Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, January 13, 2022

On that day in 1703, the first issue of the newspaper Vedomosti, established by Peter the Great, came off the press, launching the development of a highly skilled professional journalistic community in our country. Today, Russia has tens of thousands of media outlets.

I would like to congratulate all media employees on their professional holiday. We appreciate your decisive contribution to an objective presentation of events. We are grateful for your efforts to give the general public a clear view on our country’s position on a broad range of current international issues. Despite the rapid development of the media and the appearance of new technologies and opportunities, the principle of overriding importance is the journalists’ professional contribution to presenting an objective view of events. By and large, you are a beacon in a sea of misinformation and fake news. Diligence, hard work, decency, dedication to profession and talent have always been and will remain the key components of a truly professional journalist.

For our part, we will continue working to ensure respect for the rights of Russian media outlets and journalists abroad, helping them to do their professional duty and promptly providing information about international developments.

I would like to wish the journalists who are taking part in this event, media and other related professionals all the very best in their creative work, inspiration, attention, feedback from their audiences, and, considering the current situation, health.

220th anniversary of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs

The history of our department goes back to 1549 and the establishment of the Ambassadorial Prikaz (Office), which Peter the Great transformed in 1720 into the Collegium of Foreign Affairs to better deal with the increasing number of complicated diplomatic missions. Another landmark in the history of our diplomatic service happened on September 8 (September 20 New Style), 1802, when Emperor Alexander I issued a manifesto about the eight ministries formed during the reform of the upper tier of state governance. One of them was our ministry, which has been known since then as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The event marked the rise of a modern foreign policy agency designed to meet Russia’s new role on the international stage.

Our diplomatic service appeared centuries ago, but in 2022 it will mark its 200th anniversary in the format of ministry of foreign affairs.

The Ministry is a living organism. New departments are established, and new embassies and consulates general open around the world. We work on improving our communication with the public, first of all, Russian citizens and our compatriots living abroad. We are developing digital diplomacy. Late last year we announced the appearance of the Ministry’s mobile app for smartphones and tablets. It is part of our current activities. We would like to invite you to subscribe to our accounts so as to keep in touch with events and have access to feedback.

We plan to hold a series of commemoration events this year on the occasion of this memorable date. We will notify you about them in due time.

Some time ago, during an expanded meeting of the Foreign Ministry Collegium, President Vladimir Putin instructed us to keep our partners – that is, the West – in a state of tension . It is a kind of magic that we are seeing the same numbers come up again and again: in the Foreign Ministry’s anniversary, the year 2022, and 220 volt electricity. Some of our Western partners will have to get used to the new rules.

Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming talks with Croatia’s Minister of Foreign and European Affairs Gordan Grlic Radman

On January 17, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will hold talks in Moscow with Minister of Foreign and European Affairs of the Republic of Croatia Gordan Grlic Radman, who is due to pay a working visit to Russia on January 16-19.

The two ministers are expected to discuss bilateral cooperation on political, trade, economic, cultural and humanitarian and other matters and to exchange opinions on topical subjects on the regional and global agenda. The parties will focus on the situation in the West Balkan region and efforts to maintain peace and stability in Europe.

Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming talks with Federal Republic of Germany Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock

On January 18, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will hold talks with Foreign Minister of the Federal Republic of Germany Annalena Baerbock, who will pay a working visit to Moscow.

This will be the first in-person meeting between the two ministers following Annalena Baerbock’s appointment as chief of the German foreign policy service.

During the meeting, there are plans to discuss the status of Russian-German relations and their prospects, the schedule of political contacts, practical aspects of trade, economic, cultural and humanitarian and historical-memorial cooperation, as well as contacts between the two countries’ parliaments, regions and public organisations. They will also discuss expanding interaction in renewable and hydrogen energy sources, climate and environmental protection.

The ministers will conduct an in-depth exchange of opinions on the most topical international matters, primarily the Russian proposals on comprehensive security guarantees in Europe.

Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming meeting with ambassadors of CIS member states

On January 19, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will hold his annual meeting in Moscow with ambassadors from CIS countries. Chairman of the CIS Executive Committee and CIS Executive Secretary Sergey Lebedev will also attend the meeting.

During the event, there are plans to sum up the results of joint efforts within the CIS in 2021, when the CIS marked its 30th anniversary, and to discuss key long-term cooperation prospects. The participants will also exchange opinions on topical matters on the international and regional agenda.

CSTO Collective Peacekeeping Forces involved in stabilising Kazakhstan

The first days of 2022 were largely marked by joint efforts under the auspices of the CSTO to assist in restoring stability in friendly Kazakhstan.

We have regularly commented on this topic and published detailed materials on this subject. We have also received many questions for this briefing.

I would like to point out that today Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov gave an interview to Channel One's Bolshaya Igra (Great Game) talk show, where he also covered this topic.

A coordinated and externally supported hybrid attack on Kazakhstan led to tragic consequences. The attack involved armed terrorist gangs, apparently trained in terrorist camps abroad and clearly experienced in military operations in various hot spots.

Essentially, Kazakhstan faced an aggression of international terrorism, which threatened to undermine the constitutional order, destroy government institutions and seize power in the country.

After President of Kazakhstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev appealed to the CSTO Collective Security Council, that body adopted a unanimous decision to provide military assistance to the fraternal country invoking the Collective Security Treaty. The UN Security Council, as well as the secretaries-general of the OSCE and the SCO were notified of this decision.

The CSTO Collective Peacekeeping Forces were immediately dispatched to Kazakhstan; the force included units from all allied countries. Thanks to the lightning-fast deployment and the CSTO peacekeepers’ actions, primarily to protect and defend critical infrastructure, Kazakhstan’s law enforcement agencies were able to use their forces and resources to restore law and order and eliminate threats to the country's security.

It is important to underscore that Kazakhstan’s leaders praised the CSTO peacekeeping operation as highly effective and useful.

Taking into account the results of the extraordinary CSTO summit held on January 10, Russia and its allies will continue systematic efforts to build up a reliable system of collective security and strengthen the organisation’s peacekeeping potential.

Anticipating your numerous questions about the completion of this operation, I would ask you to contact our colleagues at the Russian Ministry of Defence.

Assistance in repatriating Russian citizens from Kazakhstan

The developments in Kazakhstan called for urgent action, including from the Russian Foreign Ministry, the Russian Embassy in Nur-Sultan and the Consulate General in Almaty, to help organise Russian Defence Ministry’s military transport aviation flights to take home the citizens of Russia and other CSTO states, as well as nationals of other countries. The effort involved Kazakhstani students of Russian universities, and foreign citizens. Assistance has been provided in the repatriation of six citizens of Hungary, five Austrian citizens, four Belgians and two Greeks. Overall, thanks to the coordinated efforts, more than 2,200 people have been brought from Kazakhstan to Russia. That included two groups of Russian schoolchildren: on January 6, a sports group of 22 children returned to Yekaterinburg via Bishkek, and on January 9, a Defence Ministry aircraft brought Chelyabinsk athletes (14 people) to Yekaterinburg.

The telephone hotline of the Ministry’s Crisis Management Centre department worked around the clock and has processed over 2,700 appeals in a short period of time.

Our duty officers keep in touch with Russian citizens and advised them to stay vigilant and calm, avoid crowded places, and follow updates of the Russian Foreign Ministry and local consular offices. The same recommendations are given on social media.

Commercial flights are now being resumed from the main airports in Kazakhstan, including Almaty.

We continue to receive letters from Russian citizens as well as notes from our foreign partners expressing gratitude for our help in a difficult situation.

I will emphasise one more time, it was a joint operation to facilitate the return of Russian citizens from Kazakhstan in an emergency, carried out by the Russian Ministry of Defence with the Foreign Ministry’s assistance.

Ukraine update

The developments in this country remain a matter of concern for us. Despite the New Year holidays, tension persists in southeastern Ukraine with the number of firing incidents once again on the rise, bringing unrelenting suffering to civilians in Donbass.

The OSCE Special Monitoring Mission reported 128 civilian casualties between July 2020 and late December 2021, with most of them, 93, on DPR and LPR-controlled territories, as well as 215 damaged civilian buildings and infrastructure. Once again, most of them – 119 – are located in certain areas of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions.

Untouched by this state of affairs, the United States and other NATO countries have been carrying on with their military expansion into Ukrainian territory by providing military assistance to Kiev and encouraging its aggressive militaristic rhetoric. This year, they intend to hold several joint military exercises at a much broader scale than last year.

It has been reported, including in the media, that despite declarations by the United States on its intention to contribute to bringing about a peaceful settlement to the conflict, in late December 2021 Washington approved the allocation of an additional $200 million to Kiev to supply ammunition, electronic warfare equipment and lethal weapons to Ukraine. In addition to this, a group of Republicans introduced the Guaranteeing Ukrainian Autonomy by Reinforcing its Defence Act, which provides for the allocation of another $450 million to Kiev, including $100 million for buying air and missile defence systems and combat ships. There are also plans to supply a wider range of weapons, step up military personnel training and modernise the Ukrainian armed forces. Yesterday, the US Senate published a draft bill imposing new sanctions against our country.

These are very curious developments. The American lawmakers keep drafting one bill after another and coming up with various initiatives. On Ukraine, they emphasise that this is about reinforcing or guaranteeing its independence. At the same time, they draft bills on Russia, but there is nothing dealing with Russia’s independence in them. Why has the United States opted for this selective approach by recognising one country’s right to independence and sovereignty, and not others’? Does the United States believe that our country is not sovereign and independent? If so, this is some kind of new approach that runs counter to the statement by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken just a few days ago in an interview with several US networks, when he said that the United States upholds and guards the fundamental principles of international law. This is all very interesting. What about recognising and respecting Russia’s sovereignty and independence? This is a question for our American partners. We view this as a continuation of Washington’s destructive policy to prop up the Kiev regime.

Instead of trying to understand what caused the civil war that has been going on for almost eight years now, and instead of providing meaningful assistance or at least trying to facilitate the resolution of Ukraine’s internal conflict, the European Union is acting from a position that is becoming increasingly destructive and targeted against Russia. On January 4-6, 2022, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borell travelled to Ukraine and even visited the country’s east. However, he did not come to Donetsk or Lugansk. It seems that he is not interested in learning the truth about the lives of the people suffering from the punitive operation of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. It is astonishing that this is what he has done. He has been talking so much about these developments, issued calls, but when he had the opportunity to see all this on the ground with his own eyes, he did not use it. This does happen. The High Representative had enough nerve only to call Russia a “party to the conflict” and repeat a series of Russophobic clichés, as if Josep Borrell had two personas: one who talks, and the other who writes. One of them does the talking, while other people do the writing for him. Judging by the style and language, as well as the expressions used in these texts, they were not written by a single person. This is obvious.

Feeling the Western support, Kiev persists in sabotaging the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures and evades direct dialogue with Donetsk and Lugansk. What an interesting logic: insisting on compliance, making this a matter of principle, and imposing it on others. The Kiev regime keeps saying that Ukraine’s future cannot be determined without Ukraine. But how come the Kiev regime thinks that the future of Donetsk and Lugansk can be determined without Donetsk and Lugansk? This stance is illogical and self-defeating. There is no doubt that the Kiev regime is persisting in its efforts to cast Russia as a party to the conflict in order to justify its own inaction. Unfortunately, our Western partners, including Germany and France who take part in the Normandy format meetings, encourage Kiev in these actions. Why are they doing this, and what comes out of this? I would refer these questions to them.

Against this backdrop, President Vladimir Zelensky’s stated readiness to hold a Normandy Four summit seems like a populist position. We have said several times already that in order for this to happen Kiev must do its homework, and also correct its mistakes by implementing the recommendations from the December 2019 meeting in Paris, by withdrawing draft laws that violate the Minsk agreements or make it impossible to fulfil them, and then it must return to direct dialogue with Donetsk and Lugansk. Maybe they should simply launch a hashtag in Ukraine to the effect that decisions on the future of Donetsk and Lugansk cannot be taken without Donetsk and Lugansk? What a wonderful slogan this would be for Ukraine’s foreign ministry. Take it. You are welcome.

Meanwhile the human rights situation is rapidly deteriorating in Ukraine. The Ukrainian authorities are adopting more and more legislative initiatives that run counter to the objectives of achieving a settlement. On January 1, 2022, the National Resistance Law came into force in Ukraine, increasing the probability of weapons getting into the hands of radical nationalists operating with little or no control by the authorities. I think that you can guess what this could lead to: further destabilisation of the situation, more atrocities and total chaos.

The forceful Ukrainisation continues in the country. On January 16, a new norm from the outrageous law On the Functioning of the Ukrainian Language as a State Language is scheduled to come into effect. According to this novella, printed media in Ukraine must be published in the Ukrainian language. Ukrainian journalists who swore their complete allegiance to the regime over the past years have already decried this situation. They are saying that this is not only an attack against freedom of speech, but against free speech serving the Kiev regime. Judging by these laws, it is now Ukrainian propaganda itself that is about to suffer from this legislation. This would be funny if it were not so sad, since this is reminiscent of real repression.

The way neo-Nazi movements are evolving in Ukraine is assuming an increasingly terrifying dimension. This is quite logical, since punitive measures and neo-Nazi movements are links in a single chain. On January 1, 2022, Ukrainian neo-Nazis held a torch procession in Kiev. The German and Israeli foreign ministries condemned this event.

Once again, we call on the West and international organisations to stop ignoring destructive processes in Ukraine and take the necessary steps to pressure Kiev into complying with its commitments regarding the rule of law and human rights, as well as put Ukraine on the path to fulfilling the Minsk agreements.

As for the OSCE, I do not think that I need to say this again. After what happened in Kazakhstan and the way the OSCE shamefully ignored these developments, we are asking ourselves: does this organisation have a secretariat and what about its senior officials? Are they all taking their New Year holidays, or back in Vienna? Where are you, OSCE Secretariat staff? What is going on with you? Have you been following the news and what has been going on in Kazakhstan, as well as in other countries, in Ukraine? What do you think about human rights, protecting the freedom of expression or ensuring that journalists are safe there? These are topics for a meaningful and unpleasant conversation with the OSCE leadership.

Afghanistan update

The beginning of 2022 in Afghanistan was marked by a number of natural calamities. At least 11 people died and over 20 were injured following heavy rains, snowstorms and mudslides in the provinces of Helmand, Nimruz, Farah, Nangarhar, Badakhshan, Jowzjan, Takhar, and Kandahar. Dozens of people were rescued from under high snow by the new government’s emergency services. In this connection, we express our support for the people of Afghanistan.

We took notice of the contacts between Acting Foreign Minister of Afghanistan Amir Khan Muttaqi with certain Afghan opposition politicians during his visit to Tehran on January 8-10. Although, judging by the available information, these contacts have led to no concrete results, we think this is a step in the right direction, which, hopefully, will facilitate the process of national reconciliation and the creation of an ethnically and politically balanced government in Afghanistan.

Developments in the Republic of Sudan

We continue to follow closely the developments in that country. We believe it is important to prevent further escalation of tensions and call on the Sudanese people to be guided by the supreme national interests, to display a responsible approach and refrain from steps that could aggravate the current internal political crisis.

We hope that Sudan will soon form a viable new government, which will have to take energetic efforts to deal with the vital tasks of the transitional period, primarily in the socioeconomic sphere. We reaffirm that any outside interference in the internal affairs of that country is unacceptable.

For our part, we continue to render assistance to Sudan, with which Russia is traditionally linked by the bonds of friendship. Let me remind you that Russia’s Emergencies Ministry is preparing to deliver there a shipment of wheat as humanitarian assistance.

Kosovo declaring a UN Mission employee persona non grata

The situation involving Andrey Antonov remains still unresolved. Let me remind you that the self-styled “ministry of foreign affairs” of Kosovo declared him persona non grata on December 31, 2021.

This extremist escapade by Pristina is a continuation of the Kosovo authorities’ provocative policy aimed at purging those UN Mission members who have an objective perspective on the situation on the ground. In this way, they are striking not only at a concrete specialist from Russia but also at the prestige of the United Nations as a whole. Actually, the case in point is that the local bodies, which, I emphasise, lack an international legal status, are trying to impose their decisions on the UN Mission in Kosovo, something that runs counter to the letter and spirit of UN Security Council Resolution 1244. The United Nations and its Secretariat must pay an increased attention to this fact.

We are working with the UN Secretariat in New York and the UNMIK in Belgrade to make sure Pristina’s high-handed behaviour receives a due response.

Remarks by the Czech Republic’s Foreign Minister on Russian-Czech relations

We took notice of and received numerous questions in connection with comments on bilateral relations by the Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic. I am referring to the new Foreign Minister, Jan Lipavsky, who declared (in a Czech TV broadcast on January 9) that he intends to look for ways of “unfreezing” the Russian-Czech dialogue and that there is a need to build “substantive and normal relations” with our country.

At the same time, we think it necessary to dot the i’s and cross the t’s. Russia has never sought to break off relations with the Czech Republic. Neither were we behind the provocations that resulted in bilateral relations actually being reduced to zero. Let me remind you that the adding of the Czech Republic, in May 2021, to the list of states performing unfriendly actions towards Russia and its citizens was a response to the provocative actions by the Czech Republic. This was a forced measure because Prague’s brazen and unfounded accusations against Russia, which it, moreover, was disseminating at international venues, as well as the wholesale expulsion of Russian embassy employees and their families, an expulsion undertaken without any grounds, could not be left without a reaction. And Prague was well aware of this.

We agree that we must take our relations out of the present impasse. This is absolutely true, and we are ready to do so. As for devising a positive agenda, we will see how the Czech side will put into practice the new Foreign Minister’s statement. The ball is in Prague’s court.

Anniversary of the Barents Euro-Arctic Council

On January 11, 2022, we marked the 29th anniversary of the Barents Euro-Arctic Council (BEAC), which was established in Kirkenes, Norway, in 1993. Its members are Russia, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Finland, Sweden and the EU. Since its establishment, the Council has become a successful platform of cooperation in Northern Europe with a unifying agenda. The organisation has proved to be immune to any changes on the political stage, working sustainably to strengthen the atmosphere of trust, stability and neighbourliness in the region.

Its unique feature is a two-tier structure. It is working to promote cooperation not only among the governments of the member states but also at the level of administrative territorial entities within the framework of the Barents Regional Council (BRC). This helps it to identify important projects and to find the best way to combine the priorities of states with the requirements of individual regions. The current chair of the BRC is the Nenets Autonomous Area, which we regard as a major stage of preparations for the upcoming period of Russian chairmanship of BEAC in 2023-2025.

80th anniversary of the Declaration on Punishment for War Crimes

On January 13, 2022, we will mark 80 years of the Declaration on Punishment for War Crimes. The Declaration was signed during the Inter-Allied Conference in London by representatives of nine occupied countries: Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Free France, Greece, Holland, Luxembourg, Norway, Poland and Yugoslavia. The conference was attended by the Foreign Secretary of Britain and the ambassadors of the Soviet Union (Alexander Bogomolov), the United States and China to the allied governments in London.

Citing the norms of international law, including the Convention signed at The Hague in 1907 regarding the laws and customs of land warfare, the Declaration proclaimed that one of its aims was the punishment, through the channel of organised justice, of those guilty of or responsible for war crimes.

The conference participants noted their resolve “to see to it in a spirit of international solidarity that those guilty or responsible, whatever their nationality, are sought out, handed over to justice and judged,” and that “the sentences pronounced are carried out.”

The main provisions of that declaration were consonant with the Soviet stand. The speech delivered by [Foreign Minister] Vyacheslav Molotov on June 22, 1941, regarding the German invasion mentioned the idea of responsibility of the Third Reich’s leaders for the aggression. In the notes Molotov wrote on November 25, 1941, January 6, 1942 and April 27, 1942, the People’s Commissariat (Ministry) of Foreign Affairs of the USSR informed the international community about the heinous crimes committed against prisoners of war and civilians, which was proof of Nazi Germany’s consistent policy of mass extermination of the bulk of population in the occupied Soviet territory.

Acting at the request of states signatories of the Declaration, the Soviet Government issued a statement on October 14, 1942, on its readiness to support practical measures on the part of the Allies in bringing any of the Nazi leaders to justice “before the courts of the special international tribunal.”

This issue was discussed in detail by the foreign ministers of the Soviet Union, Britain and the United States during the Moscow Conference (October 19-30, 1943). Following it, the parties coordinated the Declaration on Atrocities, which stipulated the punishment of the main Nazi criminals by the Allies’ joint decision. The declaration was signed by Joseph Stalin, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill.

The subsequent decisions on the punishment of war criminals, taken by the Allies at the Moscow, Tehran and Yalta conferences, constituted the framework of the Nuremberg Trials as one of the most important political and legal consequences of defeating Nazi Germany.

The anniversary of launching the Red Army’s Vistula-Oder strategic offensive operation

On January 12, 1945, Soviet forces launched the Vistula-Oder operation in order to defeat the Wehrmacht’s Army Group A, completely liberate Poland and create favourable conditions for the decisive blow to Berlin.

The offensive involved elements of the 1st Byelorussian Front, commanded by Marshal of the Soviet Union Georgy Zhukov, and the 1st Ukrainian Front, commanded by Marshal of the Soviet Union Ivan Konev. In all, the Soviet high command deployed over two million officers and soldiers, supported by 34,000 artillery systems and mortars, 7,000 tanks and self-propelled guns and about 5,000 aircraft.

Soviet forces faced over 600,000 enemy officers and soldiers, about 5,000 artillery systems and mortars, 1,220 tanks and self-propelled guns, supported by 630 warplanes. The German high command ordered the construction of seven lines of defence, across 300 to 500 kilometres between the Vistula and Oder rivers.

Although the Soviet high command planned to launch the offensive on January 20, 1945, the deadline was changed to January 12, following a request for help from the Allies who faced a determined German counteroffensive in the Ardennes sector. The main attacks were conducted from the north and south of the capital of Poland, with the aim of surrounding the enemy’s Warsaw formation.

On January 17, soldiers of the 1st Polish Army of Wojsko Polskie, under the operational command of the 1st Byelorussian Front and supported by Red Army units, engaged the enemy in the streets of Warsaw. The city was liberated after intense fighting. The Nazis wanted to destroy Warsaw completely. Soviet sappers managed to defuse over 5,000 anti-tank mines, more than 17,000 anti-personnel mines, 46 high-explosive land mines, 232 booby-traps and about 14,000 artillery shells and bombs.

To stop the Red Army’s advance, the Nazi high command was forced to redeploy to the East part of the German forces from the Western Front and from the German heartland. However, the Nazis failed in their attempts to restore the ruptured front, with Soviet forces reaching the Oder River in early February and stopping 60 to 70 km from Berlin.

During the operation, Soviet troops advanced by up to 500 km, liberated a considerable part of Poland and found themselves in direct proximity to the German capital. They also accomplished an important military-political task by assisting British and US forces, lambasted by the Wehrmacht in the Ardennes and Alsace sectors.

Soviet forces involved in the Vistula-Oder operation advanced rapidly, the Soviet high command skillfully manoeuvred large formations in order to bypass, envelop, encircle and defeat isolated enemy formations. During the operation, the Red Army defeated 35 German divisions, with 25 divisions losing 50 to 75 percent of their personnel. The Soviets took more than 147,000 prisoners of war. The Red Army lost over 190,000 officers and soldiers, including about 45,000 killed and missing in action. All Soviet KIAs are buried in Poland.

In all, 1,192 compounds of the 1st Byelorussian Front were awarded orders for heroism and military professionalism, and 481 units received titles in honour of the cities liberated by them. Moreover, 690,000 Soviet officers and soldiers received medals For the Liberation of Warsaw. A monument to Soviet-Polish combat brotherhood was built in Praga, a Warsaw suburb, to commemorate the victory. It symbolised the combat friendship of the fraternal armies.

Unfortunately, Warsaw stopped marking January 17, the day when the Red Army and the 1st Polish Army of Wojsko Polskie liberated the Polish capital from the Nazi scourge, long ago. In November 2011, the monument was dismantled in line with Poland’s decision. This ignominious act cynically mocks the memory of those who perished while liberating Poland.

At the same time, year after year, more and more attention is being paid to the date when World War II began. Warsaw is doing its best to deliberately distort the causes that led to the war. Poland hushes up real historical facts, including information about systemic Soviet diplomatic efforts to set up a joint anti-Nazi coalition in the late 1930s, as well as the role of the Soviet Union and its people in defeating the ultimate evil. By the way, the then Polish authorities actively resisted the above-mentioned Soviet diplomatic efforts.

We would like to recall that 477,000 Red Army officers and soldiers gave their lives for the liberation of Poland and its people.

The current Polish establishment is expressing its “gratitude” in a rather peculiar manner. They have unleashed a real war against monuments honouring these heroes, as well as a war on history, common sense and conscience, for that matter. Contrary to its international obligations, Poland continues to dismantle and desecrate the Soviet military-memorial legacy.

Attempts to erase the immortal feat of hundreds of thousands of Soviet and Polish officers and soldiers are nothing more than the highest degree of historical cynicism. At the same time, we are noting the selfless efforts of Polish citizens who preserve the memory of those times, and who truly revere the heroes of that war and those who liberated Warsaw and the whole of Poland. We are grateful to them.

The anniversary of launching the Red Army’s East Prussian strategic offensive operation

On a par with the Vistula-Oder operation, on January 13, 1945, the Red Army launched an all-out offensive in East Prussia and northern Poland to breach enemy defences in the Konigsberg and Marienburg sectors. The operation involved elements of the Red Army’s 3rd Byelorussian Front, commanded by Army General Ivan Chernyakhovsky, and the 2nd Byelorussian Front, commanded by Marshal of the Soviet Union Konstantin Rokossovsky. The offensive aimed to isolate the Wehrmacht’s East Prussian formation, to dismember and defeat it.

The operation involved over 1.67 million officers and soldiers, 25,000 artillery systems and mortars, 3,859 tanks and self-propelled guns, as well as 3,097 aircraft.

The enemy created a system of powerful defensive fortifications measuring 150 to 200 km wide and defended by 780,000 officers and soldiers, 8,000 artillery systems and mortars, 700 tanks and 775 aircraft.

In early April 1945, the Red Army was able to seize Konigsberg after intense fighting and to kill about 42,000 enemy officers and soldiers.

The main section of the Samland Peninsula was occupied by mid-April. On April 25, Soviet forces seized the port and fortress of Pillau.

As a result of the East Prussian strategic offensive operation, Soviet troops seized East Prussia, liberated some northern Polish areas, and inflicted heavy damage on the enemy. The Soviets took over 220,000 prisoners of war. The loss of numerous military units and an important military-economic region hastened Germany’s downfall.

Red Army units suffered grievously in East Prussia. Over 126,000 officers and soldiers were reported killed or missing in action, and over 450,000 more were injured. On February 18, 1945, Two-Time Hero of the Soviet Union Army General Ivan Chernyakhovsky was mortally wounded on the outskirts of German town Mehlsack, now Pieniezno in Poland.

More than 1,000 Soviet military units that distinguished themselves in battle were awarded orders for bravery, heroism and high military professionalism during the East Prussian operation, and 217 of them received honorary titles. To commemorate the victory, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR instituted the Medal for the Capture of Konigsberg.

Following World War II, most of East Prussia was ceded to Poland under a decision of the Potsdam Conference of the Big Three Allied Leaders. Thirty-three percent of the territory and the city of Konigsberg were ceded to the Soviet Union, becoming later the Kaliningrad Region.

Pyotr Barulin’s passing

We have just talked about losses of the past but we are losing people today as well. On January 2, Pyotr Barulin passed away at the age of 77. He was Director of the Diplomatic Service History Centre of the Russian Foreign Ministry. He had a PhD in law, was a distinguished diplomatic courier and chaired the Council of Former Workers of the Department of Diplomatic Courier Service.

Mr Barulin dedicated more than 55 years to the work at the Foreign Ministry, starting his career as a diplomatic courier and rising to the head of the Department of Diplomatic Courier Service. After retirement, he was involved in educational work and mentorship. He founded the Educational and Training Museum to maintain the traditions of the Diplomatic Courier Service. He was Director of the Foreign Ministry’s Diplomatic Service History Centre.

It was during his time that the Foreign Ministry’s museum became a platform to present outstanding narratives from the history of our ministry since the royal era. Many of those who visited the Diplomatic Service History Centre (and the centre has received numerous visitors, some in-person and others taking the virtual tours that we and Mr Barulin organised for our media outlets) have great memories of his fascinating tours of the museum exhibition.

Pyotr Barulin has received government and departmental awards for his honest hard work.

Pyotr Barulin stood out (in the best meaning of these words) with his commitment and dedication to his work. His approach to solving any problem was thorough and humane, which earned him great love and respect. He was a kind, honest and fair person.

He will remain this person in our hearts. This loss is truly irreplaceable. We will do everything to make sure that there is a place for him (now virtually) in the museum that he created and cherished. We will also release several posts on our social media.

Supply of Russian textbooks to South Ossetia

In late December, Russia handed over a substantial batch of new Russian textbooks (85,000 books worth over 33.5 million roubles) as a gift to South Ossetia. They are currently being distributed by the South Ossetian Ministry of Education and Science among the libraries of secondary schools in the republic.

This large-scale project was fulfilled by the Russky Mir Foundation with the support of the Prosveshcheniye Publishing House. The books were delivered from Russia to South Ossetia in two shipments on December 26 and 29. Russia previously supplied textbooks to South Ossetia in 2017. The textbooks comply with the republic’s national education standards.

This event was quite significant for South Ossetia and was widely covered by both local and Russian media. Russky Mir’s initiative complemented the consistent efforts of the Federal Agency for the CIS Affairs, Compatriots Living Abroad, and International Humanitarian Cooperation (Rossotrudnichestvo) to replenish South Ossetia’s study funds with textbooks, fiction and literature for teachers, under the Education Development state programme.

Presentation of the logo for the 125th anniversary of Russia‒Thailand diplomatic relations

Since Russia and Thailand are marking 125 years of establishing diplomatic relations (July 3, 1897), presentation of an official logo for the upcoming anniversary took place in Bangkok in late December. The logo was selected from 106 designs submitted by a joint contest commission of the Russian Embassy and the Foreign Ministry of Thailand. Thai citizen Wachira Losong won the contest. His design reflected the long-term friendship and affinity between the two nations.

Thailand is Russia’s oldest partner in Southeast Asia. Our bilateral ties are based on close cooperation in politics and security; we are actively developing cooperation in trade, investment and humanitarian affairs. Prime Minister of Thailand Prayut Chan-o-cha spoke at the 6th Eastern Economic Forum via videoconference (September 2021). Also in September, on the sidelines of the 76th session of the UN General Assembly in New York, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov met with Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Thailand Don Pramudwinai.

The trusted dialogue between the foreign ministries of our countries is based on the similarity of our views on the key issues of the global and regional agendas.

We will mark this year’s anniversary by arranging mutual delegation exchanges, and joint cultural and sport events.

Answers to media questions:

Question: How does Russia assess Tajik President Emomali Rahmon’s proposals to create a security belt around Afghanistan?

Maria Zakharova: The situation in Afghanistan continues to be in the focus of attention of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO). What is happening there concerns all countries in the region and all members of the CSTO.

Let me remind you that in August 2021, following the withdrawal of US troops and their allies from Afghanistan, Russia called for an emergency session of the Collective Security Council to discuss priority measures that needed to be taken to guarantee security in the CSTO area of responsibility.

One of the CSTO’s most important tasks is to prevent the infiltration of radical Islamism into the territory of the member states, as well as to cut short recruitment by extremist groups, including on social media and the internet.

The CSTO countries will strengthen interaction between the competent authorities and special services to identify and neutralise local extremist and terrorist groups, which are no less dangerous than their foreign emissaries.

Effective measures will also be taken in the information space to counter subversive propaganda by terrorist organisations.

At the proposal of our Tajik partners, mechanisms are now being worked out to ensure reliable protection of the CSTO’s southern borders, including joint military maneuvers and assistance to Tajikistan in protecting the mountainous hard-to-reach sections of the Tajik-Afghan border.

I also have to remind you that the CSTO's priorities continue to include suppression of the shadow arms market in Afghanistan after it was abandoned by the coalition troops, as well as drug production and the increase in drug trafficking. All these factors continue to fuel the crime situation in the region. These items are high on the agenda not only of the CSTO, but also of other international organisations. Many countries are taking relevant action in unilateral and bilateral formats.

The situation in Afghanistan requires consolidated efforts by all CSTO member states. However, this does not negate the need for global efforts under the auspices of the UN, its Security Council and all regional and global organisations that are now dealing with Afghanistan. There is a common understanding of the further strategy in the CSTO. Its specialised bodies as well as the CSTO foreign ministers, defence ministers and secretaries of security councils continue to engage in an ongoing dialogue on all these topics on the instructions of the heads of state.

Question: Can you comment on the statements by former Acting Minister of Defence of the Netherlands Henk Kamp on the alleged security threats to the Kingdom coming from Russia? In particular, he mentioned cyber threats and Russia's actions to militarise outer space.

Maria Zakharova: He made this statement in his capacity as Minister of Defence, a week before leaving his post. He spoke about cyber threats allegedly emanating from Russia and accused us of doing some wrong things in space.

We commented on this earlier. When heads of national defence make such statements, the first reason that comes to mind – which is later confirmed – is that they want more funding for their ministries and services and affiliated businesses. This helps them justify the costs of confronting the artificially-created mythical Russian threat.

In this regard, I would like to remind the Dutch Ministry of Defence of the first Russian-Dutch interdepartmental consultations on ICT security issues held on September 16-17, 2021 in The Hague, which also involved representatives of the Defence Ministry of the Netherlands. We believe those consultations have paved the way for our further bilateral mutually beneficial contacts (a press release about the event was published on the news page of the Russian Foreign Ministry website on September 17, 2021). Moscow and The Hague continue to interact at specialised international platforms, primarily at the UN.

As for Henk Kamp's statements on Russia’s space activity, we consider this anti-Russia attack as a part of the propaganda campaign NATO is carrying out to discredit Russian space activity and our initiatives to prevent an arms race in outer space. This is another attempt to present the situation in a distorted way in order to divert the international community’s attention from the real threats in space.

Russia's actions in space are not confrontational and have never been since the USSR’s Yury Gagarin made the first manned flight into space. Until now, we have always emphasised that outer space is a sphere of peaceful cooperation and interaction, the peaceful exploration of outer space. Our actions do not create any obstacles or difficulties for the operation of foreign spacecraft and are carried out in strict accordance with international law, including the 1967 Outer Space Treaty. We give priority to the non-discriminatory use and exploration of outer space exclusively for peaceful purposes. This is confirmed by the initiatives promoted by Russia with the broad support of like-minded states to prevent an arms race in outer space, including with regard to the development of a legally binding instrument that would ban the deployment of any type of weapons in space, the use of force or the threat of force in space, from space or against space.

I would like to once again suggest that our Dutch partners stop inventing an imaginary enemy and discontinue their Cold War-style aggressive rhetoric, but concentrate on jointly addressing real problems in the field of international information security, as they are growing more relevant and severe by the day.

Question: There are various accusations against Russia in the wake of the events in Kazakhstan. The Turkic world, for one, has also expressed displeasure. There is a view that Moscow has dislodged Kazakhstan from its position in the Turkic world. Its actions were also denounced by President Erdogan’s chief adviser Ihsan Sener, who accused Russia of “occupying” Kazakhstan. How does Moscow assess these remarks? How will they affect further progress in relations between these countries?

Maria Zakharova: People and organisations using these expressions as testifying to Kazakhstan’s transformation from one state to another, who at the same time are not citizens, constituents, or legal entities of Kazakhstan, do not respect its sovereignty. They do not realise that Kazakhstan is a sovereign and independent state. It can be given assistance and helped and relations can be developed with it. But the expressions like “pull out,” “move in,” etc., as coming from people who are not citizens of a country (specifically Kazakhstan), are far removed from reality and the understanding of the basics of international law.

I saw Mr Sener’s remarks. As I understand, they do not contain direct accusations that Russia has “occupied” Kazakhstan. Nevertheless, he describes Kazakhstan as a country that has first “freed itself from the Soviet oppression,” while now certain forces are allegedly threatening to put it under a “senseless yoke” again. This is a highly artistic and unrealistic narrative and style.

The Turkish official’s interpretation of Kazakhstan’s Soviet and modern history is raising eyebrows, to put it mildly. And it is not because we misunderstand something. These things should not come from people who represent a state. First, we think that statements of this sort, particularly in a highly sensitive period for Kazakhstan, can in no way help to improve the atmosphere or stabilise Kazakhstan. Second, we believe that making disrespectful remarks about Kazakhstan’s Soviet past is contrary to the spirit of Russian-Turkish friendship. It is also disrespectful towards the Kazakhstani partners, who, as we know, cherish our common historical legacy. No state is completely insured against tragedies. Turkey faced them quite recently. Its true friends supported it and offered it a helping hand in its moment of weakness. They did not use its problems and tragedies for purposes other than friendly aid. Why not remember this? Why not apply what has been demonstrated and done with regard to Turkey (friendly assistance) to Kazakhstan? The tragic, difficult and extraordinary situation in Kazakhstan required an intense effort. And it certainly should not be regarded as a chance to do harm, “fish in troubled waters,” or plan some wrongdoing.

We hope that from now on Turkish officials will refrain from speaking aloud any thoughts of this kind.

Question: Recently, the Taliban and their opponent, the National Resistance Front of Afghanistan, have held talks in Iran. Is Russia planning to organise a meeting between the Taliban and the resistance at its own venue?

Maria Zakharova: Currently, no such meeting is being planned in Russia. We would be ready to provide a venue for talks between Kabul representatives and the opposition forces, if such a request comes in from Afghanistan.

Question: Is Russia considering various scenarios for relations with the United States and NATO countries, including [in case of] Ukraine’s accession to NATO? Are retaliatory measures being elaborated? If so, what could such measures be?

Maria Zakharova: This is a hypothetical bias. We will not proceed from what and how may develop if something happens. We proceed from the position of principle that NATO’s expansion is unacceptable for us. In substantiating this position, we were referring to relevant promises, historical experience, and reality. We declared that talks should be held. We have put our position across to the United States and NATO countries via diplomatic channels. We have published it and held talks and consultations in Geneva and Brussels. We are involved in a businesslike negotiating process. We are doing all we can to use the art of diplomacy and its potential to resolve these critical global problems.

We proceed from the assumption that our positions of principle are well known. We will be taking cues from the realities as the situation develops.

Question: You commented on Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky’s statement on their readiness to take part in a summit of the Normandy Four. Has the process been put on hold or can we speak about the parties’ efforts to find a solution?

Maria Zakharova: We can say that the Kiev regime has frozen the implementation of the Minsk agreements. It is essential that they unfreeze them. There are no other realistic options for the settlement of the intra-Ukrainian crisis. This is the main issue. It is sheer populism to make statements about holding some formats, expanding, restricting, making up new and developing the existing negotiation processes while evading the obligations that were undertaken in writing and verbally. These are just attempts to draw attention away from the steps that Ukraine must take. Kiev has everything it needs for moving towards the settlement: the Minsk agreements and the reaffirmed position of the international community about the lack of alternatives. The only thing is missing: the political will, spirit or whatever it is that prevents Kiev from doing it.

Question: In addition to the Federal Agency for the Commonwealth of Independent States, Compatriots Living Abroad, and International Humanitarian Cooperation (Rossotrudnichestvo), what Russian organisations and funds work in Kazakhstan? How many schools are there that offer curricula in Russian or both in Russian and Kazakh languages? Have any Russian citizens or Russian organisations suffered from the riots?

Maria Zakharova: The situation with the education system in the Republic of Kazakhstan is as follows: there are 1,160 schools that teach in Russian (16.6 percent of the total number of schools in the republic) and 2,047 schools that use a mix of Kazakh and Russian (29.4 percent). The Russian language is taught as a separate subject in all Kazakhstani schools.

Kazakhstan has two offices of the Russky Mir Foundation, in Almaty and Aktobe. Two centres of legal assistance operate in Pavlodar and Semipalatinsk with the financial support from the Foundation for the Support and Protection of Rights of Compatriots Abroad.

As for Russians who may have suffered from the tragic events in Kazakhstan, according to the information provided by the Russian diplomatic missions, Russian nationals were not harmed in the riots (as of 3 pm January 13, 2022).

Question: Will the results of the talks with the United States and NATO be discussed within the CSTO, SCO or in the bilateral format?

Maria Zakharova: As part of allied relations between the CSTO member states there is a many-year tradition of keeping each other informed about the main foreign political contacts. Naturally, it can also relate to the negotiations on security guarantees that started in January.

In Russian diplomacy, there is a practice of informing our close partners about the key aspects of all foreign political activities. Many countries also use this mechanism. During a telephone conversation with his Chinese colleague Wang Yi, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov already shared his first impressions from the Russian-American talks on security guarantees that started on January 10 in Geneva.

These issues are always on the agenda of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. In the Dushanbe Declaration on the 20th Anniversary of the SCO adopted in September 2021, the member states reaffirmed their consolidated approach to building equal, shared, indivisible, comprehensive and sustainable security. The SCO member states take an active stance on the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the prevention of an arms race, including the non-deployment of weapons in outer space.

The issues of global security and strategic stability directly impact the national interests of each state and the world in general. For the SCO members, including the leading global and regional players and nuclear powers, these issues have special importance.

Question: What is Russia’s stance on the military provocation staged by the Azerbaijani Armed Forces on January 11, 2022, in the eastern section of the Armenian‒Azerbaijani border and violation of the ceasefire using artillery and drones? The provocation killed three Armenian soldiers and wounded two.

Maria Zakharova: There have been many questions regarding this matter. In addition to your question, there are more global questions such as what can be done to prevent more situations like this?

We are seriously concerned about the latest escalation on the Armenian‒Azerbaijani border. We urge parties to refrain from using force and to resolve any disagreements through political and diplomatic means alone.

A long-term solution to ensure stability and security in the region would be launching the delimitation process on the Armenian‒Azerbaijani border as soon as possible, with further demarcation, as stipulated by the joint statement made by the leaders of Russia, Armenia and Azerbaijan in Sochi on November 26, 2021. It is important to make steps towards establishing a competent bilateral commission. Russia is ready to offer comprehensive consultations to this commission.

Question: On January 10, Azerbaijan staged several provocations in Artsakh by opening fire at the Artsakh communities of Karmir Shuka, Taghavard and Nakhichevanik. The civilian population was affected by the shelling. This and previous incidents appear to be Azerbaijan’s attempt at casting a shadow over Russia’s peacekeeping mission in Artsakh. What is your stance on this activity that directly threatens civilians?

Maria Zakharova: Even if somebody wants to cast a shadow over Russian peacekeepers, they will not succeed. Our peacekeeping troops are well-coordinated, competent and operate in the interests of settling the crisis.

We recommend that you address this question to representatives of the Russian Peacekeeping forces in Nagorno-Karabakh. Our peacekeepers maintain constant contact with both sides and, if necessary, investigate incidents.

Question: Special representatives of Armenia and Turkey plan to meet in Moscow on January 14, with mediation support from Russia. What results do you expect?

Maria Zakharova: It is a dialogue between two countries. Russia is not included in this format. We have repeatedly expressed our principled support for settling these bilateral relations, building a dialogue and normalising contacts. We have provided practical assistance.

Question: The events in Kazakhstan have proved that Russia’s initiative to hold the Moscow format talks on Afghanistan was not in vain: many claim that foreign militants played a role in the riots. I assume that if it had not been for Russian diplomacy and the CSTO protection, the situation in the republic would be much worse right now. Now that the threat has become so obvious, does Russia plan to invite other countries to the CSTO to protect their populations?

Maria Zakharova: The course of action here is slightly different. The CSTO does not usually invite new members to join. Instead, countries wishing to join organisations, unions or associations express their willingness and interest. It would be incorrect to phrase this question the way you did. This matter is also related to the signing of a corresponding treaty that was proposed to the member states in 1992 and has been in effect for 30 years now.

Thank you for seeing the bigger picture and understanding the fact that the countries in the region are collectively responsible for its security. It is not often that somebody takes this view of the matter. Usually everybody cares about their own security while ignoring the security of others. This tendency is particularly common among authors of certain publications that make an attempt at analysis. Today, I have already commented on the statements with certain fantasies about a reincarnation of the Soviet Union under the pretext of helping Kazakhstan. We have heard horrible comparisons regarding allegations that Russia is starting an operation similar to the events in Afghanistan and participation in an Afghanistan 2 campaign. All that resembles some sort of bad propaganda coming from a narrow-minded analysis. You are absolutely right when you say that it is important to see the full picture, to understand, analyse and use verified sources and check facts. It is important to understand that the situation is truly complicated. The United States and NATO left Afghanistan to sink or swim. Pakistan and the Pakistani people know it better than anybody else as they accept refugees in huge numbers while resisting extremism, fighting terrorism and so on. Other countries, members of the CSTO and the SCO, Afghanistan’s neighbours and countries in the region, know it as well. Because to prevent a negative scenario, while understanding the global challenge we are facing (extremism, terrorism and threats to stability), once again, one must be able to see the global picture.

Question: On December 30, 2021, the Russian Embassy in Islamabad updated information on its website to announce the resumption of the permits for Pakistani citizens travelling to Russia on a business visa, which were suspended by Directive No. 635-r adopted by the Russian Government on March 16, 2020. However, applications for such invitations are not accepted in Moscow, allegedly because the authorities have no information about the lifting of the suspension. What is the current situation in this regard for Pakistani citizens? Can Pakistani citizens travel to Russia on business or tourist visas? If not, why?

Maria Zakharova: Directive No. 635-r of March 16, 2020, which was issued by the Russian Government to ensure state security, protect public health and prevent the proliferation of Covid-19, restricted entry to Russia for foreign citizens until further notice.

The document suspended the issuance of invitations and all categories of visas to foreign citizens and stateless persons at the diplomatic offices and consulates of the Russian Federation.

The list of persons to which these restrictions do not apply is provided in Paragraph 2 of the Directive. Russian diplomatic offices and consulates abroad issue visas given the decision of the Emergency Response Centre for preventing the import and spread of the novel coronavirus in Russia.

In addition, Supplement 1 to the Directive includes a list of states whose citizens can enter Russia through airline checkpoints. Pakistan is not on that list. These measures have been taken exclusively for epidemiological reasons.

The Foreign Ministry has no additional information on the lifting of restrictions regarding Pakistani citizens wishing to enter Russia, including for business purposes. We are monitoring the decisions taken by the Emergency Response Centre, which provide information for the Russian and foreign public.

Question: What is the Foreign Ministry’s position on the appointment of Askar Umarov as the Minister of Information and Social Development of Kazakhstan in the context of the Russian peacekeeping mission?

Maria Zakharova: Why do you think that only journalists are concerned about this situation? It is the general public that is concerned about it most of all.

First of all, the appointment of members of government is the competence and internal affair of any sovereign and independent state.

Second, the authorities of Kazakhstan are following a strict policy aimed at a comprehensive strengthening of friendly relations with Russia and at ensuring the rights of all citizens of Kazakhstan without exception.

There is also a third point. We regard nationalist statements as unacceptable, including statements that incite xenophobia and hate, which have provoked a strong reaction of the public in Russia and Kazakhstan.

These are the three points of my answer.

Question: In other words, you regard the statements he makes as unacceptable?

Maria Zakharova: The statements, which we have read, and which media outlets have cited, are definitely unacceptable. Any nationalist statements that incite feelings of hatred and animosity among nations, nationalities and ethnic groups are unacceptable. This is our position of principle. We uphold this position both inside the country and at the level of our foreign policy. We don’t adjust it to fit any specific individuals. It is a matter of principle.

Maybe he was misquoted, but I have not seen any refutation. The statements he has reportedly made are unacceptable. How else can we interpret them?

Question: Do you expect Kazakhstan to indicate its position regarding these statements?

Maria Zakharova: I believe I have put forth our position very clearly.

Question: What is Russia’s position on the statement of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the Organisation of Turkic States in support of the authorities and people of Kazakhstan?

Maria Zakharova: We have noticed that the statement expressed solidarity with the current Kazakhstan authorities and their counter-terrorist operations, as well as support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the republic.

We can only add that Russia and its CSTO allies have provided considerable assistance to Kazakhstan’s efforts to stabilise the situation, which allowed the authorities to redeploy substantial military and law enforcement forces in order to repel the terrorists who attacked the civilian and military facilities.

Question: What do you think of the US delegation’s attitude at the talks with Russia? Do you think they are ready to consider Russia's proposal in its entirety, and not as they would study a “menu in a restaurant,” as Sergey Ryabkov put it?

Maria Zakharova: I would like to highlight a few points. First, all our negotiators – I am referring to two tracks, Geneva-Brussels with Sergey Ryabkov and Alexander Grushko – have made very detailed comments on the situation following the talks. You should refer to their comments with regard to the attitude, the impressions, the emotions, as well as the facts?

Secondly, as I have already said, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has given a 45-minute interview to Channel One's Bolshaya Igra (Great Game) talk show. He spoke for about 40 minutes about the security guarantees talks, spelling out Russia’s approach to the entire scope of the issues under discussion, our expectations concerning further steps, as well as security and strategic stability questions.

The third point concerns expecting answers from our American colleagues to the questions raised by Russia. We are now waiting for specifics rather than considering their emotional state and attitude. We are waiting for an answer. I advise you to focus on today's interview with Sergey Lavrov.

Question: Iran has hosted a meeting between representatives of the Taliban and a delegation from the Afghan National Resistance Front, which did not produce any results. What is Russia's position?

Maria Zakharova: I have already commented on this. I can only repeat that acting foreign minister of Afghanistan met with several opposition politicians in Tehran on January 8-10; apparently, it did not lead to anything. However, even though we have no information about the achievement of any specific agreements or outcomes, we consider this to be a step in the right direction, as I have said before.

Question: Please accept our heartfelt gratitude to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for their help in bringing our compatriots home from Kazakhstan.

Maria Zakharova: I was shocked and confused by the number of publications that said we were not doing anything. I would fully accept any criticism that suggested this work could be improved. This is definitely true. Improvements are needed not only in regard to the development of provisions, concepts, and other documents – this much goes without saying. But officials’ readiness to respond to such things also needs to be enhanced. There is only one small detail: no matter how much you read papers, how many instructions and regulations you write, how much you do in practice, you never know exactly how an emergency situation will unfold. There is always a huge number of scenarios. Indeed, there was no connectivity. It was a problem because of the hostilities underway in Almaty, and not only there. It all unfolded so rapidly, with the picture changing every day, every hour. Wintertime was also an aggravating factor, etc. But it is strange not to see the obvious – that the Russian government and its agencies are involved – and not to see a concrete result when more than 2,200 people have been flown home and children, families, and women received help and assistance. We have not left our foreign partners behind either. We have figured the best formats of assistance and shown understanding. As of now, I can confirm that the joint effort by the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign Ministry have been quite effective, to put it mildly. Thank you for noticing this and ignoring fake reports.

Question: The global situation is extremely volatile and we cannot rule out the worst-case scenarios. If that happens, will our compatriots living in the countries that were dragged into a conflict with Russia be interned? Are there any agreements between states on the status and attitude towards foreign citizens during armed conflicts?

Given that everything is picking up speed and an international crisis can take only a moment to break out, does the Foreign Ministry have plans to quickly evacuate our compatriots from possible hot spots? That is, is the Foreign Ministry preparing for possible crises in advance?

Maria Zakharova: The way you put it, “in the context of the current situation,” “with some possible developments,” one could think that we are building these plans or can build them now. In fact, this work has been embedded in the activity, the function and efforts of our embassies for a long time. I cannot even say whether there was a time when our embassies did not consider or develop plans of action in emergencies. Over the entire history of embassies, for hundreds of years of their work – the work of our diplomats, embassies and consulates – emergences have taken place. This area of activity is being improved and benefits from new technological advances and experience. This is a part of the life and work of any embassy, not only ours.

I will not speak now of the agreements between foreign states. This is a global issue, and an interesting one. I will definitely find out more about the history of this. But I cannot answer now, it is a global issue.

As for the actions of embassies related to responding to a crisis situation and interaction with Russian nationals, in accordance with the Presidential Executive Order No 1198 of August 21, 2012, crisis response centres were created and are now operating at the diplomatic missions and consulates of the Russian Foreign Ministry. They are engaged in constant monitoring and analysing the situation in their host countries, including the assessment of risks and security threats to Russian nationals, as well as the development of response measures in crisis and emergency situations and prompt assistance to Russian citizens, including their repatriation.

The Foreign Ministry’s Crisis Management Centre was created at that time as well. For several years, it was in the process of forming its conceptual, technological and personnel systems. It has been operating for quite a while now and has accumulated some experience and developed its own tools. The main mechanism for communication with compatriots abroad is the consular registration of Russian nationals who live in foreign countries permanently and those who are staying there temporarily. It is a useful and convenient tool.

Many of our citizens complain that they cannot reach the embassy or a consulate, and I want to remind you that you could notify the consulate when you arrive in the country so that they can find you in order to keep you informed in an emergency. This is an optional thing, but it can help if there is an emergency situation.

The Assistant Abroad mobile app is an important channel of informing Russian nationals. It is available for almost all platforms and provides up-to-date information about various risks in foreign countries.

This work is multifaceted and you know a global example: the 2020 campaign to bring Russian nationals home. There is a special section devoted to it on the ministry’s website and even a book has been published, No One Left Behind. It is available in the electronic format and features stories about the crisis situations, emergency response centres, measures, communications with Russian citizens and helping them return home.

Question: Considering the developments in Kazakhstan, I have a question about Uzbekistan, which is in the centre of events in Central Asia. Given the possible pressure on Asia, does Russia plan to speed up Uzbekistan’s joining the EAEU and strengthen its positions in Central Asia?

Maria Zakharova: I just answered a question about whether Russia will invite countries to join the CSTO and said that usually countries themselves express an interest in the formats, organisations and unions. The member states provide assistance, make decisions, approve, support and sometimes set requirements. But the initiative belongs to the country that potentially can become a member of an association.

So first of all, this is a question for Uzbekistan. If you give me time, I will find out what I can add to this answer.

***

We have a common holiday, the Old New Year. Our country has the most amazing history; we have seen everything, ups and downs, achievements, fails and victories. And we have such a thing as the Old New Year. It is difficult to explain this concept to foreigners, but our people and our country’s friends who know its history, all of them love this holiday.

I wish everyone a happy Old New Year. We will issue a short holiday video on the Foreign Ministry’s social media accounts. I will not reveal what it will be about, so you can see for yourselves. I wish you good health, wellbeing and all the best. Happy Old New Year!

Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, January 13, 2022

补充资料

图片

主要外交政策新闻

Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, January 13, 2022

补充资料

图片

主要外交政策新闻

Поделиться ссылкой на выделенное