Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, August 28, 2024
- Sergey Lavrov to speak before Foreign Ministry MGIMO University and Primakov Gymnasium students
- The 9th Eastern Economic Forum
- Ukraine crisis update
- The 85th anniversary of the beginning of World War II
- Libelous statements by Romanian president
- Inclusion of Ukrainian nationalist Yaroslav Gunka on the Interpol General Secretariat’s wanted list
- The 85th anniversary of defeating the Japanese army at the Battle of Khalkhin-Gol
- New evidence of crimes by Japanese militarists
- Calls for demolishing war memorials in Norway
- Russian youth delegation’s participation in celebrations in Slovakia dedicated to the 80th anniversary of the Slovak National Uprising
- Supreme Court of Karelia’s recognition of Nazi genocide against Soviet civilians and Red Army prisoners of war in the territory of the Karelian-Finnish SSR
- 20th anniversary of Beslan school siege
- United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation
- Ukraine’s demands to withdraw troops from the Belarus-Ukraine border
- Pavel Durov’s detention
- Calls for building a synagogue on Temple Mount
- Switzerland joins the EU’s Military Mobility project
- Moldova update
- RIA Novosti journalists denied accreditation for the Paris Paralympics
- Article from Spain’s El Periodico
- Prime Minister of India’s visit to Ukraine
- Rafael Grossi’s visit to the Kursk NPP
- Decision by German authorities not to expel Ukrainian refugees
- US sanctions against China
- Canada’s restrictions against China
- Russian Embassy’s contacts with lawyers in France regarding Pavel Durov’s case
- Consular access to Pavel Durov
- Statements by Lithuania’s Prime Minister
- International agenda as viewed by the US presidential hopefuls
- Armenia-Azerbaijan settlement
- Failure of international organisations to respond to Kiev’s actions
- Preserving the cultural and historical heritage of the Great Patriotic War in Armenia and Azerbaijan
- French Foreign Ministry’s refusal to comment on the situation with Pavel Durov
- The North-South transport corridor
- Different interpretations of Pavel Durov’s detention
- Using Western weapons to target Russian territory
- Iraq’s oil exports
- Preventing escalation in the Middle East
- Ruling by a Latvian court in Vladimir Dorofeyev’s case
- The idea to nationalise online platforms
- The terrorist nature of the Kiev regime
Sergey Lavrov to speak before Foreign Ministry MGIMO University and Primakov Gymnasium students
On September 2, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will take part in a ceremony marking the beginning of the academic year at the autonomous non-profit general education organisation “Yevgeny Primakov Regional Gymnasium.”
On the same day, Sergey Lavrov will speak at his alma mater, MGIMO University, where, following the tradition, he will speak before the first-year students and the faculty. His speech will include an interactive discussion with the students, a hallmark of such events. I’m certain that, as usual, the questions will mostly revolve around ongoing international events, changes, initiatives, and the Russian foreign policy’s fundamental approaches towards global affairs.
The event will be streamed live on the Ministry’s website and social media.
The 9th Eastern Economic Forum
The 9th Eastern Economic Forum (EEF) will take place in Vladivostok on September 3-6. This forum was established by the President to promote the Far Eastern economy and to expand international cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region.
Over the years, the Forum has firmly established itself as a leading venue for addressing socioeconomic priorities in the Asia-Pacific region. Top government officials from China, India, Kazakhstan, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Republic of Korea, Armenia, and Japan have taken part in the forum over the years. Our partners are genuinely interested in deepening practical cooperation with Russia. For instance, the 2023 EEF was attended by over 7,000 representatives from the official, expert, and business circles across 62 countries in the Asia-Pacific region and other parts of the world. China, India, Myanmar, Laos, Mongolia, and the Philippines had the largest delegations. The organisations that are usually represented at the forum, such as the EAEU, the SCO, ASEAN, and APEC, were joined by BRICS and the Asian Cooperation Dialogue. As many as 373 agreements, including 41 with foreign companies, were signed on the sidelines.
This year’s EEF is themed as Far East 2030: Joining forces, creating opportunities. The agenda includes discussions on international cooperation in a changed world, the current state of the global economy and finance, the creation of new supply chains, technological changes, the development of Russia’s Far East, and its role in the region. A separate cluster will be dedicated to the role of youth in shaping the common future of the Asia-Pacific region.
As is customary, the EEF will have sessions involving representatives from regional multilateral organisations such as the EAEU, the SCO, the CICA, and BRICS. Preparations are underway to hold business dialogues on trade and economic relations between Russia and China, India, and ASEAN.
The second Falcon Day International Forum (September 3) and the 13th APEC Education Conference (September 4) will be held on the sidelines of the forum.
The Russian Foreign Ministry officials will take part in a number of 2024 EEF panel sessions, such as combating infectious diseases, youth policy, supporting indigenous peoples, information security, climate, and forming a multipolar world, as well as in an APEC conference.
The Ministry’s Young Diplomats Council will traditionally organise the Fifth Dialogue of Young Diplomats from Asia-Pacific countries.
I would like to bring your attention to the fact that, following the tradition, several events involving the Foreign Ministry’s Information and Press Department will take place on the sidelines of the forum. A panel discussion on “Eurasian Space: civilisational and geopolitical challenges and prospects” will be hosted by the International Life journal along with a session themed “The AI turn in international relations: A field of confrontation or cooperation?”
The next briefing will also take place in Vladivostok on the sidelines of the EEF.
On August 24, 2024, the Ukrainian neo-Nazis marked Independence Day in what used to be a flourishing country, or at least which had all it took to build a prosperous future. In this context, we can state the following fact: this country can no longer even pretend to be a democracy, has lost its independence a long time ago, and is now directly controlled and governed by the Western elites.
Once a prosperous Soviet republic, Ukraine turned into an entity that can hardly be called a state anymore, ransacked and pillaged by the neo-Nazis. On the one hand, it does have a state apparatus. On the other, it follows a distorted and perverse logic of present-day would be democracies and has no development prospects. All this results from the Kiev regime’s criminal action. It is riddled with corruption at all levels, and turned into a quasi-state. Vladimir Zelensky’s junta could not care less about the wellbeing of the Ukrainian people. They have been pillaging their own people and depriving them of what remains of their legitimate rights and freedoms.
On August 24, 2024, the Kiev dictator, who is well past his expiration date, by the way, addressed the nation with a bombastic message. It would be more accurate to describe it as venom on Vladimir Zelensky lips. Instead of talking about Ukraine’s future and making some inspirational promises, even if all he can do is make empty promises, he focused his remarks on Russia. In his speech, he humiliated Russian nationals and the country’s leaders. I think that it was not the growing sense of impotent rage that prompted him to say these words, but also instructions from his overseas masters. They needed to have something to fuel their electoral processes in the United States. He is ready to perform the orders of his masters, while throwing all this statements on Ukraine’s future under the bus.
What a paradox. On the one hand, Ukraine was marking what it calls its Independence Day. However, President of Poland Andrzej Duda and Prime Minister of Lithuania Ingrida Simonyte happened to be there on this very day. What a bizarre coincidence. Their visit proves that present-day Ukraine is not independent. Why? Just look at the weird entourage Vladimir Zelensky had on Ukraine’s would-be Independence Day. These are leaders representing countries that used to be part of the Polish-Lithuanian Union, or the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth as we call it in our textbooks. In fact, the forefathers of modern-day neo-Nazis turned to the Tsardom of Moscow asking it to protect them from this entity. Let me specify that I am referring to the ancestors of those who were forced by the neo-Nazis serving the Kiev regime to leave the country, faced extermination or had no other choice than to serve the regime. Those who turned to the Tsardom of Moscow for protection could not imagine what would happen to their descendants and what the Kiev regime would do to them. Back then, it brought about the Pereyaslav Rada’s decision on January 18, 1654, when Hetman Bogdan Khmelnitsky and his people pledged their allegiance to Tsar Alexey. Did Vladimir Zelensky understand that he was used as a clown in these historical metaphors?
Ingrida Simonyte made the most powerful statement and will go down in history as someone who went as far as target the people of Russia with her violent insults during a Nazi and Russia-hating speech on Kiev’s Sophia Square. She said that by waging this combat, the Ukrainians were defending not only their own statehood, but also the freedoms and values of Lithuania, Europe and the democratic world. She went on to call on the West to launch a crusade against Russia, and promised to celebrate victory together with Vladimir Zelensky’s regime “with lights on, gas and without any Russians around.” I remember well who feasted with “light on” and especially with gas, to make sure that there were no Russian around. These were Nazis and Hitler’s acolytes who sent Slavs, Jews, and Roma people into gas chambers. This is how far this neo-Nazi woman went in her statements. The pro-Western liberals went too far in promoting the distorted vision of democracy they have.
This amounts to an outright effort to incite present-day Banderites to exterminate all Russian and Russian-speaking people in and outside Ukraine. By delivering these remarks, the Lithuanian Prime Minister demonstrated yet again the human hating nature of the Kiev junta and the Western sponsors that nurtured this regime, including officials in Vilnius. This proves once again that Ukraine must go through a de-Nazification process, and this is one of the main objectives of the special military operation.
I wanted to draw your attention to the article “Sozdaniye Ukrainy i strukturoobrazuyushchaya rol ukrainskogo natsionalizma/natsizma” (The Creation of Ukraine and the Structural Role of Ukrainian Nationalism/Nazism) by Kirill Shevchenko and Eduard Popov in the August issue of the Mezhdunarodnaya Zhizn (The International Affairs) journal. It is quite convincing and provides facts to prove its point.
Vladimir Zelensky signed the Law On Protecting the Constitutional Order in the Sphere of Activity of Religious Organisations, an openly Satanist action timed to coincide with Ukraine’s “Independence Day.” Its true aim is to outlaw the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC) along with its millions of parishioners. In effect, the Kiev regime has acknowledged that it is an adversary to the people of Ukraine, one fully dependent on the whims of its Western masters.
In so doing, Mr Zelensky has committed an open blasphemy by claiming in public that this anti-church law was approved because the Ukrainian Orthodoxy was making a step towards liberating itself from the “Moscow devils.” But who is he? He is a real impostor, now dated. Apart from his direct involvement in the actual elimination of Ukraine’s biggest canonical church, he has shown himself to be a totally godless person, who would like to spit on the feelings of believers. No true believer professing this or that world religion would ever take the liberty to do anything of the kind. In reality, he only cares for the interests of the West (Washington and London) that bankrolls him. He is acting on the instructions of those, for whom Orthodox Christianity is like a thorn in the side and who have long nurtured plans to eliminate the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church. We see that Christians, specifically Orthodox believers have been persecuted not only in Ukraine but basically everywhere in recent decades.
Creating a legislative framework in order to ban and eliminate the UOC is clear evidence confirming that the human rights situation in Ukraine continues to deteriorate. I have to say it because this is the international legal idiom for it. But we understand at the same time that this is not just “deterioration” but a bottomless abyss, where human rights have fallen under the Kiev regime in Ukraine. This is a violation of religious freedom, one unprecedented in world history and accompanied by persecution of the clergy, takeover of churches and monasteries that are handed over to a pseudo-religious organisation controlled by the authorities, and open intimidation of church-goers. These barbaric practices are fraught with an even greater schism in Ukrainian society, harrowed as it is by the criminal Zelensky regime.
Kiev’s persecution of Orthodox priests continues, driven by political motives rather than changes in religious interpretation. The current Nazi regime shows blatant indifference and extreme cynicism in its repressive actions. For instance, on August 22, security forces forcibly brought Metropolitan Pavel, the abbot of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra, who is seriously ill, to another court hearing to extend preventive measures against him. He is facing a criminal case based on false charges, including treason and inciting interreligious hatred. This intense pressure from Bandera followers has worsened the elderly priest’s health, leading to his hospitalisation. Meanwhile, no cases have been opened against those who have committed abuses based on nationality, language, or religion, nor against those responsible for humiliating, beating, and torturing others.
The increasingly terrorist nature of the Kiev regime is becoming more evident. Its Western backers, with a manic determination, continue to push their Ukrainian puppets to persist in the reckless and self-destructive actions of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in the Kursk Region.
On August 21, head of European diplomacy Josep Borrell claimed that lifting restrictions on the use of capabilities against the Russian military would supposedly bolster Ukraine’s self-defence, save lives, reduce destruction in Ukraine, and advance peacekeeping efforts. If this statement were made to a Ukrainian audience, Borrell would likely face severe backlash or be met with open hostility.
On August 22, Pentagon Deputy Press Secretary Sabrina Singh made even more direct and aggressive statements. She asserted that Washington’s policies permit Ukraine to conduct counterattacks as a form of defence against Russian assaults from border regions, including Kursk and Sumy. Additionally, the head of the US Defence Department is reportedly planning to discuss with Ukrainian officials whether the Ukrainian Armed Forces intend to hold territories in the Kursk Region.
Western officials have twisted the narrative, essentially concluding that strikes by the Ukrainian Armed Forces against the Russian territory, amounting to military aggression and terror, will somehow lead to peace. But what kind of peace are they referring to? On the ground? What are they talking about? The reality is clear to everyone. Are they talking about peace at the negotiating table, and if so, with whom? With those who kill civilians and abuse the elderly and women? Who would negotiate with them? In truth, these statements serve only to justify and encourage the crimes of the Kiev regime. This is proverbial support for terrorism. Why is it proverbial? Because in Western countries, terrorism is legally recognised as one of the most serious crimes, something they constantly talk about. Yet, it seems they are engaging in it themselves.
In this context, it’s hardly surprising that on August 23, The New York Times reported, citing American officials, that the US and UK provided Ukraine with satellite images and intelligence on the Kursk Region after the Ukrainian Armed Forces began their incursion. We have been highlighting this for two and a half years. Where has The New York Times been all this time?
There is no sign of any condemnation from the West regarding the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ use of terrorist tactics against civilians in the Russian border area. On the contrary, these actions are not only praised but also openly coordinated. This amounts to the creation of a terrorist organisation in the form of the Kiev regime, with military, political, and financial backing.
The evidence of Kiev’s horrific war crimes against Russian civilians continues to grow. Even the Western organisation Reporters Without Borders has documented over 1,000 instances of Nazi symbols used by Ukrainian military who invaded the Kursk Region.
Horrific testimonies from captured militants continue to reveal that the Ukrainian Armed Forces command is directly instructing servicemen to kill civilians and loot Russian territory.
Numerous instances of Ukrainian Nazis looting homes and stores have been documented. One prisoner was even found with stolen baptismal crosses and jewelry taken from residents of Kursk villages. Antique icons stolen from the Kursk Region have surfaced on Ukrainian online auctions, openly labelled as trophies with their origins clearly indicated. Additionally, there are many photographs showing residents of the Kursk Region, who were unable to evacuate in time, killed by Ukrainian militants, with evidence suggesting that many were shot point-blank.
The widespread and deliberate nature of the atrocities and looting committed by Ukrainian forces on the Russian territory is becoming increasingly evident. The culpability of the Ukrainian Armed Forces in these serious crimes is now even more apparent to the global audience. No amount of Kiev’s propaganda, including Independence Day celebrations or statements from the rotten Vladimir Zelensky, can obscure the truth.
In this context, the desperate attempts of Ukrainian propaganda to fabricate stories about the supposedly kind and considerate invaders on our land appear utterly cynical. They spread false stories that these invaders are distributing food and helping local residents solve their problems, but these lies are quickly debunked, with refutations published immediately.
Foreign soldiers of fortune are also playing a significant role in the assault on the Kursk Region. American mercenaries openly posted a photo online of a Ukrainian mortar crew positioned next to a children’s playground. These militants take pride in violating humanitarian law and show complete disregard for the lives of civilians, including children. They are willing to use them as human shield, much like the Nazis did during the storming of the Brest Fortress and like terrorists do in modern history.
I would also like to note that on August 24 of this year, a missile strike on the Sapfir (Sapphire) Hotel in Kramatorsk, which is under Kiev’s control, resulted in the death of Ryan Evans, a security adviser for Reuters and a former British MI6 employee. We know perfectly well that there are no former intelligence officers. They are still closely tied to their agencies, and Western intelligence services are effectively guiding the media outlets they control to spearhead anti-Russia information campaigns. The notion of unbiased journalism is clearly out of the question. Notably, alongside this adviser, other foreign mercenaries were also killed in the strike.
Based on evidence gathered by the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, the competent authorities are working to criminally prosecute war criminals, including mercenaries serving in the Armed Forces of Ukraine.
On August 19, a member of the nationalist battalion Azov, Viktor Tsebrik, was sentenced to 20 years in prison for an armed assault on civilians in Mariupol.
On August 27, a Russian court sentenced US citizen C.V. Deveux, who participated in hostilities against Russian servicemen, to 14 years in prison. He has been placed on an international wanted list.
All criminals will be held accountable and face the full force of the law.
The Ukrainian neo-Nazis are not about to stop their terrorist activities in other Russian regions. On the night of August 21, the Ukrainian forces launched a barrage of 45 drones at targets in Moscow and the Belgorod, Bryansk, Kaluga, and Kursk regions, all of which were shot down by air defence systems.
On August 22, they attacked a civilian ferry loaded with 30 fuel tanks in the port of Kavkaz, the Krasnodar Territory. A fire broke out, and the vessel sank. Seventeen people were rescued, four were injured, and one person is unaccounted for.
On the night of August 25, the Ukrainian Army targeted a residential area in the Rakityansky District, the Belgorod Region, using multiple launch rocket systems killing five and injuring 14, including three children.
I would also like to emphasise that Ukraine’s direct involvement in terrorist activities has been noted on other continents. On August 20, Mali and Niger, which had severed diplomatic relations with Ukraine, teamed up with Burkina Faso to urge the UN Security Council to take action against Ukraine for its support of international terrorism, particularly in the Sahel region. Senegal condemned the Ukrainian Army’s destructive actions in Africa as well. The fact that the West refuses to recognise the terrorist and criminal nature of the Zelensky-led regime increases its direct responsibility for the bloody atrocities committed by Ukrainian neo-Nazis.
Presentient of its imminent collapse and in a fit of frenzied vandalism, the Kiev junta continues, on an unprecedented scale, to destroy monuments to soldiers who fought against Nazism. On August 21, Ukrainian neo-Nazis used an excavator to destroy a mass grave of 570 Soviet soldiers, who gave up their lives when liberating Ukraine, in the Square of Sorrow, town of Kolomiya, Ivano-Frankovsk Region. This barbarous act was cynically referred to as “exhumation work.” I’ve seen quite a few films about different wars and a lot of documentaries on the subject, but this one is beyond reason. I’m not even talking about morality or ethics. The operators of these excavators and those who will be filling these mass graves with earth or relocating the remains to a dump may well be the descendants of those very soldiers.
The above facts once again go to show the importance of the goals of the special military operation to denazify and to demilitarise Ukraine, and to eliminate the threats emanating from that territory. According to the Russian leadership, all these goals will, without a doubt, be fulfilled.
The 85th anniversary of the beginning of World War II
September 1 marks the 85th anniversary of the beginning of World War II which brought European and global civilisation to the brink of annihilation. Never before has humanity experienced a tragedy of such proportions. Sixty-one countries, with over 80 percent of the world’s population, were drawn into the bloody ordeal. Hostilities spread to 40 countries and, according to various estimates, casualties ranged from 50 to 80 million people, including military personnel and civilians.
Modern-day interpretations of the origins of this global tragedy are grounded in excessive amounts of blatant falsehood, opportunism, and self-serving interests, as the West seeks to absolve itself of its responsibility for the past. The Soviet Union knew from the Munich conspiracy of September 30, 1938 how and at whose expense the Western countries were planning to address the security issues. It also knew that, given an opportunity, they might form an anti-Soviet front.
Much remains to be learned about the role the West played in inciting Nazism. For instance, the documents related to secret pre-war Anglo-German talks in the summer of 1939 have yet to be declassified, something that is long overdue.
Eighty years later, the West chose the neo-Nazi Kiev regime as a tool to pursue its Russophobic policies and to inflict a “strategic defeat” on our country.
Insisting on Kiev continuing its combat operations, the West re-affirms its involvement in the conflict and its stakes in seeing it continue indefinitely with an eye towards killing as many Russians as possible, to cite George W. Bush. The situation is reminiscent of the assistance provided to Nazi Germany before it invaded the Soviet Union. Up until the first shots that were fired to start World War II, London and Washington hoped to use Hitler to weaken or to destroy their main geopolitical competitor, the Soviet Union. The Phoney War or Sitzkrieg that these countries waged against Nazi Germany until France was occupied in May 1940 leaves no doubt among the sensible people about the true intentions of the collective West of that time. Even the Nazi ringleaders were straightforward in their recollections, and one of the heads of German intelligence, Walter Schellenberg, openly stated that many in the Reich’s leadership wanted to join ranks with the West and target the Soviet Union. These plans were thwarted by the valiant victories of the Red Army.
In this context, assertions of an alleged “equivalence” between Nazism and Communism are unacceptable and blasphemous, as are the attempts to place equal blame for the start of the war on Germany and the Soviet Union, to downplay the decisive contribution of the Soviet Union on the battlefields of the Great Patriotic War, which crushed Hitler’s war machine, and to diminish the heroism of our liberator soldiers.
Defeating the most aggressive reactionary forces was the most important outcome of Great Victory of May 9, 1945. Our country saved from physical destruction many “non-Aryan” nations whom the Nazis planned to kill in concentration camps or to turn into slaves. This is what Ingrida Šimonytė, who came to congratulate Vladimir Zelensky, to “celebrate victory with light, gas, and without Russians” had to say now. This is exactly what the Nazis dreamed of 80-something years ago.
Victory over Nazi Germany and militaristic Japan contributed to the rise of national liberation movements, the collapse of the colonial system, and the establishment of a new and just world order under the aegis of the United Nations.
Today, more than 80 years later, our country is once again fighting for free and independent global development. We are fighting for the right of peoples to decide on their own future and their path of development.
As we know from World War II, claims to global domination have repeatedly been shattered by the courage and fortitude of our people.
Libelous statements by Romanian president
On August 23, 2024, the President of Romania Klaus Iohannis marked the EU’s newly proclaimed revisionist celebration – European Day of Remembrance for Victims of Stalinism and Nazism – by professing lies about our country and saying that the Soviet Union was responsible for unleashing World War II and the Holocaust just like Nazi Germany.
This amounts to making sacrilegious and misleading insinuations by their very nature. First, I would like to remind Klaus Iohannis and those who wrote his remarks about the 1938 Munich Conspiracy. This deal de facto sent a message to Adolf Hitler that he could embark on his conquest of Europe. Another thing worth recalling is that the Romanian army proactively contributed to the war effort against the Soviet Union in 1941-1944 and sided with Germany. There was also the genocide of Roma people and Jews by the Romanian state.
As a reminder, on September 29, 1938, Adolf Hitler summoned Italy’s Bennito Mussolini from Italy, Neville Chamberlain from Great Britain, and Edouard Daladier from France. These four people decided Czechoslovakia’s future. Neither Czechoslovak nor Soviet representatives were present at the Munich talks. The Poles also wanted to have their signature under the agreement to divide up Czechoslovakia, but Chamberlain objected, calling Poland a fifth wheel on a coach. Under the deal, Czechoslovakia had to hand over the Sudetenland to Germany, while Poland got Cieszyn County and Hungary received territories in southern Slovakia.
Today, few remember that almost all European countries without exception signed agreements of this kind with Germany starting in 1934. In January 1934, Poland led the pack among European nations to sign a non-aggression pact with Hitler’s Germany. Great Britain and France followed. The British never call this document the Hitler – Chamberlain Pact, even if both signed it. But why, may I ask? In fact, the 1935 Anglo-German Naval Agreement enabled Germany to build its own navy, since it could not do it after losing World War I. There is somebody putting ashes on their heads. Could it be that the president of Romania has a message for the UK?
Within just three days, from October 22 through 24, 1941, as many as 22,000 civilians, most of them Jews, were shot dead, hanged or burned alive in Odessa on the order of Ion Antonescu. The Romanians created several concentration camps in Transnistria, the former Moldavian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. This death factory killed thousands of Roma people and Jews. And this is just a small fraction of the criminal doings perpetrated by the pro-fascist Bucharest regime and the Romanian military establishment who took part in a targeted effort to exterminate Jews. Does Klaus Iohannis want to say anything on this matter? Or was he talking to the Tik Tok generation who do not care about anything except for the number of clicks and views when browsing videos? They ignore history. This makes a global-scale disaster imminent.
There was only the Soviet Union to stand in the way of these designs. It had to go to incredible pains and demonstrate its heroism, losing many millions of people.
Unfortunately, Romania’s current leaders have not only given up on learning the lessons of history, but have gone down the slippery road of distorting history and rehabilitating Nazi criminals. This spells nothing but disaster.
Inclusion of Ukrainian nationalist Yaroslav Gunka on the Interpol General Secretariat’s wanted list
The Romanian President is not alone in making slanderous statements. For example, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, another so-called beacon of democracy, has made similar remarks:
“Today, on Black Ribbon Day, we honour the millions of people who suffered or were senselessly murdered at the hands of the Nazi and Soviet regimes in Europe. This day coincides with the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact by the totalitarian regimes of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, 85 years ago. This pact set the stage for the invasion and occupation of sovereign states across Central and Eastern Europe, paving the way for the Second World War. (Justin Trudeau did not stop there. As the saying goes, “If you're going to make a fool of yourself, you might as well go all the way.”) As a result, millions of people suffered tremendously under totalitarian regimes, including Jewish, Romani, Slavic, and 2SLGBTQI+ communities, as well as persons with disabilities. Many survivors later found refuge in Canada, and to this day, their stories and contributions continue to shape the strong, diverse, and inclusive country we call home.”
We have discussed these “survivors who found refuge in Canada” multiple times in our briefings. Who are they primarily? Allow me to remind you about one notable individual.
This is the infamous Nazi Yaroslav Gunka (also known as Gunko or Hunka), who was involved in the murder of civilians during World War II. It is only now that he has been officially listed as an international wanted person through Interpol.
After receiving a standing ovation in the House of Commons of the Canadian Parliament in September 2023 (for those who may have forgotten, he was a member of the 14th Waffen-SS Grenadier Division Galicia), a request was made to the Canadian authorities to extradite the former SS member involved in the murder of at least 500 innocent Soviet civilians. What do you think was the response from the competent foreign authorities? They refused to extradite him. Canada has become a haven for such individuals. This not only disregards the principle of inevitability of punishment but also violates fundamental principles of humanity and modern civilization.
According to the materials of the criminal case opened in October 2023, Yaroslav Gunka, while in the settlement of Guta Penyatskaya (a former village in the Brodsky district of the Lvov Region of the Ukrainian SSR), was involved in the murders of innocent Soviet civilians.
Last week, thanks to the efforts of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation and the National Central Bureau of Interpol at the Russian Interior Ministry, the Ukrainian Nazi was added to the Interpol General Secretariat’s wanted list. Fifteen member countries of the organisation have already joined in the search for him.
It is true that it took Interpol nearly 10 months to decide to add a member of the aforementioned Nazi military formation to the organisation’s wanted list.
Nonetheless, we are encouraged by this concrete example of Interpol’s commitment to holding Nazi criminals accountable, regardless of the statute of limitations, including their search and extradition for prosecution of crimes against humanity.
We hope that in today’s world, Interpol, adhering to the principle of neutrality outlined in its statutes, will continue to be the most effective mechanism for combatting crime and ensuring international security.
We are confident that all Nazi criminals who have committed heinous crimes against civilians will be located and receive the justice they deserve, as such crimes have no statute of limitations.
The 85th anniversary of defeating the Japanese army at the Battle of Khalkhin-Gol
In the early 1930s, driven by its aggressive plans to occupy continental territories, Japan provoked hostilities in the Far East. Between 1931 and 1937, Japan’s expansionist ambitions targeted Manchuria which led to occupying China’s most developed industrial regions.
Isn’t it time to remind the President of Romania and the Prime Minister of Canada about these historical events? When will Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his fellow in that historical misfortune, Romanian President Klaus Iohannis, call Japan a militaristic country with a totalitarian regime? When will this happen?
Back then, Japan was open about its plans to conquer and forcefully annex parts of Mongolia and the Soviet Union. The security of the Soviet Far Eastern borders came under serious threat.
Responding to Tokyo’s brazen border provocations, Moscow strengthened its military-technical cooperation with the Mongolian authorities. On March 12, 1936, the Protocol of Mutual Assistance was signed in Ulaanbaatar. Does this Protocol annoy anyone in the West? Do they want to revise it as well? The Soviet Union officially declared that it would defend Mongolia’s borders as its own, and in September 1936, at the request of the Mongolian side, Soviet troops were deployed in Mongolia.
In July and August 1938, incidents along the Soviet-Manchurian border escalated into a serious armed conflict near Lake Khasan.
By January 1939, the Japanese ramped up their activities on the Mongolian border. The first open invasion of the Mongolian People’s Republic occurred on May 11, 1939, east of the Khalkhin-Gol River. According to Georgy Zhukov, the commander of the Soviet military group in Mongolia, “clearly, this was more than a border conflict, and the Japanese had not abandoned their aggressive goals concerning the Soviet Far East and the Mongolian People’s Republic, and wider hostilities should be expected soon.”
A massive Japanese assault began in July 1939 with the crossing of the Khalkhin-Gol River. The Soviet-Mongolian army led by Zhukov and Khorloogiin Choibalsan managed to not only repel the enemy’s attack, but also to launch a counteroffensive.
On August 28, 1939, the Japanese-Manchurian forces were encircled and destroyed. By August 31, 1939, the Mongolian People’s Republic was completely cleared of the Japanese invaders.
The defeat of the Kwantung Army was devastating. Japanese losses in the battles at Khalkhin-Gol from May to September 1939 amounted to over 60,000 killed, wounded, and captured, with 660 aircraft shot down. For his outstanding command of the Soviet forces in combat against the Japanese invaders and courage and bravery, the 42-year-old corps commander Georgy Zhukov was awarded the title of the Hero of the Soviet Union on August 29, 1939. Zhukov later said, “For all our troops, the commanders of the units, the commanders of the divisions, and me personally, the battles at Khalkhin-Gol were a great school of combat experience.”
The outcome of the clashes at Khalkhin-Gol confirmed the effectiveness of the Soviet-Mongolian military-political alliance. The Soviet Union helped the Mongolian People’s Republic uphold its independence. The lesson learned by the Japanese aggressors not only prevented further provocations on their part, but also deterred Japan from entering the war against the Soviet Union on the side of Nazi Germany later.
The memory of glorious victories and camaraderie between the Soviet Union and Mongolia is preserved to this day. August 2009 marked the release of the documentary film titled “On the Banks of Khalkhin-Gol.” The film highlights the historical importance and lesser-known facts about this military-political conflict, featuring extensive footage and comments by veterans and historians.
In August 2014, as part of a joint Russia-Mongolia project, a postage stamp was issued commemorating the 75th anniversary of the Soviet-Mongolian defeat of the Japanese aggressors at Khalkhin-Gol.
I would like to take this opportunity to say that I’m a proud granddaughter of V.G. Machulko, who took part in those battles. He defended our country and its security in that region.
New evidence of crimes by Japanese militarists
We are approaching September 3, which is a Day of Military Glory titled the Day of Victory over Militarist Japan and the End of World War II. In this context, we would like to once again talk about the crimes perpetrated by the militarist regime in Japan during World War II. As we have pointed out many times, these crimes do not have a statute of limitations and legal procedures to punish all the perpetrators continue to this day.
The Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation has officially released a regulation it adopted in July 2024 to cancel an earlier opinion rehabilitating S. Yoshikawa, a Japanese national. He was accused of sabotaging Sakhalin’s industrial sites and spying on the Soviet Union. In 1989, S. Yoshikawa was rehabilitated by a ruling arguing that the accusations he faced were driven by a political agenda. However, the effort to re-examine his file demonstrated that the criminal accusations he faced were justified. We would like to emphasise that he committed these crimes after illegally entering our country in September 1945, i.e., after Japan signed the Instrument of Surrender.
This example has special significance considering unrelenting speculation in Japan about the Red Army committing atrocities as part of its landing operations in Sakhalin and in the southern Kurils, as well as accusations against the Soviet government that it treated Japanese nationals in an excessively harsh manner. In fact, the opposite is true. Even after surrendering, Tokyo continued with its criminal activity and did not stop targeting the USSR with its sabotage efforts. It refused to recognise that it was to blame for the aggression in the Far East. Why? In fact, it was Washington who guided Tokyo in these efforts.
We will carry on with our unrelenting efforts to expose the historical truth on this topic, proactively contributing to celebrations marking 79 years since victory over militarist Japan and the end of World War II, while drafting a programme for even larger anniversary celebrations in 2025.
Calls for demolishing war memorials in Norway
There has been a growing number of attacks targeting military memorial efforts of Russian diplomats in Norway. First, the Mayor of Kirkenes caused quite a stir regarding a flower laying ceremony at a monument to the Soviet soldier during last year’s celebrations of East Finnmark’s liberation from the Nazis. Now it was the Mayor of Vardo, a community in northern Norway, who took his turn to voice his misgivings in the media. In particular, he announced plans to demolish three obelisks on his territory commemorating the Norwegian resistance fighters who perished while fighting Nazi invaders in occupied Norway.
The mayor believes that the Consulate General in Kirkenes and local sympathisers use these memorials as part of Russian propaganda. I have a question for the Mayor of Vardo, a community in northern Norway. Where do your sympathies lie? Do you sympathise with the Nazis, Hitlerites, the SS? This is how it looks, on the face of it. The mayor also voiced misgivings with the fact that Russia’s representatives took part in building these memorials. He said that these obelisks were misplaced, deprived of any historical value and had to be demolished. Who assessed the historical value of these obelisks and memorials? Where did it happen and when? Is there a registry of some kind to this effect? What defines a memorial’s historical value or the way we honour the memory of World War II heroes? All I can say in response is that they are invaluable. People have already sacrificed their lives for these memorials to be built.
Luckily, there have been some reasonable voices too, urging to refrain from rewriting history or treating the memory of Norwegian resistance fighters in this sacrilegious way. Let me remind you that the Norwegian authorities refused to recognise the contribution by these people to fighting Nazi invaders for too long. However, it seems that those who have taken this position could also be accused of serving the Russian propaganda.
As for our part, we have been stressing the importance of respecting the unparalleled feat accomplished by people of all countries in their fight for Victory against fascism.
Russian diplomats, no matter where they are around the world, will preserve and honour the memory of the great heroes without any distinction as to ethnicity, religion or other factors. For us, all those who sacrificed their lives and closed ranks in an effort to defeat Nazism are heroes. We have never sought to draw any distinctions in terms of their ethnic origin and will never do this in the future.
A Russian youth delegation is paying a visit to Slovakia from August 25 to August 31 to take part in memorial functions dedicated to the 80th anniversary of the Slovak National Uprising. The Russian representatives were invited by Prime Minister of Slovakia Robert Fico. He asked President Vladimir Putin to send a delegation made up of the direct descendants of Russians, who had participated in the uprising. The Russian President has highly appreciated and supported this noble idea.
The Slovak National Uprising (August 29 – October 28, 1944) is a symbol of the Slovak people’s liberation movement and struggle against Nazism during World War II. The Slovak National Uprising was centered on Banska Bystrica in Central Slovakia and involved anywhere between 60,000 and 70,000 people, mostly officers and men of the regular Slovak army, who had defected to the insurgents, and guerillas.
The USSR was giving them much support by delivering arms and ammunition, medicines, and other materiel. Over 35 organising groups made up of Soviet and Czechoslovak partisans and numbering a total of 200 people were redeployed to Slovakia to help expand the guerilla movement. About 3,000 Soviet citizens fought in Slovakia as members of insurgent units. Celebrating the anniversary of the Slovak National Uprising is a highly important historical and memorial event in Slovakia.
The Russian delegation includes grandchildren and great-grandchildren of such legendary participants in the Slovak National Uprising as Dayan Murzin, commander of the Jan Zizka International Brigade, Viktor Kokin, commander of the Vasily Chapayev guerilla detachment, M. Tsaregradsky, chief of the Three Oaks airfield in the guerilla-controlled territory and intelligence chief of the Slovak guerilla movement, Alexei Sadilenko, commander of a guerilla brigade and author of books about the war, and Alexander Yezhkov of the 70th Guards Rifle Division that liberated Czechoslovakia.
The young Russians cherish the memory of their heroic ancestors. While in Slovakia, they held meetings with representatives of Slovak veteran and youth organisations and told them about the glorious campaign record of their grandfathers and great-grandfathers.
The visit became possible owing to the goodwill and efforts of the Government of Slovakia, as well as Russian agencies and organisations, such as the Executive Office of the President of the Russian Federation, the Foreign Ministry of Russia, the Federal Agency for Youth Affairs, the Federal Agency for the Commonwealth of Independent States Affairs, Compatriots Living Abroad, and International Humanitarian Cooperation of the Russian Federation, the Russian Union of Veterans, and the Volunteers of the Victory Russian National Public Movement.
The young Russians’ participation in a large-scale military memorial function in Slovakia reaffirms both countries’ commitment to their common historical values and the memory of their joint fight against Nazism and for Great Victory.
We are grateful to the Slovak leaders, the local authorities, and ordinary people for their caring attitude to the memorials and graves of Soviet soldiers, who died while liberating Slovakia during World War II. Slovakia, unlike many other European countries, values and respects the USSR’s contribution to Victory over Nazi Germany and to the liberation of Europe from fascism.
We have spoken on many occasions about the scale of crimes based on misanthropy and racial superiority committed by Nazi invaders during the Great Patriotic War. However, the historical memory about the atrocities of the Nazis and their accomplices has its regional specifics.
Let me remind you that at the briefing on December 6, 2023, we spoke about the rulings of the Kaliningrad Court that qualified Nazi atrocities in East Prussia during the war as genocide against the peoples of the USSR. We also repeatedly pointed out the dangerous practice of creeping historical revisionism currently encouraged by Berlin, which refused to recognise as acts of genocide against the peoples of the Soviet Union the crimes against humanity committed by the Third Reich in the USSR during the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945, in particular the siege of Leningrad.
Today we will talk about the Republic of Karelia. In addition to Wehrmacht, the main opponent of the Soviet troops in this area of the front was the Finnish army under the leadership of Carl Mannerheim. Karelia was occupied by Finland, an ally of Nazi Germany, from autumn 1941 to June 1944. The goal of the occupation policy pursued by the Finnish military administration was to create Greater Finland. Acting contrary to law, they renamed towns and villages and carried out an aggressive religious campaign to spread Lutheranism. In practice, the Finnish Nazis implemented a policy of racial superiority, dividing the local population along ethnic lines into the allegedly indigenous Finno-Ugric, who had privileges, and the ‘non-indigenous Finno-Ugric,’ who had no privileges. It is obvious what such policy could lead to. As a result of these actions, half of the non-indigenous population (mainly Russians) was put into concentration (relocation) camps. As Deputy Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation Rashid Nurgaliyev noted in his article written on the occasion of the 80th anniversary of Petrozavodsk’s liberation from Nazi occupation, they established a regime no less brutal than that imposed by Nazi Germany in the occupied part of the USSR.
All in all, Finland established 14 large concentration camps for the civilian population and more than 70 labour and prisoner-of-war camps, where Soviet citizens died daily from hunger and hard labour. The occupation authorities did not build gas chambers or carry out mass shootings in the region, but killed people by deliberately creating unbearable living and working conditions. Starvation, exhausting labour and mass diseases killed the prisoners.
The truth about the atrocities committed by Finnish monsters, documented through eyewitness accounts, is preserved in archives and museums and has been published in specialised historical collections. Over ten thousand documents related to the Finnish regime’s occupation policies have been declassified. This evidence served as the foundation for the Supreme Court of the Republic of Karelia’s decision, which recognised the crimes committed by German Nazi invaders, occupation authorities, and Finnish troops in the Karelian-Finnish SSR during the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945 against at least 86,000 Soviet citizens as acts of genocide.
This court decision carries substantial legal significance. In the legal sense, the recognition of the fact of genocide of the Soviet people enables citizens to exercise various rights, such as accessing special procedures for burying deceased relatives and having their names entered into memorial books and military unit personnel lists.
The current Finnish “elite” continues to wilfully ignore the indisputable evidence of the immense tragedy that Finland’s involvement in Hitler’s plans brought upon both the Finnish and Soviet peoples. At the same time, they remain shamefully silent about how their belligerent fervour vanished under the relentless pressure of our nation’s courageous multinational population.
The Karelian court proceeding concludes a series of legal actions aimed at recognising the genocide of the Soviet people during the Great Patriotic War in the Northwestern Federal District. So far, courts in the Northwestern Federal District have already confirmed acts of genocide in the Novgorod, Pskov, and Leningrad regions, with the St Petersburg City Court recognising the siege of Leningrad as an act of genocide. “No one is forgotten, nothing is forgotten.”
We truly turned the page back then, without forgetting anything. We saw how they tried to erase our memory in the 1980s. Yet, for the sake of our future and our children’s future, we were prepared to move forward, to open a new chapter in our relations, to build partnerships based on mutual respect, cooperation, and understanding with those who had inflicted so much suffering on our ancestors. We were willing to overcome the pain, bitterness, sense of injustice, and the profound grief they inflicted on our people. But you can see for yourself how they responded to our open-hearted approach and extended hand.
Acknowledging the genocide of the peoples of the USSR is a matter of historical justice. They must recognise and take full responsibility for what they have done.
20th anniversary of Beslan school siege
This date is already etched in history, although the wound is still bleeding. On September 3, Russia marks the Day of Solidarity in the Fight Against Terrorism. Establishment of this commemorative date is connected with the outrageous tragedy that took place 20 years ago, which we remember as if it were yesterday. On September 1, 2004, during an official gathering ceremony, a group of terrorists seized School No. 1 in Beslan. More than 1,200 people were taken hostage, most of them being underage children. They were held without food and water for three days. They were held by those whom the ‘collective West’ called fighters for freedom, democracy and independence. Those Western exalted pseudo-liberators held children without water for three days. That bloody terrorist attack claimed the lives of 334 people, including 186 children. This wound remains unhealed for our entire country and bleeds to this day. Those who have been to North Ossetia have seen how carefully the memory of the victims is cherished there.
In 2004, terrorists pushed by Western ‘directors’ sought to destabilise our society. It was not just a monstrous targeting of civilians. Children who came to school on September 1 with their hearts wide open were caught in the terrorists’ gunsight. But this blow through the children of Beslan was aimed at our country as a whole. The task was to sow interethnic and inter-faith discord. Those abroad not only tried to condone that terrorist attack, but also provided the criminals with moral, political, informational, financial and military assistance.
Then, when it was no longer possible to hide the truth about what the terrorists did to the children, who were forced to drink their urine just to survive those three days, the Westerners got out of it. They simply ‘shifted gears.’ They blamed Russia for the terrorist attack. Instead of blaming inhuman criminals, terrorists and ghouls, they blamed Russia as a state, a society and a nation, because our country stood up to those who were supposedly fighting for freedom.
When reading publications in the Western, particularly American press, it was impossible to believe that all that was printed in the traditional media, and not in some fake publication or on the website of the White House which mental patients had seized by taking away passwords from the staff. This was the work of journalists.
Year after year, we have seen lies about Beslan spread in the West, and the truth about the terrorist attack could not get through. But the idea of the masterminds of that terrible crime failed. They did not succeed. Our society has survived; it is still wounded, but it has become stronger.
Today, Russia is facing a terrorist threat once again. As Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasised during his visit to Beslan on August 20 this year, “As for our adversaries and enemies, they don’t give up on their attempts to destabilise our country. This is obvious. Just as we fought against terrorists in the past, we must now fight against those responsible for crimes in the Kursk Region, Donbass and Novorossiya. But just as we achieved our goals in the fight against terrorism, we will also prevail in the fight against neo-Nazism and punish the criminals. There can be no doubt about it.”
Despite the hybrid war unleashed by the collective West against us, waged in particular with the help of terrorist and extremist groups of all stripes, Russia remains firmly committed to the principled fight against the threats of terrorism as well as to strengthening anti-terrorist security, relying on cooperation with genuinely interested partners.
United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation
The UN negotiating platform has started substantive work on a draft framework convention on international tax cooperation. In August this year, the UN Ad Hoc Committee approved at its second session Draft Terms of Reference for a United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. The document outlines the major aspects of the future international agreement.
The initiative to develop a multilateral UN tax convention, launched by African countries and endorsed by UN General Assembly Resolution 78/230, was a response to the non-transparent, behind-the-scenes process of global tax reform under the auspices of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
The reform was launched back in 2013 during the Russian G20 presidency with the aim of harmonising international tax rules that govern transnational corporations. Initially, it was assumed that members of the global community, with expert support from the OECD, would create a non-discriminatory, transparent and understandable tax system. However, the Westerners actually ‘privatised’ the negotiation process and deprived the majority of developing states (including the Russian Federation in 2022) of the opportunity not only to influence the course of discussions, but also to participate in them on an equal footing. The outcome of this work has demonstrated that the agreed rules are aimed solely at serving the financial interests of the West. Obviously, such an approach is unacceptable for Russia and other states of the Global Majority.
The Westerners are expectedly opposing the transfer of discussions on fiscal issues to the UN. Washington and its satellites continue to do everything possible to slow down this work, throwing up roadblocks, blocking constructive initiatives on the content of the future tax pact, and making every effort to wind up the negotiation process. During the August session, they actively tried to make the UN tax negotiation track purely auxiliary to the OECD’s, bleach the content of the future convention, and block any compromise proposals by the Global South, which is interested in effective international financial regulation. Contrary to the approved decision-making procedures, the Westerners demanded the right of veto to approve any agreements. Basically, they behaved in their traditional manner, trying to dictate their terms to the Global Majority countries in order to maintain their dominance in international fiscal interaction.
Nevertheless, the initiatives on the substantive content of the future convention found broad support from the international community. 110 delegations, including Russia, voted in favour; 8 participants, mainly Anglo-Saxons, voted against. All amendments put forth by Westerners were rejected. With the definition of the ‘terms of reference’ of the tax document, the Global Majority countries have hope for a true democratisation of international tax cooperation, an inclusive, fair and effective global tax system, and increased opportunities for financing national development plans.
The results of the session demonstrated that international taxation is becoming one of the areas where we can see gradually emerging financial and economic foundations of a multipolar world free from sanctions diktat and discrimination. Russia will continue to actively participate in the development of new tax rules together with partners from the countries of the World Majority at the UN platform based on the principles of equality of the parties and mutual consideration of interests.
Maria Zakharova: This is yet another boorish statement by the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry of August 25 this year, this time with unhinged threats of an unruly nature against Belarus that demand the withdrawal of its troops from the border with Ukraine ‘to a distance (as stated by the “adherents of Kuleba”) exceeding the range of the fire systems available in Belarus’.
We consider the reaction [of the Belarusian Foreign Ministry of August 26 this year] to such an ultimatum ‘attack’ by Kiev to be ironic on the one hand and harsh on the other. As it is rightly noted, there is no logic in this aggressive boorishness of Kiev, since it is the constant provocations of the Ukrainian side on the border, including the use of UAVs, the deployment of a large group of AFU troops there, the introduction of terrorists into the Republic, their supply and financing, and the total mining of the border area, as well as other hostile steps by Kiev, that forced Belarus to engage its Armed Forces to fulfil the tasks of ensuring the security of the territory of the Republic and its citizens. For our part, we might add that this is a habitual tactic of the Kiev regime and its western patrons, who cynically twist the facts and shift the blame on us.
Minsk also drew the right conclusions from the terrorist sortie by Ukrobanderite thugs in Russia’s Kursk Region. Everything has become obvious even to those who used to be sceptical about our warnings. The criminal nature of the Kiev clique and its propensity for military and terrorist adventures has been demonstrated. Amidst constant incitement of the Ukrainian junta by various western politicians to launch military strikes not only against Russia, but also, if necessary, against Belarus, no one in their right mind would take Kiev’s assurances of ‘no intentions to commit unfriendly actions against the Belarusian people’ seriously. In addition, with their steps to strengthen the defence of the border with neo-Nazi Ukraine, our Belarusian allies are faithfully fulfilling their commitment to ‘preventing stabbing Russia in the back,’ which we highly appreciate.
We consider the demarche undertaken by the illegitimate regime of Vladimir Zelensky towards Minsk as unacceptable and detached from reality. Having miscalculated in their criminal plans, with the situation of the AFU units along the entire front of the special military operation becoming increasingly difficult every day, Kiev has apparently decided once again to resort to its favourite method of public hysteria aimed at attracting international attention.
We believe it necessary to remind the hot (but not too bright) heads both in Kiev and certain western capitals that the Union State Military Doctrine updated in 2021 provides for the joint defence of the common borders of our integration association, as repeatedly stated by Russian President Vladimir Putin. The document sets out the participating states’ firm determination to ensure the military security of the Union State with all available forces and means.
As is well known, a joint regional grouping of troops (forces), as well as Russian advanced defence systems and tactical nuclear weapons, are currently deployed on the fraternal Belarusian land. The practical implementation of any threats against Minsk is fraught with harmful consequences not only for neo-Nazi Ukraine but also for its patrons. In this regard, we would recommend that NATO leadership and its leading member countries cool the ardour of their zealous underlings, which are capable of involving the alliance in a major armed conflict through their actions.
I emphasise that if Zelensky’s regime was actually seeking peace, he would have responded constructively to the well-known peace initiative by Russian President Vladimir Putin, and there have been many of those, along with numerous proposals from others to resolve the problematic issue, which is a dead end for Kiev. Recent events have once again exposed the true Nazi nature of the current authorities in Kiev.
Maria Zakharova: What surprises us is that the West focused on the way Russian officials and representatives responded to these developments in an effort to prove that Russia somehow used the situation for propaganda purposes or to support specific forces. At the same time, they seem to have ignored the gist of the matter – the fact that Telegram founder Pavel Durov’s detention in Paris shocked the entire world.
This goes well beyond Russia’s response. For us, this was the only way Russian diplomats could respond whenever a Russian national faces detention. However, I believe that it would not be an exaggeration for me to say that the so-called collective West shocked the entire world like never before with its actions. There is only one reasonable explanation of why these developments created such an unprecedented shock. In fact, when other countries in the Global South, the Global Majority or other countries acted in a similar way, French officials were highly vocal in expressing their hysterical concerns and misgivings. Moreover, I am not talking about the Nicolas Sarkozy or Jacques Chirac’s administrations, since it all happened during Emmanuel Macron’s presidency. It was his administration that held all kinds of conferences and symposiums whose agenda overlapped with international organisations and sought to replace them. These events focused on assessing how well various countries adhere to democratic principles, whether they guarantee freedom of expression, and whether people there enjoy human rights.
Let me remind you of the Paris Peace Forum, and the International Partnership for Information and Democracy, which paved the way to establishing the International Observatory on Information and Democracy. There is also the Forum on Information and Democracy. The French authorities used all these platforms to validate their far-fetched claims to judge whether other countries respect the plurality of views. Even when countries complied with the law and their domestic regulations, this still led to a feverish response from the Elysee Palace. This is what shocked the entire world. People started asking: What happened? How can you pride yourselves on these activities while berating others for acting in a similar way?
Let us take note of the hypocrisy demonstrated by officials in Paris who emphasise their exceptional status on matters dealing with the freedom of the media and ensuring equal access to information. They keep talking about the French Revolution and the Enlightenment to highlight the great ideas they inherited. But what remains of these concepts? What we see is the opposite of the so-called ideals they profess.
Let me remind you that the West launched an all-out informational artillery strike against our country in 2018 after a court in Russia issued a ruling to block Telegram. This was strictly a legal matter for Russia at that time. Dozens of non-governmental organisations published all kinds of appeals and criticised us day and night, and posed as anti-Russia experts to expose the witch-hunt unleashed against Telegram. We even shared a list of 26 major non-profits posing as defenders of human rights and freedom of speech.
Let me share some of the most spectacular quotes with you:
- statement signed by several Western human rights NGOs (April 30, 2018): “We, the undersigned 26 international human rights, media and Internet freedom organisations, strongly condemn the attempts by the Russian Federation to block the Internet messaging service Telegram, which have resulted in extensive violations of freedom of expression and access to information, including mass collateral website blocking.”
- statement by then OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media Harlem Desir (April 13, 2018): “The decision to block Telegram is deeply worrying as it hampers the important role of internet intermediaries in facilitating the exercise of the right to freedom of expression. In recent years, Telegram has also become an important channel for the dissemination of information by various media outlets. I call on the Russian authorities to reconsider this restrictive measure and to promote a free, independent and diverse communications environment.”
Has anything changed? On the one hand, Paris used to shame others for what it is now doing itself, while the international human rights community, shaped by Western neo-liberal institutions, has remained silent on these developments. What a contrast compared to the total silence from human rights organisations and officials today. Tens of millions of social media users have voiced their misgivings. The business and financial community has also expressed its shock, just as many other independent public figures. As for the neo-liberal elites, they have stayed silent.
For these reasons, in this situation the corresponding international institutions must fulfil their mandates to defend freedom of expression and information by condemning any actions by the French authorities to limit them. All of this once again exposes the true face of the French senior government officials who have brazenly trampled upon international norms governing freedom of speech and expression. They had only one motive for doing so and took advantage of this opportunity. If they adhere to certain standards, they must not only live up to them, but also defend and fulfil them.
Maria Zakharova: This statement has received an appropriate and fair evaluation from both his Cabinet colleagues and the opposition, who described it as irresponsible and dangerous in a situation where relations between Muslims and Jews in Israel and Palestine were already strained to the extreme. The unequivocally negative response to this initiative in the region and the world speaks for itself.
We can only add that his remarks not only show disrespect for people who practice Islam, including compatriots. Such public calls coming from an Israeli government member grossly violate the status quo of the Jerusalem holy sites, as enshrined in the 1994 Jordanian-Israeli Peace Treaty.
We regret to say that statements of this sort, coming from adherents of religious Zionism, as well as actions like the recent attempts by Mr Ben-Gvir and his supporters to perform Judaist religious rituals within the Al-Aqsa Mosque complex, occur regularly and deserve condemnation as highly provocative.
These steps contribute to the growth of radical sentiments among both Israelis and Palestinians and undermine international efforts to de-escalate military and political tensions in the Middle East against the background of continued military operations in Gaza.
Maria Zakharova: We closely monitor the EU’s efforts to upgrade their railways and roads, as well as sea and inland waterways, with the aim of extending their reach to third countries like Iceland, Lichtenstein, Norway, Switzerland, the West Balkans, the Eastern Partnership countries, the Southern Mediterranean, as well as the UK, and Türkiye.
The “military mobility” enhancement project, also known as “Military Schengen,” is the biggest present-day venture in terms of participating countries. It is totally in keeping with NATO’s interests and is closely coordinated with its leadership. The main objective is to expedite the transportation of military personnel and cargo to the “Eastern flank,” where advanced weapon systems should be deployed within the shortest possible timeframes. Washington and Brussels believe this is necessary to maintain the West’s advantage over Russia in terms of military resources.
Switzerland’s decision to join the Military Schengen reflects a departure from the principles of neutrality. Over the past few years, Switzerland has made efforts to diminish its appeal as a venue for multilateral diplomacy and mediation.
They are no longer seen as impartial intermediaries, and as a result, “Bern has lost its special international status, which had brought the country significant foreign policy, image, and economic benefits for decades.
For our part, we will need to adjust our approaches to relations with Switzerland accordingly.
Maria Zakharova: We keep track of the situation in Moldova and provide regular updates on it. The Moldovan authorities are doing their best to save the Eurointegration project. In reality, though, it is not a project, but a ploy to destroy Moldovan statehood. The tools are well-known and include ratcheting up anti-Russian rhetoric and putting pressure on political opponents.
A statement recently made by a member of the ruling Party of Action and Solidarity Party claiming that Russia is “using its agents in an effort to compromise the referendum” has come to our attention. In reality, the Euroreferendum slated for October 20 has long been compromised by Maia Sandu-led regime and has turned into a pathetic travesty of the democratic declaration of will long before that date.
On August 16, the Moldovan Central Electoral Commission hastily passed a resolution stating that only registered political parties and blocs will be allowed to campaign as part of the upcoming plebiscite. The undesirables are denied registration as was the case with the Victory opposition political bloc. On top of that, they are required to indicate whether they are “for” or “against” when they submit the documents Thus, calls to boycott the referendum, which are gaining popularity in Moldovan society, have been effectively declared illegal. Local political scientists note that this decision by the CEC of Moldova violates several provisions of the Constitution. Truth be told, this never stopped the Sandu regime, which used the Constitution to destroy the Moldovan language and is incrementally eroding the constitutional status of neutrality.
At the same time, the Moldovan authorities spare no budgetary funds to promote the infamous Euroreferendum and do not hesitate to take advantage of administrative resources. According to local media reports, the pro-government Europe for You campaign has cost Moldovan taxpayers millions of dollars.
This spending goes hand in hand with pervasive corruption among the country’s top officials which fact ordinary Moldovans find particularly annoying. The Moldovan analysts accurately pointed out the fact that having failed to overcome corruption, which, by the way, was one of Sandu’s core campaign promises, the authorities wasted no time taking the lead.
Let’s face it, the Moldovan authorities are mired in corruption. The statistics say it all: the number of documented corruption cases grew by 52 percent in the first six months of this year. Even Moldova’s international partners call it one of Europe’s most corrupt countries.
Who does all the stealing in Moldova? Is it ordinary people, sloggers who come to our country to work and who we are all familiar with? They have been doing honest work for decades letting everyone know they can make honest money. No, of course not. It is this clique that came to power in Moldova under the banners of “Eurodemocracy.” The Westerners are quite concerned with the level of corruption at the top echelons of power in Moldova which led to a decrease in direct foreign investment in the country by more than 3.4 percent in the first quarter.
Hopeless incompetence of the Moldovan authorities continues to show itself in the socioeconomic performance numbers as well.
According to the National Bureau of Statistics of Moldova, exports of goods fell by 12.8 percent and imports were down by 1.3 percent, with imports from the CIS countries plummeting by 47.8 percent in January-June compared to the same period in 2023.
Additionally, the overall output of the processing industry was down in the first half of the year as well. In particular, food production fell by 7.3 percent and garment production dropped by 15.3 percent
To patch up the budget holes, the Moldovan government continues to recklessly run the country deep into debt. More than one generation of Moldovans will have to pay it back. They are clearly taking their cues from Kiev. According to local experts, the national debt has been up by 58 percent since Maia Sandu and her team took office which brings “Western standards” to mind. It appears they are striving to catch up with the United States.
At the same time, hiding behind the front of European integration, the official Chisinau is ratcheting up efforts to destroy the education system in Moldova. More than 20 educational institutions around the country will close on September 1 under the pretext of the efforts to “streamline the sector.” We covered these kinds of “achievements” of the current authorities on several occasions during previous briefings.
The other day, the Ministry of Education of Moldova distributed teaching materials for conducting the first lesson of the year titled “Together for Peace.” It’s a classic featuring noble West versus Russia waging a “war of aggression.” There’s nothing surprising about it, since the Moldovan leadership, which is serving the interests of the West and the Kiev regime (as a conglomerate), is prepared to scrap the foundations of the teaching process in a bid to extend their access to the “trough.”
Moldovan citizens are clear that pro-Western policies of the Chisinau puppet regime condemns them to a life of destitute and disenfranchised masses, deprives their children and grandchildren of the chance to grow up and to get education in an independent, sovereign, beautiful, hardworking, and peaceful Moldova.
We fully support the Moldovan people’s aspiration to independently determine their own future and to oppose the interests that they find foreign to them and that are imposed on them from the outside.
Maria Zakharova: We have already released our principled assessment of this incident exposing the Paralympic Committee and officials in Paris for their discriminatory actions.
This is not the only ban we face. There were also other Russian media outlets, and all these actions infringe upon the freedom of information and media pluralism. They also undermine the Olympic ideals and discredit elite sports.
It is quite telling that practices of this kind have taken on a system-wide scale and turned into a repressive machine targeting the unwanted media. If the regular refusals by the French authorities to issue accreditation to various media outlets are any guide, we can clearly see that the sole reason underpinning these actions is the fact that these journalists work for Russian media outlets. As for statements that the reporting by sport correspondents on the Paralympic Games is somehow a matter of national security, I think that they amount to a somewhat deranged, sickly attitude.
And all this pertains to an event which used to be viewed as a universal gathering. France sent this personal message intentionally and decided to inject the venom of its vindicative hatred towards the Russian media into what had to be, and what used to be, an international sports celebration. Judging by what happened in Paris, this turned into a celebration of non-binary gender identities.
It all makes total sense and forms a single whole: what happened at the Olympics in general, including during the opening and closing ceremonies, the situation with the journalists at the Olympics, and the actions by the French authorities in Pavel Durov’s case, the attitude of the local NGOs specialising in defending the freedom of expression. The latter ones have put their weight behind Charlie Hebdo’s sacrilegious, totally worthless and stinky cartoon, but decided to move in the opposite direction this time around. They have not said a word about what is now happening to Telegram’s founder.
These are all links forming a single chain. Only recently, Paris posed as a major, if not the main, defender of the freedom of speech around the world, but has seamlessly transitioned to taking steps which beg the following question: Does this freedom of expression still exists in France?
I have just cited several examples, but I do think that it is high time that we shake UNESCO out of its sleep and turn to the corresponding NGOs. It is time for them, let alone the OSCE, to make their voices heard.
Maria Zakharova: This article did not come out of nowhere.
The European Parliament approved the European Media Freedom Act in March 2024. Spain’s Congress of Deputies followed up on this initiative by presenting its Plan of Action for Democracy, which raised serious concerns among the Spanish media professionals considering the lack of transparency of the document’s provisions, primarily when deciding to label reports as fake news. This means that the Spanish government wanted to get a new tool for purging its media landscape from any alternative views, all while professing vociferous accusations against massive and regular Russian misinformation.
An article titled “Decolonisation and culture: A new anti-imperial inquisition” offers a perfect illustration of this Spanish-style freedom of speech. It appeared in another Spanish newspaper, La Razon, on the same day, by the way – July 18, 2024.
However, unlike El Periodico’s Russia-hating article, the article in La Razon was quickly deleted from all its online resources. This was not a coincidence. It bluntly stated that “the United States has been dragging its allies into wars despite the fact that people there mostly aspire to peace. There is no democracy here.” It seems that this is something people in Spain must not know. This is why they deleted this article.
These incidents offer an insight into the actual state of the EU’s freedom of speech, in particular, in Spain. The military have been tasked with monitoring dissent there, which replicates the worst traditions of the 20th century military dictatorships. This runs counter to the democratic principles and will bring about a new witch hunt in the country, while also undermining democratic processes.
Question: What is your estimate of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent visit to Ukraine?
Maria Zakharova: We regard India as an influential world power that pursues an independent foreign policy in accordance with its national interests.
We appreciate the Russian-Indian relationship of specially privileged strategic partnership. We regard Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Kiev as an attempt to make a fair share of contribution to ongoing political and diplomatic efforts to settle the Ukraine crisis, along with other countries committed to an unbiased and well-balanced posture.
We are ready to continue a dialogue on the Ukraine theme with our Indian friends. We proceed from the premise that they know well the Russian position that has been repeatedly conveyed to New Delhi during bilateral contacts at the highest and high levels.
We would like to remind you that Russia has never ruled out the possibility of achieving the goals assigned to the special military operation by political and diplomatic methods. We are proving this in practice.
The direct Russian-Ukrainian talks were launched in the spring of 2022 at Kiev’s request. This was done almost immediately after the start of the special military operation. Yet, with mutually acceptable provisions of the would-be treaty on the table, the Kiev regime abruptly broke off all contacts on instructions from its Western masters (the UK in this case). To top it off, Vladimir Zelensky issued an executive order in September 2022 whereby he forbade himself to hold any talks with the Russian leaders, while in the meantime continuing to attack Russian cities and regions.
Nevertheless, President of Russia Vladimir Putin made a goodwill gesture in June 2024 by putting forward a wholly realistic proposal aimed at a long-term and fair settlement. It envisaged that the Kiev regime would pull out its forces from four Russian regions – the Donetsk People’s Republic, the Lugansk People’s Republic, the Zaporozhye Region and the Kherson Region – renounce its bid for NATO membership, solicit the lifting of all Western sanctions against Russia, and ensure the rights of Russian speakers in Ukraine. The plan provided for the definitive end of the conflict rather than its freezing with an eye to rearming the Kiev regime.
But instead of giving a serious consideration to this generous Russia’s proposal, the criminal, terrorist Zelensky regime carried out a bloody, terrorist incursion in the Kursk Region. I would call it suicidal for Kiev. The Ukrainian bandits and foreign mercenaries are committing veritable atrocities. They fire at civilians and volunteers, destroy civilian infrastructure and target journalists. They create threats for nuclear power facilities. Can there be any peace talks in these circumstances and who should they be held with? There is no question of holding peace talks with the terrorist Kiev regime.
This lawlessness is being perpetrated with the absolute Western connivance and encouragement of the Kiev regime’s terrorist actions. It is obvious that neither the US, nor its NATO satellites (or Kiev for that matter), need a settlement. They are interested in inflicting maximum damage on Russia, as they confessed themselves.
This makes all prospects of a settlement a remote proposition. The conflict will escalate and terrorism spread far and wide, which is a major challenge for the Europeans in particular. Terrorism will mature into an international terrorist movement with its sources in the European soil. The “fertiliser” is American, but the soil is European. These terrorist sprouts have shot up from it and are now spreading all over the world.
The Kiev regime is a terrorist organisation that (as we can now see) has gained a foothold on the African continent. This is a striking phenomenon. Usually international terrorist organisations recruited their reinforcements from the Middle East, Africa, or certain Asian countries. It is for the first time that international terrorists are supplied by Europe in the person of the Kiev regime. Let me remind you that Europe itself came under repeated attacks from terrorists who arrived from elsewhere. European countries had terrorist organisations of their own, such as the Sinn Fein. But this is the first time that Europe is contributing to the global terrorist international. Well done! It’s quite an achievement for the collective West. Shame on Europe!
Maria Zakharova: The industry-specific entities, primarily the State Corporation Rosatom, provide comments on the state of affairs at these facilities.
I would like to bring your attention to what President Putin conveyed on August 22 during a meeting with Government members and regional leaders regarding the situation in the Kursk, Belgorod, and Bryansk regions that border on Ukraine. The President strongly criticised the reckless and cowardly attempts by the Ukrainian Armed Forces to assault the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant. He also expressed hope that experts from the IAEA Secretariat would be able to visit the plant and to assess the situation which remains tense following the Kiev regime’s criminal actions.
Everyone is clear now that the Zelensky regime will not hesitate to gamble with the lives of the people in Russia, Ukraine, and other countries, and to burn Europe in a man-made disaster in order to serve its Western-sponsored Russophobia.
The visit by the IAEA Secretariat delegation to the Kursk NPP aims precisely to head off such a disastrous outcome of the Kiev junta’s actions.
We hope that during his tour of the plant, Rafael Grossi was guided by what President Putin had earlier to say, not to win anyone over, but to ensure that the international organisation’s mission remains objective, balanced, and focused on the interests of peace and the world at large, because radiation and contamination know no borders. These deadly particles do not need visas to travel across the globe. That brings us to the importance of providing an objective assessment of the situation by the IAEA. This is what we are looking for.
Maria Zakharova: I’d like to begin by saying that the influx of Ukrainian refugees to Germany is a direct outcome of the deliberate efforts by Berlin and its allies to flood the Kiev regime with weapons which began long before February 24, 2022, when Russia was forced to launch what is essentially a defensive special military operation. Former Chancellor Angela Merkel publicly admitted that.
The German government openly states that its goal is to prolong the bloodshed as much as possible in hopes of inflicting a strategic defeat on our country. If it were not for the imperial neo-colonial ambitions entertained by the current German leadership along with other collective West leaders, which it is striving to implement at the expense of еру Ukrainian lives, there would be no Ukrainian refugees in Germany.
Regarding the above decision by the German authorities, one could assume that they are trying to act in a practical and pragmatic manner which is typical of the Germans. This is about double-entry bookkeeping. On one hand, it’s about pragmatism, but on the other hand and long-term, it ends up with a loss.
Perhaps, by this particular time, Berlin had run the numbers and concluded that since hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees are already in Germany, they should be “monetised” in every possible way, including cheap labour and as a means to shift the demographic balance. This is social engineering at its finest.
PR advisers working for the German government might point out that images of overcrowded trains dispatched eastward by German police will unavoidably evoke negative historical associations with the international audiences.
Do you think that higher import duties on Chinese products can impact the American public opinion?
Maria Zakharova: The Chinese Foreign Ministry has already commented on this topic ahead of the visit by United States National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan to China. I have nothing to add to the comment released by our Chinese colleagues.
What would be your comment regarding these actions by Canada and the United States?
Maria Zakharova: It is up to the Chinese Government to define its export policy for Chinese-made products, including EVs, taking into consideration its national economic development priorities and the global demand for specific goods. The country has significantly increased its EV output over the past decade.
As for the accusations China has been facing from Canada and other countries, even if Ottawa has been leading the pack in this regard, we believe that they are groundless. We view them as an attempt to shift the blame for the deplorable situation in Canada on China, which exposes Canada for its irrational system of government. Just like the United States, it has excelled in using non-market, unfair and illegitimate competition practices, including all kinds of protectionist clauses and unilateral restrictive measures and sanctions turning into trade wars, rather than addressing its own economic challenges, improving its manufacturing and creating new jobs.
Maria Zakharova: The Russian diplomats must be assertive and persistent in their efforts and follow a systemic approach. This includes their requests to access Russian nationals facing detention or arrest. In this case, just like in any other instance, these are the functional duties Russian foreign missions perform, including embassies, consulates, consular departments and specific employees.
As for our contacts with the lawyers, it is quite common for our foreign missions to work with lawyers representing people who find themselves in difficult situations. Usually, both sides are willing to engage in these contacts.
Maria Zakharova: We have filed a request to this effect.
He is a Russian citizen. We made this move. In doing so, we pointed out right away that we are aware of how things work in France in this regard. If a person holds a French passport, Paris usually denies access since it views the people it detains or arrests as French citizens. But it may vary. Sometimes they deny access, while ignoring the requests altogether in other cases. This is how the French authorities do this, and we are well aware of these practices. As for the Russian diplomats, they are doing their job.
Maria Zakharova: If you delegate to me the right to respond to the insult you just mentioned, it appears that Ingrida Šimonytė’s intellect is second only to her femininity.
Maria Zakharova: We do not comment on the presidential debates in the United States. We are aware of the fact that one of the candidates represents the current US administration. It is pointless to provide comments on every statement they may make, because they are not accountable for what they are saying now and may change their campaign promises multiple times a day.
Speaking of Israel, though, we can glean from the presidential candidates’ public statements that Washington plans, in general, to continue supporting Israel. The details of the US policy will transpire after the elections.
With regard to providing aid to Ukraine and, more broadly, the policy aimed at inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia, we are not expecting to see any changes in the mainstream Russophobic policies given that Washington’s interest in Ukraine comes down to using it as a tool to “impact” our country. The anti-Russian consensus among US legislators and the executive branch will remain unchanged.
Considering the parallels we drew earlier today with the events that took place 80 to 85 years ago, we can safely assume that the collective West is trying to solve the “Russian question” by canceling culture, marginalising and stigmatising everything about Russia, persecuting the use of the Russian language, and attacking religion (not just Orthodoxy), in an attempt to pit people of different religious denominations against each other, not to mention the support for terrorist activities.
We see the way Nazi principles are used to promote ideology. We have been talking about this for many years now. But there is good news for them: they won’t ever be able to see this solution through, since such attempts have historically failed.
Washington will continue to use Ukraine and its citizens regardless of who sits in the White House as a cheap tool (this is what the US political elite think of them) which will eventually be tossed away.
We believe that sensible people in America understand, even though they generally lack the courage to admit it, that the goals and objectives of the special military operation will be achieved to the full extent.
I would recommend that the US citizens unite just like anti-fascists did during World War II, because neo-Nazism is rearing its ugly head. It will be too late if they don’t do so now.
Maria Zakharova: We discussed ethnic cleansing six months ago. Back then, I asked whether the international organisations recognised by Armenia had made any conclusions regarding this issue. You failed to provide a single solution or assessment in this regard from international organisations or experts. If you have them, please share them with me now.
Regarding your question about what Russia sees as a way for the Armenian population to return to their historical homeland in Nagorno-Karabakh, I have a counter-question: What does Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan think about it? Does he have any extended programme in this regard? I would be happy to review it and to provide my comments.
I’m familiar with the programme drafted by the Azerbaijani side which deals with bringing people back there. Why are you asking a representative of a different country about our vision? Russia encourages the parties to resolve this issue. However, doing so without implementing the trilateral agreements will be difficult.
We believe that the trilateral agreements signed by the leaders of Russia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan in 2020-2022 still form the basis for Armenian-Azerbaijani reconciliation, and there is no alternative to them. If you, as a media representative, are aware that someone in Armenia at the official level has turned these agreements down, withdrawn their signature or made an official statement to the effect that these documents are no longer valid, we will provide our comment on that. At this point, we have heard nothing of the sort.
The above agreements cover all key tracks for normalising relations between Baku and Yerevan, including the drafting of a peace treaty, border delimitation and demarcation, unblocking transport links in the region, and developing civil society contacts. Any attempt to question them is dangerous and would create a vacuum of mutual obligations between the parties amid unregulated bilateral relations.
As noted earlier, the Armenian-Azerbaijani normalisation was substantively discussed during President Putin’s state visit to Azerbaijan on August 18-19, and this issue was also brought up during the Russian President’s phone talk with Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan on August 23. Check with the Yerevan authorities whether the Armenian side officially stated during these talks that it no longer considers the trilateral agreements valid. I am not aware of anything like that.
The leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia have confirmed their commitment to continuing a constructive dialogue. The President of Russia, in turn, emphasised our country’s willingness to continue providing the necessary support to our partners with regard to all aspects of the normalisation process based on the 2020-2022 trilateral agreements that were signed at the top level.
Maria Zakharova: That’s not entirely true. As an example, I mentioned today Reporters without Borders, an international organisation. I agree that time and opportunities for de-escalation have been lost. However, they did also witness the presence of Nazi and SS patches on Kiev regime servicemen.
When we highlight the silence of these entities, we must recognise the underlying reasons. It is a result of pressure by the collective West on representatives of international organisations.
I haven’t heard of Westerners pressuring international organisations to withhold a relevant assessment of the situation in Nagorny Karabakh. So who is putting pressure? Is it Paris? Please elaborate. Let’s discuss specific examples.
For instance, the Vatican, represented by the Pope, issued a detailed statement expressing its disapproval of the law adopted in Ukraine that persecutes canonical Orthodoxy (which means the reaction of Catholics).
How can they not react? They are beginning to react more forcefully.
I have already sent you photographic evidence of Azerbaijan systematically destroying monuments dedicated to Armenian veterans and heroes of the Great Patriotic War in Artsakh. For instance the monument in Stepanakert honouring Hero of the Soviet Union Admiral Ivan Isakov, whose 130th birth anniversary was marked last week. How would you comment on such a contradiction between the words and actions of the Azerbaijani authorities in terms of “preserving the memory of the joint struggle against Nazism during the Second World War”?
Maria Zakharova: We have consistently urged both sides to include the preservation of cultural and historical heritage sites related to the Great Patriotic War in the negotiation agenda for Armenian-Azerbaijani normalisation.
We regularly address this issue at a working level with Baku and Yerevan. We express our principled position that it is unacceptable to destroy monuments dedicated to Soviet soldiers, regardless of where it may occur. Our partners understand and agree that it is a sacred duty of our countries to preserve the historical memory of the Great Patriotic War.
Yesterday, Mark Zuckerberg said that he had faced pressure from the FBI and the Joe Biden administration. Is the pseudo-liberal West trying to impose a digital dictatorship? Could this be part of a hybrid war on multipolarity in any way?
Maria Zakharova: I would not say that the West is simply trying to do it. It is actually doing it. We have been raising this issue for many years now, and have repeatedly called on the international organisations to come up with adequate responses to the way the Western IT giants have been behaving. We raised our voice on international platforms and during talks to say that a state of monopoly should not become a norm or justify the fragmentation of the online space.
We presented specific facts to make a point on the need to respect the laws of any country where online operators or representatives of IT companies, hosting providers and messengers operate. The Russian executive agencies and legislators have also been proactive on this front. The Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of Russia has sent a message on this topic to international organisations.
The dictatorship they exercise is real, and they stop acting as they please only when somebody tells them to stop, demand that they comply with national law and the international commitments of the countries where these IT giants were established.
We have explained many times the reasons that compelled Russia to designate the entity founded by Mark Zuckerberg as an extremist structure. It had an obvious connection to the United States intelligence services, which led to rampant, and shameful, practice of segregating people by their ethnicity, from blocking them to encouraging aggression against a specific ethnic group. However, Mark Zuckerberg did not face any claims or objections in the West of this kind or at this scale.
Yes, the European Parliament did summon him, and I remember that there was a financial dispute between the media and online platforms with newspapers asking to be paid for citing their contents. They got what they wanted. There was also an anti-trust investigation. However, not a single person representing American IT giants was detained or arrested. So what the world currently sees is surreal.
The West has been using the IT corporations it controls to achieve its policy objectives. The only way to cope with these practices is to be proactive in defending our information space. However, there is no way we can fully eliminate them, since American IT giants benefit from gargantuan allocations and follow strategic plans, including anti- Russia plans. They will never stop. This prompts us to defend ourselves by building up and expanding our own capabilities.
We must also act on the legislative front. This is what we did back in 2018 for Telegram. Remember all the screaming and shouting we got in response? They went far beyond criticising us and turned into screams and insults just because Russia complied with a court ruling and wanted to make sure that the way this company operated complied with the Russian law. Not a single Pavel Durov suffered in the process at that time. We were able to come up with mutually acceptable solutions.
As for the statement by the French Foreign Ministry, it locked itself in an ideological impasse. In its official statements, Paris said that it cannot comment on a ruling by a French court because it respects the independence of its judiciary. Does this mean that Paris has no respect for the International Court of Justice when it commented on its November 17, 2023, ruling regarding the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh? By the same token, it is hard to understand what prompted President of France Emmanuel Macron to comment on the decision by a French court right after the French Foreign Ministry released the statement you referred to. This begs a question: Why has the country’s president commented on a court ruling? Does this mean that he has no respect for a ruling by a French court? Overall, discussing every breath those representing liberal democracies take and every step they make is just useless.
They contradict themselves on basic issues, let alone the details. We have already exposed the tricky nature of this ultra-liberal ideology. They proclaimed that anyone could do as they pleased, arguing that this was what freedom was all about. The problem here is that if this is the case, no one will seek to impose any restrictions or limits. They refused to heed this message. This is what we are witnessing right now.
Maria Zakharova: You mixed up two different issues in your question.
Speaking of the International North-South Transport Corridor, in our contacts with Azerbaijan and Iran we mainly focus on what is known as the Western Route that goes from Russia along the Caspian Sea across Azerbaijan and then into Iran.
The route which will connect the main part of Azerbaijan with the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic through Armenian territory, along with several other routes, is being discussed within the Trilateral Working Group on unblocking all economic and transport links in the South Caucasus, which is co-chaired by deputy prime ministers Alexey Overchuk, Shakhin Mustafayev, and Mger Grigoryan from Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia, respectively. The Trilateral Working Group operates in accordance with the trilateral agreements reached at the top level, including agreements from November 9, 2020, and January 11, 2021.
We have seen statements by Iranian officials expressing concerns over the idea of establishing the so-called Zangezur Corridor. We would direct you to Tehran directly for clarifications regarding the reasons behind this approach.
Moscow’s position on unblocking transport links between Baku and Yerevan is widely known. We believe that the relevant agreements will be reached and implemented by mutual consent of the parties and on mutually acceptable terms to make sure they serve the interests of Azerbaijan and Armenia, as well as the neighbouring countries such as Russia, Iran, and Türkiye.
Maria Zakharova: I’m aware of the great variety of different theories, and the great number of people and media outlets that are trying to play this news card with the only goal of boosting their ratings by spreading various theories and, rumours, and putting forward unfounded hypotheses. This should never be done, either in this particular case, or any other case for that matter. Specific questions regarding the strategy for resolving the situation should be directed to the lawyers. We provide regular updates about Russian diplomats taking different steps in this regard.
Maria Zakharova: Things that John Kirby is saying are not true. We see no signs of the United States listening to whatever anyone has to say. They are obsessed with their own hegemony. The United States has its own ambitions that are not healthy. They operate on that premise and ignore other countries’ approaches and interests. They cross all kinds of dividing lines as much as they see fit and stop only when they are met with resistance. That’s the only thing that they understand.
Statements made by White House National Security Communications Adviser John Kirby during the August 26 briefing confirmed it one more time. When asked about prospects for allowing Ukraine to strike deeper into the Russian territory, he said that private talks between Washington and the neo-Nazi, and as recent events show, also terrorist regime in Kiev were already underway.
This leads us to a conclusion that the Kiev regime has been given a free hand for conducting operations in the Russian regions. Moreover, the Biden Administration is clearly getting ready to meet Zelensky halfway and to greenlight the use of virtually all types of American weapons, including deep inside the Russian territory. The US escalation policy has become increasingly provocative. One gets an impression that the US establishment has discarded what’s left of its common sense and remains certain that it is above the law. With the elections at stake, the Kiev card will be played.
Question: Isn’t Washington concerned about what other international players are thinking?
Maria Zakharova: It never was unless confronted with a clear-cut and firm stance. Otherwise, no.
Recently, the US Representative to the UN Security Council stated that not all parts of Security Council resolutions are bound to be implemented. How about that? Are they going to pick and choose pieces to implement?
Maria Zakharova: Regarding the first part of your question, we have a tradition not to comment on the financial relations between Russian businesses and other countries since these matters constitute commercial secrets. If you want details, you can refer this question to Rosneft. I can help you do this and transfer your question to my colleagues there, if needed.
As for the second part of your question, we keep in touch with all the stakeholders and do everything we can to resolve this situation.
Maria Zakharova: Our position on this matter has been consistent, and we can reaffirm that in today’s explosive environment and facing attempts to further escalate the situation, what is needed is maximum restraint.
We urge all the parties involved to demonstrate as much responsibility as possible and refrain from any actions which could lead the situation to spin out of control and bring about irreparable consequences including full-blown combat action.
We have been hammering this message during our bilateral talks, as well as in our contacts with other stakeholders, including in our public statements.
The Foreign Ministry shared its exhaustive comments on this topic during the July 31, 2024, briefing.
Maria Zakharova: What the Latvian authorities and their repressive machine are doing goes far beyond eliminating everything Russian from its media space or any other undesirables from Riga’s media landscape. They have eradicated all dissent a long time ago and turned to settling scores with the unwanted journalists and staging exemplary intimidation campaigns against their own people. The Latvian regime has been obsessed with controlling the minds of its people by enforcing a strict political censorship framework. This is what enabled the Latvian authorities to produce one criminal case after another, impose huge fines and use other kinds of illegal tricks like, for example, retrospectively amending their laws or rubber-stamping guilty verdicts. The verdict against Vladimir Dorofeyev is yet another warning for those who dare question Latvian policies, as well as Western approaches in general, and share their thoughts with others. This is what an exemplary neo-liberal democracy looks like when it reaches the final stage in its development. This is how officials in Riga like to present their country. In reality, however, they deny all their previous declarations. This is their current narrative, as they say.
Latvia has been sliding into dictatorship while the corresponding international institutions have completely ignored this process for many years now. Their proactive inactivity amounts to granting Riga a life-long absolution for any manifestations of intolerance regarding dissenting views. It is like they are saying: We absolve you from all your sins, so go ahead and commit more sins.
What is there to expect? This is the kind of all-permissive atmosphere they live in. For many years, they have been talking about all the sufferings they experienced under the Soviet Union, by pretending that they could not publish newspapers, listen to the radio, choose the television channels they wanted to watch. They pretended that they had to read the wrong books and speak the languages they did not want. This is what made them feel unfree, caged up. But when did all these lies happen? Did it happen back then or right now? I have a feeling that it was the case back in the day, as well as today.
Rutube, which is an alternative to YouTube for us, is in the hands of Gazprom-Media. And we remember very well that they financed Rain and Eсho of Moscow radio stations, which worked for a coup d’état in the country. Can the Russian Foreign Ministry contribute to the nationalisation of Rutube and its transfer to nationally-oriented entity, or develop and submit to the Russian Government a federal law on the creation of a nationally-oriented Internet, messengers and Internet platforms, as this is of vital importance for our country?
Maria Zakharova: On this issue, I recommend you to contact the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology and Mass Media or the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation.
Maria Zakharova: On this issue, I recommend you to contact the Russian Ministry of Defence or our country’s Security Council.
Maria Zakharova: No. It is called the terrorist Kiev regime.
Many terrorist organisations were sponsored from a variety of sources (British, American, and other), but went down in history under their own names. However, Vladimir Zelensky and his gang will go down in history as the terrorist Kiev regime.
