On August 31 and September 1, Foreign Minister of the Republic of Türkiye Hakan Fidan
will visit Moscow to hold talks with Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
on a broad range of bilateral and international issues.
The ministers will discuss the situation in the region,
including Ukraine, Syria, Libya and the South Caucasus.
They will analyse the status of bilateral cooperation, including energy projects
and review a schedule for bilateral meetings at the top and high levels.
By tradition, on Knowledge Day, September 1, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov
will take part in the ceremony for the start of the academic year
at the Yevgeny Primakov Regional School, an autonomous non-profit general education organisation.
In addition, Mr Lavrov will speak at MGIMO where he will meet first year students and the faculty.
The minister is expected to share with the audience his assessments of current international events.
As usual, he will respond to questions that concern the new generation of MGIMO students.
Foreign Ministry and Diplomatic Academy representatives were also invited to attend the event.
The Group of Twenty (G20) will hold its summit on September 9 and 10 in New Delhi, India.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will be heading the Russian delegation
at the instruction of President Vladimir Putin.
At the upcoming leaders’ meeting, the Foreign Minister is expected to take the floor
during two plenary sessions: on September 9, there will be
the One Planet session on sustainable development and promoting steady economic growth,
and on September 10, the Foreign Minister will speak at the One Future session
highlighting key matters of promoting democracy and strengthening the role of the countries
belonging to the global majority within global economic governance institutions,
as well as achieving digital transformation.
Sergey Lavrov is scheduled to hold several bilateral talks and contacts
on the sidelines of the summit.
We would like to note the unifying nature of India’s G20 Presidency,
the country’s commitment to promoting the interests of the developing countries
and creating a constructive atmosphere at the forum.
The summit is expected to take a decision on accepting
the African Union as a permanent G20 member.
We welcome this step.
Russia was among the first to support this initiative and contributed to carrying it out.
The policy of confrontation adopted by the collective West
has been creating artificial roadblocks
that prevent the G20 from unleashing its creative potential.
Efforts by the United States and its allies to spread anti-Russia and anti-China information,
primarily in the context of Ukraine, have been a special source of tension.
We refer to this phenomenon as the Ukrainisation of the international agenda,
meaning a refusal to recognise the actual challenges
related to the Ukraine crisis, its causes and ways to settle it,
while seeking to place this topic on top of the agenda everywhere
even when it has no place in the discussion.
The West’s attempts to devalue a consensus rule within the G20
and to extend questionable G7 agreements to this forum as binding commitments
have given rise to alarming trends.
The Anglo-Saxons are cooking up all kinds of dirty tricks.
At the summit, Russia intends to promote its principled vision
on ways of achieving sustainable development goals and addressing key challenges in this regard,
including the West’s efforts to destabilise the global economy through sanctions,
terrorist attacks inspired by the West, conflicts and supply chain disruptions.
We will share our assessment of the risks
related to precipitating the transition to a green economy,
especially for the most vulnerable countries of the world.
The West has succeeded in making environment protection
an extremely partisan and polarising issue.
This is not just an irresponsible attitude but a harmful one as well,
since this position is not backed by research.
We will present in detail our views regarding the need to reform
global economic governance considering the emerging multipolar world order
and the ongoing shift in manufacturing capabilities in favour of the developing countries,
as well as regarding efforts to counter the arbitrary and illegitimate unilateral Western sanctions.
We will insist on taking carefully thought-out solutions on digital transformation,
mitigating energy and food security risks and streamlining the energy transition.
We will place a special emphasis on positioning Russia
as a reliable and responsible supplier of energy resources and exporter,
and will present specific proposals on expanding multilateral cooperation,
in particular, as part of the Greater Eurasian Partnership.
Russia is committed to making the Delhi summit a success
and ensuring that the Indian G20 Presidency is effective.
We hope that all other G20 members, especially those representing the West,
adopt the same responsible attitude.
We will work with a wide range of friendly partner countries within the G20
and rely on the BRICS countries to counter any detrimental processes in this regard.
Last night, the Kiev regime used drones
to attack several targets in a number of Russian regions.
In Pskov, a military-civilian airfield was attacked; in Bryansk,
an administrative building was damaged; and in the Dzerzhinsky District of the Kaluga Region,
a drone hit an empty petroleum product storage tank.
Ukrainian drones were shot down in the Moscow, Oryol, Ryazan, and Tula regions.
According to preliminary data, no casualties were reported.
The attacks by Ukrainian drones on civilian targets
once again show the Kiev regime’s terrorist nature.
It is also clear that Ukrainian drones could not travel such a distance
without a carefully planned route based on information obtained from Western satellites.
The Kiev regime, which is actively supported and spirited up
(although the word “spirit” is not appropriate here)
by the collective West, continues to barbarically shell civilian sites
and residential areas in Russian regions on a daily basis.
Among the weapons used are cluster munitions,
which pose a particular danger to civilians.
As a reminder, they were supplied by the United States.
On August 25, the Armed Forces of Ukraine attacked Donetsk killing a civilian.
On August 26, Ukrainian neo-Nazis shelled the town of Urazovo in the Belgorod Region
wounding six people.
The next day, attacks by the Ukrainian Armed Forces on Gorlovka and Donetsk
wounded six civilians, including four children.
On August 29, two people were killed
in shelling of the Bryansk Region by the Ukrainian forces.
According to Acting Head of the Donetsk People's Republic Denis Pushilin,
after the Ukrainian army started using American cluster munitions,
the number of civilian casualties increased by orders of magnitude.
Unexploded ordnance of this type also poses a danger.
On August 18, three people were killed when cluster munitions detonated in Donetsk,
which clearly confirms that supplies of weaponry by Western countries,
including the United States, to Ukraine have led to an increase in civilian casualties.
Civilians are dying from Western projectiles.
Have the American media made the civilians part of their agenda?
Do they want to clarify with the White House and the US State Department
whether they are tallying the people who have died at the hands of the Kiev regime,
which is armed with US-made weapons?
The actions of the Ukrainian regime will not go unpunished.
Russian law enforcement agencies are investigating and thoroughly documenting
all instances of shelling of Russian regions by Ukrainian militants,
as well as their other criminal activities.
The culprits are being held accountable.
I would like to remind the Kiev regime gunmen
who are shelling peaceful quarters in Donetsk and other Russian cities and villages
and sincerely believe that their crimes will go unnoticed, will be forgotten,
or not investigated due to their mass nature that they are mistaken.
Recently, based on the evidence collected by Russia’s Investigative Committee,
the Russian courts handed down verdicts to a number of Ukrainian gunmen.
The commander of the Ukrainian unit Dmitry Khrapach,
who ordered the shelling of residential areas in Donetsk in late December 2022,
was sentenced to life imprisonment in absentia.
Ukrainian nationalist Alexander Novik who fired a grenade launcher at a residential building
in Severodonetsk in May 2022 was sentenced to 15 years in a strict regime penal colony.
Sergey Boichuk, a member of the Ukrainian forces who fired a smoothbore gun
installed on a BMP-1 APC at a residential building in the Popasnya District in June 2022,
resulting in the death of an elderly civilian,
was sentenced to 20 years in a strict regime penal colony.
Ukrainian militants Roman Petrenko and Alexei Khrolenko
have been sentenced to 25 years in a high-security penal colony
for firing shots at a car carrying civilians in Mariupol in March of 2022.
Four non-combatants were killed in the attack perpetrated by Petrenko and Khrolenko
who were following the criminal orders of their command.
Nationalist Yury Kulinich will serve 17 years in a high-security penal colony
for throwing a grenade at an elderly woman in the village of Rubezhnoye
in the LPR after hearing her say something about Ukraine he did not like.
She died on the scene – but he will live.
The work to identify and prosecute Ukrainian criminals that attack civilians will continue.
It makes no difference whether they commit their crimes on orders
from the Kiev regime or of their own accord.
They will not be able to avoid justice.
In this context, representatives of the current Ukrainian authorities
continue to step up aggressive rhetoric against Russia.
Head of Vladimir Zelensky's office Andrei Yermak recently threatened
that the entire Russian nation would be held accountable for certain alleged crimes.
In the same vein, Mikhail Podolyak, adviser to the head of Zelensky's office,
said NATO countries gave the go-ahead to the Kiev regime striking Crimea,
that there is an “absolute consensus” that Ukraine can “destroy everything Russian,
for example, in Crimea.” We will remember these words.
We will respond both in word and deed.
While encouraging their Kiev puppets to commit even more savage crimes,
the NATO countries continue to flood the country with deadly weapons.
In addition to the ongoing arms supplies, there have been never-ending discussions
lately in a number of European countries about the possibility of sending fighter jets to Kiev.
We strongly condemn such actions, as they are aimed at escalating the conflict further.
For us, it makes no difference if they send the F-16 or any other planes.
All this means is that the West is getting increasingly drawn into the Ukraine conflict.
Their words that they are not in a “direct confrontation” with our country
have lost their meaning.
All this confirms the geopolitical scale of the current stage of aggression
the collective West has been waging against Russia.
It began long before 2022 and was manifested in their sanctions, restrictions,
kidnappings of Russian citizens, acts of sabotage, interference in internal affairs,
attempts to change things and have their way inside Russia, to gain control
of every aspect that must be our concern by definition – from resources to culture.
Westerners have nurtured the neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine,
and are now using it to attack Russia, hoping to recoup their past failures –
including Charles XII, Napoleon and Hitler.
This situation – a global confrontation with Russia, which is determined to repel
the aggressive Western countries – is no different from the context
of the Crimean War in the 19th century, or the Great Patriotic War, etc.
The actors are the same; the confrontation is largely taking place in the same area.
But there is a difference.
With each new attempt, the tools used by the West become more immoral.
The NATO countries are covering up their aggressive plans against Russia
by promoting Vladimir Zelensky's “peace formula.”
What is this game they’re playing?
First, they prohibit the Kiev regime from negotiating with our country,
forcing Ukraine to reject any peaceful contacts
(in 2022 alone, not to mention the background of what is happening in Ukraine),
and adopt legislative acts blocking any interaction with Russia.
Then they come up with a peace formula, while at the same time asserting
that everything should be decided “on the battlefield.”
How is that?
In fact, it is all very simple.
Vladimir Zelensky's “peace formula,” a lame initiative, both politically and legally,
has nothing to do with peace.
The West is using every opportunity to break the impasse where it has driven itself.
But these attempts are futile because they aren’t allowing
themselves to realise the fallacy of their chosen path.
On August 5-6 of this year, Jeddah (Saudi Arabia)
hosted consultations on settling the crisis in Ukraine.
Following this event, they launched some virtual working groups
on the main points of the notorious “peace formula”
although no agreements were reached on them at the said meeting.
They tried to have their little get-together.
They failed to get any approval from the international community
and impose anything on the global majority.
Then the collective West started sending links for joining
some online conferences and inviting various countries to take part virtually
in the discussion of Ukraine-related issues.
This was not simply improper but looked like a small-time con.
The recipients of these links do not even know
who will communicate with them on the other side of the screen.
The liberal media were squeamish about pranks.
These US actions are a diplomatic prank.
Congrats on inventing a new genre.
This is the same yellow press but in a new format.
The West is trying to involve the UN and other international agencies in its plans.
They are not worried that this is a direct violation of the principle
of impartiality enshrined in Article 100 of the UN Charter.
As it turns out, this does not bother
the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, either, but it should.
The ultimate goal of these efforts is to feign international support
for the notorious “peace formula” and draw into the anti-Russia coalition countries
of the Global South that are neutral or friendly to Russia.
But they are doing this blindly.
The world majority has rejected everything
that Washington tried to offer or impose on others right out in the open.
At this point, they have launched a new plan.
Without informing these countries or explaining to them the format,
the eventual goal and rules of the game, they are trying to draw them
into the unknown webs of some virtual working groups.
However, our partners have enough wisdom and experience
to realise the danger of such formats and not to yield to these provocations.
According to the media, Ukraine is actively expanding its biggest cemeteries.
Apparently, prodded by its Western bosses, the Ukrainian authorities
are going not only to continue robbing their once prosperous country blind,
but also to deprive it of its main asset – the people who live there.
I would like to note in this context that the Kiev regime and the West
are planning to continue the counteroffensive next year.
Cynically demanding resolute action from Kiev, the Westerners intend to continue
this inhuman confrontation to the last Ukrainian.
This is no more a figure of speech but reality.
They are scratching out the last citizens of that country.
I understand that people on Bankovaya Street
don’t have the capacity to answer their questions or ask us anything but I will still try.
Could this be the initial plan?
To put Western fosterlings in power in Ukraine and destroy
the state and the people as a nation, community and culture?
It looks like it.
Actions by Kiev’s neo-Nazi regime have brought total devastation to Ukraine,
and the country is suffering from this pillaging to this day despite the odds.
This tragic moment, as Ukraine is crumbling and being destroyed,
is being used as an opportunity to steal even more.
According to Ukrainian media, seeking to pretend that he is fighting corruption
and scale back popular discontent with a mediocre government policy,
Vladimir Zelensky intends to submit a draft law to the Verkhovna Rada
equating wartime corruption to high treason.
What a marvellous undertaking.
In that case, the entire Kiev regime will have to tender its resignation.
All reasonable people, including Ukrainians themselves
who fell prey to cynical Western deceit,
recognise the need to demilitarise and de-Nazify Ukraine.
I am convinced that many of them had sincere faith in the West,
while it exploited their naïve attitude, stupidity, voraciousness,
doubts and lack of confidence.
As usual, the West fooled everyone, and this lie will be fatal for Ukraine.
Humanitarian aid from the Republic of Uzbekistan to people
living in the Belgorod Region’s border districts
A humanitarian shipment of about 12 tonnes arrived on August 26
for people living in the Belgorod Region’s Shebekinsky District.
It includes children’s and adult clothes and footwear, medicine,
as well as school kits for first graders.
This humanitarian support comes from state, civil society
and non-governmental institutions in the Republic of Uzbekistan.
Russia expresses its deep gratitude to the leaders of the Republic of Uzbekistan
and its people for this cordial gesture of goodwill, which reflects
the high level of relations between our two countries, rooted as they are
in the solid traditions of friendship, comprehensive strategic partnership and alliance.
Let me now share something that will blow up the media space, and rightly so.
We used to limit ourselves to just stating that our rights are being violated
or that Russia is being treated according to double standards, and then wait for
the so-called international community or what we call the civilised world to respond.
That time has passed.
Today, we cannot afford to wait for organisations afflicted
as they are by their selective approaches to respond
in an independent and adequate manner.
They have become largely biased and partisan – we have been hammering home
this message every day, including today.
To guarantee the inevitable punishment and criminal prosecution
for the crimes that were committed, we need all Russian government agencies
in charge of these matters to work together in a coordinated manner.
This work is underway.
To step up these efforts, the position of Ambassador-at-Large for Kiev Regime’s Crimes
has been added to the Foreign Ministry’s staffing table yesterday as per
an order by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.
Prominent government official and civil society leader Rodion Miroshnik –
former Ambassador of the Lugansk People’s Republic to Russia
and member of the Contact Group for Settling the Conflict in Donbass –
has been appointed to this post.
He has a solid track record of standing his ground
at various Russian and international platforms.
His mission includes representing the Foreign Ministry
in its contacts with federal and regional government bodies tasked with collecting
and summarising reports about the crimes perpetrated by the Kiev regime,
assessing them from a legal perspective, as well as drafting investigation reports
on high-profile crimes against civilians, prisoners or war, medical workers,
journalists, clerics, and other persons.
This is expected to be a system-wide effort.
I believe that Rodion Miroshnik will have a press availability soon
and will regularly update the international community on the crimes
committed by the Kiev regime.
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that on August 16, 2023,
Maxim Grigoryev and Dmitry Sablin published a new book
titled Ukrainian Crimes Against Humanity.
It provides evidence of the crimes perpetrated by the Ukrainian neo-Nazis
and their accomplices in 2022 and 2023.
Of course, the criminal record of the Kiev regime spans a much longer period,
so this is not a one-off publication but rather a running series.
There was also the Ordinary Fascism:
Ukrainian War Crimes and Human Rights Violations (2014-2016),
as well as Ordinary Fascism: Ukrainian War Crimes and Human Rights Violations (2017-2020).
We have talked at length about these subjects, saying that the Kiev regime
makes active use of torture and shelling, takes hostages,
attacks hospitals and healthcare facilities and was behind the disappearance of civilians.
The International Civic Tribunal collected all the information
about these atrocities, and it has now been made public
in Maxim Grigoryev’s and Dmitry Sablin’s book.
The authors provide facts backed by over 600 witnesses and victims,
as well as many Ukrainian prisoners of war.
Many of them have shared their stories about endless Ukrainian shelling,
losing their family members or attempts to flee under fire from the territories
controlled by the Ukrainian Armed Forces.
The book highlights Ukraine’s systemic efforts to annihilate
the very values of human life, faith and dignity and root out universal human rights.
The Kiev regime has not stopped at anything, including killing women and children,
executing prisoners by firing squad, beating up clerics,
or rewriting history whenever it deems fit.
These crimes by the Kiev regime do not have and
will never have a statute of limitation, and we will continue exposing them,
responding to them, and treating them on their legal merits.
We have noted Swedish media reports regarding
the delivery of broadband internet terminals to Kiev by Satcube, a Swedish company.
This technology can reportedly serve as an alternative to Starlink devices.
Satcube claims that the terminals will supposedly be used for civilian purposes alone.
Naturally, the Kiev regime is a peaceful organisation, just a club of neo-Nazi fans.
The same peace loving Swedish businesspeople supply them with
civilian equipment for playing Tetris games.
Let us talk seriously about the gist of this project and its designation.
The Swedish company does not deny the fact that it manufactures dual-purpose equipment.
It does not intend to impose any restrictions on the use of this equipment.
Nor does it object to the eventual use of this technology for military purposes,
including battlefield communications.
We see this as yet another example of Western duplicity and criminal actions.
Bankovaya Street will use this technology,
advertised as peaceful by the Swedes, for coordinating combat operations.
We perceive this step, which follows in the wake
of other odious Russophobic actions, as hostile.
Naturally, all this is aimed at pleasing the United States,
and is being done under direct US guidance.
We would like to note that low-orbit Western internet communications networks
have been threatening all states for a long time.
Their main distinctive feature is that they allow users
to directly access internet satellites in circumvention of national operators.
They have been used to interfere in the domestic affairs
of independent countries for quite a while.
For example, they spread Western misinformation
and help organise illegal protests.
Notably, Starlink terminals were used to coordinate
anti-government protests in Iran in the autumn of 2022.
By announcing deliveries to Ukraine, the Swedes obviously
wanted to showcase the effectiveness of their terminals.
In reality, they have inadvertently revealed the dual-purpose essence
of their technology, primarily for military purposes.
Russia will respond accordingly.
Today I would like to elaborate on two mythologems
that in recent years have been inculcated through the media
controlled by Washington, London and Brussels into the Western narrative,
as they say, to make public opinion and political scientists accept them as a concept.
First, I would like to speak about the situation in the global grain and food markets.
What did they say a year ago? They urged not only us but the whole world
to save the poorest countries from starvation and work hard to help people
stop starving and, generally, to enhance food security.
To achieve this, grain deals, as they call them, are needed.
Later, these words were given some civilised form of the Black Sea Initiative,
which was presented as a package of agreements and so on.
When this mystification came to light, it became clear that Russia’s efforts
to carry out what was recorded on paper had yielded no results
because they had been blocked by the West and it was also made clear
who was making money from this deal.
When Russia pulled out of this story, a monstrous information campaign
was launched holding Russia responsible for the skyrocketing food prices
and the futility of efforts to “save” the poorest countries.
Naturally, Moscow was to blame for all these things.
This is the first topic on which I would like to speak at length today.
The monitoring of the situation in the world grain markets
since the termination of the Black Sea Initiative allows us to say confidently
that no drastic or fundamental fluctuations in grain prices
around the world have been recorded.
Immediately after the statement made by Russia on July 17, 2023
about its withdrawal from the Black Sea Initiative, wheat prices edged up slightly.
However, already in the next few days grain futures prices
returned to the previous level and even slightly fell by
1.13 percent to $261 per tonne at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange.
In late August of this year, the same trend can also be seen
on other Western trading platforms where wheat prices
are ranging between $250 and $255 per tonne.
World corn price quotations are following a similar trend.
On July 17, the end of day corn price dropped by 1.51 percent to $199 per tonne.
The current exchange price for corn is $188 per tonne.
Overall, the aggregate price indicators for the main types of agricultural products
are comparable to their 2021 level.
According to statistics by the Russian Ministry of Agriculture, in August,
the average monthly wheat price delivered Free on Board
(this means that the seller pays for sending the goods to the port of shipment
and loading them on to the ship and from this point all risks associated
with the transportation and delivery of the goods have to be borne by the buyer)
from Novorossiysk was $249 per tonne, down from the similar period
two years ago when it was $284 per tonne –
I want to emphasise that this was the price two years ago.
The price specified in Free on Board contracts with shipments from Rouen, France,
was $252 per tonne, down from $295 per tonne in 2021.
I wonder if we are the only ones who see these figures.
Have they been classified, so that the public around the world
is denied access to them?
The answer is “no”.
It is open information.
Here is my second question: where are all these Western newspapers,
internet publishers and TV channels that have been generated in unthinkable quantities?
Where are they all?
Why don’t they give facts that anyone who wants to look into the situation has access to?
Why do they write something opposite?
According to experts’ forecasts, in the medium term, grain price quotations
may be subject to slight volatility due to many factors.
The most likely factors are natural phenomena caused by climate change,
such as droughts, hurricanes or floods; next come speculators’ activities
in commodity exchanges; and the third factor is emergency situations like fires
at grain elevators in France and Türkiye in August.
According to the estimates presented during
the 58th session of the International Grains Council on June 14 in London
(this isn’t intelligence; we cite public information),
there are no global crises in grain production or trade at the moment.
I have a question: where are all those foreign journalists now?
All the American, British, French, German and Canadian journalists writing about food security?
Are we the only ones seeing and reading this?
Not only that.
The International Grains Council also noted a rapid decline in world prices
compared to the previous season:
wheat, by 35 percent, corn, by 26 percent, and barley, by 41 percent.
This clearly invalidates any claims that the special military operation in Ukraine,
as well as the termination of the Black Sea Initiative,
led to a drastic surge in food prices, and that Russia is
the main cause of turbulence in global food markets.
Wait – I do agree that Russia has become an inconvenient factor in this food story,
only that happened about a decade or so ago,
when the country revitalised its agriculture.
That's when the problems with Russia started.
Russians became not just competitive rivals, but market leaders.
For decades, we had been told that we were incapable of making enough food.
We did not need to, because we would soon be accepted into the “civilised” club
and fed according to their “schedule” ˗ not when we were hungry.
Thank God we promptly came to our senses and
joined the club of real agricultural leaders instead.
And that's when the West started to have real problems.
Not because we did something wrong.
They had a problem with ideology.
They couldn't let this happen even in their worst dreams.
They were exceptional.
This intensive misinformation campaign waged by the United States
and its satellites looks to us like an attempt to oust Russia from the global food market,
while achieving advantages for their own agricultural corporations.
The year-long hysteria around grain and “grain deals,” and Western “aid”
to the poorest countries had just one purpose – to reduce Russia’s appeal
as a reliable supplier of agricultural products for the “international community”
and retain control of that market in order to prolong their dominance once again.
It’s just so predictable.
I will now say what should have been said long ago.
It is impossible to feed the world without Russia.
Unlike the US and other Western countries, we have never used this fact as a political lever.
We have always been a reliable supplier of any products, food included.
According to estimates, the main suppliers of wheat in 2022/2023 agricultural year
will include Russia with 45.5 million tonnes, EU countries (35 million tonnes),
Australia (28.5 million tonnes), Canada (25 million tonnes),
United States (21 million tonnes) and Ukraine (14.5 million tonnes).
According to the US Department of Agriculture,
about 800 million tonnes of wheat will be harvested
in the 2023/2024 crop year – just over the 2022/2023 level
(788.5 million tonnes).
At the same time, global stocks will increase
by 1.5 percent to 270.1 million tonnes in 2023/2024.
The high production volumes will push global wheat
trade up 0.8 percent to 215 million tonnes.
Russia is expected to increase grain supplies
to the foreign market by 4.5 percent to 46.5 million tonnes.
I would like to cite a Western source.
The Economist Intelligence Unit estimates this year’s wheat
harvest in Ukraine at 22.5 million, a 32 percent decrease
compared with the 2021/2022 crop year, and at 19 million tonnes in 2023/2024.
Exports will fall to 10 million tonnes, the British publication reports.
Unfortunately, their report failed to mention the fact that
the Ukrainian soil is now contaminated with radioactive waste from
the depleted uranium shells supplied by the UK.
They have been supplying the Kiev regime with such munitions for months,
as we have said repeatedly.
This has been confirmed by the background radiation measurements.
This has a direct bearing on the quality of agricultural products
grown in the territory of Ukraine.
It is a pity that British, American, Canadian and EU publications fail to mention this.
At the same time, Russia continues to responsibly and conscientiously fulfil
its obligations under international contracts involving agricultural goods,
fertilisers, energy resources and other critical products.
We are well aware of the importance of supplies of socially significant goods,
including food, for the socioeconomic development of Asian, African,
Latin American and Middle Eastern countries, as well as for food security
and the achievement of the SDGs.
This approach has been confirmed by the initiatives
put forward by President Vladimir Putin to transfer
tens of thousands of tonnes of Russian fertilisers (seized in European ports)
and grain (25,000-50,000 tonnes each to countries in need such as
Burkina Faso, Zimbabwe, Mali, Somalia, Central African Republic, and Eritrea).
At the same time, Russia is actively exploring alternative ways of supplying food
to the poorest countries in order to compensate them for the damage caused by
the forced suspension of the Black Sea Initiative.
Let me remind you that all the problems with the Black Sea Initiative
have been caused by the illegitimate, illegal and immoral sanctions
imposed by the US and the EU, as well as countries that joined
these sanctions against our country or adopted them
in the same unilateral manner under pressure from the United States.
The second myth which has been gaining traction
and spreading within the global information space, as we have been hearing
from Washington, London, Brussels, Paris, and Berlin,
has it that Russia is the only country to suffer from the sanctions it faces,
while these measures do not harm the EU or anyone else in any way whatsoever.
It is said that these illegal sanctions affect only the country they target, i.e.
Russia, with no indirect damage.
This is what Josep Borrell, Joe Biden, Antony Blinken
and Jens Stoltenberg have been saying all along.
But if we look at the facts, the global economy continues to incur substantial losses
caused by the all-out effort by the United States and its satellites to sever their trade
and economic ties with Russia and force other countries to follow them.
The key international analysts, for example from the IMF and the World Bank –
I will be referring today to sources the West views as reliable and verified
so that the Western media can trust this information –
have been trying to keep this topic under wraps.
They have been emphasising factors restraining economic growth,
including high consumer prices, tighter monetary policy, growing debt,
what they call the war in Ukraine, and climate change.
Nevertheless, in their reports they have factored in the negative impact of
the restrictions imposed on Russia on the global economy.
They have been doing this against their will and defying the orders coming directly
from the United States and its all-out effort to purge and belittle these statistics.
Still, these data have found their way into the IMF and World Bank reports.
The IMF believes that the ongoing geopolitical tension
and the way it has been aggravated by sanctions heightens
the risk of the global economy splitting into quasi-autonomous blocs.
Fragmentation leads to more trade restrictions,
including for strategic goods, such as minerals, while also slowing down
the cross-border movement of capital, technology and labour.
Aren’t these the core tenets for the global economy and international economic activity?
This paves the way to higher volatility on the commodity markets, rising inflation,
and lower household incomes in many countries, while also undermining collective efforts
to deliver on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
International experts have had to recognise that unilateral sanctions
imposed by the United States, the European Union and all those
who use them are detrimental, including for those who initiated them.
Most G7 economies have been stagnating, the IMF and the World Bank pointed out.
According to a source the West definitely views as reliable – The Financial Times –
since the beginning of the special military operation,
which coincided with the sanctions from hell as Joe Biden called them,
major European companies have lost at least 100 billion euros.
Oil and gas companies, financial institutions and banks,
as well as manufacturers piled up the biggest losses.
This primarily afflicts economic actors from the UK, Germany and France.
I believe that is high time that we call them by their names.
That moment has come.
Here are the companies that incurred the biggest losses: BP lost 23.3 billion euros,
Total Energies – 13.5 billion euros, Uniper – 5.7 billion euros,
Fortum – 5.3 billion euros, Shell – 3.7 billion euros, OMV – 2.5 billion euros,
Equinor – 1 billion euros, Renault – 2.3 billion euros, Volkswagen – 2 billion euros,
and Société Générale – 3.1 billion euros.
For example, the refusal to buy Russian fuel costs Orlen,
Poland’s state oil company, $27 million per day.
You will probably agree that this is an important factor.
When US air carriers could no longer transit through the Russian air space,
the number of flights connecting the United States to China
dropped from 340 per week before the pandemic down to 24,
creating huge losses for American carriers.
European, i.e. Western, carriers have reported a substantial increase in
fuel costs because their flights to Asia have to bypass Russia.
To give you an example, a flight connecting Paris to Tokyo
now takes 14 hours instead of nine, making these routes economically unviable.
According to Russia’s Ministry of Transport, weekly losses
stemming from restrictions on the use of Russian air space for
US and European air carriers amount to $37.5 million.
The share of alternative currencies in international settlements has been growing,
while the share of the dollar in international reserves fell below 60 percent,
down from 72 percent in 2002.
The euro fell to 19 percent, down from 28 percent in 2008,
while the yuan’s share increased by three percent, tripling since 2016.
Several countries have been more proactive in trying to switch to
their national currency in international transactions with yuan
as the case in point in terms of its growing international appeal.
The decision to disconnect Russian banks from SWIFT served as an impetus for
the development of similar solutions at the national level, including SFMS in India,
CIPS in China, SEPAM in Iran, etc.
Türkiye, the UAE, Brazil, Argentina, Egypt, Kenya, Saudi Arabia,
several ASEAN countries and others have started trading in their national currencies.
The presidents of Argentina and Brazil launched an effort to create
a currency union that could cover all MERCOSUR countries in the future.
But the West is not ready to give up its monopoly on global financial governance,
which creates a growing demand among the countries of the Global Majority for
reform of the existing financial architecture.
Ideas for alternative financial platforms are being put forward,
for example, the Asian Monetary Fund.
The collective West has been unrelenting in its misinformation campaign
to shift the blame for the ongoing global food crisis onto Russia, as we have just mentioned.
These are interconnected issues.
Russia is said to be responsible for the imminent global hunger
caused by increases in food and fertiliser prices, which allegedly result
from the ongoing special military operation to protect people in Donbass, and nothing else.
We have just looked at the figures provided by, among other sources,
international structures in which the collective West is involved.
There are persistent attempts to discredit Russia as a reliable and responsible actor
on the world food market and one of the key suppliers of foodstuffs to the countries in need.
In fact, it was the Western countries who blocked it – payment transactions,
and transport and shipments.
Not only did Russia offer this as humanitarian aid,
but even paid for shipping it to the poorest and neediest countries.
At the same time, the international expert community
has now openly recognised that food price inflation was
caused by global economic distortions and imbalances, as well as systematic errors
by major Western countries and their misguided macroeconomic, energy and food policies.
Climate disasters, the pandemic and its consequences,
as well as massive unilateral sanctions against Russia have all exacerbated
these negative trends and created even more imbalances in the global market,
primarily in terms of agricultural products.
Energy prices have been rising due to the West’s push to expedite
the energy transition and the adoption of renewables.
All this has resulted in surging transport tariffs.
Fertiliser prices have tripled since 2020 due to
fluctuating natural gas prices – this had nothing to do with the special military operation.
In fact, natural gas accounts for 80 percent of fertiliser manufacturing costs.
Restrictive measures against Russia also played a part.
This as another objective factor driving inflation since 2020.
According to the World Bank, the price of potassium fertilisers
was 2.5 times higher as of December 1, 2022,
compared to January 1, 2022, at $562 per tonne.
This meant that the availability of this commodity
deteriorated to a level not seen since the 2008 food crisis.
This is an extremely dangerous situation that can pave the way to
a large-scale famine in the world’s poorest countries.
Why is this happening? Russia has been and remains
a reliable supplier of agricultural goods.
It is another question that we are prevented from supplying it,
paying for shipments, and from managing logistics.
Our shipments have simply been blocked.
This goes hand in hand with the insane media campaign against our country.
But there is an objective factor which explains these dynamics
even if no one is talking about it in the West.
The FAO has also emphasised that food prices began
increasing before the special military operation.
A team of researchers from the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
concluded that there was no correlation between the situation in Ukraine
and changes in the price of grain.
But can you find this information anywhere?
Will anyone bother saying this?
Of course, not.
The unilateral measures taken by the collective West
to pressure our country have exacerbated
the negative trends in transport and logistics sectors.
Foreign port terminals involved in the shipments of Russian food
and industrial products were blocked.
International financial corporations, logistics companies and banks
stopped offering loans, insurance or accompanying transactions
involving the sale of Russian food and fertiliser.
This is what caused a crisis in terms of global food security.
While publicising its crass and groundless accusations against Russia
for causing the food crisis, the West has been hushing up
the fact that major Western corporations involved in producing and
trading agricultural products benefited the most from higher food prices
and supply disruptions.
I am referring to the so-called Big Four,
formed by US corporations Archer Daniels Midland, Bunge and Cargill,
as well as Louis Dreyfus – a Dutch company.
They account for 75 to 90 percent of global agricultural food trade.
In 2022, Cargill alone reported a 23 percent increase in sales to $165 billion,
earning a record-high net profit of $5 billion.
Just look at their public relations budgets, the way they have been promoting
their vision of the grain deal and the way Russia allegedly derailed it.
Just look at the amounts they spend on public relations
and how this spending has been changing, and you will get the true picture of things.
The Ukrainian subsidiaries of these companies made
a significant contribution to improving their performance.
In fact, the Big Four, plus the chemical industry giants Monsanto and E.I.
DuPont de Nemours, own 17 million hectares of the 32 million hectares
of Ukrainian arable land, either directly or through intermediaries.
Ukrainian grain, in which forage grain and corn accounts for 70 percent of it,
flooded Eastern European markets and upended them,
placing local farmers on the brink of bankruptcy.
What an amazing process.
This would make a good fairytale: they kept storing more and more grain
so that their pockets and cheeks became so full that they finally ripped apart.
In fact, this is not a fairytale, but a real-life story that happened in 2022 and 2023.
In July 2023, the FAO reported a minor uptick in the food price index
which bumped up 1.3 percent compared to June 2023 at 123.9 points,
and was up 11.8 percent compared to July 2022.
If you look at the commodity exchange indices during the first month
after the end of the Black Sea initiative, you will see that
there were no major fluctuations in the global prices of grain.
Prices did increase a bit immediately after Russia announced its intention
to withdraw from the Black Sea Initiative on July 17, 2023.
However, the very next day the price of wheat went down.
As of August 11, 2023, the price continues to decline.
The price of wheat dropped to $259 per tonne or $6.28 per bushel,
down 3.8 percent compared to the previous month.
The price of corn has been following the same downward trend.
Overall, the aggregated prices of the main agricultural products
are comparable to 2021 levels.
Therefore, claims that the special military operation in Ukraine
as well as the withdrawal from the Black Sea initiative
caused a major surge in food prices, while Russia is the main culprit
behind the turbulence on the world food markets, do not hold water.
I suggest that you rely on facts and figures when building logical arguments.
According to the FAO, developing countries are still far from resolving the issues
related to getting the food they need despite the decreasing prices.
The artificially inflated costs for processing agricultural products, transporting them,
insurance and logistics rates, as well as high inflation have been undermining
the normal operation of the relevant mechanisms.
Russia continues to perform in a responsible manner, and in good faith,
its obligations under international contracts for agricultural, fertiliser,
energy exports and other essential goods.
The fact that our country has the potential to export even more grain
has a stabilising and balancing effect on global supply and demand,
coupled with the fact that shipments of Russian food products continue despite the odds,
regardless if it’s the discriminatory restrictions enacted
by the United States and the European Union, media campaigns, or other dirty tricks.
Overall, businesses, including in unfriendly countries, believe that
the Western sanctions policy and what Russia has been doing to counter
these restrictions and adapt to new challenges have served
as a powerful trigger for reshaping the entire system of international economic ties.
This process is now in its early stages, but it is obvious that seismic shifts
in terms of trade, currency and finances, transport and logistics, insurance and transport,
energy and agriculture, innovation and high technology are all irreversible
despite the persisting challenges and the artificial barriers the West creates.
According to reports, on August 30, a Gabonese military unit announced
they had seized power in the country and had dissolved the government, the Senate,
the National Assembly, the Constitutional Court and other institutions of state authority.
They are establishing a Committee of Transition and the Restoration of Institutions.
Military leaders spoke on Gabon 24 television after the August 26, 2023,
presidential election results were announced by the Election Commission of Gabon.
According to the commission, the incumbent head of state,
Ali Bongo Ondimba, won the election.
Moscow reacted with concern to reports of
the aggravated situation in this friendly African country.
We continue to closely follow the developments,
and we hope that the situation will be stabilised soon.
According to the Russian Embassy in Libreville, there have been no reports
about any victims among Russian Federation citizens in Gabon.
We advise our compatriots to temporarily avoid traveling to
the Gabonese Republic unless absolutely necessary.
On August 28, 2023, Sergey Mironov, Chairman of A Just Russia – Patriots –
For Truth party and head of the parties parliamentary group
in the State Duma of the Russian Federation, met with Ahmad Massoud,
the head of the National Resistance Front of Afghanistan, which opposes the Taliban Movement.
In this connection, we would like to note the following.
Moscow continues to establish practical collaboration with
the government of Afghanistan without officially recognising it.
Since gaining power two years ago, this government has proven
its ability to keep the national situation mostly under control
and to ensure domestic political stability.
Nevertheless, the domestic political processes in the country have not become irreversible.
Serious risks of terrorist threats, unresolved socioeconomic issues
and failure to guarantee fundamental rights and freedoms continue.
In a worst-case scenario, international terrorist organisations, primarily ISIS,
who plan to expand beyond Afghanistan, in particular into Central Asia,
will not hesitate to take advantage of this.
In this connection, we urge Kabul and the representatives of Afghanistan’s ethnic minorities
to maintain a dialogue for establishing a genuinely inclusive government
that reflects the interests of the country’s main ethnic and political groups,
and that they can combat terrorism and drug trafficking more actively,
while observing fundamental human rights and freedoms.
I would like to note that the 2022 Foreign Ministry Diplomatic Journal has been published.
This edition includes Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks, interviews and articles,
on the main issues of Russian foreign policy over the past 12 months.
Russian and English language versions are available.
The annual journal mostly contains publications and photo materials
from the Foreign Ministry’s website.
It includes a CD version, and is available on
the Press Service section of the Foreign Ministry website.
It will also be sent to Russian libraries, research centres and universities.
This journal has been prepared by the Foreign Ministry Information and Press Department
and is intended for diplomats, foreign policy analysts and anyone
interested in Russia’s present-day foreign policy.
On August 24, 2023, the official unveiling of a restored Soviet military memorial
took place in Nagybajom, Somogy County, Hungary.
The memorial had undergone major renovation by Hungarian construction companies
with funding from the Russian Government and with Gazprom’s support.
The main monument was restored, and the adjacent area improved.
Following archive and search work conducted by the Russian Embassy in Hungary,
the names of 1,396 Soviet soldiers that were killed when liberating Hungary
from the Nazi invaders were found and perpetuated on marble plaques.
The Main Administration for Service to the Diplomatic Corps
under the Foreign Ministry has held the Summer Diplomatic Games
at its Zavidovo resort in the village of Shosha, Tver Region, for the 24th time.
The adherence to a healthy lifestyle and love for sports brought together
over 20 teams of diplomatic missions,
as well as representatives of the Eurasian Economic Commission.
As per tradition, representatives of the Russian media –
TASS news agency and MIR television channel – took part in the competition.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov sent greetings to the participants, noting that
“in the almost 25 years of its history, this wonderful sports festival has become
a symbol of professional solidarity and mutually respectful, including informal,
interaction between diplomats from all over the world.”
The ceremony was also attended by Acting Head of the Main Administration for Service
to the Diplomatic Corps Vyacheslav Fatin, First Deputy Chair of
the State Duma Foreign Affairs Committee, Olympic champion Svetlana Zhurova,
and three-time Olympic champion and nine-time world champion
in fencing Galina Gorokhova, who was the main arbiter of the event.
On August 27, 2023, the latest Eurasia Global international forum concluded in Orenburg.
The forum brought together over 500 people from 64 countries.
One of its main events was the launch of the countdown for the World Youth Festival,
which will be held in 2024 in the Sirius Federal Territory,
accommodating 20,000 guests from Russia and abroad.
During the week-long forum, the participants discussed
multilateral cooperation in the current geopolitical conditions.
This year, the event was dedicated to uniting
the international youth community based on the principles of equality.
Following the forum, the Declaration of a Multipolar World was adopted,
designed to change the perception of the omnipotence of the Western countries.
The participants outlined the six principles of a multipolar world,
with the main ones being respect for the sovereignty of states,
international cooperation and a joint approach to dealing with global issues.
By tradition, on the concluding day of the forum,
the participants received grants to undertake their own projects.
The UN General Assembly has designated August 29
as the International Day against Nuclear Tests.
The annual event is a good opportunity to recall
who is chiefly responsible for failing to eliminate the threat of these tests.
In our opinion, it would be logical to observe
the International Day against Nuclear Tests on August 6 and 9, rather than August 29.
In fact, 78 years ago, on August 6 and 9, 1945, the US leadership
implemented its decision to use nuclear weapons
against the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan.
In effect, this amounted to US nuclear tests involving
the civilian population of Japan with the cynical goal of informing the whole world that,
at the time, the United States had acquired a new type of weapon of mass destruction.
These strikes were absolutely pointless from the military standpoint
because the fate of militarist Japan had been sealed by August 1945.
Today, we are witnessing an unacceptable trend at international platforms,
including the UN, that aims to hush up the fact that
the United States is the only country that has used nuclear weapons.
The distortion of historical memory can have serious consequences.
We should not miss an opportunity to introduce
a comprehensive nuclear test ban at the level of international law.
It is necessary to enact the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.
However, the United States alone creates the main obstacles here,
refusing to ratify this Treaty year after year.
On September 3, the Russian Federation is marking a memorable date, specifically,
the Day of Solidarity in the Fight against Terrorism
that became part of Russian legislation in 2005, a year after a horrendous terrorist attack
in Beslan that killed over 300 Russian citizens, including children.
This appalling terrorist atrocity was something unprecedented
in terms of its meanness and brutality, and it highlighted the need to rally
the entire international community against terrorism.
We have to state that, in the current international realities,
the issue of combatting terrorism has long since lost its unifying essence.
The collective West that considers itself a beacon of democracy and human rights
is openly waging a hybrid war against Russia.
Not only is the West using Ukraine as a geopolitical battering ram against our country,
but it is brazenly turning a blind eye on
the terrorist essence of the Kiev regime and is sponsoring it.
At the same time, the Western line to “isolate” Russia has not been crowned
with success even in such a sensitive area as the fight against terrorism.
The opinion of Russia remains significant and weighty during dialogue with friendly states.
The Russian Federation prioritises cooperation with
friendly states in the current complicated conditions of foreign policy turbulence.
For example, we are collaborating rather fruitfully
with our partners at various regional associations,
including the Commonwealth of Independent States, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation
and the Collective Security Treaty Organisation.
Close contacts between the security agencies of these associations’ member states
are taking place under the auspices of the CIS Anti-Terrorism Centre
and the SCO’s Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure.
As for the CSTO, it can deploy its Collective Peacekeeping Forces
in the shortest possible time, and this is an extremely important, effective and essential factor
in facilitating counter-terrorism security in the zone of its responsibility.
Additionally, the BRICS Counter-Terrorism Working Group now
ranks among the most advanced cross-regional formats.
The BRICS Counter-Terrorism Strategy and the Action Plan for its implementation,
drafted in 2020 and 2021 when Russia and India chaired BRICS, are the gold standard,
reflecting an analytical and well-thought-out perception of real,
rather than imaginary, terrorist threats.
The Russian Federation also supports constructive dialogue
on counter-terrorism operations with the states of the African continent.
The Declaration of the Second Russia-Africa Summit on
Strengthening Cooperation in the Fight against Terrorism,
signed following the Second Russia-Africa Summit in St Petersburg in July 2023,
reflects the common approaches of our countries.
We will continue to coordinate joint efforts in the above-mentioned multilateral formats,
including those aimed at streamlining the existing mechanisms
for coping with the security risks of the states involved.
On September 3, Russia will mark the Day of Military Glory.
Starting this year, as per the law signed by the President of Russia on June 24, 2023,
it will be celebrated as the Victory over Militarist Japan Day and the End of World War II.
We believe that the updated name restores the historical truth
and reflects the enduring significance of the heroic role of the Soviet people, soldiers
and officers in defending our Motherland and the Asian nations from a militaristic Japan.
The crushing defeat of the enemy in Manchuria, Sakhalin and the Kurils
in August-September 1945 made a decisive contribution to
the defeat and surrender of Japan, thus putting an end to the bloodshed
started by Nazi Germany and its allies and opening the way to
the restoration of long-awaited peace in the world.
After the surrender of Nazi Germany, Japan remained
the only Axis member that continued to fight the anti-Hitler coalition.
During the Potsdam Conference, on July 26, 1945, the governments of Great Britain,
the United States and China issued a declaration that outlined the terms of
unconditional surrender and formulated basic principles based on
which the allies were to implement a peaceful settlement for Japan.
The country was required to eradicate militarism,
remove from power the instigators of military expansion, prosecute
and punish the war criminals, accept temporary occupation of the country,
disarm its armed forces, and discontinue the development of military industries,
while creating conditions for the revival and strengthening of democracy in the country.
Japan’s sovereignty will be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido,
Kyushu, Shikoku and some other minor islands.
Because Japan rejected these demands, on August 8, the USSR joined
the Potsdam Declaration and declared war on Japan.
By August 20, a Soviet force led by Marshal Vasilevsky, after heavy fighting,
reached the Manchurian plain as part of the Manchurian strategic offensive operation
where they split the Japanese forces into isolated groups and encircled them.
Each group began to surrender.
The Red Army pressed on with the offensive deeper into Manchuria,
thwarting scattered pockets of resistance.
From August 18 to August 27, our airborne assault groups captured Harbin, Mukden,
Changchun, Kirin, Port Arthur, Dalny, Pyongyang, and Kanko (Hamhung).
Soviet troops liberated Northeast China and North Korea,
landed on South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands.
The defeat of the Kwantung Army and the loss of
its military and economic base in Northeast China and North Korea
deprived Japan of forces or resources to continue the war.
As many as 640,000 Japanese personnel were taken prisoner.
On September 2, 1945, aboard the American battleship Missouri,
Japanese Foreign Minister Mamoru Shigemitsu and
Chief of the Army General Staff General Yoshijirō Umezu signed an act of
unconditional surrender in the presence of representatives of the Allied Powers,
thereby accepting all the requirements of the Potsdam Declaration.
The victorious ending of the war with Japan marked the end of WWII.
On September 3, 1945, Soviet newspapers published Stalin's address to the nation,
which declared the end of the war with Japan.
A decree by the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR introduced this day as a holiday.
The medal For Victory over Japan was established in the same year,
with the date, September 3, 1945 on the reverse side.
This is the historical background for the new name of this holiday.
The memory of those events is more relevant today than ever.
The processes taking place on the world stage have shown, vividly and clearly,
how quickly certain countries forget the tragic pages and crimes in their own history,
especially if certain inconvenient facts of the past interfere
with their reckless political plans for the present.
We see that Fumio Kishida’s administration is again pushing Japan towards
a policy of revanchism and Russophobia; like 90 years ago, the country is engaged
in accelerated remilitarisation, specifically, in building offensive potential.
In the pre-war years of the 20th century, progressive forces
inside and outside the country repeatedly warned of the dangers of the militaristic frenzy
that had engulfed Tokyo.
But those sensible voices were not heeded, and the war ended in a national disaster for Japan.
We hope that the Japanese people will have the wisdom not to allow politicians
to repeat the fatal mistakes of their predecessors and persuade them
to abandon their dangerous plans that threaten to destabilise
the geopolitical situation in the Asia-Pacific Region and the world.
Question: Several days ago, President of France Emmanuel Macron said
that the country's policy ruled out the possibility of direct involvement in the Ukrainian conflict.
At the same time, he added that France was trying to
“avoid any escalation of the Ukrainian conflict.”
Could you comment on this?
Let me translate from French into Russian.
It seems to me that he said that France was trying to rule out
direct involvement in the conflict with Russia, and this implies
that they do not exclude “indirect” involvement.
That is all.
Correcting words does not change the meaning of the actions.
Such statements by French officials are not new.
We constantly hear incantations that France
“does not consider itself a party to the conflict” and “seeks to avoid escalation.”
Who are they talking to?
What world and space do they live in?
Do they think anyone will buy it?
Sometimes you even get the impression that Paris is either engaged in self-hypnosis,
or self-justification, or they don’t understand what they are saying at all.
However, the facts are clear.
Suffice to recall the large and uninterrupted military-technical assistance
that the French (not the people of France, but politicians) provide to the Kiev regime.
France was among the first to start supplying Kiev with NATO-standard ammunition,
initiated the creation of a tank coalition,
advocated the supply of combat aircraft to Ukraine,
and actively participates in the combat training of Ukrainian Armed Forces personnel.
I am not talking about political, informational and logistical support at all.
Recent revelations by Ukraine’s Ambassador to France Vadim Omelchenko
in an interview with the Ukrainian publication Levy Bereg about holding regular meetings
with representatives of the General Staff of France - during which, according to him,
he felt like he was part of the General Staff of Ukraine - about intelligence sharing
and coordinating the supply of long-range missiles and air defence systems,
clearly demonstrating to the global community France’s real level of involvement in this conflict.
It is proof of the level of direct involvement of Paris in this conflict.
Isn’t this a direct path to escalating the crisis?
Is it indirect involvement?
It is clear that Caesar artillery systems, AMX-10 RC wheeled tanks
and SCALP long-range cruise missiles are sent to Ukraine not to be demonstrated
at exhibitions or take part in parades, but rather people die because of this.
French weapons have been causing the deaths of civilians for many months,
destroying residential buildings and civilian infrastructure.
Who doesn’t know this? Maybe some part of French society doesn’t know,
because they are not told about it? There is no doubt that Paris bears
a significant share of the responsibility for the war crimes of the Kiev regime.
It is also obvious to us that, together with other Western countries,
France continues to cynically use Ukraine as a tool in the fight against Russia,
which, apparently, it is ready to wage to the “last Ukrainian.”
I would like to remind you of several other points.
France’s responsibility is not only about armaments supply.
When they say they are not directly involved (but indirectly, it seems),
they should not begin in 2022.
It was the representatives of the official French authorities
who were at the origins of the internal political crisis in Ukraine.
They have openly participated in a coup d'état in Ukraine
more than once and interfered in the internal affairs of that country as a sovereign state.
This was done by the leadership of France.
Yes, now they will probably say that it was not just these politicians,
but someone else or their predecessors, and that they are not responsible for this.
Maybe they are not personally responsible for those actions.
But France as a country is.
All these arguments – that they do not directly participate,
but participate indirectly – are immoral.
This is not just untrue and false, but immoral considering
the colossal losses of the Ukrainians, which are now becoming public.
Does the Élysée Palace lack the strength to publicly state what they are doing?
Why do it secretly, behind everyone’s back?
Let them tell everyone how they are involved.
Why do we have to do this for them?
Let them ask their citizens a question:
do the citizens of France think that this is indirect participation?
Perhaps Mr Macron will find it useful.
I will share this information with him for the future: you cannot be just a little pregnant.
Question: Can you comment on the statement by head of European diplomacy Josep Borrell,
who assessed the impact of anti-Russia sanctions in his blog?
Maria Zakharova: This is where I fully agree with Mr Borrell’s statements.
These anti-Russia sanctions actually do have a negative effect primarily on the EU.
I would like to ask him a clarifying question:
was this Brussels’ initial aim or just how it turned out?
We have returned to this issue many times today.
I can say more, although I have already cited enough facts, including on EU companies
that have sustained massive losses resulting from these anti-Russia sanctions.
We have indeed noted all these pseudo-analytical pieces posted by Josep Borrell.
I believe they were written for him, not by him.
I am not sure he actually reads them before publishing; he probably just skims them.
I am not saying he is not responsible, but obviously he does not write them.
This time, he is making attempts to convince either himself or others
that the anti-Russia sanctions allegedly work solely against us.
But this self-deception won’t work.
The economic data European officials present to Josep Borrell
are in fact Western misinformation attempting to give unsophisticated readers
a false impression of Russia as a weak state.
The conclusion of this op-ed about our country’s alleged ultimate economic isolation
just does not hold water – particularly following
the BRICS Summit held in South Africa recently.
It is an association that embodies the emergence of a new,
more democratic and just world order.
If they want to talk about isolation, let’s talk about it.
Let’s talk about the EU’s and the West’s self-isolation from Russia.
As a global minority, they drew around themselves some sort of a red circle,
calling themselves a ‘beautiful garden’ while the ‘rest of the world is a jungle,’
as Josep Borrell said.
That is how they live.
They should not call it our country’s isolation but their own isolation.
It is also worth clarifying that the EU’s isolation has not been their choice;
it was a multi-stage US-forced self-isolation.
Consider Joe Biden, who mentioned that he had put pressure on the EU
to adopt anti-Russia sanctions during his tenure as US Vice President.
Back then, the United States did not adopt these sanctions
while the European Union did, under pressure from then-US Vice President Joe Biden.
Later on, this reached a new level – which resulted in Europe-based companies
withdrawing from EU countries to the American continent and re-registering there,
as well as in immense losses sustained by EU companies in various sectors,
as we have mentioned, as well as many other effects.
By isolating themselves from Russia and its energy resources,
the economy and opportunities, they have undermined their competitiveness in global markets.
Meanwhile, we are boosting cooperation with reliable partners
and developing global centers that are obviously making more progress than the European Union.
Russia offers a graphic example of the fact that the unilateral,
illegitimate sanctions “from hell” imposed by the Western minority,
bypassing the UN Security Council and designed to strangle us,
have failed to produce the expected results.
They are working against them, while indirectly subverting international processes.
In any case, they are not following the guidelines that came with
the illegitimate sanctions as a how-to guide.
The Global Majority denied them its support.
Moreover, the Second Johannesburg Declaration of the BRICS countries
sets forth their shared position without any ambiguity when they said
“the unilateral coercive measures
are incompatible with the principles of the Charter of the UN and produce
negative effects notably in the developing world.” They also expressed
concern with the sanctions affecting trade in agricultural products.
Who did BRICS target with this message?
You have three guesses.
Of course, they were referring to the outcomes of the sanctions war
unleashed by the European Union and masterminded by the United States.
Intimidation and blackmail are the primary purposes of the EU’s restrictions.
We believe that Josep Borrell’s renewed direct threats against Russians are unacceptable.
He said: “EU trade restrictions so far exclude products
like pharmaceuticals, food, medical devices...” He was probably talking about “creative plans.”
Does Josep Borrell have any idea of what he is talking about?
Is he aware that terrorists taking patients hostage at hospitals and medical institutions
and denying them the medical care they need followed the same logic?
Or should we remind him of what happened in Leningrad during the siege?
The Nazis followed the same logic when they sought to leave people
in the city without food and looked on as they died.
This is what fascists do.
I have a question for Josep Borrell:
has he ever heard of the Siege of Leningrad or its survivors?
He has not?
Let his aides refresh his memory.
Why is the EU leadership reverting to this criminal Nazi logic?
This statement clearly goes hand in hand with the statements
by the same EU High Representatives for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
when he used the garden versus jungle metaphor
when comparing the EU with the rest of the world.
Still, his latest verbal assault is much worse.
It exposes the very nature of this structure and the people running it.
We can see that it is built around the idea of segregating people on ethnic and racial grounds.
I am not even mentioning the political rights and freedoms,
since everyone over there seems to have forgotten about them a long time ago.
This is a manifestation of neo-Nazism.
I have already provided examples proving this point.
This is the logic modern-day terrorists use when they take people hostage
at medical institutions and deny them access to the medicines they need.
This is what the Nazis did during the Third Reich
when they starved an entire city and looked on as people died.
The European Union has been lately threatening third countries
rather than Russia with sanctions, targeting those
who refuse to comply with the sanctions regime against Russia.
This means that when Plan A failed, they moved on.
Adopted in June 2023, the key provisions of
the 11th package of anti-Russia restrictive measures target these countries.
They provide for imposing an embargo on EU supplies to third countries.
Until recently, the EU economy may have seemed so solid and robust,
but today it has become obvious that it derives its strength from
exploiting the resources of developing countries and fails to cope with
the aftershocks of severing its economic ties with Russia.
De-industrialisation is clearly underway in the EU with high-tech producers
moving their production facilities to the United States.
It also suffers from high inflation, massive public debt,
and chronic budget deficits in its member countries.
Just open the Eurostat website to learn that the EU
reported zero growth in the second quarter, while inflation is well above
the target level, especially in terms of food price inflation
which was equal to 12.4 percent in annual terms as of July 2023.
This undermines the wellbeing of a substantial fraction of the EU population.
Has Josep Borrell offered his take on this matter?
He hasn’t?
Why not?
He cheers at the declining trade with Russia, sings Hallelujah and reports back.
But what was the effect of blocking trade with Russia this way?
It undermined the EU’s economic performance.
Doesn’t the top EU diplomat see this logic?
Or maybe he derives a deep feeling of satisfaction from the fact that
EU policy causes the union to pay triple the price for American gas,
while EU manufacturers, at least those who are still there, lost a major trade market.
There is one thing on which Josep Borrell
and I agree: the anti-Russia sanctions are actually working.
Working against the European Union, that is.
It all happened thanks to its leaders who have lost all notion
of where their interests end and those of Washington begin.
They hardly have any thought for the interests of EU citizens.
Defying all the wishful thinking by Western analysts,
we expect GDP to increase in 2023 and are confident about that,
as Russian leadership has been saying all along.
Don’t count your chickens before they hatch, as they say.
Question: Can you comment on the Greek-Cypriot authorities’ reaction to
Russia launching consular services in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus?
Maria Zakharova: As you may know, efforts to improve the mechanisms
and forms of providing consular services to Russian citizens residing
on the northern part of the island have been underway for a considerable period of time now.
We believe that Russian citizens, regardless of where they may be,
should have proper access to effective consular assistance and support.
This work will continue in the forms that align with the national interests of our country.
Question: During the debates in the United States,
Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley insulted the memory of Russia's
Permanent Representative to the UN Viktor Churkin.
She drew parallels between the plane crash in which Yevgeny Prigozhin died
and the demise of the head of the Russian mission in 2017.
According to her, both were removed by President Putin.
How would you comment on this?
Maria Zakharova: She's a liar.
She's lying.
I propose conducting a simple experiment: if within 24 hours
she fails to provide any evidence to back up
what she said (I can tell you right away she won't),
you will once again see this for yourself.
What is there to comment upon?
This is what American politicians are.
They lie to everyone including their citizens and the international community.
Those who try to speak the truth become victims of those who lie.
It's obvious.
Also, when will Nikki Haley tell the world who assassinated John F.
Kennedy?
The world has been waiting for that for 50 years now.
Does she have anything to say about that?
He was a US citizen, just like her.
He was the President of the United States.
He was an outstanding political figure.
If Haley can so easily discuss these matters, she probably knows
who killed Kennedy and wiped out their entire political clan.
That's my second question for her.
The first, as I said, was to provide at least something to support her unadulterated lie
(at least give us something that led you to make this assertion).
Second, answer the question about the political figures of your country
that were killed before the eyes of the entire world.
Fifty years later, the world is still in the dark about who killed President John Kennedy.
Everyone has their theories.
But the US has not answered this question officially to this day.
Question: In September, Sergey Lavrov is expected to lead
a Russian delegation to New York for the 78th session of the UN General Assembly.
What is being done to avoid the incident that occurred in April
when the Americans failed to issue visas to the journalists who were planning to go to
the United States with the Russian Foreign Minister?
Maria Zakharova: My advice to you would be to talk not only about journalists,
because the US denies entry visas to many applicants.
They deny visas to diplomats, including those
who were heading to the UN General Assembly, both for Political Week
and the sessions that are held throughout the year.
The United States failed to issue visas to athletes, cultural figures, and scientists,
as well as participants in competitions, international festivals, and parliamentarians
who were going to attend the General Assembly meetings
as part of inter-parliamentary and international connections.
The US has denied visas to many applicants, even though it was obligated to issue them.
As a reminder, according to the Agreement regarding the Headquarters
of the UN on US territory that has been in effect since 1947, the US undertook
the obligation to provide unfettered conditions for
the activities of accredited missions of foreign states.
However, issues like this regularly arise not only with regard to
our country but with regard to other UN member states as well.
The US is well aware of our position.
Once again, we are compelled to remind you of the blatant abuse
by the US of the privilege of hosting the UN headquarters,
as well as the crude manipulation of visas to exert pressure on other countries.
The administration decides at will whose representatives are allowed
to participate in UN events and who is barred from them.
This is a gross violation of both domestic and international law.
We consider it an absolutely unacceptable breach of international law.
This should not remain unaddressed, and a repeated refusal to issue visas
to our journalists will not go without a serious response.
You are well aware of how we responded to them withholding visas last time.
Question: On August 24, the Japanese government unilaterally stepped up
discharge of radioactive water from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant
into the sea, ignoring the objections of the international community.
Nevertheless, the United States expressed its support to Japan.
Some experts believe that Washington's position on
the issue of radioactive water dumping in Japan is more like a swap
of political interests between the two countries.
Meanwhile, according to Japan's Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries,
the United States is the country that has cut imports of Japanese
agricultural and aquatic products the most in the first half of this year.
How would you comment on this position of the United States?
Maria Zakharova: As totally politicised.
This issue has a scientific dimension.
It must be analysed in terms of those existing laws
and scientific indicators that apply to this issue.
That is why we have called on Tokyo to be as open as possible on such a sensitive topic.
When it comes to blatant politicisation, which the United States does on a regular basis,
I think we get such curious things.
I would like to say that Japanese representatives, who insisted that
the water discharged from Fukushima was safe enough to drink,
for some reason refused to do so.
It seems to me that American politicians who supported Japan on this issue
can show solidarity and drink this water, being fully confident in its safety.
Question: The United States has accused Russia of intimidating employees of
American diplomatic missions with accusations of espionage.
This statement was made against the background of the Russian Federal Security Service’s announcement that it plans to interrogate American diplomats in the case of Robert Shonov,
who is accused of confidential co-operation with foreign intelligence services.
Can the Russian Foreign Ministry comment on this?
Maria Zakharova: This is ridiculous.
Russia is the one intimidating American diplomats?
I thought it was the other way round.
You want proof of that?
Question: That is what has been said.
Maria Zakharova: I will give you facts that show the opposite – not only
that Russia does not intimidate, but that the United States intimidates Russian diplomats.
We have repeatedly presented information, based on facts,
about increased pressure on Russian diplomats who work in
the United States and its satellite countries.
What does this involve?
Recruitment approaches using personal information to diplomats and their families,
including children, to exert psychological pressure, influence, intimidation, and so on.
There has been repeated talk of blocking the accounts of Russian diplomatic missions.
All this takes different forms.
To be able to carry out their activities, to guarantee that their employees
can carry out their work, is this not complicating work and intimidation?
Lack of funding means not only non-payment of salaries, but also
non-payment of medical services, no providing security
or resolving a large number of social issues.
Here is one more example: the confiscation, misappropriation,
seizure of the Russian Federation’s diplomatic real estate,
including housing and office properties.
This property also contained social facilities used by Russian diplomats on US territory.
Is this not intimidation?
They had 24 hours to vacate diplomatic properties that had diplomatic immunity status
on the territory of the United States.
Is this not intimidation?
In one incident, a helicopter with a searchlight hovered above
a Russian-owned mansion in Oyster Bay and filmed Russian diplomats
who had less than two days to take out their belongings and personal effects
and to mothball the facility.
They had only 24 hours.
All this took place to the roar of helicopter engines,
with blinding searchlights shining in the faces of Russian diplomats.
Add to this the expulsion of Russian diplomats who had 24 hours or,
at best, several days to leave the country.
The US authorities also saw to it that the last day of their stay
on US territory would not coincide with the arrival of Russian-bound flights,
so that they would automatically violate US law because their visas
had already expired and thus prevented them from staying in the United States.
They deliberately chose a day when no direct US-Russia flights operated from this city.
Is this not intimidation?
The diplomats and their families had two days to pack, take children out of school,
travel several hundred kilometers, find a flight and leave.
The arrival of chartered Russian aircraft alone saved the day.
Is this not intimidation?
They constantly failed to issue visas to employees of diplomatic missions
and those of the Foreign Ministry’s Central Office.
They also failed to extend the visas on US territory, and they
tampered with the visas of diplomats’ families all the time.
Is this not intimidation?
They hang simply mindboggling posters opposite Russian diplomatic and consular missions,
urging their employees to start working for US intelligence services.
Moreover, popup ads and banners appear on the screens of
Russian diplomats’ computers and subject them to psychological pressure.
Is this not intimidation?
Add to this posters with direct threats hanging in front of Russian diplomatic missions,
performances, threats sent to office telephone numbers
and online social media messages directly threatening diplomats and their families.
Is this not intimidation?
Can US colleagues offer any similar evidence?
Never.
We only respond to the aggressive and boorish conduct of the US side.
The Investigative Directorate of Russia’s Federal Security Service
is duly evaluating the actions of Robert Shonov.
It is necessary to question all persons of interest involved in
the case in accordance with Russian law.
We assume that Russian media materials of August 28, 2023,
provide exhaustive legal grounds justifying the actions of the Russian authorities.
Question: Last week, we learned that Yan Petrovsky,
who is a right-wing activist and fighter from Rusich,
a nationalist group, was detained in Finland.
His comrades were quick to accuse the Foreign Ministry of failing to act
and its lack of interest in helping Yan Petrovsky.
How would the Foreign Ministry respond to accusations like this?
Has the Foreign Ministry contacted Yan Petrovsky’s family?
What does the Foreign Ministry think about the prospects for helping
Yan Petrovsky who is expected to face extradition to Ukraine
where he faces accusations of perpetrating war crimes?
Maria Zakharova: Where was Reuters when Maria Butina was spending all those months
in an American prison in solitary confinement?
Where were you, our precious ones?
You have so much compassion for the destinies of Russian citizens and Russians in general,
you have all this empathy for them, and this question causes you so much concern.
But take Viktor Bout – he spent many years in prison.
Do you remember that?
Where have you been?
I do not remember a single question on this subject.
So, I would like Reuters with all its compassion and goodwill
to remember this day, August 30, 2023.
Let this date be written in gold letters in your agency’s annals.
This is when we discovered that you do care for the destinies of Russians
who can find themselves in all kinds of situations while abroad,
including when they are detained and arrested.
Please, I really want you to remember all those who are, in particular,
imprisoned in the United States right now, who were convicted or are under prosecution.
What an amazing twist.
I must call Konstantin Yaroshenko.
He would probably refuse to believe that an outlet as big as Reuters
cares about what happens to Russians when they get arrested abroad.
We spent so many years raising awareness about these incidents, and here we are!
And all these years, there was not a single question from Reuters on this subject,
neither written nor oral – nothing.
I remember Konstantin Yaroshenko’s pleas for help.
He needed surgery.
We thought his words would resonate with the Western media and beyond.
Nothing.
It was only thanks to Russian diplomats that he got the surgery he needed.
I will not give you any details on these operations since this is private, sensitive information.
All I can say is that he suffered from an extreme toothache,
but they refused to give him any painkillers.
Since you expressed interest in this topic, I do hope that you
have the courage to talk to Viktor Bout.
He can tell you a lot of interesting things.
Maria Butina is always available.
And these are only three of them.
Let me draw your attention to the fact that the Foreign Ministry
used Maria Butina’s image as its social media avatar for many long months.
Alas, no one in the Western media was interested in what was happening to her.
The same goes for so many of your own compatriots,
keeping in mind that Reuters has its origins in the UK.
Julian Assange was somewhere in London if memory serves.
I am getting to your question, even if we already answered it but you failed to notice.
The Foreign Ministry has already published the corresponding information
on its website, as well as on its official social media accounts.
But let me repeat what we said for you.
According to the information we have from the Embassy of Russia in Finland, on July 20, 2023,
Vojislav Torden, a Russian national, was detained by the Finnish border guard
when trying to board a flight to Nice, France, at Helsinki-Vantaa Airport.
Please pay attention to the dates.
After that, he was transferred to a temporary accommodation centre
which hosts people applying for refugee status, among other people.
At the time, there were no reports that Vojislav Torden,
a holder of a Finnish residence permit, was included on any sanctions list
as Yan Petrovsky and the Ukrainian authorities could be eager to get him.
According to the explanation we received from Finnish law enforcement agencies,
the detainee was free to use his mobile phone at the temporary accommodation centre
and was informed about his right to contact the Embassy.
The Embassy did not receive any requests from him which would have enabled it
to provide him with the consular assistance he needed.
A local lawyer has been representing Vojislav Torden since July 2023.
On August 23, 2023, the police informed the Embassy about changing
Vojislav Torden’s pre-trial restrictions by transferring him to the Vantaa prison.
This came on the heels of a Ukrainian request to detain and extradite him
in connection with a criminal investigation.
This was when we discovered that Petrovsky was Vojislav Torden’s former last name.
The Ministry of Justice of Finland received a request from
Ukraine’s General Prosecutor’s Office to detain Vojislav Torden and keep him
in custody so that he could be extradited to Ukraine as part of a criminal investigation
into his “involvement with a terrorist organisation or contributing to the activities
of a terrorist organisation,” which is the wording from Article 258-3 of Ukraine’s Criminal Code.
The Security Service of Ukraine opened a case against him back in 2017.
When, on August 23, 2023, we received Vojislav Torden’s personal request,
the Embassy moved quickly to offer a Russian national assistance
by negotiating a consular visit with the detainee.
On August 25, 2023, there was a court hearing in Finland with the decision
to extend the detention period.
On August 28, 2023, with the agreement of the prison administration,
a member of the Embassy’s consular staff visited the detainee,
accompanied by Vojislav Torden’s lawyer.
You understand that the application for the visit was filed in advance.
In fact, it was submitted to the local authorities for approval several days before that.
During the meeting, the Russian national said that he did not have any complaints
regarding the conditions and circumstances of his detention and expressed a desire
to return to Russia as quickly as possible.
The Russian Embassy in Helsinki continues to keep a close eye on this matter and
stands ready, in cooperation with Vojislav Torden’s lawyers, to offer him the support
he needs within its mandate and competence and ensure that the legitimate rights
and interests of this detainee are respected.
The Russian Embassy in Helsinki has been sharing detailed updates
on the efforts by Russian diplomats to assist Vojislav Torden,
including using its VKontakte and Telegram accounts.
The Foreign Ministry reposts these messages on its official social media accounts.
I hope that you will follow the updates from these sources.
Question: How does Moscow feel about Emmanuel Macron’s promise
to intensify his mediation efforts in the conflict between Baku and Yerevan?
As is known, the French president promised to present his settlement plan in the near future.
He also added that the initiative would be presented internationally
to increase pressure on Azerbaijan.
Maria Zakharova: We have repeatedly said that we welcome any initiatives
that do not run counter to Russia’s efforts to normalise relations
between Azerbaijan and Armenia, that do not duplicate or undermine them.
We are fully aware of France’s activity in this matter.
It is no less important that mediation efforts need to take into account
both conflicting parties’ opinions, i.e., Armenia and Azerbaijan.
If this is not the case, any progress in the settlement can hardly be expected.
The situation is heated enough already.
This is the alpha and omega of any mediation.
Question: How can the Russian Foreign Ministry comment on the discussions
in the Turkish media that the grain deal can be extended without Russia,
with “unilateral actions” to be taken and “alternative routes” created?
Does such speculation represent an element of pressure on Russia, a threat?
Earlier, the media reported that the Turkish authorities and the UN
are considering the possibility of holding grain deal negotiations
with a Russian delegation in Istanbul.
Will this meeting make sense before the meeting
between the presidents of Russia and Türkiye?
Maria Zakharova: You have asked a broad question.
The first part concerns the Turkish media.
I believe that any media can express a point of view.
This does not have to be the official view –
just the view of specific journalists, political analysts, etc.
Second, what do you mean, “the grain deal without Russia”?
Do you believe the G8 will remain the G8 without Russia?
No.
Without Russia, the G8 will be the G7.
All these statements should make sense.
If they mean a deal that includes Russia, it cannot work without Russia.
It is physically impossible.
If they are talking about some other agreement
that does not include Russia, then this is what they should write.
Now, as to Russia’s overall approach – President Vladimir Putin
has repeatedly talked about this.
He said that Russia withdrew from this Black Sea Initiative (aka the grain deal)
because our interests were not being respected by the parties.
It became clear who was blocking
what had been agreed on and even guaranteed by the UN.
Vladimir Putin and other Russian officials at different levels
have repeatedly stated that unless the deal is fully implemented as agreed,
promised and guaranteed to Russia,
it would be strange to expect Russia to resume the agreement.
Only if all parties comply with every provision of the deal
can we talk and discuss this possibility.
At their upcoming talks, Sergey Lavrov and Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan
are expected to focus on the situation with the Istanbul agreements –
the Black Sea Initiative on the export of Ukrainian food that was terminated on July 17
and the Russia-UN memorandum on the normalisation of Russian agricultural exports,
among other issues.
We assume that the two ministers’ final news conference
will be an opportunity to ask questions on these issues.
At the same time, it should be noted that our principled position remains clear.
President Vladimir Putin and representatives of the Government
have repeatedly spelled it out.
We insist on the full implementation of our well-known requirements
under the Russia-UN Memorandum.
I have already commented on the rest.
Question: Who has taken over the Wagner PMC mission in Niger and Mali now
that Yevgeny Prigozhin is dead?
Does the Kremlin have an official position regarding Wagner PMC in this regard?
Maria Zakharova: Your question lacks depth.
It's hardly necessary to remind you of the legal aspect of the matter.
Russian leadership has talked about this repeatedly,
including the absence of a legal status for private military companies
and specifically this one.
From this point of view, your question is inappropriate.
We have repeatedly stated that independent sovereign countries,
particularly the ones that you mentioned, on their own initiative
and based on their own needs, knowing that it was important for them,
hired and recruited companies, representatives, legal and private individuals
to fulfill tasks at hand such as security, fighting terrorism, security guarding, etc.
So, the question of who will engage in these activities in the countries you mentioned,
whether in the past, present, or future, should be directed to these countries.
Question: A minor clarification is in order.
I follow the Ministry and your personal channel.
I’m aware that this question has no depth for you.
We see our role in ensuring that our followers in Germany hear your uncensored position.
Maria Zakharova: “Without depth” means that a substantial amount of information
on this question has already been provided.
And a lot has been explained.
You asked the question superficially, even though, in my opinion,
there is already a solid foundation for this entire topic which can be used
as a well to draw quotes on all aspects of your question.
I've summarised for you everything that has been said on this issue at various levels.
Question: It is rumoured that in addition to the plane with Prigozhin on board,
there was another private jet flying from Moscow to St Petersburg at the same time.
Is that true?
Is there a passenger list?
Maria Zakharova: As a spokeswoman for the Foreign Ministry
and as a citizen of our country who is interested in various matters,
I use information related to this topic from sources
provided by Russian law enforcement agencies.
Everything that I have on this issue in my information space
is obtained through the channels of the services and agencies
that are involved in the investigation of the incident.
My advice for you would be to do the same.
Question: Are there any breakthroughs in the case of Askar Kubanychbek?
Maria Zakharova: Recall the most complex cases involving our citizens.
Whether it’s abduction by US intelligence agencies or sting operations
orchestrated by US law enforcement agencies, or the situation with the pandemic in 2020
and the lockdown, or humanitarian cases related to disasters, and so on.
Have there been cases when the Foreign Ministry, our embassies,
and diplomats ignored or failed to deal with them?
How many such cases have there been?
Not dozens, not hundreds, not thousands, not even tens of thousands.
I can safely say there were hundreds of thousands of them over the past decades –
extremely challenging incidents that required
instant solutions, patience and thorough work.
I think that as soon as this information wave starts rolling, typically it happens
within a span of one day, when they start saying that nobody is doing anything
and has left someone behind, we should remember that there must be a conscience.
As well as the fact that every year, literally every day, our diplomats,
in Moscow and at various locations, show by their actions, rather than words,
by the results achieved, that we don't leave our own people behind.
Regardless of political views or ideology, when it comes to a Russian citizen
and their constitutional rights, we always come to their rescue and do everything necessary.
I want to warn everyone including the media, bloggers, and concerned citizens
not to fall into frequently set traps where the Western media start using this topic
to pit us against each other and say that people think that
a particular citizen is left without help.
Where were the Western media when, as I've already mentioned,
Maria Butina was in solitary confinement for several months?
Where were they when Konstantin Yaroshenko needed medical help?
Or, when our people were stranded due to lockdowns and not allowed
to leave EU cities, not allowed to board flights and return home?
They all remained silent.
Now they find it interesting.
They're starting to play on the field of people's clear desire
to help their fellow countryman.
Sometimes, it's simply impossible to make it happen instantly.
But that doesn't mean we won't address it or haven't addressed it at some point.
Therefore, I have to ask you for a big favour.
I’m aware that your publication is strongly supportive of the citizens
of this country during tough times and asks questions related to the fate of Russians.
Please remember and rely on the experience that we've demonstrated
and accumulated over the past ten years, and which serves as a natural basis for our work.
We've already covered this issue.
I'd like to draw your attention to the briefing that took place on August 2.
Additional information isn't available at the moment.
We will share it with you as soon as it becomes available.
Question: On the sidelines of the BRICS Summit, Sergey Lavrov said
that Germany and Japan’s permanent membership of the UN Security Council
was out of the question.
While stating his arguments, the foreign minister did not mention the fact that
both countries have embarked on the militarisation path, especially Tokyo,
increasing its defence budget and offering its technology to the US for military use,
while allowing major defence contractors to open their branches in Japan.
It has also redeployed its F-35 fighter jets to Australia.
How do you think Moscow should respond to these actions?
Maria Zakharova: As regards the ambition of Germany and Japan
to win a permanent seat on the UN Security Council:
what would the added value of their membership be?
This has to make sense.
Let me remind you that they fully associate themselves with Washington’s policy.
Currently, there are no areas where they could defend
at least their own national interests and avoid taking their cues from the United States.
There will simply be two more players on the global stage
to support everything the US initiates.
As regards their participation in and expansion of the UN Security Council,
we have repeatedly discussed this issue.
Apart from the current developments, what do we have today?
The UN Security Council’s permanent members
include the United States, Great Britain and France, the three countries
with almost identical approaches; they follow the US lead.
Those three countries, whose positions on basic issues have not diverged
or contradicted each other for several decades, are backed by votes from
Western European non-permanent members, which either support NATO’s policy
as members of the bloc and the EU or associate themselves
with its stance as non-members of the EU and NATO.
There is such a thing as associated voting, which is an official position;
it goes like this every time.
In my opinion, when countries participate in blocs and military-political alliances,
we should find out if there is a rule on mandatory voting
and whether their foreign policy is aligned with the policy of the bloc.
This must be taken into account when we consider
its participation in the work of the UN Security Council,
and particularly when it comes to its future expansion.
If a member country has an obligation to organise its international activities
in line with the organisation and not to contradict it, what is the point of its involvement
in political issues or in devising and implementing policies
as an independent member of the UN Security Council?
This is absurd.
We already know that all NATO members have an identical stance
on the Ukraine conflict, and their approaches cannot be different.
They cannot even defend their own national interests amidst
the current developments, let alone vote in UNGA committees or anywhere else.
This does not so much have to do with the national identities of these countries,
which simply sacrificed their sovereignty to serve the United States,
as with their NATO obligations as bloc members, especially Germany.
Attempts are being made to draw Japan
and other countries in the region into this NATO-centric axis.
National policies are adjusted towards full association with the United States
in terms of the geopolitical landscape,
while there are also their obligations as bloc members.
We often mention Japan’s remilitarisation at our briefings,
in our strategic reports and foreign policy articles by our ministry’s leadership,
as well as in statements and reports by our representatives abroad.
We have made it clear to Japan that any military activity
that poses a threat to our national security or destabilises the situation
in the Asia-Pacific region is unacceptable.
Our concern is shared by other Asian states as well.
We issue demarches to the official Tokyo through diplomatic channels,
including in connection with Japan’s increasingly frequent military exercises,
such as drills held jointly with the United States and other NATO members
in close proximity to Russia’s borders.
We inform you regularly on this.
Just recently, we have reported on such an event
held by Japan in the sea east of the Kuril Islands, warning that such provocative actions
escalate tensions and will meet with our response designed to protect our Far Eastern borders.
Question: The German Government says that the investigation into the explosions
on Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines continues.
What is your comment on how this issue makes progress at the UN Security Council?
Maria Zakharova: In the past, they were more prompt.
I have no comment.
They investigated the Novichok and Navalny cases in a jiffy.
The inquiry was carried out with the lightning speed.
It invaded the international space.
Everything was done within one or two weeks.
Can you imagine it?
A chemical warfare agent – and nothing!
The man was on a plane, in motorcades, at hospitals…
Chancellor Angela Merkel came for a visit.
A fearless woman!
Visiting a person poisoned with a chemical warfare agent.
What a marvellous woman.
The investigation was carried out immediately, with conclusions,
political statements, the lot.
It would seem they had to at least identify the formula of that warfare agent,
but they found a way round, it seems.
Everything was clear to them from the start.
But in this instance, they are dragging their feet.
Almost a year has passed, but they are making no headway.
It’s hard to be serious about this matter.
Let us recall the facts.
We see a lot of speculations and specially planted media stories.
Why are they being planted?
It is because there was a lengthy, months-long pause.
Berlin and all others offered no coherent explanation
as to how that investigation was proceeding.
Funny, they didn’t so much as mumble something incoherent about that.
They said nothing at all.
After months of official silence, a respected US investigative journalist, Seymour Hersh,
published his own investigation based on the facts about the blasts that wrecked
the Russian gas pipelines in the Baltic Sea.
His publication caused quite a splash.
Next there came a comment from Spokesman for the UN Secretary-General Stephane Dujarric,
who said that the UN had no mandate for an investigation.
After that, on the one hand, the Western media came up with versions
that surpassed each other in their absurdity.
On the other hand, Russia, to move this problem off the dead centre,
introduced a UN Security Council resolution investing the UN with powers
to conduct an international, transparent and legal investigation.
On February 21, 2023, Russia convened a Security Council meeting on this issue.
Nevertheless, on March 27, 2023, the Western troika (the US, the UK, and France)
refused to support the establishment of a relevant investigative mechanism
during a vote on the document.
Obviously, this was done with an ulterior motive.
The statements by Germany, Denmark, and Sweden that
they are allegedly keeping Russia informed about any progress
made by their investigators are not true.
They weren’t true then, and they are not true now.
No one keeps anyone informed about anything.
Our requests to jointly investigate or to join
the ongoing investigative procedures have been denied.
Calls for cooperation from Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin were ignored.
To confirm this, on March 14, we circulated the correspondence
with the competent authorities of those European countries as an official document
of the Security Council and the UN General Assembly (S/2023/193).
It demonstrates the reluctance to involve Russia
in the national investigations of the sabotage (as they said).
On August 25, we once again officially circulated
a letter in the Security Council and the General Assembly (S/2023/627)
detailing the timeline and our assessments of the current situation.
We can see how the Western bloc, lacking any serious grounds to accuse Russia,
is working to create the appearance of its own non-involvement in
the destruction of critical energy infrastructure.
It makes public different versions in the form of leaks, planted stories,
and unnamed sources in order to more or less create the appearance
that they are doing something.
It is difficult to predict where these efforts will go.
One thing is clear: the national investigations of Germany, Denmark,
and Sweden are non-transparent and getting less credible.
We will continue to draw the global community’s attention to
this act of terrorism (I don’t know what else to call it).
I think, and insist that it is necessary to carry out an unbiased and thorough investigation.
This was an outrageous attack.
An exclusively peaceful project that ensures energy security,
whose participants were different countries, was blown up.
The explosion was carried out, as described in international legal documents
among other things, like a typical terrorist attack.
Moreover, the environment was harmed.
Among other things, various parties suffered colossal financial losses,
countries and private operators alike.
We cannot pretend that nothing happened, and even if it did happen,
that it doesn’t really matter.
Question: On August 28, 2023, the Azerbaijani authorities
detained three Armenian nationals at the Lachin Corridor checkpoint.
Those were young football players who were on their way
from Artsakh to Armenia with the mediation of Russian peacekeepers.
The peacekeepers did not interfere, even though the trip was organised
with mediation of the Russian peacekeeping forces.
I would like to ask what can be done to return these and other Armenians
detained in the Lachin Corridor, and how such incidents can be prevented?
Maria Zakharova: I would like to remind you that the current situation
in the Lachin Corridor is the result of Armenia’s recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh
as part of Azerbaijan.
It was stated following the summits with the participation
of the leaders of these two countries under the auspices of the European Union
in October 2022 and May 2023.
It was clearly articulated in the Foreign Ministry’s Statement of July 15, 2023,
regarding the developments in Nagorno-Karabakh.
We believe it is inappropriate, wrong and unjustified to lay the responsibility
for what happened on the Russian peacekeeping contingent.
We believe that its job is – I reiterate, in the new conditions
formed as a result of Yerevan and Armenian authorities’ recognition of Nagorno-Karabakh
as part of Azerbaijan – to provide every assistance possible in protecting
the rights and safety of the Karabakh Armenians,
including in the context of direct dialogue between Baku and Stepanakert.
Question: My question has to do with the direct dialogue.
The Armenian media, citing officials from the Republic of Artsakh,
say that Russia has suggested holding a meeting with Azerbaijani officials in Azerbaijan.
Considering the recent incidents, is there a guarantee that the Azerbaijani authorities
will not detain the Artsakh officials and renege on all their commitments?
Maria Zakharova: It is necessary to fulfil one’s commitments.
Then it will serve as a guarantee.
A very simple answer.
If there is an agreement, and, even more so, if it was signed at the highest level,
it is necessary to implement it and not try to interpret it, make up new concepts
and involve third parties (not even third parties, but fifth and tenth parties),
and play the glass bead game.
If there are agreements, they must be fulfilled.
This is a guarantee.
As soon as one party becomes unscrupulous regarding
the implementation of agreements, there will be other things
to worry about other than guarantees.
Question: Armenian society does not really understand
what agreements were violated by the Armenian or Azerbaijani authorities.
Maria Zakharova: Did I use the word “violate?”
Question: Or failed to fulfil.
Maria Zakharova: Did they fulfil them?
What I am saying is that it is necessary to fulfil agreements,
and this will serve as a guarantee.
You asked what guarantees there can be.
I am telling you: the guarantee stems from fulfilling agreements.
A minute ago, I spoke about a radical, 180-degree change in
the Armenian leadership’s position on a substantive issue.
Not a 360-degree change.
And you are asking me what agreements were not fulfilled?
The position on the key issue for Yerevan has changed radically.
This is Yerevan’s issue, a matter of their internal decision-making process.
There are signed agreements.
If they are not cancelled and have been repeatedly reaffirmed,
their fulfilment is the guarantee you asked about.
Question: Yesterday there were reports from Artsakh
that Russian peacekeepers were letting Azerbaijanis pass through,
and they were putting up their tents on the Agdam-Stepanakert road.
The question is, why did the Russian peacekeepers let them pass?
What needs to be done to unblock the Lachin Corridor?
Why does the Armenian side (not to mention Artsakh authorities)...
Maria Zakharova: Why Russian peacekeepers let them in
is the Russian peacekeepers’ responsibility.
If you want me to find this out, I can do so.
What needs to be done to unblock the passage –
I just commented on this in detail, answering your first question.
Question: The nationwide voting day is approaching.
What is the situation with the opportunities for Russian citizens to vote abroad?
Maria Zakharova: I would like to point out that Russian diplomatic missions and
consular offices set up polling stations only for federal-level voting.
This September, Russians will be voting in regional elections; in this case,
Russian laws do not require that every citizen of the Russian Federation who is abroad
at the time of the election be given an opportunity to vote in person or remotely.
Any additional questions on this matter can be addressed to
the Central Election Commission.
Question: Will economic cooperation within BRICS include member states
opening branches of their banks in Russia and vice versa?
Maria Zakharova: The BRICS countries place an emphasis
on expanding financial cooperation, including interbank cooperation.
They continue interaction at various levels to develop
effective payment instruments independent of the West
and a secure platform for multilateral cross-border transactions.
They are also studying the possibilities of using
digital currencies and other innovative financial technologies.
The Johannesburg Declaration-2 adopted following the summit (August 22-24, 2023)
stipulates the members’ intent to strengthen the correspondent banking networks
and ensure the possibility of financial settlements in national currencies.
The partners maintain dialogue on this matter,
including through the ministries of finance and central banks of the BRICS countries.
At the same time, it should be noted that opening bank branches
in foreign countries is primarily a commercial decision
usually made in compliance with national laws and on a bilateral basis.
Question: Adviser to the head of the Ukrainian president's office Mikhail Podolyak
said that partner countries had given Kiev the goahead for striking Crimea.
He said Ukraine’s Western allies had given the country permission to
“destroy everything Russian on the occupied territory.”
Do such steps on the part of the Western coalition mean that the Western countries
are ready to escalate the conflict to the point of a direct confrontation with Russia?
Maria Zakharova: That the Western countries are ready to escalate
the conflict with Russia is clear from their actions; this fact does not need to be proved
by evidence from some sub-advisor to Zelensky, or another low man on the totem pole.
We have talked about these actions.
They are sending in weapons – now in a nasty form, including depleted uranium shells,
cluster munitions and other heavy and lethal weapons – with no other purpose
than to kill as many people as possible.
This clearly indicates their interest in escalating the conflict.
Political and material support, indoctrination, and intelligence that helps the Kiev regime
to strike at our country's civilian infrastructure: all the above patently exposes the plans
the collective West has had all along, back when they established this Kiev regime
replacing Ukraine’s legal and legitimate government – to turn that country into a bridgehead.
Hence the endless NATO exercises in the Black Sea waters and in Ukraine.
They held manoeuvres there as early as in 2014, always designating Russia as a potential enemy.
Now we are seeing the implementation of their plans.
Only those plans were derailed.
It should have been different; it should have ended in a blitzkrieg.
They created the right political conditions in Ukraine by planting illegitimate political figures
and pumping weapons into the country for years.
They worked to bring Ukraine to NATO standards and imposed economic sanctions,
which apparently were to do the trick.
They maintained the endless flow of money, weapons, finances, everything,
and now also human organs (I am referring to illegal transplantology).
Their efforts were to yield very different results.
However, due to the resistance that Russia is putting up,
they are going deeper and deeper into an impasse.
Hence the nervous reactions, and open escalation.
We should not focus on the statements coming from Bankovaya Street.
They only show that the Kiev regime is truly in a deadlock and is going to any lengths,
even blackmailing and aggressively demanding more and more from its own creators.
They want them to be more active in defending the Kiev regime,
knowing full well that they are in a deadlock.
This is the only new part, while everything else is old and obvious,
leading to destabilisation and chaos, which is the hallmark of the collective West.
Question: Head of Republika Srpska Milorad Dodik suggested
that BiH apply for BRICS membership because of the delays in joining the EU.
How does Moscow feel about the possible accession of Republika Srpska to BRICS?
Maria Zakharova: Let us first go over the facts.
Bosnia and Herzegovina has not approached us about cooperation with BRICS,
and therefore there have been no official contacts or negotiations on this account.
If a request is received, it will certainly be considered.
This describes the current situation.
Republika Srpska is making an active and constructive contribution to
the balanced multi-faceted foreign policy of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
one that meets the interests of all the constituent groups in the country
and is in line with constitutional principles.
We consider this a natural and integral element of
the Dayton architecture of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
It is particularly important in the context where
the fundamental principle of inter-ethnic consensus on foreign policy,
which has no alternative, has been increasingly violated in Sarajevo
under pressure from Western forces.