Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, May 25, 2022
25 May 2022 16:31
1101-25-05-2022
Table of contents
- Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's interview with RT Arabic
- Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's participation in the 38th meeting of the Council of Region Heads of the Russian Federation under the Foreign Ministry
- Presentation of the Vologda Region
- Update on Ukraine
- Anti-Russia statements by Greek leaders
- Presentation of a booklet titled Kiev Regime's War Crimes: Eyewitness Evidence
- The booklet on Churchill and Roosevelt's views on the Red Army's role in defeating Nazi Germany
- The detention of our compatriot Semyon Boikov in Australia
- The 30th anniversary of the Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance with the Republic of Kazakhstan
- The 30th anniversary of the Treaty on the Fundamental Principles of Interstate Relations, Friendship and Cooperation with the Republic of Uzbekistan
- Payments to Russian pensioners in New Zealand
- Celebrating the Day of Slavic Writing and Culture
- Transurals 2022 Fourth All-Russia Investment Sabantuy
- Finland and Sweden's decision to join NATO
- "Assistance" for Ukraine
- Unblocking Ukrainian grain deliveries
- Igor Dodon's arrest
- Canada's CBC Moscow office shut down
- Vladimir Zelensky's statements
- Russia's views on QUAD summit results
- Azov combatants' future
- Luigi Di Maio's "plan" for Ukraine
- The goals of the special military operation
- Statements made by some Serb politicians
- Possible deployment of Polish troops in Ukraine
- The freezing of Russian assets
- Media coverage of Russia-Peru relations
- Outlook for Russia-EU relations
- The suspension of WHO and Red Cross medical deliveries to the Donetsk and Lugansk republics
- Russia's assistance to the delimitation of Armenia-Azerbaijan border
- The Nagorno-Karabakh settlement
- BRICS expansion
- New edition of Russia's Foreign Policy Concept
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's interview with RT Arabic
Tomorrow, on May 26, at approximately 8 pm, the RT Arabic channel will air an interview with the Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov during the weekly news and analysis programme, One Word.
The conversation took more than one word. It was long and interesting. Most topical issues were covered and upcoming foreign visits were announced.
The text and video of the interview will be available on the internet accounts of the Ministry.
On May 27, Sergey Lavrov will chair the 38th meeting of the Council of Region Heads of the Russian Federation under the Foreign Ministry in the Foreign Ministry house. Taking part in it will be governors sitting on the council, senior officials of the Presidential Executive Office and federal executive bodies.
The main topic on the agenda is the cooperation of Russian regions with civil society institutions in order to promote Russia's foreign policy interests.
In the context of globalisation, international ties between noncommercial organisations, especially networks, play an increasingly important role and serve as a soft power tool that effectively supplements and expands the possibilities of interstate channels of communication.
The event's goal is to discuss and outline measures to enhance the use of the domestic NPO community's potential, primarily its regional segment, to address foreign policy problems. First of all, we are talking about mobilising the resources of public diplomacy to support Russia's special military operation in Ukraine, in particular, to help solve humanitarian problems, as well as to overcome the challenges associated with the total pressure of the "collective West" on our country, our fellow citizens and compatriots abroad.
It is expected that recommendations aimed at achieving practical results will be developed following the meeting.
Presentation of the Vologda Region
On June 2, the Cultural Centre of the Foreign Ministry's Main Administration for Service to the Diplomatic Corps (GlavUpDK, 5 Olof Palme Street) will host a presentation of the economic, investment and tourism potential of the Vologda Region. An exhibition demonstrating the region's achievements in various areas of socioeconomic development, as well as its history, culture and nature, will be presented there.
The presentation will feature regional and federal officials, diplomats, businesspeople, and Russian and foreign journalists.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Governor of the Vologda Region Oleg Kuvshinnikov are to deliver speeches at the event.
Yesterday, May 24, 2022, marked three months since the start of the special military operation in Ukraine. During this time, almost all territory of the LPR, a considerable part of the DPR, the entire Kherson Region and big parts of the Kharkov and Zaporozhye regions have been liberated. Peaceful life is being restored on the territories freed from the neo-Nazis. People are restoring the economy and industry, building infrastructure, launching enterprises, and opening schools, kindergartens, outpatient clinics and hospitals. On May 24, 2022, Russian sappers demined the port of Mariupol. Specialists from the Black Sea Fleet removed a Ukrainian border patrol ship sunk by the Azov battalion from the waterway, which allowed five foreign vessels to ship out.
The surrender of militants who were hiding at the Azovstal plant was completed on May 20. It lasted since May 16. After staying in the plant's underground for a month, 2,439 Ukrainian nationalists laid down arms and were taken prisoner. All of them are staying in the DPR. The wounded were put for in-patient treatment into a hospital in Novoazovsk. The rest are in the pre-trial detention centre of Yelenovka in the suburbs of Donetsk. Their crimes will not go unpunished. The DPR leaders are planning to establish in the republic an international tribunal for the trial of nationalists from Azovstal. At present, lawyers are drafting its charter. We welcome this initiative.
Russia continues paying close attention to the delivery of humanitarian aid to the LPR, the DPR and Ukraine's liberated areas, which have already received almost 22,000 tonnes of humanitarian cargoes. Every day, the Russian Defence Ministry announces the opening of safe corridors for safe evacuation of civilians both eastward and westward.
Although Kiev has de facto blocked evacuation to Russia, about 1.4 million people, including almost 240,000 children, arrived in our country. Another 2.7 million people expressed their desire to evacuate to Russia, the DPR and the LPR or the liberated Ukrainian areas.
Every day, we witness new examples of criminal activities by the Kiev regime. It was reported the other day that Ukrainian security services staged another provocation in the area of Mazanovka (DPR). They detonated a land mine with ammonium nitrate. The Investigative Committee of Russia intends to investigate the circumstances of this crime. Every day, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are shelling residential areas of the DPR and the LPR, killing and wounding civilians. Civilians are being used as a living shield, while imprisoned soldiers are subjected to cruel torture. This looks particularly savage given the medical aid rendered by Russian doctors to surrendered Ukrainian army personnel and mercenaries of nationalist units.
The political steps taken by the Kiev regime also reveal its neo-Nazi character. Several days ago, the Verkhovna Rada voted for the country's withdrawal from the Agreement on Perpetuating the Memory of the Courage and Heroism of the Peoples of the CIS Countries During the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945. On May 23, 2022, President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky signed a law on confiscating the assets of Ukrainian citizens that support the Russian military operation. A draft law on amendments to the Law on Government Cleansing was submitted to Ukrainian parliament. It provides for the screening of all deputies of the sixth and seventh convocations who voted for the 2010 Kharkov agreements allowing the Russian Black Sea Fleet to stay on Ukrainian territory until 2042 and for the "dictatorial laws" of January 16, 2014.
Statements by advisor to the Ukrainian Presidential Office Mikhail Podolyak, who took part in the talks on settling the situation in Ukraine, have made everything abundantly clear (if this is required at all). He directly threatens to deal with the population of the freed areas in the Kherson, Kharkov and Zaporozhye regions if the Kiev authorities return there. He promised to punish cruelly the "collaborationists" and the Russian military and demands that people in the Kharkov Region, the DPR and the LPR forget the word "Russians" altogether. We understand whose orders Podolyak and his ilk are carrying out. The former US President said that Ukraine's mission is to kill as many Russians as possible. This was a surprise only to those who did not understand what was happening in the last few years. The logic driving the actions of the Kiev regime and its curators was clear to those who followed the developments. This was a clear statement and we continue hearing similar pronouncements. They did not begin in February 2022 but were heard constantly. Some people did not want to hear them and take them seriously, considering it all a bluff. They thought something was unclear. But there was no misunderstanding. Everything is clear.
The United States and its NATO allies are doing all they can to drag out the special military operation and make the confrontation as bloody as possible. Fearing the complete rout of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, over 30 states - mostly the NATO countries - are supplying Ukraine with military aid worth tens of billions of dollars. They continue expanding the range of supplied weapons that already include large caliber artillery and multiple-launch rocket systems (this is apropos democracy and its whims). That said, the Westerners admit their inability to identify the end users of weapons and guarantee their exclusive use by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. There is a growing risk that these weapons may land in the black market and be acquired by criminal groups throughout the world. This was the case in Syria where military aid to the Syrian opposition (called "moderate") wound up in the hands of ISIS or was sold on the black market. They spread not only in the Middle East but further to Europe.
The encouragement of Ukrainian nationalism by its western sponsors is further radicalising the militants fighting in Ukraine. The number of foreign mercenaries in their ranks is growing. Eventually, these mercenaries will return to their countries (if they are lucky) where they will use the military experience received on the field of battle. This has always been the case. History teaches us. We just have to remember it.
The special military operation will continue despite sanctions pressure and support for Ukraine from the West. All goals and tasks on protecting the DPR and the LPR, demilitarising and denazifying Ukraine and eliminating threats to Russia will be fulfilled.
Anti-Russia statements by Greek leaders
We are compelled to draw attention to new instances of provocative behaviour by official representatives of Athens, particularly the statements by the head of the Greek government, Prime Minister of Greece Kyriakos Mitsotakis, addressed to Russia and its leadership, which he made during his visit to Washington on May 16-17, 2022.
We noted a strange set of historical "analogies" used by the author. The national liberation struggle of the Greeks that took place 200 years ago was equated with the criminal actions of the Kiev regime, which fought against its own citizens in Donbass for eight years. It is hard to believe that the Nazis from the Azov battalion were placed alongside with heroic defenders of the Greek fortress of Messolonghi in 1825-1826, among which there were Russian philhellenes - a monument was erected to them in the city. Such remarks sound especially blasphemous against the backdrop of the selfless struggle of the Greek Resistance against the Nazi invaders during the Second World War.
In fact, this is just the latest attempt by Athens to justify its deeply erroneous decision to eagerly volunteer for the West's anti-Russia front, and to be among the first to send weapons to Kiev, using which the Armed Forces of Ukraine daily shell the civilian population of Donbass and kill people in Donetsk, Rubezhnoye, Avdeyevka and other towns. The West is generally diligent about hushing up inconvenient truths. Therefore, democratic Greece, where, as we are assured, complete freedom of speech reigns and everyone can publish literally everything, banned the Russian media outlets Sputnik and Russia Today, and, just in case, is shamefully trying to "cancel" Russian culture.
The Greek leadership diligently repeats perverted interpretations of Russia's actions, which, after unsuccessful attempts to achieve a peaceful settlement of the intra-Ukrainian conflict, is forced to stand up for the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine, including in the general context of security in the region and the world. We are groundlessly accused of neo-imperial ambitions, revisionism, and aggressive enforcement of certain territorial claims stemming from someone's historical fantasies. A long list of groundless claims has once again been presented categorically and offhand, and an alternative view is excluded, since Russian media are excluded from the Greek information space.
It is obvious that such statements are designed to once again consolidate the Western public's unified views on the events in Ukraine and around it and serve as a password to prove that Athens is faithful to US-NATO rules and guidelines. This explains the arguments about the "new meanings" acquired by NATO, the justification for continuing to spread along Russia's borders, and the growth of US military infrastructure in Greece itself.
The emerging new challenges have met with adequate responses from the Russian side.
Presentation of a booklet titled Kiev Regime's War Crimes: Eyewitness Evidence
At 2.30 p.m. (approximately) on May 25, a news conference on eyewitness evidence of the Kiev regime's war crimes will be held at the Rossiya Segodnya press centre.
It will include a presentation of booklets prepared by Rossotrudnichestvo and the Democracy Research Foundation. They contain irrefutable proof of the manifestations and encouragement of Nazism at the government level in Ukraine, excerpts from interviews with the affected Mariupol and Volnovakha residents, and an assessment of events from the point of view of international law. These booklets are available in English, Russian and Spanish for informing the general public abroad about these facts.
Taking part in the news conference will be Head of Rossotrudnichestvo Yevgeny Primakov, Deputy Speaker of the State Duma Pyotr Tolstoy, war correspondent Dmitry Steshin, Executive Director of Rossiya Segodnya media group Kirill Vyshinsky, Director of the Democracy Research Foundation and member of Russia's Civic Chamber Maxim Grigoryev, and journalist, publicist and public figure Armen Gasparyan.
We invite everyone to watch the online news conference, which will be streamed in Russian and English on our internet resources.
The booklet on Churchill and Roosevelt's views on the Red Army's role in defeating Nazi Germany
We would like to tell you about a booklet titled Winston Churchill and Franklin D. Roosevelt on the Red Army's Role in Defeating Nazi Germany. Monuments to Red Army soldiers are being demolished in the countries of the "collective West" and those siding with them. I would recommend that everyone reads what the leaders of the anti-Hitler coalition thought about the Red Army. The booklet has been prepared by the Foreign Ministry's Department of History and Records jointly with the Novosibirsk Publishers.
The goal of this booklet is to objectively demonstrate, without any bias and based on archival documents and official transcripts, what the leaders of two great powers thought about the key role of the Soviet Union in defeating Nazi Germany. The booklet has been published in Russian and English and covers the period from 1941 to 1945.
The focus is on correspondence between the Big Troika leaders during WWII, their radio addresses to their nations, and the statements they made during the Tehran and Crimea conferences. The booklet includes archival photographs, declarations, communiques and other legal acts.
The unbiased views of Winston Churchill and Franklin D. Roosevelt on the Soviet Union's contribution to routing the Third Reich, which are provided in the booklet, differ dramatically from the politicised position of the current Western leaders.
There must be a reason for this position. How do they explain it? Do they refer to continuity or say that their policy is based on historical facts that were legally formalised during the Nuremberg Trials? No, they are acting contrary to historical facts and the statements made by their compatriots who directly supervised those events. The documents provided in the booklet offer a chronicle of the battles waged by the Soviet troops.
During a difficult stage early in the war, in April 1942, US President Franklin D. Roosevelt said in a radio address to the nation: "These Russian forces have destroyed and are destroying more armed power of our enemies - troops, planes, tanks and guns - than all the other United Nations put together."
On February 20, 1945, after the end of the Crimea Conference, Winston Churchill wrote to Stalin: "Future generations will acknowledge their debt to the Red Army as unreservedly as do we who have lived to witness these proud achievements."
The booklet is available online on the Ministry's website in the section of archival and documentary sources. It is designed for the general public interested in the history of World War II.
The detention of our compatriot Semyon Boikov in Australia
On May 16, 2022, Trans-Baikal Cossack Ataman [Chieftain] Semyon Boikov, who lives in Australia, was reportedly detained by Sydney police. He is charged with violating a court order on the non-disclosure of confidential information after he spoke at a pre-election rally, which was organised in support of independent politicians, about the local authorities imposing a symbolic sentence on a man accused of the sexual abuse of minors.
Our compatriot Semyon Boikov is a popular public figure in Australia, whose activities are drawing the attention of tens of thousands of followers on social media. He characteristically takes a principled approach to many burning issues relating to domestic developments in Australia and international politics, being invariably ready to speak out publicly about his civic position. The opinion of the descendant of Trans-Baikal Cossacks is weighty, and he has a large audience due to, among other things, his uncompromising position on a number of issues relating to traditional values. Considering his position, one can conclude that it represents a real problem in Australia. In particular, this is evidenced by the failure of the Scott Morrison-led Liberal-National Coalition, which is known for numerous scandals involving violence against women, at the parliamentary elections held on May 21.
It is noteworthy that the Australian court decided to postpone hearing the Boikov case until June 30, leaving Semyon Boikov in jail until that time. The refusal to grant his appeal for release on bail pending trial was obviously politically motivated, that is, he was denied a standard procedure in Anglo-Saxon law. This conspicuous severity is completely unjustified and is sending the wrong signal to the public because it is the people whom he censured - those who abuse minors - that should be sent to prison or forced to undergo treatment, and not those who denounce them. On the other hand, we regard this case as an obvious willingness to subject our proactive compatriot to additional punishment, which serves as yet another example of double standards and a biased attitude to those who exercise the right to freely express their views, which are not consonant with the Russophobic mainstream that prevails in Australia today. The more liberal statements are the more totalitarian trends the collective West countries demonstrate in practice.
People of good sense in Australian society and our compatriots living in that country are demanding that Semyon Boikov be released as soon as possible and that the Australian repressive agencies stop persecuting the man.
The Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance is a landmark document on Russian-Kazakhstani relations which remains topical in its spirit and goals. The Treaty has become a solid foundation of exemplary bilateral cooperation and strategic partnership between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan. This allows us to look confidently into the future, to chart and implement plans for expanding cooperation between our countries in the most diverse spheres. Moreover, the Treaty laid the foundation for subsequent fundamental acts, the Declaration on Eternal Friendship and Alliance of July 6, 1998, as well as the Treaty between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan on Neighbourliness and Alliance in the 21st Century of November 11, 2013.
The document was signed on May 25, 1992, the presidents of Russia and Kazakhstan, who strove to provide legal guarantees of long-term positive dynamics of bilateral ties and efforts to consistently raise their level. Three decades on, we can once again see that both countries remain committed to the decision made at that time, and this highlights their strategic foresight.
In the past 30 years, our ties became stronger and stood the test of time. They allowed Russia and Kazakhstan to become the main driving force of integration in the Eurasian region. Their expansion completely meets the interests of Moscow and Nur-Sultan, as is proved by a substantial increase in trade. In 2021 alone, this indicator soared by 34.4 percent on 2020, to reach a record-breaking $25.6 billion. This is also proved by close political interaction: just in the period since early 2022, President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin and President of the Republic of Kazakhstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev had 16 telephone conversations and two in-person meetings. Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Mikhail Mishustin and Prime Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan Alikhan Smailov had six telephone conversations and one in-person meeting.
Today the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan are strategic partners and allies. Our interaction hinges on the carefully preserved traditions of friendship, mutual assistance and mutual understanding. The spiritual affinity of Russian and Kazakhstani citizens plays a particularly significant role.
We are committed to further deepening economic ties and political interaction at regional and international organisations, as well as strategic leadership in specific fields.
We are convinced that the Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Kazakhstan will serve the noble goal of strengthening close bonds between two allied countries that are an example of mutually beneficial partnership.
The Treaty on the Fundamental Principles of Interstate Relations, Friendship and Cooperation with the Republic of Uzbekistan, a key document on Russian-Uzbekistani interaction, was signed on May 30, 1992. The Treaty that remains topical today formalises a commitment to international law, the principles of mutual respect, consideration for each other's interests, protecting the rights of citizens, a desire and striving to expand partnership in the most diverse fields.
Uzbekistan is Russia's strategic partner and we maintain highly intensive relations. Over the past three decades, it became possible to utilise the advantages of all of the Treaty's provisions through joint efforts, to deepen mutually beneficial cooperation and to strengthen long-time bonds linking our friendly nations.
A trust-based highest-level and high-level dialogue sets the pace for Russian-Uzbekistani ties. Intergovernmental and interdepartmental contacts have assumed a vast scale. Parliaments and regions are proactive in their efforts. A specially privileged mechanism, the Joint Commission at the level of heads of government, coordinates all aspects of bilateral cooperation.
Uzbekistan ranks among Russia's leading trade partners in Central Asia. In the first quarter of 2022, bilateral trade soared by 43 percent on the first quarter of 2021 and reached $1.753 billion. Mutual trade encompasses new areas, including healthcare, the financial, taxation and digital spheres. We prioritise efforts to expand ties in such areas as science, technology, culture and humanitarian sphere.
Russia and Uzbekistan interact constructively at key international and regional venues, including the CIS, the SCO and the UN. Tashkent continues to deepen its cooperation with the Eurasian Economic Union. The sides voice similar approaches to addressing issues of security and stability in Central Asia and countering international terrorism, extremism and organised crime.
The 30th anniversary of the Treaty is a good occasion to review past experience and chart large-scale plans for the future. The upcoming highest-level and high-level contacts will deal with these matters in the coming months.
Payments to Russian pensioners in New Zealand
Due to the "autonomous" sanctions imposed by the official Wellington against Sberbank and other Russian financial institutions, our compatriots in New Zealand have difficulties with receiving their pensions transferred by the Russian Pension Fund. According to our information, more than 30 people have been experiencing these problems and four of them have filed formal complaints.
Overall, according to our data, there are 420 people receiving pensions from the Russian Pension Fund in New Zealand. The country's authorities diligently included the Russian pensions in their calculations of the local allowances and reduced them proportionally. Therefore, the introduction of sanctions has reduced the income of every Russian pensioner in New Zealand.
Naturally, nobody in Wellington is going to compensate for these losses. The country's foreign ministry has admitted the problem but called it collateral damage of their anti-Russia sanctions which, allegedly, they never meant to affect these pensioners. The ministry published an updated guidance to local banks saying that banks could accept transfers from Russian financial institutions and it would not be a violation of the sanctions regime. At the same time, they do not say anything about how they can transfer money between correspondent banks, and through the SWIFT, VISA and MASTERCARD systems.
This is yet another example of what can come of the government of New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern's blind following the collective West, the desire to show their servility to Washington and harm Russia. In fact, Jacinda Ardern has stricken a blow at the residents of her own country, and one of the most vulnerable categories, pensioners.
Celebrating the Day of Slavic Writing and Culture
On May 24, 2022, Russia celebrated the Day of Slavic Writing and Culture. This holiday is a symbol of the closeness of the national traditions of Slavic peoples and their spiritual growth.
Holding celebrations in honour of the great enlighteners Cyril and Methodius facilitates the interstate and interfaith dialogue, promotes respect for one's native language and culture and strengthens the fundamental moral values.
This year, the format of the events was significantly expanded. In particular, a gala concert was held on Red Square that brought together representatives of various countries. The traditional Cyril and Methodius Readings, organised by the Pushkin State Russian Language Institute with the participation of Russian language experts from around the world, were held as part of the Second Kostomarov Forum on May 24. The Rudomino All-Russia State Library of Foreign Literature has made a great contribution to the marking of the Day of Slavic Writing and Literature: on May 23, it opened the 5th Slavic Day Festival of Slavic Cultures. There will be a wide range of cultural and educational events, bringing together both Russian and foreign experts and guests.
Similar campaigns are being held in many Russian regions. Associations of Russian compatriots abroad also joined the events. The Foreign Ministry provides assistance in holding events with international participation.
Such large-scale marking of the Day of Slavic Writing and Literature speaks for a careful attitude towards the cultural heritage of the Slavic peoples, Russia's readiness to an equal and respectful cooperation with everyone who values and sincerely supports cultural and humanitarian exchanges.
Transurals 2022 Fourth All-Russia Investment Sabantuy
On June 2-4, 2022, the town of Sibai, Republic of Bashkortostan, will host the Transurals 2022 Fourth All-Russia Investment Sabantuy.
As per tradition, the event is organised by the Agency for Strategic Initiatives and the Government of the Republic of Bashkortostan. The co-organisers of the business programme are the Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Russian Export Centre, the Centre for Strategic Development, and the Financial Research Institute under the Russian Ministry of Finance.
The Investment Sabantuy will bring together delegations from the Republic of Turkey, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as representatives of federal and regional government agencies, leaders of Russian and foreign companies, investors and experts.
Participants in the forum will discuss investment attraction, improving exports activity, domestic tourism, digital transformation of the urban environment, and environmental protection. The main theme of this year's forum is AntiSanction REGIONS: A New Economic Reality.
Learn more about the programme at the forum's official website.
Maria Zakharova: We have pointed out on several occasions that Russia will take political, economic and military-technical measures to ensure its security in response to the accession of Finland and Sweden, which maintained military neutrality before, to NATO. It would be premature to speak about the details of such a response now. As the Russian leaders have noted time and again, this will largely depend on the terms of Finland and Sweden's membership of that military bloc, such as the deployment of NATO and member states' [military] infrastructure, including strike weapons.
Maria Zakharova: I have already mentioned today the issue of NATO's "assistance" to Ukraine. This assistance involves supplying Ukraine with weapons, which are being used to kill as many people as possible. If this is the kind of "assistance" Ukraine needs from NATO, it brings us back to the American politicians' narrative: the real mission of Ukraine. In their opinion, Ukraine's mission is to kill as many Russians as possible. But we also see killing and destruction, the death of a vast number of Ukrainian citizens. Can you describe this as assistance? No, it is not assistance but complicity to destroy a country known as Ukraine.
Regrettably, many countries are doing all they can, sometimes overextending themselves, to contribute to this process. Turkey is not an exception.
In short, we would like all countries involved in this, one way or another, to become aware of their special responsibility when formulating their policy towards Ukraine. Humanitarian aid is one thing, and arms deliveries are another matter entirely. They contradict each other.
By sending increasingly more weapons to Kiev, they are fostering its revanchist sentiments and creating the illusion that problems in Russian-Ukrainian relations can only be settled on the battlefield, which is not helping create the necessary political and diplomatic atmosphere for de-escalation in Ukraine. We have taken note of statements made in some capitals. It is inconceivable that these Western politicians believe they can send weapons and at the same time talk about de-escalation and a political diplomatic process. Regrettably, their failure to give an appropriate response to our concerns regarding military-technical cooperation with Kiev has had a tragic effect on the settlement process. The NATO countries' indiscriminate weapons supplies to Ukraine were one of the reasons behind Kiev's sabotage of the Minsk Agreements.
Maria Zakharova: I believe that the phrase "Liz Truss stated" (or "Liz Truss' new statement") is a great name for a comic book. We have not taken this British minister's statements seriously for some time now. I think they should be the subject of scientific research, rather than part of diplomacy. I'm not even going to mention their fleeting, aggressive and warlike nature, Russophobia and obvious narrow-mindedness.
With regard to creating a "coalition" to unblock the supply of Ukrainian grain and sending ships to the Black Sea, it is well known that Liz Truss earlier confused the Baltic Sea with the Black Sea. She is not good at that. I'm not sure that when introducing this initiative she was fully aware what things really are geographically. Perhaps, she is still confused about things.
Reportedly, on May 24, a British government official said that London had no plans to use British warships in the Black Sea. That is, she may have been talking about the Baltic Sea this time again. I'm not sure. It's hard to understand. Clearly, London is confused. Perhaps, this is due to lack of competence or just confusion, or maybe she is again trying to earn herself political points or some other kind of points by making loud statements that lie far from the gist of the matter.
On the other hand, we see that the British Cabinet routinely refutes statements by Foreign Office head Liz Truss.
Maria Zakharova: I would like to stress that this is an internal affair of the Republic of Moldova. Nevertheless, we are closely monitoring the situation related to the procedural actions taken against the former President of Moldova who now chairs the Moldovan-Russian Business Union.
We hope that his rights and freedoms, which are guaranteed by international legal obligations and the law of the Republic of Moldova, will be observed. Otherwise, this risks becoming a settling of scores for political reasons, of which the main one is Dodon being part of the Moldovan political forces that advocate the development of a constructive and mutually respectful dialogue with Russia. We will be following this process.
I would also like to note that the more the politics associates itself with Western liberal values, the more totalitarian habits it shows in reprisals against its opponents, which is a sad pattern.
Maria Zakharova: Let's start with the second part of your question. Yes, this can be expected. Indeed, we are going to respond to all unfriendly steps against the Russian media. Let's not specify them now, as they can be nuanced - harassment, closures, expulsions, non-admission, persecution, etc. We will respond to many of these steps asymmetrically. We can see signs of dehumanisation on the part of the countries and governments taking such steps. We will respond in an appropriate manner. We are currently developing a package of measures against the media and journalists from the Anglo-Saxon media in response to the repressive measures their countries have applied to Russian media outlets.
As for the first part of your question, you have correctly identified the causal relationship between the situation around CBC in Russia and RT and RT France in Canada. We announced this right away. Our media have been facing unreasonable repression there (not for a month or two, but since 2017). And no one cared, including their colleagues from the local media, trade unions, or human rights groups, now pounding their chests and supporting pluralism. As a matter of fact, the CBC was also expressively silent on that score. Their current attempts to publicise our purely retaliatory measures against the CBC as an attack on freedom of speech are categorically unacceptable.
We have always thought of the closure of a bureau as a last resort, a step taken when all other possibilities of resolving problems and ending pressure on Russian media and journalists in a particular country (by diplomacy, negotiation, or legal means) have been exhausted. Only then do we resort to this measure. The Canadian side had better stop pretending that this decision comes as a complete surprise to them. We publicly warned about it. Or is it possible they could have missed that report because it was news from Russia? Russian news is not needed there - this makes so much sense. News from here isn't delivered to Canada's internal media market. So some of it might come as a surprise. Perhaps something there needs to be fixed.
We have repeatedly warned the Canadian side about the possibility of this happening if they continued to ignore our concerns, with complete indifference to their own high standards in protecting media rights.
There is another important point that we have already commented on in the media, employees of the CBC bureau left Russia of their own free will in early March and have not taken any persistent steps to return to Moscow since then. They have been showing no interest whatsoever in the work of our Ministry either. Apparently, they no longer care. Their office in Moscow has been empty for months. Now, back home in Canada, they are putting up this show, as if they have been expelled. They have not been here since March. They left of their own accord. They haven't been doing much work online either. I have not seen or noticed any activity by them.
We have created all the necessary conditions for those journalists to return to Moscow. We respected all our obligations and prepared a number of documents to make this possible. Now we are ready to give them a chance to prepare the bureau for the official cessation of activity and calmly leave Russia, having wrapped things up. We have shown goodwill. There can't be any problems.
If you are asking whether they will be able to return if Russian media operators resume work in Canada - the answer is yes. Only under this condition will they be able to return. If the work of the Russian media in Canada is resumed, the retaliatory measures against Canadian journalists will be lifted.
As for the numerous instances of persecution of Russian media abroad, it has reached a truly unprecedented broad scale. Countries that think it's okay to pursue such a Russophobic policy should be prepared for the inevitable countermeasures we will take to mirror their actions. Their attempts to justify their repressive actions by dividing the media and journalists into "good" or "bad," "professional" or "unprofessional," "obedient" or "naughty" are verging between demagogy and propaganda. We will ignore this.
There are two aspects to being qualified as a journalist or not. One is to hold a certificate or other proof of professional training. The other is working within the boundaries of professional ethics and abiding by laws. A combination of these two factors makes one a journalist. Whether a person is a good or a bad journalist is not a matter to be decided by those countries' authorities or by other individuals. For that, there are laws, professional ethics and rules of the genre.
Maria Zakharova: It is impossible to comment on all statements coming from Vladimir Zelensky. He says something new every day, yet these statements have nothing to do with the current developments but hinge on various "emanations" detected by him. I don't think we should pay any attention to these statements because, as we understand it, none of them are made in earnest.
We have repeatedly said that we respond to specific proposals made during the negotiating process, depending on the situation, and we prefer a targeted and constructive response. We always act this way.
So far, I can say that Kiev broke off the talks on resolving the situation in Ukraine and so far it has failed to reply to Russian proposals regarding a draft treaty of April 15, 2022. I don't know what they are up to. I usually refer journalists to the Ukrainian side, and tell them to ask for comments there. However, it appears that this no longer makes any sense. Whom should one ask for a comment? Who will say anything there? To hear them out and to try to make some sense out of their rhetoric is an unrewarding task.
Maria Zakharova: Let's separate these two questions. I will not comment on AP reports for a number of reasons, one of them - because we have nothing to do with the four-party format.
Regarding the US actions in the context of Russia, the White House continues to involve more and more countries in the anti-Russia "sanctions whirlpool." The United States is doing this in addition to the embargo on Russian fuel and energy imports, imposed by Joe Biden on April 22, 2022. They are using the most "advanced and democratic" methods, openly forcing their allies and partners to adopt measures that are not in their interests and to renounce mutually beneficial cooperation with Russia in ensuring energy security and sustainable fuel and energy supplies. They often resort to direct blackmail and threaten to impose secondary sanctions for cooperation with Russian companies. At the same time, the US administration recognises the obvious fact that anti-Russia sanctions are hitting the West very hard, as proved by skyrocketing prices at petrol stations, as well as by more expensive raw materials, food, electricity and other commodities. All this is presented as evidence of Moscow's intrigues. In reality, it reflects their own actions and policies. They are saying cynically that it is necessary to endure the hardships for the sake of inflicting maximum damage on Russia. As I see it, quite a few ships sailing with the collective West "flotilla" may sink under this motto.
This is taking place in conditions of open duplicity displayed by Washington, which resorts to unscrupulous competition methods and strives to occupy Russian niches on international markets. The Americans, who have substantial hydrocarbon reserves, are demanding that other countries suffering from a shortage of expensive resources renounce Russian oil imports. What kind of a tactic is that? It embodies the principle "You die today, and I die tomorrow." This is what American leadership is all about.
The initial confrontational tension projected by the United States, Japan and Australia as founders of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) has not only remained but continued to grow over the years of Quad's existence, including by raising the status of the meetings within this framework to the highest level. These are not dialogues but an accumulation of aggression, which prevents this format from being seen - not only by Russia but, as we can see, by the majority of the countries in the region - as a politically problem-free and comfortable platform in terms of non-confrontational development goals. It is not something you call a dialogue. It is yet another example of the principle "who are you, girls, joining forces against?"
In Asia, where the Four tries to position and promote itself, the habit, common for US-centric alliances, of subjecting national interests to the higher ideals of the Western pseudo-democratic solidarity, is not working. This is clear and obvious. The genuine trust of the countries in the region may only be earned by actions - effective and positive actions - rather than slogans. What is typical is that all the initiatives that the West is trying to promote through Quad lack transparency and clarity - important for every country - and this usually indicates that these kind of projects have a catch. Western liberal democracies have been practicing this full force in recent decades. They declare one thing that turns out to be something completely different. They declare freedom, democracy, spreading the good but in reality, they spread chaos and destruction, driven by the same neo-colonial ideas, such as rehashing markets, seizing areas of interest, dividing resources and taking away property that doesn't belong to them - literally looting and pillaging - true pirates of the 21st century.
With the United States' growing arrogance towards the APEC Leaders' Meeting agenda that has taken the regional community decades to form, could it be simply a coincidence that the US decided to launch an equivalent multilateral structure, but this time under the Indo-Pacific US-centric brand, the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity? How can it be? It is not a coincidence.
While Asia is engaged in serious multilateral talks to settle the entire scope of maritime problems, including within the ASEAN-centric architecture, the region has been proposed an alternative model of cooperation, the Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness, a would-be new platform attempting to control and fixate on itself all multifaceted maritime security cooperation formats.
It is no coincidence that the United States and its closest allies from the military and political blocs have repeatedly demanded that these fragile negotiation processes that are important for the region make sure that they take Western countries' interests into account, which is directly related to the United States' intention to be directly involved in approving the Code of Conduct for the South China Sea.
Russia has always primarily supported the efforts of the involved parties, leaving the talks themselves to the discretion of the participating ASEAN states and China.
Quad forming a cybersecurity partnership also seems to be an alternative to the mechanisms within the ASEAN-centric system of regional ties. In the recently updated US strategy on the Indo-Pacific Region, this partnership is presented as a core structure of the Indo-Pacific project, pretending to be a new central element of multilateral cooperation in ICT. Meanwhile, the Asia-Pacific Region already has bodies supervising this matter, the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) and the ASEAN Defence Ministers' Meeting with Dialogue Partners (ADMM-Plus). There is also ASEAN's annual Cyber Week, the heart of the pan-regional dialogue on cybersecurity. The new initiatives seek to replace these structures.
Maria Zakharova: I have already commented on this subject, but I am ready to answer your question once again. Last week, all the militants from the Azov nationalist unit and Ukrainian service personnel, holed up inside the Azovstal Plant's bunkers, surrendered. In all, almost 2,500 people laid down their weapons. All of them are now staying in the Donetsk People's Republic, and wounded soldiers are being treated at medical clinics.
Unlike our soldiers, who found themselves in the clutches, not hands, of the Kiev regime, those who surrendered at Azovstal are not subjected to torture or other humiliating and degrading treatment. Just like the Donetsk People's Republic, the Russian Federation unfailingly honours all applicable norms of international law in the field of humanitarian law.
As for bringing them to account, everyone who committed war crimes will certainly get the punishment they deserve. The relevant tribunal, due to be established in the Donetsk People's Republic, will address this matter. The relevant specialised agencies and departments of the Republic can provide additional information on this subject.
Maria Zakharova: During the past few days, we received many questions from Italian journalists. I even felt embarrassed this time, because I usually promptly comment, provide reference information and answer their questions. You may be surprised, but we have not received this "plan." Impossible but true. It was from media reports that we learned that Foreign Minister of Italy Luigi Di Maio offered a "plan" to the UN. As I said, we only had media reports at our disposal. Our experts analysed these reports, and as such can offer limited comments so far.
The Italian Foreign Ministry has not sent that "plan" to us. The appearance of that initiative, about which we read in the media, shows that Rome has become aware of the consequences of the military psychosis caused by the Western reaction to Russia's special military operation in Ukraine, and has made a feeble attempt to offer an alternative to the ongoing escalation which can grow into a full-scale conflict between Russia and NATO.
It is impossible to supply weapons to neo-Nazis in Ukraine and at the same time to consider plans to "save the situation." These are two mutually exclusive things. If we assume that media reports are correct - and we have no other information to rely on - the proposals put forth in Di Maio's plan are so far removed from reality that they are not worth considering. We are surprised that some people think that Moscow can be interested in "peace" initiatives which are based on the logic of tougher sanctions against Russia and continued military support for the Kiev regime. At the same time, those who formulated this plan do not even mention, according to media reports, the termination of weapons supplies to Ukraine, which is imperative for a peace settlement. This would be obvious to any novice, let alone a career diplomat.
Furthermore, conditioning a settlement in Ukraine on its accession to the EU is absolutely unacceptable since the EU leadership has become more warlike than NATO over the past few months with its irresponsible warmongering rhetoric, such as statements about winning the war in Ukraine on the battlefield. It is no longer the EU devised by its founding fathers but a new entity that is only called the EU. It is an aggressive and warmongering entity that makes statements which have no connection to its competence and expertise or the essence of its activities.
We see that the EU is turning from an economic union into an alliance with a military wing that is geared towards serving NATO's interests, aggressively fosters the philosophy of alleged "Western superiority" and has destroyed its pacifist principles by financing the delivery of lethal weapons to Kiev via the Europe Peace Foundation. Essentially, the EU is turning into a NATO branch controlled from Washington.
I would like to remind everyone that Russia supported the idea of talks with Kiev at the very beginning [of the operation]. However, the Kiev regime, which is being handled by the West, including the EU, has suspended the talks. It is in these circumstances that a "plan" has been put forth. We are still waiting for Kiev's response to the document we forwarded to it on April 15, 2022. Not that we are on tenterhook. Not at all. But the process was initiated by Kiev, which sent its proposals to us. We have responded to them. They probably need time to consider their response or to say that they are terminating the process. We need certainty from Kiev.
In fact, they have been using this tactic for the past eight years. This should be clear to those who write "plans," supply weapons and are concerned about the situation. They should open their eyes to the fact that Kiev has been using the same tactic for the past eight years, when the Minsk agreements approved in UN Security Council resolutions - not hypothetical plans, which have been forwarded somewhere but which nobody has seen - could have brought peace to Ukraine. But Kiev relied on the tactic of procrastination: it signed and approved the agreements but later refused to implement them or pretended to be implementing them, or it claimed to have implemented them and then said that their meaning is not clear to them. This is how it was, and this should be taken into account as well.
Overall, the "Italian plan" is a product of "closet thinking," when ideas which have not been tested in practice and have no connection to the situation on the ground are put forth just because something needs to be done. This has little in common with objective reality.
I don't know about the reasons for that initiative. The Italian officials who formulated it were probably inspired by Western media reports or TV programmes. I don't know for sure. But their media don't provide an accurate picture of the developments in Ukraine. Maybe they thought that Russia would pounce on any Western initiative, however absurd it may be. In this case, they don't have a clue about the real situation.
As for drafting a long-term concept of European security, I would like to emphasise that Russia sent its proposals on this issue to its Western partners last year.
We are ready to officially respond to the "Di Maio plan" if it is forwarded to us in a proper manner after days of media hype. Once again, so that nobody has any doubts left: We have not received the plan. Maybe it doesn't exist at all. We know nothing about this.
Maria Zakharova: The aims and goals of the special military operation have been defined by the Russian leaders. Please proceed from them.
Maria Zakharova: Such assessments are irrelevant. I think that after I answered your question, you must have a number of questions to put to the side that says these things.
Maria Zakharova: This is the Kiev regime. An authority is something related, in this or that way, to a country's interests. Let me give you some facts by way of an example.
Speaking on the occasion of Polish Diaspora and Poles Abroad Day, and Constitution Day on May 3, Polish President Andrzej Duda declared that "one of the peoples of Rzeczpospolita is defending its state" and that in the future there would be no border between Poland and Ukraine. It is clear what he means. His words are indirect confirmation of Poland's recent idea to send its "peacekeeping mission" to Ukraine so that Poland can elaborate a plan to establish control over its "historical possessions."
I would like to ask the Kiev regime: Why not collect the last of what you still have? Do you understand what you have done to your country? You continue lying to your own people. You are squandering pieces of your country under whatever guise you like. This is so. The Kiev regime is destroying the Ukrainian state down to its foundation. Yes, there was no such state in history. It is one of the youngest states in the world. But it did exist and was recognised by the international community. Perhaps I am the last (or the next to last) person in this life who would play up to the Kiev regime. But I want to ask, where are all these people, who can influence this situation in any way? I am referring to the citizens of Ukraine, who have been displaying Ukrainian patriotism as never seen before. Do you have any inkling of where this regime is leading you and what it is doing with your country? It has thrown open all the floodgates, let alone the national borders.
Please note an important detail. Is this the first signal coming from Warsaw? Of course not! Suffice it to recall the foreign travel passport the Poles designed for the 100th anniversary of their state independence that was celebrated in 2018. I am certain that the public at large in Ukraine does not know that this passport had images of the non-Polish cities of Lvov and Vilnius, or that at the same time the authorities of the Subcarpathian Voivodeship (which borders on Ukraine) ordered a train decorated, apart from portraits of Jozef Pilsudski and scenes from the 1919-1921 war, with an outline of the borders of the Second Rzeczpospolita that included Western Ukrainian lands. At that time, this "historical reference" caused a scandal on social media and an uproar in certain strata of the Ukrainian public. But generally, the response was lukewarm, with no one asking any questions.
It cannot be ruled out that Warsaw is planning a creeping expansion to the neighbouring state. The facts support this conclusion. The reference to Russia's special military operation is, in this case, no more than a pretext. Ukrainian citizens should address these questions to the Kiev regime. This must not be overlooked any longer. The Polish authorities, citizens and armed forces are taking over Ukrainian territory. These plans represent a complete picture rather than separate illustrations.
Maria Zakharova: Matters of nationalisation are not within the Foreign Ministry's purview.
Confiscating private property from individuals for their political or other beliefs is a flagrant violation of the principles of democracy and the market economy, which is to say, all the fundamental Western values and approaches, which Ukraine is trying to measure up to. We are well aware of the various provocative attacks by the Kiev regime, so the only thing that surprises us is why the Ukrainians missed the opportunity to be the first to come up with this initiative.
With regard to assets owned by the Russian Federation, which are currently blocked in foreign accounts, we have repeatedly emphasised that we consider freezing them an illegitimate move that violates every principle and norm of international law and the unbiased functioning of the global financial system, and is also destructive, because, of course, this is the beginning of the end of the global financial system. Such actions by the West can be interpreted by us as an egregious encroachment on sovereign property, as well as banal, unconcealed theft by one group of states of the savings of another. This concerns not only relations between countries but also between people.
This is yet another reason for the entire world to ponder the reliability of the US dollar or the euro as reserve currencies and the main means of international settlements, and the ability of the global powerhouses such as the United States or the EU (collective EU or the European powerhouses) to guarantee anything to anyone, to think about impartiality and stability of the current global financial order imposed by the Western countries. The order that was offered to the world as an unparalleled value was based on fundamental principles, such as respect and inviolability of private property, freedom of speech, and liberal principles of economic relations. It collapsed and does not exist anymore. These are no longer unilateral sanctions, but 21st century piracy.
Any use of the means owned by the Russian state or its citizens without the consent of the legitimate owners will be interpreted by us as an unlawful and willfully unfriendly attack by a particular country and its authorities entitling us to respond accordingly.
The West being reluctant to interact exclusively in the legal field and the further aggravation of the situation with the access of states and individuals to their own assets will only create an extremely dangerous precedent for the Bretton Woods system participants. This would mean that the sovereign status of certain assets is no longer guaranteed and can be revised any time by individual players using their "privileged" positions when the geopolitical situation changes.
Maria Zakharova: Do you know the name of the current Ambassador of the Russian Federation to Peru and the previous one?
Question: If I'm not mistaken, it's Igor Romanchenko. However, I want to get an answer to my question.
Maria Zakharova: I understand. Indeed, you can join us at a briefing and comment on the bilateral and international agenda every week. The accreditation is absolutely free.
I have never seen you talking about any serious bilateral or international issue. You never asked me to comment on the statements by the Russian Ambassador to Peru Igor Romanchenko or his predecessor, Andrey Guskov. You don't think they deserve your attention? I think we should focus on the people who shape and implement our country's foreign policy in the context of bilateral relations with Peru. But you are never interested in that.
I don't think your question warrants a response. This is stupid and uninteresting.
Maria Zakharova: We have circulated numerous materials, and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has made statements on this score. I will be happy to provide you with links (1,2) to detailed materials on this topic.
How will we build our relations with Europe? Let's say at the outset that Europe and the European Union are not the same thing. Russia is also part of Europe. A number of the CIS member countries are part of Europe, too.
The second question, as I understand it, is about our relations with the European Union, specifically. We were initially determined to deepen integration with the EU countries (including economic, financial and cultural ties) - with European countries in their national capacity as well as with the EU as an association. We made efforts beyond issuing declarations, adopting treaties and legal documents - we tried to fill our interaction with substance and make it effective. We proposed agreements (such as facilitating mutual travel), held mutual investment forums, addressed pan-European security, and cooperated and interacted with our partners in a variety of formats on international platforms.
Unfortunately, on most issues of mutual interest, our EU partners have failed to withstand the pressure from Washington. The US, apparently, considered deepening ties between Moscow and Brussels a danger - this much is obvious. All of the first major sanctions the EU imposed, on a broad scale, against Russia after 2014, were introduced under US insistence, pressure and coercion. The European Union was not planning any anti-Russia sanctions on its own. But Washington took a hard line. The United States did not impose sanctions against Russia in 2014, but forced the European Union to do so. Still, we continued to work on relations with the European Union after 2014.
Let me give you an example. Our energy partnership - we have been supplying gas to EU countries, and we are doing it now. We have been building pipelines together - I mean both private businesses and government-sponsored projects. They were mutually beneficial. There was a contractual and legal framework that actually worked and brought dividends. But the United States has spent years (at least the last five years) manually pressuring the EU countries into disrupting the energy partnership with our country. The US threatened to impose sanctions on specific countries (in particular, Germany and some others). They did everything and took every opportunity they had to disrupt all energy projects.
In short, we have never been left alone with the EU as a duo; a third party was always present. It was Washington, which dominated the EU countries and the EU as an organisation, forcing it to build relations with Russia so as to benefit Washington, not the Europeans. Unfortunately, the EU countries (even countries with a long history of statehood) have succumbed to that pressure and somehow lost the fullness of their sovereignty and independence.
How will our relations progress now? I think this is a question to be asked of the EU countries. We have drawn our conclusions from all the recent years' developments. We have realised that neither the EU countries nor the association are independent in making important decisions about themselves. Our European, EU partners (or countries we thought were our partners) are not reliable. None of the agreements reached, or negotiations held actually served to promote our relations; it was all done under pressure and served the interests of a third party.
We could embark on a long political discussion, but this isn't the right format. I will be happy to expound on this topic in an interview with you.
Maria Zakharova: I have seen those reports. Our experts are currently verifying if they are true.
For eight years, Russia has been supporting the population of the DPR and the LPR, including by providing medications and healthcare assistance. The scope of this assistance has been significantly increased lately.
As for the political motivations of international organisations, this trend is obvious and it is set by a certain group of Western countries.
What is an inter-governmental organisation? It is an association of countries concerned with international cooperation in a certain area. These bodies have almost identical membership compositions. And since this group of Western countries is pursuing a course of politicisation, it will affect all international bodies regardless of their area of focus. The course is set but the stance is not agreed. Perhaps they are forming it in some kind of centre, to communicate it later to all the other representatives.
We have noted that many organisations have become susceptible to this international political ailment. Unfortunately, the epidemic is not slowing down, affecting the economy, sports, tourism, culture and healthcare. We must work to make the international community immune in order to prevent the international agenda from being destroyed and to help preserve the legal framework that these organisations base their activities on. We are working with our partners and communicating our views. We are trying to explain that politicising the global agenda is detrimental to the entire world.
Maria Zakharova: As we have repeatedly stated, Russia is ready to provide assistance in the form of consultations to the bilateral Commission on the Delimitation of the Armenia‒Azerbaijan Border. This intention was declared in the statement by the leaders of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia following the Sochi Summit on November 26, 2021. It was reaffirmed during recent contacts with our partners at the high and highest levels.
Russia can offer unique expert capacity in delimitation and settling border disputes in post-Soviet countries. We have the required cartographic documents and will be glad to share our experience and practices with our Armenian and Azerbaijani friends as part of the commission's work. A team of Russian consultants has already been formed.
Maria Zakharova: Let me remind you that Russia's strategic goal is to make the South Caucasus an area of stability and prosperity. So, Russia is helping this process. One of our key tasks to achieve this goal is to normalise relations between Baku and Yerevan across all areas and to establish lasting peace. The trilateral agreements between the countries' leaders of November 9, 2020, January 11 and November 26, 2021, support these efforts. These agreements are being consistently fulfilled. Russia is providing overarching assistance to its partners in Azerbaijan and Armenia on all the tracks, including unblocking transport connections, delimitating the border, building public dialogue and developing a peace treaty.
We have noted the EU's stubborn attempts to insert itself into these trilateral agreements at the highest level. We expect Brussels to help carry them out, not play geopolitical games.
Maria Zakharova: BRICS consistently focuses on expanding cooperation with developing countries and emerging markets, including through such partnership mechanisms as BRICS Outreach and BRICS Plus, which is a dialogue mechanism of cooperation and expanding the Five. This topic is discussed in one form or another at BRICS summits and foreign ministers' meetings. This year, Chinese BRICS Chairmanship proposed to intensify these efforts and we support this initiative.
BRICS expansion is a far-reaching and multi-dimensional issue. It is not as simple as it looks. We are to determine the key parameters of this process, build a consensus within BRICS on the standards, criteria and the accession procedure. All this requires thorough and nuanced internal work within the five member states. It would be premature to disclose details or name potential candidates. The work must be done and accord reached within the format first.
Strengthening the BRICS Outreach and BRICS Plus format as a mechanism of continuous dialogue between BRICS and developing countries and emerging markets deserves equal attention. We praise the expansion of this practice not only to summits but also to other BRICS events. Specifically, we noted interesting and fruitful discussions at the BRICS Plus meeting on May 19, 2022. It was the first meeting of this segment held during a BRICS Foreign Ministers' Meeting.
Maria Zakharova: We are indeed developing a new version of the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation, as instructed by the President of Russia. A number of agencies are involved in analytical work for this purpose.
If you have something you deem important and worthy of being reflected in this document, you can send us specific proposals on your own behalf or on behalf of a group or associations of compatriots. We will be pleased to receive your proposals and will pass them on to the concept's developers for possible inclusion therein.
Question: Since the COVID-19 situation has improved, could you hold in-person briefings for Moscow-based journalists? We would like to see you and interact.
Maria Zakharova: I will think it over and will be back with a reply to your suggestion.
This format saves you a lot of time, though. After all, not all of you are within a bus ride or two from the Foreign Ministry Press Centre. Some people live in other parts of Moscow or abroad.
We work in this format because there is a huge amount of information and information sources. This format, to our mind, enabled everyone to save time.
We will see what can be done. Perhaps a hybrid format will do.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
