Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, June 8, 2022

A Russian delegation led by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is currently in Turkey on a working visit. Information about the visit is provided in real time.

Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming visit to Armenia

On June 9, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will make a working visit to the Republic of Armenia at the invitation of Armenia. His agenda includes talks with Foreign Minister Ararat Mirzoyan and meetings with Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and President Vahagn Khachaturyan.

The talks will focus on bilateral allied relations, the development of bilateral cooperation within the framework of common integration associations: the EAEU, the CSTO and the CIS, and the strengthening of coordination at international platforms. The sides also intend to hold an in-depth exchange of views on the implementation of the agreements reached by the leaders of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Russia on November 9, 2020 and on January 11 and November 26, 2021.

We are delighted to note the intensive nature of our bilateral ties this year, when we will mark the 30th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Russia and Armenia. The year 2022 saw Nikol Pashinyan’s official visit and Ararat Mirzoyan’s working visit to Russia, the Inter-Parliamentary Commission on Cooperation held a meeting, and State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin travelled to Armenia for a meeting of the Council of Parliamentary Assembly of the CSTO.

Daily dialogue is maintained between our foreign missions.

Sergey Lavrov to attend upcoming CSTO Foreign Ministers Council meeting

During our last briefing, I announced that Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov would take part in a meeting of the CSTO Council of Foreign Ministers (the Republic of Armenia is chairing CSTO this year) in Yerevan on June 10.

The participants will review the results of multilateral cooperation within the CSTO and discuss plans for further cooperation. The event will be used to conduct an in-depth exchange of views on the international and regional situations and its influence on the CSTO member states’ security, as well as ways to improve the CSTO’s crisis response mechanism.

As planned, a 2022-2024 Plan of Consultations between the CSTO member state representatives on foreign policy, defence and security issues will be signed following the meeting.

The upcoming 20th International Likhachov Scientific Conference

The Foreign Ministry-sponsored 20th International Likhachov Scientific Conference will be held in St Petersburg on June 9-10. It was co-founded by the Russian Academy of Sciences, the Russian Academy of Education, and the Congress of the St Petersburg Intelligentsia, and is held in accordance with Presidential Executive Order 587 “On Perpetuating the Memory of Dmitry Likhachov” of May 23, 2001.

Every year, this forum of high standing brings together members of the scientific and creative intelligentsia, prominent public figures, as well as politicians and experts from different countries for a constructive exchange of opinions on a wide range of issues. Over the past two decades, the International Likhachov Conference has established itself as a credible discussion platform. This format, which is based on non-politicised discussion of modern international developments and global processes in a variety of fields, is in high demand today.

This year, the conference will be dedicated to “Global Conflict and the Outlines of the New World Order,” which is an important issue for the international community.

An event within SPIEF 2022

As I conveyed during our last briefing, the 25th St Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) will take place on June 15-18.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will participate. Corresponding formats and bilateral talks to be held by the Foreign Minister are being worked through.

A panel discussion, “Neoliberal Dictatorship through the Eyes of Russian Compatriots Abroad,” hosted by the Foreign Ministry and Rossiya Segodnya International Information Agency, will be held as part of the business programme on June 16.

The devaluation of the Western liberal democracy model values will be discussed with the use of specific examples in order to support theory with actual cases. The discussion will cover gross violations of human rights, the rights of Russian citizens and our compatriots, but also, in principle, the dismantlement of everything that the West takes credit for and what underlies a democratic state. There will be interesting participants and analysts. I encourage everyone to attend.

Ukraine update

The special military operation to demilitarise and de-Nazify Ukraine, as well as liberate Donbass and eliminate the threat to Russia from Ukrainian territory continues. Peace is returning to more cities and villages that have been freed from Ukrainian neo-Nazis and foreign mercenaries.

Every day, the operation helps uncover new evidence of war crimes perpetrated by Ukrainian armed groups. Over the past few days, shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces has resulted in over a dozen deaths and left several dozen people wounded in Donbass. In Donetsk, a kindergarten and a school building were damaged, as well as a sports school, a kindergarten and a church in Gorlovka. Makeyevka and Yasinovataya have also suffered from artillery fire. Ukrainian Armed Forces set the wooden Church of All Saints on fire and shelled the surrounding grounds to prevent the monks from putting out the fire.

Ukrainian nationalists continue setting up their firing positions in residential buildings. This is their signature style. They have relegated the same fate to education institutions, music schools and kindergartens in many communities in order to use civilians as human shields. Investigative agencies from both Russia and the Donbass republics report all these war crimes and are recording them. They will be investigated in order to hold the perpetrators accountable.

The Kiev regime continues to recruit foreign mercenaries as the Ukrainian Armed Forces lose fighters. According to the Russian Defence Ministry, they have recruited more than 6,500 ‘soldiers of fortune’ from the United States, Great Britain, Israel, Poland, Canada and the Czech Republic. There are even Brazilian and South Korean nationals among these recruits. By early June, there was a two-fold decrease in the number of foreign mercenaries. Some of them were killed, while others changed their minds and returned home, or were taken prisoner.

Still, efforts to recruit mercenaries and ‘volunteers’ continue unabated, mostly targeting Afghan refugees, which is also quite telling, and what is left of the ISIS fighters in Syria. These people have probably found new and fertile ground for their hateful ideology; this time it is Ukraine where all radical elements from Western countries converge to make peace impossible for Ukrainian land. Private military contractors from the United States and Great Britain have been helping select these fighters and send them to Ukraine. However, there has been no talk of sanctioning them in any way, imposing restrictions or expressing misgivings about what they are doing, or statements that their activity runs counter to international law. The OSCE, the Council of Europe and European parliamentary assemblies of all kinds have been silent on this issue. NATO has also been silent, and actually happy about it. Why bother, if everything is going as planned. They believe that the war in Ukraine must carry on. When it comes to crimes against humanity or humanitarian law, the West has nothing to say. But this is not the whole story. Make no mistake, these actions will be examined through the lens of international law. The West has a two-fold agenda: to help Vladimir Zelensky, while also getting rid of its own extremists and radicals. What faulty logic. These fighters will return home having acquired extensive combat experience. This will lead to even more radicalisation in the Western countries. They have already been there, but have failed to learn the lesson, it seems, and want to step into the same river twice, as the saying goes. What a strange thing to do, but they seem to like it.

Interestingly, the West has been following the same logic with arms supplies. They believe that this is a one-way ticket. Quite the contrary. They are getting rid of obsolete weapons by sending them to Ukraine or third countries and forcing the latter to hand over weapons that are even older to the Kiev regime.

In doing so, they seem to forget that arms supplies to Ukraine create a black market for these weapons, including in Western Europe. The governments in the donor countries have so far refrained from breaking their silence on this subject, while independent experts and specialised agencies like Interpol have already started sounding the alarm. They understand what this will lead to. According to media reports, transnational criminal groups have already worked out schemes for shipping these weapons out of Ukraine, including heavy artillery. Some of these weapons have already found their way into Bosnia, Albania and Kosovo. Let me remind you that the West, the United States and NATO in general have been showing how they really care about the future of the Balkans. We can imagine the kind of future the Balkans will have under NATO’s patronage with all these ‘arms upgrades’ from the black market. Those supplying these weapons to Kiev today are putting the safety of their own people at risk because these weapons end up in the hands of criminals and terrorists. This is not even a matter of legal accountability, but the fact that this will go down in history as the responsibility of the NATO-centric countries. There is no getting away from this. This evidence will surface during investigations of hit jobs, robberies and raiding attacks.

In the meantime, the Kiev authorities and their Western sponsors continue inventing and disseminating fake news about the special military operation, such as the Russian forces' alleged plans to target Ukrainian chemical facilities. These headlines appeared as long ago as three months. But there is evidence to the contrary. The Russian military is exposing fabricated news on an almost regular basis.

Let’s take a look at the real plans. Ukrainian nationalists are preparing a provocation: they are mining barrels with toxic agents at the Azot plant in Severodonetsk in the Lugansk People’s Republic, and are presumably keeping over a thousand plant workers and local residents in the plant’s catacombs. According to Kiev, the explosion of storage tanks with over 100,000 tonnes of saltpetre and nitric acid will slow the advance of Russian and Donbass forces. Just as it always does, Kiev plans to blame the disaster and the loss of lives on Russia. It is tragic that the Kiev regime is sacrificing the lives of Ukrainian civilians to stage these fake attacks. We have seen what they did in Bucha and Kramatorsk. We are waiting for a factual “report” from the “collective West,” which has been inciting these crimes directly and indirectly and which is therefore an accessory to the crimes perpetrated by the Kiev regime.

We are seriously concerned about Ukrainian Justice Minister Denis Malyuska’s statement on the creation of a special camp for Russian prisoners of war who are “unlikely” to be exchanged for Ukrainian POWs.

I don’t understand how widely different ideas can coexist in some people’s brains. On the one hand, they claim there is no neo-Nazi or people-hating ideology in Ukraine. On the other, they are considering specialised camps for the POWs they don’t plan to exchange. Have you seen this happen before? We have, and this is exactly what we have been talking about for years. The Kiev regime and those who stand behind it get their ideas from world history, from the first third of the 20th century: Europe, Nazism and fascism. This is a new word in the division and segregation of people.

We have seen many things happen in Ukraine before. And now they are planning to divide POWs into “good” and “bad,” into those who are suitable for exchange and those who are not. What is this? Where are the human rights defenders and those who monitor the compliance of such statements with humanitarian law? Are they still chewing over Bucha?

The Kiev authorities claim that detention conditions comply with international standards, but we have no proof of this. The International Committee of the Red Cross has not responded to our request to help us visit Russian POWs in Ukraine, while ICRC representatives and Verkhovna Rada deputies have been allowed to visit the Ukrainian POWs at the Yelenovka pre-trial detention centre in the Donetsk People’s Republic. We would like to hope for reciprocity and constructive cooperation with the ICRC.

The war crimes and atrocities committed by Ukrainian radical nationalists, the unbridled militarisation of the Kiev regime and other facts we have exposed during the special military operation prove that the protection of the Donetsk and Lugansk people’s republics and demilitarisation and de-Nazification of Ukraine are imperative goals and tasks.

Things the Kiev regime and the international community denied two months ago have been proved real, which everyone can see. They include the dividing of people, segregation, abuse, desecration and torture committed under nationalist banners by those whose hands are not only covered with blood but also with Nazi tattoos, including swastikas.

The goals formulated by Russian leadership will be achieved, as we have pointed out on numerous occasions. This will eventually help establish a lasting and fair peace and stability in the region, and Europe as a whole.

I believe that the European countries which have taken the wrong side of history, for a number of reasons, are gradually coming to see, though this is not happening everywhere, what they helped bring about on their continent.

The US State Department’s International Religious Freedom Report

Surprisingly, year in and year out, with a weird persistence, the United States goes around preaching gems of wisdom about everything to everyone out there. Not being (to put it mildly) an ideal model in many (if not most) spheres of public and civil life, the economy, finance, or security, for some reason Washington considers itself in charge of shaping countries’ and peoples’ approaches to a variety of issues. Then, based on the standards it had set, it looks to see who lives up to them, and who doesn’t. It goes without saying that it never holds itself to these standards.

The most recent report by the State Department is neither original nor impartial and does not provide anything new in terms of assessing the situation with human rights in the sphere of religion in our country. Many countries have already commented on their “parts.” They more or less match. Everyone is surprised and stunned by Washington unceremoniously and rudely branding everyone. The lack of fresh ideas is more than offset by the self-serving approach and absolutely groundless criticism directed at Russia and China that are pursuing an independent policy. Praise is lavished on US satellites despite ongoing developments. In principle, we are seeing the Americans continue their strategy of deliberately distorting our country’s policy in the religious sphere in order to push through their own foreign policy interests and interfere in internal affairs with their purely fleeting and selfish goals.

The United States has become increasingly aggressive in its reports as it intensifies its rhetoric emphasising that the state of affairs with our country’s religious freedom during the reporting period (they believe we have periods that we should “report” for) has allegedly “worsened.” As a reminder, we do not report to them and they cannot conduct “reviews” of the developments in our country, because no one has assigned them these functions. These functions are assigned to several international organisations. But, as a rule, the United States never goes there, because the first thing they hear there is, “Look in the mirror. What is going on at home? When will Washington address its own issues?” We could review their materials and discuss things, but the same old tired information the State Department is citing comes from research conducted by organisations recognised in our country as foreign agents, including Memorial and others like it. I wonder if they see Memorial as a religious organisation or an organisation involved in religious activities in our country. Maybe it's a sect? In the context of the fierce confrontation with the United States over the special military operation in Ukraine, one should not expect Washington to be objective (no one is expecting it). There are some rules of decency, though. It should be impossible to lie like that. But it isn’t.

An in-depth study of Russian legislation on protecting the rights of believers is provided, but only in order to reproach Russia for using “draconian legislation” to oppress “minor” religions. We will leave this hyperbolisation on the conscience of its authors, but the report also mentions pseudo-religious or non-religious organisations such as Hizb ut-Tahrir (are they the ones who should be given “religious freedom” in our country? Seriously?), Tablighi Jamaat, and Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people. What does religion have to do with them? Most interestingly, these same organisations are mentioned in other non-religious contexts. They are saying these organisations (we are talking about a report on religious freedoms) are persecuted in Russia.

In fact, these are radical entities whose activities are illegal and pose a threat to the Russian state and its citizens. Shouldn’t extremist activities be persecuted and punished? This is the first time I’m hearing it. In the United States, any such activity is punished in the most severe manner. They are persecuted precisely for the extremist and not, as the Americans are trying to tell us, religious activities and beliefs. Let us also note the Falun Gong religious sect. Not only us, but the Chinese authorities as well have serious concerns about their extremist activities.

Ukraine is another case in point. Washington had nothing but praise for its main underling. Everything is fine there with religious freedoms and the rights of believers. No violations. The main “prize” goes to Ukraine. There are insignificant irregularities, but overall it’s an exemplary country. For some reason, not a single word was said about the persecution of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, the seizure of churches, and the persecution of priests, including physical reprisals. I think you are well aware of what they hear from the authorities and the national battalions. Materials and videos abound online. Nothing is said about it. It looks like Russia is also responsible for that, not the Ukrainian authorities or the “people from Washington” who stand behind them and who are the main culprits behind the church schism in Ukraine. However, it is not only about the schism, but also physical persecution of the people who identify themselves with this spiritual and religious entity.

When you read independent religious NGOs’ reports on Russia, they say almost nothing about clashes on religious grounds in our country, or religious differences in our country, which is true. We are proud of this. Even though the Americans are reluctant to see this, and even more so credit us with this, we will always uphold and defend this.

We would like to highlight one more point. The United States has taken it upon itself to teach other states how to go about their religious affairs. At the same time, they fail to notice the problems at home that they blame others for. For example, the public found out recently that the leaders of the US Southern Baptist Convention published a 205-page special report on sexual abuse in their own religion. These crimes have been committed for more than 20 years. The fact that there has been recognition and repentance on the part of the religious organisation deserves respect. Where was the State Department, which performs these annual rituals to review religious freedoms? What is going on there? Where was American justice? Where are the “flows” of analytics and specific solutions? Why has nothing been done in 20 years?

Russia resolutely opposes Washington's purposeful use of religious issues to discredit Russian domestic and foreign policy and put pressure on objectionable countries.

44th Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting

The 44th Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) took place in the hybrid format on May 24 – June 2, 2022. The Russian delegation took an active part in it.

The ATCM is a central platform for discussing a broad range of issues of the functioning of the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) in the interests of preserving the continent for peace and international research.

Unfortunately, for the first time in history, the meeting was turned into a discussion of issues that have nothing to do with its mandate. The host country (Germany) and the Ukrainian delegation that threw in a politicised document full of unfounded claims at the last moment, provoked anti-Russia discussion. The purpose is clear. They don’t care what happens with the Antarctic, in global processes from the economy and finance to everything else. They are only interested in conducting a political information campaign on orders from Washington.

The Russian delegation rebuffed these attempts and resolutely opposed the attempts to politicise the ATCM. The attempts to introduce in the ATCM activities issues that are completely irrelevant to its competence are a dangerous precedent that may do serious damage to the ATCM’s prestige and the entire Antarctic community. Even in the most difficult times, the ATCM managed to preserve its value as a forum designed exclusively for equitable cooperation on resolving Antarctic problems.

Responding to the statements of some countries, and with a view to giving an objective idea of the events, the Russian delegation described the reasons, goals and legal foundations of the special military operation in Ukraine (since this issue was raised).

Throughout the meeting, our delegation was trying to return the discussion to the confines of its mandate. The position of the chairmanship, including its systematic neglect of procedural rules, was obstructing these efforts. Apparently, everything must be destroyed, as we understand. Obviously, a substantial part of the international legal system that has been operating is under heavy attack.

We emphasise the commitment of Russia, a pioneer of Antarctic travel, to the spirit and letter of the 1959 Antarctic Treaty. We urge everyone to pool efforts and stop the destruction of the ATS that ensures cooperation and stability in the Antarctic.

France’s ban on Russian television channels

French authorities have yet again proved, not in word but in deed, their selfless commitment to the ideals of freedom of speech and free access to information. The most recent evidence is the decision to terminate broadcasting three Russian television channels in France – Russia RTR/RTR Planeta, Russia 24 and TV Centre International – in violation of the procedure established in the European Union, because Brussels has included them in its sixth package of sanctions.

The French authorities might have decided it was too long to wait until June 25, the date by which the EU Council is expected to approve, based on the unanimous vote of all EU member countries, the required regulatory acts, and have plunged headlong into “defending freedom of speech” in their own manner, as if it were not enough that this package of sanctions, like all preceding ones, does not comply with international law, to say the least. When imposing a ban on Russian broadcasters is in question, the French authorities could not care less about any instructions and rules, even those they issued themselves. They made everything null and void, even the opinion of their partners in the EU, who have not taken a decision yet. They are even denied this, as the decision needs to be unanimous. Similar selective legal nihilism speaks eloquently to the real worth of the statements that Paris regularly makes to defend the universal right of access to information. That is, when specific websites and sources of information were banned in Russia on a case-by-case basis for their extremist activities that had been proved, had not been camouflaged and had been externally funded, primarily, by the West, including through grants and the like, which was not part of the domestic agenda but was done from the outside – all this information was gathered to call us out each time we met at international forums, from the OSCE to PACE: How is that you have banned one and a half websites or refused a licence to some organisation? And now they banned television channels – as simple as that. These channels had large audiences, however, nobody asked them. They cannot even give reasons for their decision other than current politics. This is a characteristic symptom of a progressive disease of the Western neoliberal model of democracy that is reducing to ashes its own achievements one after another and dismantling its own system of values.

I understand that it is their problem but they are urging the rest of the world to follow suit. They divide nations into those who have “approached” their level of freethinking and those who are “lagging.” The former can have the right to cooperate with them and with one another, and, generally, develop, while the latter are denied the right to be called civilised, developed and democratic until they prove their worth. This ranking scale does not even work in theory after what has been done.

Naturally, we will look into how we can respond to such unfriendly actions. There will be a response.

Ban on all Russian TV channels in Latvia

The Latvian authorities are inventing increasingly sophisticated ways of removing everything related to Russia and the Russian language from their information space. This time, the local media regulator announced a ban on signal distribution for all TV channels registered in Russia starting June 9. The ban affects 80 TV broadcasters oriented to a broad audience – from film lovers to hunters and anglers. Now this is not allowed. The only offence they committed in the eyes of Riga is that they were licensed as media outlets in Russian jurisdiction.

This ban will deprive about 40 percent of Russian speakers in that country of all access to television sources of information in the Russian language. What is this if not information or media genocide? That’s what it is. Only channels like Dozhd that have proved their loyalty to the media authorities will be allowed to operate. It is okay for them to operate because it is okay. A classic argument. And they were surprised that they were called foreign agents here. What other title do they deserve if all other broadcasters that have nothing to do with politics are banned? They are the only ones that are allowed to broadcast. So, what they are saying there, under NATO’s wing, is considered right and useful. If at least one politically neutral channel had been allowed to work, I would think twice whether I should say this or not. But when nobody is allowed to work and only one channel is okay, everything is clear. We understood this long ago. I hope nobody has any questions left.

The local media regulator said that Crimea’s return by Russia is one of the terms for being reinstated. This means that the ban is indefinite.

By committing this act of ostentatious, uncompromising and chauvinistic censorship, the leadership of Russophobic Latvia is betraying the interests of its own population. Moreover, it is also returning the principle of “collective responsibility” to legal and law-enforcement practice in the European Union. It would seem that this principle was rejected in the past century. It was practiced by some European countries at a historical stage that they hate to recall now. What is it if not yet another reminder of the first half of the 20th century? That’s exactly what it is. We know well where such practices will lead Europe, which calls itself civilised.

Response to the ongoing repression of Russian media in the United States

On June 6, 2022, State Department spokesperson Ned Price once again accused Russia of violating the rights and freedoms of journalists and of “a full assault on media freedom.”

I have a feeling that they have no other folders except for the one labelled ‘Russia.’ It’s all they have – a stack of papers entirely devoted to our country. I have just listed the countries and country associations that have removed dozens of television channels from air (close to a hundred). Where is Ned Price? Where are his comments on certain countries in the Western camp, the “collective West” his country is presiding over, which play fast and loose with the fundamental principles of freedom of speech, or assessments of their actions? Where is a reaction?

We know what this is all about – it is about the goals we have achieved. We wanted to draw the attention of US government agencies and the public to what is happening to the Russian media in the United States. There is a real war declared on them there. We realised that the situation – not just segregation or harassment, but actual persecution of Russian media and journalists in the United States – has never reached the general public through any information channels. This is happening, but no one in America knows anything about it. We were determined to make this story public so that it would reach “them.” And it did.

We gathered American journalists, heads of all the American media hubs accredited in Russia at our press centre in Moscow and filled them in on everything that was happening to their Russian colleagues abroad, primarily in the United States. We did this, amid Washington's endless recurring chorus about something being wrong with freedom of speech in Russia. Apparently, they didn't know anything about it. The American journalists working in Russia had no idea what their Russian counterparts were going through in the United States. This is the truth. Only two out of ten said they had heard something. The others hadn’t. It this okay? They are usually aware of things happening on the other side of the globe, provided these things are unrelated to Russia or the United States. But they have no idea of the problems that journalists from the country in which they are now located are struggling with in their home country. So we told them. To make the effect stronger, we said we were going to mirror this treatment with regard to American journalists in Russia if this does not stop in the United States. They didn’t seem to like this, as far as I could tell. Isn’t it wonderful when the very people who invent punishments have a chance to feel the impact on themselves for once?

As intended, the information was promptly delivered to its destination. We have not heard any constructive proposals so far. The clock's ticking. If Washington, where they are inventing all these torments, doesn’t stop unleashing all hell on Russian journalists and the media, then we will act proportionately.

We were surprised to hear Ned Price say this, and I quote: “The United States continues to issue visas to qualified Russian journalists, and we have not revoked the Foreign Press Center credentials of any Russian journalists working in the United States.” I am talking to you now, Ned Price. We know each other, we met during talks. Unfortunately, you are misleading the public. The fact is that Russian journalists have big problems with US visas. Your Treasury Department has introduced sanctions against Russia-1, Channel One, and NTV. So there are some restrictions on the Russian media after all? This is a rhetorical question. Or rather not – it's a practical matter. Mr Price, because you've been somewhat dishonest with the global audience, you of all people deserve to know the truth. And here it is.

Russian media and journalists in the United States have been struggling with unbearable conditions for living, for any professional or business activity. They are denied visas of the appropriate category, and their accreditations cannot be issued or extended without such visas. Perhaps there are some exceptions – a few journalists you have deemed good and desirable who get their visas and accreditations. But for the most part, unfortunately, Russian journalists face enormous difficulties in obtaining or extending American visas. They cannot go home for work issues or on holiday because, if their visas are not extended, they will not be able to return to the United States and continue working there. You know this very well. Banks refuse to open corporate or personal accounts for them. I hope the State Department will finally hear about this now. The accounts previously opened by Russian correspondent offices and journalists have been blocked, and transfers to and from Russia are harshly restricted.

Mr Price, how do you think they are getting paid if their accounts are blocked? Ask yourself this question. Your American journalists get their salaries; they can pay their rent, rent cars and equipment, and buy food. For now. If you don’t do something to resolve the situation with Russian journalists and media, we will take similar measures against American journalists.

Now about broadcasting. Broadcasting on air or online is also a problem; in some cases, it is downright impossible. Local contractors, under pressure from US government agencies, are terminating contracts with our media for services, leasing of premises and land – they get no advance notice or reason for the termination (in fact, the contractors are forbidden to state the reasons). Their counterparts in third countries are also in the crosshairs: they are being openly threatened with secondary sanctions. Just for cooperating with the Russians, Mr Price. On top of that, our journalists are under constant pressure from US intelligence agencies; we have repeatedly mentioned this. Perhaps your journalists aren’t telling you anything about it, or your embassy is not working. The same applies to their family members. If you forgot to mention RT or didn’t do it consciously, I will refresh your memory. The RT America television channel was shut down in March with all of its YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter accounts, and its websites blocked. Google barred it from using its recommendation services. The RT app was removed from Apple, Google, and Smart TV stores. Are you saying privately-owned operators have made up their own mind to do this? It's not true. We know how much pressure US government agencies are putting on private companies, giving them recommendations and direct orders. We can see this from the situation with US economic entities operating in our country. There is no denying the obvious.

If all of the above is normal for you, Mr Price, not an egregious violation of freedom of the media and barbarism aimed at purging the media landscape of alternative opinions – we hear you. In that case, similar conditions will be created for the American media and their representatives in Russia. You don’t think it’s a big deal, do you? The decision is yours.

Sanctions against Russian civil aviation

Illegal unilateral Western sanctions against the Russian aviation industry have been in place for over three months now. The restrictions include the closure of Western airspace to Russian airlines.

International civil aviation has turned into a tool of political and economic pressure. This is nothing but a blatant abuse of international air law, including a number of provisions of the 1944 Convention on International Civil Aviation as well as bilateral air transport agreements.

This is yet another indication of the disintegrating liberal narrative, whose status has been overly elevated and which is apparently seen as a mandatory reference point for all countries. In reality, this shows that it has nothing to do with liberalism but, in fact, amounts to a distorted interpretation of liberalism. This probably fits into the neo-liberal concept, a far cry from the classical interpretation of this concept. There can be no liberalism in such conditions.

Those who conceived these restrictions care little about the fact that the measures they introduced considerably aggravate the already complicated situation in the international civil aviation sector, which is recovering from the pandemic, or that these measures adversely affect flight safety. Nobody cares what the people think.

What kind of liberalism is this? Liberalism means economic freedom, in the first place, as well as a free civil society. The latter implies at least some contact with the people, whose freedoms the Western community guarantees. Why don’t you ask the citizens of your countries? It would be interesting to find out what they really think.

In reality, their actions force airlines to change their routes. In turn, this creates an additional financial burden for air carriers and inconveniences for passengers, including those in Western countries. This directly impacts the environmental situation, which you have declared as a new top priority, including the green transition, reduced emissions, efforts to counter the greenhouse effect, limiting energy consumption and converting to energy-saving technologies. You can calculate the number of these additional routes for circumventing the flight zone that you have restricted. People need to travel. You told them that they live in a completely globalised world without borders that does not limit the freedom of movement. People came to believe you, and they got used to this. Today, they need to travel, but this passenger traffic stipulates much longer routes. What about the green transition and the environmental situation? What does Greta Thunberg say on this issue? This approach places extra loads on air traffic controllers, increases aircraft wear and tear and causes many other problems. But does this really matter when politics tops the agenda?

Russia was forced to draw the attention of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) to this problem and to state that it emphatically rejects illegitimate restrictive measures. The issue has been added to the agenda of the current session of the ICAO Council, which is underway on May 23-June 24. We expect the concerned parties to review this issue. We intend to continue doing everything in our power to prevent violations of international air law and the use of civil aviation for narrow mercenary and selfish political goals.

The impact of anti-Russia sanctions on South-East Asian and South Pacific economies

A desire to be among the first to join the anti-Russia sanctions policy of the “collective West” has had a negative impact on some Asian-Pacific countries, primarily on their citizens.

Australians are feeling the effect of this “collateral damage.” Despite the halving of excise duties, oil prices on the “green continent” have increased by 8.2 percent since March this year, and inflation is up to 4.3 percent, double the wage growth. As a result, Australians’ real incomes have plunged to the 2014 level. This is why they voted Scott Morrison’s party out in the May 21 parliamentary election.

Inflation in New Zealand is hitting a 30-year record level, and economists expect it to rise to 7 percent in the second quarter due to growing fuel and food prices. New Zealanders, who have become much poorer, will predictably “thank” the ruling coalition led by Jacinda Ardern’s Labour Party for this during the upcoming parliamentary or municipal elections. Moreover, our compatriots living there are experiencing pension transfer problems because of Wellington’s “autonomous sanctions” imposed on Sberbank and other Russian financial institutions. This has dramatically reduced the pensioners’ modest incomes.

According to the Ministry of Trade and Industry of Singapore, inflation rose from 4 to 5.5 percent in January-March 2022, a record high since 2012. The MTI has reaffirmed Singapore’s 2022 GDP growth forecast at “3.0 to 5.0 percent,” adding that it would likely be revised downward because of the situation in Ukraine and that price hikes could force the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) to tighten its fiscal policy.

It is clear that all kinds of restrictions imposed at the height of the anti-Russia frenzy have led to spikes in energy prices and have destroyed the existing logistics chains, which has affected the economy and foreign trade of regional countries. The situation is completely different in those regional states which opted to maintain normal relations with Russia and refused to join the sanctions war, despite unprecedented pressure by Western countries.

Positive dynamics was reported in the first quarter of 2022 in Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia (GDP growth over 5 percent) and the Philippines (over 8 percent). Cambodia expects to report similar yearend figures in 2022. Export-import transactions went up in Indonesia (38 percent), Malaysia (23 percent) and Vietnam (15.6 percent).

We have taken notice of our ASEAN partners’ growing interest in Russian oil, fertilisers and food. Statistics show that Russian exports to these countries have grown in January-March 2022. For example, our exports to Vietnam reached $971 million (up 48.2 percent year on year). The delivery of our chemical and foods products to Thailand has increased by 54 percent and 185 percent, respectively. We can report an increase of bilateral trade with Indonesia (up 89 percent), Malaysia (up 38.5 percent), Myanmar (up 128 percent) and Laos (up 50 percent). Draw your own conclusions.

Marking Russian Language Day

As per tradition, on June 6, the birthday of great Russian poet Alexander Pushkin, the world celebrates Russian Language Day.

Specially for our American “partners” we note that Pushkin’s name was Alexander, not Ivan. Ivan was the name of another writer, Turgenev. Or maybe you meant Ivan Shmelyov, our intellectual friends? Please tell us, we’re really interested to know. American diplomats called Pushkin Ivan. That hurt out feelings.

This day is marked by the UN as part of a programme to develop multilingualism and cultural diversity to support the equality of the six official languages of the organisation, and Russian is one of them.

On this day, Russian diplomatic missions, Russian Houses, associations of our compatriots abroad who live in various corners of the world, hold numerous events such as concerts, themed literary readings, conferences, meetings with creative professionals, competitions, quizzes, lectures, exhibitions and Russian language lessons.

In a number of countries, our diplomats, compatriots and graduates from Russian universities laid flowers at the monuments to Alexander Pushkin. By the way, there are more than 600 monuments to the great Russian poet in the world, with over half of them located outside the Russian Federation.

We received greetings from various countries. Thus, President of the 76th Session of the UN General Assembly, Foreign Minister of the Maldives Abdulla Shahid published a special video address on the social networks. He noted the beauty and lyricism of the Russian language and emphasised its role as an official language of the UN.

This year, despite the unprecedented discrimination campaign carried out by the collective West to “cancel the culture” of Russia, the tradition of holding celebratory events was continued. There is a saying, “dogs bark, but the caravan keeps on.” Thus, for instance, as part of the Russian Teacher Abroad project, over 200 schools in Vietnam, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Serbia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan held lessons of the Russian language and literature, as well as lecture tours, themed events, seminars and conferences for teachers and those who are being trained to become teachers. The Permanent Delegation of the Russian Federation to UNESCO held a reception to mark Russian Language Day.

A series of events was held in Russia prior to the holiday. On May 24-25, the Pushkin State Russian Language Institute under the auspices of the Russian Federation Commission for UNESCO held the 2nd Kostomarov Forum, which brought together 4,000 online visitors from 86 countries, and more than 300 participants who attended in person. Between June 5 and 7, the institute held themed lessons, readings of classic Russian poetry by foreign students from Afghanistan, Vietnam, Congo, Sudan and other countries on Red Square and Pushkin Square, as well as the presentation of a survey, Index of the Position of the Russian Language in the CIS.

Another important literature event of the past weeks was the 8th Red Square Book Festival, which took place between June 3 and 6. In total, 400 publishing houses from 60 Russian regions presented their books on the country’s main square. The number of visitors exceeded the pre-pandemic level of 2019 and reached 28,000.

350th birth anniversary of Peter the Great

June 9, 2022 marks the 350th birth anniversary of Russia’s first Emperor, Peter the Great, a prominent politician, reformer, military commander and diplomat. Our ministry will have a lot to say in this regard. Stay tuned.

The start of the Soviet army’s Vyborg-Petrozavodsk offensive operation

June 10, 1944, marked the start of the Vyborg-Petrozavodsk offensive aimed at destroying Finland’s armed forces and forcing it to withdraw from the war. Forces of the Leningrad Front (commander Army General Leonid Govorov) and the Karelian Front (commander Army General Kirill Meretskov), with support from the Baltic Fleet (commander Admiral Vladimir Tributs), were to rout the enemy forces and liberate Vyborg, Petrozavodsk, the Karelo-Finnish Soviet Socialist Republic, and the northern Leningrad Region.

The Vyborg-Petrozavodsk offensive can be divided into two stages: June 10-20, 1944, when the Leningrad Front’s forces broke through the enemy defences on the Karelian isthmus and captured Vyborg; and June 21-August 9, 1944, when the Karelian Front’s forces routed the enemy on the Onega-Ladoga isthmus and liberated the city of Petrozavodsk.

As a result of the summer offensive, the Red Army advanced to the pre-war state border with Finland and eliminated the threat to Leningrad from the north.

Seeing that it no longer made sense to continue the hostilities and that the Red Army was about to overrun the country’s vitally important centres, Helsinki had to renounce its further involvement in the war. In August, the Finnish government suggested that Finland and the USSR start peace talks. Moscow accepted the proposal with the proviso that Helsinki would break off its relations with Berlin. On September 4, 1944, Finland declared that it was withdrawing from the coalition with the Third Reich. On September 19, 1944, the USSR and Finland signed a truce agreement in Moscow.

Russia Day

Next Sunday, June 12, this country will celebrate its national holiday, Russia Day.

On June 12, 1990, the First Congress of People’s Deputies of the RSFSR adopted the Declaration of State Sovereignty of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, which proclaimed the equality of political parties and public associations, approved the principle of the separation of powers, and determined the supremacy of the RSFSR’s Constitution and laws on its entire territory.

On December 25, 1991, the RSFSR Law On Changing the Name of the State of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic was approved and came into force, establishing the country’s new name, the Russian Federation (Russia).

The Declaration of State Sovereignty signified the beginning of a new stage in the Russian state’s history. Since 2002, this holiday has been officially called Russia Day. On June 12, this country and its civil society, aware of its common responsibility for the present and future of our homeland, celebrate the national unity of all peoples of Russia.

Russia Day is widely celebrated both in this country and elsewhere. Improvements in the epidemiological situation and the easing of quarantine restrictions in most countries enable many Russian foreign missions to hold festive events in the traditional manner. Again, there will be state receptions for foreign guests and embassy doors will be open to friendly public figures, politicians, diplomats and Russian compatriots.

As before, we will focus on the information aspect. In the run-up to Russia Day and on June 12 itself, Russian foreign missions will post content dedicated to the holiday on their websites and in the social media, including ambassadors’ greetings, photographs, videos, and live broadcasts of events.

By tradition, our colleagues who are working abroad will inform foreign audiences about Russia’s achievements and its economic development with an emphasis on successes attained by the regions.

Please follow the official accounts of the Foreign Ministry and its foreign missions in the social media to avoid missing the most interesting things.

I wish you all the best for the coming Russia Day!

Answers to media questions:

Question: Russia has offered oil, gas and grain concessions to many countries. Can Pakistan hope to receive special terms for Russian oil and grain deliveries?

Maria Zakharova: The issue of petrochemicals and gas concessions does not depend on political considerations in Russia. It is an exclusive competence of the Energy Ministry, which is coordinating our policy in this sphere. Agricultural exports policy is the responsibility of the Agriculture Ministry.

It is true that we are forced to comment on the export of energy resources and grain because a number of countries and associations have politicised this matter to the utmost degree. This is why the Russian Foreign Ministry has become involved to lay bare their statements or to respond to them in the same political manner. But basically, this is the responsibility of the concerned agencies, which are dealing with this matter professionally.

Question: Many meetings of various BRICS countries’ ministerial agencies have been held recently, and active preparations are underway for a BRICS Summit scheduled to be held in late June. How would you assess the international role of BRICS in the current complicated circumstances?

Maria Zakharova: Strengthening the strategic BRICS partnership is a foreign policy priority for Russia.

Multifaceted cooperation between BRICS countries does not depend on the global political situation. It is based on the principles of openness, pragmatism, solidarity, consensus, continuity, and the fundamental principle of mutual respect. It is most important that our cooperation is not intended to harm anyone and has a positive agenda. BRICS is an inclusive group that is open to interaction with any constructive partner.

In light of the dramatic aggravation of international tensions, the five countries should act as the guardians of true multipolarity based on equal dialogue and mutual respect, a collective approach to current global issues, and a healthy balance of interests. Many countries are talking about multilateralism, while BRICS is applying this principle in practice. It is working to create a polycentric and more democratic and representative global architecture based on international law.

We support the implementation of the cooperation priorities set out for China’s BRICS Chairmanship. As for preparations for the 14th BRICS Summit, I would like to note that the five countries have many achievements to report. We have launched the BRICS Vaccine R&D Centre and started implementing the agreement on cooperation in remote sensing satellite data sharing. The Strategy for BRICS Economic Partnership 2025 and the Counter-Terrorism Strategy are being steadily implemented. The BRICS Energy Research Cooperation Platform is developing rapidly.

We hope that support from our Chinese friends will enable us to make great strides this year towards adopting the Russia-proposed memorandum of understanding on the regulation of medical products for human use and an integrated early warning system for preventing mass infectious diseases risks. The importance of these initiatives is especially evident now.

Question: The sixth sanctions package against Russia was adopted on June 4. What could it do to the Russian economy or the global economy in general? How does Moscow plan to respond?

Maria Zakharova: I covered this issue in part. We comment on it regularly. On June 3, the EU Council adopted another package of unilateral restrictions against Russia that are illegitimate from the point of view of international law. Among other things, it includes restrictions on imports of crude oil and certain petroleum products from Russia to the EU, the disconnection of three more Russian banks from the SWIFT international payment network, and a ban on broadcasting the Russian TV channels Rossiya RTR/RTR Planeta, Rossiya 24 and TV Tsentr International (TVC-International) in the EU.

Clearly, maintaining the unity of its ranks in the sanctions confrontation with Russia and the ability to support Washington’s moves on this track became the determining factor for the European Union. No one is thinking any more about the consequences of these restrictions for the global economy or the EU economies. No one even can say that the blow delivered by these packages will be destructive for the EU itself, and that one could at least estimate the costs for the EU. They are not even given the chance to do so. First, they make decisions with great fanfare and then begin to analyse the potential damage. When their own people hold them accountable, strange-looking representatives come out and tell tall tales about Russia being behind all of that, including higher prices at the pump and higher prices for energy and consumer goods. It doesn’t work more than twice, though. People begin to understand the inner workings behind these actions, and the fact that this entire strategy was developed by Washington and then sent down to Brussels as a directive for action. Then, in the course of such sporadic discussions (in fact, gatherings), they impose sanctions without regard for their own interests, and get a boomerang effect. This is the Brussels-style strategy.

New EU sanctions will, to a degree, affect our economy and the global economic situation. The Russian economy and business community have learned to operate under restrictions imposed by the West and to adapt to the situation at hand. We have been exposed to these circumstances for a long time now. This may look new to some people, but we have been living under these circumstances for a long time now.

This is causing problems that we need to find solutions to. Invariably, we find ways to deal with the circumstances at hand. It’s not our choice. For many years now, we have been talking about the harmful and absolutely ineffective nature of this approach. We are now seeing the destructive effect of this logic. We have been speaking about the suicidal nature of the EU policy for a long time now as well.

As President Vladimir Putin noted at the meeting on economic issues on June 7, Russia has managed to bring inflation under control, unemployment is at an all-time low, and agriculture and the construction sector are showing positive trends.

The Russian economy is adapting to the challenging circumstances and is doing quite well, although there remains much to be done.

We made clear multiple times that the sanctions confrontation with the West is their strategic initiative and long-term policy. Long-term in the sense that the decision was made a long time ago and was gradually introduced against our country. If we want to solve pressing global challenges, we must use the post-pandemic period for concerted actions by the international community rather than have the EU take thoughtless and irresponsible steps that are worsening the already difficult global food and energy security situation. Truth be told, it was necessary to consolidate efforts even during the pandemic. But we failed to see it back then. This is probably the Western community’s system-wide problem.

We put our EU neighbours on notice on multiple occasions that we reserve the right to respond to the EU. These reciprocal measures are not taken without thought or out of spite. They are taken with an eye towards preserving our own interests and limiting the destructive nature of the illegitimate sanctions imposed on us.

Amid the calls for imposing more anti-Russian restrictions, the assessments to the effect that the EU sanctions policy against Russia has run its course, failed to achieve a single goal set by the collective West and is ineffective have been heard louder and more frequently now, which proves the effectiveness of our response. The anti-Russian restrictions will hurt the EU more than Russia, which is obvious.

Our forced economic response with regard to the EU is well-thought-out and is directed exclusively at unfriendly countries. The corresponding legal acts of the Russian Federation (they are available, you can see them) allow for adjusting our response as needed in the interest of our country and our closest partners’ socioeconomic development. We will continue to follow the same principles when developing our response measures to the EU restrictions going forward.

Question: The Turkish army and its allies plan to invade northeastern Syria once again. What is Russia’s position on this issue?

Maria Zakharova: Foreign ministers Sergey Lavrov and Mevlut Cavusoglu commented on this issue during the joint news conference following their recent talks in Ankara.

I would like to draw your attention to the material we released on June 2, 2022, expressing our concern about reports on this military operation and setting forth our position. That is to say that we have already shared our assessment of this situation.

Question: President of France Emmanuel Macron said that “Russia should not be humiliated so that we can have a diplomatic pathway out of the crisis once the fighting stops.” How could this way of achieving a settlement play out, in your opinion?

Maria Zakharova: I think that this is a question for the person who made this statement. I believe that if someone is thinking about a way out, they have to be mindful of the “way in.” You don’t need to find a way out unless you get into trouble in the first place. But why did they have to do it? I keep asking the same question, and I would very much like to finally get an answer: Why think of recovery if you continue to destroy? This is something I cannot understand. Stop the destruction so you don’t have to rebuild so much.

Everyone knows all too well our misgivings regarding the approaches of the collective West, or whatever you call it – NATO-centricity or Washington’s satellites, it can be framed in all kinds of ways. This deals with NATO’s aggressive expansionist policy, the absence of security guarantees for our country, conditions undermining our security, the destructive unilateral, illegal and illegitimate sanctions and restrictions, failing to respect Russia’s interests or take them into consideration in all spheres, including security, economic, financial and humanitarian matters, endless lying and cheating when discussing subjects that matter for the collective West just as much as they are important to us (although we have been unable to engage in a sincere, frank and pragmatic conversation on many of these subjects lately), their inability to deliver on their own promises for no particular reason or offer an adequate explanation. We have discussed this at length and convened all kinds of negotiating formats throughout the second half of 2021. President Vladimir Putin, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu have regularly raised these subjects. All Russian ministers, including the ministers of sport, culture, finance, industry, etc., have discussed these matters from all possible angles. We need to revise something in the global track so that we do not have to think about rebuilding anything. I believe that we need to address the root of the problem instead of thinking about minimising the damage it caused when there is nothing left in terms of substance.

As for the words “Russia should not be humiliated,” this is more akin to a literary expression. No one should be humiliated – it is as simple as that. This applies not only to Russia, but also to France, continents, nations and specific countries. Moreover, you cannot humiliate any individual. This may sound strange to today’s Western liberals, but this is how it is. It is not a matter of disadvantage, but a fundamental principle.

Question: Does Russia see any signs of division in the West over how Russia’s special military operation must end? If so, does Russia intend to benefit from these disagreements in any way?

Maria Zakharova: What a stunner. This is not the first time I am hearing that Russia has been trying to undermine what was presented as Western unity in order to benefit from these divisions. I suggest a different way of framing this question: there was no unity to begin with.

Today, I read a statement by a Western official who used the term “voluntary solidarity.” There cannot be voluntary or involuntary solidarity. The fact that this term has surfaced demonstrates the involuntary and artificial nature of what the West calls solidarity. You cannot force anyone to show solidarity. We have witnessed this before when alliances were built by force and coercion and though blackmail for demonstrating unity in the ranks. This is what they called “solidarity.” But whenever there are obvious attempts to pressure someone, force them to do something or reach a common denominator no matter the cost, this is not solidarity but rather a lack of unity. This unity never existed, which makes any talk of sowing discord irrelevant.

But should this unity exist when we are talking about democracies and their associations? We believe in the principle that every country can have its own vision of its development path. This is what the diplomatic negotiating process is all about. It is designed to promote unity. This does not mean, however, that there was no unity to begin with, or give anyone the right to trick anyone into showing “involuntary” solidarity. These things have nothing in common, in fact. We have always believed that every state has the right to its own independent foreign and domestic policies, economy, etc. Countries can create voluntary unions on a mutually respectful footing. If they want their integration to be guided by other principles, this must be something they decide on their own. Whenever countries decide to subordinate their national interests to a supranational structure, they must do so voluntarily. A state can cede part of its sovereignty if it believes that it can benefit from this. This can include giving up its own armed forces and merging them into a military bloc that would protect the country in question. This may be the best option for it. This way, they can spend their defence budgets on their domestic agenda instead. If they are doing this voluntarily and this is what the people want, and if all the required legal procedures are fulfilled, and referendums held, so be it. However, what we are seeing is the opposite of that.

Just look at what is going on in Sweden and Finland. These countries used to hold referendums even on changing road rules from left-hand to right-hand traffic. Today, no one is asking people what they think about the seminal issue of changing their geopolitical standing on the world map. No one even bothered to do an opinion poll on this issue. We understand what the results will be. We never sought to benefit from division, and never had to because no unity ever existed. It has been artificially put together under orders coming from Washington.

Let me give you an example of unity and division. The air space around Serbia has been literally closed in order to create a physical obstacle to Russia-Serbia talks in Belgrade. Serbia has clearly stated the goals and objectives of moving towards European integration, and has been open about them. At the same time, it wants to hold talks with Russia. Why? Because it cooperates with our country in several sectors. However, its neighbouring countries, which are NATO and EU members, stand in the way. What have we heard from Washington? I believe that the United States should have remained silent and let Europeans decide on their own affairs. After all, NATO is not involved in this issue in any way, right? At least, no one ever mentioned this in public. But what did Washington actually say? The US Department of State spokesperson urged Serbia to focus on its stated goal of EU membership so that nothing distracts it from the EU-NATO-centric movement, instead of focusing on Russia. But where is Washington, and where is Europe? Where is Belgrade, and where is Brussels? Where is Russia? What does the United States have to do with this? I offered you a specific example. Where is the unity we are seeking to undermine? We have not done anything. We accepted an invitation from the Serbian side, formed a delegation and ordered a plane. We did not do anything else. From that point, they took care of all the rest. The further we go, the less unity the West has, as America’s example shows. Why are they doing this? I do not know, but maybe they find this to their liking.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has repeatedly talked about this in his interviews, news conferences, and articles. I suggest that you read them. You can find all of them on our website.

Question: The Russian Foreign Minister was not allowed to travel to Serbia. Sergey Lavrov described this as “unprecedented and unthinkable.” What response is being contemplated? Will it be equally “unprecedented”?

Maria Zakharova: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has commented on this matter during his urgently convened news conference on current international issues, which took place on June 6. He said that Russia would never undertake anything that would further complicate contacts between nations. It is our Western partners who are doing in this, and we criticise them for it. The reason is that all this is leading to destruction, to an attack on everything – from international law to the interests of individuals. To quote the Russian singer Alexander Gradsky, “nothing in this world passes by without a trace.”

Question: Vladimir Putin declared that Russia was ready to help with the export of grain from Ukrainian ports and explained how this could be done. President of the European Council Charles Michel, judging by all appearances, understood this in his own way and said so at the UN. Russian Ambassador Vasily Nebenzya even walked out of the UN Security Council meeting he was addressing. Please explain the reason why Moscow continues to maintain official relations with Brussels. What do we need the EU for?

Maria Zakharova: Why do we need the EU? It just exists for itself. It is an alliance that was created on the basis of certain principles and unites countries that thought it necessary to join it. This is why we are not a EU member.

We have for years promoted relations [with the EU], doing this in a sincere and pragmatic manner. These relations were aimed at integrating things, minimising costs, engaging in mutually beneficial cooperation in a number of areas. Regrettably, this largely fruitful work was stymied by the West, by the Brussels elite, who are fully at Washington’s beck and call. European nations, citizens of European countries have nothing to do with this blockade. Why did this happen? Because peaceful, mutually beneficial and effective coexistence on the European continent is a nightmare for the United States! Because it means they will be unable to find competitive advantages or fish in troubled waters. No! Any kind of US domination will be out of the question. As of today, “divide and rule” is the sinister, frightful 21st-century logic, with its conscious intention to sow chaos and attempt to rule.

We were proceeding from pragmatic decisions that were necessary for our national interests. Let me remind you that the EU was created as the European Coal and Steel Community; integration in other areas was launched later, with the ECSC transformed into the European Economic Community and subsequently the European Union with a common currency. It all seemed well and good until it dawned on someone in Washington that Europe acquiring its own strong currency and a totally independent energy system was unheard-of impudence. Can you imagine what it means for the US “deep state” to understand that Europe is energy independent and has its own mineral resources and technologies to produce and deliver these to any location in Europe and neighbouring regions. It means leaving the United States out in the cold. Obviously, they could not afford it, because they have no competitive advantage left to them other than the capacity to wreak havoc. So, everything was done, as we understand now, to transform the EU from an independent economic integration system into an economic division of NATO, to destroy ties, and deal a blow to the entire edifice of European unity, which we observed.

Question: Moldova may be considering the deployment of foreign police or military forces in its territory. What risks can this pose to Transnistria? What could Russia do to protect the interests of Transnistrians?

Maria Zakharova: We are aware that efforts to involve Moldova in closer cooperation with NATO have been taken since the beginning of the special military operation in Ukraine. Western politicians regularly speak about the need to provide military-technical assistance and supply modern weapons, including lethal ones, to Chisinau. Regrettably, this rhetoric has been accepted and even eagerly supported by some forces in Moldova.

This is definitely a cause for concern to everyone, including neighbouring countries and political analysts. Of course, the strengthening of one’s security is a sovereign right of all states, but the pumping of NATO weapons into Moldova can hardly attain this goal and besides, this is contrary to the principle of permanent neutrality sealed in Moldova’s Constitution.

As for Moldova’s preparations to accept foreign military personnel, you are probably referring to the Moldovan Government’s initiative to amend the laws on the state border and on the procedure regulating the use of physical force, special means and firearms. According to media reports, these amendments stipulate the possibility of using foreigners to guard the Moldovan border and creating a legal framework for managing the flow of Ukrainian refugees by a European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) mission. We would like to hope that this will be all. We will closely monitor the activities of that body in Moldova.

As for the potential risks to Transnistria, I would like to remind you that since 1992 stability in the Dniester has been reliably protected by the joint peacekeeping mission of Russia, Moldova and Transnistria. Next month we will mark 30 years since its establishment.

Question: What does the Foreign Ministry think about Turkey’s desire to cooperate with Russia to resolve the problem of Ukrainian grain?

Maria Zakharova: The foreign ministers of Russia and Turkey discussed this matter in depth at a news conference in Ankara today.

We respond to all mediation offers and welcome all kinds of constructive mediation. Our views on this particular matter have already been provided today.

Question: The Summit of the Americas is taking place this week in Los Angeles. The US administration decided not to invite representatives from Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua. Several other Latin American leaders chose not to attend. Does Russia have any plans to host a meeting like that with its partners and invite its Latin American colleagues?

Maria Zakharova: Please note Director of the Department of Latin America Alexander Shchetinin’s interview with TASS news agency dated June 6. He provided an in-depth description of our approaches to aligning relations with this region.

Our country has historical ties with the Latin American countries that are steeped in friendship and mutually beneficial cooperation. We are closely following the discussion between the United States, Canada and the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean on the setup and content of the Summit of the Americas that is being held this week. Their approaches to the summit and its agenda are very dissimilar.

The Russia-Latin America dialogue, including at the level of foreign ministers, is intensive. We mean to preserve and expand its scope. We will regularly update you about the events to be coordinated with our partners in the region.

We maintain a variety of contacts with Latin American countries on food security. Given the circumstances, it is now particularly important to step up cooperation in exports and imports of agricultural produce and to ensure uninterrupted supply of mineral fertilisers.

Russia is a responsible global food market participant and Latin America is well aware of it. Our joint efforts will help find ways for mutually beneficial solutions to all the latest problems, both natural and artificial. In order to mitigate sanctions risks to trade and economic cooperation between Russia and Latin America, we are consistently working to introduce alternative financial mechanisms to Western ones, and that includes non-cash payment and direct correspondent relations between banks. We are also taking a number of other steps towards this goal.

We are discussing similar approaches with our regional partners in bilateral and multilateral contacts, including by harmonising interests throughout the Eurasian and Latin American integration spaces.

We maintain candid, trust-based communication with the heads of diplomatic missions of the Latin American states accredited in Moscow, which is a hallmark of our cooperation. This communication style reflects the constructive and friendly nature of the Russia-Latin America relations.

We are aware of the region’s history. The peoples of these countries draw on their own experience more than history textbooks. They understand many things without having to take special political science courses. We are good at hearing and listening to each other, which allows us to build cooperation that looks to the future and reinvigorates and expands the scope of our shared objective, long-standing interests across various areas. We have in place every dialogue mechanism we need. We will analyse them and work with our Latin American partners whenever additional options and opportunities arise.

Question: In his Washington Post column, US reporter and columnist David Ignatius wrote that there’s a possibility of President Biden opting for a Korean scenario and dividing Ukraine into two different states. What does Moscow think about the likelihood of this scenario?

Maria Zakharova: Is that a humour column? What is that? What kind of an analysis is this? Could this be a sketch, a reflection after listening to the White House briefings? I’m not sure what this is. I don’t think we should take this seriously.

This school of thought speaks for itself. Divide and conquer. US foreign policy has always been grounded in this underlying principle supplemented by attempts to sow chaos. I would not be surprised to learn that their experts see this particular approach as an opportunity to promote their leadership. For eight long years, since 2014, the United States has had an opportunity to decide on the specifics of its involvement in resolving the situation in Ukraine. Perhaps, it shouldn’t have pursued the kind of policy in this region that it pursued. They had every chance to help Ukraine become a prosperous economy. Thirty years was enough for everyone to see what the Western moderators did to that country. Let’s face it, they destroyed it. Endless interference in domestic politics, which has evolved into external control with the anti-constitutional coups, the eroded concept of law, lawfulness, etc. They rely exclusively on force to resolve things that need expertise, study and analysis to deal with. I am not surprised to know that the US analysts can’t think of anything else but ploys of this kind.

Question: The situation is escalating. Our compatriots are not going anywhere and the problem persists. The recent Russian Foreign Ministry report On Violations of the Rights of Russian Citizens and Compatriots in Foreign Countries has made quite a stir among compatriots. We know that the number of such violations and other manifestations of Russophobia is growing around the world, especially in connection with Russia’s special military operation. Meanwhile, human rights activists among Russian compatriots have been asking for several years to support their proposal to create an international non-governmental human rights organisation outside Russia, which we believe could make a tangible contribution to countering and preventing such violations. This question was also raised at the World Congress of Compatriots in October, in which you also took part. As a result, its human rights section’s recommendations included considering this issue. Can you tell us if there has been any progress on this? And don’t you believe it is time to move from considering the issue to actual implementation, especially now that the situation with the rights of compatriots in the world is seriously degrading?

Maria Zakharova: With the current wave of rampant Russophobia in unfriendly states, we have seen a surge in attacks on our compatriots lately. This includes petty social discrimination based on their nationality, language, and citizenship. Under these circumstances, the legal protection of Russian compatriots living abroad comes to the fore of our diplomats’ work.

With the coordinating role of the Russian Foreign Ministry, this problem is currently being addressed by the office of the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation, the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation, and the Foundation for Supporting and Protecting the Rights of Compatriots Living Abroad, among others. Cooperation with human rights and public organisations is being strengthened, in particular with the Association of Lawyers of Russia and the International Association of Russian-Speaking Lawyers.

Qualified legal assistance for our citizens who have suffered abuse, including politically motivated persecution abroad, is also of great importance. We assign a significant role in this area to cooperation with law firms licensed in foreign countries under local laws in order to provide Russian citizens with proper legal assistance, including on a gratuitous basis (where possible), in the territory of their state of residence. The Office of the Foreign Ministry Commissioner for Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law and our embassies are involved in updating the relevant database. Undoubtedly, consultations in Russian are the most popular and convenient format for Russians.

At the same time, we note that our compatriots themselves as well as their coordinating organisations have become significantly more active in this area. Legal aid and counseling centres are being established, and conventional and online media outlets are adding legal pages. They provide legal and practical advice to thousands of our fellow citizens.

For our part, we welcome the involvement of Russian civil society organisations and associations of compatriots in updating the above lists of lawyers and law firms. As I said, we are taking part in this work as well. Enlisting the opinion of the professional community will help better compile these lists.

We always support such undertakings – especially now. We provide Russian communities with any possible assistance, including using the capabilities of the Foundation for Supporting and Protecting the Rights of Compatriots Living Abroad. We intend to further expand the necessary interaction with interested agencies both in Russia and abroad.

Question: Have representatives of the United Kingdom and Morocco approached the Russian authorities with a request to influence the Donbas People’s Republic authorities to release or mitigate the fate of the mercenaries from these countries who were taken captive in Donbas?

Maria Zakharova: The British Embassy in Moscow regularly appeals to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs on this issue, with requests to clarify the fate of their citizens who were detained in the area of the special military operation.

We always make it clear to our interlocutors that such cases are a direct consequence of the irresponsible policy directly pursued by London aimed at escalating the situation in Ukraine. The attempts by the British side over a long period of time to distort the situation on the ground have led some UK citizens to have the false impression that there will be no consequences for them for bloodstained earnings in Ukraine. As recent events have shown, there are consequences, and remaining under such illusions is a dangerous delusion.

We have repeatedly drawn attention to the fact that the responsibility for the lives of foreign nationals who have decided to participate in illegal armed activities on Ukrainian territory lies entirely with the governments of their countries. At almost every briefing, Ukraine’s recruitment of mercenaries abroad is discussed. They do this through embassies. This is unacceptable in terms of embassies’ area of responsibility. We have brought our respective legal assessments to the attention of every country. Any armed activity against Russian servicemen will be stopped immediately and armed groups of foreign mercenaries and “volunteers” will be destroyed.

In this regard, we would once again call on London to fundamentally reconsider its attitude to what is happening in Ukraine, to refuse to provide military support to the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev and to take effective measures to prevent its compatriots from participating in the events in Ukraine.

As for the specific UK citizens, who have been captured, we recommend that London send the relevant enquiries to the competent authorities in the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics. This also applies, of course, to the mercenaries from Morocco.

I draw attention to the fact that, at the instigation of the West, a number of countries turn a blind eye to the recruitment and sometimes even encourage Ukrainian diplomatic missions around the world to recruit mercenaries to participate in hostilities. Once again, this not only violates international standards, including the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 and the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries of 1989, but also the domestic legislation of the relevant countries.

Дополнительные материалы

Фото

Основные новости внешней политики

Международная безопасность

Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, June 8, 2022

Дополнительные материалы

Фото

Основные новости внешней политики

Международная безопасность

Поделиться ссылкой на выделенное