Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, October 9, 2024
- Sergey Lavrov to take part in the 19th East Asia Summit
- Lebanon update
- Israeli air strike on Damascus
- Ukraine crisis update
- Launch of investigation by Malian authorities into cooperation between the Kiev regime and terrorist organisations in the Sahara-Sahel region
- Honouring collaborators in Canada
- Developments in Moldova
- Consulate General of Romania closes down in Rostov-on-Don
- British investigation into the Skripal case
- The 80th anniversary of liberating Riga from Nazi forces
- The anniversary of the signing of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation Charter
- The 80th anniversary of MGIMO
- The 2nd International Congress of the National Medical Research Centre of Endocrinology of the Russian Ministry of Health
- Investigation into Nord Stream terrorist attacks
- Reaction of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Office to Ukraine’s violations of international obligations
- UK and US security services’ involvement in Nord Stream terrorist attacks
- The potential for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict to escalate into a large-scale war
- Russia’s perspectives on settling the Middle East conflict
- EU’s new sanctions regime against Russia
- OPCW Executive Council session
- Deaths of journalists in the Middle East conflict
- Russia’s de-escalation efforts in the Middle East
- Parliamentary elections in the Kurdistan Autonomous Region
- Upcoming meeting between the presidents of Russia and Iran
- Attempts by US Congress to impose sanctions on Azerbaijan
- Russia-China energy cooperation
- Armenia’s refusal to sign CIS foreign ministers’ statement on Eurasian security principles
- Jens Stoltenberg’s ideas
- Moscow Declaration on the Protection of Interests of Pluralistic States and the nuclear aspect
- Russia’s migration legislation and relations with Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan
Sergey Lavrov to take part in the 19th East Asia Summit
As I said during the previous briefing, on October 11, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will attend the 19th East Asia Summit in Vientiane, Lao PDR.
This platform is one of the elements in a system of mechanisms within the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). It has invariably served as one of the key components in the ASEAN-centric system of multilateral dialogue and cooperation in the Asia-Pacific Region.
ASEAN has traditionally focused the East Asia Summit’s agenda on pressing regional development matters, with an emphasis on strengthening the association’s connectivity and expanding its cooperation potential.
The summit’s agenda will also cover security challenges for the Asia-Pacific Region. Today, these challenges are primarily linked to the Western efforts to militarise Asia, establish local NATO infrastructure there and create new blocs that serve as an alternative to the ASEAN-centric system of interstate relations, which relies on the principles of open and equitable cooperation.
Russia has consistently advocated for efforts to reinforce its multifaceted practical cooperation with ASEAN. This approach lies at the core of all Russian proposals at the East Asia Summit, including the use of the East Asia Summit’s platform in order to enhance effectiveness in responding to epidemic threats, exploring opportunities for institutionalising this aspect of our cooperation, establishing permanent advisory structures for tourism agencies and supporting volunteer projects through EAS mechanisms as an important aspect of community service. Additionally, we are ready to share with our partners Russia’s experience in implementing national programmes aimed at the development of remote territories.
During his stay in Vientiane, Sergey Lavrov will hold several bilateral meetings with his Asian colleagues.
I would like to remind you that Israeli citizens suffered a bloody terrorist attack, resulting in civilian casualties. This happened one year ago, on October 7, 2023, followed by a chain of horrific, monstrous and bloody events across the Middle East. Over the past year, dozens or even hundreds of people have died there. Civilians have dominated the death toll for all parties involved, including many children, women and the elderly. All this has been taking place against the backdrop of the unrelenting efforts by the West to add even more fuel to the fire in its determination to block any attempts to settle the conflict that is currently raging there through political and diplomatic means, including efforts by our country and all reasonable members of the international community. The destructive efforts by the United States, the United Kingdom and their satellites in the UN Security Council serve as a vivid illustration of this situation. We have been regularly commenting on the regional developments, particularly concerning Russian citizens.
Israel continues its aggression against Lebanon despite calls for a ceasefire and despite all the protests from members of the international community, with the Israeli air force carrying out massive missile and bombing attacks every day. Hundreds of reconnaissance and combat UAVs infest the skies in southern Lebanon around the clock.
The strikes that the Israeli Armed Forces are delivering on Lebanon are anything but blind. They specifically target presumed locations of Hezbollah weapons, its fighters and commanders, as well as the military and even civilian infrastructure of the Shiite movement, including healthcare and media facilities. We can see clear violations of international humanitarian law.
The cynicism and tragedy of this situation lie in the fact that some of the attacks hit densely populated districts of Beirut and other cities. The Israeli military shows little regard for the so-called collateral damage among civilians (it is terrible to even pronounce this term, which comes from the West). During the bombing on September 27, which killed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, six multi-storey residential buildings were reduced to rubble, along with all the people inside. The evacuation warnings to the Lebanese are very unspecific and essentially useless. As a result, the civilian death toll far exceeds the casualties among the Shiite movement fighters.
More than one million residents of southern Lebanon have become internally displaced persons. Over 400,000 people crossed the border into Syria just in time, before the Israeli Air Force targeted the road near the Masnaa Border Crossing, effectively blocking traffic between Beirut and Damascus.
The ground invasion of Lebanon that Israel declared on September 30 is currently stalled. The Israeli raids into Lebanese territory have resulted in fierce clashes with Hezbollah fighters and significant losses.
According to our estimates, the Shiite party of Hezbollah, including its military wing, has maintained control and demonstrates a high level of organisation. I want to stress again that we must consider the number of civilian casualties resulting from these hostilities.
Russia was one of the first countries to send humanitarian aid to Beirut on October 3. The return flight of the Emergencies Ministry partly evacuated families of the Russian embassy staff and other Russian foreign missions.
We consider the Lebanese operation as a component of the current unprecedented escalation in the Middle East. We strongly condemn any hostilities that aim to inflame tensions across the entire region. We sympathise with everybody who has suffered. Our sincere condolences go out to the families and loved ones of the victims, to all those who have been killed in the past year. We stand for an immediate ceasefire. It is in this context that the sincerity of our condolences and sympathy lies. We see many literally sobbing in public while continuing to inflame this conflict. We advocate for a political and diplomatic resolution based on international law, and an immediate ceasefire in Lebanon and the neighbouring countries. Our priority is to achieve a political and diplomatic settlement of the existing disagreements by balancing legitimate interests and adhering to the universal principle of general and equal security. We are firmly committed to strengthening coordination of these efforts with our international and regional partners.
Israeli air strike on Damascus
In the evening of October 8, 2024, Israel again grossly violated Syria’s sovereignty by launching a missile strike on an apartment building in a densely populated district of Damascus. According to the Syrian government, seven civilians, including women and children, have been killed and 11 wounded. The removal of debris is ongoing.
We strongly condemn this attack. No matter who was the target of the attack, it targeted a densely populated area in a third country, which invariably results in the death of innocent civilians. It is outrageous that such actions have become a routine practice in Syria, Lebanon and Gaza.
We again urge Israel to respect the sovereignty of states and the basic norms of international law. We draw attention to the extremely irresponsible and dangerous nature of that act of aggression, which clearly indicates a desire to further expand the area of armed escalation in the region.
The Kiev regime continues its terrorist attacks on Russian regions and citizens.
Between September 30 and October 7, 2024, the Bandera bandits launched artillery attacks on Gorlovka, the Donetsk People’s Republic, every day. They used exclusively NATO-supplied 155 mm shells, cluster munitions and drones. Overall, they delivered over 200 strikes and launched dozens of drones at the city. Regrettably, there have been casualties: four dead, including a teenager born in 2007, and 45 wounded, including two teenagers born in 2007 and a girl born in 2015. In an extreme case of brutality, a drone attacked a parked commuter bus in the Nikitovsky District of Gorlovka. Eight passengers suffered moderately severe wounds.
Enemy artillery is deliberately targeting the Petrovsky District of Donetsk.
On October 3, 2024, Ukrainian forces launched a fixed-wing drone on the Kurskaya Nuclear Power Plant, which was neutralised by our electronic warfare systems.
On October 4, 2024, Andrey Korotky, head of physical security at the Zaporozhskaya NPP and former chair of the Energodar City Council, was killed in a Ukrainian car bomb attack in Energodar. According to investigators, a jury-rigged explosive device was planted under his car. Ukraine’s military intelligence agency, the GUR, posted a video of the explosion and a cynical statement about “retribution,” thereby assuming responsibility for planning and executing another barbaric terrorist attack. What else does the international community need to see who they are dealing with and what monsters they have raised?
The Bandera forces are doing all they can to intimidate people in the Belgorod Region by launching artillery and drone attacks against them. On September 30 and October 6, 2024, they again attacked Shebekino, wounding three people. On October 2, 2024, they launched a drone attack on Tishanka, wounding a man and a woman. On September 30, 2024, they killed one man and wounded four other people, including two girls aged 14 and 3, in Krapivnoye. The same day, Ukrainian drones targeted two lorries on the Belgorod-Volokonovka route, killing one driver and wounding the other one. On October 2, 2024, one civilian was killed and 16 wounded in a shelling attack on a farm in Yasnye Zori. On October 4, 2024, eight people were wounded in a drone attack in Novaya Tavolzhanka, and four people were wounded in Cheremoshnoye and on the Cheremoshnoye-Nikolskoye route. On October 7, 2024, the drivers of a farm vehicle and a private car were wounded in a drone attack in Novostroyevka Pervaya and on the Nikolskoye-Murom route.
On October 5, 2024, Ukrainian drones attacked several civilian enterprises in the Voronezh Region, wounding one person.
Regarding the atrocities committed by the Bandera bandits and foreign mercenaries in the Kursk Region, the Russian investigative authorities are analysing a vast amount of information about the numerous crimes they have committed there. The residents of a town there, who have miraculously survived the occupation, have provided witness accounts of how the Bandera bandits riddled a civilian car with bullets and used a drone to kill a married couple that attempted to leave the area.
Russia’s Investigative Committee has opened a criminal file regarding the killing of two women and a man in the Sudzha District. It suspects Banderites from Ukraine’s 41st Detached Infantry Brigade and the 103rd Detached Territorial Defence Brigade of perpetrating this crime. In addition to this, the Investigative Committee is investigating Ukrainian nationalists from the 22nd and the 61st detached infantry brigades and the 80th Detached Air Assault Brigade who have been allegedly involved in opening fire at the evacuation station in the Bolshesoldatsky District, damaging residential buildings there, as well as cars, and social infrastructure.
According to media reports, Russian military personnel found a video camera on the helmet of a killed Ukrainian Nazi containing footage. It shows Ukrainian fighters in a local village firing at a residential building with civilians inside. There was jewellery in the glove compartment of an all-terrain vehicle not far from where the Russian military found the criminal’s body. Investigators suspect a link between this jewellery and the murder.
A captured Ukrainian terrorist said that the Ukrainian Armed Forces used residential buildings as their firing positions in the Kursk Region. They also killed civilians when ordered to do so by their commanders, who wanted these people to be shot right on the spot in order to pretend that the Russian troops perpetrated these atrocities. This is how they presented the Bucha incident, and the Western countries applauded this effort. Now, Russia, including Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, receives questions from Western journalists during a news conference on why we keep recalling Bucha. We will bring up Bucha again and again. How can we forget it? It did not come out of nowhere. This incident replicates what Nazis did during World War II, which we in Russia call the Great Patriotic War, when similar provocations took place in cities after the Red Army left them in order to shift the blame for these atrocities on the Soviet soldiers. They use the same approaches in the Kursk Region as they did in Bucha.
Russia referred the materials on reprisals by the Ukrainian Nazis against civilians in the Kursk Region to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. This and other specialised international agencies will have to provide their substantive responses regarding the Banderite atrocities. Both the Banderites and the foreign mercenaries have been hunting down civilians intentionally and knowingly. They clearly understood what they were doing and fully realised who their targets were. It did not matter for them if they targeted a child, a woman or an elderly person. These people are terrorists who are intent on killing civilians, which reveals the very essence of Vladimir Zelensky’s regime.
These crimes lie on the Kiev clique’s conscience, if we suppose that it has one, and that of its Western masters. Russian law enforcement agencies collect evidence and report all these crimes, so that everyone who was involved in perpetrating them is held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.
Russian courts have been relying on evidence presented by Russia’s Investigative Committee when releasing their verdicts against Ukrainian neo-Nazis and mercenaries for committing war crimes.
On October 1, 2024, DPR’s Supreme Court sentenced in absentia mercenaries from Finland and Israel, Arima Riku Pekka and Denis Desyatkin, to 14 and 10 years in prison, respectively, for taking part in hostilities and fighting for Ukraine.
On October 1, 2024, DPR’s Supreme Court released its guilty verdict regarding Ukrainian Armed Forces fighters Eskender Kudusov, Dmitry Braiko and Bogdan Potapov who killed two civilians in Mariupol in April 2022. The court sentenced Bogdan Potapov and Dmitry Braiko to 28 years in prison, while Eskender Kudusov will spend 29 years behind bars.
On October 2, 2024, Russia’s Investigative Committee submitted the criminal file regarding Alexander Kelembet, a commander of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, to the court, accusing the defendant of organising the November 9, 2023 terrorist attack when two missiles launched by a HIMARS MLRS hit Skadovsk, the Kherson Region, leaving 10 people dead and 11 wounded. The casualties included officers from Russia’s investigative agencies, who were working on crimes perpetrated by the Kiev regime. Alexander Kelembet has been placed on the international stop list.
On October 7, 2024, the Moscow City Court sentenced Stephen Hubbard, an American mercenary, to six years and ten months in prison for serving in a Ukrainian territorial defence battalion.
On October 3, 2024, newly appointed NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte travelled to Kiev in what amounted to a brief pro-forma visit. He rushed to reassure his Ukrainian underlings that the Alliance remained committed to offering them all-round support. He repeated the usual incantations about assisting Ukraine for as long as it would be necessary, and went on to claim that “Ukraine is closer to NATO than ever before.” On camera, Mark Rutte went to great lengths in demonstrating his complicity with the Vladimir Zelensky regime on using long-range weapons for targeting territories deep inside Russia by claiming that Kiev’s right to self-defence “does not stop at the border.” However, Rutte did not go beyond this statement saying that the Alliance did not have the mandate to authorise these strikes, since this matter was within the purview of specific NATO members who supply these kinds of weapons.
In his characteristic manner, Vladimir Zelensky put on the same broken record, begging for expedited supplies of missile systems and other military products to satisfy the urgent needs of the Kiev regime in the zone of hostilities. He promised to continue promoting his ‘victory plan.’ If you remember, first, there was a ‘peace plan’ and now, there is a ‘victory plan.’ Perhaps Zelensky actually meant ‘misery plan.’ He claims that he relies on the reassuring results of the upcoming meeting of the Ukraine Contact Group in the Ramstein format on October 17 that will involve NATO senior officials.
We noted the frank insights by former NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg. In particular, he shared his thoughts with the Financial Times on October 4 saying that, in exchange for accession to NATO, Ukraine could give up the territories it lost during the conflict.
Remarkable. The same thought did not occur to the Westerners before. After all, it is them and nobody else, not the Global Majority or members of political circles who have been persuading Ukrainians since 2022 that they simply must continue the fight and reject any form of negotiations. Jens Stoltenberg said that, as did Josep Borrell, the White House, the Downing Street, Berlin, Paris and other NATO capitals. According to the West, the fate of Ukraine but also (as they claimed) the entire outcome of the events must be determined on the battlefield. It is their ideology. Now, Jens Stoltenberg seems to have changed his mind.
The Norwegian official quoted Finland as an example. After its war with the USSR, Finland ceded 10 percent of its territory in exchange for a secure border. Jens Stoltenberg forgot to mention though that the Finns had actively fought on the side of Nazi Germany and nurse ambitions to take back the lost territories. Considering that they have rewritten history, now they apparently believe in some nano- or neo- or quasi-history.
This train of thought reveals the emerging tendency for discussing the possibility of granting Kiev NATO membership in the foreseeable future. Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson already voiced this idea recently, and now Jens Stoltenberg picked it up. Apparently, Washington, London and Brussels are sceptical about the Ukrainian Forces’ potential, and consider various scenarios to avoid the political and military collapse of Zelensky’s regime in which they have invested so heavily.
However, the West forgets that NATO’s persistent attempts to drag Ukraine into the alliance and turn it into a springboard for confrontation with Russia was one of the main reasons why this conflict began in the first place. Other reasons included mass violation of the rights of the Russian and Russian-speaking population, and cultivating aggressive nationalism that transformed into neo-Nazism. Until these root causes of the crisis are removed, it will be impossible to fairly resolve the crisis. Achieving a stable and lasting peace in Ukraine is unrealistic without formalising its non-aligned status, eradicating Nazism and chauvinism in the country, and abolishing all discriminatory laws.
Considering what Zelensky is ready to sacrifice upon the altar of his ambitions and to save himself – amid the growing losses on the battlefield, Ukraine is now in a two-way process of forced mobilisation, on the one hand, and mass desertion, on the other. The Zelensky regime keeps inventing innovative ways to replenish the reserves for further “disposal” of the male part of its able-bodied population. The government has shortened the deadline for visiting the military enlistment office from 14 days after receiving their combat summons to seven days for city residents and 10 days for draftees from smaller communities. The Verkhovna Rada is considering a bill requiring conscripts to register for military service at the age of 17 under threat of penalties. The document also makes women with basic military training subject to conscription.
According to Ukrainian media reports, a growing number of the Verkhovna Rada members are in favour of further lowering the mobilisation age to 20. The idea was prompted by letters from American congressmen criticising Kiev for not calling up Ukrainians under the age of 25. This is not even double standards or cynicism. This is perversion. A country on another continent using another state, which has long coexisted in peace and cooperation with its neighbours, as a tool in its geopolitical manipulations, while also indoctrinating its people that they must die because it is their historical calling and mission to “protect the West from Russia” – this is not just a sick fantasy or morbid philosophy, but a real perversion. What does this mean? This means that the fate of the country’s future generations is being manipulated from across the ocean.
American congressional representatives, who have no idea of Ukraine as a nation, of Ukrainian culture, history, or true and deep-rooted Ukrainian traditions, are urging the country to lower the mobilisation age to 20. What does this really mean? This means American congressmen are determined to weed out Ukrainians as a nation, as an ethnic group, as a culture. They have failed [to do this] with Russia, no matter how hard they tried to cancel our country. Now they’re set on cancelling Ukraine to its end. Do we need any more proof of who Ukraine’s boss really is, who started all this, who perpetrated a whole chain of provocations and manipulations in the country to ignite this fire? No more proof is needed. It is Washington, London and collective Brussels. But cancelling Ukraine will no longer satisfy them.
Ukraine continues to fight the Russian language, further “constricting” the rights of Russian speakers, especially when it comes to using the language. According to the media, a bill has been submitted to the Verkhovna Rada to ban its use in extracurricular activities in schools. I believe that the next bill will contain a ban on thinking in Russian. And the one after that will prohibit thinking in any language at all.
State Language Protection Commissioner Taras Kremen has uttered another outlandish suggestion, calling for the destruction of the Russian keyboard in every PC in Ukraine.
The Russian language is the Kiev junta’s pain in the neck. On the other hand, the West is paying good money for their services. The Kiev regime is overextending itself not only to eradicate Russian, but also to make millions of Ukrainians stop speaking it and thinking in it. But they are failing no matter what.
Yes, we are fighting the new followers of Stepan Bandera. Our soldiers are battling them on the frontlines. They can hear what is being said in the trenches on the other side. They often hear Russian speech. Do you think all these laws will work when even in a critical, life or death situation, people continue to speak and think in Russian, even at a moment when they have standing orders to kill Russians? What are these laws aimed at? They are aimed at further dividing people or planting time bombs.
It looks like their actions have the reverse effect. More and more people in Ukraine prefer speaking Russian today. The Russian language cannot be eradicated. Perhaps that is why they are beginning to realise deep down in their hearts what those individuals in the West have done to them, how cruelly they have deceived them.
These facts once again confirm the relevance of the special military operation’s goals to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine and eliminate threats emanating from its territory. All of its goals will certainly be accomplished.
According to incoming reports, the Malian judiciary has initiated an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the cooperation of the Kiev authorities with terrorist organisations operating within the Sahara-Sahel region.
It is well known that, at the end of July this year, terrorists, primarily from the pro-Al-Qaeda Group for the Support of Islam and Muslims, attacked a convoy of the Malian armed forces near the village of Tinzaouaten, located on the border with Algeria. At that time, the spokesperson for the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Defence Ministry of Ukraine, Andrey Yusov, alongside Ukrainian Ambassador to Senegal Yury Pivovarov, openly expressed support for the actions of the jihadists. This conduct by representatives of the Kiev regime did not go unnoticed. Consequently, Mali and Niger severed diplomatic relations with Ukraine. Furthermore, the Ukrainian Ambassador in Dakar was summoned to the Foreign Ministry of Senegal, where a formal representation was made to him.
In a bid to draw the attention of the international community to Kiev's support of international terrorism and to prompt appropriate measures, on August 20, 2024, Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso initiated their own judicial investigation. The investigation aims to identify all individuals involved in the attack on Malian soldiers, including the masterminds and sponsors of this terrorist act. The information obtained could subsequently be utilised to bring the case before international courts.
It is highly probable that in the course of the investigation, evidence will also emerge concerning other foreign actors who have long cooperated with jihadist movements in the Sahara-Sahel and financed anti-government activities against countries in the region. We believe that the competent Malian authorities will uncover the entire network of contacts linking the Ukrainian intelligence services with terrorist organisations affiliated with ISIS and Al-Qaeda.
We reiterate our concern regarding the duplicitous policy of the West, which professes a commitment to uniting efforts to combat the terrorist threat in Africa, and yet refrains from condemning the Kiev regime that is willing to collaborate with radical groups to harm African countries friendly to Russia.
We intend to continue drawing the attention of the international community, including through UN structures, to the terrorist nature and actions of Kiev, which seeks to undermine stability and security on the African continent.
Honouring collaborators in Canada
Fifteen years ago, the authorities in the capital of Canada decided to erect a monument to the victims of Communism. There were plans to unveil it a year ago. However, the official ceremony was put off indefinitely following an international scandal with standing ovations for former Waffen SS member Yaroslav Hunka at the national parliament. They decided to sit it out, so as not to become involved in an even greater scandal.
It turns out that Jewish organisations, including the Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Centre, had notified local officials in 2021 that the 553 victims of Communism, listed on the monument, might include Nazis. This is how it played out. We should not be surprised. It was Canada that had befriended tens of thousands of surviving pro-Bandera supporters and other “veterans,” collaborators from the Waffen SS Galician Division.
The press has learned that the memorial’s fund had received private donations for including the names of Hauptmann Roman Shukhevych from the Nachtigall Battalion and Ante Pavelic, the leader of Croatia’s Ustase ultra-nationalist organisation. A more detailed fact check revealed that, of the 533 victims listed on the memorial, over 50 percent (about 330) could be Nazis or pro-Nazi collaborators. Officials admitted that the monument was to have included the names of people linked with the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army and Baltic nationalist groups, Latvian Waffen SS members who had perpetrated well-documented mass murders.
A new scandal around the odious monument once again highlights official Ottawa’s double standards and hypocrisy. By portraying Nazi criminals and their servants, who obtained political asylum after World War II en-masse in accordance with a simplified procedure, Canadian politicians are trying to portray them as “victims of Communism.” It is hardly surprising that apologists of neo-Nazism and those trying to rewrite history and to justify the atrocities of Nazi henchmen are among the sponsors of the above-mentioned “hellish” memorial evoking multiple questions from the Canadian public at large.
Perhaps it would make sense to publish a list of all sponsors, so that the global public would know who is sponsoring the installation of monuments to the Nazis. I believe that it is possible to do this.
We continue to follow the situation in Moldova, where, as Moldovan citizens themselves point out, the authorities have turned the presidential election campaign and the Euroreferendum into an anti-Russian and anti-Moldovan spectacle.
On October 7, the Central Election Commission of Moldova announced that, instead of the previously planned five polling stations in Russia, only two would be opened, both in Moscow, each with 5,000 ballots. The ballots prepared for polling stations in St Petersburg, Surgut, and Yaroslavl were destroyed. This is democracy, Sandu-style.
Let me remind you (and Maia Sandu in particular) that the Moldovan diaspora in Russia is estimated to be as large as 500,000 people. So, for half a million citizens, Maia Sandu has prepared only 10,000 ballots? These are Moldovan citizens with the right to vote. She claims to stand for democracy and European values, which are grounded in free elections as an expression of the people’s will. So, how many citizens are truly allowed to vote? What percentage of them is actually given the right to a ballot?
In previous elections, the Moldovan authorities opened around 20 polling stations. Now, there are only two – a tenfold reduction. This mirrors the ongoing erosion of the rights and freedoms of Moldovan citizens both in the country and abroad. To put it in perspective: in Italy, with just over 100,000 Moldovan citizens, 60 polling stations will be available, with 236,000 ballots allocated. You might wonder how there could be so many ballots for 100,000 people. It’s clear manipulation. This is the kind of deception Maia Sandu’s regime is engaging in.
Let me also point out that in the last elections, it was the voters from Italy and other Western European countries who secured the victory for the current president, contributing around 26 percent of the votes. Had only the Moldovan residents within the country cast their ballots, the outcome would have been completely different.
These figures and examples of the deceptive political tactics employed by the Chisinau regime, under Western influence, reveal the depth of the current government’s uncertainty about its chances of victory, its panicked fear of defeat, its disregard for democratic principles, and, most importantly, its neglect of its citizens’ rights and freedoms
Today, official Chisinau makes baseless claims about so-called hybrid threats from Russia. What do these threats consist of? That we are simply telling the truth and presenting facts? Let them attempt to refute our data. If they succeed, we will acknowledge our mistake. But until Moldovan officials can disprove our information, they should refrain from talking about hybrid threats. Perhaps what they really mean by a hybrid threat is the uncomfortable truth.
At the same time, there is no effort to conceal the numerous instances of Western interference in Moldova’s electoral process. What can we make of the situation when several Western entities, including the British Embassy and NGOs like USAID and UKAID, are prominently displayed on the homepage of the Moldovan Central Election Commission’s official website? Is Moldova now a controlled territory or a semi-colony? What kind of racism is this towards a sovereign state? This is the way sponsors are usually being acknowledged. It's hardly surprising, then, that the ambassadors of the US, France, and the UK are frequent and welcome visitors − perhaps even the real decision-makers − at Moldova’s Central Election Commission.
At the same time, Western politicians and officials continue visiting Moldova and openly advocating a “European choice.” On October 4, 2024, Prime Minister of Romania Marcel Ciolacu called on the Moldovan leaders in Chisinau to work harder to convince Moldovans that “the future of Moldova is in the EU.” Why did he stop there? Why didn’t he say that Moldova’s future was in Romania? This is what they are driving for. He also said that Russia would bring Moldova “into the zone of isolation, into the zone of poverty.” We are aware of the EU’s “prosperity.” Such statements are all the more absurd since history shows that it was the Romanian occupation of 1918-1940 that brought poverty, depopulation and mass executions to Bessarabia, while Moldova’s life in the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union was marked by well-being. All this is backed by facts, figures and real data.
The Moldovan authorities continue to cleanse the republic’s information space. On September 30, 2024, the Prime and Publika TV channels were deprived of their broadcasting licences. On October 2, 2024, the authorities blocked access to the popular Russian platforms Rutube, Yandex and Dzen and the operation of Yandex.Music and Kinopoisk. They have also banned two websites of the MD24 online news platforms. Moldovan users have lost access to the Russian cartoon series Smeshariki (KikoRiki) and Tri Kota (Three Cats). The Moldovan authorities lack self-confidence so badly that they regard children’s shows as a security threat.
An open politicisation of the language issue is a major feature of the current election campaign. In 2020, Maia Sandu promised to be “the president of all citizens of the country.” What is the current situation? On October 5, 2024, the Moldovan election commission pointed out that it was unacceptable for political parties to use any language [read: Russian] other than the state language in their communication with the authorities. On October 7, 2024, state-owned national broadcaster Teleradio-Moldova announced that the duration of the presidential candidates’ address to the electorate in the language of national minorities must not exceed one minute during debates. These are obvious links in the chain of discrimination against Russian speakers in Moldova and attempts to divide society into loyal and disloyal citizens.
Opposition politicians and presidential candidates are being harassed. On October 2 and 3, 2024, the management of the pro-government Jurnal TV refused to air the election videos of two of Sandu’s opponents because they allegedly criticised the incumbent authorities. It must be very democratic not to criticise opponents. You can only praise them.
Nevertheless, despite the political monopoly and Western patronage, the Sandu regime has been unable to improve its low rating in the country and beyond it. Over the past week, anti-government meetings were held by the Moldovan diaspora in Terni (Italy), Dublin (Ireland) and Dortmund and Dusseldorf (Germany).
The tactic of playing on the so-called “Russian threat,” including ungrounded allegations of attempts to stage a coup in Moldova, is not working. Moldovans don’t believe these allegations. They are aware of the authorities’ political ineptitude and catastrophic realties behind the slogans about their pro-European course. Actually, there are being pushed into colonial dependence where they will have to give up their identity and even history. People can see this and draw their own conclusions.
Consulate General of Romania closes down in Rostov-on-Don
The Romanian side has sent an official notification, according to which the Consulate General of Romania in Rostov-on-Don will cease its activities starting from October 14. Consular services in the relevant district will be now provided by the Romanian Embassy in Moscow.
This step has been taken due to the Russian side’s decision to denounce the bilateral intergovernmental agreement on the opening of the said consular office, which was made in December 2023 as a response to the unfriendly actions of the Romanian authorities.
British investigation into the Skripal case
The British justice has once again showed its true colours. The decision of the secretariat of the public inquiry into the death of British citizen Dawn Sturgess in Amesbury in 2018 regarding the participation of Sergey Skripal and Yulia Skripal in the hearings scheduled for October 2024 has been made public. Everyone who saw it was left horrified by how those who call themselves legal experts in Britain mock the law.
The inquiry chair, Anthony Hughes, decided not to invite the Russians to the hearings, either in person or online. Instead, the protocols of the Skripals’ talks with the British police in 2018, as well as their written answers to questions within the framework of the current public inquiry by Ms Sturgess’ family, will be used to restore the picture of what happened.
Lord Hughes justifies his decision saying that the Russians’ attendance in the courtroom or via a conference call would allegedly entail a threat to their physical safety. He says there are reasons to believe that an attack, similar to what happened in Salisbury, may be carried out again, by persons with the same motives as the attackers in 2018 or sharing their alleged goals. Who are these persons? Six years have passed. Has the British justice assigned the responsibility to anyone?
The Russophobic statement made by the representative of the British investigative bodies shows that the upcoming hearings will be extremely biased, politicised, and non-transparent, with the outcome of the case already known. There is simply no hope for justice to prevail under these conditions. It is nonsensical.
London clearly works hard to prevent the Skipals’ public appearance, using even made-up pretexts. The British side hiding the Russians goes against our country’s lawful right to receive information about its citizens.
We will continue to demand that the British provide comprehensive and unbiased information about their provocation in Salisbury in 2018 and the fate of our compatriots, as well as consular access to them in accordance with the provisions of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963 and the Bilateral Consular Convention of 1965.
What is the logic of this? It looks like the British justice or law enforcement agencies think that people, against whom actions have been taken, threatening their life and health, can no longer appear in public. Or have they admitted that they cannot ensure their security?
The 80th anniversary of liberating Riga from Nazi forces
This year marks the 80th anniversary of liberating Riga from Nazi occupation by Soviet troops during the Red Army’s Riga Operation (September 14 – October 22, 1944). During the Great Patriotic War, Latvia became one of the first Soviet republics to be completely captured by the Nazis in July 1941. After taking over this region, the German Navy could operate in the eastern sector of the Baltic Sea and maintain communications with Scandinavian countries that supplied the Third Reich with strategic materials.
On September 14, 1944, the Riga Operation began with a powerful artillery barrage and all-out air strikes. The operation involved units of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Baltic Fronts that cooperated with the Baltic Fleet. The 130th Latvian Rifle Corps served with the 2nd Baltic Front.
In the morning of October 13, Soviet forces liberated parts of Riga on the right bank of the Daugava River, and the entire city was liberated on October 15. The Head of the Political Department of the 43rd Guards Latvian Rifle Division wrote that “… the people in Riga welcomed us in a much friendlier manner than those in other communities. They welcomed officers and soldiers with flowers and red flags.” During the Riga Operation, Soviet forces defeated the main elements of the Wehrmacht’s Army Group North, advanced by 150 km and liberated most of Latvia.
On October 13, 1944, the Supreme Soviet Commander-in-Chief issued Order No 194 commending troops that had taken part in liberating Riga, the capital of the Latvian SSR, from Nazi invaders. Moscow hosted a fireworks display involving 324 artillery systems that fired 24 salvos. The most distinguished military units received the honorary designation Riga. In all, 139 service personnel, involved in the operation, were awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union.
The website of the Russian Historical Society published materials on liberating the Nazi-occupied territory of Latvia, contributed by the Central Archive of the Russian Defence Ministry.
We regret to say that the incumbent Latvian leaders want to forget those who had liberated their country from Nazism. Official Riga is deliberately falsifying the history of World War II and glorifying Nazi collaborators. Today, that country is destroying memorials honouring Soviet soldiers-liberators and everything associated with Russian culture. Latvian authorities banned teaching in Russian. This is standard practice in any society affected by neo-Nazism.
Despite the attempts of Latvian authorities to renounce our common historical past, the people of Russia will always remember and cherish the memory of Soviet soldiers who liberated the capital of Latvia and made a substantial contribution to Victory over our common enemy. They will not divide and segregate people along ethnic lines, and they will not side-line photos and decorations of those who used to be the residents of Latvia. We also see them as heroes who fought together with our ancestors against the Nazi scourge.
The anniversary of the signing of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation Charter
October 7, 2024, marked the 22nd anniversary of the signing of the CSTO Charter. The Charter, adopted based on the Collective Security Council’s decision of May 14, 2002, granted the Collective Security Treaty the status of an international regional organisation. A comprehensive commentary on this topic was published on the website of the Foreign Ministry.
To provide context, the CSTO’s origins trace back to the signing of the Collective Security Treaty in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, on May 15, 1992. The organisation currently includes Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan.
In line with Article 3 of the CSTO Charter, the organisation’s objectives are to promote peace, enhance international and regional security and stability, and collectively safeguard the independence, territorial integrity, and sovereignty of its member states. The Charter outlines key principles guiding the CSTO’s operations, including prioritising political solutions over military actions, upholding strict respect for sovereignty, ensuring voluntary participation, maintaining equal rights and responsibilities for all members, and refraining from interference in matters within the national jurisdiction of member states.
A strong demonstration of the CSTO’s maturity and effectiveness was the coordinated response by member states in assisting the Republic of Kazakhstan to stabilise its domestic political situation in January 2022. Drawing from the lessons of this peacekeeping mission, the leaders of the member states later adopted several key decisions to enhance the organisation’s crisis response mechanisms. Strengthening the CSTO’s capabilities and deepening allied cooperation among the six fraternal nations within the association remains a priority of the Russian Federation’s foreign policy.
The development of the peacekeeping component is a crucial aspect of the Organisation’s evolution. Conditions are being established for its involvement in UN peace-keeping operations.
Leveraging the experience gained by the CSTO, the Russian side regards it as a fundamental pillar for creating a new pan-continental security architecture in the Eurasian region, free from external dictate, aimed at uniting the efforts of leading regional states and organisations.
On October 14, MGIMO University marks 80 years since its founding.
Ahead of this remarkable date, I would like to note that, for eight decades, MGIMO has served as the biggest talent pool for the Russian Foreign Ministry. Its alumni form the core of the Russian diplomatic service, holding senior positions in the central office and our foreign missions.
MGIMO education is known for its diversity and variety. This is why MGIMO alumni successfully build careers not only in foreign policy but also in other civil service areas, in corporations, research, journalism and many other industries in this country and abroad. Among them are President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev and President of Kazakhstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev.
President Vladimir Putin has highly praised the university’s contribution to training highly-qualified international affairs professionals. On September 18, 2024, the President issued the Executive Order to award the Order of Alexander Nevsky to MGIMO faculty for outstanding achievements in education and research.
Several themed events, conferences and sport competitions are dedicated to this anniversary year. MGIMO alumni meetings are taking place in different countries of the world. A documentary film was made about the university, to premiere on Channel One in October. The documentary features interviews with prominent alumni looking back on their study years at MGIMO. One prominent minister of foreign affairs will be among them – but let’s not lay all cards on the table just yet.
Another event marking the 80th anniversary of MGIMO was a Russia-Kazakhstan high-level conference, Sustainable Development and Security in Eurasia, held in late September at the initiative of President of Kazakhstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev.
A gala night in the Large Hall of the Moscow Conservatory will be the highlight of the anniversary. The event is planned for October 14. I am confident it will be a noteworthy event in Moscow’s social and cultural life.
We are doing everything for our university that we value and love and that we always reminisce about, to have a remarkable celebration.
On October 10-12, the National Medical Research Centre of Endocrinology of the Russian Ministry of Health will hold the 2nd International Congress, Obesity and Metabolic Disorders: A Conscious Reboot. The event will be held offline on October 10 from 9:00 onwards, and online on October 11-12.
More than 1,500 doctors of various specialisations from Russia, post-Soviet countries and beyond signed up to participate in the congress. Speakers include medical professionals from the UAE, China, the Netherlands, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. The key mission is to create a professional platform to share experience and educate specialists about the latest in the treatment and prevention of obesity, to contribute to a healthy future for every family in the world.
Media representatives are welcome to cover the event.
The congress will be streamed live. For media accreditation, please send your requests at press@endocrincentr.ru. Telephone: +79852229427.
Question: How would you comment on the progress of the inquiry into the terrorist attacks on the Nord Stream gas pipelines? What consequences could the lack of results lead to?
Maria Zakharova: We regularly comment on the subject of the sabotage of two Nord Stream branches on September 26, 2022, six months after US President Joe Biden and Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland said publicly that the pipelines would be destroyed.
Two years after these terrorist attacks, the collective West is still trying to evade accountability, making every effort to distract the international community from the subject. However, we will not allow it. As diplomates say, we keep stirring things up, bringing up the issue, asking questions and providing relevant materials. We will continue in this vein. It was a terrorist attack, an act of sabotage against major cross-border infrastructure which had a direct impact on energy security and people’s everyday lives.
In February this year, Denmark and Sweden announced that they had closed their national investigations despite the absence of results. That is, they did not close them because they have achieved some result or unearthed some relevant information – they discontinued the probes because they were no longer going to do it. The only conclusion they made was that the pipelines were indeed “intentionally destroyed using explosive devices,” but further criminal investigation “did not seem possible.”
This is so typical for the collective West. A few days ago, I published a story of another inquiry conducted in Belgium, and how it ended. Several police officers apprehended Slovak national Jozef Chovanec as he was clearing through an airport checkpoint (he was doing it legally). However, he was brutally manhandled and pinned down by the police who also tried to suffocate him. Moreover, they were using Nazi symbols – a video is available of one of the officers raising his arm in a manner obviously impersonating Adolf Hitler and laughing, mocking the prisoner. Chovanec died as a result of their actions. Although the authorities claimed that he killed himself, they provided no video evidence of him doing it, despite the fact that there was video surveillance in his holding cell. However, the video of him being bullied with a Nazi salute is available. This is not a story about some deductive reasoning in the absence of obvious corroborating evidence. The video clearly shows unacceptable treatment of the Slovak national. The inquiry took six years. As you can probably guess, it ended in nothing. It was no one’s fault; we can call it a day and go home. But the man they slaughtered in full view of millions – as it turned out later when the cell footage was released online – is no longer with us. This is what the West always does when they need to hide the truth. It “did not seem possible” to find anything – no facts, no traces, no conclusions.
And all that time, Copenhagen and Stockholm have stubbornly refused to let our country partake in establishing the truth. They told their populations that further investigation did not seem possible. We were ready to cooperate. However, not only did they fail to contact us – they never even responded to our requests. They cited the need to wait for the completion of an “effective” and “transparent” investigation conducted by Germany. They relied on it even though for two years, Berlin never submitted a report on the investigation to the UN Security Council, let alone an interim result.
As for public statements, it became clear what Berlin was after with its approaches to tackling this issue when Chancellor Olaf Scholz went as far as say that it was Russia, not Germany, that halted natural gas supplies to his country. As if it was not Germany which refuses to use Russian gas and has effectively stopped using it by keeping the valves shut on its side of the border, while they have every opportunity to reach a deal with Moscow on this matter. The German Chancellor has been caught on record lying to his people and the international community by alleging that it was Russia which stopped gas deliveries, instead of saying that it was a result of the terrorist attacks. He did not say that Germany is not willing to use this pipeline despite the fact that some of its sections are all right and supplies can resume in a matter of weeks. This demonstrates the way Berlin has been handling this investigation.
In March 2023, Russia submitted a draft resolution to the UN Security Council. It provided for undertaking an independent international investigation of the terrorist attack under the UN’s auspices. However, the West refused to support it in keeping with its unconstructive policy on this matter. We offered a series of options by suggesting that the Secretary General or some kind of an ad hoc working group oversee this effort, or that we create a mandate for a special envoy. Russia was open to all the options, but the West blocked all these efforts. Our initiative failed to win the required nine votes in favour after Washington and its satellites did everything they could to derail this effort. They did not stop there, however. In October 2023, the United States, together with its acolytes, had no qualms killing Russia’s draft statement by the UN Security Council President on this topic. What did it say? It called for finding out who bombed the gas pipeline, a civilian infrastructure site.
The United States and its satellites have been saying that pressuring German investigators would be unacceptable and used this message as a pretext for blocking all Russia’s attempts within the UN Security Council to call on Germany to act more quickly and produce at least something that would shed light on how the investigation is advancing. We must keep in mind that this investigation deals with an act of international terrorism. It has an international dimension because of its transnational nature. What gives an international dimension to this act of sabotage is that we are hearing calls coming from the territory of the United States to destroy infrastructure in several countries (and companies from several countries were involved as investors too), while even in their public statements they refuse to dismiss the notion that the Kiev regime or people affiliated with it could be behind this crime.
Russia has repeatedly sent requests for legal assistance to Denmark, Sweden and Germany, but they all fell on deaf ears. We witnessed the latest manifestation of this extreme Western hypocrisy just the other day. On October 4, 2024, when the Russian Federation convened a regular briefing at the UN Security Council, but had to announce that it could no longer draft another Presidential statement for the same reason. The West has been blocking this effort. It is quite telling that the United States and its allies have been persisting in their refusal to mention the word ‘terrorism’ in any form. Whenever they would come across any references to the attacks against the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 pipelines as terrorist attacks, they would instantly claim that this word could not be used in this document. This is a curious fact, considering it was Chancellor Olaf Scholz who talked about this act of sabotage as a terrorist attack during his meeting with voters on September 14, 2024.
What an interesting tie-up. Western countries have given up on investigating the attack arguing that why would they carry out an investigation if Germany has already launched its own would-be transparent and professional investigation. Berlin claims that this was an obvious terrorist attack but refuses to share any details. At the same time, the United States, in its status as Germany’s, Sweden’s and Denmark’s ally, including within their bloc-based structures, has been blocking any references to the fact that the incident was a terrorist attack. In fact, the United States has been preventing the UN Security Council from properly examining this issue.
There is no doubt that the world faces dangerous challenges against this backdrop. The lack of transparency in the way Germany has been investigating this terrorist attack has brought to life all kinds of interpretations, from conspiracy theories to planted stories, which are less extravagant and cannot be refuted with the same ease.
There is only one way of explaining why the Western countries have been failing to act. It seems that those who actually ordered this crime want to sweep it under the carpet and to mislead the investigation, which would literally amount to pretending that this topic is irrelevant and has always been irrelevant.
However, all the attempts to mislead the investigation and set it on a false path are doomed to fail. You have our word for it. The West’s destructive actions will not affect our resolve to achieve justice. Instead, they will only bring us closer to this result.
We are certain that those who were behind this terrorist attack and caused all this economic and environmental damage must be held accountable. Russia will make sure that the international community remains focused on this matter.
Question: Has human rights organisations responded in any way to Russia’s appeals regarding Ukraine’s gross violation of its international obligations in the area of ensuring freedom of religion?
Maria Zakharova: The Foreign Ministry received an answer from UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk, Austria, to the Russian side’s appeal regarding Ukraine’s gross violation of its international obligations in the area of ensuring freedom of religion. It was about the law On the Protection of the Constitutional Order in the Sphere of Activities of Religious Organisations signed by Vladimir Zelensky, which gave the green light to fully prohibiting the activities of the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church and, in fact, depriving millions of Christians in Ukraine of the opportunity to practice their religion.
We have to admit that it was yet another formal and routine reply. It mentioned that the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights was allegedly monitoring the situation regarding the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and that it had already expressed its concerns about the measures adopted by Kiev being potentially discriminatory, urging the Ukrainian authorities to ensure that persecuted persons have access to a fair trial. This is hypocrisy, multiplied by insolence and fear. In this case, Mr Türk from Austria is afraid of his Western masters’ anger. Perhaps he believes that the status of the UN High Commissioner gives him the right to respond to the matter that concerns millions of people so impersonally and, in fact, incompetently.
It is absolutely clear to us that the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, sponsored by the collective West, and Mr Türk, who heads this office, have turned into a pro-Western propaganda mouthpiece and an instrument for processing political orders from both the West and the Kiev regime.
The danger of this approach lies in the fact that the Office of the UN High Commissioner is ready to whitewash any violations and crimes the Kiev regime commits, shifting the blame from those who are truly guilty to the innocent. Moreover, in his public speeches, Mr Türk says directly that Russia needs to be punished and focuses the efforts of his subordinates on collecting the necessary “evidence” to later submit it to international courts. Meanwhile, he says nothing about flagrant violations of law committed by the Kiev regime.
We regard this as evidence of the complete degradation of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights that openly ignores the principles of objectivity and impartiality in its work. Mr Türk acts not as a UN senior official, but as a coordinator appointed by the West and bound by financial obligations with his sponsors.
We reserve the right to draw serious conclusions from this situation regarding further interaction with the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
Question: On Monday, head of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service Sergey Naryshkin said that Russia has evidence linking British and US intelligence services to the terrorist attacks on the Nord Streams. He specifically mentioned that saboteurs trained by the US and Anglo-Saxon operatives were involved. Can you provide more details about this evidence? Does Russia plan to make it public, and if so, when can we expect this to happen?
Maria Zakharova: As you can see, we do have evidence. As for whether we will make it public, and what type of evidence it is, our decision will depend on the circumstances and the progress of the investigation.
We have extended offers of cooperation to all parties involved, both publicly and through established channels among law enforcement agencies. We have made numerous legal requests and have politically and publicly backed these efforts, yet our requests have been met with zero acknowledgment.
In my view, those conducting the investigation in Germany (everything is perfectly clear regarding Denmark and Sweden) should be primarily interested in exchanging materials, obtaining information from us, and sharing relevant details. We were not only open to this, but we also insisted on it. Furthermore, we agreed to provide all the information we had regarding the investigation we initiated under the auspices of the UN. However, this was also obstructed by the West.
We are conducting our own investigation and possess the relevant data that representatives of Russian government agencies, including Mr Naryshkin, have mentioned. There is also a factual basis for this information. In addition to our national investigation, we will consider how to manage all of this based on the evolving situation. They have effectively deprived themselves of the opportunity to receive information from us.
Question: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been going on for more than a year now…
Maria Zakharova: I apologize, but the conflict has not been going on for just a year. Let us be more precise. This is a situation that has been unfolding for decades, alternating between active and latent phases. It has experienced various stages over time. What you’re telling about is an acute, and one might even say, unprecedented escalation phase. But it is important to recognise that this is a long-standing crisis.
Question: Thank you for putting it right. An increasing number of Middle Eastern countries are becoming involved in this conflict, and its repercussions are continuing to spread. On October 7, marking the anniversary of the tragic events, US President Joe Biden expressed support for Israel’s security and its right to exist. However, some experts argue that Israel’s determination to persist in its military actions, coupled with the US efforts to back it, could potentially lead the Middle East into a full-scale war. Do you believe this threat is real?
Maria Zakharova: Certainly, the threat is real, and we discuss it frequently. This is why we are doing everything we can to shift the situation toward a political and diplomatic solution, despite the inaction or intentional obstruction by the West in international organisations. All of this is related to assessing the potential outcomes and, regrettably, the grim possibilities of further escalation of this crisis.
The primary obstacle to achieving this goal, both historically and in the current context, remains the stance of the West, particularly the United States. Washington is preventing the adoption of a UN Security Council resolution that would clearly call for an end to military actions in the Gaza Strip. The expansion of Israel’s military operations into Lebanon and Syria, along with the escalating Iranian-Israeli confrontation, heightens the risk of further degradation of the military-political situation that could push the region to a big war with catastrophic consequences. Increasingly often, voices are heard from various parts of the region, representing a wide range of perspectives – sometimes even opposing viewpoints – that mention terms like “nuclear weapons,” “a nuclear strike,” and “attacks on nuclear facilities.”
Given these circumstances, we continue to urge all parties involved to exercise restraint and call on the international community to strengthen collective efforts, particularly at the UN, to bring an end to the bloodshed as soon as possible, primarily in the Gaza Strip. We maintain ongoing communication with our Chinese partners and like-minded allies in the region.
Question: On October 11, President of Russia Vladimir Putin will visit Turkmenistan where he will meet for the first time with the new President of Iran Masoud Pezeshkian. What does the Russian side think about the “right to self-defence” of both parties to the Iranian-Israeli conflict? What is Russia’s coordination programme during the tense situation in the Middle East?
Maria Zakharova: I have provided an exhaustive comment on this issue at the October 2, 2024 briefing. Russia’s position has not changed.
A disastrous (worst-case) scenario does not meet the interests of any Middle East country. We hope that all constructive international “players” will utilise all available opportunities for preventing it. We believe that an equitable resolution of the Palestinian issue is a key to improving the entire situation. I will not repeat the extended wording, but you know what this is all about.
We are noting an urgent need for consolidated international efforts in the interests of attaining a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip as soon as possible and creating favourable conditions for resuming the comprehensive process of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict’s political settlement in accordance with resolutions of the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly and using the two-state formula.
We are once again urging all the parties involved to display restraint, to prevent the further degradation of the military-political situation and to prevent the region from sliding into an abyss of a large-scale war.
We believe that officials in Washington are largely responsible, in the historical context, for the degradation of the current situation. They block decisions at the relevant international platforms, and they have forced regional players to completely trust the United States by claiming that they know how to bring peace to the region. Consequently, they have facilitated an unprecedented escalation of the regional situation.
Question: On Tuesday, members the Council of the European Union eventually approved a new regime of anti-Russia sanctions for this country’s allegedly destabilising actions abroad. How could you comment on this?
Maria Zakharova: This is another illegitimate regime of sanctions in the context of international law. It is directed against Russian individuals and legal entities, allegedly responsible for Russia’s destabilising actions abroad. This wording can be replaced with any other. EU representatives no longer need any pretext for imposing sanctions. Brussels that has lost its political independence long ago is following in the wake of Washington, while implementing its policy of sanctions. A considerably expanded list of legal grounds for introducing sanctions against Russia tends to resemble the relevant US regime, established in April 2021.
They are baselessly accusing our country of posing various hybrid threats, including efforts to undermine electoral processes and the operation of democratic institutions, to sabotage economic operations or critical infrastructure facilities, using well-coordinated misinformation techniques and weaponising migrants. In effect, they have established a new regime, and EU officials are trying to use it to blame Russia for all problems that they have failed to resolve. They had to find a culprit and to show EU citizens who is responsible for their troubles, including rife unemployment, inflation, a migration crisis and even more pronounced rightist sentiments in Europe. Instead of talking about their own mistakes and miscalculations, they have now shifted the blame onto Russia. This, too, is part of the “collective West’s” hybrid war against our country. During its all-out attack, the EU is openly threatening to slap restrictions on Russian economic operators and those involved in implementing the policy of the Russian Government because it does not meet EU “values” and those of its member states.
These EU “values” are something incomprehensible. If they are linked with electoral processes, we should see what is going on in countries controlled by the EU and the “collective West.” How do electoral processes in Moldova conform to the high “values” and “requirements” of the “collective West?” Elections in the United States are coming to resemble a monstrous tragicomic soap opera.
Since 2022, the European Union has imposed unprecedented restrictive measures against Russia at Washington’s urging and under its pressure. However, this policy has failed. Contrary to the hopes of European bureaucrats, their actions only serve to strengthen Russia’s economic sovereignty and to enhance its role on the international arena. True, it would probably be better without sanctions. All of us would collaborate for the benefit of the world and would develop each other’s economies. Now that they have introduced these sanctions against us, we have not overlooked our benefits and interests, and we have defended our own economy and financial system, by taking advantage of this opportunity to strengthen it.
Certainly, the new regime of sanctions will meet the same end as all earlier regimes. Those who crafted these measures will fail to undermine Russian economic growth. This will not affect Russia’s commitment to upholding its own national interests and a new equitable world order; nor will this hamper our movement forwards.
We have selected a principled direction of our actions. The people of Russia have made their choice. We will defend our choice in favour of our country and its people. I understand why this is making them so irate. They are not used to such situations. They have become accustomed to the fact that everyone bows low and raises their hands before them. They are not used to someone saying “no” to them.
Question: What can you say about the ongoing OPCW Executive Council session?
Maria Zakharova: We have recently made many comments on that issue. I would like to refer you to the materials posted on the Foreign Ministry’s official website.
We pointed out again that the Technical Secretariat’s operations are based on double standards, which is eroding the character, substance and essence of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). Today, these standards are being applied to both Russia and Syria again or at a new stage. We understand the reason for that. The OPCW Technical Secretariat has of late been dominated by representatives of NATO and EU states and their protégés from their satellite countries.
We have taken note of the atmosphere of intolerance towards those who so far rely on facts and maintain an independent stance regarding the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). We see that the situation is deteriorating by the day. This did not begin yesterday or in 2022 but back in 2018. The US-led Euro-Atlantic allies campaigned to push Venezuela and after that, Syria and Russia from the OPCW Executive Council and administrative bodies. This process is not over, as US Ambassador to the OPCW Nicole Shampaine indicated. She said last summer that without Russia in the body to direct its voting coalition, “decisions may pass more easily.” Indeed, they made single-track decisions in the interests of a certain “centre,” which was in the minority compared to the aggregate population of the world.
Despite everything I have said, Russia and like-minded countries will continue to do everything in their power to protect the OPCW’s integrity. I am not sure that the organisation’s authority can be restored in the near or middle term, but we can at least try fighting for its functionality.
Question: Will you comment on the death of Hassan Hamad, a freelancer cameraman working for Anadolu, in Gaza and the death of journalists covering the conflict?
Maria Zakharova: The global situation in journalism is catastrophic. As for the Middle East, it is an unprecedented tragedy when it comes to the number of journalists killed in the line of duty. But the concerned organisations have not commented, let alone taken any action regarding this.
UNESCO is keeping criminal silence. Its director general, Audrey Azoulay, has shut up like an oyster. This is disgraceful, and the international community should speak out in protest and express its distrust. One of UNESCO’s key mandates has to do with protecting the safety of journalists and freedom of the press. The Secretariat is funded to do this. They hold numerous events, but this has not prevented atrocities towards journalists in the real world outside the UNESCO headquarters in Paris.
I don’t have details about the death of the freelancer cameraman you have mentioned. But I have the details of the death of a great many journalists from many countries and media outlets in that region. We express condolences to the families and friends of all journalists who have been killed in the region over the past year.
We take a principled stance on this matter. The situation with ensuring journalists’ safety in the zone of the escalating Palestinian-Israeli and other reginal conflicts is catastrophic. The situation in Ukraine is no better. UNESCO, the OSCE and UN representatives have not reacted appropriately to a single case of murder, attempted murder, capture, grave bodily harm, or threats against Russian journalists.
People die every day in the Middle East. More than 100,000 people have died in that conflict because an old problem has not been resolved in the past 75 years due to open connivance by the West. It is growing even worse now under the banner of Western democracy, which wants the region to adopt its liberal values that are allegedly based on the freedom of media and the diversity of opinion. At the same time, many journalists have lost their lives or health under the heavy tread of the West, considering that the region is fighting with US-made weapons. But they pay no attention to this. Their actions are destroying the values they proclaim.
This is also taking place in Ukraine and other parts of the world. We must join forces against this.
You represent Türkiye, a Turkish news agency. I remember the beating Ankara has taken recently over its alleged non-compliance with Western standards in the spheres of human rights and freedom of the media, even though Turkey has a large network of various media outlets. The country has its own traditions and its own system of democracy, which is developing in accordance with its own situation. Journalists and journalism are paying an extremely large role in the country, which is obvious. Yet the West is never satisfied. But it looks away when journalists are killed. It only looks into the matter when it concerns the safety of Western journalists, and then only the journalists that work for the mainstream media. Little attention is given to the death of other journalists, even American ones, like it happened in Ukraine. The Kiev regime kills journalists, but the United States is not concerned.
Listen to what Julian Assange has said in European institutions. I regard this as indicative.
Question (in English): Israel has launched its ground operation into Lebanon, and there is a possibility that the war reaches Syria and Iraq, if not Iran as well. We know that the Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian is visiting Russia. They might have some meetings. Could you tell us what would Russia do for the war in Lebanon not to get extended to other countries and will all this be part of the meetings between Masoud Pezeshkian and Russian officials?
Maria Zakharova: Russia is doing everything it can to avoid escalation in the Middle East – what we want is to achieve a settlement, or at least de-escalation – and to prevent the region from sinking into a bigger war. We have been coordinating our efforts with our regional and international partners, and have been hard at work since the early days of the escalation. It all started with the terrorist attack against the Israelis. We are committed to working with our colleagues and partners in the UN Security Council, and have put forward several resolutions. We also worked on draft resolutions submitted by other countries, and all these efforts were designed to achieve a settlement by political and diplomatic means.
We can see that Western countries are blocking all the attempts to stipulate that combat action would only lead to a blind alley, and preventing the UN Security Council from discussing a political and diplomatic settlement, as if this was a taboo. They cannot come up with anything other than continuing to supply weapons to this region.
We are acting the way I have just described with a sincere intention to promote de-escalation. This is the objective behind all the steps we take.
As for the talks at the highest level, you know that this matter falls within the purview of the Presidential Executive Office, so it is up to them to comment on it.
It is obvious that the situation in the Middle East is on the agenda of talks with countries in and around this region, and at all levels in general. It is not my intention to comment on the upcoming talks between the two presidents. I will not do that, since this is not my domain.
I can assure you that our leaders have been paying a lot of attention to this topic since it is more than just a local conflict. Many countries are involved and the crisis evolves along several tracks. Among other things, this includes weapons deliveries from other continents and efforts within the UN Security Council. This is an urgent and topical matter for almost everyone.
Question (in English): There is going to be a parliamentary election in the Kurdistan autonomous region of Iraq on October 20. What does Russia have for this election? Is Russia closely watching or has any team for observing and watching this election?
Maria Zakharova: Holding elections is up to the countries where these elections are taking place. This is their internal affair. However, I will still answer your question, if I may, considering certain circumstances and nuances.
Everyone knows that the autonomous region of Kurdistan is scheduled to hold an election in the third part of the month of October. The previous election dates back to September 2018. Taking this into account, we believe that the upcoming election would be a timely and positive step in terms of reinforcing stability in Kurdistan and in Iraq in general.
We hope that the upcoming election will take place entirely in keeping with the regional laws of Iraqi Kurdistan and the national law so that all the voters who care about their region can fulfil their legitimate rights.
Question: Aide to the President, Yury Ushakov reported on the meeting of the presidents of Russia and Iran in Turkmenistan on October 11. What topics will they discuss? And will they touch upon possible joint cooperation to counter US aggression?
Maria Zakharova: I have just responded that we do not comment on the talks at the highest level. This is the prerogative of the Presidential Administration, which, in fact, has already spoken about it. Extended comments will follow. Please show understanding of our division of responsibilities.
Question: Members of the US Congress have sent a letter to the US State Department calling on sanctions against Azerbaijan. It looks like the United States is increasing its pressure on the republic a month before the start of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change 2024 COP29, which will be held in Baku. The other day you noted that the climate issue has become a powerful tool of political manipulations. I would like to get your detailed comment on this question.
Maria Zakharova: I have such a feeling that US Congress members (I do understand that they are paid for their international lobbying, they don’t conceal it) have stuff to do.
I will get back to the climate agenda and the event to be held in Azerbaijan. I want to say that the exposed monstrous facts of the global, in fact, Pan-American scandal (we are talking about the entire Hollywood party and how they have been corrupting children for decades) reveal that US members of Congress have something to address at home. If they regard their elected positions just as a business for gaining money from international lobbyists, then it all should, perhaps, be renamed and made not an entity called “Congress” but “American Lobby” or “Lobbying Agency” and funds should be sent there. Then those people will be working. Since Congress members have been delegated the rights, the aspirations and the power by the American population to realise their civic interests, then maybe they get down to their own issues? No one can stand any more looking at what is happening there. Total drug legalisation, monstrous experiments of all kinds on children, endless gender manipulation, skyrocketing crime, unresolved problems with own borders. And at the same time, they wish to scrabble around in other people’s problems.
Now, to the climate change agenda. Western countries do use it often as political leverage. It is classical tactics used by the United States. Every year ahead of the UN Climate Change Conference (UNFCCC), Washington ramps up pressure on the chairing country, especially if it is not a satellite of the United States.
We saw this happen in 2022 ahead of COP 27 in Sharm el-Sheikh (Egypt) and in 2023 ahead of COP 28 in Dubai (the UAE). Now we see that, under various pretexts, pressure is growing on the chair of COP 29 in Azerbaijan. I believe it is pointless to try to pressure the republic. It has experienced pressure many times in the past and on various issues. Not only do we hold a principled stance, according to which it is unacceptable to bring pressure to bear on a sovereign state, but also, this topic requires real involvement by experts and should not serve as a political ‘baton’ that the United States will use to hit everybody in order to push through a decision that benefits it.
This sort of politically charged efforts are used to stir up commotion around the popular topic of climate. In reality, the United States and other Western countries essentially sabotage an agreement on a new collective quantitative goal with respect to climate financing, and reaching consensus on establishing an international carbon units market.
Question: Today, you repeatedly spoke about energy security. Yesterday, on October 8, the International Gas Forum opened in St Petersburg. The forum’s programme underlines the relevance and extensive scope of the broad Russia-Asia energy agenda. A large delegation of high-ranking officials from the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) is working on the sidelines of the forum. We know that the current gas contract between Gazprom and China’s largest oil and gas company is the biggest in the world. In view of this, what does the Russian Foreign Ministry think about the prospects for cooperation between Gazprom and CNPC in the context of global energy security for the entire Asia-Pacific Region?
Maria Zakharova: I could answer shortly: the prospects are great. But I doubt you will be satisfied with this answer or with a remark that materials on this topic are available on Gazprom’s website. I believe you are expecting something else. And I have it.
The Russian Federation has repeatedly affirmed its commitment to global energy security in various historical situations in the interests of countries’ peaceful development, their constructive cooperation based on mutual respect and international law.
We have indeed spoken about the Nord Stream pipelines several times today and about the fact that, despite the terrorist attack of an international scale on these pipelines, Russia was still ready to resume supply if respective agreements had been reached. It is an unprecedented and unique example.
When German journalists asked us directly whether it was technically feasible to resume gas supplies, Russia said yes. It would take several weeks if corresponding technical documents were in order and there was an agreement to this effect.
Russia remains a steadfast and reliable supplier of energy resources, consistently honouring its commitments. Our nation is dedicated to fostering a depoliticised dialogue across a broad spectrum of issues on the contemporary energy agenda with all interested countries and associations.
We are observing an unprecedented burden from the United States in this regard, manifesting as foreign economic pressures, particularly in the domain of energy security and cooperation. The energy sectors of our nation and others are similarly impacted. This situation persists because we provide our raw materials, goods, and services on a high-quality, fair, and mutually respectful basis. We engage in honest and decent competition, which appears to frustrate the United States, a nation seemingly unable to conduct itself similarly. We have witnessed their capabilities: exerting pressure, demolition, destruction, and more.
Despite the challenges faced by our energy sector, Russia has adeptly and efficiently redirected the primary vector of its raw material supplies towards new centres of global economic growth, notably in Asia. In 2023, the Asia-Pacific Region accounted for over 60 percent of Russia’s energy exports. We are broadening the scope and geographical reach of our energy cooperation, establishing new supply routes to the rapidly expanding markets of southern Eurasia. Our LNG exports continue to grow, enabling friendly nations to mitigate import price increases, maintain their competitive edge in the global market, ensure energy security, and meet socio-economic objectives.
In 2023, Russia covered 8 percent of China’s gas consumption and 20 percent of its imports, including 35 percent of pipeline gas imports and 11 percent of LNG imports. Alongside Turkmenistan, Russia is a major pipeline gas supplier to China and, together with Australia and Qatar, ranks amongst the top three LNG suppliers to the Chinese market. In 2024, Russia is poised to become the largest gas exporter to China, surpassing Australia.
The Power of Siberia pipeline is anticipated to reach its design capacity of 38 billion cubic metres of gas per year by 2025. Post-2027, we are expected to commence contracted gas supplies via the Far Eastern route, supplying an additional 10 billion cubic metres annually.
To ensure sustainable gas supplies to China from 2030 to 2040, Russia stands ready to further augment its pipeline gas deliveries in alignment with the genuine needs of the Chinese market. In this context, active discussions are underway regarding the Power of Siberia-2 gas pipeline project.
China also represents one of the most promising and rapidly expanding markets for Russian LNG, including new, under-construction, and projected large-scale plants in the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Area, the Leningrad and Murmansk Regions, and the Khabarovsk Territory.
There exist capabilities and a mutual interest in the active advancement of cooperation between Russia and China in the development and application of technologies and the production of a diverse range of equipment for the gas industry, as well as the utilisation of our nation’s exceptional expertise in developing underground gas storage systems, trunk gas transportation, and gas distribution networks in China.
For further specifics, I would recommend consulting Gazprom, whose press service is exceedingly qualified and will provide additional information.
Question: Armenia has refused to sign the statement on the principles of ensuring security in Eurasia adopted by the recent CIS Foreign Ministers Council, which condemns any attempts at forceful dictatorship that undermines equal cooperation in Eurasia. Why do you think Yerevan made such a move?
Maria Zakharova: The document you mentioned, adopted at the CIS Foreign Ministers Council meeting in Moscow on October 7, defines approaches to the main parameters of building an equal and indivisible security architecture in Eurasia, resolving existing regional conflicts and preventing new ones by the Eurasian states themselves based on the principles of the UN Charter.
Armenia was active in the expert consultations on the draft statement and made comments on the text; many of its proposals were taken into account.
At the same time, at the meeting of the CIS Council of Foreign Ministers, the Armenian Foreign Minister refrained from signing the document. Why did he do this? You had better ask him.
Question: May I ask for your personal opinion?
Maria Zakharova: I would rather keep my personal opinion to myself.
Question: Could you comment on Jens Stoltenberg’s post-resignation call on the President of Ukraine, where he suggested a historical comparison with the war between Finland and the USSR, which implied Ukraine should give up 10 percent of the territory to preserve an independent state? Our question is about the major change in his policy: before stepping down as NATO Secretary General, he was extremely vocal about ending the war on the battlefield as the only option. Now he is proposing that Ukraine give up part of its territory to end the conflict.
Maria Zakharova: I have already mentioned this. His words could have been analysed from a reality perspective if he had said this while being NATO Secretary General. But he made the statement after leaving his post. This indicates that [his changed rhetoric] has a certain propaganda goal. What is it?
I have also mentioned the situation on the battlefield (as Western representatives phrase it) and (we have repeatedly mentioned this, too, among other things) their toying with the NATO issue. Ukraine’s accession to the North Atlantic Alliance suits the interests of a number of NATO countries in dividing Ukraine. These interests are obviously harboured by Poland and a few others, which are only waiting for Zelensky to finish off the Ukrainian population before they can start munching on it.
I might also see a connection between the portion of the territory he mentioned and certain NATO countries’ ravenous appetites. They have their own vision of Ukraine’s future border trajectory, and they are not thinking of its border with Russia in the first place; it is about the border with NATO members.
I commented on this issue in detail in the introductory part. I would also suggest keeping in mind that a number of NATO countries have their own idea each as to which parts of Ukrainian territory they are entitled to. Poland earlier printed a map that included Ukrainian regions on its money. They did not do it to relive history; the idea was to foster in the younger generation of Poles proper ambitions and a clear understanding of what should belong to Poland.
Question: It was noted that the 1994 Moscow Declaration on the Protection of the Interests of Pluralistic States is a non-binding document. Does it mean we can target our nuclear missiles at the United States anytime considering that the concept of retaliatory strike is no longer part of the nuclear doctrine?
Maria Zakharova: The Foreign Ministry is incredibly fortunate with you coming to us and asking military-political questions, isn’t it? It’ a rhetorical question. We are always happy to see you, and we always have answers for you. However, this question is better directed at the agencies that are in charge of defence and strategic planning.
Question: I think you’re a more open agency and much easier to communicate with.
Maria Zakharova: Your questions cover much broader issues than our scope of competence. We see no legal or political grounds for tying the steps of the Russian Federation to strengthen its defence capabilities in with the legal nature of the bilateral Russian-Indian declaration. The Moscow Declaration signed in Moscow in June 1994 following Indian Prime Minister Narasimha Rao’s visit to Russia captured the level of the then available bilateral relations. Importantly, non-binding documents like this one often confirm existing international obligations of the parties and the status quo in their relations, namely, commitment to generally accepted principles and norms of international law, and the friendly and mutually beneficial nature of their interaction.
With regard to targeting or not targeting Russian nuclear missiles at any particular location, we have repeatedly provided clarifications on this matter. Joint statements made by nuclear powers in various formats at different times regarding not targeting nuclear weapons at each other or third countries, were part of the systematic efforts to reduce nuclear threat. These steps were positively received by the international community as a practical contribution to strengthening international security and strategic stability. Russian approaches on this issue were outlined in more detail in the Foreign Ministry’s statement on the relevance of measures taken by Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States to de-target their strategic nuclear forces dated August 11, 2023.
Indeed, the level of nuclear threat has significantly increased as a result of the destructive policies pursued by the West, and it can provoke a direct military clash between nuclear powers. We made it clear to the United States and other NATO countries that they should reconsider their policies and be fully aware of the fact that their provocative and extremely dangerous policies may lead to devastating consequences.
Russia’s military planning documents provide an exhaustive overview of reliability and effectiveness of nuclear deterrence, which helps ensure the protection of our country’s fundamental national security interests. President Vladimir Putin provided comprehensive comments on this matter during the open part of the September 25 Security Council permanent meeting on nuclear deterrence. All of this was done to ensure the fundamental interests of our country’s national security.
Question: Is it true that Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan are expressing dissatisfaction through diplomatic channels with Russia’s policies regarding the citizens of these countries, in particular, the tightening of migration legislation? Could this cool relations with Russia and have Russia replaced by China, Türkiye, or the United States in Central Asia?
Maria Zakharova: Various political figures and officials from these countries have publicly expressed views regarding our country’s migration legislation which is in effect, or being drafted or discussed. There is no hidden agenda here. It is open for everyone to see.
Diplomatic channels exist to address and clarify these issues, and to make sure the position of a particular country is taken into account. We are working to align our stances, to resolve complex issues, and to prevent issues from sliding into problems.
Russia is working on regulating migration flows, primarily from friendly CIS countries that benefit from the visa-free regime. The goal is to taper off the illegal and shadowy side of this process. I believe every country experiencing migration knows what this is about. These complex issues must be resolved.
Our partners are no less interested in establishing clear rules which will clearly govern employment rules for labour migrants, who will also receive the necessary social protection and legal assistance, if need be.
This work is carried out openly by the agencies such as the Interior Ministry, Ministry of Labour, and Foreign Ministry, to name a few, as well as during inter-parliamentary contacts with our foreign partners which cover all these issues.
Indeed, labour migration is important in our relations with the above countries. Russia is making every effort to preserve and strengthen our longstanding friendly, strategic, and allied ties. We are convinced that our partners also fully understand the exceptional importance of such relations with Moscow.
In the public sphere, it is critical to accept this as an imperative and use it as a foundational concept when discussing such issues in a mutually respectful environment. I’m not even talking about the diplomats, since this approach is dominant in the diplomatic environment. These issues should never be discussed in a manner that incites hatred between nationalities, ethnicities, or religions, sows disrespect, or stokes conflicts.
We should be guided by the do-no-harm principle used by medical doctors. Every word, phrase, fact of participation in the debates, or upholding a position must be grounded in this thesis. Words alone can do enough harm to complicate the efforts to address an issue, let alone address a global issue. Emotions, no matter what they are, should always be kept in check, and the interests of people and stable, peaceful relations between countries and people should always be prioritised. Every effort should be made to prevent any and all manifestations of xenophobia.
