Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, February 16, 2022
Table of contents
- Foreign minister Sergey Lavrov’s forthcoming talks with Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation of the Italian Republic Luigi Di Maio
- Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s forthcoming talks with Syrian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates Faisal Mekdad
- Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming talks with Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Turkmenistan Rashid Meredov
- Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming meeting with UN Special Envoy for Syria Geir Pedersen
- The fakes
- Provocations concerning Ukraine
- Allied Resolve 2022 Russia−Belarus military exercises
- NATO weapons shipments to Ukraine
- On-the-ground results of Russian-funded FAO project for Syria
- Update on White Helmets activists in Jordan
- EU and UNDP involvement in a project to rebuild the house of Nazi collaborator Xhafer Ibrahim Deva
- Latvian human rights activist Alexander Gaponenko sentenced
- Upcoming ceremony to unveil Children of Beslan memorial sign in Italy
- Russia delivers humanitarian food aid to the Republic of Djibouti
- 55th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Russia and Burkina Faso
- 65th anniversary of diplomatic relations with Sri Lanka
- International Mother Language Day
- 75th anniversary of the International Organisation for Standardisation
- The US and NATO response to Russia’s proposals on security guarantees
- The State Duma’s initiative
- The Financial Times story on the situation in and around Ukraine
- Statements by UK Foreign Secretary Elizabeth Truss
- The Establishment of Ukrainian Unity Day
- Talks on Russia’s initiatives concerning security guarantees
- The deployment of a US military contingent in Poland
- Western media fomenting Ukraine tensions
- Russia’s role in the unification of Germany
- Germany’s approaches to the Ukrainian crisis
- Holding a RIC summit in 2022
- Russia-Pakistan relations
- Russia-India interaction on Afghanistan
- NATO’s intention to continue its open doors policy
Sorry, I was held up for a minute. I was double-checking whether we are invading or not. We’re not invading!
On February 17, Moscow will host talks between Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation of the Italian Republic Luigi Di Maio.
The ministers will exchange views on a broad range of current international issues. They will focus on the situation in the Euro-Atlantic region in the context of Russia’s initiatives on security guarantees and will also review the situation in Ukraine and Russia’s relations with the EU and NATO.
The ministers also plan to discuss prospects for bilateral political, trade, economic, cultural and humanitarian cooperation.
On February 21, Moscow will host talks between Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Syrian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates Faisal Mekdad.
The ministers plan to conduct a detailed exchange of views on the developments in and around the Syrian Arab Republic with an emphasis on the prospects of promoting a comprehensive political settlement in this country. The ministers plan to review the activities of the participants in the Astana format, including the results of the 17th international meeting on Syria that took place in Nur-Sultan in December 2021 and discuss the agenda of the Inter-Syrian Constitutional Committee in Geneva.
They plan to discuss a range of issues for the continued promotion and expansion of our diverse bilateral ties in different areas, and practical assistance to Syria in overcoming the consequences of the protracted military-political crisis.
The ministers will pay considerable attention to the humanitarian situation in Syria and the return of Syrian refugees and IDPs to their places of permanent residence.
On February 22, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will hold talks with Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Turkmenistan Rashid Meredov, who will pay a working visit to our country.
The two officials plan to discuss key aspects of cooperation between Russia and Turkmenistan, current issues on the regional and international agendas and cooperation between the two countries at multilateral forums, including the CIS, the UN, the OSCE and the five Caspian countries format.
We see the upcoming visit as an important part of the set of measures to strengthen bilateral relations under the strategic partnership treaty which our countries signed on October 2, 2017.
Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming meeting with UN Special Envoy for Syria Geir Pedersen
On February 23, Sergey Lavrov will meet with UN Special Envoy for Syria Geir Pedersen. They plan to discuss a range of issues relating to the settlement process in Syria with a focus on progress on the political process that is being carried out by the Syrians with support from the UN, including through the Constitutional Committee, in keeping with UN Security Council Resolution 2254.
They will also review issues related to stepping up efforts to render comprehensive humanitarian assistance to the needy, as provided for in UN Security Council Resolution 2585, as well as the current state of affairs on the ground in Syria and the rest of the region.
We will post more information on our website as soon as the aforementioned talks conclude.
Perhaps this is a standing section we have lacked until now and it’s high time we started one – enough to make a cat laugh. This is what Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has termed “information terrorism” on the part of the Anglo-Saxon countries, namely a “tandem” of official and media narrative. On the one hand, this is laughably absurd, while being terribly sad, on the other. The leading Western countries’ domestic and foreign policy thought has been exposed with a dramatic force. And these are the countries that are controlling the goings-on everywhere, including in NATO. They are seeking to influence the processes unfolding inside even the associations of which they are not members. I am referring to the EU. These are the countries that laid claim to leadership in our world and posed as “guarantors” of this or that – security, freedom, whatever. All of you can see what we have arrived at. Surprisingly, it is these countries that have created within organisations under their control (I have primarily NATO in mind, but their supervisee, the EU, is also in this category) a huge number of units whose duty it is to fight fakes. I think they have supplied themselves with postmortems to complete for a year ahead. It has been a long time since I last saw such an amount of fakes, disinformation, planted stories, slander and condensed lies. The concentration of disinformation was not as dense even in the case of Syria.
Provocations concerning Ukraine
Today, we are marking yet another day of “non-aggression” against Ukraine. We are doing this from the point of view of common sense and reality, which defy any likelihood of a “war” which has been promised to us with such insistence. The West – Washington and London – and its media, including Bloomberg, CNN, The New York Times, The Sun, UK tabloids, and others were active in publishing fakes and even photographs of the “attack in progress.” Yesterday, a fantastically silly report was aired by CBS. Unfortunately for many Western media outlets, this “war” has failed to materialise again. It would be funny, but we are using the term “war,” which is scaring the whole world. Yes, they were trying to do all they can for it to occur. Perhaps there were no-nonsense “engagements” on the pages of their newspapers, but this has nothing to do with reality. A detailed report on this issue has been published on the Foreign Ministry’s website in the Rebuttals section. Today, we publish a sequel describing how a number of key news agencies and other mass disinformation media (we regret to call them that, but from now on they will be known under this name) were fomenting hysteria and alleging that Russia was “within inches” of attacking Ukraine.
Unfortunately for The Washington Post, The New York Times, Bloomberg, The Daily Mirror, Bild, The Sun, and other disinformation media, the war has failed to materialise in the past few days. But they are not losing heart and await it with persistence worthy of a better cause. In the early hours today, according to a number of media reports, CNN made its correspondents and camera crew keep a round-the-clock watch to film what they called an “invasion of Russian tanks.” Reuters went on air in expectation of something terrible. I wonder if their advertising time was more expensive in that period, or they had sold it wholesale long ago. Even the post-exercise withdrawal of Russian army units to their bases was interpreted as a “cunning Russian trick” intended to sidetrack attention from the impending invasion. You can judge the morality of these actions for yourself. But the professional community (I am referring to journalists’ unions) and the anti-disinformation offices I have mentioned ought to come up with something more serious. They should at last do a bit of work. Is there some free space on the US Department of State website, where they have published a report on the alleged fakes disseminated by the Russian media, specifically RT? Insert a report about fakes spread by your US media. Do you need examples? I can let you have them.
However, this is not what I found surprising, because everything I described just now has happened in the past. What was particularly striking this time is the scale of the campaign. This must be the first time in history that not only the alleged “aggressor state” (the collective West assigned this role to Russia) but also the supposed “victim state” (this role in the US media performance was given to Ukraine) have refuted the war scenarios, which the Anglo-Saxon media has been forcing on us.
I believe this is the first time that both Russia and Ukraine are speaking almost in unison, even though they have diametrically opposite views on many issues and diverging (to put it mildly) approaches to many bilateral and international issues. First, there are no facts of any “invasion,” and second, everything we can read on this issue in the Western media is disinformation. How is it possible? Russia and Ukraine have been presented as hostile countries on the verge of a big European war, but they have refuted these allegations almost simultaneously, although their bilateral relations are far from positive.
Ukraine has tried to tell its Western curators (we will talk about this later) that such statements are “slightly” undermining Ukraine’s economy and are making Ukrainians’ life hell. Did anyone listen to them? No. Instead, the embassy was relocated from Kiev to Lvov, and so on. I wonder how much the US budget paid for that show with relocating the embassy and destroying IT equipment? After all, they had to buy new equipment, right? Maybe this is the reason for all the hectic activity of the US Department of State. Maybe this explains it?
The Defence Ministry of Ukraine says that the changes near the Ukrainian border “were expected and are proceeding within the framework of [their] previous forecasts.” It is a veiled request to the United States and Britain to stop fuelling hysteria, which is affecting the fragile public order in the country. Ukrainian Defence Minister Alexey Reznikov said every day that “the probability of a Russian invasion is low.” But who cares about his opinion in the West? This is what the political elite in Kiev cannot understand. They are only heard when it suits the West, but the sound is turned down when the White House and Downing Street have other plans. Kiev can keep talking but nobody will hear them, and nobody cares what they say.
Mikhail Podolyak, an adviser in the administration of President Zelensky, knows that the Western media are the main source of panic in the information space. This is why he has called on everyone, but first of all journalists and the media, to keep the balance and avoid making alarmist statements. But in vain. The news was streamed live, the war was expected to begin any day, even though the chief of President Zelensky’s staff said that there was no evidence of an imminent “full-scale invasion.”
Secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defence Council Alexey Danilov said that he didn’t see any evidence of the possible invasion of Ukraine on February 16 or 17.
President Vladimir Zelensky has been trying to reassure the Ukrainian people. He asked the spooked officials and oligarchs who had fled the country to return to Ukraine and begged those who might have any information about the alleged invasion on February 16 to share it. At the same time, the taxpayers’ money was used to provide insurance coverage to aircraft flying over the national territory after insurers had refused to do this because of the Western hysteria. How much more money has gone down the drain to make wooden rifles and paper guns? Thankfully, we don’t need to calculate these losses.
Two countries – Russia and Ukraine – have been saying at all possible levels that there would be no war, that nobody would invade anybody or had any invasion plans, and that no preparations were being made for the “invasion.” But this has not stopped the Western propaganda machine. Official statements continued to be issued in an endless stream. You can see what this has led to.
We have witnessed yet another round in the misinformation campaign, initiated by the West, about the mythical Russian “invasion” of Ukraine and some kind of “aggression.” A lot of effort was invested into mounting this stunt and planting fake news, spreading far-fetched information, involving both major and lesser-known media outlets, prominent politicians, diplomats, and even heads of state. In countries located thousands of kilometres from Europe and which have no ties with Ukraine whatsoever, governments shared with everyone, including Russian ambassadors, their concerns about events unfolding according to a worst-case scenario. Even these countries have been receiving all kinds of misinformation from various channels. However, they did the right thing by directly contacting Russia’s representatives and receiving the relevant explanations.
Tailor-made provocations were in the pipeline. The Washington Post sent a film crew to Ukraine to gather information on security in the Black Sea area. They wanted to cover the threats coming from Russia’s Crimean territory, as well as report on the state of the Ukrainian Navy, and planned to go out into the sea aboard Ukrainian Navy ships to describe the “actual situation” in the Black Sea basin.
However, journalists have not always stuck to the scenario written by Washington and London. There were attempts to provide an unbiased perspective. Last week, French reporters showed on one of the leading French television channels the truth about life in Donetsk. For many this was an “undesirable revelation,” which even prompted the Ukrainian Embassy in Paris to start calling the editorial desk of the television channel that aired the report to express its indignation. How did they dare show the truth?
It seems that they have not heard the calls issued by their leaders in Kiev on showing everything “as is” and presenting facts rather than concocted stories.
It is obvious that moving forward Ukraine wants to avoid any excesses when truth gets out into the open and an unbiased perspective is presented. What if it sticks? What if journalists start reporting regularly on what is happening in and around Ukraine? It is probably for this reason that on February 10, 2022, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba and Minister of Culture and Information Policy Alexander Tkachenko issued a joint statement calling on the Ukrainian and foreign media to follow Ukraine’s official position when covering developments in the country’s southeast. How interesting. When Bloomberg reports that Russia has “invaded” Ukraine and Ukraine is crumbling, including its economy, finances, and the hryvna exchange rate, people start fleeing leaving all their possessions behind, including many government officials, but the country’s authorities say: “No, no, no, this is not true.” Let’s report the truth, they say, but when someone actually makes an attempt to provide an impartial insight into what the international community has been debating for many years now, accompanied by such shameful stories, among other things, the same representatives of the Kiev regime say: “No, actually, there is only one truth, only one correct way of describing this, and this truth is ours,” so do not use any other materials.
Wait a minute. Have you not chosen democracy with the commitment to promote media pluralism, freedom of expression, independent media, etc? You, I mean the Kiev regime, joined these ranks and associated yourselves with all these “values” by voting for them while remaining outside of the EU. This is not theory. You signed the documents and said that you share the commitment to defend freedom and democracy. Here is an opportunity to deliver on this promise. Stop closing television networks. I am not even talking about opposition channels, but about those that are at least trying to do something. Stop pressuring journalists and leave Western journalists alone in their attempts to understand what is going on. We received telephone calls with questions like: “Can you explain why Kiev does not want to fulfil the Minsk Agreements?” Maybe they can produce their reports based on what they see instead of the malarkey that is being poured into their ears.
Therefore, we call on the OSCE, which has been engaged in “quiet diplomacy” lately, to wake up from its dormant state and provide its assessment of this overt and cynical attempt to pressure journalists. Two ministers from the Ukrainian government called on journalists to communicate only the official position when reporting on the ongoing developments.
In the meantime, NATO countries have continued to saturate Ukraine with weapons, rather actively, behind the cloak of their own information smokescreen. They are not the least bit concerned that these weapons can easily surface on the black market and be used against their own people, rather than against a mythical aggressor. We have seen this many times. Anything can happen there, considering the current NATO-inspired hysteria and psychosis in Ukraine. We have already noted that, according to the Ukrainian Prosecutor General’s Office, there is a constant increase in illegal weapons. I want to emphasise that this is the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine, and not another state that Ukraine and the international community do not believe. In the future, crime rings from the countries actively supplying these weapons to Ukraine might lay their hands on them.
The Western-inspired hysteria has exerted a serious psychological pressure on the people of Ukraine. Well, it is up to them to deal with this issue, and we are interested in another aspect. This country is experiencing a hot phase of the domestic standoff. The mental and moral state of people really matters. Unfortunately, any abrupt movement, including that on the line of contact, including gunfire or a provocation, could eventually lead to fatal consequences. On the contrary, people should be calmed down and told to opt for peace, and the West and some politicians in Ukraine should stop what they are now doing. No one in the West cares about the interests of Ukraine and its citizens. No matter what they say to dispel this impression, everything is more or less obvious there. Indeed, politicians and ordinary people are starting to wake up and to realise that they are mere tools in the hands of their Western mentors. Of course, the West does not care about their destiny. Deputies, officials and representatives of big businesses have simply fled the country. Today, we watched video footage showing how money was requisitioned, loaded and taken out of the country. The incumbent authorities laughed and mocked Ukrainian developments in early 2014 when their predecessors, under pressure from protesters on Maidan and the opposition forces, left Kiev to the stench of burning tyres. At that time, everyone laughed at them because of this. Where did this democratic fervour go? Where has everything vanished? Did it turn out that they acted in the same way for the past eight years, and everything was in vain?
In this context, President Vladimir Zelensky’s address to his fellow Ukrainians merits attention. I would like to note once again that he has declared openly that Ukraine is being scared with a big war (note that it’s not “us” who are scaring them), that once again an invasion date is being set (not by “us” again). In turn, we have made diametrically opposite statements and noted that we have no intention of invading, that there are no such plans, and that we are conducting military exercises. I will dwell on this aspect separately. Regarding invasion dates, everyone, including official representatives, politicians and journalists, has done their best to prove that these groundless rumours are worthless; they circulate without any reason and turn into fake news and misinformation in the West.
We are urging Western countries to stop inciting anti-Russia and essentially anti-Ukraine hysteria and stop saturating Kiev with weapons. These actions adversely affect the resolution of the conflict in Donbass and the entire situation regarding Europe’s security and stability.
Allied Resolve 2022 Russia−Belarus military exercises
The West continues to advance absurd claims with respect to the Allied Resolve 2022 Russia−Belarus military exercises. I would like to remind you that at the briefing on January 20, 2022, almost a month ago, we warned journalists and the general public that Western propaganda would be rigorously stirring up speculations about Russia’s alleged invasion of Ukraine from the territory of Belarus. In fact, all publications have included this particular tagline. The developments of the past few weeks clearly demonstrate that the purpose of the campaign was to create a media smokescreen for “pumping up” the Kiev regime with weapons. There are indications that this situation may be used by the Kiev leadership for suicidal aggression against Donbass. In their attempt to spread panic, the strategists in Washington and London not only inspired fear in Ukrainians but also themselves and their own citizens by vociferously announcing evacuation of their diplomats from Kiev and advising their fellow nationals to leave Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova.
With regard to the Allied Resolve 2022 exercises, they are being carried out in full accordance with the proclaimed concept. Russian Deputy Defence Minister Alexander Fomin provided detailed information about the goals, stages and timeline of the drills during a briefing on January 18. A similar event was held for foreign military representatives by our Belarusian partners in Minsk on the same day. But CNN and Bloomberg would not report this, of course. Press tours of the training grounds were organised. During the final stage of the drills, observation is scheduled in Belarus, with invitations extended to foreign military attaches and media representatives.
Despite the absurdity of the accusations against us, we have never avoided explaining the nature of any measures to strengthen the joint defence of the Union State that have been announced during political contacts.
We have nothing to hide. Our actions are open and transparent and we are ready to answer questions. The problem is that while we are open, the media deliberately conceal our stance from their own audience.
We appeal to our partners to stop building up hysteria and use their energy more constructively. The real security threat in the region is not posed by Russia and Belarus testing their defence capacities but by the provocative buildup of NATO forces at the Union State border and by the Western countries themselves, pumping weapons into Kiev. We have been saying this repeatedly. Perhaps we will finally be heard.
NATO weapons shipments to Ukraine
More than 40 military transport aircraft from different countries such as the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Poland and Lithuania have landed in Ukraine since the beginning of the year, or over a period of six weeks.
Last December, US President Joe Biden approved supplementary military aid for Ukraine worth $200 million. This military aid includes anti-tank systems, grenade launchers, firearms, substantial amounts of munition and other equipment. According to the US Department of State, the United States has provided $2.7 billion worth of military aid to Ukraine since 2014, including $650 million in 2021.
Let’s ask this question once again: why is Russia conducting military exercises in this region on its territory? It seems odd, doesn’t it? Russia’s unstable neighbour, hit by anti-constitutional coups on a regular basis, a country in the middle of a domestic armed conflict, has been pumped up with weapons for the past few years. What is so surprising about Russia holding drills in this region given that we realise how unpredictable developments there can be and how NATO countries usually act in such cases considering their inclinations?
There is a plan to hand over Mil Mi-17 helicopters originally intended for Afghanistan. The Americans gave a green light to their allies to supply US-manufactured machinery and arms to Ukraine. The White House is threatening to reinforce the NATO military groupings in Eastern Europe with 8,500 US troops.
Great Britain is ready to send several hundred troops to the Baltics and Poland in addition to NATO’s forward presence of 830 British troops stationed in Estonia and 140 troops in Poland. Recently, London has handed over more than 2,000 anti-tank systems to Kiev.
Additionally, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced the deployment of two Eurofighter Typhoon combat aircraft to Romania and the transfer of one thousand troops to the NATO Response Force reserve for prompt deployment in the event of a humanitarian crisis on the bloc’s eastern frontiers.
The Canadian Ministry of National Defence announced its intention to hand over guns, sniper rifles, machine guns and 1.5 million cartridges to Ukraine. People support peace. That’s right. They want what’s best for the Ukrainian people.
The Polish Government approved supplies of man-portable air-defence systems, munitions and drones to Ukraine.
Estonia announced its plans to supply 122-mm howitzers D-30 to Ukraine. This is an interesting story. The howitzers were produced back in the Soviet Union and were stored in East Germany. After Germany’s reunification, Berlin handed them over to Finland in the 1990s, and Finland handed them over to Estonia in 2009. But nothing must be spared for Ukraine. How can one not take care of one’s brother? How can one not help a friend in need, by gifting clunkers? It was very generous of Estonia. This is what I call true friendship. According to The Wall Street Journal, German officials did not allow Tallinn to supply weapons of German origin. It’s a shame. They could have thrown some matches into the fire.
The Netherlands announced that it was ready to expand its medical rehabilitation programme to cover Ukrainian troops. Indeed, instead of trying to stop a conflict, it is better to treat those who became injured as a result. Or, for example, donate 5 million euros to the NATO−Ukraine Trust Fund. That is a must.
All this will be paid for by the Ukrainian people, including with the lives of future generations. Somebody will have to use these weapons. Somebody will have to pay for these weapons, accessories and their maintenance. They’ve found a scapegoat.
On-the-ground results of Russian-funded FAO project for Syria
The project to protect agricultural livelihoods and strengthen resilience of conflict-affected households in Aleppo Governorate in Syria supported and funded by the Russian Federation in partnership with the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) was completed in January.
Russia has been contributing funds to this project since December 2018 (a total of $3 million). The goal was to overcome the devastating consequences of the military conflict for the country’s agriculture and its farming infrastructure, and to restore the potential for self-sufficient food security in Aleppo.
The assistance embraced about 45,000 households. As many as 1,600 households could increase vegetable production due to the new nurseries for seedlings and the supply of seeds.
An Animal Health Diagnostic Laboratory in the city of Aleppo has been fully restored. It will benefit more than 20,000 local small farms. Over 596,000 animals have been vaccinated.
More than 3,000 households received access to water after the reconstruction of irrigation equipment, which was crucial for resuming agricultural production on more than 5,000 hectares. Refresher courses in irrigation have been held for 47 technical experts.
The project has shown good practical results. Despite the ongoing difficulties in the country, the FAO and the local authorities provided targeted and much-needed support to the Syrian people once the active phase of hostilities ended.
We call on our international partners to become more active in the post-conflict revival in Syria, tapping the rich expert potential of the UN system organisations as much as possible.
Interesting, isn’t it? This is a far cry from supplying old weapons to Ukraine. This is a call to support civilians whom Russia helped to survive when they were attacked by international terrorists. But this isn’t on the table, because their plan is to provide food, water and medical care not to those who have fought against a real threat, but to those who fight with each other, to send them back into the civil war once they have been fed and healed. This is not what the West is interested in. True, they raise some funds, find donors and develop assistance programmes, but that mainly goes to support the opposition forces – which does little to consolidate society in Syria anyway. On the contrary, this serves to separate and split the nation. Our NATO partners are very good at this.
Update on White Helmets activists in Jordan
When the conflict in Syria broke out, the West proactively supported forces opposing the country’s legitimate government. For too long, our Western partners have been turning a blind eye to the growing presence of radicals and terrorists among these forces. The West even came up with a new designation for these people by referring to them as moderate terrorists, fighters, or extremists. Moreover, the people who flocked to Syria from across the world benefited from generous financial and logistical support.
At the same time, they haven’t spared a penny on maintaining civilian infrastructure, restoring it, or enabling the Syrian people to return to peaceful life. The money was there to support those who opposed the government. But who did it go to? Extremists, fighters, and terrorists. The West openly flirted with them in the hope that these people will help topple the “Assad regime.” This is where they placed all their bets. The US administration kept saying “he must go.” In fact, they invested their money in achieving this aim.
Even the emergence of a monster like ISIS was not enough to bring to their senses those who believed that geopolitical aims can be pursued by whatever means necessary. However, ISIS turned out to be too radical and outrageous. Its leaders dared challenge the Western interests by their statements and deeds. “Moderate” terrorists were a whole different story, including those from Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, the former Jabhat al-Nusra, as well as similar and affiliated structures, especially the infamous White Helmets, this would-be humanitarian NGO.
Western special services continue working with these structures in one way or another to this day, including the White Helmets, primarily for staging all kinds of provocations to undermine the emerging public consensus, as well as denigrate the government of the Syrian Arab Republic and its backers.
Let me remind you that on several occasions, including in April 2017 and in April 2018, NATO allies used fake chemical weapons incidents staged by the White Helmets as a pretext for launching massive missile strikes against Syrian military and civilian sites. Today, we hear about a potential Russian aggression. We are getting questions on whether Russia still intends to attack Ukraine from those who bombed Syria a couple of years ago under a far-fetched pretext they concocted themselves and paid for. There is nothing new about this hypocrisy. We know what out Western partners are capable of.
Fabricating trumped-up charges related to chemical weapons use and other false testimonies on the would-be crimes perpetrated by Damascus has been a key trend in the information war the West has been waging against the Syrian Arab Republic. Today, we are hearing statements coming from Washington that Russia could stage a false-flag operation to create a pretext for an “invasion.” It is not Russia that concocts pretexts for an “invasion,” but the White Helmets and the “moderate” terrorists, who use money from Washington, London and other NATO countries to give their patrons a pretext for carrying out air strikes. We know who worked on the most outrageous fake pretexts for an “invasion” – our American partners, the usual suspects. They will never be able to wipe out the disgrace of creating the most outrageous pretext for invading and occupying Iraq. I am referring to the vials Colin Powell brought to the UN Security Council saying that they contained anthrax, a weapon of mass destruction available to Saddam Hussein, to justify the need to rush to “save” the entire world from Baghdad because otherwise it would use the agent contained in the vials. Later it turned out that these vials contained nothing of the sort. To be precise, they contained something akin to a laundry detergent. There was no intelligence either. They made it all up. The decisions to occupy Iraq, topple its regime, undertake military action against a sovereign state were taken long before any reference to these would-be intelligence data was made. The political decision came first, and the evidence was fabricated later.
The same applies to Syria with the invention and sponsoring of the White Helmets. These White Helmets staged provocations by spreading false information about chemical weapons to pin the blame on Bashar Assad and our country.
Some people say that the Westerners are doing a good job, that they have learned to invent and implement their designs very well, and that we should try to do the same. They are not saying this sarcastically, as our diplomats do, but very seriously, reproaching our diplomats for holding on to international law instead of learning to use the real power of influence. But is it power of influence? No, it is criminal actions that bring suffering to millions, destroy states, set nations against each other and amount to crimes against humanity.
The consistent indoctrination of public opinion has led to the adoption on the legislative level of harsh repressive measures and sanctions in the West, such as the Caesar Act, which are pushing Syria towards a humanitarian catastrophe and hindering its post-crisis recovery and the return of millions of refugees back home. Having failed to overthrow the Syrian Government, they decided to use other methods: economic pressure, blockades, sanctions and more.
The cynicism of the situation is that this inhuman policy is based on “facts” and “evidence” provided by disreputable people. I am referring to several dozen active members of the White Helmets group in Syria’s neighbour, Jordan. Western intelligence services relocated them there in 2018, when the agreement on the southern zone of de-escalation expired and the Syrian Government regained control over the border with Jordan. The White Helmets’ curators promised Jordan that their “wards” would be given permanent residence in the West after the completion of formalities, which would take several months. What do we have now? After all the checks and verifications were completed, which took years, it turned out that not a single country was willing to welcome these pseudo-humanists, who were a very real threat to their security. The United States financed that project (this is public information; the State Department reported this). Britain sent its intelligence agents there, used the White Helmets for its own purposes, promoted them as a human rights organisation, and nurtured them to set against the Syrian people. At the same time, they attacked us on international platforms, claiming that we support the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian Government. When the game was over, the White Helmets’ ideological leader, James Le Mesurier, died under strange circumstances, and nobody did anything to transport the group from the region. Who needed them? First, they knew too much and could have given paid interviews to major radio and TV companies. And second, they are dangerous, considering the vast number of Middle Eastern and North African refugees in Europe, as well as Afghan refugees who have arrived in the United States. In light of this, the West recommended that Jordan keep a closer eye on these “wards.” When has it ever been different? When did the West honour its obligations and respect international law?
EU and UNDP involvement in a project to rebuild the house of Nazi collaborator Xhafer Ibrahim Deva
We were outraged to learn of the involvement of the EU and the UN Development Programme in a project to rebuild the house of Nazi collaborator Xhafer Ibrahim Deva, launched in South Mitrovica on February 2. Deva was the mayor of Kosovska Mitrovica, “the interior minister” of the pro-Nazi “Greater Albania,” recruited Kosovo Albanians into the 21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg (1st Albanian), and was involved in the persecution of Serbs, Jews, Roma and other non-Albanians.
This cynical and absurd situation has been further complicated by the fact that this project is being implemented as part of the EU initiative Cultural Heritage as a Driver for Intercommunity Dialogue and Social Cohesion.
According to the joint statement the EU and the UNDP issued on February 8, the restoration project has been suspended. We hope that the bodies of the UN, which was established after the world defeated Nazism, will never and under no circumstances take part in such provocations designed to whitewash Nazi criminals and to rewrite history.
Latvian human rights activist Alexander Gaponenko sentenced
The other day, a Latvian court passed a suspended 18-month sentence on the well-known public figure and human rights activist Alexander Gaponenko for “inciting national and ethnic hatred” and for assisting a foreign state, presumably Russia, in activities directed against Latvia.
This is not the first time that Alexander Gaponenko is standing trial. Earlier, he received a 12-month suspended sentence for a similar absurd charge. This time, Latvian prosecutors are targeting his publications featuring independent views on current developments that run counter to Riga’s official position. In these materials, he mocked the position of Latvian authorities regarding a hypothetical Russian attack on the Baltic states. Consequently, he was named an enemy of the Latvian people.
The completely politically motivated sentence once again highlights the gloomy atmosphere of real political terror and arbitrary rule against civil society representatives in the Republic of Latvia. This concerns people who have the courage to openly disagree with the discrimination against ethnic minorities and the glorification of Nazism in Latvia.
We insist that specialised international organisations give their principled assessment of the intolerable human rights situation in this Baltic country, whose authorities are using a truly punitive judicial system to fight dissent. We completely share the opinion of renowned human rights activist Alexander Brod that, by declining to support Mr Gaponenko, UN, OSCE and Council of Europe agencies are displaying shameful indifference.
Upcoming ceremony to unveil Children of Beslan memorial sign in Italy
As you know, Beslan is a word and symbol that does not have to be translated and which causes pain in every heart. We regularly discuss initiatives to honour the memory of the victims of the Beslan tragedy. Italy also has such initiatives. Florence has Children of Beslan Square, and the Garden of Children Lost in Beslan is located in Turin. A park with a memorial plaque can be found in Rovereto. A school in Roccagorga is named in honour of the children of Beslan. A monument called Memory and Hope was unveiled in Castelnovo di Sotto. A park for children called Boys and Girls of Beslan is located in Lurago d’Erba. Streets in many Italian cities commemorate the tragedy. Unlike certain European countries that named streets after terrorists who caused the tragedy in the North Caucasus in the 1990s and the early 2000s, the bronze sculpture commemorating Beslan children stands in the historical centre of the Republic of San Marino.
On February 18, the Children of Beslan memorial sign will be unveiled in Sarzana, Liguria. The memorial sign was installed at a local school with the support of the town council and the local public. It is a marble disc showing the school and children walking out of it into the sunshine. The town’s mayor, Ambassador of Russia to Italy Sergey Razov, representatives of local authorities and a delegation from Beslan, teachers and students, representatives of Russian and Italian media outlets are expected to attend. Hopefully, they will cover this event.
We are grateful to the people of Italy for yet another expression of solidarity and friendship. Attitudes towards the Beslan tragedy that shook the whole world and became a symbol of the struggle against international terrorism, one of the main modern challenges, serve as a litmus test for gauging society’s level of civilisation, love for humanity and maturity, as well as a commitment to respecting universal human values, rather than paying lip service to them. We are convinced that it is possible to eradicate the fundamental evil of terrorism only though collective and concerted efforts on the basis of the norms and principles of international law.
Russia delivers humanitarian food aid to the Republic of Djibouti
On February 10, Russia transferred the third batch of humanitarian aid (193.5 tonnes) to the government of Djibouti at the UN World Food Program (WFP) regional logistics hub in that East African state. This delivery is part of Russia’s voluntary $2 million targeted contribution to the UN WFP fund for 2022.
The Russian aid is planned for the most food insecure residents of rural areas and refugees in Djibouti (more than 30,000 people). The Russian Federation intends to continue to make a significant contribution to food security in the Horn of Africa countries.
55th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Russia and Burkina Faso
February 18 marks the 55th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the Russian Federation and Burkina Faso. While maintaining traditionally friendly ties, out two states are successfully interacting in the international arena, coordinating their steps at the UN and on other multilateral platforms. Mutually beneficial trade, economic, investment and humanitarian cooperation are growing between Russia and Burkina Faso, and the bilateral legal framework is also expanding.
Today, Burkina Faso is facing new challenges; there is a difficult internal political situation after the January 24 military coup. Our principled approach is to support restoring the constitutional order in that country and returning to a civilian form of government as soon as possible. Together with the international community, as well as regional organisations, we will continue to assist the people of Burkina Faso in finding solutions to the crisis, as well as in the fight against the terrorist threat.
As is traditional, we wish the people of Burkina Faso peace, prosperity and happiness.
65th anniversary of diplomatic relations with Sri Lanka
February 19 will mark the 65th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the Russian Federation and the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka; the two nations are bound by long-standing friendship.
The Russian-Sri Lankan political dialogue invariably rests on equality, goodwill and respect for each other’s interests. We cooperate productively in the international arena, in the UN and other multilateral agencies and forums. Russia has always been an important trading partner of Sri Lanka and is one of the main importers of its main export product, Ceylon tea. The Russian-Sri Lankan Intergovernmental Commission for Trade, Economic, Scientific and Technical Cooperation effectively contributes to the strengthening of bilateral business ties. The number of Russian tourists visiting the island nation rose after direct flights between Moscow and Colombo were resumed in July last year.
As this important date approaches, we would like to wish all the best to our Sri Lankan friends and express confidence in the continued progressive development of the entire scope of bilateral ties.
International Mother Language Day
February 21 is globally observed as International Mother Language Day, proclaimed by UNESCO in 1999 at the initiative of Bangladesh to promote awareness of linguistic and cultural diversity, and multilingualism.
This year, the International Mother Language Day theme refers to the use of technology to promote multilingualism in education.
A number of major events and round tables are planned for this day in Russia and abroad. In particular, Russia’s Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Area – Yugra will make a presentation as part of the regular event organised by the Permanent Delegation of Bangladesh to UNESCO. The project, IT camp: Nomad School-Kindergarten, is a unique digital educational resource that provides remote education for children of indigenous peoples. In addition, the national organising committee for the 2022-2032 International Decade of Indigenous Languages (IDIL 2022-2032) in the Russian Federation will hold an inaugural meeting on this day.
75th anniversary of the International Organisation for Standardisation
On February 23, the International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) marks its 75th anniversary. The Soviet Union made a proactive contribution to establishing this organisation. Today, it unites 167 countries, represented within ISO by national standards bodies, not governments. It is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland. Russia joined ISO as the USSR’s successor state and is represented within it by the Federal Agency for Technical Regulation and Metrology (Rosstandart) as an ISO member committee.
There has been consistent positive momentum in international cooperation on standards and metrology over the past years despite all the political tension around the world.
International standards are an effective tool for boosting the competitiveness of Russian companies with their products and services on the global market. Therefore, the proactive engagement by Russian experts to promote Russian solutions is a strategic mission. In 2021, for the first time in the past 20 years, the number of international standards initiated by the Russian Federation hit a new high.
The process of developing international standards consists of experts working within international technical committees on standards. Being involved in these efforts enables us, among other things, to improve Russian norms and regulations based on the best international practices, ensure that Russia’s position is taken into consideration when developing international standards for new competitive products and technologies, and regulate trade, economic, scientific and technical cooperation with other countries. This is also an important objective.
The Federal Agency for Technical Regulation and Metrology (Rosstandart) represents Russia in international standards bodies and strives to have more Russian companies represented in international technical standards committees.
We send our greetings to ISO on its 75th anniversary and wish this organisation every success in its fruitful and important work in all its undertakings.
Today, ISO has 763 technical committees and subcommittees. Russia contributes to 588 of them as an active (full) ISO member committee (P-member) and works in 122 technical committees and subcommittees as an observer (O-member). The Russian Federation is a P-member of the International Electrotechnical Commission, represented in 130 of the 184 existing technical bodies, including as an observer in 54 of them.
Today, the Russian Federation oversees and chairs 14 ISO and IEC bodies:
ISO/TC 254 Safety of amusement rides and amusement devices
ISO/TC 8/SC 7 Inland navigation vessels
ISO/TC 20/SC 6 - Standard atmosphere
ISO/TC 20/SC 8 - Aerospace terminology
ISO/TC 59/SC 2 Terminology and harmonisation of languages
ISO/TC 67/SC 2 - Pipeline transportation systems
ISO/TC 67/SC 8 - Arctic operations
ISO/TC 71/SC 4 Performance requirements for structural concrete
ISO/TC 96/SC 4 - Test methods
ISO/TC 108/SC 6 - Vibration and shock generating systems
ISO/TC 122/SC 3 Performance requirements and tests for means of packaging, packages and unit loads
EIC/TC 1 Terminology
IEC/SC 22F Power electronics for electrical transmission and distribution systems
IEC/SC 45 Instrumentation, control and electrical power systems of nuclear facilities
and so forth.
This is our practical work on the international arena.
Maria Zakharova: Decisions on a new multinational battalion-strength French-led group in Romania will be approved by a meeting of NATO defence ministers on February 16-17. They will also discuss the possibility of deploying similar battalion groups in Bulgaria, Slovakia, and Hungary. NATO’s long-standing plan is to militarise the Black Sea area, its purpose being to change it from a region of peaceful cooperation to yet another arena for geopolitical battles and rivalry in fields other than finance and the economy, where unlawful and illegal tools will be used in order to achieve selfish goals and objectives or support positions gained, rather than promote positive competition. It is an old scheme. Nothing new has been invented.
As always, NATO explains its military build-up by the need to oppose the alleged Russian “threat.” The last weeks’ hysteria has a lot to do with this as well. They are saying that the Russian military presence near the Ukrainian border compels the alliance to defend itself. This is absolute nonsense, even for children who ignore what a state is all about or that borders are guarded by armed forces. Different countries call it by different names, but no matter what you call it, there is no border protection without this. Armed forces stage various exercises in their homeland, demonstrating respect for all countries and associations of which they are members. They also inform other countries and invite observers and the media (which was done). They have the right to do this. These measures are of particular relevance, when a state next door has been engaged in a full-blown civil war for years.
I would like to reiterate that Russia is not threatening NATO countries and has no intention to attack them, as for that matter all other states. We are pursuing a peace-loving policy in a bid to preserve peace. For Russia, peace is a core value. Russia constantly had to fight aggressors on its territory, aggressors whose unexpected invasions destroyed villages and cities, people, and infrastructure. We know what peace is and how to defend it. The reason why we are developing our armed forces is that we know what trials Russia went through. I would like to stress that these trials are part of our history and that the current military exercises are being held on our sovereign territory.
Let me also remind you that the Alliance is saying that it remains committed to the 1997 Russia-NATO Founding Act, which sealed NATO’s commitment to “carry out its collective defence and other missions by ensuring the necessary interoperability, integration, and capability for reinforcement rather than by additional permanent stationing of substantial combat forces on the territory of new members.” Either they should say that it is null and void and they no longer abide by its fundamental provisions, or they must observe it. Nor should they make statements that are clearly at odds with the Founding Act, if they have not renounced it once and for all. NATO’s new military buildup calls into question not only this provision, but also the Founding Act in its entirety, which states that Russia and NATO no longer regard each other as adversaries.
I would like to repeat the whole thing once again for those who are not quite clear about it. We are on our own territory, while NATO is expanding to the territories of new members, despite the fact that this is actually banned by the Founding Act, which regulated the relations between Russia and NATO.
As for the US response to the Russian proposals on security guarantees, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reported to President Vladimir Putin at their working meeting on February 14 of this year that Washington’s negative reply to the demands of priority importance for Russia’s national security interests (non-expansion of NATO, non-deployment of attack weapon systems that may threaten Russia in the vicinity of its borders, and the return of NATO’s military-technical configuration to the 1997 positions) “cannot satisfy us.”
At the same time, we believe that the potential of diplomacy is far from exhausted. Endless talks are not in Russia’s interests, but we are ready to continue the dialogue, provided the comprehensive nature and integrity of our initiative on security guarantees is preserved. I am primarily referring to the three key elements I mentioned. We will be prepared to discuss auxiliary, applied aspects of the endeavor to maintain security, such as moving military exercises away from the Russia-NATO line of contact, setting the maximum allowable approach distance for military aircraft and warships, and a mutual moratorium on the deployment of intermediate- and shorter-range missiles in Europe.
Maria Zakharova: Yesterday, President Vladimir Putin commented on this issue. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs also shared its assessments.
The Minsk agreements are the only and uncontested framework for resolving the conflict in Donbass. In February 2015, when the Package of Measures was signed, Donetsk and Lugansk agreed to remain part of Ukraine, provided they were granted a special status guaranteed by the Constitution and the decentralisation of governance. This phrase is of fundamental importance to understanding the situation. Foreign media (the largest outlets included) are suddenly asking for explanations, as if they have just woken up. They have been writing about the Minsk agreements for years, but now they are asking to explain their essence, and why they are not being implemented.
It is important to understand that the Minsk agreements are not about improving the internal political situation in Ukraine or about nominating certain regions for “top performers of the five-year plan”. They were not even about cross-border cooperation with the regions of Ukraine. It was a critical step for preserving the integrity of Ukraine. Two major regions in that country announced they no longer wanted or agreed to be part of Ukraine on the terms or in the context of that time, both citing the same reasons that made them take action. It took an enormous international mediation effort to work out a formula that would make it possible to reintegrate (no, this is too mild), in fact, to unite the country on conditions that made sense both in the legal context and in practice. The heads of several states spent hours to come up with a formula that would underpin a document that could actually be implemented. They did it, and secured it with signatures; it was not just legalised (it did not require legalising), but its international legal status was upgraded as it was included in a UN Security Council resolution. There remained just one minor problem – the document needed to be implemented, which is a complex and monumental process. And then the funny business started, all we have been observing for years now. It is our belief that, with strong political will, the Package of Measures could be implemented in the foreseeable future (within a few months). This is the approach we strongly support and promote by mediating in the Contact Group and the Normandy format.
The Western media community is so “zombified” that people, journalists, international political commentators at the largest media outlets keep talking about the Minsk agreements, anti-Russia sanctions because of Ukraine, and Moscow sabotaging the agreements (no idea where that came from). They ask if we really want Donetsk and Lugansk to be in the trilateral Contact Group. What is there to be discussed with these people? Can you imagine the level of expertise? We ask what they think the Trilateral Contact Group is about – the answer is, Russia, Ukraine and the OSCE. But what is Ukraine? For them, finding out that Donetsk and Lugansk are also part of Ukraine is a shock. Where did they want them to be then? As separate entities? But this is something Ukraine was all opposed to in the first place. The level of those people writing about it professionally seems questionable.
We must make every effort to resolve the Donbass problem, primarily taking advantage of the opportunities that have not been fully used in the implementation of the Minsk agreements. They have not even started to be used, in fact. What has been fulfilled is an “anti-plan,” or “anti-Minsk,” given the laws Ukraine has adopted in recent years that clearly contradict the Package of Measures.
You began by citing what Kiev says – Russia recognising the DPR and LPR would derail and even nullify the Minsk agreements. The Kiev regime and its specific representatives have been doing this for the past 18 months. Before that, they had been dragging their feet, a sluggish sabotage. But in the past 18 months, we have heard direct statements from the Ukrainian leaders that the Minsk agreements “do not correspond to reality,” and that they need to be “revised.” They said they needed to figure out what the authors of the provisions had actually meant, and to reconfigure the entire structure for that. Why are they suddenly concerned about someone possibly having a different attitude to these agreements? They should make up their own minds first. Do they even recognise the Package of Measures? Will they implement it or not? A year and a half ago, there were only trial balloons (media commentators, etc.). Then they rolled out direct statements by Kiev officials – the president, ministers, representatives of the legislature, the Verkhovna Rada members who have now run to Europe to defend themselves from non-existent Russian “aggression.” They began to say there was nothing to implement. Vladimir Zelensky even said he did not understand what the Minsk agreements were about. If someone can say that, why are they concerned about someone being a little disrespectful – as they see it – of what they do not respect at all?
We have repeatedly reaffirmed our commitment to the Minsk Package of Measures. We did everything, including endless negotiations with our Western partners directly asking them to influence Kiev and encourage the fulfillment of the Minsk agreements. Even though it was definitely not our problem. One way or another, an agreement was reached: each country that has influence on the participants in the process agreed to assist in the implementation of the Package of Measures from their respective side. Russia, for one, had opportunities for talking with the DNR and LNR and helping shape their approach. France and Germany (as the Normandy format participants) assured everyone they had influence on the Kiev regime. For many years, we have been trying, among other things, to persuade Ukraine’s Western supervisors to encourage the Kiev regime to comply with the Minsk agreements. That was not part of any agreement, by the way, but we have been doing it nonetheless.
Maria Zakharova: It is funny to read stories about an impending coup in Ukraine. I get the impression that such a coup is taking place every day there, be it an unconstitutional coup or a figment of the regime’s imagination. Something is happening all the time. Regarding certain anonymous sources of the British intelligence community, they could have relied on a source with a real name at least once. There are many intelligence services in the United Kingdom. Depending on the form of the civil service’s organisation, they are integrated into civilian agencies and can delegate to their civilian colleagues, including the Foreign Office, to make such “sensational” statements. How much longer do they have to feed people with information from anonymous sources? The entire Salisbury poisoning case rested on such sources. The situation has not changed. No one understood what happened, and what the eventual outcome was. The same with this situation, including Russia’s alleged attack on Ukraine and a coup. Someone already wrote about this, and we denied such claims.
Let’s consider the facts. The most interesting thing is that this will be done by the real source in the Russian Foreign Ministry. Ukraine faced its first major coup in 2004. That was the “orange revolution,” supported by Western countries. At that time, Ukrainian voters had to re-vote in the second round of the presidential election. In effect, a third election round was organised. Viktor Yushchenko, a Western, rather than pro-Western, candidate, gained power in 2004. They also tried to stage a second coup during another election, but failed. So they pulled it off later, in 2014, with the most active support of Western countries. At that time, they were unable to repeat the success of the first Maidan protests; that was fairly obvious. So, they allowed Viktor Yanukovich to win the election, but their patience ran out in 2014.
At that time, US representatives handed out snacks on Kiev’s Independence Square, and three European countries acting as guarantors of an agreement between the government and the opposition did nothing when the opposition trampled upon this agreement and overthrew the legitimate president. Do you recall reports of gunfire and snipers? There were no investigations, as if nothing happened. The tragedy and numerous fatalities were never investigated.
After the 2014 Maidan protests, an entire avalanche of cases dealing with high treason engulfed Ukraine. This, too, has something to do with coups. According to the Office of the President of Ukraine, over 1,500 cases have been opened since then. Many decent and totally innocent people, including journalist Kirill Vyshinsky, found themselves behind bars. In their understanding, he was also masterminding some coup. Opposition leader Viktor Medvedchuk also faces high treason charges. Real chaos is now sweeping Ukraine, the authorities are cracking down on dissent, independent media outlets and journalists are being taken out, and television channels are being closed en masse. This phenomenon is typical of a mental or political coup. Virtually anyone can be prosecuted for high treason.
Do not focus on unnamed and anonymous sources of British media outlets. Focus on numerous facts that speak for themselves.
Maria Zakharova: The UK Foreign Secretary must apologise to the people of Russia, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom for spreading lies. She must also apologise to the media outlets who assumed they could take her words seriously. It does not make any sense to discuss the substance of what Elizabeth Truss has said, not because what she said was groundless, but because it was absurd. This has nothing to do with logic.
The UK Foreign Secretary has remained true to herself. She relies on the tactic the British love so much, which consists of planting anti-Russia “highly-likely” fake stories in the media space. Judging by what Elizabeth Truss has been saying, the accusations and her willingness to take “measures” to “punish” us are not backed by evidence. There is nothing new about this. What has surprised us is the extreme crudeness, which is quite strange for a person working in her position. All we hear are the same accusations and demands we have been facing for the past two weeks. Moreover, they are once again accompanying their demands with threats of imposing sanctions. We have already been there: Salisbury, Novichok, the Skripals. They imposed sanctions and handed down the “guilty” verdict, but the investigation failed to yield results. No one saw Skripal.
Her words are part and parcel of the disinformation campaign carried out by NATO countries under Washington’s and London’s leadership. In fact, she is one of the key figures in it. All these efforts are designed to drum up tension and spread the myth that Russia may “invade” Ukraine, while NATO countries use this is a cover-up to draw Ukraine into the alliance’s military orbit and turn this country into a bridgehead against Russia. In addition, all this hysteria diverts attention from Kiev’s failure to implement the Package of Measures and justifies the eventual attempts to resolve the conflict in Donbass by force. There is also a domestic agenda. Elizabeth Truss is part of Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s team which has been facing challenges and could be forced to resign. What they need is an external force to turn the public’s attention away from the scandalous events that took place despite the coronavirus restrictions they introduced. They succeeded in this. Just look at the British tabloids. They published nothing but photos from Boris Johnson’s parties for a month, but now switched to images of Russia’s “invasion” of Ukraine, which never happened. But who cares? The UK Foreign Secretary talks about it with so much confidence. She lies as naturally as she breathes.
Let me repeat once again for London. Do you copy? We have said many times already that Russia is not attacking anyone and does not intend to. It is NATO countries who owe us an explanation. There are in fact questions in this regard. It is now up to the UK to prove that is does not intend to attack anyone or that it does not have any intentions of this sort. After all, it was a British destroyer that was sailing in the Black Sea and entered Russia’s territorial waters. This happened in June 2021, but now we get this feeling we can’t shake that the UK may attack us. Maybe they were rehearsing their attack back then? They will have to explain themselves. Prove to us that you are not harbouring any plans of that kind, Ms Truss.
At the news conference following the February 10, 2022, talks with UK Foreign Secretary, Sergey Lavrov said the meeting was like a “conversation between a mute and a deaf,” but Ms Truss responded that she was not “mute.” This is all clear as day. Then began the litany of worn-out tropes about “Russian aggression” against Ukraine and that our concerns regarding European security are groundless. We see that London is not ready to engage in meaningful dialogue and a constructive exchange of views. This is not our choice. We will take this into consideration moving forward, and we wait for them to apologise.
Maria Zakharova: Much has been said about this today. In his address, Vladimir Zelensky spoke about the need for Ukraine to take some image-building measures. This is what they are doing. Whether this is good or bad depends on the situation. This may be a wonderful thing under certain circumstances. However, image-building measures cannot conceal the existing problems of a state which is disintegrating.
It is impossible to celebrate Unity Day when millions of people in the country cannot live a normal life. Vladimir Zelensky himself calls them “individuals” rather than people and suggests that dissidents should leave the country. He doesn’t think that people can have their own views, convictions and ideals. He doesn’t care for the interests and, generally, the existence of minorities. Excuse me, but how can a multi-million population of Ukraine for whom Russian is their native tongue be called a minority at all? And now here comes a day of some unity. Are they not considered people? In this case, be straight and say you are not going to fulfil the Minsk agreements and that you do not consider residents of Donbass to be citizens of your country. It is time to define one’s position. It is simply impossible to go on like this.
Children’s cemeteries appeared in the very heart of Europe in the past few years. Children were killed during hostilities and the shelling by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Some were blown up by land mines. These are just those who died. Many children were wounded and became disabled. This is the heart of Europe. Instead of celebrating Unity Day, people should ask each other for forgiveness. It is necessary to think how to co-exist in the future and on what foundation if they don’t accept the Minsk agreements. It is time to announce a day of silence to give people an opportunity to think about the horrible shape to which they reduced their country over the past few years by pumping it with weapons, stealing and betraying the previous generations, those who gave up their lives for the future of Ukraine and these people. In effect, they betrayed their own population.
I am sorry but this is how it is. There is probably no other way out. All stories about who plays up to whom are not so relevant. Everyone knows who stands behind whom. Everyone saw who rushed where with the loot. At a time when the Ukrainians badly needed unity, their elite betrayed them. They needed unity not because of the scaring by the Western media and the White House but proceeding from their own sense of national identity. Meanwhile, the elite took as much as they could and fled abroad – to Europe, Israel or even further. As for the people who work for Ukraine’s existence on a daily basis, they remained at home. Now they are offered to take some image-building measures to prove their devotion to their homeland. They do this every day by surviving in that country.
Maria Zakharova: Considering how much our leaders said on this issue in the past few days, I don’t want to repeat anything. I would like to emphasise that the interdepartmental response to the US proposals is about to be completed. Let’s wait for it to be published, as Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov suggested. In this case we will be able to continue our conversation on a proper foundation. It’s not that I don’t want to reply. I just don’t want to repeat myself because there have been many statements on this issue. We are now at the threshold of a new stage in these developments.
Question: Why does Poland now agree to the deployment of a huge US military contingent?
Maria Zakharova: You are asking me about Poland, rather than Russia. A Polish delegation was here yesterday, and it would have been more appropriate to ask them this question. I believe that it is possible to send an inquiry to the Polish Embassy or directly to the Polish government in Warsaw. Let them explain everything themselves. Unfortunately, for many years now Polish politicians have been following US directives and tasks, rather than working in their country’s real interests. If we look at the map, we can see that it is much more profitable to directly deal with a neighbouring state, since these countries are linked by land and high-seas routes, and have so much in common. It would be appropriate to leave part of our historical legacy to historians and to move on. There were problems, but we learned to overcome them. But, contrary to logic, geopolitics and strategic considerations, we have seen the Polish establishment steer in a diametrically opposite direction. There were other examples when we pooled our efforts, expanded regional cooperation and communicated within useful formats. We conducted beneficial and important discussions on foreign policy matters, and we worked on expanding practical cooperation. This is what should be prioritised. However, for many years, Poland has acted in the interests of not only NATO, an organisation where Poland should be a full-fledged member, according to the charter, but in fact has followed Washington’s instructions. This has nothing to do with regional security and stability, and merely creates various elements for destabilising the situation and making it more unpredictable.
Question: Which Western country stands to benefit from the hysteria around the situation in Ukraine?
Maria Zakharova: We have discussed this matter so much today. First of all, it is the Anglo-Saxon tandem, namely, Washington and London. Where are all the waves coming from? Who is doing this? Washington, London, the White House, the State Department and their attendant media outlets, including Bloomberg and CNN, as well as Downing Street, the Foreign Office and various tabloids. This is where everything comes from. If you take the European media, you will see that they mostly reprint various stories. We conducted a study and prepared rebuttals. Our website has a section devoted to this, and we made an overview, something like a report. We have published the second part today. Anglo-Saxon media outlets set the pace. Europe mostly reprints these stories. News agencies reprint statements by various officials, such as Elizabeth Truss, Antony Blinken, Jen Psaki and Boris Johnson. Newspapers borrow the facts, citing their big brothers. No one is trying to conceal this because it would be pointless. We have also talked about mid-term and long-term prospects and time-serving considerations. These actions are aimed at resolving domestic political problems. The United States and the UK are experiencing a highly complicated political crisis, including a dire situation with NATO and Afghanistan. After maintaining a monstrous presence there for many years and after inflicting so many civilian fatalities, the United States failed to accomplish even a single task set by the UN Security Council. All this ended in a disastrous flight. I don’t even know what to call it. It was like crawling away and leaving bloody tracks all over the place.
There is another reason, namely, Russia’s energy cooperation with European countries. Washington which wants to win yet another market, especially one that is as lucrative as the gas market, perceives it as a major headache. All these years, it was profitable for them to destabilise the situation in Ukraine, which handled Russian gas deliveries to Europe. That is why they made veery effort to slow down the Nord Stream 2 project, to prevent it from becoming reality, to stop construction and to invent arguments as to why it cannot start operating. Today, they want to launch an all-out attack and try and do this by inventing yet another “Russian threat” and to use it as a justification for even more sanctions, as well as to obtain more arguments so as to scare the Europeans that they will not get any Russian energy resources in the future.
Russia has been a reliable supplier of gas and other energy resources to Europe and to countries in other regions for decades. We have supplied them and will continue to do so on mutually beneficial terms. This is profitable not only because goods are sold for money, which is then exchanged for other goods. Add to this technology, investment and development, including the environment. In terms of global objectives, they want to expand NATO, to redeploy contingents, to swell the budget ad infinitum and to write off money as redeployment expenses. There are many goals and tasks here. Who stands to benefit from this? I have already said. Now let’s talk about who all this is directed against. Certainly, it is being done against Russia, but the people of Ukraine are suffering most of all. Today, everyone can see it like never before. Yes, the domestic Ukrainian conflict has been sputtering on for many years. People are dying there, they are being killed and disabled, and the conflict deals a tremendous blow to their world outlook. An entire war-time generation has grown up there. Children who are born there know nothing about peace and normal life. This is Europe. It has now become obvious that this is hitting the people of all Ukraine really hard. Within just two months they wrecked all investment projects, drove people into a frenzy and split society into even more fragments. This probably also has some indirectly positive aspects. I am far from happy about it, but there are some objective benefits. They showed the real essence of all those loud-mouthed people who outshouted all others at the Verkhovna Rada while discussing the interests of their country, their homeland and the need to fight some ultimate evil. Well, they were the first to pack their suitcases and to flee the homeland that they “loved” so dearly. This may be an objective result, even if it is not so good. Everything else is damaging and destructive. Is there anything new here? This is a long-time classic story. First, they “tame” someone, lavish promises on them, talk their head off, and then abandon them. Please tell me when the Western community has acted differently.
Maria Zakharova: Since it was a summit, I should think this is a question for its participants – about what has sunk in. But since you mentioned German reunification, indeed, we do see a certain trend, which is quite astonishing. A story is being promoted in the FRG about German reunification being the result of the GDR citizens’ “courage” in their striving for freedom and democracy during the 1989 peaceful revolution, as well as the FRG’s “wise” policy and the helping hand it extended. At the same time, the Soviet Union’s role in achieving German unity is swept under the carpet or nullified. This is strange, because by and large, it was the Soviet Union that guaranteed this process; not knowing this and not passing this awareness on to the future generations is a big historical mistake. All we hear is gratitude to Germany’s Western partners and Eastern European neighbours for their support, as if the Soviet Union played no role in this. But we have already mentioned this: it was the Soviet Union that played the key role in the reunification of Germany. Washington’s role was different, however; Washington officials were actually opposed to it.
Russia, in turn, is trying to counter such historical amnesia. We remind you that it was the USSR that made a decisive contribution to the German reunification process. Had the Soviet leaders not shown a will, had they not supported that process in every way, the so-called peaceful revolution would not have achieved anything.
However, apart from this newly-promoted point of view, there is another version. According to that version, what happened over 30 years ago was not a reunification, but a takeover of the GDR by the FRG. Article 146 of the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany, which stipulated that the Basic Law should be replaced by a new Constitution of the unified German state, was ignored. Instead, the West German state, political, economic and financial governance structure automatically extended to the eastern part of the country. The GDR was declared an illegitimate “dictatorial” state, and any positive, constructive and significant accomplishments connected with it have been edited out or perverted by modern Germany, including its contribution to the historical reconciliation between Russia and Germany. This is another point of view. This is not Russia’s approach. Nevertheless, this school of thought is also out there. In any case, we are talking about what German society believes in. Our goal here is to preclude any distortion of history, any misconceptions or falsifications on this score. Those events can be interpreted differently; just avoid distorting or leaving out facts.
Maia Zakharova: I don’t want to speak for Germany or about its strategic plans. This is a long conversation and I am not sure we should have it now. There were also examples of Germany’s positive, normal cooperation with post-Soviet states. It is enough to recall our numerous joint projects. There were also examples of unlawful and patently inappropriate involvement in the domestic policies of these states. Today, I cited examples of the Maidan, where the role of Germany and its political leadership was enormous and it led everything to collapse. In other words, this was not simply bad because it violated international law, ethics and some universally recognised rules but because it led, on top of everything else, to tragic results for Ukraine itself. Excuse me, but Germany was active in this respect. There are some unequivocal examples. On the one hand, it is a co-sponsor of settlement and this is how it describes its role in the domestic crisis in Ukraine. It also admits being part of the Normandy format. But, on the other hand, Germany is not making full use of its opportunities. We are seeing that it is not doing all it must do, not simply as a good gesture but by virtue of its commitments. It must exert a bigger influence on the Kiev regime. We do remember how active Germany was when it thought it had to micromanage coups in Ukraine. But now, all of a sudden, it has suddenly developed a sense of delicacy and says it is unable to influence anyone. So we are capable of changing the regime but incapable of compelling your partner to fulfil its promise although you actually guaranteed the agreements. It is impossible to paint everything black and white. The world is multi-coloured. It consists of different colours and this is why there are such examples as well.
Maria Zakharova: As you know, Russia organised the first RIC summit after a 12-year interval on the sidelines of the G20 top-level meeting in Buenos Aires in November 2018. Later on, India undertook to arrange a summit in accordance with the principle of the RIC letter rotation in Osaka, also on the sidelines of the G20 meeting, in June 2019.
Due to the complicated sanitary-epidemiological situation in the world and waves of the pandemic in different countries in 2020-2021, Russia, India and China did not convene their summits. Their foreign ministers met in the hybrid and online formats.
Now the RIC summit initiative is the responsibility of China. In turn, Russia is invariably willing to promote dialogue in this format between Asia’s three largest states that bear special responsibility for ensuring security, improving interstate relations in the Asia-Pacific Region and developing Eurasian economic integration. Beijing and New Delhi are well aware of our position.
Maria Zakharova: I do hope that you will be able to share our position with a wider audience through your media outlet. Relations between Russia and Pakistan are not directed against any third country and are focused on ensuring peace, security, and stability in the region. Counter-terrorism efforts and promoting trade and economic ties are the core areas of our cooperation.
Russia is interested in New Delhi and Islamabad building neighbourly relations and settling their existing differences, including in Kashmir, by political and diplomatic means, through bilateral channels. You know our position under the 1972 Simla Agreement and the 1999 Lahore Declaration. In this context, Russia welcomes the fact that in February 2021 India and Pakistan reaffirmed their 2003 agreement on observing a ceasefire along the Line of Control in Kashmir, as well as statements by the Pakistani leadership expressing their interest in bringing India-Pakistan relations back to normal.
As for the part of your question on whether Russia fails to keep India’s concerns in mind, this is not the way things stand. We maintain close contacts with our partners from your wonderful country. There has been a series of contacts recently, and a summit meeting took place despite the Covid-related restrictions. President Vladimir Putin travelled to New Delhi and had meaningful fully-fledged talks with Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which lasted for several hours. Russia is promoting its dialogue with India across the board, including on security matters, military and technical cooperation, economics, humanitarian affairs, combating the spread of the coronavirus, both within the framework of our relations and on international platforms. We are aware of the immense responsibility our large countries shoulder, including in global and regional affairs. The level of trust-based contacts between the leaders of our two countries and in several other fields proves that we do keep each other’s positions in mind.
Question: How are Russia and India engaging when it comes to Afghanistan?
Maria Zakharova: This is part of our dialogue with New Delhi. We work together on Afghanistan within the Moscow format. It has been gathering momentum – the third meeting took place on October 20, 2021 in Moscow. The security councils of our two countries are also working together. One of the examples is Russia’s participation in the Delhi Regional Security Dialogue, which took place on November 10, 2021, in New Delhi with the participation of India, Iran, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan.
We will continue this dialogue and discussion on this matter to come up with practical, joint steps and coordinate our actions in all spheres in a bilateral framework, as well as internationally using the mechanisms I have mentioned. We will touch base on the ongoing developments in Afghanistan and the prospects of facilitating a peaceful settlement in this country.
Maria Zakharova: I have already said that we are preparing a response to the US and NATO. We have also said that we are ready to continue constructive dialogue in these areas. We noted the contingence of many issues that should be discussed in a package. They are of major importance for us. Today, I cited the Founding Act we signed with NATO in 1997. All these issues require detailed, matter-of-fact discussion. Otherwise, we will have a repetition of what happened with the UK Foreign Secretary in Moscow – a conversation between a deaf and a mute person. We would like to avoid this. We want the parties to hear rather than lecture each other or make empty statements that do not respect each other’s concerns but are merely a waste of breath. This is why we are urging them to start a specific, practical and constructive dialogue but not at microphones, not behind closed doors in elite clubs. We have said this in the open. We are worried about our security guarantees. We are seeing trends that are bound to cause our concern: NATO’s expansion to the Russian borders; a buildup of NATO countries’ troops (on foreign rather than domestic territory); the domination of the aggressive Anglo-Saxon policy and rhetoric in the political discourse of the NATO states and now in the EU; offensive, aggressive and illegal operations by NATO and its individual members all over the world, which have nothing to do with peace-loving policy; and the destruction of the foundations of international law that used to underlie international security and stability. I am referring to both bilateral agreements with the US and multilateral treaties from which the US withdrew. Much of what was created over the past few decades in international law, and that has prevented the sides from making thoughtless, aggressive steps acted as guarantees. Now the Western countries have destroyed them.
One more aspect. A refusal to fulfil one’s commitments. We have also seen this more than once as regards specific documents or promises. In other words, neither written, nor verbal obligations were honoured. In this context, we asked a question about the interpretation and fulfilment of a commitment that was signed by every country – on the indivisibility of security. We are not interested in statements by Jens Stoltenberg who is either NATO’s Secretary General or a banker. I haven’t yet figured this out. But we are not interested in them any longer. He is not a person whose pronouncements Moscow will review as serious arguments. He is already a downed NATO pilot. We will be looking forward to a serious conversation, if our Western partners are ready for it, as the President of Russia, the Foreign Minister and the Defence Minister have said. Our response is already in the final stages of preparation and will be sent and published. We will confirm, for the umpteenth time, our desire to conduct a detailed, open and mutually respectful dialogue on security guarantees and mutual consideration of the sides’ concerns.
Дополнительные материалы
-
Фото
