#diplomatic reception 16 | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

abhrodeepnag-posts · 10 months ago

Text

youtube

14 February 2024 18:03

Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, February 14, 2024

Cancellation of postage stamp series Russian Foreign Ministry’s Diplomatic Missions

Today, the Foreign Ministry will be holding a ceremony at its Mansion to cancel postage stamps from a new series titled Buildings of Russian Foreign Ministry’s Diplomatic Missions. Published at the Foreign Ministry’s initiative and in cooperation with the Russian Post and Marka, the series presents a collection of stamps showing the most famous Russian diplomatic missions, which are also architectural landmarks. The first four stamps issued in the series depict the Foreign Ministry’s Reception House, the Ambassador’s Residence in Paris, and the Russian embassies in Vienna and Beijing.

Notable is the stamp featuring Sergey Morozov’s former mansion, which now serves as the Reception House, where major treaties and agreements have been signed. You can see it almost every week during talks between the Foreign Minister and his foreign colleagues.

During his visit to France, Emperor Nicholas II stayed at the Residence of the Russian Ambassador to Paris, while the Russian Embassy in Vienna hosted the Soviet-American summits in 1961 and 1979.

Built relatively recently, the Russian embassy building in Beijing opened in 1959, which coincided with the 10th anniversary of diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China. Let me remind you that this is the largest building, as far as its floor space is concerned, as well as one of the most outstanding in terms of its grandeur, among embassy structures of all the world powers.

The stamp depicting the Reception House has augmented reality built into it, which enables those who download the mARka mobile application to discover the building’s lush interiors.

Senior officials from the Ministry of Digital Development, Communications and Mass Media, Foreign Ministry staff, as well as representatives of the Russian Post and Marka will attend the ceremony.

Sergey Lavrov to take part in the Forum of Campaigners against Modern Practices of Neo-Colonialism

On February 16, 2024, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will address the plenary session of the Forum of Campaigners against Modern Practices of Neo-Colonialism. Representatives of the leading political forces from over fifty countries in Africa, Eurasia and Latin America are expected to take part in this event.

President Vladimir Putin supported the initiative by the United Russia party to hold this inter-party forum in Moscow. Its key objectives include developing meaningful and comprehensive measures for countering neo-colonialism and establishing a permanent international mechanism to enable major political forces from across the world to plan and coordinate their actions on the anti-neo-colonial front.

Sergey Lavrov’s visit to Cuba

On February 19, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will visit the Republic of Cuba.

Meetings are scheduled with President of Cuba Miguel Díaz-Canel and Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla to discuss current issues of bilateral cooperation, as well as the global and regional agenda.

Participants in the talks will focus on the key aspects of further strengthening Russian-Cuban strategic partnership based on a consistent deepening of political dialogue and boosting ties in the trade, economic, finance, investment, scientific, technical, cultural, humanitarian and other areas.

The parties will discuss fostering collaboration to prevent the undermining of universally accepted principles and norms of international law, the UN Charter, counteracting the use of neo-colonial practices and illegitimate unilateral restrictions in inter-state relations.

Sergey Lavrov’s visit to Venezuela

On February 20, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will visit Venezuela as part of his trip to Latin America. During the visit, he will meet with President of Venezuela Nicolás Maduro and Executive Vice President Delcy Rodríguez and will hold talks with Foreign Minister Yván Gil.

The parties will discuss the current state and development prospects of bilateral strategic partnership, including the deepening of political dialogue, and the implementation of major joint projects in the trade, investment, cultural and humanitarian areas. They will also exchange opinions on the key issues on the international and regional agendas, and on bilateral interaction within the UN and other multilateral platforms.

Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming participation in G20 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting

On February 21-22, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will take part in the G20 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting in Rio de Janeiro.

The upcoming meeting, the first one held this year as part of Brazil’s presidency, will be devoted to the current issues of the contemporary international agenda with a focus on overcoming geopolitical discord and initiating reforms within global economic institutions.

Our Brazilian friends consider progress in this field an essential prerequisite and a necessary condition for steering the global economy towards gradual development and sustainable growth.

In his remarks, Sergey Lavrov will provide Russia’s comprehensive perspective on the challenges confronting the international community, including an in-depth analysis of both their internal causes and dynamics. He will also outline the steps necessary to overcome these challenges.

Sergey Lavrov will note the special importance of utilising the entire range of diplomatic tools, as well as ways to peacefully resolve disputes, with mutually respectful dialogue and cooperation in order to provide indivisible and sustainable security. Considering all the geopolitical realities, we will urge our G20 partners to fully support the process of building a truly democratic multipolar, polycentric world and adhering to the legitimate interests of all countries and peoples.

We will speak against the militarisation of international economic relations, hybrid means of waging wars, undermining of sovereignty and independence of autonomous states, and interfering in their domestic affairs.

We will insist on upholding the supremacy of international law and its basic principles outlined in the UN Charter, and advocate a return to collective decision making with the participation of all interested countries while strictly adhering to consensus and the shared goal of finding common ground.

On the sidelines of the G20 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, Sergey Lavrov will have a busy agenda filled with bilateral meetings. The minister’s contacts with his colleagues from the countries with emerging markets are being discussed.

The 90th anniversary of the Diplomatic Academy

February 14 marks the 90th anniversary of the Diplomatic Academy’s establishment. In 1934, the Institute for Training Diplomatic and Consular Workers was established at the People’s Commissariat (Ministry) for Foreign Affairs. It aimed to provide highly skilled and patriotic human resources for the foreign-policy service, an objective the Academy successfully accomplished throughout its 90-year history.

During its existence, the Academy won a reputation as a reliable educational platform for training foreign affairs specialists, including about 800 ambassadors and representatives attached to international organisations. Every year, about 750 Russian diplomats, as well representatives of diplomatic agencies from over 40 states, improve their skills at the Diplomatic Academy. Additionally, the Academy is a major academic centre that continually builds upon its conceptual research, which focuses on topical international processes ongoing worldwide.

Faculty members of the Diplomatic Academy have received a presidential citation for their science and education successes and in connection with the Academy’s 90th anniversary. Many of the Academy’s professors and lecturers have received state and departmental awards.

On this day, we would like to join all those congratulating the Diplomatic Academy, an education organisation affiliated with the Russian Foreign Ministry.

Voting from abroad in the Russian presidential election

We are organising the process for casting votes in foreign countries. On February 8, Chair of the Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation Ella Pamfilova held a briefing at the Foreign Ministry Press Centre for representatives of the diplomatic corps accredited in Moscow. Heads of the diplomatic missions from more than 130 countries attended the event.

Ella Pamfilova explained the specifics of the Russian electoral system and the election process in Russia and introduced foreign diplomats to the new technologies used in the elections. She spoke about international observers, usually invited by the Federal Assembly, the Central Election Commission, and the Russian Foreign Ministry. There was also information about media accreditation.

We are expecting the arrival of 500 to 1,000 (we do not know the exact number yet) observers from Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Europe. Accredited by the Central Election Commission, they will be able to visit any place in Russia to observe the election. When we receive official responses from international organisations, we will release the full list of those involved.

As I said during my previous briefing, we are opening around 270 polling stations in all the countries with Russian diplomatic missions. It should be noted, though, that we are seriously concerned about the security at the polling stations. Several countries in Europe and America have not responded to our requests for assistance in ensuring security and public order during the election.

Therefore, in unfriendly states, we cannot organise off-site voting beyond cities where our foreign missions are based, in locations with a low population of Russian nationals. We used to be able to organise off-site voting at Russian cultural centres, trade missions, honorary consuls’ offices, and at venues provided by local officials as part of our friendly cooperation. To ensure the security of our nationals wishing to vote while abroad, we are opening polling stations only at our Russian diplomatic missions.

I would like to remind you that, at the request of unfriendly countries, 26 Russian diplomatic missions have been closed recently and dozens of Russian diplomats have been expelled from their countries of presence. As a result, there are fewer opportunities for opening more polling stations in the countries with large Russian communities, such as the Baltic states, Moldova, Germany, the United States, the Czech Republic, Finland, etc. There are also logistical and organisational obstacles that have been created for us. For example, it is difficult to transfer election campaign funding.

We have noted a growing number of calls for sabotaging the vote. We would like to warn all extremists about the administrative and criminal liability for attempting to disrupt the normal course of this election.

We are currently forming election commissions that will be primarily headed by representatives of our diplomatic missions abroad. We are about to receive voting ballots and are preparing to send them abroad.

The Foreign Ministry is doing everything to ensure that Russian nationals abroad have full access to the voting process. We will continue to inform you about preparation for the Russian presidential election at these briefings, on the Foreign Ministry website, on our official social media pages, and in our interviews and comments for the media from the Foreign Ministry headquarters and our foreign missions.

Ukraine update

February 18 will mark ten years since what turned out to be a turning point in the Euromaidan wave of unrest in Kiev.

On this day in 2014, the ostensibly peaceful anti-government demonstrations rapidly devolved into massive violence. The headquarters of the ruling Party of Regions was seized and burned down. Two of its employees were killed. The rioters ruthlessly attacked the Berkut police unit and other law enforcement forces, which refrained from using weapons in response. The Western masterminds and orchestrators of those “rallies” (atrocities in fact) urged the rioters on, causing further escalation. Meanwhile, the collective West leaders were openly interfering in Ukraine’s internal affairs and threatening the country’s government, literally saying that if the president or the security forces used weapons to restore constitutional order, the state of Ukraine and all decision-makers would be punished.

Twenty-nine Maidan rioters and 11 law enforcement officers were killed and hundreds were injured in just two days of clashes, February 18 and 19, 2014.

In essence, these events launched the escalation of violence, which subsequently claimed many thousands of lives and maimed millions of lives. Ukraine was rapidly heading for a disaster, a brutal anti-constitutional putsch/coup. All these years, the Kiev regime has been trying to distort the truth about those terrible events.

February 12 was another recent memorable date. Exactly nine years ago in Minsk, thanks to the titanic efforts of the international mediators – Russia, Germany, and France – an agreement was reached on the Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements, intended to end the civil war triggered by the February 18, 2014 events. I am referring to the civil war that the Kiev regime unleashed against its own population in south-eastern Ukraine, sending tanks to suppress the people who stood up to defend constitutional order.

That package of documents, the Package of Measures, was signed by all parties to the conflict including Kiev, Donetsk, and Lugansk. The document was approved by UN Security Council Resolution 2202, becoming the sole framework for an intra-Ukrainian settlement and an integral part of international law.

The Package of Measures was a unique opportunity to preserve peace in Ukraine, but the Kiev regime missed it.

Kiev did not even consider starting to fulfill the agreements reached, deliberately ignoring its own commitments. The key condition for ensuring a comprehensive, long-term, and sustainable settlement was the establishment of direct and mutually respectful dialogue between Kiev, Donetsk, and Lugansk. But both Petr Poroshenko and Vladimir Zelensky categorically rejected the very idea of direct negotiation with those who represented the interests of Donbass. They continued to refer to those people as their citizens and yet refused to talk to them. Apparently, they did not even think of the region’s population as human beings, openly calling them “scum” and “species.”

That the clique in Kiev was sabotaging the Package of Measures never evoked a proper response from the deals’ European guarantors, Germany and France, although we have repeatedly brought the Kiev regime’s inaction to their attention. It did not emerge until later that Berlin and Paris did this deliberately. They had no interest in a peaceful settlement; they were preparing the Ukrainian army for an armed struggle against Russia. Ex-Chancellor Merkel and former President Hollande, who used to be proud of their co-authorship of the Package of Measures and their co-sponsorship of the Minsk process, announced this without a shadow of regret. So, they deceived the whole world – everyone who craved peace in Ukraine, their citizens who voted for them, and the parties they represented, also because they played the role of peacekeepers, when in fact, they had no intention of being peacekeepers. They deceived the UN Security Council. They never mentioned their plan to never implement the Package of Measures when it was presented and became a binding document before the eyes of the entire international community. Which was forgery.

Seeing Kiev’s preparations for the forceful suppression of Donbass, which would have led to numerous casualties among civilians, Russia could not stand back and watch. We did not have any other choice but to begin the special military operation to protect civilians in the Donetsk and Lugansk people’s republics in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter. We could not abandon Russian people, Russian-speaking people of various ethnic backgrounds and beliefs, who associated themselves with Russian history and culture, to be butchered by Banderite cutthroats. They were people who wanted peace but who were given not simply a war, but the Kiev regime’s literal attempt to annihilate them.

The Ukrainian neo-Nazis continue their barbaric, indiscriminate shelling of civilians in these Russian regions. According to the DPR’s authorities, 58 people have been killed, 204 injured, and 390 houses have been destroyed since the beginning of the year.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces are also using drones. Thus, on February 9, 2024, the Russian air defence forces shot down 19 drones in four Russian regions and above the Black Sea. On February 11, 2024, 33 Ukrainian drones were destroyed in the Kherson Region.

Meanwhile, the West continues to overlook the terrorist actions of the Kiev junta, turning a blind eye to all their criminal activities and the threats to commit them. Ukrainian Minister for Digital Transformation, Mikhail Fyodorov, attracted attention by making a brigandish statement that resembled the rhetoric of Al-Qaeda and ISIS (organisations that are banned and globally recognised as terrorist). He went as far as promising major explosions throughout Russia.

I have one request to the representatives of the Kiev regime who make such statements. Please refrain from attempting to disavow your words, claiming they are fake, or that you did not make such statements. The reality is, you did utter those words. We observe and remember all this. Our law enforcement agencies are doing the same; a topic I will address shortly.

There should be no illusions that the Kiev regime will escape accountability for such statements and malevolent actions. Russian law enforcement agencies are closely monitoring and documenting all these incidents. Everyone complicit to terrorist attacks will inevitably be brought to justice. Do you want examples? We have them.

The Russian courts continue to sentence Ukrainian militants who committed felonies against civilians, based on proof collected by the Russian Investigative Committee.

Thirty three Ukrainian neo-Nazis were sentenced to 27-29 years in prison for committing crimes against civilians in the Donetsk People’s Republic.

Ukrainian militant Maxim Chernushenko was sentenced to 25 years in prison for the attempted murder of two residents of Mariupol in March 2022.

No criminals will be able to escape punishment. They will be found and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Today, on February 14, Brussels will host a regular, 19th meeting of the Ukraine Defence Contact Group (also known as the Ramstein group). Its agenda will focus on providing Kiev with air defence systems, munitions, and other weapons that the Ukrainian Armed Forces need.

Even the United States cannot decide whether they should continue sponsoring the Kiev regime. The US’s desire to shuffle off the unbearable burden of funding Zelensky on to Europe is becoming clearer. First of all, to Germany, which is the leader in this sense. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz visited Washington on February 9, 2024, to receive instructions. It was he who emotionally urged the Western countries to do everything in their power to prevent Russia from winning.

Let me remind you that their initial goal was to inflict a strategic defeat upon Russia. However, the rhetoric has shifted, and now they say that they cannot let Russia win. I must disappoint them; they have failed to fulfill both of their threats. We will persevere.

In his remarks, Olaf Scholz mostly noted that, in the event of a Russian victory, the Golden Billion run the risk of finding itself in an unpredictable world, one that would be much more dangerous than during the Cold War era.

He should have been more straightforward: it will prove more dangerous than during World War II. The thing is that neo-Nazism is reincarnating in Germany. We can see members of the German Government talk about their Nazi ancestors with great respect. We can see how neo-Nazism is staging a comeback all over Germany. They are reprinting Adolf Hitler’s most fiendish legacy called Hitler, Mein Kampf: A Critical Assessment. I will discuss this in greater detail today.

It may be surprising that, despite the corrupt and criminal nature of the Kiev junta, European politicians are saying that Ukraine is allegedly saving Europe from Russia. In reality, the regime of Vladimir Zelensky resembles a stone tied to the neck of a drowning person. It is dragging the European Union to the bottom and devastating a formerly thriving and prosperous territory. European functionaries do not care what their own citizens (who finance Ukrainian elites, the Armed Forces of Ukraine, and the personal expenses of Ms Zelensky out of their own pocket) think of this. They disregard the disintegrating economy of a formerly thriving and flourishing Europe, and they also overlook the deteriorating social situation there. It is hardly surprising that against such a backdrop hard-working farmers are protesting in EU countries. They do not get their hard-earned money from speculative stock trading, securities machinations, or from the creation of new “bubbles” on real estate and digital technologies markets. No, the farmers provide agricultural produce and food that keeps everyone alive. Today, they are losing profits as cheap Ukrainian foodstuffs are being imported. They face skyrocketing fuel and energy expenses, due to the EU’s criminal energy policy with regard to its own citizens. They are counting their losses brought on by tax hikes. Where are these taxes heading? They are spending these tax proceeds on carnage managed by Vladimir Zelensky, whom the United States has installed.

His regime continues to show its true face; in reality, this is just a snout. On February 11, 2024, Maxim Ostapenko, Director of the Kiev Pechersk Lavra Museum-Reserve, voiced his intention to swap the remains of the Russian Empire’s Prime Minister Pyotr Stolypin, a reformist, for Ukrainian prisoners of war. Stolypin was killed in Kiev in 1911 and buried at the Kiev Pechersk Lavra; this resting place is now turning into a museum. This is not the first time when Ukrainian nationalists are trying to perform a Danse Macabre.

The media has published multiple stories showing how they sell holy relics and deliver them abroad. They have now come up with a new initiative. Earlier, they suggested using the remains of General Nikolai Vatutin, who liberated Kiev (who is buried in central Kiev) and legendary Soviet secret agent Nikolai Kuznetsov (whose grave is in Lvov) for these purposes.

That nothing is sacred for Vladimir Zelensky’s regime is also further evidenced by the ongoing barbaric actions against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. It has recently become known that on the night of January 22, Kiev neo-Nazis brutally beat Metropolitan Longin of Bancheny. During his life, the metropolitan has actively been involved in charitable activities. Since the 1990s, hundreds of orphans and children deprived of care have been saved thanks to his efforts. For this, he was awarded the Hero of Ukraine title in 2008 (we have talked about this). The Vladimir Zelensky regime is offended by the fact that the metropolitan will not renounce his faith and instead remains devoted to the canonical church, which the Kiev regime is shamelessly and so zealously destroying. Last year, a criminal case was opened against him, accusing him of allegedly inciting interreligious hatred.

The story is again about children. For some reason, anything related to children, attempts to save them and protect from destructive logic, evokes such a reaction from the Kiev regime. Or literally without reason. Why? Because for the Kiev regime, children are also a commodity.

We call on relevant international organisations to strongly condemn the ongoing inhumane repressions of the Kiev regime against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and force it to stop this arbitrariness.

The above facts confirm the relevance of the tasks of the special military operation to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine and eliminate threats emanating from its territory. These objectives, as the Russian leadership has stated, will definitely be fulfilled.

Developments in Moldova

We continue to monitor developments in this country. We can see its leadership take feverish actions to increase the attractiveness of the European integration project, which Moldova itself more often calls European colonisation. An entire range of tools is being used: from primitive tales to clear falsification.

On February 7, Foreign Minister of Moldova Mihai Popsoi said on television that “the CIS was conceived in order to limit the independence of the so-called post-Soviet countries.” Chisinau does not provide arguments to support these fables. This is nonsense that can be dispelled with a few facts.

– The CIS is a popular and constantly developing mechanism for countries to interact, coordinate their positions, and implement initiatives in a wide range of areas, such as politics, economics, military, security, cultural and humanitarian cooperation. Interaction in the CIS space is built on real, rather than declarative, principles of mutual respect, equality, and mutual consideration of interests.

– The CIS, unlike the EU and NATO, does not force anyone to do anything. The Commonwealth mechanisms are structured in a way that allows each state to take into account each other’s interests and participate in those projects and decisions that meet its needs and national interests.

– The economies of CIS countries are developing dynamically. The results for an incomplete 2023 showed a GDP increase of 3.2 percent.

– The CIS has established effective mechanisms to counter traditional, as well as new challenges and threats, such as crime, terrorism, and extremism.

– The CIS’s cultural and humanitarian dimension is a priority, which makes it possible to annually implement many large projects, including forums of creative and scientific communities, cultural, youth, and sports events.

This is the reality supported by facts: in terms of the number of events, economic indicators, and feedback from members of the CIS.

If we speak about beneficial cooperation in the CIS, the structure of Moldova’s apple exports is a case in point. According to the Association of Moldovan Fruit Producers and Exporters, Moldova exported around 190,000 tonnes of apples in 2022, including only 5 percent to Romania. Where do these exports go then? About 74 percent go to Russia, 8 percent to Kazakhstan and 6 percent to Belarus. Moldova’s media report that during the first six months of 2023, our country accounted for 50 percent of Moldova’s apple exports.

Residents of Moldova can see this. They realise what their officials are pushing them to do. Speaking plainly, they want their citizens to abandon the mutual benefits of cooperation in the CIS in favour of the European Union. Moldova’s citizens know what the EU countries have done to their own agricultural producers, as well as industrial and other manufacturers. Farmers in Poland and other EU countries have been trying to communicate the problem to their officials. Moldova’s officials in Chisinau are condemning their producers to the same fate because NATO paid them to promote this agenda. Their rise to power was arranged and now, they receive daily instructions on how to throw the country under the bus to meet NATO’s needs.

Let me remind you that this is a deeply ideology-driven bloc that falls in line with the confrontational goals of the United States and NATO. This bloc is pushing its own rules and standards on other countries in violation of the fundamental principle in the UN Charter on the sovereign equality of states and other international formats involving Moldova, such as the OSCE. This bloc’s miscalculated macroeconomic policy and illegitimate restrictions have led the EU into economic stagnation, industrial decline, and social tensions. The EU’s notorious solidarity has been reduced to political servitude while the principles of freedom and democracy have been replaced by double standards and direct censorship. Moldova’s officials are actively adopting all these “European values” and implementing them in their country.

Chisinau is making systematic “pre-sale” preparations in Moldova to meet NATO standards. Fortunately, the majority of Moldovans (around 58 percent, according to recent polls) disagree with their leaders’ destructive course. Despite the efforts of officials and EU support, the number of European integration supporters in Moldova is falling. The EU’s granting Chisinau candidate status in June 2022 did not help; nor did the announcement of pre-accession talks in December 2023. People understand everything.

We hope that officials in Chisinau finally realise why the people of Moldova do not wish to break off their historical ties with Russia, or lose their long-term markets, for the sake of ambiguous prospects of closer alignment with the aggressively-minded European Union.

Tensions escalate at Armenian-Azerbaijani border

We are seriously concerned about the escalating tensions on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border near Armenia’s Syunik Region and Azerbaijan’s Zangilan District.

Between February 12 and 13, a series of armed incidents occurred near Nerkin Hand, which have resulted in casualties and injuries. We strongly encourage both Baku and Yerevan to show restraint, implement de-escalation measures, and refrain from any actions that may contribute to further deterioration of the situation. All issues should be resolved by peaceful political and diplomatic means.

These incidents yet again confirm the urgency of Azerbaijan and Armenia’s return to the implementation of the comprehensive set of trilateral agreements adopted at the highest level in 2020-2022.

We are confident that territorial claims should be resolved within the bilateral Commission on the Delimitation of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Border. We are ready to provide consultative assistance to this process.

Events in Japan as part of Northern Territories Day

On February 7, 2024, we saw another “puppet show” in Japan under the name of Northern Territories Day. Unlike traditional art forms, like Kabuki or other Japanese theatrical traditions, this event lacked high artistic merit. Once again, Japanese officials exhibited their primitive revanchist rhetoric. Ultra-right nationalists gathered to yell their slogans near the Russian diplomatic and consular missions, a familiar backdrop for such activities involving extremist elements in Japan.

Through such actions, official Tokyo has yet again confirmed its course towards historical revisionism that is hostile to Russia; this approach involves cultivating Russophobia and militaristic sentiments within society and undermining the post-war international order. An indirect indication of Japan entering a dangerous path of aligning with neo-Nazism was evident in equating anti-Russian sentiments regarding the developments in Ukraine with legally void territorial claims for the southern Kuril Islands.

We never tire of reminding the Japanese authorities of the need to fully acknowledge the results of the Second World War, which are outlined, in particular, in the UN Charter. At the same time, we strongly encourage the authors of the petition, adopted at the nationwide rally on February 7, 2024, to channel their demands to the resumption of talks on a peace treaty and visits to the Japanese cemeteries on the southern Kuril Islands toward the administration of Prime Minister Fumio Kishida. While trying to appease Washington, the current administration is meticulously dismantling the remains of bilateral relations created by its predecessors.

Attacks on Russian Orthodox Church congregations in Denmark

We have noted provocations in the Denmark’s media targeting Russian Orthodox Church communities in their country. Russia’s Ambassador to Denmark has commented on the groundless accusations against those communities subordinate to the Moscow Patriarchate.

We consider these publications a part of a purposeful campaign to discredit the activities of Orthodox communities, incite hatred on the basis of religion and ethnicity.

These materials are a vivid example of the anti-Russian hysteria that has engulfed Denmark and the West in recent years. This witch-hunt unleashed by official Copenhagen has already caused severe damage to multifaceted bilateral co-operation. Now the persecution has reached Orthodox communities engaged in fully legal activities in Denmark.

In particular, the Russian Orthodox Church in Denmark plays not only a spiritual and humanitarian role, but also a unifying role: its services are attended by a variety of ethnic groups living in that country.

For our part, we will continue to defend Russian Orthodox believers’ freedom of religion and the Russian Orthodox Church communities’ right to provide the necessary assistance to our compatriots and anyone practicing this religion. We will also use the potential of the relevant international organisations.

The recent concluding observations of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child

On February 8, the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), which is a United Nations body, published its concluding observations following its 95th session where the combined 6th and 7th periodic reports of the Russian Federation on the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child were presented.

We cannot help but note that this body has carried out its mandate in an unprofessional and politicised manner. In this connection, I should like to remind you that the job of the Committee is to assist state Parties to the Convention in fulfilling their obligations under that international treaty.

The Russian Federation is committed to strict compliance with international laws on the protection of children's rights. For 35 years now, the Convention on the Rights of the Child has been the main reference point and unquestionable authority for the entire international community in this area. With this in mind, we took a responsible approach to the project and dispatched a high-ranking interdepartmental delegation to Geneva. Experts from Russia spent almost six hours answering more than 100 questions, providing comprehensive details on a wide range of problems related to ensuring the rights of the child.

However, a brief analysis of the CRC’s concluding observations shows that there was no constructive dialogue with the Committee members. The assessments and conclusions voiced clearly reflected political bias, especially in the context of Russia’s special military operation. One gets the impression that the recommendations were drawn up in advance and the review during the country session was a mere formality to comply with the rules of the game. Namely, some of the concluding observations are deliberately negative. Some others demonstrate a one-sided approach in assessing the information provided by the official delegation. Anything that did not meet a certain benchmark was patently censured. Moreover, some of the recommendations are actually unsubstantiated accusations based on the use of unverified data from biased NGOs.

The Committee's failure to carry out its mandate in an impartial manner is of particular concern in this context. Before the start of the special military operation, the plight of the children of Donbass, who, as a reminder, have been living in mortal danger and dying since 2014, was of no interest to anyone, despite the materials we provided to that body. After 2022, this issue has been raised exclusively in the context of “Russian aggression,” while the casualties among children in Russia inflicted by a neighbouring state’s airstrikes have been shamelessly ignored, as were the types of shells that killed those children.

The Interdom International Boarding School

I would like to give you an example from history. Far from all obvious things that are corroborated by facts become part of the general global information accepted as truth. A certain period of time has to elapse.

In Russia, the Interdom International Boarding School was established more than 90 years ago. It was an asylum for children whose parents were serving prison terms in countries with reactionary or fascist regimes. When this institution was created in 1933, what was the press writing about it in the West? The response to how Russia was protecting children’s rights was identical to what it is today.

The school was created at the initiative of the workers’ unions of the city of Ivanovo and with support from the International Organisation for Assistance to Fighters for Revolution and its chair was Elena Stasova.

Creating this children’s home was a sign of internationalism and the goodwill of Soviet citizens with regard to orphaned children of anti-fascist fighters in Spain, fighters against dictatorial regimes in Africa and Latin America, as well as children of many progressive figures from all over the world.

Its first students were children of anti-fascists from Germany, Greece, Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, Italy, and many other countries. Does anyone in these countries, members of international organisations, know that 90 years ago, Russia, currently a target for their present accusations, saved and put on their feet many of their prominent politicians and public figures? Russia demonstrated how to take care of someone else’s children. For us there is no such thing as “someone else’s” child. They don’t remember this. But we and those children do.

Numerous Spanish children arrived in Interdom during the Civil War in Spain. There were many Chinese students in consequence of the revolutionary developments in China. Interdom in Ivanovo became their second homeland. None of these children was ever ashamed of this biographical fact.

Until the late 1990s, Interdom was a home for children from countries affected by wars, conflicts, or natural disasters. During its 91-year history, the boarding school was a second home for 5,000 foreign children from 86 countries.

Interdom has developed a system of upbringing providing maximum care and devoid of attempts to re-educate these children and turn them into Russians by mentality and culture. It never dawned on anyone in Russia to make them renounce their countries of origin. Alongside Russian, the foreign students learned their native languages and maintained contacts with their fellow countrymen. The majority of them returned to their countries, while preserving ties with Russia, their school, and school friends.

It is difficult to overestimate the role of Interdom in educating children of different ethnic backgrounds in the spirit of friendship, comradeship, and mutual respect, and in developing such qualities as determination and mutual assistance. The versatile knowledge obtained by the graduates of this unique educational institution allowed them to find a worthy application for their talents and abilities and to achieve success in various fields. Many Interdom graduates have occupied prominent positions in national governments and have made great contributions to national culture and science.

Here are some examples. Zaur Dakhta, a famous student of the school from a family of political immigrants, after graduation forged a brilliant career in the film industry. As a cameraman-director of fiction and documentary films, he shot about 100 films. As a director of photography he made the films Hafez Shirazi (1971), Registered in the Sky (1982), and Interview (1983). He holds the title of Honoured Worker of Culture of the Tajik SSR, is an academician of the Academy of Arts and an honorary citizen of Tajikistan. He is known in the republic as a bright photographer and organiser of numerous international exhibitions. The famous pupil of Interdom remembers his native school even 65 years after graduation. In early February 2024, Zaur Dakhta sent Interdom his book of memories written in two languages – Tajik and Russian.

Another Interdom alumnus Aldo Canestri, son of Italian trade unionist and communist Aldo Canestri, became an outstanding linguist. After school he entered the Philological Faculty of Moscow State University, graduating in Russian language and literature. After graduating from Moscow State University, from 1962 until his death in 2014. Aldo Canestri worked as a teacher of Italian at the Translation Department of the Maurice Thorez Moscow State Pedagogical Institute of Foreign Languages (now Linguistic University). He raised several generations of translators and specialists in the Italian language in Russia and the former Soviet Union. He wrote a large number of teaching aids, phrasebooks, dictionaries, including a unique Italian-Russian language and country studies dictionary. The main work of his life was the Dictionary of Synonyms and Antonyms of the Italian Language.

Zhu Min, the daughter of Zhu De, one of the ten marshals of the People’s Republic of China, an associate of Mao Zedong, ended up in Interdom during the Great Patriotic War. She later graduated from the Lenin Teachers Training Institute in Moscow and returned to China, where for 30 years she lectured at the Russian Language Department of the Beijing Normal University, bringing up a generation of Chinese Russian scholars.

After graduating from Ivanovo Interdom Roza Yu Bin at the age of 17 joined the Russian editorial staff of the China monthly magazine as a style editor. The first issue of the illustrated edition of China was published in 1951. The publication of this magazine helped to deepen mutual understanding between the two countries. I have seen many different publications in my life. But in my opinion, this magazine is one of the benchmarks, designed to inform, educate, unite, and preserve freedom of opinion. It’s a terrific publication. You can look it up in libraries and archives. I sincerely advise you to do so.

Alexander Karastoyanov, the son of Bulgarian revolutionaries, Alexander and Georgica Karastoyanov, took part in the defence of Smolensk and received the Medal for Combat Exploits. After obtaining his officer’s commission, Karastoyanov served with the 1st Cavalry Corps commanded by General Pavel Belov. In 1944, Karastoyanov, then a Red Army Captain, returned to Bulgaria. He commanded a military unit and headed the Operational Intelligence Department of the Bulgarian People’s Army. Karastoyanov eventually worked his way through the ranks to become a Major General. He defended his DSc (Military Science) thesis and served as a military attaché in Hungary and Vietnam. In 1983, Interdom marked its 50th anniversary, and Karastoyanov visited the international school in Ivanovo together with other Bulgarian graduates.

Graduates of the Ivanovo boarding school still maintain ties with Russia. All of them make their contribution to strengthening trust and mutual understanding in international affairs.

I would also like to note that everyone can see archive photos, part of an online exhibition, posted on the website. To mark Interdom’s 90th anniversary, we digitalised black-and-white photos, as well as related comments and titles, in a multi-colour format. I sincerely suggest that you take a look at this online exhibition. Every image of this large family photo album radiates warmth, joy, and conveys a special atmosphere of Interdom in Ivanovo.

This implies historical roots and our country’s attitude towards children who temporarily lose their families due to the international situation and circumstances linked with conflicts in their home countries. We have historical evidence showing how we dealt with such situations in the past, and how we address these issues today.

Do those who are now levelling accusations at us have such historical evidence? Let them show it to us, and we will have a look. The West claims that they can do this because they have done it in the past. Yes, we had done this in the past, we helped children who were left without parents in their countries. Their parents fell victim to fascist and Nazi regimes. We helped those children survive, preserve their human qualities and return to their home countries, while retaining their native language, culture, and love for their homeland. At the same time, they received additional knowledge that our country lavished on them.

Promoting Adolf Hitler’s legacy in Germany

There is another topic that has to do with someone doing something somewhere in the past and continuing to doing it today. I have already mentioned a wave of revelations disclosing that the families of several German politicians have Nazi roots. They have no choice now that archival documents have been unearthed. This explains why Germany and the Olaf Scholz government are sponsoring Vladimir Zelensky’s neo-Nazi regime. In fact, many cabinet members there come from Nazi families and have never condemned or rejected what their ancestors, covered in blood as they are, did.

All this is happening while several German research institutions, led by the Institute for Contemporary History Munich – Berlin, undertook a joint project to compile and publish Adolf Hitler’s public speeches and statements in 1933-1945. Those who initiated this project describe it as releasing the collection in book and audiobook formats for a wide audience, including school students. What a great choice. After all, school students must know what permeates the ideology guiding the Olaf Scholz government these days.

It seems like the effort to inject Adolf Hitler’s literary legacy into the public space and minds has reached an industrial scale. Since the 1990s, over the past 30 years, the Fuhrer’s speeches and orders dating back to 1925-1933 appeared in print after a similarly thorough research effort in a 17-volume publication, accompanied by a two-volume edition titled Hitler, Mein Kampf. A Critical Edition, which has had as many as 12 print runs since its initial release in 2016.

Instead of condemning everything that is connected with the criminal legacy of one of the most heinous monsters in the history of humankind, present-day Germany chooses to publish the works and speeches of this deranged Fuhrer, with the government’s consent, all while pretending that it is done for the purpose of research, education and awareness building. We believe that there is only one plausible explanation: the German authorities seek retribution for the Third Reich’s defeat. This sentiment has taken hold within a certain segment of German society and manifests itself in the deliberate effort to obscure Germany’s criminal past.

Germany’s position regarding Russia’s traditional resolution at the UN General Assembly, titled “Combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance,” confirms this. After abstaining for many years during the vote on this resolution, Germany has been casting its vote against it since 2022.

This naturally raises questions for the German authorities, but to be honest with you, I would like to pose these questions to the people of Germany: What does the future hold? Do you understand what to expect from yourselves? What’s next? How about praising Adolf Hitler for his achievements as an outstanding statesman or something along those lines?

Recognising the genocide of the Soviet peoples during the Great Patriotic War

For me, this is the most important material not just of today’s briefing but of the past few years.

I just said that books with Adolf Hitler’s remarks and speeches are published in Germany. These books do not contain a critical analysis of Adolf Hitler’s remarks and speeches but rather present the original speeches. Perhaps Germans should publish a book about the genocide of the Soviet peoples during the Great Patriotic War. Or perhaps, for every new edition of Hitler’s propaganda speeches, they should publish an equal number of copies of books, brochures and materials about what he did to the peoples in the USSR. Maybe those who still stand in the way of anti-Nazism in Germany will ponder it or present proposals. Allow me to present you with an extensive analysis of this matter.

Nowadays, politicians and public figures, mainly in the West, tend to cast a veil over the horrors that the Soviet people were subjected to during World War II and the Great Patriotic War. Some attribute the suffering of millions of people to just one country or one nation, essentially banning others from considering themselves victims. Others are proud of their “heroic” ancestors, like German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock and some of her colleagues (recently, Bild published an entire list of these people who take pride in their family members, former representatives, activists and supporters of the Nazis and the Third Reich). There are people like Canadian officials who consider it impossible to extradite a Nazi criminal, referring to the lack of an extradition agreement between our countries. These actions directly or indirectly encourage neo-Nazis, including in Ukraine and in the Baltic states, and we talk about this regularly during these briefings.

All these public figures in the West ignore or fail to recognise the sacrifice made by Soviet people during the Great Patriotic War. Even when these public figures speak about the 27 million victims of that war, they forget about the tens of millions of ruined lives of Soviet families (if they survived), relatives and loved ones. Some politicians ignore these facts defiantly while others refer to a lack of information.

Now, especially for those who did not know or see, I will present information so that nobody can say that they were unaware of it or did not have access to it. Of course, it is impossible to cover the entire scale of this tragedy at this briefing but I will quote some horrendous figures.

According to the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office, during the occupation of Soviet territory between July 1941 and August 1944, the Nazi invaders and their accomplices deliberately eliminated more than 7.3 million people, including more than 18,000 children, through executions and using an extensive network of concentration and labour camps. Almost 2 million Soviet citizens were kidnapped into Nazi slavery. Half of the population of Leningrad, or 1,093,000 people, died during the Siege of Leningrad.

Based on the overall statistics, the tragic occupation affected the lives of almost 80 million people in the Soviet Union. Some 13,684,692 were killed by the Nazis, enslaved or starved to death.

In his conversation with Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Romania Mihai Antonescu in Berlin on November 27, 1941, Adolf Hitler openly declared his plan to eradicate Slavic ethnicities. Here is a direct quote of his words that everybody should know about because the Nazis’ true goals may be literally buried under the amount of political husk and other political statements today. People will pretend that none of this ever happened. But yes, it did. This is what the fuehrer plotted as of November 1941: “Only two races must remain in Europe in the future, Latin and German. These two races must work together in Russia to eradicate the Slavs. The Slavic problem is biological rather than ideological, as you said, and all Europeans must fight the Slavs. If I succeed, my mission is to destroy Slavdom.”

The significance of the directive to the Navy on September 29, 1941, concerning the destiny of the city on the Neva River is equally illustrative. In the directive, Hitler said about Leningrad: “In this war for our very existence, we can have no interest in maintaining even a part of this very large urban population.”

There is incontestable, documented evidence of a deliberate, premeditated policy by the political, economic and military officials of Nazi Germany, on the extermination of civilians and war prisoners in order to destroy the statehood of the USSR and capture new territories for subsequent colonisation and exploitation in accordance with the expansion concept, or as the Third Reich put it, “the conquest of living space for Germany.”

1. According to Hitler’s speech at a meeting with Reich officials on July 16, 1941, the Lebensraum strategy was based on the following principles: “Never again must it be possible to create a military power west of the Urals, even if we have to wage war for a hundred years in order to attain this goal… The entire Baltic area must become Reich territory. Likewise the Crimea, including a considerable hinterland… the Volga colony too will have to become Reich territory, also the district around Baku…The Kola Peninsula must become Reich territory…Leningrad must be razed to the ground in order to hand it over to the Finns… Undoubtedly, Ukraine is the most important territory for the next three years.”

In his testimony at Nuremberg on November 13, 1945, one of highest-ranking officers of the German Army, Walter Warlimont, said regarding the goals of the Nazis in the war against the Soviet Union that Germany planned to expand its living space far to the east. To that end, new military borders needed to be established: the Trans-Caucasian region was supposed to be included in the new territories, then the border would go along the western shore of the Caspian Sea to Astrakhan, then up north along the Volga River and then from the head of the Volga River to Arkhangelsk.

German leadership set a goal for the mass extermination of the population long before the war against the USSR. This was reflected in various instructions, orders, and later in practical actions. In accordance with the General Plan Ost, death camps were one of the main ways to “free the occupied territories from the native population.” Such documents as Generalplan Ost, Instruction On Special Regions to Directive No. 21 (Barbarossa Plan) of March 13, 1941, Decree on the Exercise of Military Justice in the Barbarossa Area and on Special Measures by the Troops, signed on May 13, 1941 by Chief of the High Command of the German Armed Forces Wilhelm Keitel, and others elevated the atrocities against civilians to a state policy and freed Nazi soldiers from responsibility for their crimes.

On March 30, 1941, Adolf Hitler, speaking to high-ranking officers, said that “it necessary to exterminate the Bolshevik commissars and the Bolshevik intelligentsia.”

The directive of the Supreme High Command of the German Armed Forces dated May 12, 1941 ordered the death of captured political officers of the Red Army and employees of Soviet state, utility and economic institutions, who were declared especially dangerous, in implementing plans to colonise the Soviet Union. An act was passed stating that political officers were not considered prisoners of war and were to be killed immediately, preventing them from being evacuated to the rear. For prisoners of war whose lives were spared, a hard labour regime was declared, dooming them to slow death.

In particular, the Decree on Exercising Military Jurisdiction in the Area of Barbarossa and Special Measures by the Troops dated May 13, 1941, stipulated that with regard to offences committed against enemy civilians by members of the Wehrmacht or by its auxiliaries, prosecution was not obligatory, even where the deed was at the same time a military crime or misdemeanor. In populated areas, where the armed forces had been subjected to “insidious or treacherous attacks,” collective coercive measures were required to be immediately applied if the circumstances would not allow for quickly identifying individual perpetrators.

By the Order on the Behaviour of Troops in Russia dated May 23, 1941, the military command of Nazi Germany directly called on the troops to “mercilessly and energetically fight against Bolshevik instigators, resisting saboteurs and Jews, including the unconditional suppression of any active or passive resistance.”

Mass executions of civilians, concentration camps, burning villages with people – all this was part of everyday life for the German occupation regime.

2. At the behest of Adolf Hitler, Hermann Goering, the number two man in the German hierarchy, developed a plan for exploiting the territories to be conquered in the East. If implemented, this plan would have led to death by starvation of millions of Slavic people, mass killings of prisoners of war, and seizing food on the occupied Soviet territories to be used by the Germans. According to the German Hunger Plan drafted by State Secretary and Minister of Food and Agriculture Herbert Backe, the German armed forces were to be fully supplied with resources from the Soviet Union, without consideration for the needs of the Soviet people.

According to materials from the Generalplan Ost (Master plan for the East) dated May 23, 1941, the Nazis sought to rearrange Europe demographically and have the fertile lands of what they saw as former Russia supply food to occupied Europe.

In his speech at the Castle of Wewelsburg in early 1941, Reichsführer SS and head of the German police Heinrich Himmler spoke about reducing the Slavic population by 30 million people as one of the goals of the Russian campaign, as evidenced by former head of the SS and police in Central Russia and Belarus Erich von dem Bach-Zelewski in Nuremberg in 1946.

In November 1941, Goering shared with Italian Foreign Minister Galeazzo Ciano his thoughts about “20 to 30 million people in Russia dying of hunger within the next year, which is good, because some peoples must be significantly reduced in numbers.” Hitler also predicted a “national disaster” for “Muscovites” and made it clear that lack of food in many Soviet regions would lead to “millions of people dying.”

Throughout 1941, Joseph Goebbels stated that “Russia should expect nothing from us ... we will let it die of hunger.” During his tours of the occupied Soviet territories, General Plenipotentiary for Labour Deployment Fritz Sauckel stated that “all German authorities are absolutely certain that this year, that is, this winter, at least 10 to 20 million of these people will succumb to hunger.” Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories Alfred Rosenberg also repeatedly stated that the famine affecting millions of people was a “cruel necessity... that is not subject to compassion.”

Do you now see the terrible substitution of the Holodomor issue in Ukraine? Who exactly was condemned to hunger and who condemned them? Everything is mixed up in their heads courtesy of the Westerners.

A letter sent by head of the NSDAP Chancellery Martin Bormann dated July 23, 1942 to the Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories Alfred Rosenberg regarding the policy on the occupied territories contained the following instruction: “We have an interest in reducing the population growth in the occupied eastern regions by using abortions... The threat of the populace in the occupied eastern regions reproducing faster than before is high, because, clearly, its well-being has so far been much better. That is why we must adopt necessary measures to prevent the non-German population from reproducing.”

3. The International Military Tribunal held in Nuremberg from November 20, 1945 to October 01, 1946 ruled that the crimes committed by Nazi criminals were crimes against peace and humanity. The Nuremberg verdict stated that the killings and cruel treatment of civilians peaked in Nazi dealings with Soviet citizens, among others. In the East, mass killings and atrocities were committed not only to suppress opposition and quell resistance to the German occupation forces. In the Soviet Union and other countries, these crimes were part of a plan aimed at disposing of all local people by banishing and exterminating them in order for the Germans to colonise the vacated territory. Crimes against civilians were of outrageous proportions.

Since the Nuremberg Trials, which explicitly condemned Nazism as a criminal ideology and political practice, the volume of available documents corroborating the facts of numerous atrocities committed by the German occupiers and their accomplices has increased several times over.

In 2019-2022, Russia’s Investigative Committee initiated criminal cases under Article 357 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (“genocide”) related to mass killings of Soviet civilians and prisoners of war during the Great Patriotic War within the borders of modern Russia. Eleven of them have been completed. The rulings adopted in recent years by the courts of St Petersburg, the Leningrad, Novgorod, Oryol, Pskov, Belgorod, Bryansk, and Rostov regions, the Republic of Crimea, the Krasnodar and the Stavropol territories clearly qualify the criminal acts committed by Nazis and their accomplices as crimes against humanity and the genocide of national and ethnic groups that represented the people of the Soviet Union.

In the run-up to the 75th anniversary of Victory, work started on the Federal archival project “Crimes committed by Nazis and their accomplices against civilians of the Soviet Union during the Great Patriotic War.” This package of documents continues to be supplemented and contains over 5,000 documents as of today.

Our foreign missions will circulate this information as official documents at UN agencies and other international organisations in accordance with the instruction issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia.

The collective West’s neo-colonial policy towards Bosnia and Herzegovina

We would like to draw your attention to the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. As one of the guarantors under the 1995 General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina and a member of the Steering Board of the Peace Implementation Council, Russia has serious concerns regarding the illegal actions by the Western parties’ multilateral efforts to promote a post-conflict settlement in Bosnia and Herzegovina. They are seeking to substitute the core principles set forth in the peace treaty with their own self-serving provisions in keeping with the glorious traditions of Western neo-colonial policies.

They are guided by a Less Dayton – More Brussels motto, and acting in gross violation of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s constitutional provisions, which guarantee equality for the three state-forming peoples and the country’s two entities. They are pressuring the country into accepting a Western neo-liberal pseudo-civilian social model while failing to take into account the historical, political, cultural, religious and administrative factors that have defined the way the state in Bosnia and Herzegovina has been developing. They are open about imposing their priorities on sovereign Bosnia and Herzegovina, leaving it no option other than to follow the EU and NATO in their policies while sacrificing ties with third parties. High-ranking Western visitors have been showing up in Sarajevo more and more, but they never focus on facilitating social and economic development for Bosnia and Herzegovina, encouraging inter-ethnic reconciliation or promoting inter-ethnic dialogue. Instead, they have made unconditional compliance with EU and NATO objectives their highest priority by pretending that the country has no alternative other than to join these blocs.

This is colonialism at its worst. We can clearly see the true objective of this policy, which is to draw the country into its exclusive sphere of influence and reduce its role to a supplier of raw materials and a political subject. The West does not need anything from Bosnia and Herzegovina other than obedience and lack of leadership on behalf of its senior government officials who must blindly follow the orders coming from Washington and Brussels and ensure a steady supply of natural and human resources for the European Union. It is for this reason that the West focuses on developing so-called civil society institutions in Bosnia and Herzegovina, imposing an alien LGBT agenda, and easing requirements to allow qualified workers to enter the EU, thereby intentionally draining the national economy of its resources.

At the same time, mechanisms relying on the diplomatic missions to the country, including the delegation of the European Union, the Council of Europe and OSCE missions, and the Office of the High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina, have a tight grip over the political situation in the country. In fact, people there do not have a say when it comes to running their own country. Bosnia and Herzegovina was literally stripped of its sovereignty by those who posed as its staunch supporters based on the Dayton Accords. The collective West turned Bosnia and Herzegovina, a European state, into its colony and continues its experiments on its people, who have already suffered from the NATO aggression in 1995.

As a responsible contributor to post-conflict settlement in Bosnia and Herzegovina and permanent member of the UN Security Council, while also keeping a close eye on the situation in the country, Russia upholds its support for the Dayton constitutional principles stipulating the equality of the three peoples and two entities. We call on the international community and political forces inside Bosnia and Herzegovina to abide by the principles governing Bosnia and Herzegovina’s statehood and the distribution of power there as coordinated and approved by the UN Security Council. This is the only way we can expect the country and the Balkans in general to live in peace and stability.

World Conference on Culture and Arts Education 2024

The World Conference on Arts and Culture Education opened in Abu Dhabi on February 13, co-organised by UNESCO and the Government of the United Arab Emirates.

This is an intergovernmental forum of UNESCO member states and its associate members and observers, which also includes its partners such as invited NGOs and other international agencies.

The Russian delegation consisting of representatives of relevant ministries is led by the Minister of Culture Olga Lyubimova.

Participants from 130 countries, including 89 ministers and deputy ministers, will discuss the problems of and prospects for the promotion of creative education in the context of contemporary challenges, including the rapid development of information and communication technologies and artificial intelligence. They will particularly focus on ways to broaden the scope of culture and arts learning, to integrate a cultural dimension into national education systems and to enhance relevant international cooperation.

The Russian Minister of Culture addressed the thematic session on Equitable Access to Culture and Arts Education. She spoke about the traditions of the national school of arts, as well as national plans for the development of modern higher education in creative fields, shared her experience in identifying young talent and creating an accessible learning environment for people with disabilities. She also met with representatives of the UAE and the UNESCO Secretariat.

Deputy Minister of Education Denis Gribov will deliver a report on the achievements in secondary and general education related to culture and arts during the session on Skills to Shape Resilient, Just and Sustainable Futures.

Dina Kirnarskaya, Vice Rector for Public Relations of Gnessin Russian Academy of Music, will give a lecture on the benefits of general music education as a side event.

The conference will last until February 15 and will end with the adoption of the UNESCO Framework for Culture and Arts Education.

Lack of reaction from the OSCE to discrimination against Russian and the Russian-speaking population in the Baltic States

The systematic violation of the rights that Russians and Russian-speakers face in the Baltic States continues to cause the most serious concern. We regularly highlight such violations on the OSCE platform, at meetings of the Permanent Council and in other formats, pointing to the gross deviation from the commitments undertaken by the Baltic States as participating OSCE states. We emphasise that for decades, the authorities in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia have been pursuing a distinct state policy imbued with hatred of all things Russian, aimed at dividing people and promoting Russophobia to the point of extremism.

Among the most egregious recent examples are the deportation of 82-year-old Russian military pensioner Boris Katkov from Latvia on January 12 under the discriminatory law On Immigration; attempts by the Lithuanian authorities to manipulate citizenship by using their new legislation allowing citizenship to be revoked on vague grounds such as a “threat to national security” and “support for Russian aggression;” Estonia (which has not lost its illusions of becoming the acting president of the OSCE) has expressed a groundless refusal to extend Metropolitan Eugene's residence permit; and official Tallinn's intention to “temporarily” deny Russian and Belarusian citizens the right to vote in local government elections.

However, the OSCE’s specialised executive bodies pretend not to notice what is happening. Even in response to our direct written appeals, we receive a perfunctory reply at best, saying they are “closely monitoring the situation.” In most cases, our demands are simply ignored, in particular by Director of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, Matteo Mecacci.

The term of office of the OSCE's leading “quartet” expires in September. We will insist that the candidates to replace them work in a completely different manner – impartial and complying with their mandates.

Day of Remembrance of Russians who Served Abroad

Every February 15, the people of Russia mark the Day of Remembrance of Russians who Served Abroad. The Federal Law dated November 29, 2010 set this date marking the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan. The country is marking the 35th anniversary of their withdrawal today.

Afghanistan probably ranks among the most graphic examples highlighting different Russian and Western approaches towards the Global South. This is particularly evident if we compare the ten-year deployment of Soviet forces in Afghanistan (1979-1989) with NATO’s 20-year “peacekeeping operation” (2001-2021) that ended in August 2021 in a total fiasco.

The 20-year military campaign in Afghanistan that involved the United States and its NATO allies produced no results, if we mean positive, and the one result it did produce was negative. Washington’s attempt to “civilise” and “acculturate” the population of this country, to introduce its values, narratives and opinions differing from local traditions proved a complete failure.

The reckless Western gamble in Afghanistan destroyed the country’s economy. Moreover, the West used the most powerful conventional munition in history called the Mother of All Bombs there, a dubious achievement. The world has witnessed similar developments not only in Afghanistan but in many other regions of the world during 30 military interventions involving the United States and its allies since the early 1990s, specifically, in Kosovo, Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc.

Our country has traditionally taken different approaches and helped other countries and nations resume peaceful life while facilitating their socioeconomic development. This is what we are now witnessing in full measure in the special military operation zone.

Over 140 industrial enterprises, built with Soviet financial and economic assistance in Afghanistan, still form the mainstay of this country’s economy. According to independent international experts, the Soviet Union helped create over 70 percent of Afghan economic capacity. Incidentally, the Soviet Union did not involve its Warsaw Pact allies in its Afghan operation. Just like in the special military operation zone, Soviet soldiers fighting in Afghanistan faced extremists trained and armed by US and British special services.

Ahead of the 35th anniversary of withdrawing Soviet forces from Afghanistan, I would like to address all Afghan War veterans and all our citizens who are now honourably doing their military duty in Syria and in the special military operation zone. Please accept our sincerest gratitude. You remain faithful to the oath of allegiance until the end, you defend the interests of the Motherland, and you are the hope and salvation of other nations in the direct sense of the word. For this we humbly thank you.

Day of Remembrance of Russians who Served Abroad

Multipolarity Forum

On February 26, Moscow will host the Multipolarity Forum under the auspices of the International Russophile Movement. It is expected to be a large-scale event involving several hundred delegates, including prominent thinkers, political scientists, philosophers and opinion leaders from all regions of the world.

The Forum is positioned by the organisers as a platform for exchanging views and jointly seeking a common course for the Global Majority wishing to participate with Russia in the formation of a fairer multipolar world based on the principles of equality, mutual respect and cooperation.

Second Congress of the International Russophile Movement

On February 27, Moscow will host the 2nd Congress of the International Russophile Movement. It will confirm the creation of the Movement, founded last year, as an established, popular and effective international public organisation.

It is expected that this event will gather several hundred foreign delegates from all over the world and will become an important platform for exchanging views for all those who are interested in what is happening in the world, in our country, and who want to associate themselves with Russia’s cultural and spiritual and moral values.

The leadership of the International Russophile Movement expects the 2nd Congress to bring together new supporters of the movement and create additional opportunities for establishing horizontal ties between Russia and foreign countries, for popularising the cultural heritage of our country in different parts of the world.

Answers to media questions:

Question: Following a meeting of the Weimar Triangle countries on February 12, 2024, the foreign ministers of France, Poland and Germany accused Russia of creating complex chains of websites for spreading pro-Russia propaganda, as they put it, aimed at undermining Western governments and warned of the appearance of such materials in particularly large amounts ahead of EU elections. What can you tell us about this?

Maria Zakharova: This has become a deliberate campaign of witch-hunting and mudslinging at Russia and at all those who are looking for the truth or at least pursuing information and journalistic analysis, if not investigation. This rabid information harassment is taking on new forms and dimensions in EU capitals. In my opinion, it borders on paranoia. They are feeding people with myths about the “threat from the East” on which they blame the poor decisions and political machinations of their own regimes.

I don’t know what threats they see in the East, from which their countries, in particular, Germany, received gas. This was not a threat but a resource. It looks as if the threat has come from the West in the form of terrorist attacks on the Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines. It was not from the East that sanctions and trade wars came. The East offered markets and the possibility to trade on mutually beneficial conditions. It is the West that has hobbled the EU’s economic space with legally binding obligations and weights to prevent it from developing. What threat from the East are they talking about? It is the other way around.

I would like to remind you that in June 2023 the French authorities accused Russia of a mythical “digital disinformation campaign” allegedly waged by Russian government agencies and affiliated organisations. We called on Paris to share available facts and materials so we could assess them and draw our own conclusions. If they had the facts, they would have either published them or forwarded them to us or to international organisations. They did neither.

It is not surprising that while advancing a new collection of absurd claims our former partners have not provided any credible proof of Russia’s allegedly malicious activities. This scheme has been used in the West for ages. They invented and spread myths and used politically motivated censorship because of the alleged “threat from the East” in order to control their media and communications, which we see clearly now, and to prevent their civil societies and audiences from getting access to the “undesirable” sources of reliable information, seeking to plunge everyone into an information vacuum deliberately created by their aggressive propaganda. But this time the abovementioned foreign ministers, who reflexively blame everything on Russia, have inadvertently spilled the beans and exposed themselves.

According to the French media, Foreign Minister of France Stephane Sejourne has accused Russia of “spreading information from Russian social media, news agencies and organisations’ websites.” In other words, they have admitted to trying to prevent Russia from circulating any information provided by either government agencies or common people. What is this? In the past, they accused us of spreading disinformation and of allegedly interfering in their elections and internal affairs, which they used as a pretext for censoring news, closing media outlets and blocking access to online resources. This time they have been straightforward. They have said that everything that comes from Russia, including Russia’s stance, must be prohibited.

As a US representative said into a microphone at a UN Security Council meeting, “Why do we have to listen to Russia at all?” The heads of France, Poland and Germany didn’t even bother to mention their “unrelenting struggle” against disinformation. They routinely used it to explain the establishment of a NATO and EU infrastructure for countering disinformation, which actually tried to disorient their own citizens. In fact, they have admitted that they don't want anyone in the West to hear Russia's stance and opinion at all. More than that, they want to place a media “iron dome” over Europe.

Such statements are clear proof of the irreversible departure of these countries’ authorities from their international obligations to protect media pluralism and the freedom of opinion and expression. They have been made by a representative of the country where the freedom of speech has been declared a basic value. This is cynicism pure and simple. Any unbiased observer can see that it is the latest deliberate propaganda attack in the French authorities’ campaign to discredit Russia and also an attempt to deflect public attention away from growing domestic problems. There is nothing surprising in that, other than they have shamelessly threw their fig leaves away.

They no longer need the fig leaf of “Russian interference,” Russian trolls and hackers, and Russian manipulations. They have said it out loud: There can be no information from Russia. It is an interesting downward turn on the path of their degradation.

Question: Foreign Minister of Australia Penny Wong did not support the petition to close Russia’s Consulate General in Sydney saying that it was important to maintain diplomatic channels with Moscow in terms of protecting the country’s national interests and serving the Russian diaspora. What does Moscow think about Australia’s decision?

Maria Zakharova: First, I think that Canberra understands that we will not leave any action like this without a response, as we have shown many times. All they will get is an appropriate response with the Australian embassy in Russia.

Let me reiterate that this would not be our choice. Should Australia go down this road, we will respond in kind. So far, this situation has been confined to the media, and it may well be that it stays this way.

However, as a matter of principle, we do not see any change in terms of the current anti-Russia position that dominates the Australian political establishment.

Canberra continues to obediently follow the collective West in its policy. It has contributed about $600 million to supporting the Kiev regime, including $500 million in military aid. Both the current Labour government with Anthony Albanese as Prime Minister, and the previous liberal-national government led by Prime Minister Scott Morrison have been firm in their anti-Russia position and regularly reaffirm their loyalty to Washington as Russophobes.

To demonstrate their unfriendly attitude, the Australian authorities have made life much harder for Russian foreign missions, and have gone so as far as to seize diplomatic property and target our staff members with provocations. In this context, we regularly see planted media stories about closing our missions in Australia and expelling the Russian ambassador.

Let me reiterate that if this happens, we will respond in kind.

Question: Foreign Minister of Australia Penny Wong said she wanted to keep diplomatic channels open, but despite that, Australia has been keeping pace with its Western partners in terms of imposing sanctions on Russia. Do you see any contradiction in what officials in Sydney say and what they do?

Maria Zakharova: Please, refer to the preceding answer. This does not change anything. I do not see any contradiction here. It is obvious that they have a plan and they are sticking to it, even if they have not gone the whole way with it because they know that we would respond. Without this understanding, or had we failed to respond, they would follow through on their Russophobic agenda.

Question: February 15 marks the 35th anniversary of the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan. As we look back at these events today, was there a possibility for these events to take a different turn? Whose interests played the decisive role in the way the conflict unfolded in this country?

Maria Zakharova: I will not remind you of the fact that the conditional tense has no place in history.

Historians and those who took part in these events offer a wide variety of views, interpretations and conclusions. There are so many memoires, books and research papers on this subject. Instead of asking us to offer our take on this matter, I suggest that you read what these people wrote.

Anyway, the Soviet Union did a lot for Afghanistan, laying the foundation for its economy, as I have said many times.

Question: Former President of the United States Donald Trump said that US President Joe Biden has enough time to unleash a third world war before his presidential term ends. We can understand that with the election approaching the United States is engulfed in intense political infighting, but Americans are not the only ones who can be intimidated by these statements. How would you comment?

Maria Zakharova: I agree with what you said. We must treat statements of this kind as electoral rhetoric, since the presidential election in the United States is a peculiar show.

That said, if we add up all the bloody conflicts over the past decades masterminded by the United States, with Democrats and the conservative movement playing a comparable role, and considering that the American elite and the White House clearly played a role in these conflicts – if we consider all this as a single whole in terms of the number of victims, human suffering and the extent to which they shattered the statehood of other countries, this could well amount to a global conflict.

Question: Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin explained Russia’s principled approach to the Ukraine crisis to Israeli Ambassador to Russia Simona Halperin. How does the Foreign Ministry assess the Israeli policy towards Ukraine? What makes it so different compared to Russia’s interests?

Maria Zakharova: We regret that representatives of the Israeli political establishment and other government officials there misinterpret the causal links underpinning the current situation in Ukraine, what is happening there today, and what has been going on for decades.

We regularly use our bilateral contacts to inform Israel about our position, including on the Ukraine crisis, all while respecting Israel’s sovereignty and independence in its foreign policy choices.

Our position on the situation in and around Ukraine is a matter of principle. It is based in fact and immune to momentary considerations. We explain it whenever we contact our Israeli colleagues via diplomatic channels, as well as through civil society institutions. It is strange that the Israeli leadership and its political forces do not understand that the situation in Ukraine was years in the making and can be traced back directly to World War II, Nazism and the way it manifested itself in a new way in present-day Ukraine. This is where the historical roots stem from. Israel must know this better than anyone else.

Question: This year’s Munich Security Conference opens on Friday, but Russia will not be represented. What does the Foreign Ministry expect from it, and how does the ministry assess this platform’s effectiveness before and after February 2022?

Maria Zakharova: We have no expectations whatsoever since we have watched the Munich platform consistently go downhill over the past years. We will release a detailed material with a historical retrospective and quotes by our representatives. I clearly remember how these crisis moments began, including the time when only one side – the United States – assumed dominance over the Munich Conference.

I remind you that its very name indicates that it is about security policy in Europe. It's absurd to see the United States, representing another continent, dictate to its satellites the agenda and the outcomes the conference must arrive at.

I remember how the situation in Ukraine in 2014 made the participants in this conference laugh.

The downhill slide has lasted a long time. We did everything we could to get the discussion back on the genuine political, historical, and diplomatic track. Apparently, they chose a different path.

Russia saw its participation in the Munich Conference as a chance to let our position on Eurosecurity and international security in general be known to a broad audience of politicians and analysts, as well as to explain our views on a wide range of items on the global agenda. As you know, the principle of indivisible security is at the centre of Russia’s approach. We believed efforts to form a single security system in Europe and the Euro-Atlantic region must be united.

In Munich, Russian representatives always openly spoke about our red lines and drew attention to the unacceptability of NATO's creeping expansion and other Western steps to create threats at our borders. Back in 1999, speaking at the Munich Conference, Deputy Foreign Minister Yevgeny Gusarov made it clear that NATO’s eastward expansion was unacceptable and strongly urged NATO to take Russia’s concerns into account.

Vladimir Putin’s famous Munich Speech of 2007, in which the President warned the West against continuing the thoughtless policy of ensuring its own security at the expense of the security of other countries, has gone down in history. Here is just one quote: “Clearly, NATO expansion has nothing to do with upgrading the Alliance or ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary, it is a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust.” The speech turned out to be prophetic: the man-made crisis that we are experiencing today could have been averted had Western politicians listened to the President’s warnings back then. I would encourage our colleagues to refresh their memory of President Putin’s Munich speech. It has remained relevant, and it contains answers to many of their questions.

The last time our country was officially represented in Munich was four years ago when the Russian delegation was led by Minister Lavrov.

Over the past few years, we have seen the analytical component of the Munich platform disappear, and the forum lose its status as a discussion club and turn into a Russophobic propaganda gathering. President Zelensky’s speeches devalued Munich altogether and reduced it to the level of a talk show.

The same fate befell the reports that were prepared in the run-up to the conference. The quality consistently worsened giving way to dogmatism. The analysis became increasingly politicised and flawed. Most issues were viewed through the prism of confrontation. The intellectual process driving the conference zeroed in on countering the “undesirable actors” thus becoming part of the West's course on containing Russia and other independent centres of power in the spirit of their ruled-based order. Today, the masterminds and ideological gurus of the conference are no longer able to offer anything of value when it comes to serious intellectual scrutiny of international processes.

The Munich era is a thing of the past. There are many alternative platforms – both our own with an international dimension and foreign ones – in which we participate at various levels. There are good alternatives to what, unfortunately, has become dysfunctional.

New discussion platforms are coming to the fore such as the Valdai Forum, the Minsk High-Level Conference on Eurasian Security, the Raisina Dialogue (India), the Sir Bani Yas (UAE), the Anatolia Forum (Türkiye), and the Doha Forum (Qatar), as well as other conferences that provide opportunities for equal and open exchanges of views on current issues of international relations. It is not surprising that all these platforms are located in the countries of the Global Majority.

The world is moving forward leaving Munich to stew in its own juice and to continue on its path – together with the rest of the collective West – towards self-isolation from the rest of the world.

Question: Is Moscow making any effort to settle the differences between Baku and Yerevan after tensions escalated on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border? What caused the escalation, in view that Yerevan has permanently acknowledged Karabakh being part of Azerbaijan, and the parties were actively working on drafting a peace treaty?

Maria Zakharova: I have already given a detailed comment in the first part of the briefing.

Question: Russia’s Ambassador to Azerbaijan Mikhail Yevdokimov said that Moscow and Baku have agreed on the dates of talks on the future of the Russian peacekeeping contingent in Karabakh. What is Moscow’s current negotiating position on this matter?

Maria Zakharova: I can say that the preparations for regular Russian-Azerbaijani contacts regarding the Russian peacekeeping contingent are underway. Our dialogue in this area is regular and is built in a constructive manner. Among the issues we discuss are the prospects of returning the Armenian population to Karabakh while ensuring their rights and security are safeguarded. We are also exploring the coordination of joint patrolling efforts and the preservation of cultural, historical, and religious landmarks.

Question: Can you comment on the demand of former US President Donald Trump for NATO, urging an increase in spending on aid to Ukraine to match the levels provided by the United States? Does this mean that if elected, Donald Trump will continue combat operations in Ukraine?

Maria Zakharova: It is up to American voters to decipher what one or another candidate means. Honestly, I feel sorry for them because it is practically impossible to do so. In recent years, candidates made numerous promises and statements during their campaigns, aiming to secure votes from voters, dead or alive. But if you compare their words with their subsequent actions, you will see a huge gap.

In this situation, it is necessary to understand that we are talking about the heat of an election campaign. Traditionally, nobody cares whether the candidates keep their promises. What matters is emotions and the external spectacle of American elections. The rest does not matter. It is for US citizens to deal with it.

Question: I would like to know more about the request that NATO increase spending on helping Ukraine to the level of the United States. Is there a real chance?

Maria Zakharova: This sounds like something out of fairy tales, ancient myths and Oriental stories about a labourer compelled to sell everything, left without house, food or clothes. And there is still an expectation of further sacrifice. What else is left to give?

America’s NATO partners have nothing left. Maybe they will be able to shake something out of Britain, and another diamond egg will roll out of Buckingham Palace. There is nothing left to take. The EU countries are providing assistance to the Kiev regime not in the form of tranches and sums but promises. They cannot provide what the US wants them to because they will collapse. The promises must be backed by something (not just a cheque, but something more tangible). There is nothing left.

All of this gives insight into US policy which comes down to harassing its NATO partners in the EU in order to bleed them dry in the economic sense. Their ultimate goal is to eliminate competition, given the horrendous economic and financial performance of the US.

Question: The European Council approved a resolution providing a legal basis for using profits from frozen Russian assets for Ukraine. It explained that central securities depositories “holding more than one million euros of CBR's assets must account extraordinary cash balances accumulating due to EU restrictive measures separately and must also keep corresponding revenues separate." The document also bans depositaries from disposing of net proceeds. What measures will Russia take in response to this EU decision?

Maria Zakharova: Indeed, on February 12, 2024, the EU Council announced the adoption of legal acts to legalise its earlier declared intention to place on separate accounts profits accrued from the Russian frozen sovereign assets in accordance with the EU’s arbitrary illegal decision. Brussels emphasised that this step opens the road to confiscating such incomes in the future. They are supposed to be channeled into the EU budget and later on, probably, on the support of the Zelensky regime and the prolongation of the conflict in Ukraine.

Russia’s position remains unchanged. We call it stealing regardless of all eloquent verbiage and wordings. Any EU actions to freeze and potentially confiscate the funds and property of Russian citizens and companies or our sovereign reserves are a flagrant violation of the standards and principles of international law and the existing contractual commitments. I want to separately focus on the laws of specific countries.

The European Central Bank and other agencies have noted more than once that the theft of Russian assets by the EU at Washington’s prompting may open a Pandora’s box. The fact that the EU is ready to rewrite its own laws for this purpose only confirms that this idea fully contradicts the EU’s internal laws.

The EU and its political leaders will bear exclusive responsibility for all consequences of the confiscation (stealing) of Russian assets. Russia reserves for itself the right to take necessary response measures as regards the EU and its member countries to protect its lawful interests.

We would like to warn once again the EU officials that in case of stealing funds that by right belong to Russia the EU will suffer inevitable long-term damage that will exceed the potential momentary profits by many times. This happened with its anti-Russia sanctions that caused in the EU unprecedented inflation, an energy shortage and declining incomes for its citizens. They led to economic stagnation, de-industrialisation and recession. Germany – once the driver of the EU economy – has sunk into an economic crisis. At the same time, the Russian economy has more than made up for the minor decline in 2022 and continues steadily developing and strengthening its financial, industrial and technological sovereignty.

We are warning the EU countries against committing violations of law in all areas. Russia will make full use of its own legislation for a powerful response.

Meanwhile, the EU will lose forever what will be left of its reputation as a reliable jurisdiction for business and investment in the eyes of third countries. This will make Washington happy. It is already willingly offering a “safe harbour” for high-tech and profitable forms of manufacturing that are rapidly fleeing Europe. Apparently, foreign capital recklessly placed in the EU is the next in line for “emigration.” The Brussels kleptocratic elite may pocket them any time.

Question: On February 12, Israeli aircraft attacked Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip. A few hours later, the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell told a news conference in Brussels that the authorities in countries that were supporting Israel should stop pleading with it to refrain from killing Palestinians in the Gaza Strip; rather, they should start doing something, like curtailing their arms supplies. US President Joe Biden, for his part, declared that the United States and its partners were working on a deal between Israel and the radical Palestinian movement Hamas for a pause in hostilities to last for no less than six weeks. Earlier, Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited several Middle East countries in order to settle the conflict in the region. How do you assess the US efforts to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict?

Maria Zakharova: To assess the US efforts, we should see at least some of their results. So far, we see an “anti-result” showing that the United States as totally incapable of bearing responsibility for this region and those international conflicts which it thinks it has the right to moderate.

For our part, we reaffirm that it is necessary to consolidate the international efforts with a view to achieving a speedy resolution of the unprecedented crisis in the zone of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that has claimed tens of thousands of victims. In their overwhelming majority, they are peaceful civilians from the Gaza Strip, many of whom are women and children (more than a half, according to some estimates).

We are extremely alarmed by the Israeli statements that they are planning to extend the military operation to Rafah. This dangerous scenario will lead to a disastrous expansion of the scale of the humanitarian catastrophe that will engulf more than a million Gaza residents, who have fled the fighting to this city on the border with Egypt. We must do all in our power to prevent this development. Our common aim is to stop the bloodshed as soon as possible and ensure conditions for establishing stable channels for humanitarian supplies to local residents.

Russia has said repeatedly that it will not be possible to achieve a durable peace in the conflict zone unless a clear “political horizon” for resolving the Middle East problem is restored. Therefore, with the violent phase of the crisis over, we think it necessary to start shaping conditions enabling a re-launch of the political dialogue between the Palestinians and Israelis, aimed at a comprehensive resolution of all disputed issues within the well-known international legal framework outlined by the resolutions of the United Nations and its Security Council. This negotiating process should result in the creation of an independent Palestinian state within the 1967 borders with the capital in East Jerusalem, a state existing in peace and security with Israel. The tragic events underway in the region show that there is no reasonable alternative to this approach.

Question: Russia often mentions that it would respond if the EU took action to use or expropriate income from Russian frozen assets. Nevertheless, what would the response be? You said that Russia would use its own legislation with all its might. Will this involve confiscation of European assets that have been under the control of the Russian Government since foreign investors left? Or will it be some other action? Please specify.

Maria Zakharova: I understand that you want specifics. But you know that actions can be responded to. This decision was made, therefore, the Russian Government is currently considering several options for exerting legal and economic influence on unfriendly countries, and on individuals and legal entities in these countries in the context of the possible seizure of Russian funds and property.

Among other issues, reciprocal options are being worked out and action algorithms are being formed for use in the event of Russia being deprived of its accumulated reserves. This work is carried out away from cameras and microphones. The official position is indicated. We will respond to the extent of the unrestrained behaviour by EU Brussels. Can you imagine if they rejoiced ahead of time? It would also be wrong.

Question: This week there were reports from Russian news agencies that terrible discoveries had been made in Mariupol and it was said that Western Big Pharma corporations conducted experiments using the services of the Ukrainian Ministry of Health’s unscrupulous officials for medical experiments on children. What do you have to say about this?

Maria Zakharova: We have seen this news. The information is shocking. It is currently being verified. I do not want to even speculate before we get precise details from experts, to avoid any accusations that we are speculating on unverified information.

At the same time, we have repeatedly talked about American biological laboratories around the world and mentioned that the entire territory of Ukraine was being used for Western experiments. These are medicines, biologicals and weapons that are literally being tested on the Ukrainian armed forces and those against whom they use these untested weapons.

Let us wait for official confirmation. I will not be surprised if this information is confirmed.

Question: Despite the international court’s decision to prevent the risk of genocide in the Gaza Strip, the Israeli army is continuing with its military action, in which civilians are killed. How do you regard Israel’s actions that run counter to international decisions?

Maria Zakharova: I have just commented on this in the context of the developments in Rafah which are being discussed throughout the world. The Foreign Ministry and Russia as a whole have repeatedly called for all parties to fulfil their international obligations. The settlement process should be the goal. That is why we focus on the international legal component of the settlement process.

To be continued...

Additional materials

Photos

The main foreign policy news

08.02.2024 19:20Press release on Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s meeting with President of the Republic of Abkhazia Aslan Bzhania

24.01.2024 22:57Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to media questions following a UN Security Council meeting on Ukraine and an open debate on “The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question,” New York, January 24...

24.01.2024 01:00Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s statement at the UN Security Council Ministerial Meeting on the Situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian Question, New York, January 23, 2024

International security

16 February 2024 18:41Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to questions at a conference on the 10th anniversary of the coup in Ukraine, Moscow, February 16, 2024

14 February 2024 16:22Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks and answers to questions during Government Hour at the State Duma of the Federal Assembly, Moscow, February 14, 2024

13 February 2024 16:54Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks at the 13th Middle East Conference of the Valdai Club, Moscow, February 13, 2024

#Youtube

0 notes