Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, St Petersburg, June 26, 2024
- Ukraine update
- Seoul and Bucharest reach an agreement on the supply of South Korean howitzers to Romania
- Ukraine’s attempts to manipulate the contents of the UN Secretary-General’s Annual Report on Children and Armed Conflict
- President Putin’s initiative to create new continent-wide security architecture in Eurasia
- Dynamics of G20 countries’ economic growth
- Negative consequences of anti-Russia sanctions for the socioeconomic situation in the countries that imposed these restrictions
- The Republic of Korea’s response to Russia signing the Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with the DPRK
- UN Security Council’s restrictive regime regarding the DPRK
- US sanctions against Kaspersky Lab
- 135th anniversary of the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the International Day of Parliamentarism
From answers to media questions:
- Facilitating the relocation of compatriots living abroad
- Western countries bear historical responsibility for their crimes
- Foreign Ministry’s relations with the academia and research communities
- Developing international transport corridors
- Introducing uniform history textbooks
- Statements by Americans on the Sevastopol terrorist attack
- Julian Assange’s liberation
- SCO Summit in Astana
- Russia-China relations
- Investigation into the terrorist attack in Dagestan
- Sanctions’ impact on climate cooperation
- Signing comprehensive cooperation agreements with third countries
- Statements by Secretary of Armenia’s Security Council
- Alternative for Germany’s anti-war initiative
- Restoring Russia-Georgia diplomatic relations
- Terrorist attack in Dagestan
- France’s military expansion in the Caucasus
- The St. Petersburg International Legal Forum and Interpol
- Dual citizenship
On June 22, many countries of the former Soviet Union marked the day of sorrow, the day when the Great Patriotic War began in 1941. Ukraine marked it in a specific manner: not with commemoration events, mourning, exhibitions, news conferences or interviews. It marked it with war crimes and a new series of terrorist attacks. Taking their cue from their ideological predecessors in the Third Reich, modern-day Ukrainian Nazis targeted Donetsk with US-supplied HIMARS missiles at dawn on June 22. It was the first time they used an M26, a 227mm unguided artillery missile armed with a cluster munition. Three people were killed. They also attacked Gorlovka, which is located nearby, where three people were wounded. Head of the Donetsk People’s Republic Denis Pushilin has reported that six apartment houses were damaged in the Kuibyshevsky and Budennovsky districts of Donetsk, four civilian facilities were damaged in the Petrovksy and Budennovsky districts, and a transmission line was damaged in the Nikitovsky district of Gorlovka.
But the Ukrainian neo-Nazi were not finished.
On June 23, 2024, when Orthodox Christians celebrated one of their main holidays, Trinity Sunday, the Ukrainian armed forces launched ATACMS missiles with cluster munitions at Sevastopol. Their goal was to kill as many civilians as possible. One of their targets was the Uchkuyevka Beach, where many people went with their children to enjoy the sea on a Sunday. You have seen the horrible footage.
The Kiev regime committed a similar crime 10 years ago, when it bombed a children’s beach in Zugres, Donetsk People’s Republic, on August 13, 2014, killing 13 people, including three children, and wounding 30.
Four people, including two little children, have been killed in the June 23 terrorist attack on Sevastopol. As many as 144 people have been wounded; 82 of them, including 27 children, have been hospitalised. On June 24, 22 gravely wounded people, including 12 children, were flown to Moscow on a special Emergencies Ministry plane.
How has the “civilised” and “enlightened” international community reacted to that attack? Washington, London and Brussels, whose specialists made it possible, have denied any involvement, flinching and claiming that they knew nothing about it. The EU’s lead spokesperson, Peter Stano, went as far as to say that reports of an attack on Sevastopol with NATO-supplied missiles lacked credibility. This is either unacceptable unprofessionalism that borders on madness or political cynicism. In plain English, there are none so blind as they who will not see. As for the spokesperson for the US Department of State, Matthew Miller, he cynically dismissed the Russian Foreign Ministry statement on the United States’ responsibility for the attack on civilians in Sevastopol as “ridiculous and hyperbolic” claims, although the statement included a detailed description of the attack and our views on Washington’s recklessness.
We have not heard any words of condolences or compassion towards the victims from them. However, this is not surprising. The representatives of NATO countries will continue to cover the criminal Kiev regime by turning a blind eye to the atrocities is has been perpetrating against Russians. Why? Because it performs their orders and delivers on the tasks they assign to it. This is how it gets all these huge pay-outs. This does nothing but reinforce the feeling of impunity within the Office of the President of Ukraine.
Over the past years, representatives of the Kiev regime have made thousands of statements. They may have varied in terms of their monstrosity, cynical and inhuman nature, but the statement by Mikhail Podolyak, who serves as advisor to the head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, crossed all the possible boundaries. Only a mentally deprived person or someone who has a totally flawed and distorted vision of our planet and civilisation could say anything like this. He referred to people living in Crimea as “civilian occupants,” while calling the peninsula “one big military camp and a stockpile of hundreds of priority military targets.” This amounted to recognising that Sevastopol was targeted by a pre-mediated terrorist attack. He made no bones about the fact that the Kiev regime views everything in Crimea and Sevastopol as potential military targets. Vladimir Zelensky still believes that people living there are Ukrainian nationals, even if this is not what these people believe, but his clique views them as occupants. This could amount to a bipolar disorder, a psychiatric condition, or demonstrate their persistent desire to make this whole situation confusing to an extent that no one can understand anything anymore.
There was not a single voice in the West to tell their puppets that they veered off course. This is all about money for them, so no hard feelings. All these monstrous statements invading and polluting the public space demonstrate that dehumanisation processes are gaining momentum in Ukraine.
Against this backdrop, we noted the June 23, 2024, statement by Marjorie Taylor Greene, who said that the United States would have had a different kind of response if “Russia, using a Russian satellite, fired cluster munitions on a Florida beach.” Maybe this US Congresswoman does not know what her fellow Americans from the US Department of State have been saying.
The US diplomats started by saying that not all UN Security Council resolutions were binding. In other words, they will comply with those that benefit the United States and its allies, and will not follow through on those that do not. If they benefit someone else, this would not be a reason for the United States to comply with these binding international documents.
Second, it may well be that members of the US Congress are not aware of what their officials have been saying about the International Criminal Court and its activities. Let me remind you that they clearly explained Washington’s posture regarding this entity: if the ICC takes any decisions that run counter to the interests of the US allies, the Americans will act to counter this organisation. And should the ICC go as far as do anything against the United States, they would probably send a couple of missiles flying its way. These are not double standards but the primacy of all-permissiveness and a humiliating way of treating the rule of law in all its manifestations.
The Russian law enforcement agencies have been diligent and thorough in documenting the crimes perpetrated by the Ukrainian neo-Nazis by identifying all the culprits and holding them to account.
The courts of the Russian Federation continue to pass sentences on Ukrainian neo-Nazis who have committed grave crimes against civilians based on evidence provided by the Investigative Committee of Russia.
A militant of the National Guard of Ukraine Alexei Korol received 27 years in prison for firing at a civilian car with two civilians, who died on the spot, in Mariupol on March 14, 2022. Ukrainian citizen Stanislav Grudnenko, who planned a terrorist attack in the village of Tokmak, the Zaporozhye Region, received five years of prison. The investigation established that in the spring of 2023 he was collecting information about the disposition of Russian Army units in Tokmak. In May 2023, he was given coordinates with a hidden makeshift explosive device. Using his experience in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, he chose three facilities where military personnel were located to carry out terrorist attacks. Fortunately, thanks to the coordinated actions of Russian law enforcement agencies, he failed to accomplish his plan.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank our law enforcers in all agencies, departments and ministries, who are doing this hard work, while I am at the XII St Petersburg International Legal Forum. During hostilities, they gather evidence and facts, and travel to various places in order to put a stop to the feeling of impunity and permissiveness, give a legal assessment, and respond to the Kiev regime’s actions. The current work is carried out not only to collect data for the future, but has specific legal results.
Recently, news has appeared in the media once again that the Kiev regime is planning to organise another counterattack on the eve of the NATO summit in Washington (July 8-9). The previous one stalled and resulted in obvious consequences for the Kiev regime. Apparently, the money has come. The order is accepted. The US election is coming soon. American Democrats need at least some facts to support their “Kiev regime” project in order to keep the topic afloat.
At the same time, Bankovaya Street does not care that the losses in this gamble could be even worse than the catastrophic losses that the Armed Forces of Ukraine suffered during the previous similar reckless scheme in the summer of 2023. Now everything is at stake. It is important to show its sponsors on the other side of the ocean that the junta is still capable of resisting and is ready to send tens, if not hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians into senseless meat grinders for their own interests. It is important for the White House to enrich Biden’s election programme with another pseudo-achievement, because after all, he leaned specifically on the Ukraine project in his foreign policy. What else to report? The Biden administration has nothing else to present on the foreign policy track. What is going on in the Middle East? A catastrophe. What about other projects? Perhaps the European Union stands applauding what the American “allies” did to it, doesn’t it? There are numbers that speak for themselves. American foreign policy has failed everywhere, if we don’t count the new waves of chaos an achievement. If it is ready to write this down as an asset, then this is a complete “success.” There is more chaos in the world now, although seven years ago a liberal democrat Barack Obama, who was US President back then, said that the world had become more predictable and safer. Now we can see it.
A quite telling interview by Chief of Ukrainian military intelligence Kirill Budanov was published on June 23 in The Philadelphia Inquirer. Budanov rejects peace talks, calling for escalating the conflict and committing acts of international terrorism. In the interview, he claimed that Kiev allegedly has no choice but to return what has been “occupied.”
These statements confirm once again that Vladimir Zelensky’s regime and his Western curators do not care about the fate of Ukraine and its residents. They do not care about the suffering of their own citizens who will have to face the hardships of this escalation: a destroyed Ukrainian statehood, a destroyed economy, destroyed industrial production and manufacturing facilities across the entire territory previously called Ukraine.
The Kiev regime is committing genocide against its own population. In addition to this tragedy, one more is happening. Vladimir Zelensky has taken out billions in loans pledging the future of those who will live in Ukraine. It is the money that Ukraine will have to pay back. These pennies came with strings attached. The lenders will either take away the land, the national economy and industrial facilities – everything that is left not of modern Ukraine (it did not build much) but of its Soviet past – or demand a repayment. As of today, Vladimir Zelensky has burdened its people with enslaving obligations if these people remain to live and build on this territory. They no longer have a future. These are not loan payments but extortion money that people will have to pay. For what? For the “bright future” that was “drawn” for them? For somebody in the White House to become richer and extend their term indefinitely. Or for the wellbeing of the self-proclaimed global Western elites and for allegedly belonging to them.
The weapons for the Kiev regime, the world’s biggest importer now, are steadily growing in price, as confirmed on June 16 in an interview for The Sunday Times by Vladimir Pikuzo, former director of the Ukrainian Defence Ministry’s Defence Procurement Agency, established in 2022. As the Ukrainian army’s needs grow, intermediaries are greedily capitalising on whatever is left of Ukraine – further to the tragedy of the Ukrainian population. The cost of one shot from a Grad multiple rocket launcher has grown from $900 to $6,000 in the past two years. One 125 mm projectile now costs around $7,500 as opposed to the previous $1,200. Pikuzo claims that, in order to turn the tide of the conflict, Ukraine will have to spend three or four times more than the defence budget of China, one of the world’s leaders in economy and finance ($200 billion).
Fired amid a corruption scandal, former head of the Defence Procurement Agency, Vladimir Pikuzo, candidly admitted that “corruption is an ally” in buying arms from third countries. “We sometimes do things that are prohibited under their own laws,” he noted. This is just beyond words. The only thing that could explain this is that they have reached an impasse. They have been driven into a corner, including by themselves, where wearing masks becomes pointless. One might as well call a spade a spade.
It is to be hoped that Julian Assange is finally free. A man who was hunted around the world, forced to lock himself up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for several years, and finally incarcerated in a British prison for five years, where he was held in appalling conditions. Even biased UN special rapporteurs, manipulated by the West, acknowledged that it was torture. Why did he have to suffer for so many years? What was he being punished for? For letting the world know the truth by publishing authentic documents on Iraq, which exposed an array of reckless policies including arms trade, torture, and occupation by the United States, Britain and the coalition they led. This is why Assange faced persecution by “Western justice” for so many years.
Now, the Kiev regime has explicitly admitted to committing crimes on a global scale, including arms trade fraud. Has any American legislator, judge or prosecutor at the International Criminal Court bothered to put this whole picture together? No US politician or military official has ever been prosecuted for arms fraud or for illegal occupation (in particular, of Iraq).
There have been a few low-profile investigations into British soldiers abusing their fellows or the local population – and those largely became public thanks to Julian Assange. There have been cases where inmates brought from the Middle East and North Africa were put through a living hell in US prisons.
But no one has been held accountable, materially or legally, or even publicly condemned for the far-reaching changes caused by the dismantling of sovereign and independent states. To this day, no one knows how many civilians were killed in Iraq. Probably over a million. No one has counted or will ever be able to do so. The Brits only admitted once that they had acted for other reasons than those declared. Sorry, that was a bad choice.
What we have just heard is a former Ukrainian official bluntly admitting that corruption (including in arms trade) was the norm for the Kiev regime leaders. It was actually a state policy for years. But there is no reaction.
Today’s Ukraine has long become a toxic state, rotten from within, which infects other countries with its corruption plague. This is something to be discussed on specialised platforms. Mutually beneficial cooperation with the Kiev regime (it is important for the Global Majority countries to realise this, too) will only do harm, because no one will ever be able to estimate the true scale of corrupt schemes implemented by Bankovaya. They have clearly learned the trick by now. Their promises have brought huge gains to crime rings and arms barons around the world. In this sense, they feel like masters of the world right now.
As a reminder, the Kiev regime’s corrupt bureaucracy is sustained with taxpayer money. Indeed, the money comes from the US government. But whose money is it? It is taken from honest taxpayers in the US and EU, who thus become donors, willingly or unwillingly. Mostly unwillingly, because they have never been asked.
Kiev’s intentional actions to plant mines along the Black Sea coast raise serious concerns in terms of the safety of navigation. In a June 24, 2024, article, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Ukrainian armed forces have been using Sea Baby drones to plant plastic bottom mines weighing about 180 kilogrammes. They are nearly undetectable for the ships. At the same time, representatives of the Kiev regime invite the international community to do business with them, and expand food deliveries and economic cooperation in the Black Sea region. Ukraine mined its Black Sea ports in the early days of the special military operation. But storms teared these mines from their anchors, sending them drifting towards the Romanian, Bulgarian and Turkish coasts. Nothing guarantees that this does not happen this time as well. Kiev’s NATO allies will be happy to receive a present of this kind, especially with the tourist season at its peak.
The mobilisation effort is in full swing in Ukraine. In accordance with the law which enacted stricter mobilisation requirements, persons eligible for military service must update their registration credentials before the July 16 deadline. This process is about to be completed: 2.3 million people have done this. Of this total, less than one half, or 1.1 million, were recognised as apt for military duty.
Challenging this verdict is not an option. Over the past eight months, civilian plaintiffs did not win a single court case against conscription offices. According to the Minister of Justice of Ukraine Denis Malyuska, Ukrainians who did not obtain their conscription papers will not be able to register their marriage or divorce, or to make any other applications to the civil registry, be it to register childbirth, get a death certificate or change their name. By the same token, they would not be able to register property rights, get any notary services or request international legal assistance. They would not get anything without adding their name to this funeral list.
This outrageous mobilisation drive has been causing misgivings among Ukrainians and fuelling hatred towards the country’s government. There have been more attacks against conscription officers, police officers accompanying them get beat up, while their cars are put on fire.
Some may be wondering what makes are so sad when discussing this matter. After all, they are doing everything to harm us, including by perpetrating terrorist attacks. On the face of it, any internal strife in Ukraine should make us happy, at least this is what they think in the West. They believe that it all comes down to fuelling tension and unrest. But Russia understands that the Kiev regime does not care about the national interests of its people, even if these interests may not coincide with what we want, or contradict our aspirations. The Office of the President of Ukraine simply wants to show something for the money it has been receiving from the West.
Do you remember how the Covid-19 pandemic started? What a painful experience we had back then. But then we developed a Russian vaccine, which offered us an opportunity to share it, and to enable others to use this solution by working together to make these vaccines. But they viewed this as an opportunity to reduce their population numbers – and here I literally quote the Western leaders. Vladimir Zelensky has been on the US payroll, and his actions are part of a concept the liberal democrats have in America along with all those who swore them allegiance. It consists of reducing the world’s population. It may sound horrific, but this is what the Office of the President of Ukraine is doing to its people. The Third Reich targeted those whom it did not view as its equals, but the Kiev regime went even further by using the same methods against its own people.
Such incidents were reported in Dnepropetrovsk, Odessa, Kiev, and other cities. People are fleeing from the country to avoid becoming cannon fodder. To catch those escaping near the borders of Moldova, Romania, Hungary, and Slovakia, the Kiev regime deployed additional security units with carte blanche, including the use of lethal force. These measures target those leaving Ukraine, not those entering.
As time goes on, Ukrainians will come to realise the impact of this on their lives. The sooner this realisation dawns, the more they can safeguard themselves and future generations. Reflecting on a 2,000-year-old passage from the Gospel of Matthew, where Jesus Christ said, “seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand”, this ancient wisdom finds a contemporary echo in Ukraine today. Everything unfolds in plain sight, data are available. You can look out of the window and see what’s going on. There are visible signs of hardship affecting every Ukrainian family – yet many remain unaware, seemingly in the dark.
Those who left Ukraine have no plans to return. It was recently revealed that Germany granted asylum to the Kiev Symphony Orchestra, which departed Ukraine in 2022. The orchestra, consisting of 73 individuals, two-thirds of whom are men of mobilisation age, and with family members − 130 persons total, has been provided with housing in Monheim am Rhein. They are set to stay in Germany for the next three years.
The Kiev regime, along with the administrations of Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau, claim that Russia poses a threat to them. But who are people fleeing from? Why were Russian diplomats expelled from Poland in 2022? It was because a large number of Ukrainians attempted to reach Russia via Poland. Polish authorities issued orders to allow entry to everyone from Ukraine, even those without passports or other documents, but allow exit only into European Union countries. Entry into Russian territory was prohibited.
Nevertheless, people managed to break through Kaliningrad and Belarus. Russian diplomats were expelled to prevent them from providing assistance, to ensure that those fleeing from Vladimir Zelensky’s regime couldn’t find refuge at Russian embassies and consulates. Despite these efforts, our diplomats maintained remote communication, offering aid and facilitating entry into Russian territory. This serves as evidence: Ukrainian citizens are indeed fleeing their own government and “president”.
Yet, Vladimir Zelensky’s repressive measures are proving ineffective. The mobilisation plan is encountering significant challenges, leading to strong discontent in Bankovaya Street. The number of deserters is steadily increasing, with estimates suggesting it could reach around 200,000 people. In an attempt to apprehend them and restore order within the military, a military police force with exceptionally wide-ranging powers is being established. What kind of police force is this? The police operate within the bounds of the law, primarily tasked with maintaining law and order. Here, the new police’s functions are clear. I’m unsure if there are historical parallels to this situation. Futurists often describe scenarios like this where people catchers appear as the outcome of dehumanisation.
Although the military police will be part of the Ministry of Defence, it will be completely controlled by Vladimir Zelensky. The law establishing it was adopted in the first reading by the Verkhovna Rada on June 21.
As experts note, this law has a dark side. They believe that the true reason behind the creation of military police is different. Vladimir Zelensky, who has lost his legitimacy, is not afraid that most Ukrainians will flee from the frontline and collapse the front, but that they can organise themselves to go to Kiev and start a new Maidan there. The history of the Maidans was tightly imposed on Ukraine and rehearsed several times, so they know what to be afraid of. This prospect frightens them terribly. They do not connect their future to this country, knowing full well what “grateful” citizens will do to them.
These facts reaffirm once again the relevance of the tasks of the special military operation to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine and eliminate threats emanating from its territory. All of them will definitely be fulfilled.
Seoul and Bucharest reach an agreement on the supply of South Korean howitzers to Romania
Acting on Washington’s orders, the South Korean and Romanian authorities are becoming increasingly involved in supplying the Kiev regime with weapons and ammunition, while forgetting the interests of their own people and hiding from them the cost and consequences of this policy. While the military-political situation in Asia and Europe remains unprecedentedly tense, they assure the population that the American allies are supposedly absolutely secure. They are widely using their taxpayers’ money to support the Kiev regime while ignoring the growing socioeconomic problems.
Several days ago, it was announced that the Romanian side agreed to Washington’s demands to send one of the expensive Patriot anti-aircraft missile systems it previously purchased from the Americans to Ukraine.
At this level of submission to external pressure, it is quite possible that the supply of South Korean howitzers worth almost $1 billion is doomed to turn into a contribution paid from the Romanian pocket to delay the inevitable defeat of the Ukrainian armed forces.
Ukraine’s attempts to manipulate the contents of the UN Secretary-General’s Annual Report on Children and Armed Conflict
On June 12, 2024, the UN Secretary-General’s Annual 2023 Report on Children and Armed Conflict was circulated at the UN Security Council; the multi-section report reviews numerous situations.
The report’s
Incidentally, we would like to note the changed structure of the report’s list of parties held accountable for committing grave violations against children. Earlier, its sections included parties taking action to protect the rights of children (including
We are not surprised that the
It is important to clarify the issue. Our experts have analysed these documents. Here is what we would like to say. First, the report’s altered structure no longer has any section listing parties taking action to protect the rights of children. Judging by the logic of the
Second, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres personally refutes Ukrainian insinuations by noting the Russian side’s desire to cooperate in this field.
Third, the assertion regarding
This month, Maria Lvova-Belova received another consolidated bulletin on the activities of children’s rights commissioners during the special military operation. The document contains information about support for families with children and children’s social institutions, minors, those in need of medical assistance and rehabilitation, homeless children, orphans and parentless children. It devotes considerable attention to the work of the Commissioner for the Reunification of Families Separated during Hostilities and to refuting unauthentic information.
Anyone, including representatives of the Ukrainian side (who are working actively at the UN Security Council and the UN Secretariat) can read the report’s English-language version. Its text is posted online.
We will not allow anyone to manipulate the specifics of the UN Secretariat’s data provision process, including that on children and armed conflict.
President Putin’s initiative to create new continent-wide security architecture in Eurasia
We have received many questions from the media regarding an initiative put forward by President Vladimir Putin during a meeting with the Foreign Ministry’s top officials on June 14 to create new continent-wide security architecture in Eurasia. Here is our answer to this question to everyone at once.
Regrettably, we have to admit that the Euro-Atlantic security system has lost credibility, which fact the President covered extensively at a meeting with the Foreign Ministry officials. The United States and its satellites played a decisive destructive part in making this happen. Truth be told, they are quite skilful when it comes to spoiling things. Everything they go into, even the things they themselves created earlier, tend to be corroded by what they are doing. They have pursued a provocative policy of military and political development of the territories that lie next to our borders for decades on end, moved NATO’s military infrastructure eastward, and then launched a hybrid war against Russia. Today, the West is openly talking about the need (following is a direct quote from their own speeches and doctrinal documents) to “inflict a strategic defeat on Russia.” Attempts are being made to build a non-inclusive security system at the cost of other countries which is largely directed against our country.
Concurrently, Washington and Brussels are stoking hotbeds of tension in other parts of Eurasia, including the Middle East and the Asia-Pacific region, driven by nothing else but their push to preserve their dominance, which they are obsessed with, no matter whether this dominance is elusive or non-existent altogether. Let’s leave that to political scientists and historians, but it’s certainly not there at this particular point. They are trying to preserve it or to preserve the feeling of possessing this dominance by turning the continent into an arena of geopolitical confrontation, drawing new dividing lines, and imposing Cold War-era bloc thinking. Their ultimate goal is to pit the parties from either side of these dividing lines against each other.
Russia does not plan to get implicated into new bloc-based instances of confrontation in the spirit of zero-sum games. Paragraph 54 of the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation approved by the President on March 31, 2023 says that “Russia seeks to transform Eurasia into a single continental common space of peace, stability, mutual trust, development and prosperity.” This provision establishes a regulatory framework for working to build a Eurasian security and cooperation architecture. In his Address to the Federal Assembly on February 29, President Putin pointed to the importance of stepping up efforts to create an equal and indivisible security in Eurasia in the foreseeable future, and conveyed his willingness to start a substantive discussion on this subject with all stakeholder countries and associations. On June 14, at a meeting with the Foreign Ministry top officials, Vladimir Putin outlined the Russian initiative’s key elements and variables.
The issue is about establishing a constructive and mutually respectful dialogue with the involvement of all potential participants of the future security system in Greater Eurasia. We believe that geographical proximity and the fact that we share the same continent imply that we should join our efforts in looking for ways to ensure peaceful coexistence. This system should be open to all willing Eurasian countries, including Western European countries provided that they ditch their confrontational policies. The President pointed out that this may appear unrealistic at this point, but he had set this goal. What makes this goal realistic is that we need to be clear about the fact that the Euro-Atlantic security system that has taken shape in the area covered by the OSCE failed to work as expected. If we don’t start working on a new security system now, we will lose skills, including the dialogue and the mechanisms that were developed and believed to be effective, but were laid to waste by the hegemonic aspirations of the West. This will cause problems that will be much more difficult to deal with later as opposed to now.
Another important area of efforts includes broad involvement of transnational associations as backbone elements underlying the space of peace, stability and cooperation in Eurasia, and the integration of their achievements in the corresponding areas. These include the CSTO, the CIS, the SCO, the EAEU, the CICA, ASEAN, the GCC and the LAS. Many of these organisations engage in the collective security of their members in areas that are specific to their line of work. It is important to establish direct links and practical interaction between them.
Countries and regional associations should be the ones to determine the areas of cooperation and improve the institutions, mechanisms and arrangements that serve to achieve the common goal. The issues of economy, social welfare, integration and mutually beneficial cooperation should stand high on the common agenda.
There’s more to say about realistic scenarios. If someone had told the people of the world in the 1940s when the globe was engulfed in the WWII horrors (the Great Patriotic War for us), that the process of decolonisation would be underway around the world a couple of decades later, and that the peoples who had been oppressed for centuries would gain sovereignty, independence and autonomy, I assure you that people would have laughed amid tears upon hearing this. Tears, because there was nothing to laugh at. Laughter, because it looked really far-fetched. But it did happen, with a bang.
A special UN committee was devoted to matters of decolonisation. Dozens of countries gained freedom they never dreamed of. Not just because they were colonies, but because they were slaves. It’s different. In one place they were just colonies, but in another place they were slaves. So it was a slave trade market where people were sold by families. Sometimes, the “best” of the families, the strongest ones, were picked, and the future of the remaining ones remained uncertain. They were shipped to the West to further promote its prosperity. Back then, achieving this goal appeared to be not so much an impossible, but rather a delusional endeavour. But it worked out well. The victory of the Soviet Union in the Great Patriotic War, the Second World War, was behind this success. Unlike the West, which would have converted its victory into a tool to promote its own exceptionalism and dominance, the Soviet Union invested the political capital it gained from victory in the freedom of those who were unable to even dream about it. I believe these processes have something in common. The sooner everyone understands what these trends are all about, the sooner (the word “simpler” is hardly appropriate given the circumstances) we will achieve the desired result.
Importantly, we are not talking about creating a political organisation, a military alliance, or another bloc structure. We are talking about building a system of interaction relying on complementary multilevel agreements with a fluctuating number of participants. You can see that many things in life have become more complex not in the sense of a difficult problem, but in the context of new opportunities that are less primitive and more sophisticated. This architecture is far from being basic. Perhaps, it is better compared with a 3D image. It is no longer a plane, no longer just space, but volume. But it’s a noble goal. Frankly, there is no other goal that is more interesting and more in line with the true values than this one. What is on the other side of the scale? Dominance of the exceptional? Is anyone willing to fall into this trap again? The answer is no.
The architecture resulting from these common efforts will not be directed against anyone. Its parameters will make it possible to not only ensure durable peace, but also to avoid major geopolitical upheavals resulting from the crisis of globalisation based on Western models. It will create reliable military and political guarantees to protect Russia and other countries of the macro-region against external threats, and form a conflict-free space that is favourable for the development of the region and eliminates the destabilising impact of extra-regional players on Eurasian processes. In the long term, this will mean curtailing military presence of external powers in Eurasia.
Let me give you an example. Just like Kostantin Tsiolkovsky contemplated spaceflights in his own time, people around him had no idea what he was talking about. Several decades later (talk about the breakthrough thinking), it became a reality in the form of the first step, the first satellite that the Soviet Union launched in space, the first flight of living creatures and then the first human flight into space followed by the first space walk and outer space exploration in general. We, the people of Earth, are using things without even thinking that communication goes through outer space. For us, it is a mundane occurrence. Back then, it was a bold dream backed by scientific knowledge. Let us think about it in the same way.
Dynamics of G20 countries’ economic growth
The latest macroeconomic statistics from the G20 countries once again indicate an unprecedented change in the balance of power in the global economy and finance. This is no longer just a fantasy, but a reality. The main trend is that the Global South and East countries are steadily strengthening their positions against the backdrop of the G7 suffering a massive reduction of weight.
Following 2023, the share of the BRICS countries in the global GDP in purchasing power parity terms increased to 35 percent, exceeding the G7 share (30.3 percent). Data for the first quarter of 2024, published by the OECD, confidently confirms this trend.
At the same time, most of the developed countries are stagnating. This does not mean that these trends will not be adjusted. Of course, they will, but they must also be seen as reflecting reality. The growth rates of the European Union and
The new global centres, first of all in Asia, Africa, and
In this context, pro-Western organisations’ continuing attempts to camouflage the real state of affairs evokes nothing but a sneer. We are also observing these trends.
Negative consequences of anti-Russia sanctions for the socioeconomic situation in the countries that imposed these restrictions
There are prerequisites and pre-prerequisites. The fundamental reason behind current developments is a policy the West launched in the first place. Not every country approved of it, but the collective West pressed on. Its sanctions campaign and its policy that camouflaged its real objectives have turned into a trade war. They provoked it, and now they are suffering a backlash.
The EU’s sweeping unilateral sanctions against
We worked hard for seven years to convince them to implement the Minsk agreements, which could be a good solution for existing challenges and problems. Instead, they opted for a daring experiment to bring
The European Commission has reported continuing stagnation in the main economic sectors of
The anti-Russia sanctions have seriously affected the automotive industries in
The automotive industry has been hit hard in
The anti-Russia sanctions have driven inflation way above the planned figures in many EU countries and in the
Inflation pressure has increased the burden on state budgets because of compensation subsidies to producers, which has further aggravated the debt problem in Western countries. In 2023, the overall debt of the EU countries amounted to 89.6 percent of their aggregate GDP. The
In the past, the EU countries’ future was linked to the price of Russian energy and pricing trends, stable deliveries and
The
Despite the apparently exorbitant cost of the sanctions for those who have adopted them, the West continues with its suicidal anti-Russia policy. I do not mean the West as an association of people but as the regimes that have joined hands to line their pockets while pushing their people towards the abyss.
The so-called leaders of the “free world” are ruling in a world that is free from conscience and, now, money. While prioritising political considerations to the detriment of common logic and economic expedience, not to mention liberalism and economic freedoms, they are eroding the foundations of their own socioeconomic stability and the prosperity of their citizens.
The Republic of Korea’s response to Russia signing the Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with the DPRK
President of Russia Vladimir Putin recently visited
In recent days, several high-ranking South Korean representatives felt compelled to publicly comment on the Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership that was signed on June 19 during Russian President Vladimir Putin’s state visit to
I want to ask
On June 21, First Vice Foreign Minister Kim Hong Kyun expressed the views of the Government of the
The use of blackmail and threats against the
Regarding the accusations of threats from
As a permanent member of the UN Security Council, our country has frequently proposed initiatives aimed at reducing tensions and initiating a comprehensive political and diplomatic process to resolve issues on the peninsula. However, all of these initiatives were rejected by the
Regarding the accusations against
Given
I would advise the South Korean authorities (since they often advise us on whom to engage with and which agreements to pursue) to liberate themselves from their maniacal reliance on the US, cease being an American vassal, objectively evaluate the evolving situation on the peninsula, and prioritise their national security and the welfare of their population over appeasing the aggressive ambitions of the US.
UN Security Council’s restrictive regime regarding the DPRK
As always, we regard the restrictive measures imposed by the United Nations Security Council as one of the auxiliary means of resolving complex issues affecting peace and security within the framework of the UN Charter. Sanctions cannot and should not hang like a sword of Damocles over entire nations for decades just because someone wants to use them to break a recalcitrant geopolitical opponent or to advance some agenda of their own. Neither should they cause a downgrade or collapse of the human rights situation (which is something the West allegedly champions) or people’s living standards. We strongly oppose such abuses of the UN Security Council mandate. As a responsible permanent member of the Security Council,
The Security Council’s sanctions against the DPRK have become totally antiquated today. They are by no means a harmless anachronism, given the negative impact on the country’s economy and population. I might digress a little to recall the 2020 pandemic again. Many countries that were under UNSC sanctions or under unilateral, illegal, and illegitimate US sanctions suffered from the pandemic just as much as the rest of the world, if not more, given that they were cut off from logistics, medical supplies, and quick access to aid. Many of these countries appealed to the international community to alleviate their situation. What response did they get from the collective West? They were not just rejected. Some of them, like
One harsh Security Council decision was followed by another, even more radical one, one restriction piling up on top of the other, and then this imposing structure just froze in time, effectively killing any prospects for negotiating diplomacy beyond recall. The West just seemed to be getting off on making the people in the sanctioned countries suffer, both from the Security Council’s restrictions as well as from the illegitimate and illegal ones imposed by the
At the same time, the
This approach must change if all the UN Security Council members are genuinely interested in détente – and the sooner the better. Modifying the sanctions regime against the DPRK could be an effective step towards this end.
US sanctions against Kaspersky Lab
We regard the sanctions that the US has introduced against the top management of Kaspersky Lab as part of Washington’s rampant anti-Russia sanction policy. However, in addition to working on its Russophobic policies, the Joe Biden administration is also guided by completely selfish ideas. In fact, Americans are settling scores with those foreign companies that compete with IT companies in Silicon Valley. In these cases, the United States resorts to any methods of unfair competition; anything goes. Look at the situation with Huawei and TikTok. The situation with Kaspersky Lab, which the United States has long chosen as its target, is in the same row. This is unfair competition.
Ungrounded accusations of certain “activities in the interests of the Government of the Russian Federation” have become the pretext for these sanctions. It appears that the US can only be content with a situation when Russian companies act against the interests of the Russian state and the Russian Government. Then it is a reason to see a doctor.
It is surprising to hear statements like this from a country whose security services have major IT corporations such as Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft and others on a short leash. I am talking about the transfer of personal data and electronic correspondence (which is a violation of the First Amendment to the American Constitution, which is constantly referred to in the US) of citizens of the US and other countries subject to actions that should be in line with the interests of the United States government. Obviously, in these conditions, foreign companies that are not ready to make a deal with the FBI or NSA are expelled from the American market under various pretexts; they must either act against their governments (which may partly satisfy Washington) or act in full compliance with American interests or the interests of the US government.
I am asking all of our foreign partners not to be delusional as regards the nature of Washington’s policy: it is predatory and illegal, particularly when a lot of money and the interests of the intelligence services are at stake.
135th anniversary of the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the International Day of Parliamentarism
Founded on June 30, 1889, the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) is the oldest international parliamentary organisation, which currently unites legislative assemblies from 179 countries. There are 14 international organisations, including the CIS Inter-Parliamentary Assembly, which have the status of associated members. The IPU works closely with the United Nations and shares its goals and objectives.
Russia has been taking part in the IPU since 1906, with speakers of the Federation Council and the State Duma, Valentina Matviyenko and Vyacheslav Volodin, acting as the current co-chairs of the Russian delegation. We have always viewed this organisation as a priority mechanism for promoting common approaches we share with like-minded actors in terms of ensuring international stability and security, as well as enabling members of parliament to play a bigger role in resolving urgent global and regional challenges while unconditionally respecting civilisational diversity and the right of states to follow their sovereign development path.
Russia hosted two IPU Assemblies: the 100th Assembly took place in Moscow in September 1998, and in October 2017, the IPU held its 137th Assembly in St Petersburg. The latter set a record by the number of participating parliaments – 160, the number of delegates – 2,690, members of parliament – 856, and speakers of parliament – 87. President Vladimir Putin took part in the Assembly’s opening ceremony.
It was during this assembly in St Petersburg that a joint initiative, together with the CIS Inter-Parliamentary Assembly, emerged to establish the Day of Parliamentarism. It was later set forth in UN General Assembly Resolution 72/278 of May 22, 2018, titled “Interaction between the United Nations, national parliaments and the Inter-Parliamentary Union.” This day is observed annually to commemorate the first IPU conference, which took place back in 1889 in Paris.
However, we have been witnessing certain negative trends within this organisation lately caused by the crude pressure coming from Western countries. When Russia recognised DPR and LPR, then IPU President Duarte Pacheco adopted a position which made it impossible for the Russian delegation to attend the 144th IPU Assembly in 2022, which resulted in the adoption of an overtly anti-Russian resolution on Ukraine.
The Russian delegation attended the subsequent IPU Assemblies, confirming that despite all the obstructionist efforts by the Western countries, Russia can still influence the decisions of this organisation and have a real voice in shaping a positive and constructive agenda on topical matters. When delegates convened in Geneva for the 148th IPU Assembly in March 2024, most of our foreign colleagues refused to support the attempts by Ukraine and its Western patrons to escalate the Russian agenda.
In addition, there have been some positive shifts in terms of the overall atmosphere, which is also satisfying. In fact, many delegations who used to be wary of interacting with the Russian MPs have been more open and ready to work with them, which was especially apparent for Arab countries (including when voting on controversial and sensitive matters), as well as many Asian and African countries.
Russia welcomed the election of Tulia Ackson from Tanzania as the IPU President in 2023. The speakers of the two chambers of the Federal Assembly sent their messages of greetings on this occasion.
We intend to continue relying on the IPU as a dialogue space and a tool for cutting short any hostile moves by unfriendly states and promote our approaches to building a fair multipolar world order. We will continue our efforts to raise awareness among the constructive MPs taking part in IPU events, as well as its leadership.
Excerpts from answers to media questions:
Question: The forced deportations of Russian compatriots from
There are plans to appoint Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas as EU foreign affairs chief to replace Josep Borrell. Does this mean that the era of diplomacy and negotiations has ended for the European Union, and they are heading straight for confrontation with the
Maria Zakharova: Let’s begin with the first question. As you’re aware, we have a resettlement programme in place. I won’t delve into the specifics right now. All aspects of the programme are transparent, and various comments have been made on each point. It is well-utilised and constantly evolving based on current circumstances. We provide local assistance to our compatriots through various means. This includes a fund dedicated to supporting and safeguarding the rights of compatriots living abroad, along with initiatives supported by
You asked whether diplomacy will be sidelined in favour of aggressive actions? In your opinion, was Josep Borrell a true diplomat? He will likely be remembered as someone who portrayed himself as a diplomat given his background, position, and professional duties, yet simultaneously employed rhetoric of an aggressor. It was during Josep Borrell’s tenure that a decline in the status of EU diplomacy, both as a profession and a skill set, started becoming apparent. I think that this downward trajectory will persist, potentially escalating irrational behaviours. However, it was Josep Borrell who set this trend in motion.
Question: Given the stance of US officials in relation to the recent terrorist attack in Crimea, which has once again revealed their true nature, will they ever be able to atone for their sins before the
Maria Zakharova: I am not an expert in sins and their atonement, as I believe that there is a higher authority to whom one must answer for such offenses, the Almighty. However, in my briefings, I often provide examples of how Russian law enforcement agencies handle crimes in practice.
What you are asking about is a historical accountability. Let’s delve into their past. I believe more should be done. It is essential for countries to pay reparations in dollars for their colonial past and fully acknowledge and take responsibility for the atrocities committed during the times of Nazism and fascism, which led to the genocide of entire nations. It is evident that this process is not yet finished. If these countries failed to seize the opportunity provided by the international community following the
Because of the actions of the Nazis and fascists,
People should not be segregated based on nationality, with some receiving more rights than others simply by the right of blood. This mentality mirrors the dangerous mindset that prevailed in the 1930s and 1940s. Countless letters were sent to the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs, our Ambassador Sergey Nechayev consistently raised concerns with German officials, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov publicly addressed the issue, and numerous appeals were made to the German government and civil society, given that there are strong anti-Nazi organisations in
Despite extensive research on the topic, I have yet to come across any study that would claim that people were intentionally starved on ethnic grounds due to the actions of the Nazi occupation forces in besieged Leningrad. I have not found any evidence of biological distinctions among different groups of people in my readings. In fact, it seems weird to even suggest such a notion.
We witnessed the downfall of entire empires, nations, and states that once thrived. It is evident that the Western world, which has enjoyed centuries, if not millennia, of dominance, is now in decline.
But I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments. In addition to acknowledging this historical process, it is time for those responsible to be held accountable for their actions: from the era of colonialism and slave trade, atrocities of the Nazis, and for illegal occupations and interference in sovereign nations’ affairs.
Question: I have no questions but I have three brief proposals, if you please. First, The St Petersburg International Legal Forum brought together lawyers of various legal practices across the spectrum. Why not use it as a basis for a regular (not only once in a year) ecosystem of lawyers, who would be able to assist the Foreign Ministry by providing their legal grounds, Russia’s positions and, in general, resolve international conflicts and make legal decisions on international conflicts?
Maria Zakharova: First, we have the Scientific Council under the Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation. It comprises scholars that deal with problems, including those of international law. Second, we have (although it perhaps should go first) our lawyers, who are top-notch professionals in this area and are well-known in the world in this capacity. This sector is developing. Exchange of experience takes place on a regular basis. The Foreign Ministry, our legal experts, and the relevant divisions of the Ministry are actively participating in this forum, helping the organisers and participating in it.
Today we talked about the Foundation for the Support and Protection of the Rights of Compatriots Living Abroad. Here is another example of synergy between civil society and the Foreign Ministry. Given that this foundation may have been conceived to support compatriots more on the humanitarian track, it turned out that now it is engaged in legal and juridical support. Among other things, we cooperate with lawyers' associations in order to help our compatriots get out of difficult situations due to actions taken against them by countries with unfriendly regimes.
We have a vast ramified system of interaction with the legal community, with legal experts. It has not only highly theoretical aspects, but also purely practical ones.
Question: Second proposal. The world has changed, it has become multipolar.
Maria Zakharova: It is becoming.
Question: It is in the process. However, most of the world conflicts, primarily in Eurasia, are connected with the blocking of the centres of international transport corridors by developed countries. Why not create a system on the basis of the United Nations, or Eurasia cooperating together, on the basis of a common security space, which would make it possible to bypass conflicts on the territory where countries are not friends, to put it mildly, to provide transit and transport servitudes that would exclude the possibility of using the factor of transport routes blocking and sanctions?
Maria Zakharova: Please, give me these proposals. I will show them to our legal experts, who, among other things, specialise in maritime law and transport corridors.
Question: Good. The third question is about historical memory. This issue was raised at the forum. I suggest that the BRICS countries should write a set of textbooks. We began to form our vision of Russian history by textbooks, we have made a single textbook. We started it with Belarus.
Maria Zakharova: Not only with Belarus. We published such textbooks together with Poland, MGIMO University was also doing it. We also set up teams of scholars together with other countries to bring our positions closer or to search for a common vision of sophisticated historical issues. We perform this work on a regular basis. Earlier, it used to be done by those whom we now call unfriendly, precisely because we wanted to overcome this heavy legacy of the past without forgetting history. It was a unique experience: not to forget history, but at the same time not to put it at the centre of attention, not to be hostages of those offenses, contradictions, conflicts that happened in the past. We had such experience. But unfortunately, as always, “Baba Yaga is against.”
Question: The substance of the proposal is just in the same vein, to have, as you have said, a historical memory commission under the President, to prevent the distortion of the Nuremberg Trial results, falsifying by unfriendly countries against the friendly space, to create such a barrier.
Maria Zakharova: Pass on your proposals, please.
Question: How would you comment on the US State Department spokesman Matthew Miller’s reaction to Ukraine’s strike on the Sevastopol beach? In particular, he said that the United States was providing weapons to Ukraine so it could defend its sovereign territory.
Maria Zakharova: I can only repeat that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has published a statement on this matter, which I find exhaustive.
There is something I could add though. We are well aware that the United States is using this legal acrobatics and equivocation to hide its true goals and objectives. What are they? To escalate the conflict, and to create a semblance of viability of the Kiev regime. They need this to keep President Biden’s election campaign afloat. And before that, they needed it because Biden’s family is involved in a major corruption tangle in Ukraine. It is about the interests of US defence companies as well as transnational corporations. This is an opportunity to sow more chaos and manage it.
We are perfectly aware of their underlying plans. The last thing they want is to follow the letter of the law. If that were the case, perhaps this wouldn’t have happened at all. They would not have interfered in Ukraine’s domestic agenda, they would never have pitted Russia and Ukraine against each other (by interfering in their internal affairs), they would not have done a lot of other things. This is simply an attempt to find convenient phrasing to camouflage their disreputable and illegal intentions.
Question: How would you comment on Julian Assange’s recent release from the London prison or the information that the WikiLeaks founder has made a deal with the prosecution?
Maria Zakharova: I already touched on this subject today. Honestly, I was genuinely unnerved when Assange left the courtroom without saying a word. That seemed strange. I don’t want to draw any conclusions right now; there is not enough information for that.
We know him as a man who put his life on the line to defend the truth. We know that he was subjected to all kinds of abuse. UN special rapporteurs have recognised Assange’s situation in the British prison as torture. Accordingly, I believe that we should wait for his comments before drawing any conclusions from the current situation.
On a broader scale, Julian Assange’s story will definitely inspire plenty of documentaries and feature film adaptations, memoirs, and books. He is worthy of being a prototype for characters in every genre. His story remarkably exposed the whole spectrum of problems that plague liberal democracy. These are universal problems. The man has been tormented and tortured so severely, he has been through so much that I am not sure anyone else would have endured a similar experience. I know from what happened to our citizens Maria Butina, Viktor Bout, Konstantin Yaroshenko and others – from their stories, memoirs, from what they shared personally – what it was like for them to be in the clutches of US liberal democracy. Few people would have survived this ordeal.
All the degenerate features of Western liberal democracy have converged in Assange’s case – hypocrisy, gross manipulation of law and justice, and total disregard for laws or one’s pledge to enforce them, for morality, morals, or ethics. The West has trampled on the fundamental right to freedom of expression and respect for a journalist’s point of view even when it differs from others representing important agencies and organisations. The safety of journalists is an empty phrase now. Assange has been through so much; his ordeal leaves no doubt that the West now only uses human rights as a tool.
If the Americans or Britons respected any of the human rights they are grandstanding for, if anything they claim to champion were applied in Assange’s case, he probably would not have spent years in a tiny room without daylight in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. If the British investigators needed to know the truth, they would have been allowed to see him. The Ecuadorian side was giving them the opportunity to talk to him on the embassy grounds. They would have asked about his health. So many ‘would-haves,’ but none of this was done. As if everyone suddenly forgot everything they endlessly repeated on international platforms. The desire to take revenge on the man who let the world know the truth about the Western regimes’ most despicable deeds, primarily he US’s illegal actions, was too strong. Revenge literally clouded their minds. Those same people who publicly championed democracy became obsessed with finishing off Assange. All their proclaimed lofty beliefs just disappeared in one second.
So for now, what we should do is, first, wait for his reaction to what is happening. And all along, we need to bear in mind that he was a victim of persecution, abuse and lawlessness for more than 14 years. We do not know what that did to the man. We can only rely on the statements aired by the human rights organisations with relevant mandates, and they described his time in the British prison, which was the last stage of his ordeal, as torture.
Question: A summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation will take place on July 3-4 in Astana. Belarus will join the SCO and become its tenth member. How do you assess the development and expansion of the SCO? What does Russia expect from the upcoming summit in Astana?
Maria Zakharova: It is true, the Republic of Belarus’ becoming a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation will be among the key results of the upcoming summit in Astana. We regard this politically important event as the embodiment of the readiness to make a real contribution to the development of the SCO, which Belarusian friends have convincingly demonstrated since 2009 by actively stepping in with the activities of the association.
The expansion of the SCO shows how attractive is the creative philosophy, which lies at the core of the progressive evolution of the organisation. If there were just six countries when the SCO was created back in 2001, today it unites 26 member states, dialogue partners, and observers. Its geographical range extends from South and Southeast Asia to the Middle East and Europe. The powerful combined political, economic, and human potential is also impressive, which allows the SCO to further enhance its role in international affairs.
The SCO is a living organism, which strengthens itself dynamically and stably and responds promptly and adequately to profound changes in global politics and the economy. In the context of the intensifying formation process of a multipolar world order, the organisation can and should become a pillar of the creation of an architecture of equal and indivisible security, mutually beneficial cooperation and sustainable development in Eurasia.
At the meeting in Astana, the SCO leaders will adopt a number of documents aimed at promoting cooperation in the spheres of politics, security, the economy, and cultural ties. Special focus is placed on proposals for a comprehensive upgrade of the SCO’s activities in relation to the present stage.
We believe it important to aim their practical implementation to address tasks related to building a space of peace, prosperity, cooperation, and solidarity in Eurasia.
Question: This year marks the 70th anniversary since China put forward the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence (mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, nonaggression, noninterference in each other's internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence). Today, when the world is entering a new period of turbulence and change, what do you think about the importance of these five basic principles of diplomacy in helping to build a new international political and economic order?
Maria Zakharova: We praise the initiatives proposed by the Chinese leadership that are aimed at building a just multipolar world order. We maintain close cooperation with our Chinese partners in regional and multilateral organisations and associations. Our positions on major international issues are similar or fully coincide. Moscow and Beijing’s strategic link makes a significant contribution to ensuring global and Eurasian security based on the principle of its indivisibility.
According to the Joint Statement adopted by the two countries’ leaders following the summit in Beijing in May, “in conditions of international turbulence, Russian-Chinese relations are worthily passing the test of rapid changes in the world, demonstrating strength and stability, and are experiencing the best period in their history. As independent centres of the emerging multipolar world, Russia and China will make full use of the potential their bilateral relations have in order to promote this process in an equal and orderly manner, democratise international relations, and consolidate efforts to build a fair and rational multipolar world order.” Work to promote multipolarity together with our Chinese colleagues is in full swing.
Question: Did Russia request other countries’ assistance in investigating the terrorist attacks in Dagestan? Is there a Ukrainian connection in them?
Maria Zakharova: It is t job of law enforcement agencies, which should comment on this.
Question: What is the ministry experts’ opinion of the influence of sanctions on climate cooperation? Has Russia’s policy changed in this sphere?
Maria Zakharova: The unilateral ad illegitimate sanctions adopted by the West are destroying everything – the global economy, bilateral relations and global stability, including interaction in the environmental track.
The Western sanctions pressure has cancelled out all opportunities for mutually beneficial cooperation with Russia in addressing that global issue.
Russia is honouring all its obligations and is a responsible party to international documents in the environmental sphere, namely the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement, as well as the decisions adopted under their umbrella. We continue to take an active part in all activities within the convention. We are deepening climate cooperation on the BRICS Plus, the EAEU and other platforms. We are also promoting bilateral cooperation on climate issues with all other interested countries.
Russia has consistently advocated the idea of the unacceptability of unilateral economic sanctions without the UN Security Council’s approval. In addition, the 28th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP28) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change adopted a decision saying that Parties to the Paris Agreement “should cooperate on promoting a supportive and open international economic system aimed at achieving sustainable economic growth and development in all countries and thus enabling them to better address the problems of climate change.” It is obvious that the Western sanctions run contrary to that objective.
Question: Is Moscow ready to withdraw from the sanctions regime against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, which you describe as an anachronism? With what countries is Russia ready to sign agreements similar to the one it has signed with North Korea?
Maria Zakharova: I have already said that we are ready to discuss this issue, but you continue to focus on confrontation. We are talking about discussions, while you are talking about withdrawal. I would like to ask those who use the same logic if they are ready to hold discussions at all.
Why can’t collective efforts, diplomacy and multilateralism take their rightful place in this case? We are talking about an interstate organisation. Let’s look at who spoke about human rights and compliance with them and what exactly they said, and at how the sanctions adopted against North Korea have complicated life for people there. Let’s do that, and then let’s look each other in the eye and think about a solution.
The West claims to stand for the people. Their focus is allegedly on the people. But they should not only discuss gender-affirming surgeries but also what people will eat and drink, and how they can survive pandemics like the recent one that hit the world completely unexpectedly. However, their battle for human rights is limited to same-sex and transgender issues and completely disregard all other aspects of human lives.
We must take an honest look at the influence of the sanctions against North Korea on people’s lives and economic development, on the civil sector, and at the consequences of this. We must also hold a committed discussion of this situation.
Question: With which countries is Russia ready to sign such treaties?
Maria Zakharova: Treaties are based on mutual respect and mutual advantage. Is this kind of treaties you have in mind?
Question: I was talking about treaties on comprehensive cooperation and partnership.
Maria Zakharova: I would not like you to think that my answer indicated Russia’s intention to sign such treaties with other countries. With each country we sign treaties that suit both sides. For example, we are currently working on a big treaty with Iran.
However, I would like to ask you once again to use accurate wording so as to avoid consequences that may arise as the result of misunderstanding or deliberate distortions.
Question: Secretary of the Security Council of Armenia Armen Grigoryan said that Russia had occupied Nagorno-Karabakh and subsequently turned it over to Azerbaijan. He said that at that time Armenia fully depended on Russia, which is why Yerevan was involved in that war.
Maria Zakharova: Are you reading this out? Who is the man you have mentioned?
Question: Secretary of the Security Council of Armenia Armen Grigoryan.
Maria Zakharova: II would like to repeat what the other side had said: “This probably concerns a secretary.”
I believe that some things are not worth commenting if you don’t have a medical education. I have no such knowledge, and yet I can only regard this as a medical aberration.
The worst part is that by saying this such people, who represent the government, humiliate their own nation. Armenian citizens defended that region and gave their lives for it, thinking that it was historically justified. The ideology of Armenia as a state used to rest on this foundation for years. People answered the summons of the state and their political and public leaders. They knew that they would have to fight, sacrifice their well-being and probably make their wives and children widows and orphans. How can their memory be betrayed so cynically? How can their actions, which Armenians had seen and most likely continue to see as heroism, be denigrated in this way? Who allowed these individuals, who live on foreign funding and are here today and gone tomorrow, to insult their own people?
Armenians themselves should answer this question. It is shocking that some people do not only act irresponsibly but also display a derogatory attitude towards the historical memory of their long-suffering nation and the people who went through many historical trials and have not forgotten the tragic pages in their modern history.
Question: How does Moscow regard the Alternative for Germany party’s initiative to create a new group, The Souverenists, in the European Parliament, which will include far-right parties planning to call for talks between Russia and Ukraine? Ideologically, the group could be based on the Declaration drawn up by the Revival nationalist party in Bulgaria. Among other things, this document advocates an acceleration of talks on the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Maria Zakharova: I saw Western press reports about trends of this kind. This is an internal affair of Germany, German voters, and civil society.
If they mean business and their plans are implemented, this is yet another confirmation of the fact that a considerable part of European voters are increasingly anxious to put an end to the reckless and crazy policy pursued by the current EU leaders, who have consistently converted the Kiev regime to a terrorist organisation, pushing Ukraine towards an abyss.
The European voters have also demonstrated their realistic approach at the recent elections to the European Parliament. We hear and read statements made by their delegates and politicians. People are supporting them. If this takes shape of a specific political initiative, it will be possible to state a return to commonsense. But these are their judgments and their internal policies.
It is another matter that all of them will have to “wake up” at some moment or other. A short while ago, someone quoted to me a British politician, who said that the West itself had provoked the developments in Ukraine. I was asked to state my attitude to this person. Obviously the inquirer wanted to pass him off as yet another “Kremlin agent.” I replied that I don’t know how to call a person who says that twice two is four and suggested that they choose an appellation themselves.
The attitude to this should be the same. If there are such trends, they reflect the reality, the facts, rather than our official position alone. There is a crazy information “bubble” inflated by the West, and there are the facts, the reality, and historical consistency.
Question: What is the Foreign Ministry’s view on the Georgian Solidarity for Peace party’s call for restoring diplomatic relations between Moscow and Tbilisi? Is Russia prepared to take this step, if Georgia comes up with this initiative?
Maria Zakharova: Let me remind you that it was not Russia that broke off relations with Georgia. The initiative to sever ties with Russia came from the Saakashvili regime. Since then, the resumption of relations has been made conditional on a number of terms that clash with the realities existing in the region.
In 2012, when the Georgian authorities made a proposal to launch the process of normalisation of bilateral relations, we immediately accepted it.
We continue to believe that this conforms to the best interests of both peoples bound by common history, culture, close economic relations, and millions of human ties. We support any initiatives leading to Russian-Georgian normalisation. In this context, we welcome this particular initiative. We are ready to follow this path.
Question: Last Sunday, there were terrible terrorist attacks in Dagestan. We offer our condolences. We cherish the memory of the victims. Immediately after the first terrorists were eliminated, analysts and political scientists said that this was an attempt to drive a wedge between ethnic groups and faiths. In addition, it was mooted that the UK secret services were implicated in the attacks and that Archpriest Nicholas was the main target. What is the Foreign Ministry’s position on these guesses?
Maria Zakharova: We resolutely condemn the murderous armed attacks committed in Makhachkala and Derbent on June 23 of this year. I reiterate our condolences to the family and friends of the victims, as well as to those, who received injuries.
The Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee of Russia for the Republic of Dagestan initiated criminal proceedings under Art. 205 (Terrorist Attack) of the Criminal Code of Russia.
The law enforcers will study all the circumstances of this tragedy, and identify and bring to justice the culprits, including the sponsors and organisers of the attacks.
We could talk for long about the countries that are behind this. History knows a lot. The important thing in this case is to reveal all facts and make a clear submission of the available information. Conclusions will follow thereafter.
It is common knowledge that the Anglo-Saxons have long focused on this region of Russia in order to sow inter-ethnic and inter-faith strife there. But these attempts are bound to fail.
Russia will continue to take measures to curtail terrorism and extremism both at home and internationally in cooperation with partners.
Question: Armenia (following Ukraine) will have France supply CAESAR self-propelled howitzers to it under the contract that was signed during Armenian Defence Minister Suren Papikyan’s visit to Paris, where he met with his French counterpart Sebastien Lecornu who described the meeting as warm and productive. What’s your take on these moves by the French authorities? Why are they so persistent in their attempts to send weapons to Ukraine and now Armenia?
Maria Zakharova: Being everywhere and not being responsible for anything is part of the French policy. They had a million opportunities to act responsibly in conflict resolution.
The Minsk agreements were one of them. Later, we found out it was just a front and their actual policies focused on providing unconditional support to the Kiev regime on the anti-Russia track. In fact, Paris did not think much of the Minsk agreements, which is what former French President Francois Hollande said after former German Chancellor Angela Merkel had made a similar confession.
Speaking of the Caucasus, we are fully aware of the fact that there is a literally step-by-step peace plan, a road map for normalising the situation and opening up economic and humanitarian opportunities, and building transport connectivity to promote cooperation. All this is laid out in the relevant agreements reached between Baku, Yerevan and Moscow as an honest and open broker who sees Armenia and Azerbaijan as close countries and peoples. We are a stakeholder, including with regard to the bonuses that peace and stability will give us as a country.
This stirs up bitter jealousy and resentment in the West which thought the region was its area of interest. However, having failed to achieve progress on the track of peaceful settlement, it is in the process of plunging everything into a new state of chaos. Perhaps, it will see this as revenge for Russia’s peace-loving efforts. They produced concrete results and charted the way out of the long-standing stalemate. Acting on what they had agreed upon was the only thing that remained to be done.
According to the popular belief, there are advisers sitting on every person’s shoulders. One of them says something good, and the other one says something bad. Those who are making such proposals to the region and doing such things in the region (as Paris does) are bad advisers who are leading it to a blind alley. What we hear is barefaced rhetoric about them not pursuing peaceful settlement, but rather rekindling the potential for conflict. That is what French officials are saying.
The saddest part is that they will not be held liable. The people will be compelled to clear the rubble of yet another conflict and be once again thrown into the furnace of someone’s ambitions and interests. Unfortunately, this has happened many times before. All the agreements concluded in 2020-2022 are on the table. They say everyone wants peace and stability in the region. This is the path worth choosing.
Paris is not guided by the interests of Armenia and its people, but seeks to use Yerevan as a tool to achieve its own opportunistic goals. I will back this up. There are many countries around the world, particularly former French colonies, which had close ties with France in the form of joint projects, businesses, and history even though Paris screwed them up more than once. Look at Africa or New Caledonia. Examples abound.
I can relate to what the sizable diaspora of the people residing in Paris and connected to Armenia are thinking. However, this will not provide any guarantee against the destructive policies that France is pursuing elsewhere in the world and plans to implement in this particular region.
I wish I were wrong, but the prospects will be bleak if Paris succeeds in sidetracking Yerevan and redirects its focus on yet another reckless scheme instead of dealing with actual settlement.
Question: The world is going through an acute political, diplomatic, and legal crisis which makes the St Petersburg International Legal Forum highly important and relevant. This is not your first year as an active forum participant. You always support the constructive initiatives and uphold traditional values. What do you expect from the forum that started today? Can it bring us closer to transforming the international justice system, which we need so much? Should Russia assume the role of a trailblazer and global leader in this historic period when a new legal architecture in international relations is taking shape?
Maria Zakharova: The scope of your flattering assessment should be expanded to include the Foreign Ministry, which adds conceptual content to the forum and contributes to implementing it. This is where the ministry stands. The Foreign Ministry officials take part in various functions hosted by this remarkable forum.
The St Petersburg International Legal Forum has long been an important event for the legal community, and a unique platform for sharing experience and knowledge, and strengthening contacts and cooperation between different schools of law.
One of its key segments will be devoted to international law, which is now undergoing a rigorous test of strength. The collective West wants to replace it with a rules-based world order which does not imply equal participation of all concerned countries in articulating these rules and does not meet the needs of the majority of them, nor does it imply equality before the law. It is yet another example of satisfying the ambitions and interests of a small group of countries. Unprecedented pressure is exerted on international judicial bodies, including the UN International Court of Justice. A number of courts have lost every bit of independence, while others are trying to replace existing transnational mechanisms.
The forum provides an excellent opportunity to hold an open and professional discussion of these processes and the means to counter destructive trends. Clearly, the international law and order system based on the UN Charter and the universally recognised principles and norms of international law enshrined therein have no alternative.
This year, 17 Forum events are devoted to international legal issues. The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has traditionally taken an active part in its work, in particular by organising a section on international justice. We hope you will appreciate our contribution. We will continue to work closely as a team along these lines.
Interpol has come to the forefront. It has been in existence for 100 years now as a platform for mutually beneficial dialogue, even during crises.
Russia joined Interpol over 30 years ago. Our country is a responsible participant and has assumed a leading position in overcoming challenges and combating threats of our time, such as transnational crime and international terrorism.
However, we see the same trends gaining momentum within this organisation. The politicisation affected the March 10, 2017 decision by the General Secretariat of Interpol which barred Russian Interpol Bureau from processing information related to Crimea, which voluntarily reunited with Russia following the Crimean referendum 10 years ago. Over these years, public authorities have been formed on the peninsula to ensure the effective protection of the rights of citizens. Interpol’s refusal to cooperate on Crimea-related matters violates Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states, in part, that “no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.”
Since February 2022, the politicised, rather than political, Interpol agenda became more pronounced and unprecedentedly biased. Interpol started evolving from a professional organisation into a platform for implementing geopolitical interests of the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union.
The organisation’s leadership deliberately opted to isolate Russia at Interpol by approving a politically motivated decision of Interpol’s secretary general in March 2022 with the wording “in connection with the developments in Ukraine.” The decision stipulated restrictive measures, as regards information relayed by the Russian Federation via channels of the International Criminal Police Organisation. This concerns all-points bulletins, issued on the initiative of Russian law enforcement agencies, as well as all outgoing correspondence of the Russian Interior Ministry’s National Central Interpol Bureau, the use of Interpol databases regarding stolen travel documents, as well as the access of Russian users to the organisation’s files, including the international wanted list. This impacts ordinary people, in the first place, primarily those on the European continent because law enforcement agencies are unable to update the relevant information. This is being done due to a politically motivated order.
In March 2024, restrictive anti-Russia measures were extended once again. Speaking at a regular meeting of the Executive Committee, the secretary general of the International Criminal Police Organisation raised the issue of completely denying Russia the right to access Interpol databases for the first time in the history of the organisation (at least, we know nothing about similar initiatives with regard to other countries). To the disappointment of the West that ordered this, sober-minded countries did not agree to make the situation completely absurd and voted against this unjustified proposal.
Since 2022, the media have been conducting a cynical information campaign, with officials from foreign countries suggesting that Russia be expelled from the organisation (Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau, as well as the UK Home Secretary and the Lithuanian Interior Minister endlessly elaborate on this issue in public space). Who will feel better from a possible decision to expel Russia from Interpol? First of all, this would impact these countries’ citizens and subjects. The General Secretariat of Interpol has so far failed to duly assess these statements because it is under pressure of these countries.
On February 20, 2024, The New York Times website posted a story by Jane Bradley titled Strongmen Find New Ways to Abuse Interpol, despite Years of Fixes. Jane Bradley claims that the Russian Federation, as well as China, Türkiye
and other countries, allegedly use Interpol channels for political purposes and virtually abuse them. What kind of political purposes is she talking about? How can one abuse these channels? Jane Bradley quotes information posted in Interpol databases and interprets this information a priori incorrectly, while trying to blame Russia in line with classic scenarios.
Recently, when US State Department Spokesperson Matthew Miller was asked about Moscow’s response to the European Union's ban on broadcasting of three Russian media outlets, he stated that this action indicates that Russia is attacking free journalism. This is absurd. Russia’s measures are purely responsive. Could someone have suggested to him to read the Foreign Ministry Statement? The statement simply notes that if and when the EU reverses its decision to ban Russian media, Russia will reciprocate by lifting restrictions on West European media. The narrative is being misrepresented.
The same situation is occurring with Interpol. The release of this information marked the start of a large-scale campaign to discredit our country ahead of the 92nd session of the Interpol General Assembly in Glasgow (November 4-7), as well as other states pursuing sovereign policies.
This serves as yet another cautionary example for lawyers, legal experts, and international legal scholars to see how the legal foundations of international organisations can be distorted, the global consequences of such distortions, and how to counteract them. The transformation of another major international professional organisation into a tool of political pressure is not only a blatant misuse of Interpol’s fundamental principles and the norms of its Charter but also a blow to the entire “family” of international legal frameworks. The foundations of international law, and consequently global cooperation, are being undermined. These principles should be based on mutual respect, both within Interpol and globally, rather than being held hostage to someone’s political ambitions.
Question: If a Ukrainian citizen acquires Russian citizenship, Ukraine revokes their Ukrainian citizenship. In this case, does the Ukrainian passport become invalid for us and other countries?
Maria Zakharova: What an optimist you are. Do you think the Kiev regime only strips citizenship from those who receive a Russian passport? They are prepared to take lives and strip away all rights. And they are doing it. They begin to destroy a person morally and physically, not just for obtaining a Russian passport, but even for celebrating historical dates shared with Russia.
According to current Russian legislation (Clause 1 of Article 10 of Federal Law No 138-FZ On Citizenship of the Russian Federation, dated April 28, 2023), a Russian citizen with dual or multiple citizenships is regarded by the Russian Federation solely as a Russian citizen.
For Russian authorities, the identity document for a Russian citizen who holds another citizenship, including Ukrainian, is the passport of the citizen of the Russian Federation. This passport must be presented in situations as required by law.
Under current circumstances, it is not possible to receive notifications from Ukraine regarding the termination of Ukrainian citizenship. Consequently, we do not have such data or official information about the stance of foreign states on this issue.
When a person accepts Russian citizenship, they take the oath of a citizen of the Russian Federation, pledging to comply with the Constitution and laws of the Russian Federation.
Дополнительные материалы
-
Фото
Выступление С.В.Лаврова на презентации Республики Дагестан.mp4)
С.В.Лавров с министром иностранных дел Абхазии О.М.Барцицом (1).mp4)