Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, May 3, 2024
- Ten years since May 2, 2014, tragedy in Odessa
- Ukraine crisis update
- Freedom of speech the British way
- The issue of whether arms supplies by the United States and the West to Ukraine are legal
- Changes in procedure for accessing Ukrainian consular services
- Ukraine’s war on the Russian language
- Moldova update
- Evolution of EU defence policy
- Danish media’s speculations regarding possible restrictions on the passage of Russian ships through the Baltic Straits
- Vrbetice case investigation concluded in the Czech Republic
- New round of politicisation of international scientific cooperation
- World Press Freedom Day
- 80th anniversary of the liberation of Sevastopol
- Events to commemorate the 79th anniversary of the Great Victory
- Display of trophy Western countries’ military equipment in Victory Park
- Russia’s position on UNGA resolution on Srebrenica
- Detention of St Peterburg-Tiraspol bus on the Lithuanian border
- Armenia’s membership of the CSTO
- Georgia’s foreign agent law and EU integration
- Provocations against Russian offices abroad
- Student protests in the United States
- Washington’s interference in Russia-China relations
- Settlement of the Ukraine crisis
- The futility of anti-Russia sanctions
- Statements by Armenian politicians
- The “battle of Africa”
- Western initiatives promoting Zelensky’s “peace formula”
- David Cameron’s statements
- US trade war against Russia
- US insinuations concerning chemical weapons
- NGOs’ allegations regarding Russia
- Strange ideas of Estonian authorities
- Russia-Tajikistan relations
Ten years since May 2, 2014, tragedy in Odessa
I would like to focus on specific date. Anyone who considers themselves as being human cannot fail to feel affected by it. On May 2, 2024, it was ten years since the tragic events in Odessa. On that day, guided by proto-fascist ideas, Ukrainian hoodlums wrecked bloody reprisals on those who opposed the Maidan government coup, the politics of the new government in Kiev and the rampant aggressive nationalism. Those who spoke out against all this probably understood where this could lead.
By that time in 2014, those who cast themselves as the Maidan victors started banning the Russian language across the country and restricting Russian speakers in their rights while not shying away from using violence against those who tried to speak out against these policies or stand up for their rights. Ukraine found itself on the brink of a civil war. The Kiev regime sent its regular troops and punitive nationalist battalions to Donbass to “subdue the restive region,” and the first armed clashes with the local civil society activists there had already broken out by that time.
However, people in Odessa still believed in the rule of law in their country and thought that they could assert their rights by stating their categorical refusal to accept that rampant outrage and chaos across the country.
In the spring of 2014, Odessa residents set up a tent encampment near the Trade Unions House on Kulikovo Polye Square where they held rallies with calls for giving Ukraine a federal structure, defending the Russian language and preserving the local historical and cultural heritage.
The regime viewed the freedom-loving and predominantly Russian-speaking Odessa as a thorn in its side and wanted to subdue the people from the city it hated so much, even if it meant drowning in blood resistance of any kind, no matter how legal or peaceful. The nationalists prepared their provocations in advance. Fighters from Western Ukraine were brought to Odessa alongside the would-be Maidan activists and football fans. On May 2, they attacked a peaceful procession in the city centre during a rally for federalisation. Under attack, the demonstrators sought refuge inside the Hose of Trade Unions where they tried barricading themselves from the Nazis in their beastly frenzy. However, this did not save them. The radicals set the building on fire, while finishing off those who tried to flee the flames and jumped through the windows. This resulted in an official death toll of at least 48 people who burnt alive, died after inhaling too much carbon oxide or fell from the windows of the building’s upper floors. Many corpses also had gunshot wounds. There were children among the dead. Dozens of people were injured or hurt. Basically, what happened in Odessa echoed the events in Khatyn, Belarus, in 1943.
Let me remind you that the neo-Nazi hoodlums did not stop there. Just a couple of weeks after the tragedy, they vandalised the tomb of one of the May 2, 2014, fire victims when unidentified criminals burnt wreaths, damaged an Orthodox burial cross and left a note containing offensive statements.
What about the investigation in a country which was designated by the West as the “new young Ukrainian democracy?” International organisations pressured Kiev into launching an investigation on what happened on May 2, 2014, but it turned into a farce. The court returned the indictment to the prosecutor’s office many times due to various shortcomings and inconsistencies. In four instances, the judges recused themselves causing further delays. There were also attempts to turn everything upside down by designating the anti-Maidan activists who suffered at the hands of the nationalists as the actual culprits. These efforts went hand in hand with a blatant attempt by the radicals to interfere with the proceedings by staging riots, disrupting court hearings, attacking lawyers, judges, defendants and their families.
The said international organisations also failed to live up to their mission. The Council of Europe’s Secretary General initiated the constitution of a special mandate for the International Advisory Panel on Ukraine to help investigate violations perpetrated in that country, while the OSCE has had its special monitoring mission in Ukraine for many years and had thousands of employees there, including in Odessa, but neither the Council of Europe or the OSCE saw or did anything.
For all these ten years, this topic remained front and centre for us. This is not just a date or an anniversary for us. This is part of our lives, of who we are. This is about the demonstrators who lost their lives while claiming their right to peaceful existence by legal means. This is also about living without Nazism, fascism, racism or other types of xenophobia. This is who we are, and we are committed to dedicating our lives, among other things, to making sure that those new victims of fascism are not forgotten.
We have said many times that the immediate sponsors and mentors of the Ukrainian authorities in the West, as well as quite a few international media outlets with their would-be freedom and independence encouraged the careless and passive attitude adopted by Ukraine on this matter. We believe that Europe and North America paid very little attention to the May 2014 tragedy in Odessa. This is yet another element in the informational war and efforts to manipulate the media.
But why has the West been so indifferent regarding this tragedy? That is an interesting question. After all, unlike Bucha, we have the names of all those who died in Odessa in 2014. Foreign correspondents and heads of international organisations could have spent all these years talking to the relatives of the victims about the horrible things that happened to their children. Memorial books have already been published on this topic. Was there any response? Have you seen UN Secretary General visiting the House of Trade Unions in Odessa to lay flowers there or talk to local residents or the families of the victims? Has anyone from the Council of Europe − a delegation, let alone the senior officials − or the OSCE done this?
Everyone descended on Bucha after a bloody and provocative incident was staged there in broad daylight, including heads of state and government from NATO countries, heads of international organisations, human rights activists, and the Western media. The West turned a blind eye to the tragedy in Odessa, despite the fact that everyone saw how it unfolded in real time. People could see the victims of these racist hoodlums falling from the windows and hear them screaming as the criminals finished them off. They have been sweeping these events under the carpet for ten years now. But why? I have an answer for you. First, these were the wrong victims. Second, there was evidence demonstrating how this tragedy unfolded. It was not something scripted and performed by the West, but an actual tragedy with real victims.
Zelensky came to power in 2019 promising that Ukraine would strictly abide by the law and respect the principle of unavoidable punishment, but the glimmer of hope he brought quickly faded away, defeating any hope of a fair investigation into what happened in Odessa. Zelensky failed to live up to his promises, just as in many other instances.
As we pay tribute to the victims of the bloody reprisals in Odessa, we have no doubt that sooner or later those who perpetrated and inspired this barbaric crime, which has no statute of limitations, will have to face the punishment they deserve.
We are confident that the day will soon come when Odessa gets rid of the yoke and oppression imposed on it by present-day Banderites and emerges once again as a city of genuine freedom, with people of various ethnic and cultural backgrounds living side by side in peace and accord.
May 9 marks yet another tragic anniversary: on May 9 ten years ago, Ukrainian militants from two punitive battalions – Azov and Dniepr (both banned in Russia) – massacred policemen in Mariupol for refusing to obey the Kiev regime and carry out criminal orders issued by people, who had come to power in an unconstitutional way in violation of all possible laws. The order was to disperse local residents rallying to celebrate an anniversary of Great Victory. The Nazis that outnumbered the policemen attempted to take the city police division by assault, firing at the personnel, who had barricaded themselves inside. Local residents rushed to help them but failed to stop the Bandera supporters that opened fire on the unarmed people. The atrocities continued on May 10 as well. Dozens of people were killed and over one hundred wounded.
We sincerely commiserate with the people of Mariupol and admire their willpower and courage, which the bloody Kiev regime has failed to break. After eight years of neo-Nazi occupation and terror, Mariupol is free again and voted, in September 2022, for returning to Russia, as did other cities and villages in the Donetsk People’s Republic. We are confident that Mariupol is in for progressive development and prosperity in the future.
The Kiev regime persists with its terrorist activities, venting on Russian civilians and civilian infrastructure its anger for military defeats on the battlefield.
On April 25 of this year, Ukrainian terrorists attacked a passenger bus in the village of Kurkovichi, Bryansk Region, with a kamikaze drone, injuring four people, including a child.
On April 25 of this year, they fired a projectile at a block-of-flats in Tokmak, Zaporozhye Region, killing a man and wounding another four people.
On April 27 of this year, AFU militants attacked the village of Voznesenovka, Shebekino District, Belgorod Region, with FPV drones, injuring six people, including a 17-year-old young woman.
On April 26 through 30 of this year, the Ukrainian neo-Nazis launched artillery and drone attacks on five border districts in the Kursk Region, killing three people and wounding another three.
From April 25 to May 1 of this year, the Armed Forces of Ukraine shelled residential areas in Donetsk, Aleksandrovka, Gorlovka, Olginka and Naberezhnoye, killing four people and injuring 15, including a 5-year-old child.
Russian law enforcement agencies have meticulously recorded all crimes committed by the Ukrainian neo-Nazis. Not a single atrocity perpetrated by the Kiev regime will be left unnoticed. Persons involved are being identified and brought to justice.
The Kiev regime and its Western patrons are nurturing plans of new terrorist attacks in Russia ahead of the anniversary of Great Victory. They are hoping for a great media and propaganda effect.
It was with this aim in view that they tried to attack the Moscow Kremlin with drones on May 3, 2023.
The Crimean Bridge is again targeted today, on the eve of the 80th anniversary of Crimea’s liberation [from the Nazi invaders]. Preparations for attacking it are conducted openly, arrogantly and with a direct and shameless support of the collective West. Over the past few days, the Ukrainian forces launched several US-made long-range ATACMS missiles, which had been secretly delivered to Ukraine several months ago, against Crimea. According to the Defence Ministry of Russia, all of them have been shot down. Kiev is waiting for the delivery of F-16 jets after Easter, which, according to British plans, could be used to destroy the Crimean Bridge. We commented on these plans in detail at the April 18 briefing, when we cited the British newspaper The Sun.
We would like to tell Washington, London and Brussels again that any aggressive actions against Crimea would not only fail but would provoke a destructive retaliation strike.
Russian courts continue to deliver verdicts, based on the evidence collected by the Investigative Committee of Russia, holding the Ukrainian neo-Nazis accountable for grave crimes against civilians.
A court has approved a 18-year prison sentence (in absentia) to Yevgeny Bulatsik, commander of the 7th Tactical Aviation Brigade named after Petro Franko, for giving two Su-24M tactical bombers a criminal order to attack Russneft’s oil loading terminal in the Bryansk Region with 500-kg FAB bombs on April 30, 2022, which caused an explosion at that industrial facility and endangered many civilian lives.
Ukrainian serviceman Denis Sprinchak has been sentenced (in absentia) to 14 years in prison for shooting two Mariupol residents, who were driving a car with white ribbons, in April 2022.
Erkele Amiranashvili, a Georgian citizen and a member of the Georgian National Legion, has been sentenced (in absentia) to 14 years in prison for participation in fighting against the armed forces of Russia and the Donetsk People’s Republic between March 2022 and February 2024.
Members of the Azov nationalist battalion Dmitry Vikhor, Stanislav Dutov and Andrey Bogdan have been sentenced to prison sentences ranging between 22 and 27 years for murdering a defenceless Mariupol civilian when fulfilling the Kiev regime’s criminal orders in March−April 2022. Another civilian managed to escape despite a wound he received.
The Investigative Committee of Russia is working hard to call members of Ukraine’s military-political authorities and various “activists” to account for the crimes they have committed against Russia and its citizens. It will forward case materials to the court, requiring the trial (in absentia) of Verkhovna Rada deputies Alexey Goncharenko (for encouraging the murder of Russian officials) and Vladimir Parasyuk (for attacking Russia’s consulate general in Lvov in 2016), commander of a Ukrainian volunteer hospital Gennady Druzdenko (for encouraging violence against Russian prisoners), and actress Adrianna Kurilets-Kmetyuk and TV hosts Yanina Sokolova and Natalya Moseichuk (for encouraging the murder of Russians).
Charges have been brought against former Verkhovna Rada speaker Vladimir Groisman, ex-foreign minister Pavel Klimkin and ex-minister of information policy Yury Stets, then members of the National Security and Defence Council, who supported the decision to launch the “anti-terrorist operation” in Donbass in April 2014 and took part in conducting it. Measures are being taken to find and detain them.
None of the Ukrainian criminals will escape punishment. All of them will be identified and punished with the full force of the law.
Meanwhile, the Kiev regime seems to be working off the pain of its losses on the frontline by fighting its Soviet past and rewriting history. The Bandera followers have redoubled these efforts before the day they especially hate, Victory Day, a story of the fight between good and evil where the Bandera army fought on the side of evil.
This time they have attacked Sidor Kovpak, the legendary commander of the Soviet partisans in Ukraine and twice Hero of the Soviet Union. Cals have been made to eliminate his “personality cult,” remove memorial signs with his name from buildings, rename dozens of streets, and dismantle monuments to that people’s hero of the Great Patriotic War. The Nazis feared him and set a price of 100,000 in gold on his head. In September 2016, neo-Nazis defiled his grave in Kiev by removing the two gold Hero of the Soviet Union stars from it. Today, it is not enough for them. They want to eliminate the memory of Sidor Kovpak and millions of other Soviet soldiers who save the world from the Nazi plague. But these attempts will fail. We will never forget those who gave their lives to protect peace.
The current generation of Ukrainian neo-Nazis, who worship their fascist idols from the Third Reich era, should revisit the public archives containing statements made by Nazi Germany’s officials about Ukraine. For example, on March 5, 1943, Reichskommissar of Ukraine from 1941-1944, Erich Koch, notorious for his brutality, said, “The last German labourer would be a thousand times more valuable in terms of race and biology than the local population.” In other words, for Hitlerites and present day’s Anglo-Saxons alike, Ukrainians are considered expendable.
The Ukraine Defence Contact Group, also known as Ramstein, held its 21st online meeting on April 26, 2024. The meeting coincided with the second anniversary of the group’s establishment. However, there were no festive declarations. Vladimir Zelensky’s regime has achieved no military success to boast about. He has failed to fulfil the expectations placed upon him two years ago. Yet, this seems to be of little concern on Bankovaya Street, where they continue to demand more weapons from their partners, specifically anti-aircraft defence systems, missiles and artillery shells – and they don’t forget to remind their partners of Kiev’s alleged historical mission to defend the democratic world. These appeals have long stopped working with the Westerners. Their resources are far from limitless, and they know better than to deplete their own arsenals. Therefore, no new decisions on supplies were made at the meeting. The participants limited the discussion to summarising the group’s work over the past two years and reporting on the aid currently being provided or planned for Ukraine in the near future. Compared to 2022 and 2023, this aid has shown a negative dynamic and may become depleted soon. The United States and Europe have openly acknowledged this prognosis. Once again, they have abandoned those they have tamed.
Corruption in Ukraine is off the scale to the point that even the US State Department noted this fact in its annual report on human rights violations.
Interestingly, the publication of the report coincided with the arrest of Ukrainian Minister of Agrarian Policy and Food Nikolai Solsky on April 23, 2024. He is suspected of fraud involving state-owned lands valued at over $7 million. However, despite extensive media coverage, high-profile corruption cases in Ukraine rarely make it to court or result in prison sentences. According to Ukrainian media, only 435 people (or 9 percent) of those held accountable for corruption in 2022-2023 ended up behind bars. The rest paid fines and walked away.
The uncontrolled financial and military aid from the West to the Kiev regime is only fuelling its corruptibility, even if it seems that the limit was reached a long time ago. There are numerous examples of this. On April 26, 2024, during a national television marathon, Ukrainian political and economic expert Georgy Birkadze had a slip of the tongue, saying that officials “embezzled” 37 billion hryvnias (about $1 billion) during the construction of fortifications. He quickly corrected himself, claiming that the money had been invested rather than embezzled, but the Freudian slip was telling.
According to the Ukrainian Defence Ministry, over $250 million of budget funds failed internal audits, while one-third of the humanitarian aid provided since the early 2023 did not reach the military units. There is no doubt that the actual figures are significantly higher.
The officials on Bankovaya Street are adept at appropriating the injections from foreign sponsors. Little money escapes their grasp. We can be certain that the new packages of defence assistance from the United States, Great Britain, Germany and other countries will be spent in a similar way.
The above facts once again underscore the importance of the goals of the special military operation, which are to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine, as well as to eliminate threats originating from its territory. These goals will be achieved by any means necessary.
Freedom of speech the British way
Yesterday, Western media once again exhibited their deceitful nature, reflecting tendencies that run counter to freedom and democracy.
On May 2, 2024, former Prime Minister and current Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom David Cameron made a sudden statement in his interview with Reuters that Ukraine has the right to attack Russian territory using British weapons.
The claim caused a major uproar in global media, including in Britain. This is the first time a Western politician has publicly admitted what is an open secret for all countries of the Global Majority: the West is waging a proxy war against Russia through Ukraine, and it’s even not hiding it.
But that statement was such an obvious self-incrimination and admission of wrongdoing that just that two hours after its release, probably due to pressure from Downing Street, Reuters removed the interview and issued the following statement: “A Reuters story saying Britain's Foreign Secretary David Cameron promises aid to Ukraine is withdrawn, pending review of certain details in the story. A revised version of the story will be published in due course.”
This case of outright censorship did not go unnoticed. Even those who wanted to stay silent and sit it out had to speak out against it.
Less than 12 hours later, the agency reinstated the piece back on their website, seemingly unchanged. David Cameron’s quote about attacks on Russian regions is still present, indicating that he did make that statement. The effect was even more profound than expected. Apparently, Reuters was under pressure, too. To be fair, they failed to suppress the information as the publication eventually returned in its original form.
It is important to remember that similar bravura and sincere congratulations have been heard from NATO officials after the terrorist attack on the Crimean Bridge in October 2022. We remember the gloating posts on social media and websites openly glorifying the “brilliant work” of Ukrainian intelligence. The day after the attack, these publications were similarly purged as the collective West attempted to back-pedal and deflect attention from the incident. We have examples to support this.
Chief of MI6 Richard Moore claimed that he was flattered by the allegations that London may be involved in the terrorist attack on the Crimean Bridge. He said he was flattered by the fact that President Vladimir Putin believed that MI6 was behind the attack. The reality, he said, was much simpler. Great Britain made it clear that it would help Ukraine defend itself, and MI6 was doing exactly that.
NATO’s former Supreme Allied Commander Europe General Philip Breedlove advised the Armed Forces of Ukraine treat the Crimean Bridge as a target for attacks in order to weaken Russia. The ex-commander believed that Kiev could deliver a strike on the Crimean Bridge by attacking it via the Kerch Strait with the Harpoon anti-ship missiles that the United States supplied to Ukraine. According to Breedlove, an attack on the Crimean Bridge by Ukraine was fully justified.
Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Reinsalu welcomed the explosion of the Crimean Bridge and congratulated the Ukrainian army on the act: “Estonia certainly welcomes this and congratulates the Ukrainian special operations units, who are expected to be behind this operation. In a positive outcome, traffic was suspended.”
Chief of Ukrainian military intelligence Kirill Budanov admitted: “The bridge is properly secured but everybody is working on this problem.” Ukraine’s Permanent Representative to the UN Sergey Kislitsa hinted that Kiev is planning an attack on the Crimean Bridge by posting an image of “six main types of bridges in 2024” on X, with the “Kerch bridges” caption next to an empty space.
Leftist member of the Polish Sejm Robert Biedron called reports about the incident on the bridge “a balm for the heart.” His colleague from the Law and Justice party Miroslawa Stachowiak Rozecka pointed out that the incident “was not only symbolic but also practical in nature.”
Latvian Foreign Minister Baiba Braze declared that Ukraine had the right to attack Russian facilities and that some Western countries supplying weapons to Ukraine had given Kiev permission to attack Russian targets.
Lithuanian Ambassador to Sweden and former Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius hinted that the strike was coming by posting the following: “If someone hasn’t had a chance to take a photo at the Kerch Bridge, its’ still time,” alongside pictures of the bridge and a missile launch.
I have a question for all this political riff-raff and beau monde. Can you imagine anybody in the Russian Federation, or another part of the world, publishing anything like this about, say, the Channel Tunnel or another civilian infrastructure facility? How would you like it? I guess this is a rhetorical question.
Civilian infrastructure facilities have already been blown up on their territory, namely Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2, and there has been no investigation because all signs point to them. So, not only do they sponsor terrorist activity of the Kiev regime but they also think like terrorists.
The Westerners’ excited congratulations on the terrorist attack on the Crimean Bridge had to be speedily cleaned up. They must have realised that the posts exposed their own terrorist mentality. Doesn’t a direct analogy with David Cameron’s words about attacks on Russian facilities emerge here? Aren’t they in the same vein? It is not news to us that the collective West not only ignores all of the Kiev regime’s crimes but openly encourages these crimes and pushes Ukraine to commit them. David Cameron’s words serve as evidence of that. The problem is, they not only push others to carry out terrorist attacks, but they also consider it normal.
To summarise, I want to say that David Cameron’s words were yet another confirmation that the collective West is indeed waging a proxy war against our country and we are responding to it. We will continue to do so.
One more thing. All similar projects that the collective West has undertaken with respect to other countries, organisations and social groups by supplying them with weapons, money, political support and, most importantly, by pushing them towards terrorism and extremism in the same manner, usually have the same outcome. The terrorists created and nurtured by the collective West eventually turn against the West. That is exactly what will happen this time. And it is already happening. Western weapons are resurfacing in the Western countries, with terrorist attacks being carried out around the world using these weapons. The weapons are emerging in conflict zones as well. No Western citizens are safe from becoming victims of the same weapons and the same ideology as they instilled in the Kiev regime.
The issue of whether arms supplies by the United States and the West to Ukraine are legal
The EU and NATO countries, led by the United States, have been supplying Ukraine with massive amounts of weapons and munitions, all while violating on a system-wide basis their commitments under international law and their political obligations arising from several international agreements they had joined.
In particular, this includes the Arms Trade Treaty, as well as the so-called EU Common Position on arms exports, which sets forth the EU’s approach to this matter as articulated in writing. These instruments stipulate rules governing export controls for military technology and equipment. For example, the Arms Trade Treaty prescribes that exporting state parties act in an objective manner when assessing the risks of using the supplied weapons in violation of international humanitarian law or for committing serious acts of gender-based violence (Article 7). The treaty also does not authorise any transfer of arms if a state party has knowledge that the receiving party intends to use these arms in the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, attacks directed against civilian objects or civilians protected as such (Article 6).
As for the EU’s Common Position, it sets forth an export control framework for military technology and equipment and provides for denying arms export licences whenever there is a clear risk that the export of military technology and equipment might be used for internal repression, or violate international human rights or humanitarian law, gives rise to or escalates armed conflicts within the territory of the receiving states, or can be used for undertaking offensive actions against third countries. EU member states must also rely on their own standards when factoring into their decisions on arms supplies risks dealing with unauthorised re-export practices or arms trafficking (Europol data have demonstrated multiple instances of this kind), as well as the human rights situation in the receiving country and whether it complies with its international obligations in general.
The Western capitals have also committed grave violations of several binding political agreements adopted by the OSCE at the initiative of the West, by the way. This primarily includes the Principles Governing Conventional Arms Transfers (1993), the OSCE Document on Small Arms and Light Weapons (2000), OSCE Principles for Export Controls of Man-Portable Air Defence Systems (2008).
Changes in procedure for accessing Ukrainian consular services
The Kiev regime has recently announced two “diplomatic novelties,” both concerning the procedure for providing consular services to the country’s citizens.
First, on April 23, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine suspended all consular services to Ukrainian men aged 18 to 60. The decision was so shocking that even many people at home in Ukraine condemned it as illegal and unconstitutional.
The motive behind the decision is clear. The change will force men of conscription age come back to Ukraine to renew their expired passports, where the Kiev regime will seize them and send them for slaughter.
As Vladimir Zelensky’s neo-Nazi regime is losing ground, confronted with an acute shortage of manpower, he has tasked the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry with bringing back everyone they can and putting them into the field to plug the holes on the line of contact with fresh cannon fodder.
It is an outrageous story. Ukrainian nationals are now literally storming their overseas mission, desperate to legitimise their stay outside their homeland. Let’s not discuss Ukrainian patriotism now; much has already been said about it, and more will be said in the future.
But let us recall the slogans Vladimir Zelensky had when he came to power with the help of the United States – law, order, democracy, freedom and, most importantly, human rights. None of what the United States, Britain and the collective West promised the people of Ukraine, directly or indirectly, has been fulfilled. Exactly the opposite has been done.
The second innovation is the “digital avatar” presented by Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry. The AI-generated representative will now officially comment on Ukrainian consular information. The digital persona’s name is Victoria Shi. Her last name, Shi, is the Ukrainian abbreviation of “AI” (shtuchniy intelekt).
So, Kiev has not only refused to talk to Ukrainian citizens, whose problems are, if anything, multiplying, including for those abroad, but has also set up an artificially generated buffer between itself and real people. Now this “electric girl” will deal with the problems of Ukrainian nationals currently staying abroad.
Ukrainian consuls are being bombarded with hundreds of thousands of appeals from millions of Ukrainian emigrees. Does this mean that Ukrainian diplomats no longer have to respond to them? These appeals will find neither an answer nor an addressee. The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry and Vladimir Zelensky have assigned a robot to talk to Ukrainians.
Not only is this convenient, but it also exposes another problem. This is a perfect way for the Kiev regime and its Foreign Ministry to dodge responsibility. Refusing to provide consular services to Ukrainian nationals abroad is a violation of the Constitution. There is no legislation that can justify this move. Any attempt by diplomats to explain or rationalise this would also outlaw them. They would be targeted by lawsuits, complains and court orders. This is where Victoria Shi comes in. Now an AI robot will bear full responsibility for the crimes of the Kiev regime in this area. Apparently, such robots will increasingly appear across Ukraine. Vladimir Zelensky is killing living people, destroying the country’s population. So, we will probably see reincarnations or clones of Victoria Shi in agriculture, at factories, schools, hospitals, and in business soon.
There is one more problem caused by this decision. The AI consular representative is modeled after a real person, Rosalie Nombre, a dark-skinned model, singer and social media personality in Ukraine. Obviously, this was done to “launder” the Kiev regime from its well-earned neo-Nazi reputation, including in the West. Look, a woman of colour is representing Ukraine and its diplomacy on its most intense track, the consular services. I’m sure that Western grants were provided for this; just as they had been provided for the promotion of the extremist LGBTQ+ agenda through creating the post of spokesperson of the Territorial Defence Forces of the Ukrainian Armed Forces for the transgender Sarah Ashton-Cirillo. Later, the money ran out, and so did Sarah Ashton-Cirillo.
However, the opposite happened. Nombre is now complaining on social media about racist comments that Ukrainians are writing about her. Indoctrinated and infected with neo-Nazi ideology, Ukrainian-speaking users are actually insulting the influencer, apparently believing that a non-white person cannot and should not represent the Kiev regime. This is all in the style of Vladimir Zelensky and his monstrous deception of Ukrainian citizens, something he and his terrible gang on Bankovaya Street are trying to do with the whole world now.
I am not sure if Nombre’s avatar, Victoria Shi, has started working yet, but the mathematical algorithm designed to answer Ukrainians’ questions has already highlighted what was already clear:
- Racism and xenophobia reign in the territories controlled by the Kiev regime. The people there are literally infected with it.
- The regime on Bankovaya Street could not care less what happens to its own citizens and is only interested in them as potential cannon fodder; they are expendable. No one is going to think about their civil rights and freedoms.
- The situation in Ukraine’s public administration is not just deteriorating with each new day; it is becoming hopeless, caught in a downward spiral.
Ukraine’s war on the Russian language
Ukraine continues with its lifelong project, that is, a war on the Russian language.
Regrettably, discrimination, neo-Nazism and the rewriting of history in modern Ukraine no longer come as a surprise. All these elements have been institutionalised. But Zelensky’s regime is working especially hard to eradicate the Russian language.
According to Ukraine’s State Language Protection Commissioner Taras Kremen, who is aptly known in the country as “Sprechenfuehrer,” thanks to Kiev’s policy of forced Ukrainisation, the number of schoolchildren studying Russian as a subject has diminished by nearly 600 times over the past two years, from 455,000 to 768. Russian has miraculously survived in three schools where it is aught as a subject.
However, even the bloodsuckers on Bankovaya Street cannot eliminate the Russian language despite all the bans. On April 17, 2024, Taras Kremen complained that Russian-Ukrainian bilingualism is practiced on national television channels, when Ukrainian translation, voiceover or subtitles are not provided if guests speak Russian. He added, happily, that “this practice will be prohibited starting July 17, 2024.” They’ll be golden thereafter, of course.
Here is what it means. The provisions of the media law that came into effect on January 1, 2024, situate that the share of Ukrainian used on radio and television must be increased to 90 percent. The required figure is 30 percent for radio and television broadcasters using Ukrainian plus the languages of indigenous peoples or the languages of ethnic minorities that are official EU languages or languages governed by the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. The law also points out that this provision is not applicable to the Russian language. The Council of Europe surely applauded that stipulation.
Another provision of the law that will come into effect on July 17 says that a programme or show is considered presented in the Ukrainian language if the participants’ remarks or statements (excluding hosts and broadcasters) not made in Ukrainian do not constitute more than 10 percent of the overall remark or statement. I wonder what will come of it. Will another Victoria Shi time it with a stopwatch? Or will they stun those who use 11 percent of Russian in their speech on television? Pre-recorded or replay content must be broadcast in Ukrainian or supplied with subtitles. Exceptions are only made for live broadcasts (excluding the journalist’s statements and remarks), performances in the languages of indigenous peoples of Ukraine, set or short phrases, and certain words.
Just think how far the Kiev authorities are ready to go in their frenzy and absurdity! Quotas have been increased for the languages of indigenous peoples and EU languages, which are spoken by small groups of people, whereas the Russian language, which the overwhelming majority of Ukrainians speak in the family, is banned contrary to the Constitution of Ukraine, which seals the authorities’ commitment to develop, use and protect it. And don’t even get me started on Zelensky’s promises! On the other hand, he also promised to restore peace. As a result, there is no peace and no Russian language.
The war on the Russian language is taking truly horrible, ugly and sordid forms. On April 22, 2024, the media reported that a 13-year-old boy was cruelly beaten at school because other children suspected – merely suspected – that he watched a cartoon in the Russian language. I wonder if they know what language Ukrainian soldiers use to speak and make videos? Or they are allowed this because it could be their last statement? Imagine how children have been brainwashed to turn them into such savages?
Language scandals are reported in Ukraine almost every day. People in hotels, hospitals, on municipal transport and in shops do not simply quarrel but pummel each other over language.
This shocking situation is a result of the ideology of neo-Nazism, the eradication of everything that is Russian and the transformation of Ukraine into anti-Russia, which is being nurtured by Kiev with the connivance and money of Western mentors. We pointed out many times that Washington and Brussels, pleased with Kiev for destroying centuries-long ties with Russia, turn a blind eye to the large-scale infringements on human rights in Ukraine. The Kiev regime has admitted this when it informed the Council of Europe that it no longer considers itself obliged to respect certain human rights standards under the Statute of the Council of Europe.
In this context, we would like to remind everyone about the Foreign Ministry’s annual reports on human rights situation in certain countries, including the manifestations of Nazism around the world, as well as reports on Ukraine with the analysis of the human rights situation, which indicates the catastrophic spread of racism and neo-Nazism.
All of the above is evidence of the importance of the denazification of Ukraine as a key goal of the special military operation.
The West is turning that nation into its speechless slave. We continue to follow the developments in Moldova. Its current leaders, who collectively regard themselves as Romanians and not Moldovans, are pursuing a home policy of repression modelled on the policies of Ukraine and the Baltic states and aimed at turning the republic into a powerless appendage to the EU and NATO. Here are a number of recent examples.
The government has slammed down a harsh media censorship. On April 26, the Council for TV and Radio Broadcasting fined two Gagauz TV channels for spreading “misinformation.” The media watchdog was displeased with their reports about there being no democracy in Moldova, the Moldovan authorities’ dependence on Romania, the loss of Moldovan identity, statehood, and traditional values, and much else besides. What was wrong with that? After all, Maia Sandu publicly says as much in her remarks on national policy.
The Moldovan government continues pressurising the political opposition. On April 24, it sued the head of Gagauzia, Evghenia Guţul, on criminal charges. Independent Moldovan experts believe that the true cause of this was her participation in the Moldovan opposition’s congress in Moscow on April 21, resulting in the creation of the Victorie (Victory) electoral bloc.
Under the pretext of “European integration,” the Chisinau regime is working to eliminate the Moldovan identity. On April 26, President of Parliament Igor Grosu declared that the Moldovans should call themselves Romanians and their language – Romanian, if they wanted to become part of the Greater EU Family. Does this mean that there is no access to this “greater family” for inhabitants of Moldova, who identify themselves as Moldovans?
The story I am going to tell is for those who continue to cherish the Moldovan language and their Moldovan identity. You are being invited to a cult, not the EU family, because the principles of this kind are only accepted in a cult that is out to suppress individuals’ identities, will, and self-identification based on the values and traditions of their nation, ancestors and family.
Moldova is creating a legislative framework to rewrite history. On April 30, the government approved amendments to the law on monuments, which would enable it to come up with an initiative to dismantle monuments within the jurisdiction of local authorities, if they “interfere with the public order and good ways.” Opposition politicians and civic activists fear that these amendments could be used to authorise demolition of monuments to Soviet liberator soldiers.
We remember the “good ways” introduced by the German occupation forces. The Germans advertised them in leaflets they scattered and in newspapers they published in occupied territories in order to ingratiate themselves with the local people. These publications said that Germans were good guys while the government of the countries where these people lived, was evil. Read these leaflets once again.
Earlier, we drew your attention to Chisinau’s double standards with regard to mercenary activities. Being a mercenary is a criminal offence under the Criminal Code of Moldova, but the local authorities would close their eyes to Moldovan citizens fighting for pay on the side of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
This double-faced policy received yet another confirmation on April 24, when the commander of Getica, a battle group manned by Moldovan and Romanian mercenaries, published an appeal which said that his men were ready to act from the shadow to restrict Russian influence in Romania and Moldova even if their methods could be regarded as terrorist. There was no response to these threats from the Moldovan government agencies.
This policy both gives rise to indignation among Moldova’s rank-and-file and places the Western patrons of the Chisinau regime in an awkward position, to put it mildly. Even the US Department of State had to admit in its 2023 human rights report that Moldova was facing a number of problems, including a selective and politically motivated use of laws, widespread corruption at government institutions, torture and other types of cruel and humiliating treatment. Even Amnesty International, an organisation notorious for its biased attitude towards Russia, could not overlook in its 2023 report the fact that Moldova violated the rights to freedom of association, freedom of expression, and the sanctity of private life.
According to independent Moldovan political scientists, the incompetence of the Sandu team is turning it into a white elephant in the eyes of its Western sponsors, who have put so much money into it. This assertion could be challenged. As is common knowledge, the collective West will not hesitate to get rid of its former favourites who have outlived their usefulness.
Evolution of EU defence policy
The European Union continues to pursue a self-destructive path of forced militarisation. Very little remains of the peaceful integration project. It is now adopting long-term military strategies and plans aimed at continuing reckless confrontational escapades of its current leadership to militarise the EU economy, all of which are accompanied by relevant statements from heads of EU countries.
On March 5th, the EU presented its first European defence industry strategy, which seeks to promote joint military procurement by member states under the control of the European Commission and to collaborate with NATO in this area. They have also developed a European defence industry programme to implement this strategy, which is expected to attract 1.5 billion euros from the EU budget between 2025 and 2027. According to the plans of European bureaucrats, the common budget should also boost defence cooperation with Ukraine and provide support for its industrial and technological sectors.
The exaggerated narrative of “the threat from the East” is an attempt to conceal the West's hybrid war, which aims to maintain global dominance, hinder the development of the Global Majority, strategically defeat Russia, and prevent the establishment of a multipolar world. This strategy is being forcefully implemented under pressure from the United States and its defence corporations, to the detriment of socio-economic development, well-being and growth rate, as well as security and stability in Eurasia.
Current EU leaders are acting as conduits for the US dictate, depriving the EU of its political independence and international authority, and turning it into NATO's European political pillar, utterly dependent on Washington's instructions. It is safe to say with full confidence that such a policy does not serve the genuine interests of Europe and its people.
It is absolutely clear that the multibillion financial and military investments made by the EU, taken from the pockets of ordinary Europeans and spent to support the Kiev regime, will never be returned to them. All Western arms supplied to Ukraine will be destroyed, and the funds and loans granted will be looted by corrupt Ukrainian politicians who are actively purchasing luxury properties in Europe and the United States, where they believe they can hide from the inevitable trials for their numerous crimes.
We have noted the campaign underway in the Danish media regarding the movement of Russian oil tankers through the Baltic Straits. The pretext for the restrictions is that there is a threat of an environmental disaster in the Baltic Sea due to Russian ships deemed unfit for navigation or lacking insurance documentation.
This is absurd. I would like to address Copenhagen and say that it was your allies who caused massive environmental damage to the Baltic region by damaging the nearby Nord Stream pipelines. Yet, you remained silent and did nothing. But now you are bothered by Russian oil tankers because of alleged ecological concerns in the Baltic basin?
We base our stance on the procedures for the passage of ships through the straits regulated by the Copenhagen Treaty of 1857 and the provisions of the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. According to these documents, all ships, including Russian ones, have the right to undisturbed and safe passage through the Baltic Straits.
Rewriting international law without authorisation is unacceptable. Any attempts to restrict the navigation rights of Russian ships will be seen as an unfriendly action and will be met with strong retaliatory measures.
Vrbetice case investigation concluded in the Czech Republic
On April 29, Czech authorities officially announced the "postponement" of the investigation into the explosions at ammunition depots in the village of Vrbetice. In a joint statement released by the Czech police and the Czech National Centre for Combating Organised Crime, it was stated that "Russian military intelligence was involved in the bombings and deaths of Czech citizens. This was not an isolated incident but part of a long-term Russian subversion programme implemented by the military intelligence on the territory of the European Union and Ukraine."
Furthermore, the same statement says: "The Czech police lacks certain information to continue the investigation, including data on the movements of the group's members across the territory of the Czech Republic." According to Prague, obtaining this information is impossible "since the suspects are in Russia."
The investigation's findings into the explosions at ammunition depots in the Czech Republic in 2014 only serve to confirm that the accusations against Russia were fabricated and orchestrated. These accusations have triggered a deterioration in bilateral relations and the complete halt of mutually beneficial cooperation in 2021. This demonstrates the Czech authorities' uninspired attempts to deceive their citizens and their willingness to cover up crimes committed within their own territory through corruption, irresponsibility and lies.
At the same time, the investigation conclusions are absurd and cannot withstand any criticism. How is that possible? You were so well-informed about everything connected to Russia that you accused us of every possible crime and passed sentences without a trial. But when it came to conducting a real investigation, which had evidence and factual materials, and all of this happened on your territory, there was insufficient information.
Three years after making baseless statements about Russia's supposed involvement in the explosions that occurred 10 years ago, the Czech police has to acknowledge "the lack of information to continue the investigation" and declare that the case is "postponed" due to the Russian side refusing to provide the evidence that Prague requires. This is both ridiculous and sad.
The only thing evident in this story is the political directive to make accusations against Russia, which Prague dutifully followed under the control of London and Washington, as usual. Presumably, there were also ample rewards, considering that even the disgraceful conclusion of the investigation did not bother anyone in the Czech Republic. It appears that everyone understands the consequences of asking Prague uncomfortable questions.
New round of politicisation of international scientific cooperation
Another instance of Russian science being cancelled occurred last week in plain sight. This time, the field of geosciences was the target of biased officials.
The International Union of Geological Sciences published a statement on its website titled Participation of the Russian Federation in the International Geological Congress, which is scheduled to take place on August 25-31 in Busan, Republic of Korea. According to the statement, "presentations and abstracts submitted by Russian scientists from Russian institutions will be refused," and this decision is justified by a certain "sanctions policy" against Russia. Additionally, we learned that the Congress's organising committee required Russian scientists to replace their "Russian affiliation with any other."
It is worth noting that the International Union of Geological Sciences is an international non-governmental organisation established in 1961 that brings together national scientific unions to form a global geological community. The organisation's charter states that it shall promote the participation of geoscience researchers in international efforts regardless of race, nationality, language, political affiliation, or gender.
It is evident that the responsibility for maintaining international peace and security, territorial integrity, and sovereignty does not (and should not) lie within this authoritative scientific association. Such matters fall under the purview of other structures. However, the organisation repeatedly tries to instrumentalise scientific cooperation to serve politically biased interests or agendas. We recall that back in 2022, the union's Executive Committee made the decision to cancel its 2028 International Geological Congress in St Petersburg, which contradicts its charter. We regret to observe that the Union persistently and consistently pursues a policy of restrictions and exceptions that carries a strong racist undertone towards Russia and its expert community, contrary to its obligations to provide advisory support to UNESCO. This reality is so evident that no one is attempting to hide it.
This blatant discrimination against scientists based on their nationality not only violates the Union's own charter, but also grossly infringes upon every individual's right to participate in scientific progress and reap its benefits, as enshrined in Clause 27.1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
It isn't difficult to surmise that the illegitimate actions of the Union and other similar organisations stem from a desire to influence the political stance of the domestic scientific community and divide Russian society.
Russia has a strong geology school. Traditionally, the findings of our compatriots' research were published in highly reputable scientific journals and presented and discussed at leading international events. They made appearances in publications and conferences because they contributed to the advancement of global science. All this time, Soviet and later Russian scientists made significant contributions to the Union's activities. The exclusion of domestic researchers from the international scientific dialogue deprives it of its representativeness and causes irreparable harm to world science, the extent of which and the consequences for the future are difficult to gauge.
We believe that the Global Majority with common sense will recognise this and not succumb to the manipulations of those who seek to further their short-term, self-serving political objectives at the expense of progress, the future and the development of all of humankind.
For our part, we will continue to consistently advocate for the development of fair international scientific cooperation, including in addressing the global challenges that humanity faces and in responding to transboundary issues.
Today, we are celebrating World Press Freedom Day proclaimed by the UN General Assembly in 1993. It is designed to attract attention to the problems of ensuring freedom of the media, protecting the rights of journalists as well as creating necessary conditions for their safe work.
Russia remains committed to its obligations on guarantees to the media pluralism and free access to information. It regards media freedoms as an essential attribute of a truly democratic society. Meanwhile, the situation in the information space is deteriorating every year in the countries of the collective West. It suggests a sad conclusion – far from all states that claim to be democratic share this approach. The promises to observe the rights of journalists, which are fixed in numerous international documents, have been actually trampled underfoot. All this is taking place before our eyes.
Despite these commitments, the Western countries continue creating obstacles to the free activities by journalists. At the same time, they do not stop lecturing us and other countries on the freedom of speech and independence of the press. At the same time, they are ignoring the bloody crimes and terrorist attacks against journalists by their protégés in Kiev, the suppression of the media in Chisinau and actions taken in the Baltic countries and other parts of the world.
The West has finally moved into the mode of total cleansing of its media space from inconvenient truth, using the entire repressive arsenal of political censorship. It was at its prompting that the largest online social media platforms actively joined in censoring content and blocked en masse the sources of alternative opinions on world events. Moreover, in censoring content, they are guided not by the lofty ideals of humanism and certain values of civilisation. On the contrary, they are censoring content and have allowed the use of information violence towards people of a particular race, ethnic or civic origin. This was the case with our country in 2022, when largest American digital platforms allowed their users to call for murders of Russians because they did not consider this content extremist. This is a monstrous but not the only fact that will always reflect Western hypocrisy as regards the freedom of speech.
We can also consider many years of bullying Julian Assange solely for his convictions and journalistic activities as a symbol of hypocrisy and cynical cruelty. Some forced “guarantees” from Washington that a prisoner of conscience will not be executed, but may only be put behind bars for 175 years, are presented almost as a triumph of humanity. Indeed, this is a “pinnacle” of humanism displayed by liberal democracies. No one in the “civilised” West was touched by the tragedy of the American-Chilean journalist Gonzalo Lira who was tortured to death in a Ukrainian prison. Nor does the West care a bit about purposeful murders of Russian journalists, war correspondents and public figures, which were perpetrated by the Kiev regime and its agents. They include Darya Dugina (Platonova), Vladlen Tatarsky (Maxim Fomin), Oleg Klokov, Rostislav Zhuravlev, Boris Maksudov and Semyon Yeryomin. We have not heard a word of condemnation or even human sympathy from officials in Washington, London and Brussels. These journalists were cruelly murdered, in some cases by terrorist methods. Specialised international organisations, such as UNESCO and the OSCE also maintain grave silence. They are diligently fulfilling the Western order for silence. This criminal indifference is determined by the connivance at neo-Nazi cutthroats in Ukraine. It has a direct consequence – the Kiev regime is not even trying to deny its atrocities but is openly bragging about them. It puts “ticks” marked “eliminated” in the “Mirotvorets” (Peacemaker) table against the names of those it has designated as its targets. Moreover, it is even announcing future murders of journalists. Nobody in the West pulls back the Kiev regime for this, not to mention denounces it. Instead, the West is giving it new multi-million and multi-billion tranches designed, in part, to suppress freedom of speech.
All these actions have nothing to do with the ideals that World Press Freedom Day is supposed to honour. We should not allow its initial meaning to be completely emaciated and reduced to a caricature of itself. The rights of the media and journalists are not some opportunistic privilege for a select few. They are an enduring universal value, an inalienable part of a sound society and a strong, confident state.
80th anniversary of the liberation of Sevastopol
On April 8, 2024, we marked 80 years since the beginning of the Crimean Offensive in 1944, which culminated in the liberation of the peninsula on May 12.
It took Hitler’s armies nine months (250 days) in 1941-1942 to seize Sevastopol. Not only men but also women rose in defence of the city. Machine gunner Nina Onilova and sniper Lyudmila Pavlichenko were decorated with the gold star of Hero of the Soviet Union for their heroism. It is said that the war has an unwomanly face, which is true. But heroism can have a woman’s face.
Overall, the Germans lost about 100,000 troops fighting for Crimea in 1941-1942. Crimea had a major strategic and ideological importance for Hitler, who saw the peninsula as a rest and recreation zone for his “Aryan race.” Even before the war, Nazi propaganda referred to Crimea as Gotenland, a mythical proto-homeland of the Germans, where they should replace the local population, which was to be exterminated.
During the occupation of Crimea, the Nazis and their accomplices set up concentration and screening camps, as well as numerous prisons and prisoner-of-war camps. The German security and punitive troops carried out the policy of genocide, killing civilians, partisans, members of underground organisations, and POWs. Before fleeing, the Nazis committed a heinous crime in Stary Krym on April 12, 1944, where they killed 584 civilians, including women, children and elders. Overall, during the occupation of Crimea the Nazis shot 72,000 local people and tortured to death over 18,000 in prisons and camps. They also killed 45,000 Soviet POWs in Crimea.
Crimea was liberated by the 4th Ukrainian Front commanded by Fyodor Tolbukhin. The assault on Sevastopol began at 8 am on May 5, 1944, and the city was liberated by night on May 9. It took the Germans 250 days to occupy it, while the Soviet forces, acting heroically, broke through the enemy defences and reached the Sevastopol harbour within five days.
On May 9, 1944, exactly a year before Victory Day, Sevastopol, the city of military glory and Russian seamen, was liberated. The remaining German troops fled to Cape Khersones, making desperate attempts to escape to Romania under heavy artillery fire. A lightning Soviet attack disrupted the Nazis’ plan. Many enemy vessels were hit and sank in bays and the sea. As the result, the bulk or two thirds of the Romanian Black Sea Flotilla was destroyed. By noon on May 12, the remaining German and Romanian troops were taken prisoner. The Battle of Crimea and Sevastopol turned into a complete disaster for the German armies.
By retaking Sevastopol, the Soviet Union regained the main naval base of the Black Sea Fleet and ensured fire and logistic support for the subsequent offensives and the liberation of Moldova and the Balkans. That event also had a vast spiritual significance, because ancient Chersonesus, the birthplace of the Russian Orthodox Church where Prince Vladimir was baptised, was cleansed of the Nazi scourge.
The liberation of Crimea created a bridgehead for the strategic advance of the Red Army in the southern part of the Soviet-German front. In addition, in February 1945, Crimea hosted the Yalta Conference of the Big Three, where they discussed vital aspects of the post-war world order.
Moscow celebrated the liberation of Sevastopol with artillery salute the very next day. Government decorations were awarded to the troops for their courage and heroism, including 126 gold stars of Hero of the Soviet Union. As many as 118 army and navy units were awarded the honorary title “of Sevastopol,” and 51 units were awarded orders. On May 1, 1945, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief signed an order awarding the title of Hero City to Sevastopol.
Events to commemorate the 79th anniversary of the Great Victory
The approaching Victory Day over Nazi Germany is the most significant holiday for our people. The units of the Foreign Ministry Central Office, our regional representative offices, and diplomatic and consular offices abroad are actively involved in the preparations.
In line with tradition, a flower-laying ceremony will be held at the Foreign Ministry on May 8, the eve of the holiday. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, along with the ministry's leadership, veterans, and young diplomats, will participate in the ceremony.
The entrance hall of the Foreign Ministry's Central Building will host the Diplomacy and the Red Army's Liberation Mission in the Central and Southern Europe historical documentary exhibition as part of the Victory Day celebrations. Follow-ups on the exhibition will be posted online later.
Russian diplomatic missions abroad are becoming significant hubs for historical celebrations. The celebration programmes of the diplomatic missions vary depending on the conditions of their stay in the countries of accreditation. These programmes include visiting veterans to convey congratulations, presenting gifts and flowers, organising war film festivals, concerts, competitions of frontline songs, drawings, posters, thematic radio broadcasts, articles, and speeches by ambassadors in the central media, historical documentary exhibitions, and open Russian language lessons dedicated to Victory Day at schools at diplomatic missions. These ceremonial assemblies have already become traditional. Other scheduled events include Victory Dictation, Memory Garden, Windows of Victory, Moment of Silence, and Memory Candle events, as well as gala evenings and receptions. We also observe the consistent interest every year in the St George Ribbon, which has become the main symbol of Victory Day, and not just in Russia.
Our compatriots in many countries will join the Immortal Regiment procession to honour the heroes of the Great Patriotic War. The online formats allow for an expansion in the number of participants in this already international event, bringing together those who genuinely cherish the memory of the heroic generation of the Great Patriotic War.
As part of the Memory Fire event, meetings will be held with compatriots, veterans, and in some countries, with representatives of the Popular Front. The purpose of these meetings is to transfer lamps with particles of the Eternal Flame to local museums, libraries, educational institutions, and churches. In 2024, the fire will be delivered to 14 countries in Europe, Asia and Africa.
Ceremonies to lay flowers and wreaths at monuments, graves and memorials of the fallen Soviet warriors, war prisoners, and civilians who died in Nazi captivity are of great importance. These ceremonies are already taking place or are scheduled to take place soon in all countries without exception that were liberated by Red Army soldiers, where underground fighters and partisans fought, and where our citizens were imprisoned. During our briefings, we regularly discuss the challenging situation in the memorial sphere and the blasphemous and cynical war on monuments being waged by the authorities of some European countries.
No Russophobic antics will be allowed to overshadow the most significant holiday in Russia's history. Even in countries with unfavourable conditions, there are people who join us in laying flowers together with our colleagues. They do this despite knowing that they may face reprisals from unfriendly regimes.
We can feel the support of those who remember the Soviet Union's decisive contribution to defeating Nazism. This inspires faith, optimism, and gives strength to combat attempts to falsify and distort the history of World War II or to denigrate and desecrate the memory of the warriors liberators.
Despite any opposition, Russian diplomats pay tribute to those who gave their lives for the future, saved the world from the scourge of Nazism, and laid the foundations of a world order based on international law enshrined in the UN Charter.
All the announced events are covered on our social media accounts. All messages have the hashtags #Победа79 and #Victory79. Please follow our Embassies abroad on social media for details on Victory Day celebrations in various countries.
Display of trophy Western countries’ military equipment in Victory Park
On May 1 in Victory Park on Poklonnaya Gora, the Defence Ministry opened an exhibition of trophy weapons and equipment of Western countries, hit and captured during the special military operation in Ukraine, including during the liberation of Rabotino and Malaya Tokmachka towns in the Zaporozhye Region, as well as Avdeyevka in the Donetsk People's Republic. The exhibition is divided into several areas and has information boards about the arms-producing countries, performance as well as place and circumstances of their capture by Russian servicemen.
The open site presents over 30 samples of military hardware made in the United States, Great Britain, Germany, France, Sweden, Finland, Austria, Türkiye, Australia, South Africa and Ukraine. The exhibits include Bradley and Marder infantry fighting vehicles, M1 Abrams and Leopard 2 tanks, an M777 howitzer, a variety of lightly armored vehicles and many other equipment. The exhibition tents also contain samples of small arms and engineering equipment from the NATO countries, as well as drones, means of communication and gear.
NATO combat vehicles supplied to Ukrainian neo-Nazis brought sorrow and trouble to the residents of Donbass and other new Russian regions. Now they are damaged and defeated. I will draw attention to the way our country has done it – decently. We did it in response to presenting our military hardware in front of our embassies in NATO countries. It created danger to the work of our diplomatic missions. And above all it was humiliating for the states that did it. Their citizens, who brought flowers to the Soviet military hardware told them so. One more time the West failed to implement its idea in the amount and in the way it wanted to achieve. There has been much discussion in our society about how we should respond. We respond with dignity and honour. We are doing it so that people understand who is opposing us, where is good and where is evil, where is truth and where is lie. We do it not to humiliate ourselves, but to avoid dehumanisation that has been trying to climb the world pedestal lately.
We make it a point that the total cost of the military hardware displayed at the exhibition amounts to several billion dollars. The exhibition in Victory Park will not leave anybody indifferent – it arouses an unprecedented interest. People come not only from other cities but also from other countries to look at the defeated enemy hardware. Diplomats and military attaches from the countries accredited in Russia also visit the exhibition.
Strength is in the truth, it has always been so. Let us remind you that more than 80 years ago, from 1943 to 1948, Moscow’s Gorky Park hosted an exhibition of trophy weapons captured from Nazi Germany in 1941-1943.
We remind those who have forgotten the terrible lesson of the Second World War: no Western military equipment will change the situation on the battlefield. The enemy will be defeated!
The exhibition will be open until June 1, 2024, from 10 am to 8 pm.
Question: How would you comment on Russia’s position regarding the UN General Assembly Resolution on Srebrenica?
Maria Zakharova: Detailed explanations were given by Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the UN in New York Vasily Nebenzya at the UN Security Council meeting on threats to the Dayton Agreements on April 30.
The proposal to establish an international day of remembrance for the victims of the “genocide” in Srebrenica is a politically biased initiative promoted by Permanent Representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the UN in New York Zlatko Lagumdžija with the support of NATO countries, despite the fact that it is NATO members who bear the main responsibility for the tragic events in Yugoslavia, which resulted in the deaths of people from various ethnic and religious groups, including in and around Srebrenica.
The corresponding draft resolution submitted to the UN General Assembly cannot ensure national reconciliation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It can only increase the divide in that country and in the Balkans as a whole. The document carries an anti-Serbia charge, which is obvious. It does not directly accuse the Serbian nation but references decisions of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, as well as the opinion of the International Court of Justice regarding Srebrenica. These decisions cannot be considered fair in relation to the Serbs, a fact recognised also by the participants in the process who do not sympathise with the Serbs. These decisions do not enjoy support among the Balkan countries and others.
The fact that this initiative is being promoted in violation of the internal procedures of Bosnia and Herzegovina, since the Republika Srpska has repeatedly expressed its disagreement with it, is of principled importance. The entity’s leadership has sent position documents to the Secretary-General and the General Assembly Chair of the UN, as well as its member countries, appealing to prevent the adoption of the resolution. Moreover, recently the Parliament of the Republic of Srpska initiated a request to revoke the powers of Zlatko Lagumdžija.
We call on the authors of the draft resolution to withdraw their document. In UNGA resolution 69/323 of 2015, the international community agreed on a single date, December 9, to pay tribute to the memory of all victims of genocide, regardless of where it was committed. (The exception is the day of remembrance of the Rwandan genocide, which was established in 2003 before the abovementioned decision of the General Assembly was adopted).
Question: On April 29, the Moldovan media reported that a St Petersburg – Tiraspol passenger bus, with citizens of Moldova onboard, underwent a two-day inspection at the Lithuanian border. According to passengers, they were tested with a lie detector, asked “who Crimea belongs to,” and were asked about their attitude to the events in Ukraine. How would you comment on this?
Maria Zakharova: We have already commented on this issue.
Let me repeat that this is what European values are. In words, in pictures, in some brochures, they are presented as the path to the rule of law, freedom of speech, and respect for human rights. However in reality, this is what Maia Sandu’s regime with all its repressive instruments professes. Perhaps this could be classified differently. But it seems to me that the citizens of Moldova have already given their assessment.
Question: Can Armenia leave the CSTO after the country suspended its participation in February? Have there been any decisions or progress since Nikol Pashinyan’s statements on freezing Armenia’s CSTO membership? Where can the organisation go from here?
Maria Zakharova: We have repeatedly commented in detail on the modalities of Yerevan’s participation in the CSTO’s activities, including during briefings. Your question about whether Armenia can leave or withdraw should be addressed to official Yerevan. As before, we do not question the sovereign right of our Armenian partners to independently determine their foreign policy, like any other sovereign country, including with regard to continued participation in the CSTO. As a reminder, Article 19 of the CSTO Charter stipulates the possibility of withdrawal from the association. In this case, the member state, after settling its obligations within the CSTO framework, must send an official notification no later than six months before the date of its potential withdrawal.
As far as we know, despite the repeated accusations against the CSTO, our partners have taken no new steps with regard to their membership. This leads us to assume that Armenia continues to be a full-fledged member of the association and must honour the relevant obligations, including those arising from the 1992 Collective Security Treaty, the 2002 Charter of the CSTO, and other documents.
We are strongly confident that in any case, the CSTO is and will remain an effective tool for maintaining security in Eurasia, as well as its member states. This year, together with our allies, we continue to invest effort in strengthening multifaceted cooperation, which extends to foreign policy coordination, building up defence potential, combating new challenges and threats to security, and other domains. We are intensively working on substantive content of the meetings of its statutory bodies scheduled for May and June under Kazakhstan’s chairmanship, including the foreign ministers’ meeting to be held on June 21.
Question: How will the law on foreign agents affect Georgia’s European integration?
Maria Zakharova: I think you want a lot. It is difficult to understand why this question is being addressed to us. Russia has nothing to do with Georgian legislation, or with Georgia’s European integration plans, or with the dramatic events that the whole world is watching. I saw that for some reason a number of protesters in Georgia apparently turned out to be susceptible to Western propaganda’s attempts to find the notorious “Russian trace” where there is none. Some of them even allowed themselves to mock the state symbols of Russia. Perhaps this is someone’s provocation. This is sad.
We can see that provocations like this happen, including in Georgia. Alas, no one is immune to this. I can say for sure that this question is not for us.
As we know, it was already answered both in Brussels and in Washington, where they said right to the cameras, without shying away, that this draft law is allegedly incompatible with democratic values. I would also like to understand what “democratic values” are. Maybe they will post the list in Washington, Brussels and London? No one has ever seen the rules, which, from their point of view, the world order should be based on. It seems to be the same with democratic values. There is also no list anywhere. If anyone finds it, please send it to us.
Washington and Brussels announced that the adoption of this law would put an obstacle to Georgia’s integration in the EU and NATO. Though, it is really a comic situation. The Georgian version of the law is derived, and in a much milder form, from similar regulations that are in force in the United States, France and some other Western countries. Is this double standards? Yes and no, because in this case, this is no longer about double standards, but, in fact something like their elimination.
Russia has never interfered and does not intend to interfere in the internal affairs of third countries. We are interested in the peaceful, stable and prosperous development of all countries of the South Caucasus, including Georgia.
Question: You have already said about our diplomatic missions’ preparations for May 9. Have there been any provocations so far? If yes, which ones?
Maria Zakharova: Of course, provocations go nonstop. First of all, it concerns monuments. You can see that inscriptions are being doused with paint or picked off. People trying to restore them are being repressed and persecuted. Flowers at these monuments are destroyed. Participation in ceremonies is prohibited. You have seen and heard our statement on this matter. No invitations are being sent to our representatives to attend ceremonies that pay tribute to the heroes of World War II, or the Great Patriotic War for us. We deal with this on a case-by-case basis. We also show some things in the public sphere. We talk about this a lot at briefings. Some things can be resolved without being shown to the public. This is just a small list in short phrases. In fact, our foreign missions are working to prevent provocations, to minimise their damage and, in general, to uphold historical memory, 24 hours a day, every day, all year round.
Question: Axios reported that the New York Police Department started detaining Columbia University students who actively protested against the US Administration’s policy regarding Israel’s actions in the Gaza Strip. The university administration reported that the NYPD had arrived at campus at their request. Earlier, the Human Rights Watch international organisation expressed their opinion that the universities’ response to student rallies in support of Palestine had been too harsh and deprived the participants of their right to peaceful protest. UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk also expressed concern over the tough measures taken in the US to suppress student protests and described certain actions by law enforcement in some universities as disproportionate. The Washington Post calculated that in the past 10 days, US police detained about 900 people during rallies in support of Palestine, which had taken place on campuses of several major US universities. What could you say about the actions by the US authorities regarding students taking part in peaceful protests against US policy on Israel’s actions in the Gaza Strip?
Maria Zakharova: I can't help but laugh. This is amusing. Of course, it's a serious issue, but it seems comical.
Just imagine, during these same days, the US is concerned about the fate of demonstrators in Georgia but is mistreating its own protesters. They haven't yet deployed the National Guard, but they've already taken all other measures. Hold on, it seems that these actions have nothing to do with any "standards." It's some kind of contradiction.
This has been going on in the US for two weeks now. Large-scale student riots are taking place. Students are protesting in support of the people of Palestine. The scale of these demonstrations and the unrest is reminiscent of the protests against the US war in Vietnam. Even many American experts acknowledge this. Meanwhile, the US authorities are clearly relying on violently dispersing the demonstrators and clearing tent camps with the help of special police forces.
I find this interesting. The American authorities regularly pay tribute to the memory (as they call it) of the events in Tiananmen Square. They talk about the brave Chinese students who became victims (as the US Administration presents it) of the Chinese authorities. Meanwhile, the actions the US is taking towards its own students are nullifying its laws on freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.
Through these actions, the US is disregarding its own international commitments. This is yet another example of double standards or the absence of any standards at all. I believe this also reflects the US authorities' disrespectful attitude towards people, driven by their own political agendas.
Now they are mistreating American students. The US media and members of Congress are denigrating these students. They prefer to support protesters all over the world, but when it comes to US citizens within their own country, the punitive machine is doing a good job, as we know all too well. Judging by the previous US presidential election, they seem to have it all figured out now.
As we can see, the situation is not calming down. More than 2,000 students and sympathisers have been detained by now. More people are being detained. How can anyone in America lecture others on organising security, controlling mass events, or observing human rights? Punitive measures do not calm the protesters. On the contrary, they predictably provoke a harsh response, including vandalism and seizure of premises. After all, the US authorities have taught American students that their rights (human rights) are sacred. And now, what an embarrassment!
A number of universities have switched to remote education format. They have cancelled graduation ceremonies or called them into question.
The US financial capital – New York – did not escape riots. On April 30 of this year, counterterrorist police units stormed one of the nation's oldest, most prestigious universities, Columbia University, which was occupied by the protesters. About 300 people were detained. Can you imagine that? This is the freedom of rallies or the freedom of assembly (as the US formulates it). Counterterrorist units detained about 300 people. Are they considered "domestic terrorists" as well? This is how the US authorities will describe them, just as they described the protesters who were detained after the previous election in the US.
I would like to emphasise that it is not our policy to comment on purely internal processes in foreign countries. You know this. However, we will make an exception for the US because it constantly lectures everyone. It keeps interfering in the domestic affairs of other states, primarily our own country. Washington believes it has the right to point out various domestic shortcomings or problems in the rest of the world. This time, Washington should look at itself, at its large-scale problems that are only getting worse. It is worth checking whether the US observes human rights, including the rights of young people and women.
I am sure that transgender individuals are also participating in rallies. What about their rights? Are all detentions justified? Are all detainees treated in accordance with legal norms and human dignity?
I hope the US will raise this issue at a meeting of the UN Human Rights Council. It is necessary to establish if the police did not abuse their powers and if there were no brutal detentions or rough treatment. We are looking forward to US Secretary of State Antony Blinken's remarks denouncing the actions of the US police towards peaceful demonstrators. I hope the US public and international organisations will ask the US government the right questions.
We would like to draw your attention once again to the recent report on the human rights situation in the US, which we published on our website on April 25. This report provides a clear picture of all this chaos.
Question: The right to normal trade and economic exchanges between Russia and China should not be interfered with or disrupted, Lin Jian, Spokeserson for the Foreign Ministry of China, noted at a briefing. He was replying to a TASS request to comment on a statement by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken who said that the United States would take action if China did not stop supporting Russia. The diplomat also noted that China is neither a creator of the Ukraine crisis nor a party to it, and that China had never done anything to fan the flames or seek profit from the crisis. He noted that the US keeps pouring munition into Ukraine, while blaming China’s normal trade with Russia. What do you think about this statement by your colleague?
Maria Zakharova: I align with the statements by the Spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry of China. Washington has been trying unsuccessfully to drive a wedge into Russia-China relations for a long time. This is part of the US policy to contain our two countries.
We have repeatedly and publicly noted China’s well-thought out and consistent position on the Ukraine crisis. Beijing has invariably emphasised its readiness to play a constructive role in resolving it by political and diplomatic means. President of China Xi Jinping recently talked about the idea of convening an international peace conference, provided that both Moscow and Kiev recognise it, and provided that the conference would make it possible to discuss all available peace initiatives.
Speaking of Russia-China cooperation, it hinges on the principles of respectful, equitable and trust-based partnership, as well as resolute mutual support on key issues of national agendas. This highlights the value of Russia-China strategic interaction. As you know, we tirelessly repeat and underscore this aspect. This is our “strategic tandem.” All this is not directed against other countries and is not influenced by external timeserving considerations.
US rhetoric is nothing but an attempt to turn a sore head into a healthy one and to find a pretext for blaming someone else for its own mistakes. Washington’s multiple restrictive measures lay bare the irrational governance system in the United States that has failed to resolve its own economic and human rights issues. On the contrary, the United States has succeeded in using non-market and openly illegal competition methods, including various protectionist ploys and politically motivated reprisals and even tools of a large-scale trade war.
Question: What concessions would the Russian side agree to make for concluding a peace treaty with Ukraine?
Maria Zakharova: A concession is part of the negotiating process. The Anglo-Saxons forbade the Kiev regime to negotiate. The United Kingdom and later the United States did this, they forced Kiev to pass relevant legislation forbidding it to conduct any negotiating processes with the Russian side. What are we talking about then?
On the whole, Russia has always been and remains open to resolving the Ukraine crisis by political and diplomatic means, with due consideration for current realities and Russian security concerns.
It is necessary to eliminate its root causes for the sake of a comprehensive, stable and fair settlement of the crisis. The West should stop saturating the Armed Forces of Ukraine with weapons, and the Kiev regime should end hostilities. Ukraine should return to the sources of its statehood, specifically, a neutral, non-aligned and non-nuclear status. It should protect the Russian language and honour the rights and freedoms of citizens and ethnicv minorities, and it should renounce the neo-Nazi ideology.
Unfortunately, neither Kiev, nor the West are displaying any political will for peace today. We are only hearing aggressive rhetoric in their statements rather than these words. They are only thinking in terms of war, deliberately raising the stakes and hatching aggressive plans with regard to Russia and other parts of the world.
I would like to recall that, since 2014, Russia had exerted considerable efforts for resolving the Ukraine crisis by political methods. Should we note once again that Russia initiated the Minsk Agreements in February 2015, and that the Minsk-2 document was drafted and signed with direct Russian involvement (I believe that everyone understands this)? A UN Security Council resolution also approved this document on the initiative of Russia. At that time, Donbass made this serious concession in the hope of resolving the conflict by non-military methods. However, Ukraine sabotaged the Minsk Agreements with the support of the West, primarily Germany and France acting as guarantor countries. Later, Kiev, Berlin and Paris admitted that they did not intend to honour them, and that they needed these agreements to gain time for expanding the military potential of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
I would like to note once again that Russia is ready to examine proposals based on realities and addressing our security concerns. We find the language of threats and blackmail to be unacceptable.
Question: Is the Russian economy ready for an escalation of the conflict, if it occurs, or for further tightening of the sanctions?
Maria Zakharova: Recently, many Western experts have begun to gain a more realistic perception of the situation and to see that the anti-Russia sanctions are counterproductive and hopeless. At the same time, they allow themselves to talk about the real situation in their own economies. After more than two years of their sanction games, our counterparties have finally come to realise that what they call ‘sanctions’ is, first, a pointless attempt to harm Russia, and second, a policy that has caused them enormous self-damage, harming the initiators, their populations, and their own development.
Russia, for its part, has not only successfully addressed the external challenges, which is clear to everyone now, but is also vigorously and successfully building a solid foundation for the implementation of its strategic plans for social and economic development – something President of Russia Vladimir Putin mentioned in his Address to the Federal Assembly in February 2024.
Russia is the fifth largest economy in the world and the first in Europe. Our goal is to become the fourth economy by 2030. In spite of the restrictions already imposed, Russia’s GDP grew 3.6 percent over the past year according to both Rosstat and the IMF. In January, the IMF predicted a 2.6 percent GDP growth in 2024, but has raised its forecast to 3.2 percent now. For comparison, also according to IMF projections, the EU’s GDP growth will not exceed 1.1 percent in 2024. So, who is sanctioned now?
Moreover, we are systematically and purposefully building integration ties with friendly countries, both on a bilateral basis and in multilateral formats such as the EAEU, the CIS, BRICS and the SCO.
We are pursuing a policy to de-dollarise our foreign trade and develop payment mechanisms independent of the West. The import substitution programme is also making active progress. All the above are the consequences that the sanctions against Russia have entailed.
Therefore, I believe we have every reason to assert that Russia’s economy will be able to overcome any new challenges, even if our “enemies” continue or step up the sanctions pressure.
I hope you will be able to draw your own conclusions about the new challenges that the economy may face.
Question: The authorities in Yerevan have explained why they used the phrase “Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine.” The Russian Foreign Ministry has previously commented on that statement. Armenian Parliament Speaker Alen Simonyan said that he used the term “illegal invasion” to avoid disrespecting his “European partners.” He added that Belarus and Turkey did not recognise Russia’s new territories either and asked a counter question: “So you only have the heart to lash out at us?” How would you comment on this new statement by the Armenian official?
Maria Zakharova: I don’t know what this “having the heart” part was all about.
I hope that those who make such statements will have the heart to respond to the Russian parliamentarians’ request of April 24, 2024.
We wish them to be strong and write a response.
Question: Russian flags have been raised in the capital of Niger, Niamey, at the local government’s initiative, as a sign of friendship with Moscow. At the same time, The Hill published an article, ‘US losing ground to Russia in geopolitical battle over Africa.’ Are the US media exaggerating things to draw the State Department’s attention to the problem?
Maria Zakharova: They always use an aggressive approach or narrative, as they say – a battle over Africa. We are expanding ties with Africa, providing support [to African nations] at their request, considering opportunities for advancing mutually beneficial cooperation, combining efforts, preserving history, and charting development trajectories. We aren’t fighting, battling, or using aggressive rhetoric. That’s the difference. I will cite additional facts to substantiate my point.
Why have American journalists and experts concluded that the United States and the West are losing ground in Africa? Because they never review their mistakes. Instead of acknowledging the mostly deadly role they have played in Africa over the centuries, they keep repeating the same mistakes. They are acting the same way, only this time, in a neocolonial framework: through transnational companies, media enslavement, hidden influence, cutting off opportunities for equal cooperation, derogatory propaganda campaigns, and false messages of equality. They are also refusing to sign UN General Assembly documents aimed at preventing new forms of racism, xenophobia and related intolerance. Perhaps that’s why they think they’re losing ground.
But I can say it again: this is not about a game or a battle. It’s about interaction, peace, and true equality, not false equality.
Question: On April 25, Bloomberg reported that the advisors of the G7 leaders intended to hold a Copenhagen-format meeting with representatives from some countries of the Global South. The meeting was scheduled to take place in Doha on April 27-28 to discuss their preparations for a conference in Switzerland regarding the Ukraine crisis settlement. What do we know about the outcome of this meeting? How would you comment on it?
Maria Zakharova: I strongly advise caution when quoting this misinformation media outlet as they have proven themselves unreliable on many occasions.
As far as we know, the meeting did indeed occur behind closed doors. It seems that the Western countries have something to hide as no official information was widely disseminated.
It appears that things are not going as well as they would like. Despite significant Western pressure, the countries of the Global South and East are not being persuaded to support the Zelensky formula or create a joint ultimatum for Russia. They continue to question the usefulness of meetings in the Copenhagen format without Russia’s involvement. They fail to see the value added.
Switzerland has offered to intervene and find a solution. They proposed moving away from the Copenhagen format and the Zelensky formula and initiating a new process focused on discussing three supposedly neutral topics. These topics include nuclear security, food and shipping, as well as humanitarian issues such as the exchange of prisoners of war and the return of children.
There is nothing new about Switzerland’s efforts. It is a cunning manoeuvre. Kiev proposed a similar approach to convince the countries of the Global South to support at least one of the ten items in the Zelensky formula, which would later be interpreted as a joint approval of all its provisions.
Furthermore, work on the aforementioned topics is already underway, albeit with difficulties caused by Kiev’s uncooperative approach.
For example, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is actively discussing nuclear security, specifically the situation at the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant, where the agency maintains permanent observers. It is worth noting that Kiev continues to pose daily threats to the security of the plant.
Aspects of food security and Black Sea shipping were also explored with the involvement of Türkiye, but Ukraine refused to approve the emerging agreements.
Contacts between Russia’s Commissioner for Human Rights Tatiana Moskalkova and Commissioner for Children’s Rights under the President of the Russian Federation Maria Lvova-Belova, on the one hand, and Ukrainian ombudsman Dmitry Lubinets, on the other, have helped to resolve issues related to the exchange of prisoners and the repatriation of children.
So, there will be no value added in discussing these topics in Switzerland. Indeed, the Swiss conference is just a continuation of the failed Copenhagen process that promoted the Zelensky formula, which is disconnected from reality. Such forums do not bring peace closer but prolong hostilities. Any discussions on resolving the Ukraine crisis without Russia and outside of considering its interests are senseless and futile.
It is worth noting separately the inappropriate choice of Switzerland as the conference venue. Does Bern still believe it is a neutral platform and a centre for political meetings? It has lost its function as a neutral mediator. It has openly sided with the Kiev regime, imposing anti-Russia sanctions and supporting pro-Ukrainian resolutions at international organisations.
If Switzerland wanted to initiate a new process, it should have worked to restore its lost neutrality and included pressing issues on the conference agenda. These issues include: ending arms supplies to the Ukrainian Armed Forces, confirming Ukraine’s neutral and non-aligned status, recognising the territorial realities, addressing the destructive role of NATO’s expansion, addressing illegal sanctions (which also affect Switzerland), acknowledging the neo-Nazi nature of the Kiev regime, addressing the violation of human and ethnic minorities’ rights by Kiev, and addressing the suppression of freedom of speech and the assassination of journalists. However, the Swiss pseudo mediators do not even consider such an option.
We once again urge our partners from the Global Majority countries not to be drawn into another anti-Russian venture by the West and the Kiev regime.
Question: You have already commented on David Cameron’s remarks regarding potential attacks on Russia using British weapons. In the event of such attacks, what would be Russia’s reaction and retaliation?
Maria Zakharova: This question should be addressed to the Russian Federation’s agencies tasked with defending this country . There is no doubt that they will respond accordingly. But someone posing as the leader of a supposedly civilised state must be mad, if he makes statements of this sort. How amnesic must they be to forget that they are dealing with nuclear powers? How irresponsible and callous persons (I wouldn’t call them “politicians,” since many people in the West seem to be chips off the same block) they must be to fail to grasp what these statements may lead to? They should think not so much of Russia’s retaliation (which will always be forthcoming) as of the feelings of their own citizens in the UK and other countries belonging to the collective West. But no!
On the other hand, we are talking about David Cameron, aren’t we? Was he thinking anything at all while pulling Britain out of the European Union? The consequences are still a mess no one is able to rake up. Why is he now at the helm of the UK foreign policy agency? Reuters could ask this question without resorting to my mediation.
Question: On May 1, 2024, the US announced sanctions against nearly 300 companies and individuals that, in Washington’s opinion, are helping Russia to shirk restrictions introduced against it and purchase dual-purpose technologies and manufactures. These sanctions are targeting dozens of companies in China, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Türkiye, the UAE, and Russia. What is your comment on the actions taken by the US?
Maria Zakharova: It is a full-blown trade war for market re-division, with the US seeking to maintain its own development rates. Its aggressive actions are prompted by a lack of resources.
Russia is merely a pretext. Containing China has been on Washington’s official agenda for a long time, and its spokesmen openly say as much in public. The US is extremely exasperated by China’s economy.
This move should be regarded as an attempt to maintain its economic leadership in the absence of real chances to do that in a legitimate way.
Question: On May 1, the United States accused Russia of breaching the international ban on the use of chemical weapons. The Department of State claimed that Russia had attacked Ukrainian troops with a chemical known as chloropicrin, and also used crowd control agents. Could you comment on these charges?
Maria Zakharova: The cynicism of this situation is in the fact that the US protectors of the Kiev regime’s crimes indulged in these insinuations on the eve of the tenth anniversary of the May 2 tragedy at the Trade Unions House in Odessa. Ukrainian neo-Nazis set fire to the building and used CWC-controlled chloropicrin, killing over 50 protesters, who rebelled against the armed coup in Kiev. It is against the background of this anniversary that the US makes its statements.
The speculations about the Russian Federation’s violation of its obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention are at odds with the actual state of affairs and the situation existing since the start of the special military operation in Ukraine. But the West has toyed with this topic and instrument for a long time.
Washington could come up with nothing better than the stale chemical weapons insinuations it had tested in Syria, multiplying the unfounded and absolutely false accusations that the Armed Forces of the Russian Federations had used toxic chemicals and crowd control agents. Washington is doing all this to distract attention from the numerous crimes committed by the Kiev regime with its knowledge and consent and occasionally with direct involvement of US or NATO secret services.
Let me remind you that the Federal Security Service of Russia reported, on February 27, about the detention of three Ukrainian agents, who planned a terrorist attack in the Zaporozhye Region with the use of an equivalent of BZ warfare agent that the United States had developed for its military chemical programme. The [Russian] investigative agencies have both ampoules with this substance (whose composition has been confirmed by a laboratory certified by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) and other materials that make it possible to ascertain the Zelensky regime’s direct involvement in this crime.
The Defence Ministry and the Foreign Ministry of Russia regularly publish reports on armed units of the Kiev regime using toxic chemicals against Russian troops and civilians in violation of Ukraine’s obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and on Ukrainian militants’ plans to stage provocations against chemical plants in Donbas and the new constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Regrettably, some of these plans have come to fruition.
Question: On May 1, 2024, the organisation Hand in Hand for Aid and Development lodged a complaint with the UN Human Rights Committee, accusing Russian forces of carrying out air strikes on the Kafr Nobol surgical hospital in Syria’s Idlib Governorate on May 5, 2019, resulting in the death of two individuals. Can you comment on this complaint?
Maria Zakharova: Why haven’t you given any quotes from Russian non-governmental organisations, including those operating in Syria? There are also many human rights organisations in Syria.
The name of this organisation means nothing to me. I have not come across any reports on their online platforms, in media reports or those from the UN Human Rights Committee. It appears that, by asking such questions, you are advertising this organisation. I hope that this is not the case, and that you are not doing so.
I will look into the matter and will certainly provide a comment if I find anything. However, you should pay more attention to other human rights organisations and NGOs, and broaden your sources of information.
Question: This is in response to a publication from one of our Middle East bureaus.
Maria Zakharova: I will take a look. I know the kind of information your Middle East bureau uses, and what it disregards.
Question: How would you comment on the plans of Estonian authorities to raise the issue of alleged GPS signal interference by Russia with the European Union and NATO?
Maria Zakharova: The Foreign Ministry does not handle matters related to the satellite navigation system, and we suggest that you contact specialised agencies.
Question: The foreign ministers of Russia and Tajikistan discussed the restriction of entry for their citizens into Russia. However, Moscow and Dushanbe provided different interpretations of their conversation. The Russian Foreign Ministry reported that detailed explanations were provided to their partners regarding the measures taken by Russian services to prevent terrorism. On the other hand, Tajikistan spoke about “a negative attitude towards their citizens and widespread violation of their rights and freedoms.” The stark difference in perspectives suggests that mutual understanding was not achieved.
Maria Zakharova: First of all, we want to highlight the high level of collaboration between Russian and Tajik authorities in combatting the terrorist threat. This cooperation is grounded in our shared stance on pressing issues within the international anti-terrorism and anti-extremism agenda. Furthermore, we face common challenges and threats, including the activities of various international terrorist organisations in Afghanistan and their detrimental efforts to propagate extremist ideologies across the region.
The steadfast dedication of both parties to the relentless fight against international terrorism and the alignment of their approaches on this matter are exemplified by the coordinated efforts of Russian and Tajik intelligence services following the horrific terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall. These efforts facilitated the swift identification of individuals involved in this tragic event in both countries. We have taken note of the political assessments from Dushanbe, and we deeply appreciate the solidarity demonstrated by the people of Tajikistan towards our nation and its citizens, regarding this tragedy as their own sorrow. We recognise and appreciate this shared sentiment, which is now ingrained in our collective history.
I want to emphasise that during the recent telephone conversation between the foreign ministers of Russia and Tajikistan on April 30, 2024, the Tajik side received detailed explanations regarding the anti-terrorism measures implemented by Russian authorities, all in accordance with Russian legislation. The terrorist attack at Crocus City Hall and its grave aftermath served as the primary catalyst for more rigorous screening procedures for foreign nationals entering our country. It was underscored that these measures were not directed at any particular nationality or religion. Both sides expressed a commitment to handle the long-standing Russian-Tajikistan relationship of strategic partnership and alliance with care, aiming to maintain and strengthen its positive trajectory.
***
Warm Easter greetings to all Orthodox Christians! Happy holidays to you.
As we embark on a series of celebrations and great holidays ahead, I extend my heartfelt best wishes to you all.
补充资料
-
图片
