Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, Makhachkala, May 27, 2025

 

Table of contents

 

1. International and interregional ties, landmarks, culture, and traditions of the Republic of Dagestan
2. Sergey Lavrov’s schedule
3. Sergey Lavrov’s meeting with UN Under-Secretary-General Tom Fletcher
4. Meeting of Government Commission on Compatriots Living Abroad
5. Presentation of the Republic of Dagestan
6. Ukraine update
7. Norway’s aggressive war preparations
8. NATO troops and equipment taking part in Narrow Waters – 25 Navy exercises on Finland’s territory
9. Humanitarian aid for Afghanistan
10. Investigating crimes perpetrated by the West in Afghanistan
11. South Sudan update
12. Canadian diplomats’ historical innuendos
13. Crimes against the Soviet memorial legacy in the European Union
14. Foreign Ministry report on the desecration and destruction of monuments dedicated to those who fought against Nazism during WWII in several European countries
15. The 70th anniversary of the Baikonur Cosmodrome
16. Beijing’s Russia Day celebrations

Answers to media questions:

1. Potential use of Russian regions in foreign policy
2. Certain statements by the Foreign Minister of Lithuania
3. Remarks by the Foreign Minister of Moldova
4. Sanctions pressure on Russia
5. Attack on a Russian military base in Syria
6. Expansion of Russia’s presence in Africa
7. Destruction of Soviet monuments in Poland
8. Russia’s collaboration with other nations on security matters
9. Guidelines for journalists’ conduct in foreign states
10. Financial cooperation between Russia and the UAE
11. Humanitarian aid for displaced persons from Karabakh
12. Situation around the US missile defence system Golden Dome
13. Humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip
14. Press tours across Russian regions organised by the Russian Foreign Ministry
15. Indo-Pakistani relations
16. Russia’s role in ensuring security in South Asia
17. Certain statements by Friedrich Merz
18. Situation regarding the ban on the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
19. Situation in the Gaza Strip
20. Mediation efforts in the Ukraine conflict
21. Switzerland is no longer a neutral state
22. Russian-Armenian relations
23. “Adequacy” of European mediators
24. Dagestan’s role in fostering economic ties with various nations
25. Surge in military expenditure and the militarisation of Europe

 

I usually begin by saying “Welcome to the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation,” but today we are guests here. At the same time, we will meet with our foreign guests. We are meeting in the heart of Dagestan, Makhachkala, in the south of Russia.

This event is being attended by foreign guests from many countries, including journalists accredited in Russia who have come to this hospitable land on a media trip at the invitation of the authorities and people of the Republic of Dagestan.

I asked our hosts if I could greet everyone. Since this honour has been delegated to me, I am delighted to welcome everyone, but especially foreign journalists,  to Dagestan, even though, as I have said, we ourselves are guests here at the kind invitation of our hosts.

It is a unique land. We have been talking at length about the dialogue of civilisations, multiculturalism, as this process is called at international organisations, the preservation of traditions, and the current state of our civilisation.

I believe that Dagestan is a place where a great number of widely different ethnic groups have lived side by side for centuries, jointly overcoming problems, and experiencing the ebbs and flows of various periods in our history.

Yesterday I had a meeting with representatives of this fantastic group that consists of various ethnic groups, nationalities and religious communities. We have come to the conclusion that the term “crossroads of cultures” does not fully explain this land. Crossroads is a place you go through, while Dagestan is where different cultures have come to stay and live harmoniously in a fantastic synergy of cultures.

I invite everyone to come here. There are many things to see and admire here – we will talk about them later today. There are many things to study and places to  stay for recreation. In a word, this is an unbelievable land. Thank you again for an opportunity to meet here.

The history, culture and especially hospitality of people in Makhachkala not only make this city the capital but also the symbol of unity of multi-ethnic Dagestan. I see this as yet another distinctive feature of the Caucasus. Those who study the Caucasus  simply must come here because Dagestan is one of the trademarks of the Caucasus where the past mingles with the future into historical memory that is our protected heritage. You can see it everywhere here – in stones, architecture and nature.

The media trip is being held from May 26 to 29. Foreign journalists from 11 countries will find many things of interest which they can write about, such as the industrial potential and the socioeconomic, cultural and historical aspects of life in this region. But the main thing is that they can receive answers to their questions about the republic from local residents.

I am delighted to welcome journalists from Azerbaijan, Belarus, Venezuela, Hungary, Vietnam, Cuba, the United Arab Emirates,  Türkiye, Iceland, Kazakhstan, and Pakistan, as well as our colleagues from regional media outlets.

As usual, members of the journalistic corps from many countries will attend this briefing online.

 

International and interregional ties, landmarks, culture, and traditions of the Republic of Dagestan

 

Dagestan presents itself as one of the most vibrant, distinctive, and appealing regions of our nation. It is a promising and dynamically developing constituent entity of the Russian Federation, where over 30 indigenous ethnic groups and more than 60 distinct peoples with their own languages and dialects coexist in peace and harmony. Each of these communities has preserved its traditions – something I find particularly striking.

The republic actively cultivates external relations, successfully reorients its economy towards closer partnerships with friendly states, and seeks new opportunities. As the southernmost region of Russia, occupying a strategically advantageous position with direct access to international maritime routes, Dagestan serves as a vital link in the transport and logistics infrastructure of the International North–South Transport Corridor.

At present, Dagestan maintains ties with 62 states, prioritising cooperation with CIS and EAEU countries, as well as South and Southeast Asia.

Key sectors of the Republic’s economy – agriculture, food and processing industries, and engineering – are experiencing robust growth. Seven industrial parks are currently operational. In 2024, Dagestan’s total foreign trade turnover reached $314.28 million, with primary exports directed to Iran (22.6 percent), Afghanistan (6.3 percent), and Iraq (3.9 percent). The Republic’s largest imports originate from Iran (9.6 percent), China (9.3 percent), and Belarus (7.8 percent).

We support the regional leadership and business community in their pursuit of new promising economic ties and the expansion of cultural and humanitarian contacts with foreign partners. In this endeavour, the Representative Office of the Russian Foreign Ministry in Makhachkala provides practical assistance to the Dagestan administration.

The cultural diversity of Dagestan’s peoples, their folklore, and traditional crafts have long become a recognisable brand. The Republic boasts 11 national theatres – just yesterday in Derbent, we witnessed the near-completion of the Azerbaijani theatre’s reconstruction, which is set to reopen shortly. Additionally, there are over 1,000 club institutions and 97 municipal schools of supplementary arts education. The region has long been renowned for its diverse crafts: metalwork artistry (the famed Kubachi Museum, which we had the pleasure of visiting yesterday in Derbent); stone and wood carving (Dagestani stone is already a pan-Russian brand); pottery; and the famous Dagestani rugs, which have gained global recognition in recent years.

Even in the medieval era, Dagestan was home to major centres of artisanal craftsmanship, whose products found markets across the region and far beyond.

This land has long captivated and inspired travellers, artists, and writers. In 2023, the Republic – and indeed all of Russia – widely commemorated the centenary of the birth of the outstanding Dagestani national poet, Rasul Gamzatov. The celebrations paid profound tribute to his memory and served as a reminder of the enduring significance of spiritual values – values he extolled with a distinctly national and folkloric flair. His works championed civic unity, patriotism, and the friendship and brotherhood among the peoples of our great country, all conveyed with sincerity.

Dagestan’s natural beauty, the Caspian coastline, and its golden sands attract beach enthusiasts. Popular tourist routes combine visits to scenic landscapes and nearly 6,000 cultural and historical heritage sites. The crown jewel is Naryn-Kala – a fortress-citadel in Derbent, which we were shown yesterday. It is not the only treasure, but certainly the grandest. Such genuine riches abound at every corner and turn here.

In southern Dagestan lies the unique mountain complex of Shalbuzdag – Bazardüzü – Yarydag, a magnet for thrill-seekers. It offers diverse opportunities for recreation and adventure to suit all tastes.

One could speak for hours about Derbent – and the locals do so with particular relish, recounting the region’s history with artistic flair.

Yesterday, on my flight from Moscow, I found myself seated next to a group (I hesitate to call them tourists). It turned out they were travelling to Dagestan for leisure – a trip they make regularly, despite having visited many places. They raved about how each visit reveals new facets of the region. What I found particularly remarkable was that, despite their specific enthusiasm for nature (they spoke extensively about waterfalls, mountain gorges, and rivers, showing photographs), this was not what they valued most. When I asked what was of greatest importance, if not nature, nor the sea, nor museums, they responded that I would discover it for myself – it was the exceptional hospitality and warmth of the local people. I can unequivocally confirm that this is indeed true.

There is something I couldn’t fail to highlight, not when this year marks 80 years of the Great Victory. During the Great Patriotic War, Dagestan – the region known as the Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic of Dagestan back then – made an inestimable contribution to achieving victory, its residents doing their fair share on the battlefield and working with dedication on the home front.

Dagestan contributed the 44th and 58th Armies, the 91st Rifle Division, the Makhachkala NKVD Rifle Division, the 714th Anti-Aircraft Artillery Regiment and many other units, which were formed in the region. Nearly 126,500 men from the cities and districts of Dagestan were enlisted to serve in the Soviet army and navy. In addition, before the war broke out, about 16,000 Dagestanis were serving in the regular army and navy, and they took the first blow of the Nazi troops, along with their fellow servicemen from other regions.

Dagestanis fought heroically defending Brest, Leningrad, Moscow, Odessa, Sevastopol, Stalingrad, and Novorossiysk; they repelled and crushed the enemy in Belarus and Ukraine, and in the Caucasus mountains, before actively joining the liberation of Europe, as well as Korea and China, from fascism and Japanese militarism.

You can see the connection between that war and the current events. We never talked about the years of the Great Patriotic War, or World War II. It was an international duty we performed, in its highest and deepest meaning. And it is coming back to us now, reciprocating the help we offered to the world. Not everyone – indeed, some have been ungrateful, but others have joined us to fight neo-Nazism together, shoulder to shoulder.

During the Great Patriotic War, factories and plants in Dagestan manufactured a wide variety of products for the army, such as shells, torpedoes, mortars, tinned meat and vegetables and many others. Despite being located far behind the lines, the region entirely shifted to war economy, including its healthcare facilities. The first evacuation hospital in Derbent was opened in July 1941, literally in the first weeks of the war, with 60 more hospitals added later during the war.

Dozens of Dagestanis showed unparalleled courage fighting in partisan groups on occupied Soviet territory and participating in the resistance movements against Hitler in European countries. This tradition is still alive! Dagestanis are fighting as part of the regular army today, and they are brave and effective fighters. What used to be called partisan units, are now volunteer groups. This tradition of fighting fascism and Nazism (neo-Nazism today) – an evil that seeks to discriminate people, assuming that some are better than others simply by birth right – is definitely still alive.

The feats of arms and labour that Dagestanis accomplished during the Great Patriotic War were recognised by high state awards of the USSR. Fifty-eight Dagestanis were awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union. Seven became full recipients of the Soldier’s Order of Glory (all three classes). More than 100,000 Dagestanis were decorated with combat orders and medals, and thousands more, with orders and medals for selfless labour on the home front. More than 27,000 individuals were decorated with the medal For the Defence of the Caucasus. After the war, about 142,000 Dagestanis were awarded the medal For Valiant Labour in the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945.

Now back to our time and the mass heroism shown by Dagestanis on the special military operation battlefields – over 1,000 representatives of the ethnic minorities of Dagestan have been decorated with orders and medals, and this figure is steadily growing. While we were preparing for this briefing, we read reports about nine Dagestanis honoured with the Hero of Russia title; the more recent number is 13.

Nurmagomed Gadzhimagomedov was the first Dagestani to be awarded the Hero of Russia title for the heroism and courage he displayed during the special military operation. The unit he was entrusted with commanding was forced to engage in a battle being severely outnumbered by the enemy. Even wounded, he continued firing, first to inflict damage on the enemy, and then to cover his subordinates’ retreat he had ordered. Surrounded, he detonated a grenade, killing himself along with more than a dozen enemies. President Vladimir Putin said, honouring this fallen hero: “When I see heroes like this young man, Nurmagomed Gadzhimagomedov, a resident of Dagestan and an ethnic Lak, and our other soldiers, I can hardly stop myself from saying: I am a Lak, a Dagestani, a Chechen, an Ingush, a Russian, a Tatar, a Jew, a Mordovian, an Ossetian.”

In fact, these are great words, and like nowhere else, they are literally etched in every stone, every tree, and every architectural landmark here, a testament to a synergy of nationalities, ethnicities, and religions in the best and highest meaning of the word in the name of serving the Truth.

back to top

 

Sergey Lavrov’s schedule

 

Last time, we extensively covered events taking place around these days. I will skip this part today. All the information is available on the website and social media accounts of the Russian Foreign Ministry.

back to top

 

Sergey Lavrov’s meeting with UN Under-Secretary-General Tom Fletcher

 

On June 2, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will receive Tom Fletcher, UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Head of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, who is currently in Moscow.

During the consultations, the parties plan to discuss some of the most acute humanitarian crises, including those in the Middle East, such as the crisis in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict zone, in Syria, Lebanon, Sudan and Yemen, as well as Myanmar and Afghanistan. The Foreign Minister and the Under-Secretary-General will also discuss UN’s activities in Ukraine and the Office’s operations, including in the context of the comprehensive UN reform.

back to top

 

Meeting of Government Commission on Compatriots Living Abroad

 

On June 3, the Russian Foreign Ministry will host a regular meeting of the Government Commission on Compatriots Living Abroad (GCCLA), chaired by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

Russian senators and members of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation involved in the GCCLA, as well as representatives of federal and regional executive bodies, senior managers of public organisations and foundations will attend the meeting.

The meeting agenda will centre around the Russian community’s involvement in the events marking the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War and the work of Russian federal entities with Russian communities abroad — with the Republic of Tatarstan as an example. The participants will also discuss preparations for the World Congress of Compatriots Living Abroad scheduled for October.

back to top

 

Presentation of the Republic of Dagestan

 

It may be an event in Russian Foreign Minister’s schedule but it is directly related to Dagestan.

On June 6, the Cultural Centre of the Main Administration of Service to the Diplomatic Corps of the Russian Foreign Ministry will host a presentation of the economic, investment and tourist potential of the Republic of Dagestan. The presentation will comprise an exhibition of the region’s achievements in socio-economic development that showcase its unique natural beauty and authentic culture. The presentation is to give an extra impetus to expanding the republic’s links in international affairs and foreign trade.

Members of the diplomatic corps, representatives of the business community, and journalists have been invited to the event.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Head of the Republic of Dagestan Sergey Melikov will address the guests.

back to top

 

Ukraine update

 

New developments have been taking place along this track almost daily. Suffice to mention what they did to the agreements resulting from the Istanbul talks, which required so much effort, mostly due to the position adopted by the Kiev regime.

Let me remind you that Russia and Ukraine carried out a prisoner exchange under the 1,000 for 1,000 formula. Held in three stages on May 23-25, 2025, with the assistance of our Belarusian partners, it enabled 880 Russian service personnel and 120 civilians to return home, including people from the Kursk Region who were taken to Ukraine by force. Ukraine received the same number of its nationals and the ratio between military personnel and civilians was also the same. There was a difference, however, since no one took people from Ukraine and brought them to Russia by force, unlike what the Ukrainian Armed Forces and neo-Nazis did in the Kursk Region.

Russia continues drafting a memorandum regarding the future peace treaty. It is expected to set forth our position on several points by articulating settlement principles, setting a timeframe for signing a peace agreement, and a possible ceasefire for a specific period subject to achieving corresponding agreements. As soon as this memorandum is ready – and I must mention that Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has been sharing his comments on its progress almost daily – it will be forwarded to Kiev. We hope that Ukraine is also doing its part of the job and will send us its draft when it receives the Russian version.

Against this backdrop, we are witnessing Vladimir Zelensky’s destructive statements. Instead of recognising and heeding those who are trying to focus on a constructive agenda and achieving tangible results, he has opted for escalating his aggressive rhetoric by trying to shift the blame on Russia for making the conflict last longer than it should by accusing our country of what he calls its lack of commitment to peace. Moreover, he keeps begging for more weapons every day. He wants stricter sanctions on Russia. Everyone is already laughing in his face, even those who have been imposing sanctions for all these years. After all, is there any space left for tightening these sanctions? They have already adopted 17 crazy packages. Vladimir Zelensky is begging his mentors to give his office more aid. But we all know where this assistance ends up and what purposes it serves. Some of these funds get embezzled, while some are used to kill people in Ukraine. Why are Vladimir Zelensky and those backing him doing this? The answer is rather obvious. They want to complicate the nascent peace process. Those who want peace do not harbour plans to deliver more weapons to the region, or to make them as lethal as possible, or to make the situation worse while preventing the preliminary contacts and tentative approaches resulting from the Istanbul talks from taking root.

I cannot say that this is what the EU stands for, since not all EU countries support this madness. By the same token, I can hardly describe this as a European position, since the EU does not represent the continent. In fact, we share the same European continent with the West. So I would rather say that the party of war in Western Europe has been relentless in its efforts along this track. EU countries adopted the 17th sanctions package against Russia, but they can only hurt themselves with these sanctions. They agreed to put more pressure on our country with these sanctions while proactively supporting Ukraine. In what way, may I ask? How have you supported them? Who do you support? Are you supporting those who embezzle all the funds you send to the Kiev regime? If you want to help people, you would be better off asking for their opinion.

As emphasised by Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof during his joint news conference with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte on May 21, 2025, alliance members will continue to support the Kiev regime and invest in its “defence” regardless of the outcome of Russia-Ukraine talks. This is absolute madness. On the one hand, at this stage, you (I mean NATO and EU representatives) speak about being given a place at the negotiating table and the need to progress toward peace. You go back to accusing Russia of taking the wrong approach to peace settlement. On the other hand, you declare that you have no intention to consider the results of Russia-Ukraine talks regardless of the sort of agreement to be reached by the parties. This is either complete insanity or a cold-blooded ideology of those advocating exclusively for undermining the remaining peace on the European continent in favour of war.

A similar agenda regarding the progressive militarisation of Ukraine has been announced for the upcoming NATO summit in The Hague on June 24-25.

In the past days, the Kiev regime has significantly intensified terrorist attacks against civilians. Apparently, emboldened by Western fantasies about militarisation, the regime now feels completely unrestrained. These terrorist attacks target civilian infrastructure across multiple Russian regions, including Moscow.

On May 23, 2025, the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement on this matter, mentioning only some of the crimes committed by Ukrainian Armed Forces militants. The full scope of their atrocities is far broader.

In the Belgorod Region, on May 20, two women were seriously injured by an explosive device dropped from a UAV on the agricultural facilities in Tserkovny. On May 22, two other women and a 7-year-old girl were injured after an enemy drone attacked a private home in Shebekino. On May 24, two workers of the Russian Emergencies Ministry were injured while eliminating dry grass fire caused by another drone explosion in the village of Zozuli. Between May 20-25, at least 15 civilians were injured by dozens of strikes and drone attacks across the Belgorod Region.

I remember well how Westerners would take photographs of individual casualties — somebody killed or wounded — and display them in parliaments, government meetings, turn them into memes, use them as profile pictures on their own social media, and lecture others about empathising with the sufferings of specific individuals. They would invoke all previously adopted treatises on human rights, demanding, insisting, and intimidating. How come they now fail to see any of these civilian victims? How come they refuse to look at these civilian faces?

In the Kursk Region, on May 22, a 50-year-old civilian was killed and four others injured by Ukrainian Armed Forces strikes and drone attacks on populated areas. Also on May 22, the Banderites attempted another assassination of Belovsky District Head Nikolay Volobuyev, who managed to exit his vehicle before it was struck by a Ukrainian UAV. Earlier in March, he had already sustained concussion in a Ukrainian neo-Nazi attack on his vehicle while delivering bread to local residents.

On May 23, militants from the Armed Force of Ukraine attacked the town of Lgov using HIMARS rocket launchers, injuring 16 people, including two children, and damaging 64 single-family homes, 28 flats in three buildings, and two shops. On the same day, they attacked Rylsk damaging a sports school for children and youth, two flats, and two administrative buildings. On May 24, five people suffered from enemy attacks in the Kursk Region.

I can predict that American and British tabloids will present this as a revelation after some time. They will drop a bombshell, citing those same figures and facts that we have been highlighting every day and that are publicly available. Behind these figures are real people – their names and dates of birth, and unfortunately, now also dates of death, places of burial, or places of treatment and rehabilitation. However, they are not interested in these lives; they do not see the people behind the statistics. Remember how it was, and still is, after Bucha. They have provided no names, dates of birth, or places of burial – nothing. However, the community’s name has become a meme for Western journalists.

The Ukrainian Nazis have launched a true manhunt in Russia’s Bryansk Region. On May 22, one civilian was killed and two injured by drones in communities close to the border. Since May 23, two people have been killed and one injured by drones deliberately targeting civilian cars.

While I mentioned damage to residential buildings, flats and sports schools from the May 24 attacks, five civilians in the Kursk Region were also injured by those strikes.

Since May 20, relentless shelling of communities in the Kherson Region has led to one civilian death, and at least 10 people have been wounded, including a 19-year-old girl.

In total, according to Investigative Committee, since the start of the special military operation, 43 Russian regions have come under attack with over 8,000 shelling incidents in border areas and deeper into our country’s territory.

They realise that, to put it mildly, they are incurring substantial losses on the battlefield, and they are retaliating by assaulting civilians and attacking non-combatants, which unequivocally makes them terrorists. The Kiev regime is using terrorist methods to create an illusion of being able to negotiate “from a position of strength.” In reality, by doing so, it only demonstrates its incapacity, along with its puny and hateful nature.

These actions call for punishment. Russian courts continue to sentence Ukrainian neo-Nazis and mercenaries for their war crimes and other offences.

Ambako Soziashvili, Simon McCarthy and Caleb John List, mercenaries from Georgia, the United States and Australia who fought in the Ukrainian armed forces, were sentenced in absentia to 14 years’ imprisonment each. A Colombian, Luis Miguel Ortiz Ruda, was sentenced in absentia to 13.5 years in prison. All of them are on the international wanted list.

Also, several AFU militants were sentenced to various terms for crimes against civilians in the Kursk Region, including Vitaly Lutsenko (16 years), Sergey Chumasov (15 years), Yaroslav Zubritsky (18 years), Alexey Bolshakov (17 years), Arsen Stegar (17 years), Mikhail Shkoda (17 years), and Andrey Dolgy (18 years).

Since 2014, Russia’s Investigative Committee has initiated over 7,000 criminal cases against 1,500 individuals, including members of the Ukrainian leadership, its security agencies, and radical neo-Nazi groups. A total of 132,000 persons have been recognised as victims, among whom 24,000 are children. Criminal liability has been imposed on 962 individuals, with both in-person and in absentia verdicts delivered.

Twenty-four thousand children have been officially designated as victims. Where are the specialised bodies of the United Nations, its special rapporteurs, or the envoys of various international organisations, intergovernmental or non-governmental entities? We recall how they fixated on a single photograph of a Syrian boy – who, incidentally, turned out to be alive. Yet here, we speak of 24,000 children!

Russia’s investigative authorities will continue gathering evidence to hold Ukrainian neo-Nazis and foreign mercenaries accountable for war crimes and other atrocities.

On May 22, Ukrainian Finance Minister Sergey Marchenko proposed that the European Union participate in financing the Armed Forces of Ukraine while simultaneously integrating them into the EU’s defence framework. From the perspective of the Kiev regime, this would cost pennies (based on the billions already squandered?), and in return, the EU – according to Bankovaya Street’s logic – would acquire “the world’s most powerful army.” The costs are to be divided among the so-called “coalition of the willing.”

With astonishing audacity, Sergey Marchenko asserted that “this solution offers strategic advantages for Ukraine, particularly in maintaining financial stability in 2026.” This reflects the obsessive notion advanced by Vladimir Zelensky of outsourcing the permanent upkeep of Bandera’s terrorist remnants to Euro-sponsors. Such a proposition is especially brazen against the backdrop of Ukraine’s rampant, systemic corruption across all tiers of governance. Previously, funds were merely funnelled into their coffers; now, they seek direct access to the EU’s financial reserves, intending to dictate what and how much they may pilfer. The insatiable embezzlers of Bankovaya Street continue devising new schemes to perpetuate their dependence on a Western Europe already buckling under the strain of militarisation. Moreover, the terrorist army of Ukrainian neo-Nazis is, to put it mildly, a dubious contributor to European defence.

Seven million Ukrainians currently reside abroad. Have they meaningfully assisted Western Europe? Have they distinguished themselves as creative specialists? Have they alleviated the region’s economic crisis? Or have they not? This is not a rhetorical question – it carries practical implications.

The utterly depraved nature of the Kiev clique was laid bare by their undisguised glee on social media following the contract killing on May 21 in Madrid of Andrey Portnov, former deputy head of the Ukrainian Presidential Office under Viktor Yanukovich. Portnov had previously announced his intent to publicly expose the corrupt Zelensky regime.

They revelled, exulted, and savoured every detail of the assassination. This unequivocally corroborates, albeit indirectly, the junta’s liquidation of a dissenting and dangerous opponent to perpetuate its grip on power and enable continued large-scale embezzlement across Ukraine’s territory.

As I have previously stated, multitudes of Ukrainian citizens reside beyond what they profess to be their homeland – all while calling upon others worldwide to defend it, content to calmly observe from afar.

Amid Ukraine’s catastrophic economic collapse and systemic corruption, its citizens persistently flee the country at every opportunity. According to the Ministry of Economy of Ukraine (I stress, their data), over 100,000 individuals have departed the country permanently since the beginning of 2025 (over these past few months). Globally, approximately 7 million Ukrainian so-called refugees now reside abroad. While certain states have granted them this status, labelling them ‘refugees’ remains deeply contentious given their conduct, among other reasons.

Rest assured that the actual migration numbers in Ukraine are much higher. Bankovaya Street can no longer keep the problem under wraps. According to a research conducted by the foundation led by Zelensky’s wife, every fourth youngster in Ukraine wants to leave the country. They are all terrified by the prospect of becoming cannon fodder. They did not come up with that prospect themselves. They are basing it on what they are being told officially. The other day, Deputy Head of Office of the President of Ukraine Irina Vereshchuk was unusually frank when she said, “Our children must prepare for war. Whether there is a ceasefire or not, the war will last a long time.”

This is something everyone in the West, especially those who still dare suggest that Russia supposedly doesn’t take the issue of a ceasefire seriously, should hear. We do take it seriously fully understanding what’s in the minds of those who are truly infected and obsessed with nothing but war and carnage.

Kiev regime’s madness knows no bounds when it comes to Christianity and Orthodoxy in Ukraine.

On May 20, the “transition period” established by the law On Protecting the Constitutional Order in the Sphere of Religious Organisations of August 20, 2024 which is popularly known as the “law banning the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC),” came to an end (a phrase that has a hideous ring to it). Under its provisions, the Zelensky-led regime plans to inspect religious organisations for affiliations with the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC). Founding documents, financial records, and other details will be reviewed. The goal is clear and it is to use any pretext to liquidate the canonical church and to transfer its property to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU). On May 9, the Ukrainian government approved the procedure for such inspections.

They decided to start at the top with the UOC’s Kiev Metropolis. The inspection began on May 20. Head of Ukraine’s State Service for Ethnic Policies and Freedom of Conscience Viktor Yelensky made it clear that if the Kiev Metropolis did not sever its ties with the ROC within a month, it will be liquidated by a court ruling. What’s next? What will they demand next time? Would they want them to renounce Jesus Christ? What do they need? It’s clear what they need. They want to destroy true values that have stood the test of millennia and are part of world civilisation and replace them with their own. This has been attempted before them, 80 years ago. It didn’t succeed then, and it won’t succeed now. But they are trying.

According to Yelensky, around 8,000 UOC parishes located in territories controlled by Kiev are at risk of closure. Church representatives are being bluntly told to issue more “clear-cut” official statements about the “irreversibility of the break-up with the Russian World.” This is how the neo-Nazi regime’s approach aimed at the destruction of the canonical church is being implemented. Let me remind you: this is being done by the officials whose job titles include the words “freedom of religion.”

In their hatred of everything connected to Russia, true Orthodoxy, and Christianity, Ukrainian officials have descended into utter madness. Everything I’m saying has sources and dates and can be verified.

Director of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra National Reserve (as it is now called) Maxim Ostapenko enthusiastically began looking for “Kremlin agents” among the frescoes of the monastery’s St Andrew’s Chapel, publicly describing them as painted in an “imperial style” and calling them “Russian World frescoes.” I will refrain from quoting the rest of the rabid nonsense he said about saints who came to us from the depths of history rather than the 20th century. It is blasphemous even to utter such things, although we are indeed documenting all of that.

The Foreign Ministry has released reports, On the Unlawful Actions of the Kiev Regime against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (UOC), its Clergy and Parish.” I believe a third report will be out before long.

Ironically, none of this delusional madness saved Maxim Ostapenko. He was removed from his post. Why, do you think? One might logically assume that Bankovaya took notice - or perhaps someone from a human rights organisation pointed out - that such a monster cannot represent anything that is related to freedom, religion, or nature reserves on the hallowed grounds of the sacred Kiev-Pechersk Lavra. You’d be shocked to find out. He was dismissed for a different reason.

According to the head of the agency, Nikolai Tochitsky, the director of the reserve was dismissed because of his “weak stance” in the fight against the UOC. He was not obscurantist enough. He didn’t rave wildly enough. The minister himself let slip the Ukrainian Nazis’ plans for the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra and the canonical church as a whole. According to him, “the activities of Moscow religious organisations are banned by law,” “Moscow priests desecrated the Lavra,” and “there should be no Moscow spirit in it.” The “cleansing of Ukrainian shrines,” according to Tochitsky, is a top priority requiring effective measures. That would leave Mikhail Bulgakov speechless. This is Sharikov (an uncouth and uneducated character from Bulgakov’s Heart of a Dog) on an unprecedented scale. We call on all relevant international organisations and the international community, including representatives of world religions, to pay close attention to this. I don’t know what form the reaction may take. Condemnation, a call to come to one’s senses, or to repent. I don’t know what words need to be used. But it’s frightening to see what is happening. It is a violation of freedom of religion, and lawlessness against believers and clergy in Ukraine. This is simply about dehumanisation.

Monuments to Soviet soldiers cause the same hatred and rage as religious shrines do in today's Ukraine. Most likely, it is because these true heroes are of the same kind.

According to local media reports, in Odessa, national radicals who arrived from other regions of Ukraine dismantled a memorial plaque in honour of the pupils of a special artillery school who had fought the Nazis, and smashed a memorial plaque commemorating a native of the city – the legendary Soviet submariner Alexander Marinesko, who sank many Nazi ships. He is no longer part of the history of modern Ukraine. Reportedly, Odessa residents took an extremely negative view of the activity of neo-Banderite provocateurs sent by the regime and began to form patrols to protect the monuments, many of which are inextricably linked not just with the city's history, but with the history of the people who, thanks to these defenders, received not just the right to live, but life.

In the village of Sursko-Litovskoye in the Dnepropetrovsk Region, local authorities and radicals dismantled a memorial sign dedicated to fellow villagers who died in battles with Nazi invaders. These are not the names that arouse their hatred and anger because of their greatness. It is already demolishing monuments and memorials to fellow villagers.

In the village of Kovyagi in the Kharkov Region, the Order of the Patriotic War was literally torn off the monument on the mass grave of soldiers who fell for the liberation of their native land from the Nazis. In Glukhov, Sumy Region, in the courtyard of the local school the authorities removed a memorial plaque from the monument to the pupils and teachers who died fighting the Nazis.

Vandals also destroyed the monument to Peter the Great (we know that he, like Alexander Pushkin, is responsible for everything) in Poltava, established in 1849 in honour of the 140th anniversary of victory in the Battle of Poltava on the site of a Cossack's house where the emperor stayed on the second day after the battle. Since 1849, the monument managed to survive everything: all epochs, change of historical paradigms, different systems, hot and cold wars. It did not survive the neo-Banderites.  The monument was demolished. However, the Ukrainian timeserving barbarians will not achieve their cherished goal to consign to oblivion the history connected with Russia. The historical truth will live on and be preserved in the memory of the people, and the monuments will be restored and renewed with time – there is no doubt about it.

I have spoken on many crazy things happening in Ukraine. I ask for your attention now, as what I’m about to share may seem almost beyond belief. Now they are after Yuri Gagarin. Having dismantled monuments to Catherine the Great and Grigory Potemkin, among many others, Ukraine’s ongoing campaign to erase its Soviet past has now reached Yuri Gagarin, the first cosmonaut in the world.

According to media reports, neo-Nazis from the Decolonisation: Ukraine movement have demanded that a memorial plaque in Odessa bearing Gagarin’s profile and a Russian-language inscription: “The avenue is named in honour of the world’s first pilot cosmonaut, Hero of the Soviet Union Yuri Gagarin” is removed.

Do you know what is the most barbaric about this? I’ll remind you. Everyone knows they are dismantling monuments to people the entire world respects regardless of nationality and geographic borders. What makes all of this more absurd?

A couple of years ago, pseudo-historians working under the Kiev regime tried rewriting the biography of the legendary Soviet aerospace engineer, Sergey Korolev, claiming he was Ukrainian.

How does this all come together in one mind? On the one hand, they announce that Korolev belongs to their culture, regardless of his own self-identity, writings, or life’s work; and on the other, Korolev dedicated his life to, whom his love as his own family. In fact, I think that, after their great achievement, they became family in spirit. They want to erase the legacy of this person, of Yuri Gagarin, tearing down everything honouring him. How is this possible? It might be an illness.

All these facts reaffirm the necessity of the special military operation aimed at the denazification and demilitarisation of Ukraine, as well as the neutralisation of threats emanating from its territory. As the Russian leadership has consistently affirmed, all these objectives will be fulfilled.

back to top

 

Norway’s aggressive war preparations

 

We noticed a number of reports testifying to Norway’s military preparations in the North, including in the vicinity of the Russian border. Oslo is militarising not only the Norwegian mainland but also the Spitsbergen archipelago. Let me remind you that this archipelago has a special international legal status.   

On May 21 of this year, Prime Minister of Norway Jonas Gahr Store declared that his country and its allies were stepping up their military activities in the North. We regard this statement as yet another indication pointing to the erosion of Norway’s self-imposed policy of restricting foreign military presence and activities in its territory.  According to the Norwegian leaders, their country can independently determine the frequency and parameters of military exercises in its territory and the “adjustment” will not affect its relations with Russia. For our part, we declare that we cannot agree with these assertions. Why?

First, Oslo is not independent in its military decision-making because Norway’s foreign and defence policies are aimed at implementing the goals of the North Atlantic Alliance. This point is confirmed by plans to establish NATO’s Combined Air Operations Centre at Bodo, Northern Norway.  They declare their aims openly and it is clear that NATO is expanding its presence in northern regions.

Second, Russian military-political planning takes into account any steps and statements made by the Norwegian leaders, particularly those stoking tensions in the border area, which steps will certainly entail negative consequences for Russian-Norwegian relations.

We must state again that Norway intends to make the Spitsbergen archipelago part of NATO’s military-political planning. On May 12−14 of this year, a numerous delegation of the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (almost 40 representatives from 20 countries) was visiting the archipelago. On May 20 of this year, Norway’s Boeing Р-8А Poseidon reconnaissance plane was simulating a landing at the airport of Longyearbyen, which has a purely civilian status. We regard these steps as contradicting the spirit and the letter of the 1920 Spitsbergen Treaty. Let me remind you that the Treaty makes it incumbent on Norway not to create or allow others to create an infrastructure that could be used for war.  

All the above-mentioned actions by the Norwegian authorities, allegedly undertaken in order to ensure security, actually bring military activities closer to the Russian borders and, contrary to Oslo’s soothing statements, only stoke tensions in the high latitudes.   We want to stress once again that it is the Arctic states that are vested with prime responsibility for a peaceful development of the Polar regions. 

back to top

 

NATO troops and equipment taking part in Narrow Waters – 25 Navy exercises on Finland’s territory

 

We have been keeping a close eye on the increasingly active military preparations and exercise drills in the countries of the so-called collective West. The fact that they have stepped up their activities in this domain confirms, among other things, that NATO has taken an aggressive posture and has set sight on the territories of its new member states. In this case, it is eying Finland.

Navy ships and service personnel from Germany, Sweden and Estonia are taking part in the Narrow Waters – 25 Navy exercise in Finland. Carried out by the Finnish Navy on May 21−28, 2025, these drills offer a telling example of NATO’s commitment to strengthening and expanding its offensive capabilities along its northeastern border. The manoeuvres include performing wartime tasks. I would like to stress that they have been talking about practicing wartime tasks rather than countering terrorists or providing emergency relief.

This means that an ordinary Navy exercise, which used to be held at a national level without any foreign military forces, has suddenly evolved into yet another escalatory tool at NATO’s disposal along the Russian border, and the Finish authorities offered their full-throttle support to this initiative.

This suggests that the Russia-hating virus has penetrated deep into Finland’s military and political elite, prompting it to launch preparations for a war we can hardly fathom. Maybe they could explain what they mean by that. All they do is focus on the objectives related to this war and spend billions from their national budgets on promoting this so-called narrative, as they say in the West. At the same time, the government of this country has been turning a blind eye to the domestic economic woes they are facing, primarily in terms of the social and economic situation there. This creates an impression that someone is pushing them off the cliff while they fail to understand where they are headed, let alone stop moving in this direction.

I think that it is up to the people of this country to assess these developments. On the other hand, we understand the extent to which the media space is blocked. Few people realise the scale of the all-out confrontation with Russia the collective West has been seeking to impose on them and the way this contradicts their national interests, as well as the fact that these steps can literally undermine their national security.

back to top

 

Humanitarian aid for Afghanistan

 

A humanitarian shipment with over 1,280 tonnes of wheat flour arrived in Hairatan in northern Afghanistan on May 25, 2025. Russia provided it as part of its additional contribution to the UN World Food Programme’s fund.

This flour will be distributed among people in Afghanistan who need it.

Efforts to provide humanitarian aid to the friendly Afghan nation will carry on.

back to top

 

Investigating crimes perpetrated by the West in Afghanistan

 

We have noted that new information has been surfacing regarding the crimes perpetrated by the West in Afghanistan.

The latest publication on this topic comes from Human Rights Watch Associate Director for the Asia division, Patricia Gossman, who shared statistics dealing with the investigation of civilian extrajudicial killings in Afghanistan by foreign military personnel. She wrote that Western governments have been seeking to sweep under the carpet efforts by the courts to investigate crimes dating back to the time when Afghanistan was under occupation, despite all the pressure they face from the civil society. Paying compensation to the families of the victims is out of the question for them.

In particular, only one out of 19 Australian soldiers whose names appeared in an investigation into the killings of Afghans, including civilians, was indicted. As for the UK, where there has been a lot of reporting lately about these monstrous crimes, there has been hardly any progress in investigating these cases.

As for Russia, we welcome the fact that human rights activists are becoming increasingly vocal in requesting retribution against the Western military for the crimes they committed during Afghanistan’s occupation so that all the perpetrators are held to account.

They have created all kinds of quasi-structures with their international criminal tribunals by concocting their agendas and spreading incredible stories. But there are facts, victims, their relatives and families. There is evidence, including the names of those who killed people in Afghanistan. There are figures, dates and all these data are evidence-based. But no one is interested. There is zero interest, in fact. Why, will you ask? The logic of segregation is a primary factor here. There are people who deserve to enjoy human rights and the corresponding safeguards, and there are those who do not deserve to know that they have these rights, let alone enjoy them.

Second, there is a trend, which is gaining momentum, to subject any pretext (be it in international law, justice or domestically) to geopolitical aspirations and interests instead of seeking justice, truth and ensuring the rule of law in deed, rather than in word.

back to top

 

South Sudan update

 

A dramatic aggravation of the situation in South Sudan over the past few months is a serious concern. Clashes between government forces and opposition supporters resulted in the increased number of deaths, including among civilians. Ethnic problems are a compounding factor. We believe that there is no forceful solution to that problem.

Regrettably, this new round of armed confrontation in South Sudan is another challenge for the subregion, where there are more than enough negative factors as it is. These include the internal conflicts in Sudan, Somalia and in the east of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, instability in the region of the Great Lakes and the Horn of Africa, plus the geographic proximity of the Sahel-Saharan region with its numerous problems. This is creating conditions for extensive destabilisation due to transparent borders, which is contributing to the migration of fighters, illegal arms trafficking and other crimes.

We believe that the efforts of the African community for a peaceful settlement of the military-political crisis in South Sudan are extremely important in this context. We hope that the conflicting sides in South Sudan, supported by their African partners, will show the political will to stop the further escalation of the armed confrontation and proceed with the logic of the renewed Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan, signed on September 12, 2018.

back to top

 

Canadian diplomats’ historical innuendos

 

On May 9, 2025, Russia and its foreign partners, allies, friends and like-minded people celebrated the 80th anniversary of the Great Victory. You probably remember how our former allies in the anti-Hitler coalition marked this date. For example, the Foreign Ministry of Canada, which is obviously unhappy about our joint defeat of Nazism, wrote that Russia celebrated “its own version of ‘Victory Day’.”

What does this mean? We have always celebrated  May 9. There are relevant laws regarding this. Foreign guests, who reaffirm their attitude to undeniable facts in the spirit of historical truth, join our celebrations. Why is that our own version of Victory Day?

The numerous attempts to deliberately distort the memory of the Great Patriotic War are evidence of a thorough historical ignorance or even malicious intentions. They have above all discredited Canada, which has succumbed to time-serving considerations and is blindly steering a Russophobic policy, contrary to Canada’s interests.

The most outrageous element of this situation is Ottawa’s hypocrisy. It is throwing such innuendos although its parliament arranged a ceremonious meeting and applauded Yaroslav Gunko (Hunka), a Nazi collaborator from the 14th Galicia Division of the SS. You probably remember that event. Canada also votes against the UN General Assembly resolution on combating the glorification of Nazism every year. Moreover, Canada, which claims that we celebrated our “own version” of Victory Day, has not declassified the lists of the Nazi criminals and their accomplices who have found refuge in Canada. These lists are stored in the Library and Archives Canada (LAC). Maybe Canada should look at itself and answer these questions?

It is not surprising that Canadian Ambassador in Moscow Sarah Taylor has contributed to this. As if the insulting Russophobic comments she made after the ceremony of laying flowers at the Motherland monument at Piskarevsky Memorial Cemetery in St Petersburg, which we have previously commented, were not enough, she has written in the social media that the Russians have “usurped” the right to Victory. Sorry, but I must speak about this to show their disease.

Ms Taylor, have you saved at least one monument to WWII heroes in Europe from demolition? Have you posted a single 140-character tweet in support of such a monument?  Or have you condemned the barbaric destruction of the graves of those who died fighting against Nazism in Europe? Have you said anything when monuments, memorials and graves were being demolished, including in Ukraine, the country you are “protecting”? No, not a word. Therefore, you have no right to make such statements. We are preserving our historical memory, including for the future generations on all continents who are open to reason, who will eventually overcome the disease of historical amnesia, and will want to know what really happened.

Canada should stop trying to rewrite the history of the Second World War, abandon its provocative rhetoric, and focus on an objective assessment of the past.

Victory Day is not a topic for political speculation but a symbol of unity and commitment to the struggle against any manifestations or Nazism, fascism and other man-hating ideologies. The memory of the heroism and sacrifices made by the Soviet people in the battle against Nazism is sacred to us, and we will clamp down on any attempts to slander it.

back to top

 

Crimes against the Soviet memorial legacy in the European Union

 

I said I would give examples of incidents when, while we and all normal people celebrated Victory Day on May 9 or the Day of Liberation from Fascism in Europe on May 8, there was an anti-celebration of Victory over Nazism happening. I will elaborate on this topic.

Estonia, May 11, 2025. Imagine that, May 11, 2025. The date is the epicentre of anniversary events marking 80 years of Victory. On May 11 in Tallinn, the people bringing flowers to the ill-fated Alyosha monument (the Bronze Soldier) discovered a white stain on the sculpture along with offensive writing. The memorial was brought back into its proper condition. The Estonian Foreign Ministry received a note from us demanding that the perpetrators be held accountable and measures be taken to prevent similar cases in the future.

In the early hours of May 9, 2025, in Vilnius, Lithuania, unidentified individuals defaced a soldier sculpture and a tombstone marking the mass grave at Antakalnis Cemetery, where the crew of the Ilyushin Il-4 bomber of the 12th Guards Gatchina Aviation Regiment are interred, by splashing them with red paint. Additionally, ahead of Victory Day, a military burial site in Utena was vandalised — the date “1941” was partially obscured with black paint, alongside the inscription of “39”. Such acts are beyond all bounds of decency. Also, the site where Hero of the Soviet Union Lieutenant Yefim Belinsky near Klaipeda met his demise, marked by the concrete pedestal of an earlier demolished memorial, was smeared with mud. Who did they deface? A hero? They defaced themselves.

Germany. One of the most cynical incidents took place in Bavaria. Our compatriots living in Munich reported that Russian and Belarusian flag-coloured ribbons were cut off the wreaths that the Russian Ambassador and the consulates general of Russia and Belarus laid on May 6 at the memorial standing at the SS Hebertshausen shooting range near the Dachau memorial complex. What happened to them? Where did the ribbons go?

It turned out, Director of the Dachau Memorial Gabriele Hammermann is personally behind it. She prohibited using the national symbols of Russia and Belarus and instructed that the ribbons be removed. In a similar way, Jews had been labeled with yellow stars, also in Germany. It took several decades to treat Germans from this plague, through a special programme. Apparently, there are people who did not respond to the treatment.

The Russian Consulate General in Bonn sent a report to local police demanding a criminal investigation to establish those responsible for vandalism and hold them accountable. We consider the incident as arbitrariness and intention to deny and rewrite history, to offend the memory of victims of Nazism, to justify and approve the crimes committed by Adolf Hitler and his abetters, as violation of the state symbols of the countries whose diplomatic missions are accredited in Germany according to the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Let me remind you that the convention grants workers of diplomatic missions and consular offices with an overarching immunity and the right to use their national symbols without any restrictions, which somebody in Germany decided to impose at their own discretion in line with the momentary political situation or their own historical preferences.

In the past, they labelled us in concentration camps, with red triangles, OST armbands, and more. Today, they pursue a similar policy and remove any reminders, even ribbons from diplomats’ wreaths, in attempts to depersonalise our memory. But we remember.

Bulgaria, May 6, 10 and 11. Offensive graffiti was daubed on the monument at the mass grave in Sofia’s Lozenets district. Responsibility for the act was claimed by members of the neo-Nazi National League of Bulgarian Youth group, the group Decommunization.bg, and instigators of the annual march in honour of Adolf Hitler’s ally Hristo Lukov from the pro-fascist Bulgarian National Union movement. On May 8, a monument to Red Army officer Mikhail Kalinin in the village of Chelopech, Sofia Province, was desecrated. The following day, on May 9, the memorial plaque in Haskovo installed by the Russian Club was vandalised with graffiti.

Teplice, Czech Republic. Had it not been for the Red Army, today, this city would be known as the German Teplice — or might have ceased to exist altogether. Teplice was liberated on May 7, 1945, by the 10th Guards Tank Corps. One well-known historical fact about Teplice is that in 1939 (if somebody in Europe recalled it during these days), following Germany’s annexation of the Sudetenland under the Munich Conspiracy, one of Czechoslovakia’s largest synagogues was set ablaze in the city. On May 7, the anniversary of its liberation, an egregious act of vandalism was perpetrated against the Red Army monument: the sculpture of the Soviet soldier was toppled from its pedestal and shattered. Chair of the Russian Investigative Committee Alexander Bastrykin instructed opening an investigation into the desecration of the memorial. It is our firm expectation that those responsible will face the full severity of justice.

Copenhagen, Denmark. On the eve of May 9, the monument to Soviet fighters at the Bispebjerg Cemetery was defaced with paint. The Russian Embassy has submitted a formal request to the Danish authorities, urging an investigation into this act of vandalism and calling for the perpetrators to be brought to justice. At present, no information regarding remedial measures has been made available. 

Each act of vandalism against our monument is another brown stain of resurgent fascism on the map of the European Union. A little more of this – and the EU will not be able to wash it off. It will become brown.

back to top

 

Foreign Ministry report on the desecration and destruction of monuments dedicated to those who fought against Nazism during WWII in several European countries

 

The Foreign Ministry today published a report Regarding the Situation with the Desecration and Destruction of Monuments Dedicated to Those Who Fought against Nazism in the Years of World War II. The document is available on the Foreign Ministry website in Russian and English.

The incidents I mentioned just now are the workings of some vandals, ghouls, possibly mental cases. The report, on the other hand, contains assessments of the actions of specific states, primarily the Baltic countries, Poland and Ukraine, which have been using Russia’s special military operation to denazify and demilitarise Ukraine and protect the civilian population of Donbass as a pretext to ramp up their efforts to exterminate all things Soviet and Russian on their territory, often along with their own memorial heritage, a practice they had been engaged in for years.

Acts of “decommunisation,” the destruction of landmarks commemorating our shared history and culture, the desecration of the graves of fallen Soviet soldiers, neo-Nazi torchlight processions, the glorification of Nazis and their collaborators, and murders of ideological opponents – many of these acts, and often combinations thereof, have become commonplace in the countries mentioned in this report. Naturally, they cite the laws on “decommunisation” as a proper façade for demolishing monuments to Soviet soldiers – I mean the governments of these states – trying to “cement” the anti-Russia front.

What makes me think that it is not “decommunisation” after all, but something entirely different? I repeat once again: this is the revival of Nazism. Because, even as they demolish monuments to the heroes of World War II and the Great Patriotic War, they are also erecting monuments to Nazi criminals and legislating their protection, while the rare acts undertaken by anti-fascist activists against monuments to the Nazis are being harshly prosecuted. All these policies are solely aimed at cleansing historical memory and reshaping the modern world.

In terms of content, the document is guided by the provisions of the 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.

The resolution, inter alia, emphasises the General Assembly’s deep concern at the intensifying attempts and incidents of desecration or destruction of monuments erected in honour of those who fought against Nazism during World War II, as well as the illegal exhumation and transfer of their remains, and strong condemnation of incidents of glorification and propaganda of Nazism, such as putting pro-Nazi graffiti and drawings on various surfaces, including monuments to WWII victims. Sorry, is applying just any drawings and graffiti on monuments the norm now?

Russia, as a country that suffered enormous losses during World War II and the Great Patriotic War for the sake of restoring peace, will never allow the lessons of the past to be forgotten.

Our country, together with its allies and anyone sharing our stance, will continue to work purposefully to counter any attempts to distort the historical truth, including about the liberation of the countries of Eastern and Central Europe from Nazism, which was achieved through the joint actions of the anti-Hitler coalition.

We will not stop after publishing this report. We will also support the work of our civil society representatives, who are acting in parallel with state agencies at the call of their hearts and conscience, out of respect for their families’ past, perhaps, or simply guided by the concept of fighting for all good against all evil. We will continue to support everything they do, and promote whatever facts they uncover.

back to top

 

The 70th anniversary of the Baikonur Cosmodrome

 

On June 2, the Baikonur Cosmodrome, whence mankind stepped into outer space, will be 70 years old.

Our greetings go to all those who have been closely involved in creating this unique facility, or made a contribution to its rise and years-long successful functioning.

It will not be an exaggeration to say that there is not a single person on this planet, who is unaware of what Baikonur is all about.  It is from Baikonur that the first artificial earth satellite, the Sputnik, was launched and the Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin performed his first ever piloted space flight.

Let me remind you that Baikonur is the world’s largest space centre responsible for about 5,000 launches, with nearly 150 cosmonauts and astronauts (Soviet, Russian, and foreign) blasting off from there on board rockets to outer space. It launched piloted spaceships of the Vostok, Voskhod, and Soyuz class, carrier rockets of the Proton and Energia class, and the Buran space shuttle. It placed into orbit the Salyut and Mir automatic space stations, as well as the Luna, Mars, Venera, and Vega interplanetary automatic craft.  A Baikonur launch inaugurated the 25-year-old multilateral ISS cooperation.

Baikonur retains its relevance to this day as an important international facility. This space launch centre is also a most significant, outstanding and fantastic symbol of friendship and an example of years-long successful partnership displaying a strict commitment to international space law.   

back to top

 

Beijing’s Russia Day celebrations

 

On June 12, the Russian Embassy in Beijing will hold a state reception dedicated to Russia Day. It has invited high-ranking PRC officials, ambassadors and senior diplomats of friendly countries, and representatives of Russian and Chinese business circles, local public organisations, and institutions of culture. As part of the event, the National Philharmonic Orchestra of Russia conducted by Maestro Vladimir Spivakov will give a concert against the background of the Great Wall of China, playing compositions by world-famous Russian and Chinese composers and with operatic stars Olga Peretyatko and Alexey Neklyudov for singers.

The Moscow Seasons in Beijing will be held in Wangfujing, the central pedestrian street, from June 12 to 15, thereby continuing a series of events within the framework of the Cross Years of Culture of Russia and China in 2024−2025.    

Beijing residents and guests will be invited to sample foods of the Russian cuisine, visit a fair of Moscow souvenirs, attend creative and dancing workshops (I am envious), and enjoy performances in various genres. Moscow will open a tourism information centre offering a lot of interesting information about the Russian capital, its rich cultural and historical heritage, spectacular events, gastronomic variety, and urban environment. 

On June 13, Beijing will host a conference entitled Cities of the Future. The Synergy of Strategic Partnership between Moscow and Beijing.  Experts from many sectors – trade, tourism, culture, creative industries, etc – will share experience in running the two megacities and discuss new opportunities for cooperation.

back to top

 

Answers to media questions:

Question: Dagestan is a region with a strong cultural code, and it maintains ties with the Islamic world. Are there any plans to more actively utilise the potential of these regions in Russia’s foreign policy, especially in the East?

Maria Zakharova: I have already noted this in my opening remarks. Yes, of course, in every sense. I will be delighted to repeat this.

Dagestan is a unique region of Russia and a graphic example of the vibrant embodiment of the centuries-old synthesis of cultures where the Islamic tradition has been coexisting with other religions for centuries, blending harmoniously with Russian state values. This example can serve as an important part of the answer to the question, asked in many parts of the world, how to combine the incongrous (as many people have been telling us for the last few decades) and how to ensure the peaceful coexistence of world religions.

To be frank, yesterday I tried to ask guides and local residents (not without provocation) what culture dominated the region. I addressed the issue from different angles. I received one and the same answer to all provocative questions. They told me that this was Dagestan, and that it had everything. I inquired whether any language, culture and graphic art prevailed. They told me only one thing: synergy and coexistence. It may be surprising, but our dialogues were not prepared in advance. This was an impromptu conversation when I wanted to find out, learn and understand certain things.

Indeed, people treat culture and the region’s distinguishing features as something unique. As I see it, this experience can be copied, and it can serve as a wonderful example for those trying to find out how this can be accomplished. Of course, this does not mean that there are no problems, that there have been no problems, or that such problems will not emerge. You see, this is a living developing organism. Various methods for overcoming these problems deserve attention and they can also be used as successful experience.

The republic’s historical spiritual and cultural proximity to Eastern Muslim countries creates favourable prospects for the development of inter-civilisational dialogue within the framework of the Russian Federation’s international ties. In September 2024, the Muftiate of the Republic of Dagestan, with the support of the head of the Republic, successfully hosted an international religious forum titled Peace to Your Home in Makhachkala. The forum brought together religious leaders from the Russian Federation’s territories and foreign states.

This is only in the civilisational context of answering your question. Speaking of international activities, I have just mentioned a presentation by the Republic of Dagestan at the Main Directorate for Servicing the Diplomatic Corps (GlavUpDK), affiliated with the Foreign Ministry. This will be a presentation for representatives of the diplomatic corps (who will clearly see and comprehend available opportunities), rather than for people here in Moscow.

So many forums are taking place. The Caspian Digital Forum, linked with information technologies and digitalisation, is scheduled to be held in autumn and will also feature an international component. So, I have mentioned only a few examples.

I would like to say that this is not just about the future because the experience of Dagestan is already used successfully in Russian foreign policy practice, during dialogue with Eastern countries and in the context of coexistence, blending religions and cultures and in other fields, too.

The region is actively expanding ties with countries of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. Dagestani universities train students from Syria, Yemen and Sudan. Before earning their degrees and going home, they gain an insight into the advantages of precisely this model of interfaith and inter-cultural dialogue. One can answer this question indefinitely, and this is just a brief review.

back to top

 

Question: Can you share your comment on a statement by Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys about imposing tougher sanctions on Russia and isolating it?

Maria Zakharova: We are no longer talking about avowed Russophobes, but Baltic-phobes who have lost their minds. The fact that they advocate for more sanctions on Russia - sanctions that ultimately harm their own national interests - is beyond comprehension. They no longer hate us; they hate themselves, their own people, and their own countries. They have cut off their own countries that are natural geographic neighbours and promising partners of Russia from resource bases, markets, technology exchange, and scientific and humanitarian cooperation. They have cut themselves off from everything. For what? Have they, fueled by this destructive ideology, produced anything of value, or made any scientific breakthrough? Look at any field. They have no achievements, only anti-achievements.

First, we need to realise that this has gone beyond Russophobia and has become Baltic-phobia, when we hear officials from Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia call for more destructive actions in Europe. Second, we should not pay too much attention to it. Who are these people? Temporary Brussels appointees. They are not truly valued, loved, known, or trusted by their people. They are the people who come from EU-NATO backroom lists.

This destructive policy adopted by Vilnius, Riga, and Tallinn has led to a massive population outflow from the Baltic states. No one forced them to make such statements. They present it as a nationally-oriented policy. Clearly, it is not. The result is there for everyone to see. The people flee these countries, and their economies, science and education systems are getting destroyed. All of these trends will persist and intensify.

Russia will continue strengthening all-encompassing relations with the World Majority countries and all those countries that rely on common sense in international affairs.

We are following our own path, adhering to international law, and aiming for peaceful coexistence, mutual cooperation, and, overall, friendship and peace.

back to top

 

Question: On May 19, speaking about the situation in Ukraine, Moldovan Foreign Minister Mihai Popsoi claimed that Russia supposedly understands only the language of strength and is not seeking peace. What’s your take on that?

Maria Zakharova: We have repeatedly drawn attention to the systematic attempts to integrate the Republic of Moldova into NATO, to pump Western weapons into Moldova, and to upgrade its logistics and military-technical infrastructure in the interest of the alliance, as well as to frequent multinational exercises held there clearly not in Moldova’s own interests.

Here are more examples that point to Moldova’s consistent militarisation.

On April 24, Brussels announced a new military aid package for Chisinau in the amount of €60 million, including support for strengthening Moldova’s air defence capabilities. Another batch of military equipment and gear, including demining equipment, special transport vehicles, drones, bulletproof vests, and protective helmets, was delivered to the Moldovan National Army.

On May 15, an intergovernmental agreement was signed in Berlin between Moldova and Germany on an assistance programme and the deployment of a Bundeswehr advisory group to Moldova aimed at “accelerating the modernisation of the country’s military sector.” Maia Sandu has destroyed the economy. What Moldova really needs is education reform and demographic support. Instead, they keep signing defence agreements. To what end? To scuttle what’s left of Moldova?

On May 20, the EU Council extended the mandate of the EU Partnership Mission in Moldova for two more years until May 31, 2027 with a budget of approximately €20 million, focusing on providing strategic advice to Moldovan authorities in the security sector. Even a schoolchild knows what true security means. It means strong economy, robust education, job availability, and neighbourly relations and ties with every country on Moldova’s borders. I understand that the Kiev regime is their neighbour, but these deliveries clearly aren’t intended to address any of that.

At the same time, it is the citizens of Moldova who are being forced to pay for turning their country into yet another anti-Russia bridgehead, as the current authorities continue to burden them with servicing multimillion-dollar Western loans. Meanwhile, she personally gets bonuses from the West at a time when ordinary, hardworking Moldovan citizens, who earn their daily bread through sweat and toil, will be the ones paying interest on the “assistance” to militarise the country. Clearly, this has nothing to do with peace or security for them.

Fortunately, Moldovans understand this. Our contacts with them (including during the recent St Petersburg International Legal Forum) confirm this. They do not want this. They wish to break free from the imposed logic of militarisation and the transformation of their country into a military foothold. They understand that true peace and security cannot be achieved through force, but only through mutual respect and mutually beneficial cooperation, including with Russia. This is not just a theory for them. It comes from real-life experience. They know history, they remember the way things once were, they know what they want, and they can distinguish the false from the genuine.

And one more thing, since Mihai Popsoi himself took the initiative to speak, in fact, about using force against the Russian Federation. The Moldovan Foreign Minister apparently dreams of the notorious “strategic defeat” of Russia and reproduces Western clichés about applying military pressure on our country, without even considering that every attempt by the West to pressure Moscow has always ended in complete failure and backfired both on the Western powers themselves and on those who aligned with them.

What is he trying to accomplish? They have no clue about how to patch up their own economies. They run around trying to figure out which new delegation to dispatch in a desperate attempt to rebuild something. What exactly are they hoping to rebuild with such aggressive thinking? Why are they dragging Moldova into all this being citizens (at least on paper) of that country themselves? Although, I suspect many of them hold citizenship in other countries. It’s all deeply destructive, but we will react every time.

back to top

 

Question: The West continues to impose new sanctions on Russia despite the fact that both Russia and the United States have been promoting peace efforts. What is Moscow’s perspective regarding the new sanctions? How can the pressure created by these sanctions affect efforts to achieve an effective agreement to end the war with Ukraine?

Maria Zakharova: The effort to aggressively impose sanctions on our country date back to 2014, rather than 2022. That said, some of them existed even before that. There were all kinds of measures to prevent us from becoming fully involved in formats in which we had every right to participate as members in our own right. For example, we were denied the opportunity to take part in the Group of Eight’s economic cluster. This amounted to covertly sanctioning us, don’t you think? There was no problem with the political cluster – go ahead and work on statements, but when it came to taking decisions on economic matters, they kept us in the cold.

There were other examples too, including all these far-fetched ideas the United States came up with for restricting trade and economic ties with Russia. There was this infamous and obsolete Jackson-Vanik amendment. It dates back to the olden days of the Cold War and was designed to enable Jews to leave the USSR. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, many Jews returned to the Russian Federation, but the amendment remained in place. Overcoming this mentality with its flaws and cancelling this amendment took decades. But when it did happen, they enacted similar restrictions by passing the so-called Magnitsky Act. As usual, there was a political motive underpinned by their tireless effort to deny Russia its rights and make it impossible to deal with it on equal terms.

They have been relying on restrictive measures before switching to openly pressuring us with sanctions. We have been referring to these steps as anti-Russian sanctions since 2014. Starting in 2022, these anti-Russian sanctions evolved into an all-out trade war as part of a hybrid war.

Today, they have a new status. We are dealing with sanctions targeting the international community as a whole, rather than just Russia. They are targeting global logistics. For example, Western Europe has closed its air space for Russian aircraft. There is a ban on payments and blocked accounts. These sanctions have already affected their countries. They keep coming up with ways to impose indirect sanctions, and the international community as a whole suffers from them.

It is quite perplexing that while imposing these sanctions, they understand that they are counter-productive for their own countries. I cannot think of any other examples anywhere in the world where governments were so steadfast in their commitment to shatter their own economies.

We have responded to these trends by making our economy stronger, developing manufacturing and increasing industrial output. We have succeeded in partnering with the countries of the Global Majority by developing economic ties with them to offset the losses resulting from sanctions. President of Russia Vladimir Putin, Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin, and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov have been regularly raising this point.

We will always stick to a tit-for-tat response by prioritising our interests and adopting an integral approach in an effort to reach new economic heights. Things will never be the same again, and we know this. We must never forget the way the West betrayed us once again. Not only us, but the Global Majority too.

back to top

 

Question: Fighters attacked Russia’s Khmeimim Air Base. There were casualties among Russian service personnel. Do Russia military bases face a real threat in Syria? Is there a final agreement with the new Syrian government to keep operating these bases?

Maria Zakharova: This matter falls within the Defence Ministry’s purview. I think that it will answer this question.

In my capacity as Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, I can say that Russia is committed to undertaking a consistent and proactive effort to develop its ties with Syria in various domains. In our current contacts with Syria, we want to identify specific opportunities for promoting bilateral cooperation. The topic of enabling Russia to retain its military presence in the Syrian Arab Republic is on the table.

back to top

 

Question: Many African countries are now leaning towards Russia, which they regard as a reliable partner rather than a neo-coloniser who is focused on draining their resources. However, not all African countries have our embassies or consulates. What is the Foreign Ministry planning to do to enhance our diplomatic representation in Africa? Our businesses have an interest in this, for example, in Liberia.

Maria Zakharova: Speaking at a reception on the occasion of Africa Day held yesterday, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov provided exhaustive comments on the current state and development outlook for Russian-African interaction. I invite you to read his statement.

As for our plans to expand Russia’s diplomatic presence in Africa, we are actively working to implement them. In 2023 and 2024, we opened our embassies in Burkina Faso and Equatorial Guinea.

In December 2024, the Russian Government adopted resolutions on reopening our embassies in Niger and Sierra Leone and opening an embassy in South Sudan. These efforts have recently entered the practical stage. Our other plans provide for opening embassies in Gambia, Togo and the Union of the Comoros.

The expansion of Russian diplomatic presence in Africa will not only promote trade, economic and investment ties but will also help strengthen our political and humanitarian cooperation.

This is a two-way road. We are responding to the African countries’ call for stepping up our dialogue. When I worked at Russia’s Permanent Mission to the UN in New York and during later conversations with diplomats, I many times and in various formats heard Africans inviting us to return to Africa as soon as possible and on a large scale. They told us that Africa needed Russia and a global balance. They did not only imply investment or assistance. They spoke about a balance. Africa probably knows better than any other continent what it means to live with a single decision-making centre, a single centre of power, and a single self-proclaimed dominant force. They know about the absence of deterrents from their own experience rather than textbooks. And they see Russia as a partner and ally, as well as a balancing force. They know about our stance at the UN Security Council, including on a number of regional issues, and they draw their own conclusions. They are aware of the constructive role of our country in African affairs, including during the Soviet period. Africa has never been harmed by the Russian Empire, which is another factor in our favour. They see that we continue to operate in the same manner in modern conditions amid our growing presence.

We hold forums and Russia-Arica summits, as well as ministerial meetings. This is more than classical protocol diplomacy. Forums are being held in all spheres – investment forums, education fairs, women’s conferences, and meetings of NGOs and journalistic discussions. This process is based on the mutual interest of Russia and our African friends for developing lasting relations of mutual respect. We will continue doing this.

back to top

 

Question: The Foreign Ministry of Poland claims that it has sent a note of protest to the Russian side over the dismantling of the bas-reliefs of Polish military awards at the Mednoye memorial complex in the Tver Region. Have you received it? Will you respond to it?

Maria Zakharova: We have received that note, and before that the Polish Foreign Ministry issued a statement, on which we have commented.

As I have said, these protests are cynical and hypocritical in light of the large-scale and consistent destruction of Soviet memorials and monuments, which has been ongoing in Poland over the past years. They are doing this deliberately and with malicious intent. Even when these sites are vandalised, this is done with the authorities’ open or silent approval. Do you know why I think that this is particularly cynical? Because the Polish note mentioned bilateral documents on the preservation and maintenance of graves and memorial sites to the victims of war and persecution campaigns, which we have been citing in vain all these years in our notes of protest to the Polish side regarding real and numerous incidents. But Warsaw turns a blind eye to them.

back to top

 

Question: What are the prospects for Russia’s cooperation with Middle Eastern and Caucasian countries concerning security and counter-terrorism?

Maria Zakharova: We consistently advance the necessity of establishing a new, equitable world order that serves the interests of maintaining universal and indivisible security. In this context, we attach significant importance to developing collaboration with all friendly nations, including those of the Middle East and South Caucasus regions. This occurs primarily within the United Nations, its specialised agencies, and influential international and regional platforms such as the CIS, CSTO, and SCO.

Russia and Middle Eastern states maintain robust cooperation across a broad spectrum of issues, grounded in shared approaches to key global and regional challenges. Given the high conflict potential and multiple crisis hotspots in the region, an intensive dialogue is naturally conducted between us and these nations – including Syria and Iraq – on countering threats of terrorism and radicalism.

The situation in the Syrian Arab Republic remains complex. Beyond difficulties in state-building and violations of Syrian territorial sovereignty, a serious threat persists from terrorist groups operating within the country. We hope the new Syrian leadership will take vigorous steps to suppress their activities and to conclusively resolve the issue of foreign terrorist fighters. These individuals pose a threat not only to Syria but to the entire region and indeed the world, particularly as the region largely serves as a breeding ground for such criminals. We maintain that Syria must not harbour persons stained with blood who bear no relation to the Syrian people.

We support the Iraqi Government’s counter-terrorism efforts and seek to enhance collaboration in this sphere. Owing to the authorities’ effective measures, ISIS terrorist activity is being contained. We express unwavering support for Iraq’s sovereignty and oppose any interference in its internal affairs.

Regrettably, the emergence of flashpoints and the escalation of the military-political situation across the Middle East are largely driven by the destructive policies of Western actors. These policies forcibly engineer dividing lines and exploit regional contradictions to preserve their influence. Consequently, the weakening of state authority in crisis-affected countries fuels the spread of terrorism and radical ideologies beyond their borders.

The Russian Federation maintains active dialogue with South Caucasus partners to bolster regional security. We foster close collaboration with Azerbaijan, Armenia, Abkhazia, and South Ossetia on combatting terrorism. A requisite legal framework and effective cooperation channels between our nations’ law enforcement and intelligence services have been established. We are intensifying counter-terrorism efforts with mutual interest, recognising the imperative to consolidate resources and capabilities towards this end.

back to top

 

Question: First and foremost, through you, our publication wishes to convey profound gratitude to the staff of the Russian Consulate-General in Dubai. Our journalists were there conducting an investigative report, and it appears the subjects under investigation misled local police. A misunderstanding arose, but thanks to the Consulate-General’s staff, the issues were resolved instantly. Hence, a low bow and thanks – truly commendable personnel.

Maria Zakharova: I will personally convey your gratitude to our colleagues in Dubai. I can attest that their team is both professional and deeply committed.

Journalists, film crews, operators, and bloggers travelling to the UAE must thoroughly understand local legislation and clearly comprehend the scope for professional activities. At times, ignorance, misinterpretation, incompetence, or the ill intent of certain intermediaries may play a cruel trick on them. What seems trivial and insignificant may prove a serious and substantial offence. We encounter such cases. Shortly, we will finalise comprehensive guidelines outlining the regulations governing journalists’ work in that country.

back to top

 

Question: In February of this year, an agreement was concluded between the governments of Russia and the UAE to eliminate double taxation with regard to taxes on income and capital and to prevent tax avoidance and evasion. In this regard, should our so-called relocants – including individuals concealing their assets from bankruptcy proceedings, as well as creditors in the UAE – expect that the UAE tax authorities will begin disclosing information to the Federal Tax Service of Russia and the Federal Service for Financial Monitoring regarding financial assets, accounts, and real estate holdings?

Maria Zakharova: The modernisation of the double taxation avoidance agreement between Russia and the UAE is primarily aimed at enhancing mutual investment appeal between our nations, fostering a favourable environment for businesses and individuals, and preventing the duplicate payment of taxes in both the country of residency and the state where income is generated.

This matter falls predominantly within the purview of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation. For clarifications on specific nuances, it is advisable to consult this authority directly.

As a representative of Russia’s Foreign Ministry, I can only emphasise the imperative of strict compliance with the legislation of the Russian Federation.

back to top

 

Question: Does Russia continue to monitor the situation concerning forcibly displaced persons from Nagorno-Karabakh? Previously, Moscow and Russian non-governmental organisations dispatched humanitarian aid on multiple occasions. Are new deliveries planned?

Maria Zakharova: This humanitarian issue remains a priority for the Russian side. In the near future, a major new humanitarian initiative is planned through the Russian Humanitarian Mission, a domestic public organisation. On the Armenian side, this matter is being addressed by the republican branch of the Eurasia autonomous non-profit organisation and other entities.

As you may recall, the Russian Humanitarian Mission previously delivered humanitarian aid to Armenia: in October 2023, 6 tonnes of food and personal hygiene items were provided to Nagorno-Karabakh displaced persons.

back to top

 

Question: The United States has recently announced plans to develop a space missile defence system called the Golden Dome, and said that it expects to have a full, combat-ready version within three years. The Golden Dome will be integrated into the missile defence system the United States already has at its disposal. Once this system becomes operational, it will be able to intercept missiles launched from anywhere in the world, as well as from space. This system is expected to cost about $175 billion. A spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry said that the plan by the United States to create this Golden Dome violates the principle of using outer space for peaceful purposes as set forth in the Outer Space Treaty, while also creating new risks regarding space wars and an arms race, undermining international security and arms control. What does Russia think about these plans as announced by the United States?

Maria Zakharova: Russia and China share coinciding or converging views on this and many other matters of principle dealing with strategic stability, as proven yet again by the joint statement on global strategic stability. Adopted by the two countries following the recent Russia-China meeting at the highest level, it sets forth their shared views on this matter.

This document pays special attention to the plans by the United States to create what it calls the Golden Dome for America. It notes that this programme is designed to create a global missile defence system that would operate without any restrictions and in multiple domains in an effort to counter, among other things, Russian and Chinese strategic missiles. This amounts to a very destabilising initiative. Looking at this concept, we can see that Washington reached a point of no return in its refusal to recognise the way strategic offensive weapons are inextricably linked with strategic defensive arms and that this nexus serves as one of the pillars of strategic stability.

In addition to this, the United States plans to make a special effort to further develop and deploy what is called the “left of launch” pre-emptive strike capabilities targeting missiles and the related infrastructure. This formalises what amounts to an extremely dangerous doctrine by the United States of carrying out what it calls pre-emptive strikes. In fact, this means carrying out the first strike aimed at disarming the adversary. This reckless approach undermines strategic stability at its core.

What makes this situation even worse is that the Golden Dome provides for reinforcing combat capabilities in outer space, which includes deploying interception systems on the orbit. These actions are designed to enable the United States to use force or threat of force in space, from space or against space targets, effectively turning outer space into a deployment area and an arena for military confrontation.

In this context, launching talks on a legally binding instrument for preventing an arms race in space takes on a special sense of urgency. This requires practical steps in this direction rather than just putting these words on paper.

We believe that the draft treaty on preventing the deployment of weapons in space, the use or threat of force against spatial objects could serve as a starting point. Russia and China co-sponsored this document and presented it at the Disarmament Conference. There is also a detailed reported by the United Nations Group of Governmental Experts on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space, which worked in 2023 and 2024. It was approved by consensus. Russia is interested in enabling the international community to consolidate its efforts along this track as part of the Open-ended Working Group on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space in all its Aspects established as per UN General Assembly decision 79/512 and based on the results it has achieved so far.

According to the statement that I have already mentioned, Russia reaffirms its commitment to working with China by proactively coordinating our approaches and deepening our practical cooperation for ensuring global strategic stability and countering common challenges and threats in this sector.

back to top

 

Question: Russia has repeatedly sent humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip. It has been provided on a private basis and by Russian charity foundations as well. Recently, Palestinians who cooperated with the Insan Charity Foundation were killed in Gaza. Are there any agreements in place with the Government of Israel on ensuring the security of humanitarian shipments from Russia?

Maria Zakharova: We regularly raise this matter in our engagements with Israeli authorities. Their actions constitute a violation of the obligations to international organisations. Official statements have been lodged accordingly. Our sustained support for Gaza will continue through regular aid shipments. Concurrently, we are maintaining contact with our Israeli counterparts to ensure unimpeded humanitarian access to affected populations.

back to top

 

Question: I want to thank the Russian Foreign Ministry and all the regions that we visit during press tours. With each encounter, we discover a new and beautiful Russia. Our viewers also see a different Russia through our eyes. Until recently, this Russia was known only to residents of major cities. Now, many of my colleagues can attest, we have seen Russia’s many positive aspects — from Vladivostok to Kaliningrad.

Maria Zakharova: True, Russia was earlier known from Kaliningrad to Vladivostok, and after 2014, from the Murmansk Region to Crimea. It is time for others to deepen their understanding of our country. With the inclusion of more regions, we encourage you to study on. We will help you by organising more press tours.

back to top

 

Question: What mechanisms of dialogue between India and Pakistan do you find most effective for achieving lasting peace in the region?

Maria Zakharova: Russia maintains its consistent position in support of dialogue between India and Pakistan. We welcome the ceasefire agreement between New Delhi and Islamabad, and express our hope for its continued observance.

We expect that the current disagreements between the two countries will be resolved through political and diplomatic means on a bilateral basis, in line with the 1972 Simla Agreement and the 1999 Lahore Declaration. The normalisation of relations between India and Pakistan will ensure lasting peace and stability in the region; it represents a key factor for stability in international relations and an opportunity for cooperation between these two nations and the rest of the world, free from destabilising elements.

We also anticipate that expanded cooperation, including in counterterrorism efforts, within multilateral frameworks involving our nations — particularly in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) — will promote constructive engagement between India and Pakistan while fostering greater mutual trust between these South Asian neighbours and our valued friends.

I believe this situation indeed exemplifies a proper approach to emerging conflicts. The world is not perfect. Conflicts have historically occurred and will regrettably continue to occur. The fundamental question remains, how one engages neighbours, friends, allies and partners. One could inflame tensions, pit the opposing sides against each other, and pursue one’s own gain. Alternatively – and this represents Russia’s firm stance – one could do everything in their power to bridge differences and facilitate a mutually acceptable solution. This constitutes our fundamental approach. I think you can see it.

back to top

 

Question: How does Russia perceive its role in ensuring security and stability in South Asia, particularly in the context of the nuclear capabilities of both states?

Maria Zakharova: We possess numerous avenues for fulfilling our role. Regrettably, the Western contingent of the United Nations Security Council pursues an utterly subversive, destructive, and irresponsible policy aimed at literally undermining this institution’s function and, indeed, destabilising international relations wholesale. Consequently, the role of responsible actors – namely Russia and China – is growing in significance. Many view our nations with hope, anticipating that we will harmonise and restore the Security Council’s work to its proper course. Undeniably, the Security Council primarily addresses matters of maintaining global peace, stability, and security. This constitutes one track.

The second paramount track is regional security. I have previously listed numerous structures established either through our country’s direct involvement or largely at its initiative to address security challenges, emerging threats, and novel risks.

Considering the geographical focus of your enquiry, this pertains foremost to the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, which maintains a dedicated counter-terrorism component tasked precisely with such matters. Yet this is not the sole framework.

Crucially, the defence of international law remains imperative. Without it – or amid its disregard – nuclear-weapons-related issues likewise risk devolving into zones of chaos. This, of course, must not be permitted. Hence, when we advocate preserving international law and striving for global development within a multipolar context – yet grounded in the international legal system – we unequivocally address the vital security component: the nuclear dimension. This must be addressed not through some obscure, undefined rules or arbitrary regulation, nor by allowing any party to unilaterally appoint itself as the ultimate authority on the matter. Rather, it must be governed by clear, comprehensible, articulated, and codified norms of international law.

back to top

 

Question: German Chancellor Friedrich Merz continues to fuel anti-Russia hysteria. He has stated that the protection of Vilnius from the mythical Russian threat “is the protection of Berlin.” How would Russia reply to that unfriendly rhetoric?

Maria Zakharova: When I was reading news  to prepare for this briefing yesterday, I saw an item citing reliable sources according to which the Vice-Chancellor of Germany has refuted Merz’s statement.

I don’t know their feelings for each other, but I’d like to recommend them to take a more responsible attitude because they are playing with the future of Europe at the least.

I received numerous calls yesterday asking for comments on Merz’s statement. Such statements must not be based on a personal biased attitude or ambitions. Statements by the head of state or government must be based on a balanced and responsible stance and the law. This doesn’t mean that there can only be one stance. Positions may differ, but such statements should correlate to responsibility for them.

Many people – millions, I believe – shivered when they heard the news from Berlin about lethal weapons. And several hours later it turned out that they have allegedly misunderstood it, that it was nothing but words, even though they left a lot of loose ends. Will the Chancellor of Germany refute that statement by the Vice-Chancellor? What is this? How can it be? This is not just a matter of season-related agricultural deliveries, even though they are important for market quotations and people’s plans in many countries. The matter concerns the future of millions of people, life and death on the continent.

Frankly, I doubt that the head of the German state was or is authorised to make such statements on behalf of other states. According to him, that decision had been made by France, Britain and the United States. Either we accept the refutation by the Vice-Chancellor of Germany, or they should tell us who had authorised that statement and who made the decision he mentioned.

It is obvious to me that it was a publicity stunt by Mr Merz. As a newcomer in politics, he probably can’t fully realise the effects of his statements. He is the first chancellor who has won a parliament vote at the second attempt, and so he wants to look strong. His failure in the first round of voting is probably the reason why he is trying to bolster his self-esteem with such statements. However, it is definitely not a topic for loose words said by those who don’t understand their responsibility for what they say.

As for Germany’s stance, by adopting a decision to lift restrictions on the range of weapons sent to Ukraine – if there were any restrictions - Berlin will drive itself deeper into the same corner with the Kiev regime it is supporting. They will no longer be able to speak about peace or talks. No German weapons, which I see as the main point in this story, will change the course of the special military operation. The Leopard tanks, the Gepard self-propelled guns and howitzers are burning like matchwood. The Taurus missiles, German drones and the “foreign specialists” who are sent or choose to go to Ukraine will suffer the same ignoble fate.

Friedrich Merz and his deputies should first of all tell the German people the truth and ask German citizens for advice about whether they should do this. All these weapons are extremely important. While businesses are leaving Germany and re-registering in other countries, just to keep their heads above water, the German authorities continue to kill their own economy.

I believe that they should first of all discuss such decisions and statements with the people, asking them to second them, so that they won’t have to correct or refute each other.

back to top

 

Question: The Ukrainian authorities are threatening to outlaw the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Will Russia oppose this diplomatically and complain to international organisations? 

Maria Zakharova: I have devoted sufficient attention to this topic today. We will certainly oppose these plans internationally by convening interstate meetings, Security Council meetings, informal meetings, Arria formula meetings, conferences, and others. We will also prepare reports, attract the attention of all authorised international officials, and address all committees, including the Human Rights Committee and the UN General Assembly Third Committee. We regularly send relevant data as official materials to the UN Security Council and we continue this work at the OSCE.

We constantly urge international organisations (the OSCE, among others) to focus on each aspect of Ukraine’s persecution of Orthodox Christianity.  In effect, this is no longer a persecution but an effort to stamp it out. Russian diplomats in Vienna address OSCE Permanent Committee meetings and distribute relevant materials. There is no response to date, as you can see.  This is a taboo matter with them. But this does not mean that we will give up this work. We will only work harder.

back to top

 

Question: After the Gaza ceasefire, the Israeli army resumed its attacks on March 18 and continues to kill Palestinian civilians on the daily basis.  A few days ago, they opened fire on a group of diplomats in Jenin, Palestine.  What is your comment?

Maria Zakharova: Regrettably, like other attacks, it makes no contribution to de-escalation. On the contrary, it makes the situation even worse. It goes without saying that each state takes its own decisions on how to protect its security. But the goings-on in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict zone are synonymous with a humanitarian disaster. It is even something more than a disaster.

This is the most disgraceful phenomenon of modern times that has led to a huge number of civilian casualties. I do not know how to separate women from men; for some reason, we do that, possibly because women are less protected. But in the first place, I would like to speak about the number of children, who have died over this period.

We maintain contacts with the Israelis and convey our point of view on this matter to them, and publish statements. You can see all of this. We pursue this work at international venues. Nevertheless, we should focus on the problem as a whole, rather than on some specific attack or steps undertaken by armed forces. We remain strongly committed to these approaches.

back to top

 

Question: Many countries want to be involved in Russia-Ukraine talks these days.

Maria Zakharova: I like all these statements coming from the West and expressing their desire to be at the negotiating table. However, judging by what they have been doing recently, including in this infamous train car when leaving Kiev, I doubt whether they can manage to sit properly. How about reserving a place for them under the table? They must be clear-eyed about how they look and what others think about them.

back to top

 

Question: But despite all this, they want to be involved. Switzerland and the Vatican have come forward. I know quite a few journalists who believe that holding the talks in Minsk, for example, would suit everyone. First, this is a convenient venue as far as logistics are concerned.

Maria Zakharova: Are you referring to Belarusian journalists you know?

Question: No, these are Russian journalists.

Second, there is no need for any visas. Minsk has a lot of experience when it comes to offering its good offices. There were the Minsk agreements in 2014, and the 2022 talks in Gomel and Brest. In your opinion, could Minsk serve as a negotiating platform? Or can it be that our European would-be friends and Ukraine believe that they would not benefit from this and are doing everything they can to complicate the settlement process?

Maria Zakharova: Your question contains multiple aspects. Let me start from the beginning.

You have mentioned Switzerland. For some reason, this country continues to claim its neutrality both in the public space and at various international platforms.

There was a debate on this topic at the Valdai Forum in Sochi in November 2024. I was among the speakers there, and someone asked me on Russia’s perspective regarding Switzerland’s neutral status and whether it can potentially act as a mediator. You cannot imagine the shock Swiss and Western European political observers experienced when I said that Russia no longer views Switzerland as a neutral state, and that this did not start in 2024. I drew their attention to the fact that, rather than issuing multiple public statements on this topic in general, we made comments on specific actions by officials in Bern to expose the way they had undermined Switzerland’s neutral status – it has all but evaporated. After that, we moved on to draw the corresponding conclusions.

This dawned on them as a revelation, something that they just learned and discovered. At first, they thought that I was not serious. A little later, they raised this issue again. In fact, this caused so many misgivings among them, that they referred this question to Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who took the floor at the same forum later. He reaffirmed that there was no way we could treat Switzerland as a neutral country. However, it seems that they wanted to check whether he spoke the truth and went even further, but heard the same assessment in response.

After all, in order to act as a mediator and to offer one’s country as a negotiating venue, while claiming that it does not side with either party and understands the root causes of the crisis and while saying that the country wants to do something to bring about a peaceful solution and believes that these efforts must ultimately bring peace – all this must be backed by action.

But what did Switzerland do? There was nothing but sanctions against Russia. Moreover, this country was not bound to impose them in any way and did so out of its own free will. It has offered the Kiev regime its all-out political and informational backing. They call this posture a ‘strategic silence’ on all the illegal and disgusting developments, including along the humanitarian track. Switzerland has been always involved in humanitarian matters and is home to a UN office which works on this agenda. I am referring to the ICRC. But in this situation, it appears that they failed to notice all these atrocities. Kursk offers one telling example. People there covered the soil with their blood. Our troops have been discovering things that even Nazis did not dare during the Great Patriotic War.

How can we even fathom a situation in which Switzerland would host talks as a mediator between the two sides? Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has made this point on many occasions.

In fact, this is an even broader issue for us. How can countries which failed to live up to their role as mediators on this track fulfil their obligations? If we are talking about mediation efforts as something that offers added value, this creates a responsibility for them as a host country for international organisations to enable delegations to travel there. They have disregarded this aspect too. I think that Belarus knows this. There were situations when logistics prevented diplomats from attending meetings held by accredited international institutions there. This is a settled matter for us.

As for Minsk, you were spot on when you said that Belarus has the experience it needs for hosting Ukraine settlement talks. In fact, this goes beyond its experience; it is also willing to facilitate this process. We see that Minsk, in its role as a brotherly nation, demonstrates genuine compassion and sympathy regarding what is going on in the region, as President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko said. The people of Belarus share this attitude. Minsk has served as a venue for reaching landmark agreements in September 2014 and February 2015; there was every chance for them to stabilise the situation and stop the crisis from escalating. Let me remind you that the UN Security Council approved these agreements by adopting a resolution to this effect, making them legally binding for everyone. Minsk hosted the Contact Group in an effort to promote dialogue between Kiev, DPR and LPR with the OSCE and Russia as mediators. Therefore, there were several events and an effort to facilitate various multi-faceted processes, as well as a plethora of mediation initiatives for making complex mechanisms along this track operational.

When the special military operation started, Minsk was one of the first capitals to offer its good offices for organising direct Russia-Ukraine talks. At the time, Belarus hosted three rounds of these talks.

Our Belarusian friends played a unique and invaluable role in humanitarian matters. Time and again, Minsk and the people of Belarus have been there to help Russian military personnel and civilians from the Kursk Region return from Ukrainian captivity, and reunite children with their families. Let others speak for Ukraine, while I will focus on the debt of gratitude we owe Belarusian people.

The biggest prisoner exchange took place on the Belarus-Ukraine border on May 23-25, 2025, under the 1,000 for 1,000 formula. Of course, representatives from Belarusian government institutions and agencies made a meaningful contribution to this initiative.

All I can do is reaffirm that Minsk has the experience and is willing to offer mediation services of this kind by undertaking this noble mission. It is up to senior government officials to decide.

back to top

 

Question: During his visit to Yerevan, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that his talks with Ararat Mirzoyan were a frank exchange and that the period of misunderstanding and suspicion between Armenia and Russia is a thing of the past. In this regard, I would like to ask whether the Armenian authorities explained during the talks how and why their affiliated persons participated in organising anti-Russia protests during Sergey Lavrov’s visit to Yerevan. Also, is there a specific date for the opening of the Russian consulate in Syunik or the resumption of Armenia’s regular participation in the CSTO?

Maria Zakharova: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov offered an official assessment of the results of the talks. I cannot add anything because I was not present; I was at the Legal Forum in St Petersburg. I will try to find more information and get back to you, but right now, I can give you a more general answer. We commented on this “buffoonery,” all these performances staged in Yerevan even before the visit. They are using the same well-worn patterns and working for the same clients; the money comes from the same sources. What else is there to know? Do we really need to ask anyone about it? Don’t we know where all this comes from and who benefits from it? This benefits those who dream of dividing the post-Soviet states, and other states, for that matter. Do we really need to ask who contributed their two cents (or more) towards this goal? Isn’t this obvious?

The plan to open Russia’s Consulate General in Syunik was discussed in detail during Sergey Lavrov’s talks. We do not have to be convinced of the need to open this foreign mission as soon as possible. However, at this stage, there is no Russian consulate general in Kapan. Therefore, you will need to check with the Armenian side to find out the official stance.

As for Armenia’s activities in the CSTO, at the moment, we have nothing to add to what Sergey Lavrov said during his news conference and other public events during his visit to Yerevan. We continue to assume that the republic is a full-fledged member of the CSTO, with all the ensuing rights and obligations.

back to top

 

Question: Are there any specific dates or plans for negotiations regarding the peace process in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict? How would you elucidate the fact that Brussels-based Eurocrats are undermining this process?

How would you objectively assess the adequacy of European Union and British leaders following the aforementioned train carriage incident in Kiev?

Maria Zakharova: Am I required to objectively assess their adequacy? The format of this public briefing does not allow me to do so as comprehensively as I might wish.

I am convinced that various peoples’ sacred texts, myths, legends, and epics all communicate the same message in one form or another: “He that hath eyes to see, let him see, and he that hath ears to hear, let him hear.”

You yourselves witness – literally in real time, day after day – the evidence of their adequacy. At this juncture, the issue transcends mere adequacy and concerns the colossal falsehoods enveloping their inadequacy.

Any individual may find themselves in unfortunate circumstances – through personal fault, external factors, or even provocation. Such things happen. But as the saying goes, “Do not lie – speak plainly about what occurred.”

When the entire international community saw – not through hearsay or speculation, but in actual footage – the paraphernalia laid out on a train carriage table (pardon the expression), the kind typically staged in films to depict a narcotics gathering, with the leaders of Western Europe seated around it – while we were simultaneously accused of fabricating and disseminating so-called fake news – that transcends mere inadequacy. It is inadequacy squared. Inadequacy because it happened, and because the chosen response was not justification but an escalation of falsehoods. And the pattern persists.

Second point. You inquire whether this explains their sabotage of a peaceful settlement in Ukraine. Just days ago, following the Russian Foreign Ministry’s statement condemning the latest terrorist attacks by the Kiev regime against civilian infrastructure on our soil, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov expanded on this, noting that many EU leaders are adhering to the course set by Joe Biden and his team. Why? Presumably because these very forces – or those affiliated with them – were instrumental in bringing them to power. Perhaps they anticipate a revenge – perhaps because the previous US administration refused to accept its objective defeat in the 2024 election, retreated into the shadows, and now seeks to undermine the current administration while preparing for some sort of forced march. All await the moment and manner of its execution – and loyally “bark in chorus” along the way.

Third point. I believe it is unclear how they attained their positions. Their professional competence is unsubstantiated; their public and political record alone could never have elevated them. Their grasp of history is better classified as ignorance of history. Given this combination, it is evident they are not independent figures with their own agendas. They are mere instruments – much like Vladimir Zelensky in Ukraine. They, too, are tools of this global liberal dictatorship, periodically taking inadequate actions or making incoherent statements, without comprehending their own words.

Statements from the Élysée Palace – whether from the president, his communication team, or numerous French diplomats – contradict one another daily. Not our position, but each other’s. It has become impossible to discern who is saying what. Take, for instance, the recent quote by the German chancellor, promptly refuted by his own vice-chancellor. Did he clarify? No. It is pure cacophony.

There are countless reasons, but broadly speaking: Europe’s crisis and its decline in this regard were predicted long ago – not in this century, nor even the last, but the one before. Today, it is no longer termed a “decline” but described with even stronger epithets. This is the systemic collapse of what is called global liberalism, ultra-liberalism, liberal dictatorship – a system where individuals of unclear merit ascend to power, where the will of the majority is distorted by the machinations of a minority, where democracy survives in name only, where law is trampled by political “narratives” (it is their term), where human rights serve as a façade for advancing self-interest, and where morality and ethics have dissolved into little more than a “puddle.” Though much could be said in general, I believe this framework holds the answer to your question.

back to top

 

Question: What place does the federal centre allocate to Dagestan in developing economic relations with friendly countries?

Maria Zakharova:  I have already covered this topic today.

Overall, we welcome the republic’s efforts to diversify its foreign trade and international connections, develop its export potential, and seek new partners. Given its economic and geographical position, Dagestan serves as Russia’s southern outpost, sharing land and maritime borders with five states and being historically located along major trade routes. The community factor also contributes significantly. With its streamlined road, rail, maritime and air infrastructure, the republic naturally functions as an important logistics component of the International North-South Transport Corridor, which is the republic’s defining competitive advantage.

New investment projects are in the pipeline, aimed at further developing transit and production capabilities in cooperation with Russian and international partners. These investment projects focus on establishing transport and logistics hubs, storage facilities for agricultural produce, and food processing capacities. Dagestani enterprises are now accessing halal product markets.

The spectrum of opportunities is remarkable, spanning from halal products to information technologies. Each represents significant potential for international cooperation. Several national development initiatives for the region include modernisation of ports and Makhachkala’s airport, along with upgrades to major transport arteries.

We are convinced that the prospects here are exceptionally promising. For its part, the Russian Foreign Ministry will continue to extend full diplomatic support to Dagestan to ensure that the republic can fully capitalise on all the opportunities available thanks to the International North-South Transport Corridor project.

Dagestan actively participates in the Foreign Ministry’s Council of Heads of Constituent Entities of Russia, with varying levels of engagement over the years, and maintains robust involvement through its Representative Office. An upcoming presentation will showcase these efforts. This represents only a fraction of the work that happens every day with our embassies, where, at the region’s request and with the Foreign Ministry’s coordination, we establish contacts, address diverse issues, and conduct analytical work. We maintain close daily cooperation.

back to top

 

Question: Military expenditures are rising across the globe. In 2021, the figure stood at $2.1 trillion (of which the United States accounted for $806 billion). In 2024, this already reached $2.72 trillion, with the United States spending $997 billion and China $314 billion. Over three years, the world increased military budgets by $620 billion – and the trend continues. By 2029, the figure could reach $4 to $4.5 trillion. Global tensions are escalating. Does Russia have any means to ensure its own security and prevent the world from descending into a full-scale Third World War?

Maria Zakharova: Yes, it does.

I believe this should primarily fall within the purview of our defence authorities and relevant agencies, which must provide a comprehensive analysis and response to your question. Nevertheless, I will briefly address the matter.

Undoubtedly, in its military and geopolitical planning, Russia relies on meticulous analysis of continuously evolving threats and, naturally, concrete facts. Particular attention is paid to risks undermining strategic stability. Earlier today, I referenced the Russian-Chinese statement of May 8, this year, which serves as a tangible example of how we respond – among other measures – through political and diplomatic means. The document extensively outlines steps taken by the United States, other Western nuclear states, and their allies in implementing deeply destabilising doctrinal concepts and military and technical programmes.

Such risks can be mitigated either through countermeasures to restore strategic balance or via political and diplomatic means. Regarding the former, Russia is acting systematically. A detailed analysis may be furnished by our defence authorities. As for political and diplomatic steps, we undertake these in coordination with our allies. If you are referring to non-allies or those representing unfriendly regimes, conditions have yet to ripen for resuming substantive, full-fledged dialogue with the United States on the entire spectrum of interrelated strategic stability factors. This would require – as our country’s leadership has repeatedly stated – a solid political foundation, predicated on normalising bilateral relations, including tangible proof of Washington’s willingness to respect Russia’s core interests and eliminate the root causes of fundamental security contradictions.

At the same time, the baseless narrative being peddled by NATO-aligned European elites about an “inevitable” war with Russia – or a “future large-scale” war – cannot but provoke grave concern. They seem to revel in it. This is a direct path to confrontation, fundamentally at odds with the imperative of ensuring international peace and security.

Moreover, these declarations are made in complete disregard of public will. Elections take place in Western European countries, politicians come to power with their programmes – yet nowhere is there mention of an impending major war, as if urging people to vote for it. On the contrary, the emphasis leans toward pacifism or assurances that they will somehow normalise security on the continent. Yet once in office, militarisation, aggression, and talk of future wars begin immediately. The people are neither consulted nor even informed – they are deceived.

Once again, take Switzerland as an example. The country has, to put it mildly, an extensive system of referendums on virtually any issue. Even something as mundane as installing roadside barriers requires district-level referendums. Citizens are polled on all matters affecting their daily lives – a practice many nations can scarcely imagine. This system has functioned for decades there. Yet when it comes to decisions impacting not just a single district but the entire country – given Switzerland’s position at the heart of Europe – Bern acts without even the slightest pretence of public consultation, let alone a referendum. I am absolutely certain that were the Swiss asked in a referendum whether they support some major war, they would dismiss it as absurd and opt instead for peace.

These assertions conceal attempts to inflate and exploit military budgets – an endeavour pursued with particular zeal in recent years by Western powers and Vladimir Zelensky – whilst simultaneously seeking to bolster their own standing within NATO structures and secure future positions. We have witnessed this pattern repeatedly.

Furthermore, one cannot overlook the deft extraction of funds from their own populations in Western countries to sustain the military and industrial complex, all whilst grappling with a severe economic downturn that was entirely predictable following the imposition of anti-Russia sanctions. Now, it appears European authorities see no path to economic recovery other than inflating their military budgets to unprecedented levels and pursuing wholesale militarisation at the expense of ordinary taxpayers – without consulting whether they consent to this course. The myth of a “long-term Russian threat” serves precisely this practical purpose.

By demonising Russia, the North Atlantic Alliance has itself embarked on preparations for a major war. NATO’s process of building its Combined Armed Forces (CAF) has shifted from crisis response to enabling large-scale, high-intensity military operations against a “comparable adversary.” Preparations include deploying multi-role troop formations on the Alliance’s “eastern flank,” stationing additional strike assets and air/missile defence systems in the Baltic and Black Sea regions, and expanding transport and logistical infrastructure. We hear utterly absurd claims – insistently repeated – that the Baltic Sea will become “NATO’s internal waters.”

The Alliance’s operational and combat training of its CAF focuses predominantly on scenarios against Russia. Approximately 50 military exercises involving over 300,000 personnel collectively are conducted annually near Russian borders. Brigade and divisional-level units undergo interoperability drills, operational plans are refined, and new tactical procedures and technical solutions are tested.

It is evident that NATO’s materialised focus on confrontation with Russia, coupled with its accelerated military build-up, heightens the risks of dangerous military incidents and direct armed conflict.

All these factors are duly accounted for in our defence planning to ensure guaranteed national security.

However, as this remains a briefing on foreign policy and Russia’s approach to international affairs, I would like – through your question – to address the citizens of these very countries: Are they even aware of what is being done to them? Do they recall how this same playbook was used 85 years ago, when they were blindly pushed towards a major war through provocation? Do they remember how that ended? Yet they tear down memorials to erase memory and rewrite history textbooks to remain ignorant.

back to top