Maria Zakharova Weekly Briefing Selections

From 16 October 2024

We haven’t heard from Maria for several weeks, but the fault’s not hers—there’s only so much that can be published. Again, as a reminder, Russia’s MFA weekly briefings can be accessed at its English page for the full official English transcript 48-72 hours after it’s occurred under the heading Briefings that also contains an archive going back several years. Yesterday’s affair lasted over 3 hours, which is far too long to be recorded and published here on a single page; so, I’ve been providing selections I deem more important than others. This issue will feature Summit updates and other items related to BRICS; the critical situation in Moldova whose elections are to be held on the 20th; and a few related Q&As. The Russian transcript is here. Now for the selections:

On the XVI BRICS Summit

I would like to tell you about a global event in which the Russian Foreign Minister is also taking part. It will be held at the highest level. We are talking about the BRICS summit in Kazan on October 22-24. Let me remind you that this is the 16th "summit". It is taking place in our country, which chairs this association. The theme of the meeting is "Strengthening Multilateralism for Equitable Global Development and Security".

The agenda of the meeting of the heads of state of the association is very rich. The leaders will discuss topical issues on the global and regional agenda, the results of joint work within the framework of the BRICS strategic partnership in the political, economic, cultural and humanitarian spheres. The results of cooperation in the field of security, including through the High Representatives in charge of these issues, and the relevant working mechanisms will be summed up. Particular attention will be paid to the reform of the international financial system and enhancing the role of the BRICS countries, the development of interbank cooperation and the expansion of mutual settlements in national currencies. Another important topic is the establishment of a new category of BRICS "partner states".

The main agreements of the summit will be recorded in the final declaration. It will also reflect the consolidated approaches of the member states of the association on a number of topical international and regional issues and the further development of BRICS.

A meeting of the summit in the "outreach"/"BRICS plus" format is scheduled for October 24 with the participation of delegations from more than 30 developing countries, including those chairing regional cooperation mechanisms, as well as heads of executive structures of international organizations. The central theme of the meeting will be "BRICS and the Global South: Building a Better World Together". The discussion will be devoted to topical issues of interaction between the world's majority states and increasing their role in making decisions on issues on the international agenda. It is also planned to consider the situation in hot spots with a special emphasis on the situation in the Middle East, ensuring sustainable development, food and energy security.

A lot of information has been published by the Presidential Executive Office and the Foreign Ministry. Our representatives and ambassadors are working. They give interviews, talk about upcoming events at all venues, in the media, hold press conferences, briefings, speak, answer questions. If you have any questions, we will be happy to answer them.

I would also like to mention that Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is scheduled to hold a number of bilateral and multilateral meetings with our partners on the sidelines of the BRICS summit. In addition, we will inform you about their schedule. Everything will be published on the ministry's website and in our social media accounts

On the Annual Meeting of the BRICS Business Council and the BRICS Business Forum

On October 17-18, Moscow will host the annual meeting of the BRICS Business Council and the BRICS Business Forum.

The BRICS Business Council is one of the main mechanisms of corporate interaction within the association. At the event on October 17, the annual report will be approved, which will include the proposals and initiatives of the Council's working groups. This document will be presented to the heads of BRICS states during their meeting in Kazan.

On October 18, the BRICS Business Forum will take place, which is traditionally held on the eve of the BRICS summit and serves as a useful platform for building ties between representatives of the business community of the BRICS countries. This year, panel discussions will be devoted to issues of financial and investment cooperation, international trade and logistics connectivity, agribusiness development and strengthening food security, sustainable energy transition and the role of technological cooperation in the implementation of the ESG agenda. This agenda is a concept that identifies three main criteria by which the performance of companies is evaluated. Addresses by the leaders of the BRICS countries are expected at the plenary session.

The Forum will also host award ceremonies for the winners of the BRICS Solutions Awards International Best Practices Competition and the BRICS Women's Startup Competition.

Developments in Moldova

In the country, the literal crusade of NATO for the freedom and independence of the Moldovan people continues. There are a few days left before the upcoming presidential elections on October 20 and a referendum on the expediency of joining the EU. Moldovan experts have already assessed the actions of the authorities, I mean the Maia Sandu regime in the current election campaign, as a totalitarian theatre of the absurd.

Unable to present to voters any positive results of its four-year rule, the Maia Sandu regime relies entirely on administrative resources, repression against political opponents, independent media, and everyone who literally does not obey it directly.

On October 9 this year, in the absence of any grounds, the police confiscated the campaign materials of the Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova from the printing house. Why on earth? Is this a banned party? Is it a party that publishes prohibited content or prohibited materials? Oh, no! On October 13 of this year, a similar fate befell the party of newspapers of the Vozrozhdenie political formation. These publications expressed their own vision of the situation. They believed that Moldova did not need to join the European Union. All. Their fate is already sealed.

On October 10, the Telegram channels of a number of opposition members of the national parliament, the head of Gagauzia, E. Hutsul, and several Moldovan media outlets were blocked for Moldovan users. On October 11 of this year, it became known about the deletion of seven accounts on Facebook and Instagram, which are banned in Russia. Let me remind you why they became banned. Because they were spreading extremist information. 23 pages were deleted and 20 accounts containing criticism of the current president and calls to vote in a referendum against European integration.

Imagine, this is the same West that is now rushing and advancing on the freedom and independence of Moldova, in the same social networks and on its own Internet platforms, it said that killing Russians and calling for the murder of Russians is (according to these extremist networks) normal. And that, these are the "values" they want to instill in the Moldovan people in the form of some democratic guidelines. And at the same time, without closing accounts with obviously extremist content, in which there are calls for the murder of people on the basis of nationality, they close accounts and block pages where people simply express an alternative point of view, not calling not only for murder, but even for violence. It's just Through the Looking Glass.

It is indicative that even such a structure known for its biased approach as the OSCE ODIHR was unable to "turn a blind eye" to Chisinau's gross violations of the electoral rights of citizens. Look, the ODIHR interim report of October 4 draws attention to the authorities' abuse of administrative resources, the refusal to register some presidential candidates and the opening of a limited number of polling stations, in particular, in Russia. It is clear that the assessments are unclear. Obviously, they do not reflect the real state of affairs. But even this is at least something that the ODIHR has squeezed out of itself. This is despite the fact that it is an absolutely biased structure. It meant that it was impossible not to see it.

Despite all the efforts of the authorities, Maia Sandu's anti-ratings are record-breaking. Seeing this, the Western sponsors of the Chisinau regime are forced to increase overt interference in the internal affairs of Moldova. For what? In order to save their wards. What do they do for this? As always, they begin to scatter money and statements of an anti-Russian nature from a helicopter.

On October 9, the European Parliament adopted a resolution replete with Russophobic passages "Strengthening Moldova's resilience against Russian interference in the upcoming presidential elections and the constitutional referendum on joining the EU." The so-called MEPs called for sanctions against individuals and organizations undermining the sovereignty of Moldova. Is someone undermining the sovereignty of Moldova? Probably, those who call the Moldovans Romanians. Or those who say that there is no Moldovan language, but only Romanian. This is the end of Moldova's sovereignty and its identity. But for some reason, no one named these people. We are talking about the opposition in Moldova. It stands for the preservation of culture, traditions, and legality in the country. In this "work", MEPs call for the allocation of additional EU consultants to provide "technical assistance" on EU accession and to increase support for the Center for Strategic Communications and Combating Disinformation of Moldova, which the Moldovans themselves call the "Ministry of Truth". The same according to Joseph Goebbels.

On October 10, during her visit to Chisinau, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen openly campaigned for Maia Sandu. This is in their "rules". I am just wondering if she has already sent a letter of congratulations to Maia Sandu, just as Francois Hollande once sent a letter of congratulations to Hillary Clinton, even before the US elections ended.

Ursula von der Leyen announced the European "Growth Plan for Moldova". Most of this growth plan is in the form of credit. The amount is beautiful, wonderful. It is really large - 1.8 billion euros. Only a small nuance, you know, an asterisk, a footnote, which for some reason no one sees and does not pay attention to. The fact is that it's all on credit. This is not a gift, not humanitarian aid, not gratuitous support. This is a loan. No one asks the question of who will give it back, how, from what funds. Who and how will dispose of it. It doesn't matter. It is important to voice a beautiful figure and at the same time keep silent about the fact that all this is on credit. This is a real Western, not mythical Russian interference in the internal affairs of Moldova.

On October 4 of this year, the EU Council imposed sanctions for attempts to "destabilize the situation in Moldova." Who are these sanctions against? Against five individuals and legal entities, including the head of Gagauzia, E. Hutsul, the founder of the Autonomous Non-Profit Organization "Eurasia", N.A. Parutenko, and the aforementioned organization itself.

It is noteworthy, however, that in an effort to keep Maia Sandu in power by all means, the West is increasingly talking about its true interests with regard to Moldova. Recently, EU Ambassador to Chisinau J. Mažeiks said that as a result of Moldova's European integration, what do you think Western transnational corporations will receive? An opportunity to help Moldovan business? Invest in the Moldovan economy? To support Moldovan startups free of charge? No. Western transnational corporations (as the EU ambassador in Chisinau openly said) will have the right to buy up the country's land fund. All. Curtain. This is what the Germans failed to do then, 80 years ago, first occupying, subjugating the land, thinking that it was their property, their patrimony, and then simply exporting black soil, stealing their fertile soil. Now this is being done by the hands of multinational companies. Someone may say, they will buy it. But we know how they "buy". We know that later all this will be presented as if Moldova owes a lot, is late in paying off loans, is unable to pay off creditors, and therefore there is no need to pay for land. There is real bondage. This is the enslavement of people. This is a real colonization of Moldova. This is neocolonialism. This is the same slave trade, only in a new way. In the midst of the XXI century, when "on a mirror", and now it is not even a "mirror" (mirrors used to be brought to the natives), and now they are just "papers" on which some numbers are written. In exchange for these "papers", all the most expensive things that an agrarian country (Moldova is just like that) can have are taken away? Earth.

On October 8, Romanian MEP C. Târziu pointed out into the microphone that Moldova's accession to the EU is possible only in the event of the republic's complete withdrawal from the CIS, the de-Russification of the country and the demolition of Soviet monuments. What are these Soviet monuments? Let's think about it. The first is monuments to the heroes of the Great Patriotic War, World War II, who fought against Nazism. The second is monuments, monuments and memorials to great figures of science, culture, art, both our general and directly Moldovan. Why? Because from the point of view of the West, it is necessary to erase the Moldovan identity. They need to do everything so that children in Moldova do not know either their heroes or those people who forged not only victory, but also their well-being. They achieved results in science, culture, and art. And thirdly, of course, these are the very monuments that were erected in the name of peace, friendship, outlining the main priorities of the peace-loving Moldovan people. This is what needs to be demolished from the point of view (as he calls himself) of the Romanian MEP.

One of the pro-government Moldovan propagandists recently went so far as to say that Maia Sandu's victory in the upcoming elections is necessary to preserve Moldova as an important logistics hub for supplying Ukraine. Of course. By the way, all this is true. This is a tool, this is the very point on the map that is needed as the implementation of the geopolitical aspirations of the West.

At the same time, the West would not be the West if it tried to "hold" Moldova at its own expense. No, they are used to walking there at someone else's expense. This is done at the expense of the Moldovans themselves. After all, most of the funding allocated to the republic is loans. And they will have to be given to future generations of the country's residents. They are made directly dependent on the money that Maia Sandu will now receive and which she will steal. Thus, according to IMF estimates, from January to June 2024 alone, Moldova's public debt increased by $330 million. This is a huge amount for Moldova, especially given that during the mentioned period the negative balance of the republic's trade balance amounted to more than $ 3 billion.

These are the real results of the work of the current Moldovan authorities, their policy of rapprochement with the EU and a break with Russia and other CIS countries, for which Moldovan voters are urged to vote. I am sure that the people of Moldova understand the abyss into which the current regime and its Western curators are pushing them.

Update on the East Asia Summit

As you know, this is not the first year that the West has been trying to use its unscrupulous manoeuvres to cover up the policy it has taken within the framework of the Indo-Pacific strategy to reduce the functionality of multilateral ASEAN-centric structures. This also applies to the situation that is developing today around the work of the East Asia Summit.

Since its inception in 2005, this mechanism has focused on issues of inclusive practical cooperation between ASEAN states and dialogue partners. Initially, six basic industry areas were identified - economics, energy, environmental protection, healthcare, finance, emergency response. And the applied abstract of the EAS was seriously expanded in 2017 with the adoption of the Manila Action Plan - the "road map" of the association's activities for 2018-2022, which included the topics of connectivity and food security. To increase the practical impact of the forum, a special group of permanent representatives of the EAS member countries to ASEAN was formed. The sphere of responsibility of this structure included the tasks of implementing leadership decisions.

This policy of our ASEAN partners, with the active support of Russia and China, made it possible to develop and approve a number of documents that are important in terms of consolidating regional cooperation both on the sustainable development agenda and on responding to cross-border problems and challenges in the period up to 2021. Although already in those years, the United States and its allies – primarily from the pro-NATO "Asia-Pacific Four" (Japan, the Republic of Korea, Australia and New Zealand) – as part of their "Indo-Pacific" course aimed at reformatting the cooperative landscape in the Asia-Pacific region according to bloc patterns and standards, began to systematically create obstacles to the productive work of the EAS platform.

In 2020, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, a paradoxical situation arose when a group of countries that I have already mentioned (this very "quartet") diligently erased everything related to practical cooperation from the draft leadership declaration on increasing the regional anti-epidemic potential in the format of the 18 EAS states proposed by Russia and supported by ASEAN. Let me remind you that it was 2020. If after 2022 they motivate everything by Russia's "aggression", then what happened in 2020? If there was any aggression on the planet, it was the COVID-19 pandemic. Why was it necessary to put "spokes in the wheels" then? This is the nature of the West. As a result, the application was accepted. The West refuses to implement all this and work on the implementation of this document.

A similar fate befell the document agreed with no less difficulty in 2021 on strengthening cooperation in the field of tourism as one of the tools for artificially suppressing the negative economic consequences of the pandemic. Russia's calls to launch expert contacts and ministerial dialogue in this area are swept under the rug from year to year, blocked and erased in practical terms. Everything is as always.

The peak of the West's destructive behavior was the blocking in 2022, literally at the last minute before the summit, of almost ready-made statements by leaders on the topic of promoting volunteering. How did volunteering prevent the West? Well, and the development of energy cooperation (this was a Chinese proposal).

In 2023, the Western group was no less enthusiastic about criticizing Russia's proposal to adopt a detailed, well-developed version of the EAS Action Plan for the period from 2024 to 2028, as well as our idea to initiate a review of the baggage of leadership decisions accumulated over the course of the association's existence. There were 44 documents on this list. Why was it necessary? In order to determine further steps to implement these decisions. But all this, again, ran into a reluctance on the part of Western states to work normally.

Instead of concrete work in a region-wide format, the East Asia Summit was given a place in the West's system of priorities as a platform for replicating ideological "narratives" in the style of a "rules-based order." At the same time, the United States and its satellites are trying to transfer all practical cooperation in the regional field into a system of American-centric, narrow-bloc mechanisms and partnerships alternative to ASEAN, of which there are already more than a dozen.

This year, at all stages of preparations for the summit, Russia has consistently defended the applied importance of the EAS in the context of ensuring sustainable economic and social development in the region. We supported the practice-oriented draft document originally presented by the Lao Chairmanship and urged not to make this statement hostage to geopolitical ambitions. That is, they encouraged us to work constructively, normally, aimed at practical results. Nevertheless, Western states have not abandoned plans to lead the EAS down the path of politicization. They refused to look for a compromise, increased the degree of aggressive rhetoric, conditioned the approval of the statement in the form of an ultimatum on the presence of their confrontational content in the text, which, in fact, once again disrupted its adoption.

At the summit itself, the Russian delegation was forced to raise the issue of the unfair behaviour of the negotiating teams of the United States and its allies, including the blocking of our proposals to build work on the implementation of the roadmap for practical cooperation in the EAS region.

We have backed up our call on all members of the association to prove their commitment to the development of multilateral ASEAN-centric mechanisms with two new initiatives that are relevant for the region. Based on the Russian experience gained both in the framework of the implementation of national programs and in the format of international cooperation at the SCO and APEC platforms, we proposed to study the possibility of cooperation on the development of remote areas. In addition, we put on the Vasov table the concept of strengthening socio-cultural interconnectedness in the region.

We have seen publications that appeared at the instigation of Westerners to the effect that Russia is allegedly disrupting its work, that the Supreme Commercial Court is acting unconstructively and does not show proper cooperation. We have read so many things. I have cited facts based on the data of our experts, which testify to who really puts spokes in the wheels of this structure.

Italy's refusal to issue visas to the Russian delegation to the 75th International Astronautical Congress

These days, Italy did not do its best deed.

From October 14 to 18, the 75th International Astronautical Congress is being held in Milan. It is one of the world's most authoritative platforms for exchanging views and discussing the prospects for the development of the space industry. The event of the International Astronautical Federation annually brings together over 5000 participants - heads of space agencies, cosmonauts, scientists and specialists from different countries. The State Corporation for Space Activities "Roscosmos" and a number of organizations of the Russian rocket and space industry have been permanent members of the Federation since 1993. Russian representatives were repeatedly elected to the governing bodies of the Federation.

This year, a representative Russian delegation headed by Director General of the Roscosmos State Corporation Yury Borisov planned to take part in the Milan Congress. Official invitations were received from the president of the International Astronautical Federation (by the way, he is a citizen of the United States, but this did not prevent him from acting within the framework of the norms and rules approved in his own Federation). They also received an invitation from the president of the Italian Space Agency. Despite this and Russia's full membership in the Federation, the absence of financial and other debts, despite the observance of the necessary formalities, including the payment of participation fees, flight and accommodation expenses. What do you think happened? The Italian government did not issue visas to Russian delegates.

I understand that Italy is a great space power. It can probably compensate for the absence of the Russian delegation. Although many will argue with this. But think about it, if our country, which has made and has been making an invaluable contribution to the exploration of outer space every day for decades, has proclaimed it not a zone of strife and unscrupulous competition, but a sphere of peaceful exploration, Italy does not allow it to attend conferences and events on the topic of space, who is being robbed by the government of this country? Who does it make worse? Our achievements in space, in general, do not need any advertising. Russia generously shares them with all other countries that do not have such potential, capacity, space capabilities for the delivery of cosmonauts or cargo, do not have the opportunity to create a space station or take a place on the ISS, cannot conduct manned astronauts into orbit. Russia helps everyone. Our country is ready to provide opportunities and is doing so. How many astronauts around the world have been taking advantage of these opportunities for decades? Who is the Italian government deceiving when it does not issue visas to Russian representatives? Himself and his own people. Yes, he also exposes himself in a ridiculous way.

We are outraged by another unfriendly step by official Rome. Moreover, it is a disgrace for Rome to engage in such things. The Italian side again grossly neglected the obligations of the country hosting a major international event. We regard this as nothing more than an unlawful and unjustified decision to refuse to issue entry visas to the Russian delegation. We consider this to be another manifestation of the Russophobic course of the current Italian leadership. Rome's decision completely contradicts the goals and objectives of the Federation, undermines the foundations of international cooperation in the field of exploration and peaceful exploration of space and deals another blow to Russian-Italian relations, which, due to the actions of the Italian leadership, are experiencing the deepest crisis since the end of World War II.

This approach of the Italian side contrasts with the honest and open policy of our country when holding international events in Russia. Let me remind you that in 2021, the International Conference on Space Research was held in St Petersburg. It was organized by Roscosmos and the International Astronautical Federation. Despite the restrictions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, our side has fully fulfilled its obligations to the Federation to issue visas to foreign participants of the conference. Let me remind you how many restrictions have been imposed in the world for people to cross borders. Nevertheless, we have fulfilled all our obligations.

Now official Rome has once again confirmed groveling before the "collective West". To their own detriment. They ridiculed themselves in the international arena. It would be better if Italy listened to Russian representatives on the topic of space. They would be enlightened. Rome has once again demonstrated that they are using unscrupulous methods and resorting to unilateral destructive steps. All this is needed, apparently, in order to serve Washington. There is simply no other thing to see here. And the United States needs this in order to prevent the formation of a multipolar world. The West needs this in order to maintain the irrevocably departing Western-centric "rules-based world order", and in fact on their one rule – the rule of the strong.

Statements by Prime Minister of Japan Shigeru Ishiba

We have taken note of the recently intensified rhetoric of official Tokyo about "nuclear and missile threats" allegedly emanating from North Korea. Another portion of groundless accusations on this topic was voiced in the speech of Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba at the East Asia Summit in Vientiane on October 11 of this year.

What is really behind such hysteria? We could not help but notice the "presentation" by the new Japanese prime minister in one of the US publications on the eve of taking office of his own concept of building an "Asian NATO model", which directly states that the members of such an association should have access to US nuclear weapons in the format of "joint nuclear missions" or the ability to deploy them on their territory.

Could it be because the Prime Minister of Japan has just taken office? Maybe they didn't tell him, they don't know? Even when the United States deploys its nuclear weapons on the territory of other countries, it does not give anyone access to them. Never. Not in any form. I am saying this for the information of the Japanese leadership.

The other day, Japanese Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya, commenting on the prospects for implementing the idea of such an alliance, admitted his intention to "tie ropes in knots crosswise to get a kind of network." And who is this network for? Maybe this is a trap for ourselves? Does Japan calculate their actions at least one step ahead? They imagine what will happen in the region if the Americans also deploy their nuclear weapons in Japan. They wonder what this will lead to? A (wrong answer) leads to greater security, and B (correct answer) leads to the collapse of stability in this long-suffering region.

We see how Japan, in line with the policy of radical remilitarization, continues to rapidly expand military-political cooperation with Washington, form an offensive strike potential, increase the scale of military training activities, involving non-regional forces of the North Atlanticists, and now also claims its own role in providing the American nuclear "umbrella."

In this context, all Japanese accusations against the DPRK of escalation, as they say, the situation around the Korean Peninsula correspond to the idea of who usually shouts "stop the thief!" He is the thief himself, when his hat is on fire. I want to warn Tokyo, using the terminology of Japanese Foreign Minister Tokeshi Iwai: when you tie the rope, do everything so that it does not turn out to be a noose around your own neck.

About the Caribbean Disbursement Initiative

On October 25-26, 2024, Samoa will host a summit of Commonwealth leaders. The results of this meeting may have the most unpleasant consequences for London, including in financial terms: 15 member states of the CARICOM trade and economic association, once the centers of the plantation economy and the slave trade of the British Empire, intend to demand that London pay reparations in the amount of at least $260 billion for centuries of slavery. This amount is by no means final and can be significantly increased. If the refusal is heard at the Commonwealth summit, then CARICOM members intend to file a lawsuit in international judicial structures.

The idea of demanding reparations from the former metropolis for centuries of colonial exploitation and slavery, which are still the main cause of socio-economic problems and extreme poverty of the population, has been discussed for a long time. But now, thanks to the just and persistent demands of the Caribbean States, the calls for reparations are beginning to take shape.

During a speech at the opening of the regular session of the UN General Assembly in September this year, Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley, on behalf of the Caribbean Community, called for "the completion of unfinished business and the resolution of the issue of reparations for slavery and colonialism." Earlier, the head of government has repeatedly noted that the UK's debt to her country during the period of colonial exploitation reaches five trillion dollars.

I would like to remind you of a fact that even the British themselves admit: of the 193 states recognized by the UN, Britain did not take part in interfering in the affairs of only 22 countries. By seizing rich countries and territories, the British then siphoned off resources and used these countries as raw materials appendages and markets for their manufactured goods and a way to replenish slave markets. Today, this terminology cannot be used. She's so wild. But when you come to the countries of the region and come to the central square, you are shown the places where people were sold. Where were they sold? To the United States of America, to Britain, to Europe, but above all to the world of the Anglo-Saxons.

Let me remind you that today Britain has 10 "non-self-governing territories" in colonial dependence. If we use the UN classification, some of them are in the Caribbean (Anguilla, Bermuda, British and Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Montserrat, Turks and Caicos Islands).

Literally in early October of this year, after a long-term territorial dispute, an agreement was reached with the UK on the return of the Chagos Archipelago to the sovereignty of Mauritius. It would seem that it was worth rejoicing. But the Diego Garcia Atoll, where the Anglo-American military base is located, remains under the administration of the United States and Great Britain for the next 99 years.

The brutality with which the British carried out their colonialist policy was well known not only then, but also well documented. Britain's colonial machine literally "ground up" millions of people on various continents. We can justifiably talk about the responsibility of the British for the genocide of the peoples of the world. In a cowardly effort to evade responsibility for the crimes of the past, London is now working on the deliberate destruction of archival materials in order to make it difficult to assess the scale of its crimes and criminal acts. At the same time, the colonial period, at the instigation of the elite, still remains a factor of national pride for British society to a large extent – a specific system of values is firmly rooted – the ideology of "messianism" and the "heavy burden of the white man", which is supposedly the source of "progress" for all the "unreasonable", which they include the rest of the world.

London can no longer indefinitely suppress the independence and sovereignty of peoples. Russia supports the Caribbean countries in their desire to receive fair compensation from Britain for the past and present grave consequences caused by colonization and neocolonialism. These are not just words and concepts. This is the heaviest burden that has fallen to the lot of peoples. It's not just oppression. This is bullying, exploitation, lack or non-realization of human rights. This is the removal of such a concept as law from the life of entire peoples.

I would like to note that it was the USSR that played an important role in the decolonization process and consistently opposed the policy of neocolonialism in the Caribbean. In the second half of the 1950s, the main principles of Soviet foreign policy were to support the national liberation movement of colonial-dependent peoples and cooperate with newly independent states.

For example, the USSR initiated the adoption of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (it was approved on December 14, 1960 during the XV session of the UN General Assembly by Resolution 1514). This made it possible to establish the Special Committee on Decolonization (the so-called Committee of 24) within the UN, which Russia is a member of to this day. The efforts of the USSR in this direction allowed the UN to play a decisive role in the process of achieving independence by colonial countries. I think in many ways they are taking revenge on us for this today.

At a time when Washington and London are pursuing a policy in the Caribbean region towards the restoration of an ideologized, in fact, neocolonial policy in the spirit of the Monroe Doctrine, the relatively "young" Caribbean states by historical standards are striving to defend their sovereignty and the right to an independent path of development.

Russia has consistently reinforced this attitude among its partners and supports the Caribbean countries in their desire to receive fair compensation for the past and present grave consequences caused by colonization and neocolonialism.

Question: In September, the American magazine Foreign Affairs published an article titled "The Battle for BRICS – Why the World Order Will Determine the Future of the BRICS?" Among other things, it says that many Western analysts have been predicting the collapse of BRICS for 15 years since the formation of the association. They also write that its members are so different from each other, often disagree on a variety of issues and are scattered around the globe that it is difficult to build a meaningful partnership. Nevertheless, we see that BRICS not only survived, but is also developing successfully. What are your forecasts regarding the words of Western analysts and what are the main reasons for the development of BRICS?

Maria Zakharova: Forecasting is one of the important components of state planning, including in the field of foreign policy. We pay great attention to the materials of serious analytical structures, including foreign ones, which have not been seen in "black PR", outright bias or political order.

Another question is about the "end of the BRICS." As Foreign Affairs correctly notes, slogans or curses have accompanied the association since its birth. We got acquainted with such "works". Later it became clear that it was not about forecasting, but about ordering. Apparently, for good money, grants or fees, similar "manuals" were distributed. The message has always been the same: the first is not to notice or say anything (try watching the BRICS summits, the first five or six of them were not covered in the Western media at all), the second is when it has become impossible not to notice, especially in recent years, when countries one after another, dozens of people are talking about their desire to join this association – to present everything only in a negative way.

This is not forecasting, but simply ordering. By such orders, you can judge a lot. In particular, about the approaches to BRICS activities of those who order such "materials". We are talking about our Western "non-partners".

We have identified the following pattern for ourselves: the deeper and more effective the interaction in BRICS, the more such publications there are. This means that the association is moving in the right direction.

BRICS does not threaten the West in any way – it does not make aggressive speeches, does not aim its members at confrontation. None of this exists. But at the same time, there is endless hysteria on the part of the West.

As for the reasons for the development of the Association. It is obvious to us that the fundamental factor in this regard is its very nature. This is an innovative format of interstate interaction that unites different cultures and civilizations, countries with different economic and political potentials, systems and levels of development, and, as analysts rightly note, often with different views on the global agenda. Each has its own nuances.

At the same time, we are united by a common goal – a firm commitment to pursuing an independent foreign and domestic policy, upholding sovereignty and our national interests.

Over the years of cooperation in BRICS, a special culture of dialogue has been formed, open and trusting relations have developed based on the principles of sovereign equality, respect for the choice of one's own path of development and consideration for each other's interests. This helps our countries to find common ground and even "solutions" on difficult issues that obviously must arise, because these are issues on the agenda of the Association and the lives of the citizens of our countries.

It is this format that should become the basis for a more just multipolar world order, a model of equal interstate communication aimed at a constructive search for answers to the challenges facing the world, without imposing any recipes from the outside, alien values that do not meet universal human priorities, views and views.

The secret of the BRICS' success is that it does not have any confrontational, aggressive or "hidden" agenda. It is an association of like-minded people who may have different views on certain topics, issues, or problems. It's about friendship. After all, when you are friends, you do not force your friend to share absolutely all your interests with you or think only the way you think. Do not demand that your friend give up his worldview, from what is important to him. Do not try to isolate a friend from communication with acquaintances, comrades, friends. Friendship is about something completely different. It's about support, understanding, non-betrayal, lack of violence. About what the world just began to strive for in the 20th century and then again went into contradiction and conflicts fanned by the Anglo-Saxons because of the policy of the West.

The BRICS member states do not build communication on the principle of "leader" and "follower". I will not give other comparisons. It is clear what we are talking about. There is consensus, reconciliation of positions, development of a common vision and consideration of each other's interests.

Question: Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said last Thursday that a meeting of representatives of the five nuclear powers will be held in New York in the next two weeks. Is the date of the meeting known? Who will represent Russia at it? What would Russia like to get from this meeting?

Maria Zakharova: The meeting you are asking about has already taken place. It was held on October 10 in New York at the expert level.

Russia was represented by representatives of the Department for Nonproliferation and Arms Control of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

I would like to draw your attention to the fact that since August of this year, the functions of coordinator in the nuclear five have been rotated from Russia to China. Accordingly, all logistical, announcement and final information (about meetings of this format) will be made public by the Chinese colleagues in agreement with the other participants. Follow the comments of the Chinese Foreign Ministry. We, in turn, are always ready to answer your questions.

Now about our substantive participation. We intend to continue using this platform to convey Russia's principled approaches and important signals on topical issues of international security, such as the strategic risks posed by Western countries that increase the level of nuclear danger.

Question: As part of the implementation of anti-Russia restrictive measures, OFAC (financial intelligence) officers of the US Treasury Department, with the active support of the US Department of State and its diplomatic missions abroad, regularly carry out measures in the banking systems of the countries of the Global South aimed at preventing contacts and cooperation with the Russian banking system, including with individual commercial banks. In particular, in the event of attempts by Russian commercial banks to open correspondent accounts in national currencies in banks of these countries (UAE, Oman, Turkey, Egypt, India, etc.), the official authorities of these states are immediately threatened by official threats from representatives of OFAC, US embassies and the State Department to include national commercial banks in the US sanctions lists with their subsequent disconnection from the SWIFT system. Is the Russian Foreign Ministry taking any countermeasures aimed at supporting Russian commercial banks abroad in this situation? How can you comment on this situation in general, taking into account the constant statements of the "collective West" about freedom of the market, the movement of capital and financial rights?

Maria Zakharova: The Anglo-Saxon world has long discredited the very idea of a free market and fair competition, which they also promoted. In their neocolonial paradigm, only the "civilized", "democratic" Western "garden" has financial and any other rights. Only they are entitled and given the right to dispose of all this. Everyone else can get "permission" to connect or activate all mechanisms only for and only when it is beneficial to the "golden billion" or, at least, does not bother it. In order for the "golden billion" to continue to dominate, to feel exceptional. Hence the aggressive promotion of the "rules-based world order." It would be more correct to say that there is only one rule – this is the rule of the strong (only the West), which believes that it can do good to everyone at its own discretion. He is trying to dictate this rule to the world community in all areas, primarily in the economy and finance, and so on.

Those who disagree with this line are "educated" by the Westerners. They apply various sanctions, restrictive measures and "stop lists" that are outside the law and international law, outside domestic legislation and, of course, contrary to the principle of sovereign equality of states enshrined in the UN Charter.

The measures of pressure on countries friendly to Russia that you mentioned are part of this strategy and "collective punishment." Our partners see the boorish behaviour of the Americans, the British and the EU, who shamelessly hand out "instructions". Someone is separately issued "indulgences", someone is given orders, but not to receive "scarce goods", but to appear "in front of the white eye" and receive their portion of punishment or "instructions", according to their idea of how the world should be arranged. They tell everyone who can communicate with whom and who cannot communicate with whom.

The problem lies in the dependence of most financial institutions in developing countries on Western capital markets and payment and settlement infrastructure, as well as their "focus" on Anglo-Saxon rating agencies. In these conditions, we are working with our friends from the countries of the Global South and East, the World Majority, to find mutually acceptable solutions to build uninterrupted settlements and create the necessary infrastructure. The Russian Foreign Ministry provides the necessary foreign policy support for such activities.

We believe it is important to continue to give priority attention to the conversion of mutual settlements into national currencies and to move away from "toxic" currencies in ensuring foreign economic activity. Ultimately, it is necessary to build an alternative financial infrastructure that is independent of the West and the destructive Western mentality, resistant to external pressure. First of all, we are talking about the integration of payment systems (including the topic of settlements in digital currencies of central banks and other financial assets), building direct interbank ties, and establishing mechanisms for the transfer of financial information.

It is necessary to promote a comprehensive reform of the global monetary and financial system, which does not meet the current needs and interests of the majority of states and is, first of all, a tool for promoting Western neocolonial interests. All these areas are the subject of close cooperation with our partners, including BRICS (the topic will be discussed in Kazan), the G20, APEC and other international venues.

But where there is the United States, Britain and those who "grunt" at them, they are trying to block this topic.

Question: From the Foreign Ministry's point of view, what is the real prospect of the Georgian Government's current aspirations to settle the South Ossetian conflict? Does the Russian Federation plan to contribute in any way to this process?

Maria Zakharova: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov gave an assessment of the recent statements by Georgian officials on this matter in response to a media question following the High-Level Week of the 79th session of the UN General Assembly on September 28.

The problems of post-conflict settlement between Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia are being discussed under the auspices of the Geneva International Discussions on Security and Stability in Transcaucasia. Our common priorities with our Abkhaz and South Ossetian allies remain unchanged. This is the receipt of legally binding guarantees from Tbilisi on the non-use of force against Tskhinvali and Sukhum, as well as the launch of the process of delimitation of state borders with these republics. There is no need to talk about progress on these issues, given the remaining fundamental differences in the parties' approaches to the geopolitical realities that have developed in the region.

Recent statements from Georgia about its intention to apologize to the people of South Ossetia for the war unleashed by the regime of Mikheil Saakashvili in August 2008 inspire some hope in this regard. It is gratifying that we hear public confessions of a long-confirmed fact that a madman who was overwhelmed by passions, morbid ambitions, an unhealthy outlook on life, who became another victim of American deception, went to what later went down in history as aggression. Let me remind you that this is not only our qualification. All this was recorded in a report initiated by the European Union, namely, the International Independent Mission led by Swiss diplomat Giovanni Tagliavini, better known as the Tagliavini Report. It contains all the wording and facts. Then, fifteen years ago, the EU was bolder, more decent. There were such people there. Despite the complexity of the situation, Carlo del Ponte also said that "black transplantologists" operated in Kosovo. I don't know for what reasons people from European countries found the courage to tell the truth.

We hope that this spirit will be reflected in the work of the Georgian delegation during the upcoming rounds of the Geneva International Discussions on Security and Stability in the South Caucasus.

It is important that Sukhum and Tskhinval are also ready to turn a tragic page in the history of relations with Georgia. At the same time, we understand that no one in Georgia, Abkhazia, or South Ossetia will forget anything. But it is one thing not to forget and preserve the memory, and another thing to move forward to normalise relations and overcome the contradictions that such madmen as Mikheil Saakashvili have held hostage. Moreover, the countries are ready to turn this page with an emphasis on consolidating the statements made in specific practical actions, primarily the conclusion of a legally binding agreement on the non-use of force by Tbilisi.

Russia, as a participant in the Geneva International Discussions on Security and Stability in Transcaucasia and the closest neighbor of Abkhazia, Georgia and South Ossetia, is vitally interested in normalizing relations between these states. Moscow is ready to contribute to this in every possible way, both in bilateral and multilateral formats.

Question: Georgia has once again accused the West of exerting pressure to open a second front against Russia. Prime Minister Irakli Kobakhidze expressed hope that next year the Ukrainian conflict will end and then the West "will immediately lose interest in opening a second front in Georgia." Does the Russian Foreign Ministry share Tbilisi's hopes?

Maria Zakharova: It seems to me that the citizens of Georgia, for all the depth of their experience of what happened to them in the first decade of the 21st century, understand the root cause of what happened. This is the wildest adventure to which the then leadership of this country was pushed by the West. This becomes more obvious, more pronounced. New documents appear. Similar events are taking place in other parts of the world. People see what was happening to them, that behind the words about freedom, democracy and everything good, in fact, a real dangerous "wolf" was hiding. It is also poisonous. He has big teeth and no moral and ethical principles other than what he wants to eat. It is also poisonous with its "bites". It seems to me that the understanding of Mikhail Saakashvili's criminal adventure, among other things, forms the current position of official Tbilisi and civil society in Georgia. Therefore, realistic assessments are given about the "second front". I think that no one wants to be dragged in, to become a "bargaining chip" in someone else's game.

As for forecasts. It has been proven for centuries that the West has not yet received a real rebuff, it will try to go everywhere, anywhere, contrary to logic, law, morality and ethics. It is necessary to build up internal potential, to create a system of our own security. At the same time, it is necessary to say that it should be indivisible for everyone. It is necessary to strengthen their "immunity" in every sense of the word, to unite all sensible countries under the auspices of a new world order based not on someone else's unknown "rules" based on exceptionalism and domination, but on multipolarity, polycentricity, respect, sovereignty and everything that was laid down in the UN Charter. This is the way. Then all the talk about the "second front", about domination, about "divide and rule" will be irrelevant. Let's not predict. Let's get to work. The summit in Kazan is aimed at this. [Bolded italics my emphasis]

As reported, it’s clear the Outlaw US Empire wants to obtain Moldova as a new “bargaining chip” by employing methods very similar to those used in Ukraine. Moldovans have already filed protests about the illegal nature of the election, that it’s already invalid. If the election is fair, Sandu will be booted, to which the EU/NATO will say the election was corrupt since its stooge didn’t win, and a succession crisis will likely arise. However, with the election already corrupted, it’s possible another Donbass situation will unfold with a majority of Moldovans rising in revolt. If that occurs, I expect Sandu to call for Romanian intervention. Where things go from there if they reach that point, I’m not going to try and predict. Yet, IMO Russia cannot allow Moldova to become a second Ukraine crisis, although that seems the Outlaw US Empire’s exact intent.

One of the reasons why the West is so upset with BRICS success is that it can’t meddle as it does with the EAS, G-20 and other formats where it’s included. There were other issues that were omitted like the Armenia/Azerbaijan drama. The Ukraine update deals with the so-called Victory Plan that’s now in the news and will become a separate article given its length.

*
*
*
Like what you’ve been reading at Karlof1’s Substack? Then please consider subscribing and choosing to make a monthly/yearly pledge to enable my efforts in this challenging realm. Thank You!