Maria Zakharova's Weekly Briefing--Selections

A very long read.

After a two-week hiatus caused by the coverage of other events, we return to providing selections from the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Weekly Briefing held by Maria Zakharova. This week’s briefing is just under three-hours, which is dominated by the Ukraine update, and this week includes an update on Moldova and the massive farmer protests sweeping Europe. Included will be more words related to Macron’s inanities and the escalating neonazification of Bulgaria. The negative affects to the global economy from illegal sanctions on Russia is discussed along with the actions of Latvia and Estonia against their national athletes participation in the Games of the Future being held in Kazan. And before the Q&A a salute to Arctic Day, which happens to be today. As usual, the Russian video of the briefing is available at the above link as is the entire Russian transcript containing what was omitted. All emphasis is mine:

On the Ukrainian crisis

Knocked out by the loss of strategically important Avdiivka, enraged by its own powerlessness in the face of the successes of our Armed Forces, the Ukrobanderite, neo-Nazi regime, with its characteristic inhumanity, continues to take out its anger on the civilians of Russia. At the same time, it actively uses weapons supplied by the West to shell Russian settlements and carry out terrorist attacks.

On February 21 of this year, the Armed Forces of Ukraine launched an obviously deliberate strike from the American HIMARS MLRS on the Kalinin Republican Clinical Hospital in the center of Donetsk. On the same day, they opened fire on residential areas of the Kirovsky, Kuibyshevsky and Kievsky districts of the city. As a result, a woman was killed, 7 more people were injured. On February 24 of this year, Bandera followers fired a HIMARS MLRS at one of the Donetsk restaurants where they were celebrating a wedding at the time. As luck would have it, there were no casualties.

On February 22 of this year, the Kiev regime used a UAV to attack a regular bus in the Kherson region on the route Nova Kakhovka - Topolivka. The driver and passenger were injured.

On February 25 of this year, one civilian was killed by shelling by the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Kreminna municipal district of the LPR.

Note that the Kiev junta still considers these regions and cities to be Ukrainian, and their inhabitants (and they declare this openly) to be citizens of Ukraine. And at the same time, it mercilessly bombs them. It is frightening to imagine what the criminal regime of Vladimir Zelensky would have done to these people if it had been able to implement its plans for the notorious "return" of these territories to Ukraine. These plans are not destined to come true. But it's helpful to imagine what could have been.

In addition, on February 26 this year, in the Belgorod region, Ukrainian militants hit the village of Novaya Tavolzhanka with mortars, wounding two children. They also attacked a civilian car with a drone in the village of Pochayevo, where three civilians were killed and four others were injured.

All these monstrous atrocities of the Kiev regime are carefully recorded by Russian law enforcement agencies. Those involved in their commission will inevitably be held accountable.

On the basis of evidence collected by the Investigative Committee of Russia, the courts of the Russian Federation continue to sentence Ukrainian militants who have committed grave crimes against civilians.

Ukrainian militant from the neo-Nazi organisation Azov A. Bura was sentenced to life imprisonment for killing three civilians in March 2022 in Mariupol. Another Azov fighter, Dmitry Zhuchkov, received a similar sentence in absentia for the murder of four people and the attempted murder of three people in March 2022 in Mariupol.

Azov militant Ruslan Shebanov was sentenced to 28 years in prison in absentia for ordering the shelling of civilian infrastructure in March 2022 in the DPR.

Azov neo-Nazi Alexander Stupnitsky was sentenced in absentia to 25 years in prison for the murder of a civilian in February 2022 in Mariupol.

None of the Ukrainian criminals will be able to escape punishment. They will be established and held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.

On February 24 of this year, another Western visitor made their mark in Kiev. This time, the prime ministers of Belgium, Italy and Canada were accompanied by President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen. They did not come empty-handed.

Ottawa and Kyiv signed an agreement on cooperation in the field of security. Within the framework of the document, Kiev was promised financial and military assistance for $2.2 billion, another $125 million will be used for demining, reconnaissance, medicine, and the development of Ukraine in cyberspace. On the one hand, they allocate more than $2 billion. On the other hand, they provide twenty times less money for medicine and demining. That's absurd. Obviously, such a colossal amount of weapons will be supplied, the use of which will entail a huge number of victims. At the same time, the mentioned $125 million. It is impossible to cure people or to overcome the consequences of the prolongation of this conflict. Why do they do this? This is a demonstration of their alleged commitment to certain humanistic ideals. What are these ideals for which twenty times less money is allocated than for aggressive ideals?

Belgium plans to open offices of the Belgian Development Agency in Kyiv and Kharkiv.

Italy has also signed an agreement with Ukraine on security cooperation. It is noteworthy that a few days earlier, Italian Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister A. Tajani warned that this document is not legally binding and does not contain guarantees of military and political support. Is this to show the unfortunate citizens of Ukraine, who are being "dragged along" to murder every day, that Western Europe is with them? In fact, this is a "filkin letter".

The day before, Kiev signed a similar document with Copenhagen. Denmark also announced the transfer of another package of military assistance to Ukraine in the amount of 247.4 million euros. In general, according to media reports, this year the Danish authorities will allocate at least 1.8 billion euros for the Armed Forces of Ukraine, and in the period 2023-2028 - 8.5 billion euros.

In addition to this, Britain and Poland proposed to "cleanse" European arsenals of remnants of Soviet weapons with an expiring shelf life and transfer them to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The goal is to send old scrap metal for disposal to Ukraine and replace it with NATO-style weapons, providing additional orders to the military-industrial complex enterprises of Western countries, which are getting rich on the Ukrainian conflict and the tragedy of Ukrainian citizens. Such "humanism".

Despite the symbolic nature of the "agreements on security guarantees" and the absence of any novelty in them, in addition to the military assistance already provided to Kiev in the form of pumping the Zelensky regime with weapons and military equipment, their signing is another step in the West's hybrid war against Russia, confirming its focus on a long-term confrontation with our country and its unwillingness to follow the path of a political and diplomatic settlement of the Ukrainian crisis. Did the citizens of Europe choose it? No. For taxpayers, citizens, and the public of the European Union countries, the choice was made in Washington, which "placed" in these countries and the corresponding bloc structures people who swore allegiance to the White House, but not those who believed that they were electing them through democratic institutions in their own countries.

According to old memories, former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson also visited the Ukrainian capital on February 24 of this year. Obviously, in order to personally inspect how Bankova is fulfilling his order almost two years ago to refuse peace talks with Russia and continue hostilities "to the last Ukrainian."

Apparently, Boris Johnson's supporters in Kiev did not upset him. No one in Ukraine is thinking about any negotiations with Moscow. This is on February 25 this year at the forum "Ukraine. The Year 2024" was confirmed by Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Oleksandr Yermak, who, although he admitted the possibility of inviting Russia to the "peace summit", but on the condition that the leadership of our country is ready for a "fair settlement" based on the "Vladimir Zelensky formula", i.e. the actual acceptance of the ultimatum of surrender contained in it, which, of course, will never happen.

Such statements testify to the progressive inadequacy of the Ukrainian "elite" and Kiev's unwillingness to resolve the crisis by political and diplomatic means. This dichotomy of playing the "peace formula" and at the same time rejecting peace negotiations will not lead to good. Vladimir Zelensky's regime still thinks in terms of war and dreams of Russia's "military defeat", not allowing itself to simply "look out the window". I'm sure they understand reality, but they're afraid to voice it to themselves. Therefore, they lie to their people, to the media, underestimating losses, embellishing the situation. The goal is to drag more Ukrainian citizens into this terrible pit of war, to "pull" more money from Western sponsors and "shove" it into their pockets. All of the Kiev regime's pseudo-peacemaking initiatives are designed to conceal Vladimir Zelensky's aggressive plans and are aimed at creating a broad anti-Russia coalition in which they are trying to trick the states of the Global South and East into participating in it.

On February 26, a high-level conference on Ukraine was held in Paris with the participation of presidents and heads of government of more than 20 European countries. The event was intended to demonstrate Europe's moral support and solidarity with Kyiv against the backdrop of its catastrophic military failures. In reality, it looked more like a meeting of Ukraine's main donors, who had to decide on further assistance to the Zelensky regime, the main burden of which Washington decided to shift to its NATO satellites within the EU due to its own internal problems. Apparently, this is the reason for the presence at the "forum" of the American "overseer" in the person of the US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs James C. O'Brien.

The results of the conference indicate that Europeans are seriously frightened by the prospect of a military collapse of Ukraine and are ready to do everything to avoid such a scenario. I understand that not everyone in Western Europe is educated enough to live up to their high positions. This can be seen in many heads of both foreign ministries and states, who suffer from ignorance of their own history, lack of understanding of realities, and poor education. I don't think you had to graduate from Yale and the Sorbonne to know: "No matter how much you whip a dead donkey, it won't be of much use – it won't get up and go." The peoples of Western Europe should ask their governments to whom they are sending this money and what they expect to receive in return from the Kiev regime, which no longer controls the situation either on the battlefield or in the political space and will never again win even illusory victories.

We hear a lot of absurd statements, but what French President Emmanuel Macron has taken the liberty of saying has largely hit rock bottom. Many have seen his aggressive statements about the likelihood of sending EU troops to Ukraine and the creation of a "coalition for the supply of long-range weapons to the Armed Forces of Ukraine." However, in many ways, this was work for the public in order to inspire the Kiev regime and those people who are being "dragged to" the Ukrainian military registration and enlistment offices that everything is not in vain and that abroad will always be with them. Emmanuel Macron did not say anything new. It is no secret that servicemen from a number of NATO countries have been in Ukraine for a long time and are actively helping the Armed Forces of Ukraine, including in the operation of Western weapons systems transferred to Kiev. NATO experts from the United States, Britain and European countries were also behind all the "Maidans".

At the same time, two weeks ago, Emmanuel Macron denied any participation of French representatives (mercenaries, security officials) in the conflict in Ukraine and said that mercenary activities are prohibited under French law. It is not responsible for the defense policy of the European Union, it is not endowed with the appropriate powers, it can only dispose of the fate of its own citizens. What did he mean? Behind such actions is the West's desire to prolong the agony of Vladimir Zelensky's regime, especially against the backdrop of a growing shortage of weapons and personnel in the Ukrainian army.

We have taken note of an article published on February 25 by The New York Times about the cooperation between the Ukrainian authorities and the CIA after the Maidan protests, as a result of which Kiev became one of the most important partners of the United States in the fight against Russia. We have been talking about all these facts for many years, long before this article appeared. I would like to emphasise that Kiev began to cooperate with the CIA in the anti-Russia area not after 2022, not after the Maidan, but for many years. Specialists from the US and other special services occupied entire floors in state institutions in Kiev, directly supervised Ukrainian departments and law enforcement agencies.

The publication reports that Washington has helped train Ukrainian spies operating inside Russia, across Europe, Cuba and elsewhere where there is a "significant Russian presence." This is nothing new either. Calls with threats of mining and blowing up civilian infrastructure, social, medical, and educational institutions on the territory of the Russian Federation came from the territory of Ukraine. Who arranged all this? These weren't amateur hackers. How many years has telephone terrorism lasted under the guise of employees of banking structures and law enforcement agencies? All this is directed against the citizens of Russia and comes from the territory of Ukraine. People who carry out this extremist, terrorist activity have all the personal data of users: phone numbers, bank account numbers, names of banks where their deposits are located, addresses, names of relatives. After all, someone provided them with all this? The supervision of this terrorist activity, which flourished in full bloom on the territory of Ukraine under the control of the Kiev regime, was born many years ago under the supervision of American and British special services.

In addition, since 2016, at the instigation of the Americans, 12 secret bases have been created in Ukraine, located along the border with Russia. In turn, the Kiev regime shared valuable intelligence with Washington regarding Russia. After the start of the special military operation, interaction, according to the article, with the CIA gained additional momentum - the American intelligence service began to target the Armed Forces of Ukraine and supply them with other "useful" information. In 2022-2023, we have repeatedly said that the Americans and the British are working as gunners, using the capabilities of the Kiev regime to strike at our territory. This fact-based information was brought to the attention of the international community through international organizations. There is no sensation in this article. This is a statement of facts. Perhaps this is a sensation for the American public.

How is the information blockade organized inside the United States if its victims are the Americans themselves? They block their own citizens from receiving information when long-circulating official materials cause such genuine surprise. The article emphasizes that at a certain stage, Kiev began to be irritated by the "unjustified caution" of the Americans, and it began to show independence, organizing assassinations and other operations at its own discretion, for which the United States threatened to stop supporting it. This thesis does not stand up to any criticism at all. Such conclusions look like a clumsy attempt by US intelligence services, the White House and the Biden administration to absolve themselves of responsibility for the bloody crimes of Vladimir Zelensky and his criminal entourage. It won't work. If the situation had been as described in this article, then these terrible terrorist acts would have stopped after the first or second time. But the murders of Russian public figures and journalists, as well as terrorist attacks against civilian infrastructure, continue to this day. Who else but the United States should know about this. I do not know how cautious the United States was, but it did not stop a person who was supplied with a huge amount of means and weapons to continue terrorist activities on the territory of the Russian Federation.

Remind. This sad series includes the dastardly murders of the leaders of the Donbass militia – the commander of the Sparta battalion Alexander Pavlov (call sign "Motorola") in October 2016, the commander of the "Somali" battalion M.S. Tolstykh (call sign "Givi") in February 2017, the Russian political scientist and journalist Dmitry Dugina in August 2022, and the military correspondent Mikhail Fomin (known as Vladlen Tatarsky) in April 2023. resulting in the death of civilians. A recent and very eloquent example is the Ukrainian attack with the help of the American Patriot air defense system on the Il-76 military transport aircraft in the Belgorod region.

American journalists should not hesitate to ask the Biden administration questions about its involvement in all these crimes.

On February 25 this year, during a press conference at the forum "Ukraine. Year 2024, Vladimir Zelensky made frank statements that during a one-on-one meeting with the President of Russia in Paris on December 9, 2019, on the sidelines of the Normandy format summit, he ignored Vladimir Putin's call for a ceasefire in Donbass and the beginning of the withdrawal of forces and equipment from the demarcation line. Thus, he confirmed his unwillingness to comply with the obligations under the Minsk Package of Measures. In fact, Vladimir Zelensky not only once again demonstrated Kiev's inability to negotiate, but also actually admitted that Russia has never acted as an aggressor, which Ukraine and the West are trying so hard to impose on it.

These facts confirm the relevance of the tasks of the special military operation to denazify and demilitarize Ukraine and eliminate threats emanating from its territory. All of them will definitely be fulfilled.

Disclosure of a network of agents related to chemical weapons in the Zaporizhzhia Region

In addition to the information already announced by the FSB of Russia on February 27 of this year about the crimes of the Kiev regime against representatives of local authorities and servicemen of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, we would like to clarify the following details in international law regarding one of the criminal cases initiated by the Investigative Directorate of the FSB of Russia against agents of the Ukrainian special services who planned terrorist attacks using an analogue of the chemical warfare agent BZ and the arrest of three Ukrainian citizens in this regard.

In particular, we are talking about a violation of Article I of the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, which prohibits the use of toxic chemicals as chemical weapons. The laboratory of the 27th Scientific Center of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, when analyzing samples of the contents of ampoules seized from a cache on the territory of the Zaporozhye region of the Russian Federation, found an analogue of the chemical BZ controlled under the Convention and its derivative, which are included in List 2 of the Annex to the CWC on chemicals.

As established in the course of the investigation, the special services of Ukraine gave instructions to carry out terrorist acts on the territory of the Zaporozhye region against representatives of the authorities, law enforcement agencies, as well as the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, including with the use of chemical weapons by adding them to food and drinks. The goal is to destabilize the activities of the authorities and, accordingly, the situation in the specified area. The Investigation Department of the FSB of Russia initiated a criminal case under Article 355 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation "Development, production, stockpiling, acquisition or sale of weapons of mass destruction prohibited by a treaty of the Russian Federation" on the proven episode of terrorist activity of the special services of the Kiev regime.

Such incidents are a clear example of the criminal actions of the Kiev elite and its subordinate law enforcement agencies. They add to the unflattering picture of the numerous facts already made public in October 2023 of the use of toxic chemicals and riot control chemicals by the special services and militants of the Kiev regime as a means of warfare, coupled with provocations at chemical industry facilities in Donbass. The use of such toxic chemicals by Kiev is not an isolated case.

It is deeply alarming that the toxic substances and their formulations found in the possession of Ukrainian terrorists are somewhat endemic to the US military chemical program. In other words, they were not produced anywhere except the United States and were in service only with the Pentagon. This circumstance unequivocally points to specific curators of the Ukrainian special services and the Kiev regime as a whole, who do not shy away from direct complicity in the terrorist activities of their wards, whether it is rocket and artillery shelling of civilian facilities and civilians or the use of toxic substances for terrorist and military purposes in violation of their obligations under the CWC.

We will monitor the emerging data in this area in our law enforcement agencies. This issue will be raised at the platform of international organizations.

There is a process of "double standardization" of everything that happens. We remember the reverence with which Western regimes treated everything related to chemical warfare agents (Salisbury, Amesbury, Novichoks, and so on). This time, everyone is silent. Why didn't anyone run to the microphones? For example, in the British Parliament, as Theresa May once did, when she saw some information provided to her by the British special services that Russia had allegedly used chemical weapons on British territory (as it was formulated by official London). Do you remember how the idea was formulated? "Europe has been attacked. England has been attacked." Let me remind you that "Ukraine is also Europe." No one in NATO or the European Union is interested in what is going on there. What are these substances? In the United States, there is no desire to bring this issue up for discussion in Congress?

This is due to the latest American programs, as was the case with biological laboratories, the existence of which the American authorities were forced to admit when they were presented with evidence. Here, too, the evidence has been presented. No one wants to ask questions to the Pentagon, the U.S. State Department, the White House? What has the U.S. come up with this time to "smell" on the territory of Ukraine?

Let me remind you how it was when the story around the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the Organisation as a whole was beneficial for the promotion of Western countries. In March of this year, 6 years have passed since the high-profile incident in Salisbury. When, on the British side, it all literally developed not according to a "sine wave" but had a "vertical take-off". The British side presented this as "the deliberate poisoning of former GRU officer Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia."

London used this incident to launch a large-scale anti-Russian political and propaganda campaign aimed at the international "isolation" of our country and the curtailment of bilateral relations. The accusations sounded literally in conjunction with the verdict. We were accused and punished almost at the same time. Russian diplomats were expelled. They frightened us with all sorts of measures and so on. Throughout this time, the British authorities have stubbornly avoided a substantive dialogue with us to clarify all the circumstances of the incident (including providing samples of the substances that allegedly poisoned Sergei Skripal and his daughter).

After the Salisbury incident, London refused to cooperate with the Russian competent authorities in the investigation of the incident. In response to requests for legal assistance in the criminal case of the attempted murder of the Skripals, submitted by the Russian Prosecutor General's Office to the Home Office in April 2018. The Foreign Office has informed our embassy of the decision of the British authorities to reject the relevant Russian appeals. In general, since the provocation (this is how we qualify it) in Salisbury, the Russian Embassy in London has sent more than 60 notes to the British Home Office. They raise a lot of questions about the Skripals. Most of them have not been answered. On some points, we received literally formal, boorish replies.

The political background of that incident is evidenced by the way the British, without waiting for the results of the investigation, hurriedly went to the capitals of all EU member states and other like-minded countries. Without presenting facts, without any data, they tried to convince them that they should expel Russian diplomats. They promised to present irrefutable facts later. Then the journalists got their hands on the very data with which London tried to convince its allies of Russia's guilt. It felt like a fifth-grade presentation. Five pages with arrows. These "papers" said that "Russia did it, because Russia has done it before, so Russia can always do this." There weren't even photographs, nothing resembling evidence.

Of course, later, none of the members of NATO and the European Union received anything from Britain. But they then expelled the Russian diplomats. Why did they do this? Because then the majority "took the word of the British". Some, however, doubted and did not expel our employees. Subsequently, we privately asked those who joined this action whether they were provided with at least some facts, evidence and arguments, apart from London's public statements, designed in the style of "highly likely." We were honestly told that no, London had not provided anything to anyone. It was yet another brazen deception by Britain and its allies.

To this day, I repeat, the British side has not been able to provide any reliable information on the Skripal case. Nobody. Not to us, not to our closest allies. Apparently, the reason is simple - either there is something to hide, or there is simply no real evidence, or both.

We intend to continue to consistently seek to establish the truth. Remaining deeply concerned about the fate of Russian citizens, our country regularly appeals to the British authorities to promptly provide the relevant information and to ensure consular access to Russian citizens (in accordance with the provisions of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the 1965 Bilateral Consular Convention).

The facts show that it is the British who are not interested in a fair and impartial trial in the Skripal case. Just like Denmark now, Sweden, and it seems that Germany is not interested in conducting a normal, transparent, legal investigation into what happened to Nord Stream. At that time, London deliberately delayed the investigation of the Salisbury incidents and politicised the issue in every possible way. London's actions once again confirmed the ordered nature of the incident. Its real aim was to damage the international reputation of our country.

French President's statements on the possible dispatch of European Union military contingents to Ukraine

We have already taken note of and commented on the bellicose remarks made by French President Emmanuel Macron following a meeting of European leaders in support of the Ukrainian neo-Nazi regime in Paris on February 26.

One gets the impression that official Paris is finally losing its sense of reality and self-preservation. For several years, the Elysee Palace has been dragging the country into the Ukrainian conflict to please Washington and the EU-NATO Brussels, to the detriment of national interests. We have repeatedly said that France has become an accomplice in the war crimes of the Ukrainian regime.

Recall that Paris was one of the first to supply the Kiev regime with NATO-style ammunition, initiated the creation of "tank" and "artillery" coalitions, and now also a "coalition of long-range missiles", advocates the supply of combat aircraft, actively participates in the training of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, condones the sending of mercenaries, including from among its own citizens (although the latter denies the fact in every possible way). But that's not the case. They are indeed supplying mercenaries to the Kiev regime. Now Emmanuel Macron's words have confirmed all this.

What did all this lead to? Only to the escalation of hostilities, which is absurd against the backdrop of the French president's statements about some kind of peacekeeping efforts and attempts to transfer this into a political and diplomatic track. We are already accustomed to such contradictory statements from the President of France, the Elysee Palace and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of this country. Apparently, they don't care what they say. The fact is that, unfortunately, the civilian population is suffering. Many are being killed for their positions in Paris because of the "aid" (although it is not aid), financial support and the amount of weapons that France provides to the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev. People are dying.

Now Paris is making it clear that the West does not rule out an open military clash with our country. It should be noted that dozens of representatives of the EU countries (at the level of foreign ministers, defense ministers and even heads of state) said that they personally did not initiate anything of the kind, do not plan to do so, because they understand the "deadlock", futility and danger of such statements. By the way, official representatives of Germany spoke about this.

What does this indicate? That this is a complete philosophical and ideological "dead end" of the Western approach to world affairs. Can you imagine if there is bloc discipline within NATO, which does not allow countries to conduct their policies without taking into account NATO standards (I mean defense and geopolitical standards in general). At the same time, some countries make statements of such a scale that other NATO member countries have to justify themselves. This testifies to the crisis within the Western community, to the impossibility of developing a unified ideology, concept, and approach to key existential problems based on democratic principles of decision-making.

The cynical use of Ukraine by Western states as a tool to fight Russia to the "last Ukrainian", the transformation of the country into a testing ground for NATO weapons and military equipment can only be a prelude to their own entry into hostilities.

The question arises: are the citizens of France and other EU countries fully aware of where the current inhabitants of the Elysee Palace or other administrations of the EU and NATO states can lead them? Neither the French parliament nor the public have any idea what is in the French president's head. Emmanuel Macron did not consult or discuss with anyone. This is not part of his program, it was in no way "visible" in his previous speeches. He just went ahead and said it. Western Europe shuddered with horror at what it might be dragged into.

Do the French want to turn into "cannon fodder" in order to find a place for themselves in the Russian land "among coffins that are not alien to them," to use the words of Alexander Pushkin? Are you ready to support your president in an adventure that can have the most difficult and unpredictable consequences? We believe that the citizens of France should seriously think about this and ask questions to the leadership of their country.

Another annual event in Sofia in memory of Bulgarian Nazi collaborator General Kh. Lukov

News from the past, unfortunately, has overtaken Western and Eastern Europe. On February 17, another neo-Nazi gathering in memory of the Bulgarian collaborator general Kh. Lukov, the so-called Bow March, took place in Sofia. The paramilitary gathering, copying torchlight processions in Nazi Germany and praising Hitler's accomplice, has been held in the center of the European capital for more than twenty years. We talk about it for the same amount (1,2,3,4,5). For a long period of time, the Bulgarian authorities, confining themselves to empty declarations of rejection of the ideas of the organizers of the marches, did not dare to take decisive steps to put an end to them. Perhaps the Bulgarian authorities are waiting for Germany to reach the level of wartime combat readiness? Then these marches will be very useful to them. Maybe they are links in the same chain?

At the same time, in December 2023, Sofia had enough political "courage" to barbarically desecrate and destroy the Monument to the Soviet Army, which is common to us in Bulgaria. This step was taken contrary to the Court's decision. And before that, the Russophobic wing of Bulgaria made such statements that they would not leave a single monument to their own soldiers and soldiers of the Soviet Army. They have no legal basis for this.

Today's Bulgarian followers of the Nazis have adopted the Russophobic narratives of their authorities and came out under the slogan "about the victims of the communist regime." At the same time, some representatives of the capital's municipal council called on the mayor's office to prohibit the Russian Embassy from holding events on the occasion of Defender of the Fatherland Day, which are associated with the memory of the Victory over fascism in the Great Patriotic War.

The extremely alarming trend of the rehabilitation of Nazism, supported by the active support of official Sofia, as well as the Kiev regime mixed up with this ideology, reflects the continuing moral degradation of the ruling elites in the countries of the European Union and NATO. We understand the dangers. This can lead to catastrophic socio-political consequences in these states, but also in a broader sense, on an international scale.

Let me remind you that the Italian Supreme Court recently ruled on the admissibility of using the "Italian greeting" – a raised hand in the same greeting that the whole world has associated with fascism and Nazism for 80 years. This greeting is now allowed. Such small "pieces" form the overall picture of the neo-Nazi puzzle.

At the same time, the responsible approach of the world majority, which is clearly aware of this danger, gives grounds for positive hopes and forecasts. I would like to note that the vote on the draft resolution, which is submitted annually by the Russian Federation to the UN General Assembly, is evidence that there is still hope. It is a draft resolution on combating the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

There is only one problem: the world majority supports this resolution, either by co-sponsoring it or by voting for it. But the "collective West" is collectively opposed.

Update on Moldova

We continue to monitor the situation in Moldova, whose leadership is literally bogged down in a destructive Russophobic policy and double standards. We see that the declared political postulates are increasingly at odds with the real affairs of the Chisinau regime.

This is most clearly manifested in the attitude of official Chisinau to the special military operation. The second anniversary of its beginning has become a pretext for yet another groundless accusation of "terror" and "diabolical aggression" against our country. A lot of things were invented. A real hysteria began in Chisinau. At the same time, the Moldovan leadership still does not want to hear anything about the genocide of Donbass residents in 2014-2022, regardless of how we use this term: in a legal sense or as a metaphor that best reflects the meaning of the events that took place in Donbass. The Sandu regime does not want to hear anything about other crimes of the Kiev regime.

Another example is the attempts of the Moldovan authorities to justify the purchase of NATO military equipment by the "Russian threat" and the "irrelevance" of the neutral status of the Republic. Let me remind you that it was enshrined in the Constitution of Moldova. On February 18, Moldovan Defence Minister Andrei Nosatyi said that since Russia had "completely violated the concept of neutrality" by attacking Ukraine, it was unclear "to what extent this status protects us." The Moldovan government has announced plans to create a national air defense system by 2030, which will require several billion euros. The acquisition of a second radar to monitor the country's airspace worth 15 million euros has been announced.

This is despite the fact that the Republic is one of the poorest countries in Europe, and the realism of the "Russian threat" raises questions even among representatives of the "collective West". Let me give you an example that is understandable and relevant for the Chisinau authorities. Even US Ambassador to Chisinau Christopher Logsdon noted on February 21 that there is no evidence or signs that Moldova is threatened by a military attack by Russia. At the same time, the regime of Maia Sandu, her ministers and heads of departments repeat this like a mantra.

Double standards are also manifested in the attitude of the Moldovan authorities to history. Acts of vandalism against Soviet war memorials remain without any reaction from the country's leadership. This indicates the tacit encouragement of such extremist activities. In particular, there was no response when, on February 24 of this year, an obelisk was torn down from the grave of a participant in the Great Patriotic War, Guards Captain A.V. Kolbinsky, in the center of Chisinau. At the same time, Moldovans are regularly told about the "horrors of the Soviet era." Now, by the decision of the leadership of the country's Ministry of Education, a new subject will appear in the school curriculum, in which children will be told about the "repressions of the totalitarian communist regime."

We have repeatedly touched upon the issue of Moldova being part of the USSR. Here are some more facts about the "Soviet terror in Moldova" that we would like to share with the authors of this course.

In 1944-1945, when the Great Patriotic War was still going on, 448 million Soviet rubles were allocated from the all-Union budget for the restoration of Moldavia. 20 thousand tons of ferrous metals, 226 thousand tons of coal, 51 thousand tons of oil products, 17.4 tons of seeds were transferred from other republics of the Soviet Union. Will Maia Sandu tell her children about this? Or will it ban it, as it prohibits any information that does not support their Russophobia?

In the 1970s and 1980s, the Moldavian SSR was rightfully considered a "union garden and vegetable garden", the main export items were fresh and processed agricultural products. From 1945 to 1990, the production of canned fruits and vegetables increased from 28 to 728 thousand tons. To put it more clearly and visually, production has increased 26 times.

Thanks to the construction of large energy facilities, electricity generation in the Republic increased from 100 million kWh in 1950 to 17 billion kWh in 1989.

Mechanical engineering, including tractor building, the production of electrical units and machines, as well as light industry, primarily the production of shoes and knitwear, were developed.

I sincerely hope that this data will be presented in detail and with pictures as part of the teaching of the subject "on the repressions of the totalitarian communist regime."

Yes, there were a lot of bad things and problems. But when the data, facts and figures testifying to the development of the Moldavian SSR and its achievements are crossed out, a blow is dealt to the history of the Moldavian people. After all, all of the above are the achievements of people who lived and worked in this territory. These include Moldovans and people of other nationalities who consider this republic and land as their own.

What did Maia Sandu do? She deprived the country of the Moldovan language, "renamed" it Romanian. Now it is depriving the citizens of Moldova of the history of their achievements and work. Who gave her the right to do this?

The language issue deserves special mention. On February 21, President of Moldova Maria Sandu said that "the Romanian language in Moldova is a bridge for dialogue between all communities." I understand that if in recent years there has been a trend in the world to call people of one sex another, there are several dozen genders, then the Romanian language in Moldova can be called a "bridge for dialogue between all communities." What are these communities?

The paradox is that, firstly, the majority of the country's inhabitants believe that they speak Moldovan, not Romanian. Secondly, about 80% speak Russian. Third, about 7% (not 70% or 17%) of the country's population are ethnic Romanians. Thus, the absurdity of the linguistic policy of the Chisinau "elite" is obvious. They chose the wrong bridge.

Moldovans see this detachment of the authorities from the real life of the country and its citizens, and openly declare their disagreement. But who hears and sees them? After all, the media have been taken under the control of Maia Sandu, despite her statements about democracy and freedom as the main values. It turned out that these values were false. Or Maia Sandu deceived everyone. Or maybe both.

Moldovans see the dismantling of Moldova's sovereignty and national identity. They are witnessing the severance of ties with Russia, which is presented to them as part of some kind of "European project." Europe had different projects. Adolf Hitler, Nazism and fascism are also European projects. So where are Moldova and its people being "dragged into"?

Russia, for its part, is always ready to continue cooperation with our Moldovan friends, which is based on deep historical roots, mutual respect and mutual consideration of interests.

Moldova's denunciation of international treaties signed within the framework of the CIS

We have repeatedly drawn attention to how, in its thoughtless desire to destroy the very right "bridges" that have been building for decades, with Russia and the CIS, the Moldovan leadership is detached from reality and the fundamental interests of its own citizens. Another example is the recent statements by the press service of the Moldovan government that the international treaties signed within the framework of the CIS, which denounce the authorities, "do not correspond to the existing state of affairs" because "the policy of our country does not resonate with the goals that the countries that signed these agreements established in these treaties." Masterpiece.

Let's talk about the goals with which the policy of the current Moldovan leadership "does not resonate". I would like to mention a few specific documents that Chisinau considered unnecessary and "non-resonant".

For example, Maia Sandu's team was not pleased with the agreements on cooperation in the fight against the circulation of falsified medicines and on cooperation in the field of public health. At the same time, as noted in Moldova itself, the situation with health care in the country and the availability of medicines for residents leaves much to be desired.

Moldova, or rather Maia Sandu, does not need the Agreement on Cooperation of the CIS Member States in the Event of the Evacuation of Their Citizens from Third Countries in the Event of an Emergency Situation. Apparently, instead of this, Moldovan citizens will be offered to use commercial flights, as was done during the evacuation from the Palestinian-Israeli conflict zone. How many people were evacuated during emergencies and during the pandemic in 2020 by Russia without prior agreements on how to divide and "count". No one counted or divided anything. We just extended a helping hand and friendship. There are many families with dual citizenship of Russia and Moldova. Does the leadership of Chisinau need these people?

Moldova also plans to withdraw from the Agreement on the Exchange of Information on Natural and Man-Made Emergencies, on Information Interaction in the Elimination of Their Consequences and the Provision of Assistance to the Affected Population. How does this agreement not resonate with the goals stated by Maia Sandu? At the same time, Chisinau coped with the heaviest snowfall in January this year not with European, but with snowplows donated by the Moscow government.

As for the denunciation of the agreements on the creation of a common scientific and technological space of the CIS member states and on cooperation in the formation of a single (common) educational space of the CIS, everything is more or less clear. The scientific and technical potential inherited by the country from the Soviet Union is melting away before our eyes, and the number of students entering the universities of this country is decreasing every year. Accordingly, the agreements in this area were recognized in Chisinau as superfluous.

As you know, the path to the European Union, where Moldova is so aspiring, passes through the introduction of severe restrictions on the professional activities of journalists, the eradication of any manifestations of dissent. We have seen all this in the example of Ukraine. This probably explains the country's planned withdrawal from two agreements regulating the activities of the Mir Interstate Television and Radio Company.

These are just a few examples. Of course, there is a certain amount of irony in the comments. But it should be understood that in practice, the reckless rupture of agreements reached over the years in such socially significant areas has much more negative consequences for the citizens of Moldova than for its government. It doesn't take a lot of intelligence to denounce agreements by the dozens, thereby burning socially important "bridges" built by someone else's hands. The Moldovan authorities should be aware that it will be difficult to resume their participation in the agreements that they destroy.

Crisis in the EU agricultural sector

A wave of mass farmers' protests since the beginning of this year has swept more than half of EU member states, from Lithuania to Portugal. The farmers' claims are simple: rising prices for feed, fertilizers, energy, food inflation, unfair, in their opinion, competition from cheap foreign agricultural products - primarily Ukrainian, which European agricultural producers cannot withstand, a decrease in the standard of living in the countryside and the profitability of production, increased risks of bankruptcy and bankruptcy of farms.

As we have said repeatedly, with facts in hand, all these are direct consequences of anti-Russian sanctions. They cited a large number of arguments, figures and facts. There is already an evidence base. This is part of the strategic miscalculations of the EU leadership in the energy, food and financial spheres. A separate discontent of European farmers is caused by the reduction in the volume of state subsidies sacrificed to "financial assistance packages" for Ukraine, and draconian "green" standards in agriculture.

Among the key demands of the farmers' protests is a reduction in agricultural imports from third countries. A separate meeting of the Council of Ministers of Agriculture of the European Union member states was devoted to the "crisis in the agricultural sector of the EU" on February 26 this year.

What is the result? The Brussels bureaucracy has exhaustedly made a number of tactical concessions of a "cosmetic" nature. In the climate sphere, the moratorium on compliance with a number of EU environmental standards, which allows the use of land under fallow, has been extended. The plan for reducing carbon dioxide emissions in Europe in the agricultural sector has been adjusted, the level of its ambition has been reduced. An unpopular draft regulation on reducing the use of pesticides has been removed from the agenda.

A separate survey of farmers regarding their concerns and the continuation of the dialogue on the future of agriculture have been announced. Now everything will get better – after a separate survey of farmers, all the problems will be removed. The purpose of the plebiscite is obvious – to give an opportunity to simply "let off steam" to the rapidly impoverished EU agricultural producers.

What about the main concern of European farmers related to the uncontrolled import of Ukrainian products into the European Union? Contrary to the direct demands of the participants in the mass protests that swept across the European Union, the EU Council supported the proposal of the European Commission to extend the regime of duty-free and quota-free trade in food products with Ukraine. May I ask a question? Is democracy being built in the European Union? This is usually the will of the majority, taking into account the opinion and interests of the minority. All countries are agrarian, and agriculture is the basis of the economy. When will this be taken into account? On the basis of what opinions is a decision made that is contrary to the demand of the majority? Indeed, certain restrictions have been imposed, especially with regard to goods that are so "sensitive" to the EU market – chicken meat, sugar and, oddly enough, chicken eggs. Apparently, in order to limit the availability of products, which the protesters throw at European politicians, who with irrational persistence undermine the foundations of the agricultural sector in their own countries.

The motives for the extension, of course, are purely political. They have nothing to do with the real situation and the demands of the peoples of these countries. What do European officials, European bureaucrats, the European Union, and the EU Council want to do? To give Kiev the opportunity to earn and pay off Western creditors. After all, it is Brussels and Washington that have created an amazing story when every month they announce new tranches of aid to the Kiev regime (as they formulate it – Ukraine). At the same time, it is mainly on credit, you need to cover at least some bills and interest. There is nothing to pay for them. The Kiev regime has nothing but failures. What to do next? In such a simple way (through the purchase of agricultural products from the Kiev regime), they are trying to get out of the situation. This is a monstrous fraud on a global scale. Given that in terms of information, the West has been "pumping" the topic of food and food security, which is allegedly threatened by Russia, for two years.

European and transnational agricultural concerns, which have bought up Ukrainian agriculture on the vine, are given the opportunity to continue to "line their pockets" by importing agricultural products from Ukraine at dumping prices. It is not clear what European citizens and EU farmers have to do with it. In fact, European agrarians have turned into a "bargaining chip" in a big political game.

In their justification, European officials are trying to vociferously blame Moscow for all the troubles - both for low prices for food products supplied from Ukraine to the European Union, and for the related problems in the EU agricultural market. It is proposed to solve all the difficulties under the slogan of fighting the "Russian threat", which has become familiar to the European Union. They argue that Ukrainian agricultural products should be urgently returned to world markets only because the vacant niche is filled by Russia. Where can we think about the real needs of European farmers? Where is the problem of food security? After all, the countries of the West wanted to feed the entire planet, and perhaps the entire universe. Now it turns out that food is also divided according to political criteria into "right" (which can feed the Earth) and "unreliable".

Of course, there is no time to think about the real needs of European farms. They should not allow Moscow to receive additional revenues by supplying high-quality and competitive products to global markets. After all, according to their plans, by that time we should not have had our own agro-industrial complex or it would have been completely dependent on the will of Western countries. There was a "mismatch". We have it. And what else. At the same time, it is proposed that Ukraine itself take the initiative, magically making it so that its agricultural exports still make their way through the EU to other countries, and not get lost in the expanses of the European Union. Masterpiece. Theater of the Absurd. This can be said about the entire policy of the European Union in relation to the "Europe" it has nurtured. The disproportionate losses of our own farmers are nothing more than "collateral damage" of the pro-Ukrainian hysteria that has gripped the EU.

Impact of anti-Russia sanctions on the global economy

Regrettably, we have to admit that political factors have an ever-increasing influence on global economic processes. The countries of the "collective West", primarily the United States, are actively resorting to financial, trade, investment and technological tools to achieve their foreign policy goals. A wide range of measures of non-market competition (trade war, to put it in plain language) is being applied against Russia, including undisguised pressure on foreign businesses present in our country, on international partners, not to mention direct discrimination against domestic companies in the West, which will soon be a thousand years old. More than 18,000 anti-Russian restrictive measures have been adopted.

Such actions by the Westerners run counter to the economic interests of the majority of the international community and are fraught with the aggravation of structural problems in the global economy. At the same time, it is indicative that Russia, despite everything, is confidently coping with the massive pressure of the "collective West."

The global economy, in turn, is in a zone of turbulence, and its growth rates are stagnating. According to IMF forecasts, global GDP growth this year will not exceed last year's level and will amount to about 3.1%, and next year - 3.2%.

The confrontation between the main economic players and interstate associations for control over transport, logistics and production chains, access to markets and sources of resources in the world is intensifying.

The unprecedented restrictive measures of the West have accelerated the conversion of many countries of their international settlements into national currencies. Such measures only spurred the process of de-dollarization of the world economy and the formation of payment and settlement mechanisms independent of the West. A multi-currency economic foundation for a future multipolar world, free from neocolonial diktats, ultimatums and unilateral sanctions by the United States and its satellites, is gradually being laid.

The global crisis of confidence provoked by the Westerners is pushing the process of systemic rethinking and reformatting of world economic relations. On the agenda is the formation of new cooperation mechanisms to replace the tools that the West has traditionally used to maintain and strengthen its dominance to the detriment of developing countries.

In many economically developed countries of Europe, there is a trend of deindustrialization and an increase in unemployment. The most obvious example is the German economy, which, while maintaining the current anti-Russian sanctions policy, is irreversibly losing its position as the "locomotive" of the European economy.

Despite expectations of a decline in average global inflation, experts do not rule out that geopolitical risks may lead to a new jump in prices. Against this background, there is an increase in social tension.

A striking illustration of the negative impact of anti-Russian restrictions is the imbalance in the global food market. Western sanctions and restrictions on exports of food, fertilizer and fuel from Russia have led to an increase in the prices of electricity, food and other essential goods around the world. Numerous protests by European farmers show that the situation in EU agriculture is deteriorating.

The Latvian Ice Hockey Federation suspends the current licenses of Latvian athletes for participating in the Games of Future

From February 21 to March 3, Kazan hosts the Games of the Future International Multisport Tournament. The Games are organized in a format open to all interested states and bring together athletes from more than 100 countries of the world. The opening ceremony of the event, which was attended by the heads of Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan together with President Vladimir Putin, and the first competitions became a striking international event. A number of countries have already announced their readiness to hold the next tournaments on their territory and develop the phygital movement initiated by Russia. The competitions confirm Russia's status as a world sports power, developing international sports cooperation on a depoliticized basis, in the spirit of the true values of sport and Olympism.

Such success could not leave indifferent our "well-wishers" from Western countries, who by hook or by crook are trying to interfere with the holding of competitions in our country. Now for the news of a kind of "sport".

We have taken note of the suspension by the Latvian Ice Hockey Federation of the current licenses of athletes for participating in the Games of the Future in Russia and the real harassment to which these hockey players have been subjected in the Latvian media space.

It seems that the Latvian authorities simply did not care about the fundamental principles of the Olympic movement and generally recognized standards in the field of sports. At the same time, their own athletes who have performed well at an international tournament are discriminated against.

This once again proves that the Latvian authorities, under absurd pretexts, use instruments of political pressure to intimidate their population. In recent years, Riga has become quite adept at fabricating politicized cases out of thin air.

Almost immediately, similar actions were taken by the respective Estonian federation. That is, we are talking about punishing athletes for doing their job – realizing their talent. What they have dedicated their lives to is participating in competitions.

Such actions are sincerely regrettable. If we talk about the officialdom of these countries, then it's just disgust. After all, they are acting against their own population. The Baltic countries have once again demonstrated Russophobic aspirations. They are ready to act to the detriment of themselves and their citizens, in this case, athletes, wanting to put spokes in our wheels. I understand that everything is learned by comparison, but there is already something to compare it with. All the "sticks" will be broken. Everything is fine with moving forward, if the Baltic countries have not noticed this. It seems to me that they can already break their fingers. Maybe they're masochistic? This is all absurd, because they are primarily targeting their own citizens and population.

We are convinced that sport is a unique opportunity to develop and strengthen social ties, build mutually respectful communication, and is designed to bring peoples closer together and unite. In this regard, our country, despite the pressure from international sports structures led by the International Olympic Committee and international sports federations, is making tremendous progress. We continue to develop sports cooperation with our partners, create new formats of competitions that are held in the spirit of fair competition and without any discrimination against athletes. This will continue to be the case. We will develop this area regardless of whether someone likes it or not.

As for the punishment of athletes for participating in competitions, this is just another example of the politicization of the field of sports, which only leads to the disunity of the international sports family and the murder of Olympism.

Arctic Day

February 28 is Arctic Day (since 2011). The main objective of this holiday is to popularize Arctic expeditions, scientific research, draw attention to the problems of preserving the nature of this unique region and its original culture, as well as the life support of Arctic communities.

The Arctic region is rich in a variety of minerals. About 22% of the world's undiscovered hydrocarbon resources are located in the Arctic, which are: 13% of oil, 30% of natural gas, 20% of gas condensate. At the same time, 84% of the resources are located on the shelf of the Arctic Ocean and 16% on the land territory of the Arctic states. In particular, the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug occupies one of the leading places in Russia in terms of hydrocarbon reserves, especially natural gas and oil.

February 21, 2023 was an important day for the Arctic, Siberia and the Far East. On that day, President of Russia Vladimir Putin said in his address to the Federal Assembly that Russia intends to increase the capabilities of the Northern Sea Route, proposed to develop ecotourism, and also made changes to the Fundamentals of the State Policy of the Russian Federation in the Arctic for the Period up to 2035.

This year, during the Days of the Arctic, the Arctic Dictation environmental education campaign will be held, initiated by the Russian Arctic National Park.

The importance of the development of Arctic maritime navigation along the Northern Sea Route for the Russian Federation, especially in its eastern direction, is primarily due to the dynamic development of the Asia-Pacific region, which is becoming a real stimulating factor for the growth of the global economy.

The development of the Northern Sea Route is important for Russia not only as a responsible participant in international economic relations, but also for ensuring uninterrupted supply chains to our northern regions in order to ensure their sustainable development and improve the well-being of the people living there.

To date, the Northern Sea Route is already actively and quite effectively functioning. According to the Northern Sea Route Administration, in 2023, 1219 permits for navigation in this water area were issued (for comparison, in 2022 - 1196, in 2021 - about 1200), only 1 application was refused, and a vessel under the Russian flag was refused.

The deterioration of the situation in the field of shipping in other waters once again underlines the importance of diversifying international sea routes, including through the Northern Sea Route, as the shortest route from Europe to the Asia-Pacific region. Statistics show that 11 of the world's 17 largest ports today are in Asia.

We note the growing interest of transport, logistics and other companies from a number of Asian countries, including India and China, in cooperation with Russia in the use of the Northern Sea Route.

Russia, as a coastal Arctic state, is attentive to the activities of the Northern Sea Route and will continue to do everything necessary to ensure the safety of this route with the utmost respect for the fragile ecosystem of the Arctic, of course, in compliance with Russian regulations governing navigation along the Northern Sea Route. The current navigation procedure in the waters of the Northern Sea Route is not burdensome or discriminatory and does not prevent foreign vessels from using this route.

The Q&A Session:

Question: How would you comment on the latest EU economic sanctions against Russia? How much will they affect the Russian economy?

Maria Zakharova: Based on the 13th package of sanctions, we have already understood that for the political elites of the West, it is not so much the content that is important, but the very fact of the adoption of restrictions. A few days ago, German Foreign Minister Angela Baerbock said that when they adopted the sanctions, they understood that this would in no way stop Russia from implementing its foreign policy, but it was important. That is, for the Westerners, the sanctions themselves are important.

It seems to me that this is the motto under which they develop them: "the sanctions themselves are important." Apparently, they need different sanctions. And what effect they produce and what kind of return goes to the EU itself, they are silent about this.

Our country has developed sufficient "sanctions immunity" to successfully neutralize the latest attempts by Brussels to undermine the steady growth trend of the Russian economy. And the new EU sanctions will certainly not have any impact on the course of the special military operation, the implementation of our foreign policy and Russia's firm commitment to defending its legitimate interests, including in the field of security.

Sanctions, as the EU itself has begun to understand, contribute to strengthening Russia's economic sovereignty. It's not our choice. We followed a different path, but since this challenge was thrown at us, we used it in our own interests: we gained new opportunities and competencies in the industrial, technological, and financial spheres.

At the same time, the sanctions are undermining the prospects for the economy of the European Union itself. We were not happy about it and never set such a goal for ourselves. We were in favour of a strong, pan-European continent and, probably, a Eurasian continent with common economic goals and objectives. It is clear that it is of different speeds, with its own specifics, but with a common agenda of cooperation.

Western Europe has made its choice. Unfortunately, it is following the path of these sanctions, approaching not the cherished goal of inflicting a "strategic defeat" on Russia, but its own deindustrialization and lack of resources for growth. As many have written, Brussels has used everything. There are senseless and inhumane bans aimed at exerting pressure and reducing the standard of living of ordinary Russian citizens, from an embargo on the export of a wide range of exclusively consumer goods to Russia to the cessation of air passenger transportation. It didn't work. They harmed themselves and everyone else, but they did not achieve their goals.

There was blatant blackmail of a number of countries. The European Union, well aware that massive sanctions against Russia lead to the undermining of global food and energy security, brazenly accused us of provoking the relevant crises. It didn't work either (there was a lot of talk about it today). However, in the minds of the EU members, who have not got rid of their colonialist habits, it still does not fit the fact that in relations with third countries, the deliberately false messages and instruments of pressure actively used by Brussels no longer work. And even more so, they do not work with our country.

Now the European Union is trying sanctions restrictions on other major economies. In particular, they are already aiming for the World Majority. Russia is the pretext in this case. They need to somehow stop their own powerlessness and crises. Industrialization doesn't help, there's no economic growth. What should I do? They are trying to slow down the global economy through this "anti-Russian message".

As part of the latest anti-Russian packages, Brussels has imposed "secondary" sectoral restrictions against a number of economic operators from China, India, Iran, Central Asian countries, Armenia, the UAE, Serbia, Turkey, Singapore, Syria, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. Thus, the EU makes it clear that it considers itself entitled to dictate the terms of trade and economic cooperation between Russia and other sovereign states.

This is being done not only in relation to our country. They directly impede the development of the economies of sovereign states around the world. All this is being done under the slogan of fighting the circumvention of anti-Russian sanctions and achieving the goal of inflicting a "strategic defeat" on us. I assure you that time will pass and the thesis will be used as an "excuse" that these countries allegedly do not have enough democracy, they do not respect human rights as much, and they are poorly committed to this or that Western dogma. They will find something to come up with, but they will leave the economic pressure in place.

We have no doubt that the people of the countries whose business representatives have been targeted by the EU sanctions will draw the necessary conclusions about the EU's policies and the consequences of the concept of a "rules-based order" that it aggressively promotes.

In short, this is another evidence of the "sanctions agony" that has begun in the European Union. They cannot oppose anything else, but it boomerangs primarily on the interests of ordinary Europeans.

Question: Going back to Emmanuel Macron's statements about the possibility of sending military personnel to Ukraine, which you have already mentioned today. Nevertheless, if this happens (assuming it did), how do you assess the chances of an increase in escalation?

Maria Zakharova: What if something happens?

Question: If the military personnel of the EU countries, which are NATO members, do find themselves on the territory of Ukraine and take a direct part in hostilities, what are the risks of escalation and, accordingly, the escalation of the conflict into a direct conflict with NATO?

Maria Zakharova: There are no risks here. This is escalation. Obviously, every supply of weapons leads to it. Every new tranche that goes to the goals of the "war" carried out by the Kiev regime is an escalation. If we add to this the representatives of the EU officially supplied or recruited as new forms of mercenary activity (I don't know what they will call them – "mercenaries", "mercenaries", "strikebreakers" – no one can understand what he said there), this will not be a risk, but the escalation itself.

As for a direct collision. It is necessary to understand what a "direct collision" is. I'm sure the military has its own terminology. The best thing to do is to contact them. From the point of view of ordinary human logic and foreign policy expertise, it is obvious that the EU and NATO countries are involved in this conflict. These are the supply of weapons, ammunition, endless cash injections, intelligence according to which the Kiev regime is carrying out strikes, a colossal number of all kinds of experts, militants, even representatives of official government bodies from the EU and NATO countries on the territory of Kiev, full coordination of the Kiev regime by the United States, Great Britain, and Brussels. How else can this be characterized? Naturally, it's involvement.

Will this involvement, the hybrid war unleashed by the West against our country, reach a new level? Perhaps it is better to put this question this way. It should be addressed to Emmanuel Macron and the entire Western community.

Question: The Danish police have dropped the investigation into the explosions on the Nord Stream gas pipelines, saying that they do not have the authority to continue the case in Denmark, although they saw signs of deliberate sabotage. What will Russia do in this regard?

Maria Zakharova: Let me tell you what we have already done.

It was the Russian delegation that submitted to the UN Security Council a draft resolution on the establishment of an independent international commission by the Secretary-General. Unfortunately, during the vote on March 27, 2023, our initiative was blocked. It did not gather the necessary number of votes in favour due to the destructive line deliberately adopted by the Western members of the Security Council.

They insisted that there was no need for the Council to "interfere" in the national investigations of Germany, Denmark and Sweden, which, according to the Westerners within the framework of the UN Security Council, they "fully trusted." At the same time, Berlin, Copenhagen and Stockholm regularly lied that they share information with the international community, and they certainly lied that they share it with us. Although, in fact, they did not provide us with any intelligible information even about the intermediate results of their research. Now it turned out that there was nothing to share, because no real work, in fact, was being carried out. As you know, Denmark has admitted the incapacity of its investigative bodies. It was not the first in this, but went the way of Sweden.

The decision of the Danish authorities, following Sweden, to stop investigating the terrorist attacks that took place in Denmark's exclusive economic zone in September 2022 on the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines fully confirms the lack of interest of Western countries in identifying the true customers and perpetrators of the terrorist attacks.

Today I told you about the meticulousness with which everyone delved into the "pseudo" or allegedly "newcomers", for example, in Salisbury, Amesbury and so on. Laboratory tests, as we were told, were done, decisions were made, in particular, citizens of our state were accused. And here we observe an absolutely quiet, calm, measured silence, which ended with a modest announcement that everything was over.

From the very beginning, Copenhagen refused any interaction with the Russian side on the issue of investigating the sabotage at Nord Stream and opposed an international investigation under the auspices of the UN. A message from Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Mikhail Mishustin sent to Prime Minister of Denmark in October 2022 was left unanswered. In December 2023, the Prosecutor General's Office of Denmark rejected the request of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation for legal assistance in investigating the sabotage of the Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2 gas pipelines.

It took the Danish side a year and a half to conclude that there had been a deliberate sabotage. At the same time, paradoxically, there are no grounds for further investigation in Denmark. There is a strong impression that the Danish authorities know who orchestrated this terrorist attack and simply prefer to withdraw themselves.

All this clearly confirms the relevance of Russia's proposals to conduct an independent international investigation under the auspices of the UN. We will continue to draw the attention of the international community to the unscrupulous position of the "collective West." We are convinced that those responsible for the attack on a key energy infrastructure facility, which caused economic and environmental damage, must be punished.

Let me remind you that our national investigation is underway.

Question: At the moment, the fact that Sweden will join NATO is quite obvious. We are no longer discussing this in my country. How would you characterize Russia's position on Sweden's future membership in NATO, and what measures will Russia take as a result?

Maria Zakharova: This issue has been commented on many times. Will do it again.

First. Sweden's accession to NATO and Stockholm's renunciation of its own history of military non-alignment (let me remind you that this history is 200 years old), which served as an important factor in maintaining stability in the Baltic Sea and in the Northern European region as a whole, inevitably contributes to the transformation of this part of Europe from a zone of stability and cooperation into a zone of potential confrontation.

The second important point. Sweden's membership in NATO would lead to a significant loss of national sovereignty for Stockholm. It should also be noted that Sweden's accession to NATO is accompanied by the continued whipping up of anti-Russian hysteria in the country. It is encouraged, unfortunately, by the Swedish political and military leadership. But its main source is abroad. It is not the Swedes themselves who make the choice. This choice was made for them.

And the third point. For our part, we will closely monitor what Sweden will do in this aggressive military bloc and how it will put its membership into practice. Accordingly, proceeding from this, we will build our policy and take retaliatory steps of a military-technical and other nature in order to stop the threats to Russia's national security that arise in this regard.

Question: Could you tell us what concrete steps Russia will take?

Maria Zakharova: We will take reciprocal steps based on the practical results of Sweden's membership in NATO, what will appear on Swedish territory, how contingents will be moved, what measures will take place and what strategy will be adopted. We will specifically respond to this. How? I assure you that we will keep you informed about this.

Question: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has presented a plan for a post-war settlement in Gaza. According to the plan, Israel will continue military action until its objectives are achieved. What do you think about this plan, given the fact that Israel has no intention of stopping? If implemented, what will be the consequences for Gaza and the region as a whole?

Maria Zakharova: We have seen media reports. We do not have the original text. Judging by the fragmentary information, it will be difficult to achieve sustainable peace in the region and create conditions for a solution to the Palestinian problem on the basis of this proposal.

History proves that any initiatives in the Middle East peace process, if they run counter to the UN Security Council decisions that provided for the creation of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, coexisting in peace and security with Israel, all attempts to circumvent the existing international legal framework are doomed to failure.

You are aware of our country's position. We promote it both in bilateral contacts and at international venues, primarily the UN Security Council. Today's priority is to establish a ceasefire in Gaza. The overwhelming majority of the world's states, I would even say the absolute majority of them, are saying this. Not just the world majority, but almost all countries. Even those who initially kept silent or took some kind of ambiguous position are now talking about the need for a ceasefire. This is important for us because it is a priority and imperative step to create the conditions necessary to launch a comprehensive settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. To this end, together with like-minded countries, we are making every effort in the UN Security Council, which, unfortunately, is blocked by the United States.

This is the isolation in which the United States finds itself. They tried to divide many countries, but they found themselves isolated. Look at how the United States votes on this topic and what the vast majority of countries in the world are calling for. And you will see that America is left alone.

The political and geographical unity of Gaza and the West Bank must also be ensured. Among other things, the meeting of representatives of leading Palestinian organisations in Moscow, which is to take place this week, as well as the implementation of the Russian initiative to hold ministerial consultations with key external players involved in the Middle East settlement, are designed to help resolve these problems. Without achieving such unity, the situation in the confrontation zone risks returning to the status quo before October 7, 2023, which will inevitably entail new outbreaks of violence, new casualties and continue to destabilize the entire Middle East.

Question: You mentioned the intra-Palestinian meeting. What does the Russian side expect from it?

Maria Zakharova: This is obvious. Discussion of topical issues. Of course, we will share additional detailed information on this matter. We will definitely publish it.

Question: Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said in an interview with France 24 that "the collective security treaty on Armenia has not been implemented, especially in 2021-2022. Meanwhile, the CSTO secretariat noted that they had not received Yerevan's applications for suspension of membership. How would you comment on Nikol Pashinyan's statement and the situation in general? Has Moscow received any clarifications from Armenia on this issue?

Maria Zakharova: We categorically reject the reproaches of the Armenian authorities regarding the CSTO's alleged failure to fulfil its mandate and obligations towards Yerevan during the well-known events in the region in 2021 and 2022. As a result, the decision of the CSTO Collective Security Council on the deployment of a monitoring mission in Armenia was prepared. It is not our fault or the fault of other members of the Organization that this balanced decision, which also provided for the provision of military-technical assistance to the Republic and a number of other measures, was rejected by the Armenian authorities under far-fetched pretexts. Moreover, in return, Yerevan demonstratively preferred to invite pseudo-observers from the EU – the well-known facts speak for themselves and leave no doubt about the zero effectiveness of the work of these representatives.

We proceed from the premise that the Republic of Armenia continues to be a full-fledged member of the CSTO, with all the rights and obligations arising from this status. At the same time, we note with regret that the dynamics of Yerevan's participation in the Organization's activities has decreased, which clearly does not meet the interests of the friendly Armenian people and the tasks of ensuring the country's security. We hope that Yerevan will come to an understanding that the existing concerns should be discussed and resolved in a calm and trust-based dialogue, and not by endless chaotic throwing them into the public space.

As for the style of the statements and the logic of their construction. It's not very clear. Just recently, representatives of Armenia said that the CSTO had withdrawn from Armenia. If the CSTO, according to official Yerevan, has withdrawn from Armenia, then how can Armenia freeze its participation in it?

Question: I have a question about the trilateral statement, or more precisely, about its free reading by the Armenian side. Recently, official Yerevan has been declaring at various levels its unwillingness to provide Azerbaijan with unhindered communication between the western regions of the country and Nakhichevan, and the border service of the FSB of Russia - control over this route. I would like to hear your comments on this topic. And the question is the question. Recently, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has been presenting his Crossroads of the World project as an alternative to the above-mentioned route at Western venues and has received quite extensive support. Why do you think Yerevan's extra-regional partners are so concerned about the opening of the route specified in paragraph 9 of the Trilateral Statement?

Maria Zakharova: We know that the Armenian authorities have said that they are ready to open regional communications based on the principle of sovereignty and jurisdiction, within the framework of equality and reciprocity. Azerbaijan, as a matter of fact, did not abandon this approach. Earlier, this topic was discussed in detail in the format of the Trilateral Working Group co-chaired by the Deputy Prime Ministers of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia. Unfortunately, this work has now stalled due to the position of our Armenian colleagues.

As for the point in the statement concerning control by the FSB of Russia over the Meghri route, this is logical both from the point of view of optimal traffic management and from an economic point of view. Russian border guards are already stationed in the south of the Syunik region, protecting the border between Armenia and Iran.

As for the "Crossroads of the World" – we do not believe that this is an alternative to the "Meghri" or any other route. Rather, it is a broader view of the future of regional and sub-regional communications. On the sidelines of the 22nd session of the Russian-Armenian Intergovernmental Commission on Economic Cooperation on December 15, 2023 in Yerevan, Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Alexander Overchuk expressed support for the project and noted Russia's contribution to its implementation.

As for the extra-regional players, their reluctance to contribute to the unblocking of communications in the South Caucasus can be explained solely by considerations of the political situation. They are not interested in increasing the interconnectedness of Armenia and Azerbaijan with each other and with their neighbors but are trying to "tear" the region to pieces and present their interests there, as if not thinking about the interests of others, and thus exacerbate the contradictions between the countries.

Question: In an interview with France 24, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said that Russia directly called on the Armenian population to carry out a coup d'état in the country, and Moscow's propaganda, according to him, has not yet weakened. In fact, this is a rather serious accusation. What is Moscow's assessment of this statement?

Maria Zakharova: I always ask you to provide the facts. Were there any quotes on this?

Question: The quotes were directly in the Armenian media.

Maria Zakharova: I am referring to quotes that would indicate that Russia has made some statements. Are there any? I haven't seen it, so I don't know what it's about. If there are specific quotes, we will be able to answer them.

The claims of the Prime Minister of Armenia mentioned by you are groundless. Russian officials have never allowed even a hint of calls for the overthrow of legitimately elected authorities anywhere.

I would like the authorities in Yerevan, when talking about such things, to remember that we profess a similar approach in relation to both the current and previous authorities in Yerevan, and in general in relation to any sovereign state.

A logical question arises. Do those who are now in power in Yerevan themselves adhere to this logic in relation to other countries or in relation to their own internal political process? I think it would be a good idea to speculate on this topic. We remember recent history, what happened a few years ago. Russian officials never allow even a hint of calls for the overthrow of the legitimately elected authorities. I'll say it again. Can the representatives of the current Armenian authorities boast the same approach to the Armenian leadership of the past?

If anything happened in the public space, it was questions to journalists and the facts they provided. If there are doubts about these facts, the representatives of Armenia can always use a refutation. We do this on a regular basis. We have an "Anti-Fake" section. We can refute point by point. We can use some other courts to refute all this.

Indeed, Moscow and Yerevan remain allies. This is the main thing. Unfortunately, for some reason, Yerevan pays the least attention to this. They examine some information component "under a magnifying glass", for some reason they deny journalists the right to make reports and prepare programs. We have official relations that have stood the test of time. And there is a legal framework underneath them. We have never taken any actions aimed at purposefully destroying friendly ties with Armenia. Moreover, we have repeatedly invited our partners to discuss and resolve all problems within the framework of a trust-based dialogue. So far, we have not seen any counter movement in this regard. None of this is groundless. And if there are, then let someone provide us with something.

Question: The Secretary of the Security Council of Armenia said that the Russian military failed to prevent the shooting incident in the region on February 12 of this year. How would you assess such a statement?

Maria Zakharova: I have already said a lot on this subject, but let me repeat it again.

We view such statements as extremely negative. This is not the first time that Security Council Secretary Alexei Grigoryan has distorted the facts in order (I think) to please someone in the West or perhaps come up with a reason to criticize Russia.

There are no Russian soldiers in the area of the village of Nerki. In 2021, in accordance with an agreement with the Armenian side, a post of the Border Service of the FSB of Russia was located there. But at the same time, as we know, an investigation is now underway in Armenia for violation of the order to prevent provocations and maintain restraint in the border area.

We consider attempts to smear our representatives counterproductive. For more than 30 years, Russian border guards have been guarding the borders of the republic and have repeatedly proved their relevance.

In contrast to the Russian border guards, the EU pseudo-observers are not doing what they were called in. Their main occupations are intelligence activities in relation to Russia and Iran and, of course, a bit of self-promotion.

Question: The Armenian media reported on preparations for Vladimir Zelensky's visit to Armenia. It is said that it is tentatively scheduled for March. At the same time, neither Yerevan nor Kiev denied this. What do you think this could lead to?

Maria Zakharova: You are absolutely right to say that this should be commented on by the two states. I think that Armenia, as an ally of Russia, is well aware of our position. It is justified in relation to the Kiev regime, which, by its actions to destroy its own state and sovereignty, has brought suffering and tragedy not only to its country, to the entire region, and, perhaps, to the world as a whole.

Question: Recently, NATO has been making frequent statements warning of the consequences of Transnistria's accession to Russia. Are there any prerequisites for this?

Maria Zakharova: If you are referring to NATO Deputy Secretary General Miguel Geoana's statement of February 26 that "if Russia decides to annex Transnistria, the alliance will condemn such actions and continue to support the Republic of Moldova," then, as far as we understand, this is a nervous reaction to the 7th Congress of People's Deputies of all levels taking place today (February 28) in Tiraspol. For several days now, Chisinau has been speculating and guessing about what decisions this forum can make. Apparently, this panic has taken hold of NATO as well.

As for the North Atlantic Alliance's "support" and, in fact, militarization, of Moldova despite its neutral status, there is nothing new here. The bloc is stubbornly trying to mold the republic into a "second Ukraine" contrary to the mood of the majority of the Moldovan population and, it seems, does not think at all about the possible consequences for the country and the region as a whole.

Question: US specialists are conducting medical experiments on people in the occupied territories of Ukraine. Human organs are being removed, both from soldiers and civilians. This is done in an inhumane way, without the use of anesthesia or painkillers when the person is conscious. The amount of activity that the United States has launched around the world in this direction is also impressive, given that hundreds of thousands of unaccounted for illegal refugees are moving to the territory of the United States and the European Union, whom they successfully "master" both as organs and as free labor. There is no need to deport people by force, as was done before, it is enough to carry out a coup d'état, destroy, bomb the state and lure them with generous benefits for refugees. They go on their own, cross borders, live in bestial conditions in special camps, take tests and wait for their fate. Can Russia stop this, and what mechanisms are in place to do this?

Maria Zakharova: You see what is happening now. A special military operation is underway. Because all the manifestations you mentioned have begun to take place in close proximity to our country and to the population, which for many years before had declared that they were being exterminated precisely on the basis of ethnicity, on an ethno-cultural basis. Not only that, all of this was done (all the actions, acts, actions and steps you mentioned above) to destabilise the situation in this region and on the territory of our country. As well as the transfer of this destabilisation into a more serious military-political and geopolitical track, through the pumping of weapons, which went in parallel with the monstrous facts to which you refer and which have become known.

Accordingly, the response to this with the presentation of the arguments of goals and objectives was the special military operation of our country. Here is one of the answers.

Prior to that, and at the same time, we defended international law as the only safety net against the world falling into some bottomless pit of impunity for the crimes you listed.

It is not our task to improve life within the United States or any other sovereign states. We dedicate all our capabilities to our own domestic and foreign policy, to creating security conditions for our country and citizens. Through our foreign policy and international efforts, we bring the following postulates to the world: the preservation of international law, multipolarity as an effective mechanism for countering the monopoly or the unipolar world or the global diktat of one center of power, respect for the principles of the UN Charter and their implementation in the daily life of international relations. These are not only principles, but also specific areas implemented by our country in the international arena. And we continue to do so.

I believe that this is also the adoption of a number of doctrinal documents within our country. They are perceived in the world as the creation of additional insurance for the preservation of civilizational values, cultural and historical achievements and historical facts. We have announced this. This is also our response to global destabilisation and the destructive policy of chaos that you mentioned at the beginning of your question.

Question: What the United States and its allies are doing in the occupied Ukrainian territories qualifies as Nazism and fascism, and it is being done at the global level. President of Russia Vladimir Putin said in an interview that it is also necessary to launch anti-fascist propaganda at the global level. At the same time, this should be done not from the position of the state, but at the level of public consciousness and public initiative. How can this be done? And how will the Foreign Ministry facilitate such initiatives at the international level? What initiatives of citizens or public organizations are especially needed today?

Maria Zakharova: Please remember that we are the executive branch. In our country, civil society and, accordingly, its institutions are engaged in public initiatives.

We have the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation. You can look at what each member does, what initiatives they make, what events they hold, what books they publish, what events they have.

Let me give you an example of our foreign policy and the situation around Ukraine – Mikhail Grigoriev, Director of the Foundation for the Study of Democracy and his fundamental research on the problem of neo-Nazism in Ukraine:

Ordinary fascism: war crimes of the Ukrainian security forces (2014-2016),

Ordinary fascism. Ukrainian War Crimes and Human Rights Violations (2017-2020)

Ordinary fascism. Ukrainian war crimes against humanity. (2022–2023),

Black Book. The atrocities of modern Bandera followers - Ukrainian neo-Nazis. (2014-2023).

These are the public initiatives we are talking about. This is an example. There are many such initiatives. This is one of them.

Yes, that was a very long event and about 1/3 was cut. It seems quite clear the Outlaw US Empire is trying to turn Moldova and Armenia into the next Ukraine, but that’s hard to do because there was no decades-long association between the CIA and those people’s equivalents to the Nazi OUN in Ukraine and their citizenries are majority Pro-Russian. As NATO continues to lose in Ukraine, IMO the shrillness will increase in volume. Even as the sanctions are made, they are deprecated by those who voted for them. Putin just made a visit to the Karachay-Cherkessia Republic located in the North Caucasus that borders Georgia and is thus a pivotal region. Russia well knows the methods used by its enemies in the region to foment anti-Russianness as the region is much like the Balkans in its ethnic fragmentation caused by its geography.

More action on Russia’s Africa policy happened today when Lavrov talked with his opposite Mr. Diop from Mali and will meet with several other African delegations during the coming week. Lots of progress is being made in those relations.

*
*
*
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!