Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Moscow, December 24, 2021
- Celebrating New Year and Christmas together
- First session of the United Russia General Council’s Commission on International Cooperation and Support of Compatriots Living Abroad
- The Astana format 17th session on Syria
- Update on Afghanistan
- Update on Ukraine
- Verkhovna Rada’s new resolution on celebrating memorable dates and anniversaries
- 78 years since the end of the Battle of the Dnieper
- UN General Assembly resolution on “Combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance”
- US trade claims against Russia
- Non-compliance by the United States with its obligations as the host country of the UN Headquarters
- Results of the first substantive session of the UN Open-Ended Working Group on international information security
- Ninth session of the Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption
- A meeting of the Russian-French Economic, Financial, Industrial and Trade Council (CEFIC
- Russian assistance to CIS countries in developing sustainable housing and smart cities
Answers to media questions:
- Oleg Nikitin and other Russian citizens detained abroad
- NATO Secretary General’s initiative to convene Russia-NATO Council
- JCPOA talks update
- Russia’s view on Armenia-Azerbaijan settlement
- CIS countries’ support for UN resolution on combating glorification of Nazism
- Preparations for second 3+3 format meeting
- Upcoming CIS heads of state meeting
- Abkhazia update
- Opening of Dudayev Park in Turkey
- American exceptionalism
- Sweden and Finland’s approach to collective European security
- EU joining discussion on Russia-proposed strategic guarantees
- Russia’s views on hostile NATO activities
- Transit to Kaliningrad
- Unblocking links in South Caucasus
- EU’s involvement in Nagorno-Karabakh settlement
- Russia-US summit
Celebrating New Year and Christmas together
New Year and Christmas are the most loved and anticipated holidays all over the world. The New Year Tree is the gist and symbol of festive preparations. Decorating it is a good old tradition in both Russia and many other countries.
This year, like in 2020, the Holiday Tree of Peace and Friendship was installed in the Foreign Ministry at the initiative of the Synergy of Talents Rostov regional public movement, a long-rime reliable partner of the ministry. It is right here during this briefing. Later on, we will relocate it up to one the ministry’s central halls. What is its secret? Why is it special? The thing is that children made all the toys that decorate the tree. Children of our compatriots living abroad came up with the ideas for and made all of them. This was part of the project “Celebrating New Year and Christmas together.” The toys are incredible (some of them are symbols of national cultures and countries where these children live). We are grateful to the project and all the children, our compatriots, who are taking part in this initiative. Albeit symbolic, this initiative is very important. It does unite us even when we are going through difficult times. Children made these toys with much care and from the heart.
Many thanks to the Synergy of Talents! I think you will like this as well.
On December 28, Sergey Lavrov chaired the first session of the commission on international cooperation and support of compatriots living abroad in the building of the Central Executive Committee of the United Russia national political party. United Russia established the commission at its General Council on instructions from President of Russia Vladimir Putin.
During the session, the participants will discuss the main areas of the commission’s work next year. The national leaders have set the following priorities: to update migration policy and Russian law on citizenship, protect the rights and interests of our compatriots abroad and promote the Russian language and culture.
The Astana format 17th session on Syria
On December 21-22 of this year, Nur-Sultan hosted the 17th international session on Syria in the Astana format. Apart from the delegations of the Syrian Government and the Syrian opposition, this important forum was attended by high representatives of Russia, Iran and Turkey, the Astana guarantors. The delegations of Jordan, Iraq, Lebanon, the UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross took part in it as observers.
The Astana format is the only effective mechanism of international assistance to settlement in Syria. The decisions adopted in this format have made it possible to ensure a sustainable ceasefire in Syria for several years now. The intra-Syrian Constitutional Committee was established following agreements reached by the Syrian National Dialogue Congress with the support of the guarantors. The goal of the committee is to draft Constitutional reform in Syria in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 2254. A working group for releasing detainees and hostages, transferring the deceased and searching for missing persons has been established in the Astana format and is doing a good job. One more operation on the simultaneous release of detainees, about which we reported earlier, took place on the eve of the current international session on Syria in the Astana format.
Following the 17th international meeting on Syria in the Astana format, the participants adopted a Joint Statement by the Representatives of Russia, Iran and Turkey. In it, the guarantor countries described in detail their approaches and the content of their agreements on overcoming the crisis in Syria and around it. The text of this document is published on the Foreign Ministry’s website and we advise everyone to read it attentively.
The complicated humanitarian situation in Afghanistan is a pressing problem evoking concern of the international community, especially now with the advent of winter and cold weather. At the same time, terrorist groups have become less active in the cold season.
Participants in the December 19 extraordinary meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation in Islamabad emphasised the importance of coordinating international efforts to settle the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan. The main result of the meeting was to establish a trust fund for the socio-economic support of that country. At the same time, we noted that not a single country has assumed any specific financial commitments. We believe that the United States and other countries of the Western coalition must bear the brunt of the financial burden, rather than some theoretical one, for Afghanistan’s post-conflict humanitarian recovery. I must recall that their 20-year long presence in that country has led to consequences that are now obvious to the entire world.
On December 18 of this year, a third consignment of Russian humanitarian aid (food products and medications) weighing 36 tonnes was delivered to Kabul. About 200 passengers, including Russian nationals and Afghan students of Russian universities arrived in Moscow from Kabul on special flights of the Ministry of Defence.
Ukraine is a traditional briefing column. I would like to start it with something encouraging but, unfortunately, the situation in that country continues going from bad to worse.
This concerns the situation at the sides’ contact line during the conflict in Donbass. In the past two weeks, the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission recorded almost 7,000 ceasefire violations, which is five times more than in December 2020. This means that approximately every three minutes, a shot or explosion posing threat to people’s lives takes place in the region. This is about the escalation of tensions. How is it that our Western partners, journalists, correspondents and other media representatives, who are monitoring developments there, fail to understand where it is truly hot and who stands behind all this.
Instead of putting an end to the civil war that has been going on for over seven years now, Kiev seems to be getting ready to resolve by force what it calls “the Donbass problem.” Speaking on December 17 of this year in the Verkhovna Rada, Prime Minister of Ukraine Denis Shmygal announced the increase of the national military budget to almost $12 billion next year. Which country exactly are we talking about? A country that is ahead of the entire planet in the R&D required to support counterterrorism in the entire world? Or has it made some space developments or maybe built an orbital station? No, these $12 billion are required to fight against Ukrainian nationals those who are often spoken about and thought about only when war budgets are signed. Ukraine has increased its war budget by 20 percent. Is this a sign of peace? Don’t our Western partners that patronise the Kiev regime understand where these funds will go or don’t they notice this budget increase? Defence Minister Alexey Reznikov urged Western countries to supply Kiev with offensive weapons in addition to defensive arms. Apparently, with a view to finally resolve the Donbass problem.
It is very unfortunate that NATO countries fully support the current Ukrainian authorities in this absolute madness, this crusade against their own people. In addition to supplying them with individual types of weapons and combat hardware, they are sending their military specialists to Ukraine.
The scale of foreign military presence in Ukraine is increasing every year. Doesn’t anybody notice this? Where are the extensive articles by The New York Times and The Washington Post, or statements by American analysts from CNN and Fox News, who should be telling their audience what is really happening in Ukraine and how it is “resolving” the Donbass problem. We have already said that there are about 10,000 instructors, including 4,000 Americans, who are permanently present in Ukraine. It would be good thing if the situation there changed for the better. It might have violated the Minsk Agreements but in practice on the ground it would have shown that their presence contributes to the peace process. However, everything is quite to the contrary. All increases in the number of instructors there, Ukraine’s war budget and arms supplies lead to more explosions, not only on the contact line but also in the areas of civilian infrastructure. This is absolutely clear. But instead, hysterics are unfolding around our country. Russia is accused of supposedly plotting, scheming and drafting scenarios. Words about the participation of foreign military personnel in activities that are designed to ensure the national security and defence [of Ukraine] and curtail Russian aggression are a lie. These instructors are instigators and are directly in charge of the events that are unfolding in Donbass before our eyes. Recently, these instructors received the right to acquire Ukrainian citizenship in a simplified way. This is sacrilegious and humiliating. People who have lived in Donbass forever are deprived of the opportunity to have the legal right to their own language, while those who have never lived in Donbass and have come there obviously not to establish peace are granted the right to receive Ukrainian citizenship easily and without any ties. Nobody asks these military instructors what language they will speak. They will speak whatever language they want. Moreover, media will be published in their language to make life for them as comfortable as possible. What zealotry! Normative acts allowing these military instructors to receive fast-track Ukrainian citizenship is provided for in amendments to the Law on Citizenship. They entered into force on December 21 of this year.
What are the Ukrainian authorities after? They are trying not only to legalise the presence of military instructors in the country but also to skirt around the demand of the Minsk Package of Measures on the withdrawal of foreign armed formations, combat hardware and mercenaries from Ukraine. If it transpires that foreign military instructors are present on their territory, they will tell us that these are not military instructors but holders of Ukrainian citizenship. The people who are inventing these tricks not only evoke doubt in their integrity but also in their grasp of reality. Against this backdrop, statements by the leaders and representatives of the Kiev regime about their striving to de-escalate tensions sound simply false.
As before, there is no progress in the resolution of political aspects of settlement. The recent media-promoted initiatives by Ukraine about “10 steps” towards unblocking the peace process are in fact part of the Minsk Agreements. Kiev continues subverting the agreement’s implementation in every possible way with tenacity worthy of a better cause. These are not 10 steps forward but rather 100 steps back.
Ukraine has actively joined the US-inspired informational campaign on fuelling hysterics over the allegedly planned “invasion by Russian troops.” We have noticed this, too. At first, Ukrainian representatives said themselves there was neither a threat nor preparations coming from Russia. They did not record anything dangerous. Then the concept underwent an abrupt change and their orders have changed accordingly.
Kiev decided not to limit itself to some discourse and buttressed its words by practical deeds. The Ukrainian capital and other cities inspected bomb shelters and tested air alarm systems. Apparently, they thought that those who did not die of the civil war in Ukraine were bound to die of fear. They started digging ditches in “the most threatened areas” in the Suma Region. They had already protected themselves with barbed wire at the prompting of the former Ukrainian leaders. Now only the digging of trenches remains. I don’t know what they have decided to bury there, probably, the remains of their conscience.
They are doing all this to divert public attention from unfulfilled promises to stop the war in Donbass, the disastrous state of affairs in all areas, the deteriorating socio-economic situation, the growth of the cost of utilities and encroachments on the freedom of speech and the rights of Russian-speaking citizens. This list is practically endless.
For the umpteenth time, we urge the Western curators of Ukraine, including international structures that are turning a blind eye to what is happening there to stop looking elsewhere and make at least minimal efforts to compel Kiev to abide by the Minsk Agreements. Without this, it is impossible to establish peace, neither in Donbass nor in the whole of Europe. The situation in Donbass is a disgrace for modern Europe and those who engineered it for many years and have now relieved themselves of all commitments, guarantees and responsibilities.
Verkhovna Rada’s new resolution on celebrating memorable dates and anniversaries
If I may alter a popular proverb – tell me who your heroes are and I will tell you who you are. Let’s look at who Ukraine’s heroes are these days.
The Verkhovna Rada has recently adopted Resolution No. 6406 “On the celebration of memorable dates and anniversaries in 2022-2023.” Let’s have a look at this document, available on the Ukrainian parliament’s online database, to find out who the heroes worthy of nationwide celebration and honouring are, according to Ukrainian deputies.
Here are some of the milestones Kiev will celebrate with fanfare in 2022-2023:
- 80 years since the foundation of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), a nationalist paramilitary group that collaborated with the Nazis;
- 130th birth anniversary of Yury Polyansky, a Nazi collaborator and follower of Stepan Bandera, who was the burgomaster of Lvov during Nazi occupation;
- 100th birth anniversary of Fedor Vorobets, a Nazi accomplice, militant and member of the UPA punitive squads (there is documentary evidence of his involvement in the executions of Jewish children on the territory of Soviet Ukraine during Nazi occupation);
- 110th birth anniversary of Yaroslav Stetsko, the closest associate of Stepan Bandera;
- 130th birth anniversary of Porfiry Silenko-Kravets, Hauptsturmführer, member of Division Galizien of the Waffen-SS;
- 130th birth anniversary of Ukrainian collaborator Amet Ozenbashly.
The Verkhovna Rada resolution recommends the Government of Ukraine to create an organising committee for the celebration of the above “memorable dates and anniversaries” in order to hold appropriate events, including awareness-raising lessons at schools, thematic television and radio broadcasts, and other projects.
After reading this, how can one not understand and continue asking what they are protesting against in Donbass? What do they want? They are protesting against this; they cannot accept it and just go on living. They put the memory of their ancestors above the comfort of their own lives, even above their very lives and the lives of their children. While some people are solemnly celebrating collaborators’ anniversaries and thinking about how best to glorify them, people in Donbass are fighting for historical memory.
Those seem to be the best “prominent Ukrainians” they could find, the best they could do, after they have apparently edited out all the others. Of course, if you demolish memorials to Georgy Zhukov, you need to come up with someone else as a wartime “hero.” So those are the individuals they have selected. Real criminals, Nazi accomplices and members of punitive squads who killed millions of people right there in Ukraine. Although they would not have been any better if they had committed their crimes in some other country.
To touch up the picture, let us remember that Kiev always votes down the Russia-sponsored draft UN General Assembly resolution on combating the glorification of Nazism. Apparently, not because it is Russia-sponsored, but because it clearly states that glorification of everything associated with Adolf Hitler, xenophobia, Nazism and the corresponding practices as unacceptable. As a reminder, our initiative is supported by all countries except just two – Ukraine and the United States. Let us also recall how the United States is feeding weapons to Ukraine and in what quantities, and who Ukraine hails as heroes, and we will understand why they keep blocking this resolution. Sometimes one or two countries tag along, so that it would not be so embarrassing for the two to stand up against the entire civilised world, or actually against the whole world. But usually, it is just the two of them. Moreover, Washington always claims hypocritically that it cannot support this resolution because it can allegedly infringe on freedom of speech. It’s no problem that they block channels in social media, delete accounts, imprison protesters, and jail people for five years for expressing their views. They are okay with all that. But they are not okay with voting for the resolution because it can limit the freedoms of those who do the Nazi salute, for example. Ukraine’s approach is definitely based on even more terrible things. When they say, what, fascists in Ukraine? Give me a break! That can’t be right. I would like to say, yes, it is.
Kiev's policy to falsify and rewrite history, and whitewash Nazism has actually made the country a hotbed of neo-Nazism, where such individuals flock together from around the world. Things have come to a point where military instructors from the United States, UK, Canada and other NATO countries are openly teaching them how to fight. All this is being done under the pretext of defending against some mythical Russian threat.
In reality, Ukraine has simply become a forge of militants with the dominant neo-Nazi ideology.
The 20th century Germany was a tragic, terrible example of how dangerous such trends are, how dangerous it is to turn a blind eye to them, and even more dangerous to encourage them. We call on the international community to prevent a repetition of the previous century’s mistakes. We hope that specialised bodies at international organisations will react to the ongoing cultivation of Nazism in Ukraine and will give an appropriate assessment to this trend.
Now let’s talk about some real heroes of Russia and Ukraine.
78 years since the end of the Battle of the Dnieper
The Battle of the Dnieper ended on December 23, 1943. It began in August, and was a combination of four strategic offensive operations (Donbass, Chernigov-Poltava, Nizhnedneprovsk and Kiev) as part of the Soviet army's larger offensive during the Great Patriotic War. The goal was to liberate the Left-Bank Ukraine and Donbass from the Nazi invaders, to cross the Dnieper River and recapture strategically important facilities and territories.
As a result of long defensive and offensive moves, the Red Army liberated almost entire Left-Bank Ukraine. Soviet troops inflicted severe defeats on the main Nazi forces and liberated over 38,000 villages and 160 cities and towns.
In November, the focal point of the Dnieper theatre moved towards the Kiev track, which was crucial to the fight for the Right-Bank Ukraine. On November 6, 1943, the capital of Ukraine, Kiev, was liberated by the troops of the 1st Ukrainian Front (including the 1st Czechoslovak infantry battalion under the command of Colonel Ludvik Svoboda, who later became the leader of Czechoslovakia).
After the liberation of Kiev, on November 8, 1943, the Soviet military command established the Order of Victory intended to reward especially distinguished commanders. Who do you think were the first to receive the highest military order? Marshals Georgy Zhukov and Alexander Vasilevsky, who coordinated the fronts in the Battle of the Dnieper, that’s who. Ukrainians, wake up, come to your senses! Monuments to Marshal Zhukov, who liberated your country, are now being demolished across the territory of Ukraine. These monuments, memorial plaques and inscriptions are being replaces by others, commemorating Nazi collaborators. What are you doing?
You could hardly find a unit at the front that had no Hero of the Soviet Union. The title was bestowed on 2,438 soldiers, officers and generals – for the crossing of the Dnieper, for courage and self-sacrifice. This was the only case during the war when so many people received awards for one operation. Those were the true heroes of Ukraine, real heroes, not false or invented ones. Many units that fought at the front were awarded honorary titles for combat achievement and heroism: 65 units were named after Kiev, 13 after Zhitomir, 6, Fastov, 6, Korosten, 4, Vasilkov, and 1 after Ovruch.
That battle was one of the three largest in 1943. In the Battle of Stalingrad, the Nazi troops suffered a heavy defeat; at Kursk, they lost hope of turning the outcome of the war in their favour; the Battle of the Dnieper showed that the Wehrmacht was no longer able to stop the Red Army’s advance, even taking advantage of a convenient natural border. With its East Wall broken, the Wehrmacht lost its last chance to move the fighting into a protracted war on Soviet territory.
The Battle of the Dnieper went down in the Great Patriotic War’s history as a heroic epic, playing a key role in the total liberation of Soviet Ukraine and was an important step towards the Great Victory.
Those were the real heroes. We remember them, we honour them, we will never forget them. We will always preserve the historical memory, not just to make sure they are remembered in Russia, but to share it later with the citizens of Ukraine, when they are no longer led by the mankurts.
This document is concerned with the acute subject of the growth of extremely dangerous manifestations of neo-Nazism and racial discrimination, the ideology of hatred and the theory of racial superiority, as well as the importance of preserving the historical memory and truth about the causes and results of WWII. The resolution condemns any attempts to justify and glorify the Nazi movement and former SS members, including former members of the Waffen SS organisation, which was declared criminal for its activities at the Nuremberg Trials, as well as the so-called war against monuments erected in honour of the Red Army soldiers and fighters against Nazism.
Initiated by Russia, this resolution is always supported by a large number of UN member states, which is proof of the importance of the issues addressed in it.
The majority of CIS member states support this important Russian initiative. Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan become the co-authors of the resolution every year. At the same time, we have taken note of a change in the position of Moldova, which abstained during this year’s vote on the resolution. This is regrettable, to put it mildly.
This agreement of opinion is based, in part, on the fact that all nations of the Soviet Union have first-hand experience of the hardships of that war. And all of them made a huge contribution to victory over Nazism, which has become the common heritage of the fraternal Soviet republics and all the United Nations who fought against the Nazi plague. It is our common victory, which we not only can but also have every right to be proud of. We invariably highlight our common contribution to victory.
We would also like to mention the joint statement adopted by the CSTO member states in support of this resolution. It was made public at the November 12 plenary meeting of the UNGA Third Committee by a representative of Armenia as the current chair of the CSTO.
It is notable that the majority of our CIS partners support not only this resolution, but also other Russian initiatives aimed at preventing the falsification of history. Recent proof of our concerted approaches was a special solemn meeting of the 75th Session of the UN General Assembly in commemoration of all victims of the Second World War. It was held on December 1, 2020, at the joint initiative of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and China.
We are also working actively in the CIS to combat the falsification of history. The similarity of our approach to this subject allows us to regularly include relevant formulas in the joint policy documents of the CIS, which the country that holds the rotating CIS chairmanship circulates in the UN and other international organisations.
For example, on June 1, 2021, the heads of state of the Commonwealth of Independent States adopted an address to the peoples of the CIS and the international community in connection with the 80th anniversary of the start of the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945). It was signed by all CIS states with the exception of Moldova and Ukraine. That address highlighted the unacceptability of the attempts to reject the decisions of the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg on crimes that are not subject to the statute of limitation and to rehabilitate Nazi criminals and their accomplices.
On October 15, 2021, the CIS Heads of State Council adopted a statement on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the CIS, which stipulates the preservation of the memory of our common victory in the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945) as a fundamental task of our cooperation, and condemns any attempts to falsify history, revise the results of WWII and glorify Nazism contrary to the decisions of the Nuremberg Trials. The statement defines the expulsion and extermination of the peaceful Soviet population by Nazis and their accomplices as the genocide of Soviet peoples.
As for other forms of cooperation in the post-Soviet space, the CSTO member states are working together to combat the falsification of WWII history, the glorification of Nazism and the propaganda of neo-Nazism, and to preserve our historical memory about the results of the war. The CSTO allies traditionally adopt joint statements on these issues, which are subsequently published on their official online resources. In May 2021 in Dushanbe, the CSTO foreign ministers adopted a joint statement on the 75th anniversary of the verdict of the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg. The same month in Vienna, the permanent representatives of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Serbia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan to the OSCE adopted a statement in the CSTO + format on the occasion of the 76th anniversary of victory in the Second World War. The adoption of statements at the level of permanent representatives of CSTO states to the OSCE on the occasion of May 9 celebrations has become traditional practice in the past few years. It is attracting the attention of new members and winning over new supporters. Another regular feature is the joint statement of the CSTO member states, which I have already mentioned today, in support of the resolution on combating the glorification of Nazism, which is read out during its adoption at the Third Committee of the UNGA.
As for the current efforts to keep up historical truth, on October 14, 2021, the CIS Council of Foreign Ministers approved the Provisions on the International Association (Commission) of CIS Historians and Archivists, which was drafted at Russia’s initiative. Only Azerbaijan, Moldova and Ukraine abstained. The commission, which is being established now, will consist of representatives of the member states’ institutes of history, archives and the history department of each state’s leading university. The head organisation will be the Institute of World History of the Russian Academy of Sciences. We hope that our Azerbaijani partners will find the opportunity to take part in this extremely important project, in one form or another.
US trade claims against Russia
We have heard a fantastic statement from our US partners recently. US Trade Representative Katherine Tai in her report on our country’s compliance with the WTO regulations noted “Russia’s continued departure from the guiding principles of the World Trade Organisation, such as non-discriminatory practices, more open trade, predictability, transparency, and fair competition.” We have got used to ungrounded accusations against us by the United States, but what we have heard now exceeded all our expectations. According to the US official, the breach of WTO rules and regulations places US businesses in poor economic conditions and deprives them of fair competition. This is a statement by a representative of the country that has showered the world with its unilateral sanctions, is introducing blacklists, and denies visas not only to business operators, but also to athletes and participants in cultural exchanges and programmes. Ms Tai underscored that her office would “continue to work with like-minded partners and use the tools of the WTO to hold Russia accountable for its behaviour in the multilateral trading system.” Do you know what the grounds for the complaints against our country are? “Russia continues to adopt and implement localisation measures to provide preferential treatment to both domestically produced goods and services.” How dare we do it under sanctions? “In the agriculture sector, Russia maintains non-science-based import restrictions and refuses to recognise other countries’ guarantees on exporting facilities.” Has the United States ever heard about its own sanctions as well as about those imposed by the EU, i.e. enforced by Brussels under Washington’s pressure? This is a rhetorical question. Another complaint is also a masterpiece: “Russia is implementing import substitution strategies for the IT sector.” But you keep threatening us that you won’t sell phones to us. It seems to me that our colleagues should finally make up their mind. Accusing us of import substitution while we have been hearing for years on end that we would be restricted here and there, disconnected from the SWIFT system and what not, is beyond the reach of reason.
Every year ahead of the New Year celebrations, Washington reproduces with admirable consistency and minimal addenda a set of trade claims against our country, meanwhile imposing more and more unilateral sanctions and making more and more threatening statements, including in the economic and financial areas. We do not think it expedient to analyse them in detail. Just recently the US had an opportunity to have a productive discussion with Russia on all issues at the WTO second Trade Policy Review of the Russian Federation this October. Our partners from the United States did in fact make use of this opportunity: they sent us nearly two hundred written inquiries. And what do you think happened next? We sent them detailed responses on all their concerns.
Our country supports an open, transparent, inclusive and multilateral trade system and the WTO that remains the basis of the world trade regulation. Currently, the WTO is going through upheavals. There are lots of reasons for that, some of which were artificially created. I am referring to the need for an urgent reset of the WTO Appellate Body blocked by the US since the end of 2019. Yes, it happens. The apoplexy of the WTO two-stage disputes resolution system prevents other countries from contesting a number of trade measures. This pertains to the problem of neo-protectionism, transparency in trade, in general, etc. Many WTO members would like to contest them on the grounds worked out by the WTO; however, it is impossible because the contesting mechanism is blocked by the United States.
We once again call on Washington to stop the attempts to shatter the backbone of global trade (this applies to international relations as well), return to a constructive and equal dialogue at the WTO, which is especially important in the present-day conditions of multiple and global challenges.
Non-compliance by the United States with its obligations as the host country of the UN Headquarters
I would like to mention once again the issue of gross violation of international law by the United States. I am referring to the US obligations to ensure the normal operations of the UN headquarters in New York.
For the past few years, the United States has been consistently hindering the work of several delegations at the UN. The United States is abusing its status as the host country of the UN headquarters and violating its international obligations under the Agreement regarding the UN Headquarters it signed with the UN in 1947. In particular, the United States regularly denies and delays visas or fails to extend visas in due time exclusively on grounds of nationality. Measures of discrimination, such as limitations on the movement of diplomats and personnel of the UN Secretariat, not only from Russia but from other countries as well, outside the 25-mile zone from the centre of New York (Columbus Circle) are still applied.
Five years ago, on December 29, 2016, the US Department of State blocked access to the official premises of the Permanent Mission of Russia to the UN, which are located a short distance from New York. The premises were bought in 1953 and are the property of the Russian Federation. In the period since 1953, we faithfully complied with all our obligations as the premises’ owner and there have not been any complaints or objections. The host country recognised the diplomatic status of these premises. But now the Russian property in the State of New York, which has been used to represent Russian interests at the UN, has for all intents and purposes been seized by the Americans.
This matter has been on the agenda of the UN Committee on Relations with the Host Country and the General Assembly since 2017. Its resolutions adopted every year are calling on the UN Secretary-General increasingly strongly to take the matter against the United States to the tribunal of arbitrators, which is stipulated in Section 21 of the Agreement regarding the UN Headquarters, for bringing the United States to account for violating its obligations to the member states and to the United Nations Organisation in the person of its Secretariat. The last time such a resolution was adopted was in December 2021. The procedure should be initiated by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who has the authority to do this.
We are told in response that the Secretary-General is concerned and is working unofficially with the host country to find a mutually acceptable solution. However, no actions have been taken so far. The United States is in no hurry to resume compliance with its obligations under the 1947 Agreement and UNGA decisions. This much is clear to us.
In this context, Antonio Guterres, as the guarantor of the 1947 Agreement, should take practical measures without any delay to officially launch the arbitration procedure regarding the United States.
We recall that the United States has recently outlined its position regarding premises with diplomatic immunity. In that instance, it complied with international law, but it acts contrary to it in other cases. This means that it is time to act.
The first substantive session of the Open-Ended Working Group on international information security was held on December 13-17, 2021. This open, universal, transparent and democratic mechanism was set up at Russia’s initiative in 2018. In 2020, we insisted that global talks on international information security must continue in this format.
On the whole, discussions held during the first session of the OEWG were substantive, constructive and focused on the group’s mandate, which was reaffirmed in the joint Russian-US resolution approved by the UN General Assembly on December 6 (we reported this during the briefing on December 9, 2021).
At the same time, we would like to point out that the Western countries, even though they have signed and co-authored this document, cannot accept the fact that the relevant discussions will be held in an open-ended mechanism under the UN auspices.
Several countries tried to dead-lock the talks. The British delegation acted in an especially strange and unseemly manner, trying to undermine a substantive discussion by demanding that the parameters of the participation of NGOs in the OEWG be determined without delay, even though this is not stipulated in the group’s mandate.
As expected, the language of ultimatums and threats failed to produce the desired effect. Many countries supported Russia’s argument that the meeting should focus on the priority rather than secondary issues on the agenda. It was pointed out that the opinions of a broad group of interested parties should be considered, and that the main role should be played by states, which are responsible for the results of the group’s activities.
Such attempts must be precluded. There are five years of hard work ahead. It is of fundamental importance to ensure that the group works in a pragmatic and target oriented manner to produce applicable norms, recommendations and assistance programmes.
The first substantive session of the UN Ad Hoc Committee on drafting the first ever Convention on Countering the Use of Information and Communications Technologies for Criminal Purposes, created at Russia’s initiative, will be held on January 17-28, 2022. We hope for fruitful cooperation with all UN member states in this sphere.
In conclusion, I would like to note once again with deep regret that the Americans continue to wage a “visa war.” They deny visas to the heads and members of Russian interdepartmental delegations who plan to attend official UN meetings, including the afore-mentioned sessions of the OEWG and the Ad Hoc Committee. Russian officials are not the only ones to be denied visas. These activities are affecting our colleagues from other countries as well.
We consider this situation to be absolutely unacceptable and inadmissible. We call on the United States and the leadership of the UN Secretariat to do everything in their power to preclude a repetition of this and to comply with their obligations as the host state of the UN headquarters.
On December 13-17, 2021, the Russian interagency delegation led by Deputy Foreign Minister Oleg Syromolotov took part, via a video call, in the ninth session of the Conference of the States Parties to the UN Convention against Corruption, which is the largest international anti-corruption forum.
The agenda included the main anti-corruption issues, including prevention, criminalisation, international cooperation, technical assistance and asset recovery. Special attention was paid to the possibility of implementing the provisions of the political declaration adopted at the UN General Assembly session against corruption held in June. The Russian delegation informed the participants about the completion of the second cycle of review of progress in implementing the convention on preventing corruption and recovering assets as it applies to our country. It was emphasised that a set of measures will be developed with the stakeholders’ involvement that will be aimed at implementing the recommendations for Russia.
Eight resolutions on various topics were adopted at the end of the session, including the resolution On Strengthening Anti-Corruption Education and Outreach Activities initiated by our country. The document covers the main aspects of teaching anti-corruption disciplines at all levels of education, introducing advanced technology in the learning process, developing additional professional education, conducting comprehensive awareness campaigns aimed at creating a corruption-averse culture in society, and supporting case studies in order to develop better anti-corruption policies.
The Russian delegates also took part in a high-level event held on the sidelines of the conference to launch the UNODC Global Report on Corruption in Sport. This comprehensive analytical study focuses on various manifestations of sports corruption ranging from rigging sports competitions to illegal betting, as well as international legal instruments applicable to this area. All of the above was developed by the UNODC with the participation of a group of international experts in pursuance of the resolution that was spearheaded by Russia in 2019 and adopted by the conference Safeguarding Sport from Corruption funded by Russia’s voluntary contribution to the UNODC’s fund.
In the run-up to the session and on the BRICS Anti-Corruption Working Group’s initiative, a virtual seminar was held for teachers of anti-corruption disciplines at leading universities from five countries. It was hosted by the UNODC with Russia’s financial support in pursuance of the provisions of a future-oriented document on promoting cooperation between the BRICS countries in anti-corruption training, which was adopted at the end of Russia’s BRICS chairmanship in 2020.
A meeting of the Russian-French Economic, Financial, Industrial and Trade Council (CEFIC)
The 26th meeting of the Russian-French Economic, Financial, Industrial and Trade Council (CEFIC) was held on December 21 and chaired by Russian Minister of Economic Development Maxim Reshetnikov and Minister of the Economy and Finance of the French Republic Bruno Le Maire. This time, the rotating event was held in Paris. (The previous meeting took place in Moscow on December 10, 2019).
The parties exchanged views on pressing issues of trade and economic cooperation and summed up the activities of this crucial bilateral mechanism over the period under review. The participants discussed the performance of 11 specialised CEFIC groups, including groups on aircraft construction, energy, agriculture, space exploration, cooperation in intellectual property protection and combating counterfeit products, as well as cooperation in the peaceful use of atomic energy. It was stated that even amid challenging sanitary and epidemiological circumstances and an unfavourable foreign policy environment, interaction within the CEFIC had been productive and without disruptions, and, whenever possible, experts met in person, but also virtually. The final protocol was signed at the end of the 26th meeting.
The participants resolved to hold the 27th session of the Russian-French Economic, Financial, Industrial and Trade Council in the second half of 2022.
Russian assistance to CIS countries in developing sustainable housing and smart cities
The Executive Committee of the UN Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) has approved a project on improving the potential of East European, Caucasus and Central Asian countries in developing and implementing their policy and strategy for sustainable housing and sustainable smart cities, which is to be funded at the expense of Russia’s voluntary contribution to the ECE.
The project is scheduled to be implemented in two years. Its budget is $210,000. Its main objective is to set up in Yerevan a Centre of Best Practices on Sustainable Housing and Sustainable Smart Cities for CIS countries.
The Centre will address a range of issues related to providing affordable and energy-efficient housing and developing sustainable urban infrastructure, in particular on the basis of the Geneva UN Charter on Sustainable Housing.
Currently, such centres operate in Albania, the UK, Norway and Estonia. They support ECE member states in developing and implementing national housing, urban planning and land use strategies. They are used for holding training workshops, accumulating expert potential and best practical examples to be applied by all countries in the region.
The Armenian Centre will conduct its activities in Russian, which will enable experts from the CIS to actively participate in international efforts on the development of sustainable housing and urban infrastructure.
Answers to media questions:
Maria Zakharova: Let me remind you that the United States arrested KS Engineering (KSE) Director General Oleg Nikitin in September 2019 on charges of conspiracy with the intent to commit fraud and money laundering.
According to US prosecutors, he and another KSE employee, Anton Cheremukhin, conspired with two Italian nationals to purchase a US power turbine for $17.3 million and transfer it to Russia.
The prosecutors asked for a five-year prison term for Oleg Nikitin, as well as a fine and property confiscation. On March 30, 2021, this Russian national pled guilty to export violations, and on September 22, 2021, the court in the Southern District of Georgia sentenced him to 28 months in prison (he spent almost as much in pre-trial detention), after which he was to be deported to Russia.
The deportation has been pushed back several times, as they have been telling us, due to COVID-19 outbreaks, and after Aeroflot cancelled some of its New York-Moscow flights. Having Russia’s Consulate General in New York or private individuals buy the ticket was not possible, since the court ruling did not provide for this option.
The Russian Embassy in Washington has sent notes to the US Department of State requesting that real steps be taken to enable the Russian national’s immediate return. On December 21, 2021, Oleg Nikitin returned home on board an Aeroflot flight.
We have commented on stories of this kind on many occasions. The problem with Russian nationals being detained in third countries is much broader than the issue of far-fetched sanctions. This is an extremely urgent and topical matter. People are being abducted at the request of US authorities, detained under the pretext of violating one legal provision or norm or another, with the United States announcing charges against those who have not committed any offences, but somehow “threaten” the United States.
We provide comment on all cases of this kind. Every story requires months and years of hard work from our diplomats both in the host countries, as well as at the Foreign Ministry’s headquarters. Only in the past few years there were several dozen cases of this kind. They are different, but still have much in common.
As soon as Russia’s foreign missions learn about the arrest of a Russian national, they immediately get to work with local law enforcement agencies. We stress that what the Americans are doing is illegal and groundless, and insist on the case be handled under the laws of the country of temporary residence, with the involvement, if necessary, of Russia’s Investigative Committee, the Prosecutor General’s Office and the Interior Ministry. We recommend deporting the detainees to Russian territory for an impartial and objective investigation and due process.
In the United States, Russian diplomats provide all-round consular and legal assistance to arrested Russians to make sure that their legitimate rights and interests are respected, as well as enable them to return home as quickly as possible. The Embassy pays special attention to these cases, which are regularly raised during talks at the US State and Justice departments. We have been working along these lines despite the reduction in our consular capabilities, which was caused by the United States: Consulates General have been closed, and the geography factor makes continuing business as usual challenging. We have quite a few compatriots out there, and unfortunately with the Consulates General closed we cannot receive them where they are. We work through the consular staff in Washington. All this further complicates our work.
Our staff remain in constant contact with the arrested persons, as well as with their relatives and lawyers, and the prison administrators. Oleg Nikitin’s case fits squarely into this mould. We pay the utmost attention to the conditions in which these people are kept, whether they can access qualified medical care when they need it, make calls, use email and have visitors. The pandemic and the mayhem the United States created on the issuing of visas (in fact, on refusing to issue visas) made things even worse.
In our contacts with the Americans, we invariably note that having Russians arrested in third countries is unacceptable, and insist on putting an immediate end to this illegal “hunting.”
We emphasise that the current Treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, dated June 17, 1999, contains everything that may be needed to enable the competent agencies of our two countries to work together on resolving issues of this kind as prescribed by law. We have offered to collaborate on fighting cybercrime many times. However, for many years our American partners have been avoiding any meaningful discussion of this topic. There has been some progress lately, but it has yet to gain momentum.
Considering the above, the Foreign Ministry has called repeatedly on our citizens to weigh all the possible risks when planning their trips abroad, especially if they have reasons to suspect that they may be targeted by American law enforcement or intelligence agencies. We posted an alert to this effect on the Foreign Ministry website.
Maria Zakharova: I can confirm receipt of this proposal. We are considering its practical aspects.
We reaffirm our readiness for a direct dialogue with NATO regarding our proposals on security guarantees for Russia that would preclude the alliance’s further eastward expansion and the deployment of offensive systems in direct proximity to the Russian border.
As you may know, the normal functioning of the Russian Permanent Mission to NATO has become impossible and has been suspended because of deliberate and hostile actions. All Russian diplomats and the staff of the Senior Military Representative have returned to Russia. We will have to consider these circumstances when taking decisions on the format, modalities and timeframe of the potential Russia-NATO Council meeting. Nevertheless, we are open to dialogue.
Maria Zakharova: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov spoke in detail about the talks held to relaunch the JCPOA during his interview with RT yesterday. The text is available on the Ministry’s website.
As for any potential alternatives to relaunching the JCPOA, Russia believes that there is no alternative to this plan.
Our position was clear from the outset and formed the basis of discussions on the plan of action. We knew that we had done everything we could to coordinate a workable and effective document. The United States first acted unilaterally to undermine it and later pulled out arbitrarily, without using the appropriate mechanism, allegedly because it is “exceptional” and can be “excepted” from the deal. We believe that there is no alternative to the JCPOA. We can only reaffirm our approach to it, whereas Washington has now come around on the deal. We are taking part in the talks in a constructive and partner-like manner, hoping for the nuclear deal to resume as soon as possible.
The parameters of the JCPOA were coordinated during the signing of the agreements in 2015 and formalised in UN Security Council Resolution 2231. This is an enduring value for Russia. We believe that all parties must regard it as such and that it is binding on all parties. The importance of the JCPOA has not waned. We believe that all member states of the UN Security Council, which adopted this resolution, including the United States, must comply with it.
Maria Zakharova: One should not try and create expectations or judgements around a specific date – even if it is the end of the year and everybody is looking back at their results. Since the agreement was reached, every single day has been marked by hard work, victories and losses, achievements and failures. We are commenting on them every day. We comment once a week during briefings. The country’s leadership, the Foreign Ministry, experts and representatives of various departments make statements on a regular basis, giving in-depth comments during interviews as well as news conferences. The reason is not to create extra attention or interest around this work but to be the first source to inform the nations and primarily Azerbaijan and Armenia, to clarify any questions that arise for objective reasons and also due to extensive misinformation, as well as to emphasise successful efforts and inspire ourselves and the other parties involved to achieve more. This emotional component is important. We should show what has been achieved, to create motivation to keep going despite challenges. I do not want to comment on the overall results. Results have been summarised daily, with new plans made for the future. We commented on them every day and reported what has been successful and what has failed.
We spoke about this on the anniversary of the ceasefire on November 9, 2021. The Foreign Ministry issued a corresponding statement stressing that the agreements documented in the statement of the three leaders of November 9, 2020, have been fulfilled in principle. Baku and Yerevan remain committed to further implementation and strict compliance with all of its provisions.
The leaders of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia extensively reported on the progress made in the past year during the Sochi summit on November 26, 2021, both during the follow-up news conference and the joint statement.
Question: What are your personal expectations?
Maria Zakharova: My expectations always concern the quality of work. One may make any kind of statements but there must be actual work behind them. Experts, diplomats and representatives of government bodies communicate every day based on the instructions from the countries’ leaders and joint documents.
I personally want to wish Armenia and Azerbaijan as well as everybody who is working on the ground (including Russia’s representatives) and protects the status quo from any new complications – I want to wish them peace, patience, success and good luck in this difficult mission to settle one of the most complicated, long-lasting and violent conflicts. I want to wish them confidence that everything will turn out well, provided that they all do their best.
Maria Zakharova: I extensively covered this matter during the briefing. The memory of our people’s concerted struggle against the misanthropic ideology of Nazism and fascism is the cornerstone of our common history. All the CIS member states, except for the one which you know very well, are united in this matter.
In 2020, the Commonwealth countries held a great number of joint political and commemorative events marking the 75th anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War of 1941‒1945. The most important event that I want to mention included the Victory Parade on June 24, 2020, on Red Square, when troops of all the CIS countries (Kiev was, obviously, not invited) marched in front of the CIS leaders who found it possible to visit Moscow during the pandemic (Ilham Aliyev was among the attendees). Commemorative medals were presented to veterans, similar to those they received during the year of the Great Victory that united them.
We are developing multilateral cooperation. Azerbaijan has unfailingly been among the co-authors of the Resolution on Combating Glorification of Nazism, Neo-Nazism and other Practices that Contribute to Fuelling Contemporary Forms of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, which Russia submitted for consideration at the UN General Assembly. That constitutes a good practical confirmation of the fact that Russia’s and Azerbaijan’s approaches to preserving the historical truth and countering falsification of history and the outcome of the Great Patriotic War and World War II, in particular, are close or congruent.
Maria Zakharova: We have read the statement made by Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu. I would like to note that Turkey is not the only country that has voiced its readiness to host the next meeting of the 3+3 regional consultative platform. This is proof of the parties’ interest in continued joint efforts and practical interaction.
The site and substance of the next meeting are being coordinated by the foreign ministries based on consensus. We believe that it should first of all focus on issues of common interest to all the parties, namely, the development of trade, economic, transport, cultural and humanitarian ties, as well as efforts against common challenges and threats. All these areas of work contribute to building trust and stability in the region.
As for Georgia’s participation, during the first meeting of the platform held on December 10, 2021, all the participating countries, including Russia, expressed their unanimous interest in Georgia’s participation in the 3+3 platform and agreed that the door remains open for Georgia.
Maria Zakharova: Presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov has already made a statement regarding this meeting. Any other information is available at the Presidential Executive Office.
I would like to remind you that it has become traditional to hold informal meetings of the CIS heads of state, usually at the end of the year. Their format does not include a fixed agenda; the meeting is held in the form of a free discussion. The CIS leaders are expected to review the organisation’s performance in the outgoing year and set out the main objectives for the future. They usually highlight multilateral cooperation within the framework of the CIS and review their approaches to the main international and reginal issues.
Any topics can be discussed at the upcoming meeting. Please, ask the Executive Office of the President of Russia for details.
Maria Zakharova: We are closely monitoring the internal political developments in Abkhazia. The tensions that peaked on December 21 are gradually subsiding.
Russia and Abkhazia are working consistently to develop and strengthen multifaceted interstate ties. They are based on the solid principles of equality, mutual respect for sovereignty and non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, which have guided our relations since Russia recognised the independence of the Republic of Abkhazia.
Our bilateral cooperation in the sphere of defence, security and border protection is reliably protecting peace and stability in the region in the best interests of our countries. A close coordination of our foreign policy activities helps us to promote the interests of independent Abkhazia on the international stage, including on the important platform of the Geneva Discussions on Security and Stability in the South Caucasus.
I would like to note that the Agreement on a joint Russian military base in the Republic of Abkhazia, signed on February 17, 2010, and ratified on January 20, 2012, is available in the public domain. The agreement was ratified by the People’s Assembly (parliament) of Abkhazia. Anyone can read its text and the list of Russian military bases and their locations.
Maria Zakharova: We have already commented on this subject. We pointed out that we do not accept the glorification of extremists, armed insurgents and collaborators, let alone terrorists, in any form or practice. This is Russia’s official stand. It does not change and does not need to be reaffirmed. It is a basic principle of Russia’s domestic and foreign policies. In this context, I am surprised that anyone can have any questions regarding this. In this particular case, it is not a matter of making loud or emotional statements. This is our fundamental position of principle, which has been set out in all foreign and domestic policy doctrines of Russia.
It is not the first attempt to memorialise a person who is responsible for the deaths of thousands of Russian citizens, people of different nationalities and faiths.
Such actions are unacceptable and should be firmly condemned by the international community. We must act as one on such cases.
They contradict the essence of Russia-Turkey relations of mutually beneficial cooperation, the preservation and strengthening of which has been in the focus of attention of our heads of state.
We hope that our Turkish partners will very seriously consider Russia’s message that such actions are unacceptable and serve only to undermine mutual trust. The justification and glorification of militant leaders, extremists and terrorists for time-serving considerations are absolutely unacceptable. It is Russia’s position of principle.
Maria Zakharova: My impression was different. Maybe you are citing an incorrect translation. He said, “If we (the US) are not engaged, if we’re not leading, then one of two things: either someone else is likely to be, and probably not in a way that actually advances the interests and the values of the American people; or, maybe just as bad, no one is, and then you have a vacuum that tends to be filled by chaos and law of the jungle before it’s filled by anything else.”
The US has said so many conceptual things lately that it is beginning to contradict itself. But one thing remains unchanged: their endless desire to be leaders and their endless fear (and this statement is a clear example) of losing this leadership.
Many of their actions are based on their fear of losing their own exceptional nature and the leading role (which has nothing to do with real leadership) and their vision of themselves as an endless master of everything. The most dangerous thing is not that they think these things, but that at the core there is a fear of losing all that. It means that they don’t understand that they don’t have these qualities at the current stage, and that the world is being built upon totally different concepts. When the political elite harbours fears and shows this fear, it has already lost.
Maria Zakharova: What an interesting way to frame the question. You said that Finnish and Swedish representatives said that their countries should not be left behind when it comes to collective security for the entire European continent. Can Russia be left behind when European security matters are discussed? We have been asking this question the entire world. Why have you decided that one specific country can be left out when talking about the security of the entire continent where this country is located by signing under obligations within an international structure, in this case, the OSCE documents. Why do you even think that you can rule the world’s destinies without those who bore the brunt of saving the world and have been guaranteeing stability and security, together with its partners, for many years? Why do you think that someone can be left behind? Why do you think that you can simply forget Russia’s proactive steps when Russia reaffirmed its commitment to indivisible security, or rewrite them to cast Russia as a pseudo-aggressor in the public space? This is the underlying premise of our question and our position.
Everyone must be involved in discussions about security and promoting collective approaches. There are many reasons for this. One of them is that we face the same challenges. When we are told that we are enemies to one another, this is not true. This is not Russia’s approach. We do share the same challenges, however, and they must bring us together. Many of our opponents have been saying that it is Russia that challenges other countries, in particular, NATO, so they need to stand united against Russia. Coming together to counter China has become trendy over the past years. This way we will not be “alone.” This is not the way things are. We face common challenges and threats: extremism, terrorism, drug trafficking, organised crime, corruption, kidnappings, the pandemic and unknown diseases (as it turns out), which humankind has yet to learn to counter, as well as all these natural disasters that keep catching us unprepared. These are the potential threats. Experts know them. There is probably a lot more out there which requires a collective response from us. How did it occur to anyone that you can “throw someone overboard,” while giving others a place of honour? No. Russia paid a high price for this very strategic stability and security, including during World War II. We have every right to discuss the future of our planet and our European continent on equal terms.
I do agree that security cannot be divided into “our” security and “someone else’s” security. Everyone must be involved, on a global scale. Recalling this when tension already runs high is too late. You must always keep this in mind during collective discussions. After all, Finland and Sweden are part of other regional structures and alliances, where they can speak out in favour of indivisible security, and could have done this before. There were statements of this kind in the past. Unfortunately, no one spoke out on this on a global scale; there was no powerful global voice. All this domination and endless orders and rectifications will instantly cease once European countries collectively state that they will discuss European security among themselves, instead of seeking help from or involving those who do not belong here. We do understand their historical role and capabilities, but still, it is those who are here on the European continent who must take ownership of these processes.
This principle has been set forth by the OSCE, where Russia, Finland, Sweden, and Iceland are all members. This means that no one has the right to build its own security at the expense of others. This is the kind of approach the Russian Federation has been consistently promoting. However, for some reason quotes to this effect from the statements by the Russian President, Foreign Minister or Defence Minister never make the headlines when covering Russia’s position. Western magazines and newspapers look elsewhere for their headlines, leave these statements unnoticed and attribute other messages to Russia.
We strongly believe that Russia’s proposals on ensuring clear international legally binding security guarantees will promote de-escalation and reduce the military threat across the European space, from the Atlantic to the Pacific.
Russia views Finland’s and Sweden’s traditional policy of non-participation in military alliances as an important stability factor for Northern Europe. We always stressed that every country has its own sovereign right to choose its national defence and security strategy. Of course, this should not be done at the expense of security for other nations. At the same time, we cannot fail to notice NATO’s targeted efforts to draw these countries into its sphere of interests and policies. They have been increasingly active in taking part in large-scale NATO exercises, including by hosting these manoeuvres with the scenarios for these drills including nuclear strikes against a “comparable” enemy. They must be fully aware of what it means to launch a nuclear strike against a neighbouring state. Otherwise, this would make them naive. Maybe it is worth recalling the Fukushima disaster and its consequences for the region, and it did not even involve military hostilities or nuclear strikes. Maybe it is worth proceeding from there when holding exercises involving drills for using nuclear weapons against neighbouring countries, and simply ask yourselves, what will happen to you? Do they have territories on other continents where they can all move just in case? Or maybe they have spaceships to reach other planets?
This begs quite a few questions. It is obvious that this is an issue of Finland and Sweden joining NATO, which is primarily a military structure that focuses on aggressive actions, not defence. We have seen this in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, and other places. This would have serious military and political consequences which would require an adequate response on Russia’s part. We have never concealed and always stressed that we stand for collective efforts, negotiations, and indivisible security.
Maria Zakharova: The way you have phrased your question, it sounds like some Foreign Ministry representatives are objecting to Brussels’ involvement. This is never the case with us. We work out collective approaches to drafting and pursuing our foreign policy. We have a unified Russian stance. Other countries can do this differently. In some cases, they have as many approaches as there are government agencies in a country; the more influential politicians, the more voices in the choir. Unfortunately, their tunes lack harmony, for some reason. We have no problems of the kind.
Secondly, we intend to talk with those who can make a real contribution to providing long-term legal guarantees of Russia's security on the Western track. It is in the EU’s interests to help prevent further degradation of the military-political situation in Europe, create prerequisites for eliminating dividing lines on the continent and free up resources for joint constructive work towards strengthening a single and indivisible Euro-Atlantic and Eurasian landscape. For this, the United States and its allies will need to provide guarantees that NATO will not expand and that weapons systems that threaten Russia will not be deployed near our borders.
Is the EU ready to take these steps? Is Brussels ready to interact with Russia on the basis of equality and respect for our legitimate interests in this matter? No, we do not see that it is yet. Hopefully, yet is the key word here, not the negative part. So far, what we see is that the EU’s illegitimate restrictive measures against Russia and our closest allies are growing steadily. European agencies are promoting this new formula for interaction with our country, this phantasmagoric “push back against, contain, and engage with Russia” triad. Naturally, it is impossible to build a stable and predictable relationship on such a disrespectful basis.
Look at the anti-Russia statements Mr Borrell allows himself to make, statements that are out of any diplomatic practice context, in the columns he publishes (we don’t know if he actually writes them), and in his spoken statements. One sometimes stumbles across discrepancies between his letters, views and remarks. It is difficult to say why this happens. Much of what he says is unacceptable for a person of his calibre and experience.
Question: Regarding the possible deployment of nuclear weapons in Belarus, if this happens, can Russia deploy conventional forces there? How realistic is this?
Maria Zakharova: For obvious reasons, these questions should be addressed to the Ministry of Defence. Everyone should understand why this topic even arose – because of NATO’s continued hostile actions. Russian officials have said that if this continues (these hostile, unfriendly, aggressive moves), a proportionate response will follow, including one involving military technology.
Maria Zakharova: Latvia is not involved in any Kaliningrad logistics plans. Passenger and cargo traffic to and from the Kaliningrad Region goes across Lithuania.
Overall, over the last two decades, there has been uninterrupted traffic along this corridor in accordance with the November 11, 2002 Joint Statement of the Russian Federation and the European Union, and the June 20, 2003 Russian-Lithuanian intergovernmental agreement on the procedure for issuing simplified railway travel documents.
Vilnius has introduced some restrictions on passenger rail transportation due to the pandemic (no more than 250 people on a train at the moment). This is because of the pandemic. We assume that, as the epidemiological situation improves, all restrictions will be lifted and transit will be fully restored.
At the same time, we have already voiced our concern on December 16 about Lithuania’s possible restrictions on the shipment of goods from Belarus, which may negatively affect the Kaliningrad cargo transit. Hopefully, this will not happen. There are enough problems in the world without it. We hope that Lithuania will fully comply with its international obligations.
Our approach is extremely simple: any steps taken by Vilnius should not impede or in any way complicate the movement of Russian citizens or goods between the Kaliningrad Region and the rest of Russia.
Maria Zakharova: The understandings reached in Brussels regarding the railways are part of the November 26 trilateral accords between the leaders of the three countries – Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia. A substantive discussion on these agreements continues at the Trilateral Working Group co-chaired by deputy prime ministers.
As a reminder, this mechanism addresses an entire package of issues for unblocking transport and economic ties in the South Caucasus, including the restoration of rail and road transport connections in the region. As the heads of state agreed in Sochi, we are working towards an expeditious launch of specific transport projects.
The co-chairs of the Trilateral Working Group will update the media on their progress.
So all statements being made now should be aimed at the same target, the one we are talking about. They must work to achieve this result and create an appropriate atmosphere.
I cannot say we are not recording any problems. We are not just recording them; we are addressing them. It is our job to create and form an appropriate atmosphere, rather than fixate on problems and going on about them. We see all this; we are recording it, understand it, take a lot of it into consideration to discuss with the parties; we are talking separately, and collectively, etc. In the information space, we need to show positive points as well, rather than endlessly presenting problems as cornerstones and all other things as influenced by those problems.
Maria Zakharova: We stick to the November 26 agreement and are working to create a bilateral commission on the delimitation of the state border between the Republic of Azerbaijan and the Republic of Armenia with subsequent demarcation with Russia’s assistance upon request from the parties.
We welcome international efforts aimed at normalising bilateral relations. Just keep in mind the current regional realities, including consent from Baku and Yerevan, as well as the added value to be derived from this.
For our part, we will continue to provide Azerbaijan and Armenia with all the necessary support, including consultancy.
Maria Zakharova: I would say you and your colleagues do need to take a break, because productive work is impossible without proper rest. Problems do tend to pop up on holidays and weekends, anyway. We must take every opportunity to relax.
As for a meeting of the heads of state, any contact at the highest level is something the Presidential Executive Office comments on. The President's annual news conference took place yesterday, with most plans discussed there. You can rely on this and contact the Presidential Press Service if you have questions.
I would suggest you take some time off.
Additional materials
-
Photos
