstock.
Pitiable are the attempts by Bucharest’s elites to deflect blame for their own grave failures onto Russia. Their methods? Circulating allegations of our interference in the electoral process. Such claims are not merely groundless – they are ludicrous.
One cannot but recall last year’s annulment of first-round election results. How was this justified? Through entirely contrived pretexts to disqualify the leading candidate. This resembles a farce, yet it is reality. These are not our troubles. Equally irrelevant to us is the branding of George Simion – a nationalist, anti-establishment figure deemed threatening to Romania’s ruling elite and Brussels’ bureaucratic tranquillity – as a pro-Russian candidate. No, these are not our burdens. They are symptoms of the collective West’s own afflictions.
Throughout this propaganda campaign, elementary democratic norms were brazenly violated. Above all, freedom of speech was crucified – subjected to outright desecration.
Against this backdrop, it is pointless to speculate on the prospects of extricating Russian-Romanian relations from their current impasse. Any progress will hinge entirely on Bucharest’s ability to discard Russophobic stereotypes and adopt a pragmatic foreign policy course aligned with the genuine interests of the Romanian people.
Economic and social consequences facing EU countries if they say no to Russian energy imports
On May 6, the European Commission presented a roadmap for the European Union to stop purchasing Russian energy by 2027 which comes as a follow-up on the suicidal course that the EU bureaucrats embarked on in 2022 under the REPowerEU plan. By 2027, the EU plans to completely stop purchases of Russian energy, including petroleum, gas, and nuclear fuel.
As high-flown as it may sound, for many decades, steady supplies of affordable Russian resources ensured Europe’s energy security, supported the competitiveness of its economy, and, accordingly, contributed to the growth of public welfare. Even to this day, EU countries have remained major buyers of Russian gas. According to the European Commission itself, 52 billion cubic metres of gas were purchased in 2024. According to Bruegel European think tank, EU imports of Russian LNG in January-February 2025 amounted to 3.92 billion cubic metres, 5 percent up compared to the same period in 2024. In February, a record-high volume - 1.55 billion cubic metres, up 26 percent year-on-year - was pumped through the TurkStream pipeline.
By destroying our traditional historical ties in the energy sector, EU leaders continue to pursue a consistent and deliberate policy of self-destruction contrary to common sense and economic viability.
I have some statistics to share with you. The EU’s anti-Russia sanctions have hit back and affected the socioeconomic situation in European countries. Since they turned down Russian energy imports, the EU’s economy has been stalling: in 2024, GDP growth amounted to a modest 0.9 percent. The European Central Bank is forecasting a similar figure for 2025. Industrial output in Europe fell by nearly 6 percent between 2023 and 2024. Competitiveness and corporate profit margins across many European countries are down, and companies are relocating production overseas - not only across the Atlantic - as European firms are forced to pay double or triple for electricity of that their US counterparts are paying. No one in these countries dares ask the obvious question: why have the leaders of these regimes done everything possible to destroy their own businesses by raising energy prices? After all, they were elected by their people, not always through direct elections, but through various political mechanisms, but they were voted in to promote national interests, above all the well-being of their citizens, especially businesses, since these are capitalist countries with market economies where business interests are front and centre. I will tell you why this question is not being asked. In a number of countries (Romania, for example, and other Western European countries, which we will discuss later), freedom of speech has simply been trampled. It has been straight up choked off. Labels and smear terms have been invented for the people who try to raise questions. When they realised even that wasn’t working, authorities began raiding newsrooms, visiting people’s homes, and declaring them outlaws. That’s exactly what happened with the German journalists from the Compact publication that came to Russia with one key question: if a decision is made, could supplies resume through the remaining Nord Stream pipeline, and how long would it take to resume supplies? When they got the answer that it could be done in roughly three weeks with the necessary agreements and political will in place and brought this information back to their German audience, they were outlawed literally overnight. A real witch hunt began. That is why things like that are happening.
Even European politicians themselves are acknowledging the massive economic losses. In April 2024, Executive Vice President of the European Commission for European Green Deal Maros Sefcovic said that the energy crisis had set the European economy back an astronomical 1 trillion euros. Today, figures as high as 1.3 trillion euros are being mentioned.
The roadmap itself states that the EU has spent around 245 billion euros on diversifying supplies, in fact, to replace Russian energy. Not to support businesses, and not even to build domestic alternative energy sources like nuclear or hydroelectric plants. No. They spent 245 billion euros solely to prepare for eventually saying no to Russian energy imports. These are the numbers the EU is willing to announce publicly. The actual damage caused by Brussels’ destructive policies, especially taking into account indirect losses, is significantly higher.
At the same time, the European Commission acknowledges that it is impossible to taper off the remaining portion of Russian supplies in the EU energy mix using market-based methods alone, without additional intervention. Additional intervention means the European Union will have to spend even more billions of euros. Not to mention the scale of potential penalties that could arise from terminating long-term gas contracts imposed by EU bureaucrats. Naturally, member states will be expected to come up with even more self-destructive and costly measures, including larger LNG imports. It doesn’t make any economic sense. It’s expensive. They are nipping everything in the bud. But they keep biting the cactus, as the popular meme goes.
Apparently realising this, EU officials have repeatedly postponed the publication of the roadmap. Sensible voices are being heard in some member countries. Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico called the plan absolutely unfriendly towards Bratislava. He said the EU would suffer more than Russia, something everyone has already seen after anti-Russia sanctions had been imposed, and the EU officials’ actions will lead to more gas price hikes. This is indeed what is happening. I didn’t make it up. Once the roadmap was made public, gas prices in Europe rose by 6.7 percent.
In turn, Russia’s economy has managed to effectively mitigate a significant portion of negative consequences. Following the EU’s decision to expedite banning Russian energy imports, the main trajectory of our raw material and processed goods exports was swiftly redirected towards new global growth centres in Asia, among others. A transition to settlements in national currencies is underway (as of January 2025, the share of the rouble and currencies of friendly countries in foreign trade transactions reached approximately 83 percent across the entire range of goods). Work is underway with our partners to identify solutions to the current situation and to expand cooperation.
In conjunction with other OPEC+ format participants, Russia is making a decisive contribution to ensuring stability and predictability in the global petroleum market for producers and consumers, as well as to maintaining global energy security.
Campaign against Russian language teachers and Russia-friendly NGOs in Bulgaria
A witch hunt targeting Russian language instructors and Russia-friendly non-governmental organisations has been unleashed within Bulgaria’s public sphere. This campaign was instigated by reports of local school students participating in events celebrating the cultural heritage of our nation.
Russophobic members of the national parliament have submitted inquiries to Bulgaria’s Ministry of Education and Science, demanding clarity on the scope and methodology of Russian language and cultural studies in schools to “prevent the dissemination of Russian propaganda.” The ministry subsequently circulated a thematic questionnaire to subordinate institutions. This is merely the beginning. It appears matters will not conclude here.
If propaganda is indeed at play, it is exclusively of the anti-Russian variety – propagated by certain political circles in Bulgaria. The state broadcaster, BNT, has aired multiple segments alleging the harmful influence of children’s competitions with a “Russian connection.” What constitutes these competitions? Evidently, it is deemed more beneficial and important to promote contests on topics such as gender fluidity or paediatric gender reassignment surgeries. Is this the logic of those Bulgaria’s activists? Meanwhile, Russian-sponsored competitions – encompassing song, dance, mathematics, chess, and athletics – are branded as contrary to healthy lifestyles. Is this the position of official Sofia? Such abandonment of common decency is unconscionable, driven solely by demands to pledge allegiance to Russophobia. Predictably, this farcical narrative – that Bulgarian children must be barred from competitions with a “Russian link” – is now being peddled by elements of the media. This constitutes a textbook witch hunt, redolent of twentieth-century totalitarian practices. One might assume such eras were consigned to history, their lessons learned. Yet here we are. Such conduct is unbefitting a nation with Bulgaria’s ancient history.
We are witnessing a phenomenon disgraceful to any modern civilised state: the crude execution by official Sofia of external directives to eradicate any manifestation of Bulgarian citizens’ affinity for Russia – an affinity rooted in our shared history, spiritual bonds, and cultural kinship. These ham-fisted measures have provoked profound indignation within Bulgarian society, particularly among patriotic groups who prioritise their nation’s welfare over foreign agendas.
We will undoubtedly continue to bring to the attention of the global community Bulgaria’s flagrant violation of its citizens’ rights and international humanitarian norms.
Day of Slavic Literature and Culture
On May 24 this year, Russia traditionally celebrates the Day of Slavic Literature and Culture – a symbol of the spiritual kinship and shared national traditions of the Slavic peoples. The occasion coincides with the Day of Remembrance of the great educators Cyril and Methodius, who laid the foundations of Slavic writing. We will never disregard the contributions of all nations and peoples to the development of Slavic culture.
Numerous events will take place across our country on this day, the centrepiece of which will be a nationwide celebratory concert in Moscow featuring distinguished Russian performers and musical ensembles. His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia will deliver a welcoming address.
The festivities foster interstate and interfaith dialogue, promote respect for native languages and cultures, and reinforce fundamental moral values. They hold particular significance in the 80th anniversary year of Victory.
This holiday is widely observed abroad, serving as a reminder of the common roots of Slavic languages and a vivid testament to the unbreakable historical ties and cultural unity of the Slavic peoples. This is how we must regard the past that binds us – the past that continues to nourish the cultures of our nations. Not, as some would have it, by eradicating children’s participation in “competitions with a Russian link,” as prescribed by certain authorities.
The 23rd International Likhachov Scientific Conference
On May 22-23, the 23rd International Likhachov Scientific Conference will take place in St Petersburg. The event is held as per the Executive Order of the President of Russia On Immortalising the Memory of Dmitry Likhachov, dated May 23, 2001.
Co-founders of the Conference include the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Russian Academy of Education. The Likhachov Conference is traditionally held with the support of the Russian Foreign Ministry. Each year, the forum brings together over 1,500 leading Russian and international scholars – academics, politicians, public figures, church leaders, prominent cultural and artistic figures, writers, and journalists. Over the years, representatives from 57 countries have participated in the Conference.
The agenda of the Conference traditionally features the most pressing contemporary debates, addressing key trends in the development of human society, the transformation of the global order, and the role of culture and education in the modern world. This year’s Conference is dedicated to the theme titled “The Transformation of the World: Challenges and Prospects.”
Since 2008, the Likhachov Conference has also included the Diplomatic Programme, International Dialogue of Cultures, in which ambassadors from foreign states present their perspectives on the most critical issues of our time.
May 25 marks the 30th anniversary of the signing of the Joint Declaration on the Foundations of Friendly Relations between the Russian Federation and the Kingdom of Cambodia.
This pivotal document established a robust foundation for the progressive development of bilateral relations across a wide spectrum of areas. Our two nations maintain a substantive political dialogue, sustain close contacts between ministries and agencies, and foster active engagement between leading political parties. Trade, economic collaboration, and cultural ties continue to expand. Russia and Cambodia collaborate effectively on international and regional platforms.
We are confident that the wealth of experience accumulated over these three decades will help identify new opportunities to strengthen our traditional friendship, enhance practical cooperation, and promote mutually beneficial exchanges for the good of our peoples – all in the interests of stability, security, and sustainable development in the Asia-Pacific region and beyond.
Another significant date in May: by decision of the heads of state of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), May 29 is now celebrated annually as EAEU Day.
Today, the EAEU stands as a paradigm of successful integration, where cooperation is built on principles of equality, trust, and respect, with due consideration for the interests of each member state. Over the years, the five nations have achieved substantial progress: the internal market functions and evolves, the geography of international engagement expands, mutual trade demonstrates steady growth, and cooperation strengthens in key sectors such as transport and logistics, industry and agriculture, and energy and food security.
The EAEU has emerged as a significant player on the global stage, evidenced by its extensive network of international partnerships. This includes free trade agreements with Vietnam, Serbia, and Iran, as well as a non-preferential agreement with China and over 80 memoranda of cooperation under the Union’s supranational body – the Eurasian Economic Commission. Work is in its final stages on trade agreements with Indonesia, the UAE, and Mongolia. Active engagement continues with observer states – Uzbekistan, Cuba, and Iran.
We extend our congratulations ahead of EAEU Day and express gratitude to our colleagues from member states and the Eurasian Economic Commission for their productive collaboration. We remain committed to unlocking further economic potential and deepening integration for the benefit of our nations’ citizens and businesses.
Answers to media questions:
Maria Zakharova: We’ve seen these comments. Comments on the information that could confirm or refute statements to the effect that Director General of the General Directorate of External Security of France Nicolas Lerner approached Pavel Durov with a request to block materials posted by conservative forces in Romania on the Telegram messenger app should come from Paris.
The French authorities (primarily the president of that country) should provide clarifications. This is not about leaks or anonymous sources. This is an open statement by a person who created an online platform for communication and who was involved in measures taken against him by the French law enforcement system related to the operation of this platform. Considering this, I believe that clarity on this issue (refutal or confirmation) should be provided by Paris.
But given the ongoing developments, I would like to remind you that shortly after Pavel Durov had been arrested in Paris in August 2024, we made it unequivocally clear that no matter how much the French might reassure everyone that there is no political motive behind what is happening, we are witnessing a brazen attempt to exert pressure on an independent information resource.
Every country has its own specific legislation to regulate such platforms, which are cross-border communication platforms, so each country regulates this activity in its own way. Nonetheless, there are tools to resolve these issues in a civilised manner, especially in countries that claim that no one can use any methods to influence business people, especially those involved in freedom of speech, information dissemination, and so on.
Therefore, based on everything that is happening, we would not be surprised in the least if it transpires that such actions by the French intelligence services are not the product of someone’s imagination, but indeed a fact. To reiterate, the Elysée Palace must provide clarifications.
It is no secret that ruling neoliberal circles in the EU have never shied away from meddling in the internal affairs of other states. This applies to our country, among others. It is understandable that we are their main target. Today, almost every politician or party in Europe whose approaches do not toe the general line of the liberal party is subject to systematic persecution, harassment, and cancellation (to use their language). Legal levers are used under contrived pretexts.
Examples abound. In Germany, pressure was exerted on the opposition; in Romania, the tours of elections that did not go as planned by collective Brussels were annulled. Candidates are disqualified; political parties are harassed and labelled by none other than the European Union. Isn’t the same happening in Moldova? The politically motivated arrest of the head of Gagauzia, Evghenia Gutul, is part of the same sequence of events. The assassination attempt on Prime Minister of Slovakia Robert Fico is part of it as well. It was largely the result of the atmosphere of hostility and non-acceptance of those who stick out from the ideological mainstream, who pursue an independent policy, and who just may want to ask a question to get more clarity on things.
With regard to France, one gets an impression that the elimination of key political competitors through various methods (court decisions and provocations) before each electoral cycle is becoming some kind of an unseemly democratic tradition.
Sure enough, someone out there may say that these are inconsistencies that everyone might have. True, anyone can have a blip. However, political competitors are systematically eliminated specifically in France. In that country, this is simply put on a conveyor belt. Both current political leaders and former political actors who previously held various posts may be eliminated to prevent them from claiming anything in the future. The case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn has become a household name.
Examples of France abusing of democratic norms are increasingly often brought into public spotlight. There’s no need to spend decades waiting for archives to get opened. Truth starts to surface fairly quickly. The international community has the opportunity to draw conclusions about what these French “lessons in democracy” or unsubstantiated accusations coming from Paris against other countries about interfering in internal affairs, electoral processes, and so on, are worth. Go ahead, do your investigation and provide answers to the claims that have been made.
Question: What would be your comment regarding the second EU-Ukraine Defence Industry Forum?
Maria Zakharova: First, this was not a defence forum. I would rather call it an aggressive sectarian get-together. In fact, this is not the only one of its kind. This is just one of the multiple initiatives concocted by the European Union’s leadership. For what purpose, you may ask? For the sake of keeping the Kiev regime afloat as a tool at their disposal for confronting Russia.
What was the outcome of this forum? It approved a statement on further integrating Ukraine’s defence manufacturing sector with the European defence manufacturing sector and technical standards in keeping with the White Paper for European Defence – Readiness 2030. We offered a detailed comment on this document during our briefing on March 20, 2025. These decisions demonstrate that Brussels stubbornly persists in its efforts to address the increasingly challenging economic situation within the European Union simply by putting its economy on a war footing. This includes making use of Ukraine’s defence manufacturing capabilities with their supposedly low costs, as well as EU’s unwavering commitment to ensuring that the effort to forcefully militarise the European Union becomes irreversible, even if this undermines the wellbeing of its people.
The European Union has been obsessed with this agenda. They are obsessed with destroying everything for achieving a political and diplomatic settlement, which goes beyond Ukraine. This is happening in the very centre of Europe. This demonstrates that they are not willing to accept the first steps towards finding ways for achieving a peaceful resolution of the Ukraine crisis. This amounts to a sick obsession with going down the road of destruction and aggression, regardless of the consequences, even if they could have a self-destructing effect. It seems that someone turned them into zombies.
Maria Zakharova: Russian. The Russian delegation spoke Russian. There was simultaneous interpretation into several languages: English, Turkish and Ukrainian. I do not know if anyone listened to the Ukrainian channel, since the Ukrainian delegation spoke Russian. I can tell you how it all happened. The Ukrainian delegation read out what amounted to an opening statement. But it was not in the Ukrainian language. They read out their opening remarks in English.
It may well be that they were the ones who needed interpretation from English. I cannot be certain about it, because I do not know. However, the Ukrainian delegation did not speak Ukrainian during the talks. The Ukrainian delegations used the Russian language during the Istanbul talks.
Do you understand what this means? What language did you think they speak? Did you think that they speak Ukrainian? After all, this is all about posturing. I am referring to the declarations by people from the Office of the Ukrainian President about the need for the people of Ukraine to forget the Russian language by using the Ukrainian language everywhere. There were all these fines, oppression, and harassment in schools, colleges, and universities. They have been destroying books, censoring audio and video content in Russian. Look at the way they have fooled the people of Ukraine – Zelensky went as far as promise them peace to secure his election. They misled people by lying to them about how great it would be to be part of the European Union in an effort to persuade them to cut ties with Russia. We are witnessing a similar situation here.
They may well use the Ukrainian language during their rallies or broadcasts for spreading lies about the substantial momentum generated by the Ukrainian government in advancing this agenda. However, in reality they are moving in the wrong direction. Instead, what they want is to cozy up to the countries where they have parked their stollen assets, all while pushing the people of Ukraine toward an abyss by demanding that they stop using the Russian language, imposing fines on them and lynching them, all while speaking Russian and using the Russian language in private, when the people of Ukraine cannot hear them.
This is yet another manifestation of the monstrous narrative of deception – the representatives of the Kiev regime imposed it on the people of Ukraine even though it contradicts the Ukrainian culture and history. This amounts to an effort to destroy the Ukrainian culture and history, since the Russian language is an integral part of this heritage. This does not mean that Ukraine lacks its own unique identity. Of course, it has it. It has its own vibe, a rich culture and its own history. But its history is tightly intertwined with the history of Russia, the Russian culture, the Russian language, and with Russian literature, including books coming from Russia.
Regardless of their ethnic background, people in Ukraine have been using two languages when thinking and speaking, just as many other people from what was once a single country. Ethnic Ukrainians could identify as Russians, and vice versa. There were all kinds of situations. This was not about drawing dividing lines. On the contrary, people thought that this diversity offered an additional advantage. They viewed this as an asset they inherited.
Today, this is just one more thing people in Ukraine are about to lose. There is an effort to deny them the right to use the Russian language. At the same time, the regime uses the Russian language even during formal talks. Yes, they did have an interpreter. But it remains unclear whether anyone listened to the Ukrainian channel, since the Ukrainian delegation spoke Russian.
Maria Zakharova: I have dwelled in great detail on this issue today. Mr Vladimir Medinsky, the head of the Russian delegation in Istanbul, as well as representatives of the Russian authorities, have made extremely detailed statements. The Russian Presidential Executive Office has also commented on this matter.
Consequently, all possible exhaustive answers have already been provided. I repeat, it is now important to realise the agreements reached in Istanbul on May 16, 2025. This includes the largest prisoner of war swap in the past three years, when each side will release 1,000 forcibly detained persons. Additionally, both sides will submit written documents formulating their approaches towards a hypothetical future process of settlement. The relevant future steps will be taken with due consideration for these factors.
Maria Zakharova: The media reports that the Israeli army has stepped up hostilities in the Gaza Strip in accordance with the national government’s plan, starting a sweeping ground operation. Air and missile strikes have intensified, causing additional civilian casualties.
In the past three days, about 300 people were reportedly killed during attacks on social facilities and accommodations for internally displaced persons in various parts of the Palestinian enclave. We are disappointed with this Israeli decision that will inevitably lead to more civilian deaths and new destruction.
We have repeatedly stated in public that the only way to normalise the situation in Gaza is to start resolving the conflict by the political and diplomatic methods. For this purpose, it is necessary to achieve a complete ceasefire and to resume the provision of humanitarian relief aid to the population of the Gaza Strip. This will help create favourable conditions for resuming the political process for the sake of a fair and long-term resolution of the Palestinian problem in line with the well-known international law framework.
We actively and consistently strive to achieve these goals as soon as possible in collaboration with our partners and opinion allies both in the bilateral format and at platforms of international organisations, primarily the United Nations Organisation.
Maria Zakharova: Let me repeat a phrase from your question. Did you say that Ursula von der Leyen believes that this week would be crucial for the future of Ukraine? Why should I share this view or not? We will certainly talk about that, but this phrase was of crucial significance for Ukraine three years ago.
Incidentally, Ursula von der Leyen was president of the European Commission three years ago, as far as I remember, and as a member of the European bureaucracy she made recommendations to the Kiev regime and the Ukrainian people on what they should do. Why didn’t she say in the spring of 2022, when the peace talks began, that the upcoming days would be critical for Ukraine? And they were critical days indeed. They could have encouraged the negotiations. What did they, including Ursula von der Leyen, did instead? They did their best to discourage the Kiev regime. They didn’t say a word about negotiations or diplomacy. They only spoke about the “battlefield” and that might is right. That is what they talked about.
What did Ursula von der Leyen do when Prime Minister of Britain Boris Johnson rushed to Kiev and forced Zelensky to walk out of the negotiations in the spring of 2022? She could have said that it would be critical to continue the negotiations because the issue concerned the European continent. But she didn’t say this, although she is a spirited woman and quick on the draw? She didn’t say this because she hoped for a different outcome, for inflicting a “strategic defeat” on Russia instead of settling the situation in Ukraine and Europe as a whole. That is what they hoped for. They were obsessed with that idea, both Ursula von der Leyen, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell, and other Brussels functionaries.
The statement which you have asked me to assess should be viewed from the three-year perspective and the situation that existed three years ago. That is when she should have said it. That is when European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen should have done her utmost to spur on the talks and to ensure the implementation of the agreements that were reached in Istanbul in 2022 thanks to Russia’s political will. However, as I have said, they had different plans.
As it is, the resumption of the Russia-Ukraine talks, which Kiev sabotaged in the spring of 2022 under Britain’s pressure, is a significant achievement. However, the attempts to set artificial deadlines, mount pressure, make ultimatums and threats, blackmail and fuel unhealthy excitement through the media controlled by the Western establishment are absolutely counterproductive. Therefore, I will not accede to that phrase because of the arguments I have cited just now. It should have been made three years ago. Today, they should encourage negotiations and the implementation of the sides’ agreements, instead of taking sides or inviting Zelensky to covert meetings to whisper advice into his ear, with tissues and sugar spoons on the table.
As for the future of Ukraine, it has long lost the ability to independently take crucial decisions. For many years or even decades, these decisions are not only taken but also planned by those who control that country, tell the Kiev regime what it must do, and formulates its domestic and foreign policy. Three years ago, Russia and Ukraine held negotiations and came to the doorstep of peace. The important detail is that the situation on the ground was different back then. Ukraine could have prevented the loss of its territories at the negotiations. But the interference of UK Prime Minister Johnson encouraged Kiev to recklessly disrupt the dialogue with Moscow and continue the fight until final victory, which has turned into a fight until the last Ukrainian. You can see how this has turned out for the Zelensky regime and Ukraine. It’s difficult to say if anyone has learned anything from these developments. I think the immediate future will show.
Maria Zakharova: We take note of all the statements coming from senior government officials in the United States.
It is our strong belief that there are reasonable people working in the current administration in the United States who understand that trying to pressure or directly threaten Russia is pointless and counterproductive, as proven by our history, as well as the recent past, including the latest developments.
Russia and the United States have resumed their contacts after a lengthy pause. There were three telephone conversations since Donald Trump’s inauguration between the leaders of our two countries(1, 2, 3). This demonstrates that equal dialogue taking into consideration our mutual interests still offers the only reasonable foundation for our interactions even considering the serious disagreements we have.
I would like to go back to the way you framed your question. You talked about Marco Rubio’s warning that Congress might impose stronger sanctions on Russia unless there is progress on Ukraine. How about Congress drafting similar sanctions and imposing them on Boris Johnson? It is a fact that then Prime Minister of the UK Boris Johnson stopped the settlement process for Ukraine in its tracks. Everyone knows this. How about targeting Boris Johnson as a person who derailed the Ukraine talks? Who was behind Boris Johnson? Whose point of view did he bring to Kiev? This is something worth exploring. The fact remains that he was the one who pressured the Kiev regime into withdrawing from the talks back then. In addition, it was the administration of then President of the United States Joe Biden that pushed Vladimir Zelensky to self-impose a ban on holding talks with Russia, which in turn undermined progress on Ukraine. Congress may well add these people to the list of those it intends to designate. These people have undermined efforts to settle the Ukraine crisis.
Russia has never done anything of this kind. In 2022, we responded to the proposal to hold talks, came to the negotiating table. Before that, we spent seven years asking everyone to abide by the Minsk Agreements. Even before 2014, we have been saying that if the West keeps pushing its Ukraine agenda, it would split into two halves or disintegrate.
Every time, we talk about what needs to be done to prevent the situation from getting worse. After that, we help everyone correct their mistakes.
Maria Zakharova: Do you know how many people work in the US Embassy in Yerevan?
Question: I cannot say.
Maria Zakharova: Give me your guess. How many people are there in the US Embassy?
Question: Several dozen, probably.
Maria Zakharova: Two thousand. It seems that it has yet to dawn on some of them that they must expand Russia-US ties instead of seeking to undermine our relations with Armenia. This probably means that there are still people in the US Embassy who have been sticking to an obsolete playbook. It could be that someone in Armenia has not spent all the money from USAID since it worked on projects of this kind.
We cannot care less about whether they unfold their posters or put them away. We have a broad agenda with Armenia across the board. This goes beyond discussions. We have specific, hands-on pragmatic efforts underway. We also know that many so-called minorities do not like this. This is why we focus on the constructive, positive agenda.
We understand where this all comes from. Initiatives of this kind have been funded, promoted and tested around the world and in many countries. How about using USAID funding for doing something good, like offering medical treatment, building something, overcoming a crisis. Nothing – they never do this. Unfortunately, this is all they can do, but this is not rocket science.
Maria Zakharova: What is the purpose of your question? You have framed your question too broadly to make it unclear. What do you mean? What kind of an insight are you looking for? Did you want to ask whether direct contacts between the President of Russia and the President of the United States have any immediate impact?
Question: Direct impact. Is it better for peace negotiations? Does it have any direct impact?
Maria Zakharova: It seems that you are asking this question based on the bitter experience of the Joe Biden administration, where Biden did not have any leverage and could not influence anything going on in his own country. Today, the President of the United States is proactive in his efforts to understand and analyse what is going on, which includes the situation with Ukraine. In fact, settling matters dealing with Ukraine was part of his election campaign, and in the first days after his inauguration he came forward with several proactive international initiatives.
As for President Vladimir Putin, he holds talks with his foreign colleagues depending on whether the agreements they reach are carried out. This much is obvious.
Nobody has ever asked me this question before. But if we are speaking about President Vladimir Putin and President of the United States Donald Trump, and considering that both presidents see, understand and have been emphasising the need to achieve a settlement, this can have a direct bearing on the situation. They are giving instructions to their teams, administrations, and diplomats. They submit proposals and get their briefings and reports.
It is not up to me to go into the details on this matter, but this is quite obvious, at least for Russia it is more than obvious. So let me try to answer your question.
I think that the fact that President of the United States Donald Trump started talking about the need to address the root causes of the crisis proves the point you have raised in your question. This goes beyond a superficial vision and demonstrates an effort to understand the situation in its complexity. This proves that there is a direct impact.
But it could be that something was lost in translation, and you had something else in mind. In this case, I am ready to refer your question to the Presidential Executive Office.
Let me remind you that I have already covered this matter, and everyone knows this. I will also add that it was President Vladimir Putin who came forward with the initiative to hold direct talks with Ukraine. It was the President of Russia who sent a delegation of the Russian Federation to take part in talks in Istanbul, and the fact that the head of state has been sharing his comments on these developments almost daily demonstrates that what you called a direct impact does exist.
Maria Zakharova: Let me expand on the question you asked. It will be recalled that an Arab League summit was held in Baghdad on May 17 of this year. President Vladimir Putin sent a message to its participants. He invited them to the first Russian-Arab summit scheduled for October 15 of this year in Moscow.
Russia and the Arab World have long-standing and traditionally friendly relations that have become markedly strengthened in recent time. Our joint efforts have contributed to the dynamic development of mutually beneficial ties in trade, the economy, culture, and the humanitarian area.
Our international cooperation with the Middle East and North African countries is based on the community of approaches towards the need for establishing a more just world order founded upon true multipolarity and sovereign equality of all states as well as a commitment to respect the basic norms of international law enshrined in the UN Charter. Russia consistently advocates for the region’s problems being solved by the political and diplomatic methods. To assist in normalising the situation in this strategically important area of the world, we maintain close foreign policy coordination with our Arab partners and like-minded people.
We hope that success in implementing the initiative to hold the first ever Russian-Arab summit in Moscow next autumn will provide an additional powerful impetus to strengthening the multifaceted cooperation and strategic partnership between our country and the Arab League states.
Maria Zakharova: We have made numerous comments on the provocative statements and actions by NATO and its member states, which try to present the Baltic Sea as their inner sea and reshape the existing navigation system, which is based on international law rather than their specific understanding of geography. The NATO allies are trying to impose their rules on other countries, hoping in vain that this would allow them to control traffic in the Baltic Sea, especially the vessels that are being used in the interests of Russia, as they say.
In late 2024, NATO accused us, without any grounds, of deliberately disrupting subsurface energy and telecommunication cables. After that, they prowled about the sea in search of Russia’s “shadow fleet.” In January 2025, they launched Operation Baltic Sentry, allegedly to strengthen the protection of critical subsurface infrastructure. This shows that they live in a surrealistic world.
A subsurface explosion was organised in the Baltic Sea against our common civilian infrastructure, the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines. It must be investigated and analysed. But they don’t want to do that because it is easier to invent lies and post a Baltic sentry, although it’s unclear what that sentry will protect.
NATO has now started acting against nothing less than the freedom of maritime navigation. That is exactly how the situation should be described.
Last week, they tried to force a vessel sailing under the Gabon flag into a Russian port to enter the Estonian territorial waters. They have failed to do that. They sent a landing group to the vessel, which failed to board it thanks to the crew’s actions. What next? Will they adopt more aggressive piracy methods? Will they sink vessels or use other methods to harm us?
According to international law, the freedom of navigation (a phrase the other side probably doesn’t know) beyond the territorial waters of coastal states allows vessels under any flags to sail in the Baltic Sea. Foreign vessels can only be stopped, searched and detained, and any other measures can only be used against them in that maritime zone for a specific number of reasons. Protecting subsurface infrastructure or checking ship’s documents are not on this list.
I would also like to remind everyone that in accordance with the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, coercive measures can only be taken against foreign vessels in the economic zone with the agreement of the flag state. Interference in the passage of vessels may not be based exclusively on unilateral discriminatory rules and ungrounded suspicions, or on the desire to present sea carriers as belonging to the so-called “shadow fleet.”
We believe that the international community should provide an appropriate assessment of the NATO countries’ provocative activities in the Baltic Sea taken in violation of international law. As I have said, there exists, and I hope will continue to exist a branch of international law that is known as international maritime law, or the law of the sea.
For its part, the Russian Foreign Ministry will continue to monitor the situation in that maritime zone and will, if necessary, provide an appropriate response to wrongdoings by the NATO countries’ ships, especially if they create risks for our interests and the security of navigation.
Maria Zakharova: I would commute the “why” to the “what for.” It will be more correct, I think.
The new arrangement will ensure a more effective coordination of international activities pursued by this country’s bodies of state power.
You were absolutely right in saying that Executive Order of the President of the Russian Federation No. 1478 of November 8, 2011 On the Coordinating Role of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia in the Conduct of the Unified Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation has been in existence for a number of years. It is the main legal instrument regulating international activities of the federal executive agencies and executive agencies in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. In accordance with this document, they have a duty to coordinate their official statements on international issues with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, as well as – and perhaps on a first priority basis – do so with regard to their contacts and practical activities related to foreign partners. As you can see, this arrangement has been in effect for the last 14 years or so.
On May 17, amendments were introduced to the abovementioned Executive Order, which gave the Foreign Ministry additional powers. Specifically, the Foreign Ministry reports to the national leaders on non-compliance with the requirements imposed by Executive Order No. 1478 and drafts relevant proposals in this regard.
