Seasons Greetings: Maria Zakharova's Briefing Selections

Not quite the colors an Elf would wear this time of year, but the backdrop is correct. Unfortunately, the world situation doesn’t really lend itself to tidings of joy, as they’re more like the rearranged carol linked to a few days ago. But Maria’s Briefing’s one of those musts, although even it can get preempted by events as it did last week. Of course, in Russia, it’s the New Year’s Tree, not the Christmas Tree. I’m sure this time of year has even greater meaning for Maria as her birthday is December 24th. To see the tree in all its majesty, you’ll need to watch the first two minutes of the video that’s at the above link. Here’s the story/dialogue behind the tree:

About the "Christmas Tree of Peace and Friendship" of the Rostov Regional Public Movement "Synergy of Talents"

New Year's Eve is coming! Traditionally, a New Year's tree was erected at the Foreign Ministry's press centre.

For four years in a row, on the initiative of our friends from the Rostov Regional Public Movement "Synergy of Talents", we have been installing and decorating this stunning spruce. All the toys that you see on it are the result of the international competition "Fireworks of New Year's Toys".

In 2023, more than 10 thousand children took part in the competition. The participants were children of our compatriots living abroad from 67 countries of the world and children from 64 regions of the Russian Federation, including from our new regions.

All New Year's toys are handmade by the children. They are truly made with love, warmth and diligence, reflecting the flavor and characteristics of each region and country (because they came from abroad) where they were created. I would like to thank all the children who took part in the international competition.

People ask me all the time where all these toys "go". At the end of the New Year's Tree Festival, the best creative works will be sent to the only museum of Christmas tree toys in our country "Klinskoye Podvorye" to the exhibition "Fireworks of New Year's Toys" opened last year. Nothing will be lost. The toys made by the children will also be sent to hospitals as gifts to our defenders.

I would like to sincerely thank Talent Synergy once again for this wonderful project and initiative. We will continue to cooperate with you in the future.

It would be excellent if the briefing that followed this nice, touching, introduction were as pacific, but that isn’t the nature of today’s world thanks to one specific entity— the Outlaw US Empire’s government and those behind the curtains who manipulate its onstage puppets. This week’s selections focus on Ukraine and Nazism, Moldova, Bulgaria, EU Idiocy, Palestine, Latvia, and Finland. The briefing lasted for about 2.5 hours, so the read, as has become usual, is long.

On the Ukrainian crisis

Ukrainian neo-Nazis are failing on the very battlefield where they were sent by their Western handlers instead of sitting them down at the negotiating table or at least allowing them not to go out to the slaughterhouse. Let me remind you that this was a concept of Washington, London and Brussels. It was voiced in different ways, but the meaning was the same: only "on the battlefield it will be possible to determine the winner." The situation on the battlefield for Ukrainian neo-Nazis is disappointing and unequivocal. Because of this, they take out their anger on the civilian population.

Every day, residential buildings and social infrastructure facilities in the territory of Donbass, the Azov region, the Kherson region, the Belgorod, Bryansk and Kursk regions are subjected to their shelling. There are casualties and destruction.

On December 14 of this year, the Armed Forces of Ukraine inflicted the most massive blow on Donetsk since 2014. Direct hits were recorded on multi-storey residential buildings, the dome of the Transfiguration Cathedral, and the buildings of the Donetsk National Technical University. A hospital and a school were damaged. Two civilians were killed and three others, including a child, were wounded.

On the same day, Ukrainian neo-Nazis shelled the Kherson region more than a hundred times. 11 settlements came under fire. A civilian was killed. Do you think any of this has been noticed in international organizations, in committees and commissions dealing with human rights, or in the capitals of those countries that are so concerned about the fate of children? No, they didn't say a single word. Not just a condemnation, but at least a record of what the Zelensky regime is doing. And what should they say? After all, they are actively sponsoring all this.

In the Luhansk direction, the Armed Forces of Ukraine use American MLRS "HIMARS". On December 15, eight people were killed and 23 others were injured as a result of shelling in the village of Lantarovka. On December 17 of this year, Ukrainian militants launched a missile attack on the city of Shchastia, where three civilians were killed and four residential buildings were destroyed.

On December 16 of this year, Ukrainian neo-Nazis attacked a humanitarian aid delivery site in Nova Mayachka, Kherson Oblast, with the HIMARS MLRS. Two civilians were killed and two were injured.

Over the past week, the Kiev regime tried to attack the territories of the Moscow, Lipetsk, Rostov, Volgograd, Bryansk, Kaluga, Kursk regions, as well as Crimea with the help of UAVs. These attempts were successfully suppressed with the help of air defense systems.

For our part, we regularly bring to the attention of international organisations the facts of the crimes committed by the Zelensky regime against civilians. On December 15, we handed over to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres a document containing the facts of the Kiev regime's criminal acts against civilians from 2014 to September 2023. We need some kind of response to these crimes and distribute these materials as a document of the 78th session of the UN General Assembly. Russian diplomats urged him to do all this.

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

For the murder of several civilians in Mariupol, Ukrainian Armed Forces militant Alexander Grebenkin was sentenced in absentia to life imprisonment.

Ukrainian Nazi Eduard Kudusov was sentenced to 25 years' imprisonment in a high-security penal colony for the shooting of two unarmed civilians.

Bandera follower S. Paliychuk, who ordered to open fire in order to damage civilian infrastructure, was sentenced in absentia to 28 years in prison to be served in a maximum security penal colony. He has been put on the international wanted list.

The investigation of crimes committed by Ukrainian neo-Nazis will continue. No one will escape punishment.

Against the backdrop of such barbarism by the Nazi regime in Kiev, the European Council, at its meeting on December 14-15 of this year, decided to start negotiations on Ukraine's accession to the European Union. Thus, it is not Kiev that is being pulled up to the European Union, but the EU is sinking to the level of the Nazi Kiev regime.

Moreover, this step is nothing more than a "consolation prize" from Brussels, which failed to allocate 50 billion euros to support the Zelensky regime. This is eloquently evidenced by the words of French President Emmanuel Macron, who said following the event that the decision announced in Brussels is a political move that has no legal force, since the EU is still very far from enlargement to include Ukraine. To put it simply, all this is a terrible and bloody masquerade, the result of which is casualties among the civilian population and among those whom the Kiev regime forcibly recruits in order to send them to certain death.

On December 18 of this year, Bloomberg News reported that they had learned about a letter from Pentagon Comptroller Michael McCord to the leaders of the defense policy committees of both houses of the US Congress, in which he said that the last $1.07 billion would be exhausted on December 30 to support Ukraine. Moreover, these funds will not be transferred to the Zelensky regime, but will be used to replenish the US army's supplies to replace the weapons previously sent to Kiev. As the saying goes, watch your hands. Look at the machinations carried out there under the aegis and slogans of helping the young Ukrainian democracy.

On December 15 of this year, European Commissioner for Budget Yonhide Hahn admitted in an interview with Reuters that back in the spring of this year, the United States had convincingly asked the EU to create a long-term financing program for Ukraine in the amount of 50 billion euros, so that the Biden administration could use this to "put pressure on the US Congress" in order to obtain additional funds for the Kiev regime. This can be summed up in one phrase: "A thief stole a club from a thief." This is about what Brussels, Washington and London are doing.

Washington is cynically trying to shift the multibillion-dollar costs to the EU for the continuation of the Ukrainian crisis it has unleashed, and, in fact, to force ordinary Europeans to fork out money for the maintenance of the Zelensky regime, mired in corruption and murder.

In Ukraine, mass forced mobilization continues. More and more videos are appearing on the Internet, proving how real roundups are arranged for people of military age. This all happens in shopping malls and other public places. However, this is not enough for the Kiev regime. People are still walking down the street. There are others who can be killed from Vladimir Zelensky's point of view.

Recently, Deputy Chair of the Verkhovna Rada Committee Maria Bezuglaya reported on social media about the upcoming amendments to the law on mobilisation. What are these amendments to the law on mobilization in Ukraine? Of course, in the direction of increasing the possibility of forcibly recruiting even more people. Now, apparently, they are planning to drive everyone "on the rack". Such initiatives once again confirm the readiness of the Kiev junta for any casualties and the conduct of hostilities to the "last Ukrainian".

Against this background, we have taken note of the revelations of former Ukrainian Ambassador to the UK Viktor Prystaiko, who in an interview with Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty did not rule out the possibility of British soldiers appearing on Ukrainian soil in a catastrophic scenario for the Kiev regime. According to Viktor Prystaiko, when the Zelensky regime runs out of soldiers and weapons, London will have to decide to send an expeditionary force to Ukraine. Let's be clear. The British military has long been firmly established in Ukraine. Everybody knows that. This is not even an open secret. Everyone knows that. They are involved in the training of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the planning of combat operations by Ukrainian saboteurs against the Russian Black Sea Fleet, facilities in Crimea, and were seen guarding Vladimir Zelensky. Everyone knows that they are also present there, in the trenches.

All this shows how these events are developing in reality, and who really stood at the origins of the Ukrainian crisis, inspires its escalation and hinders a peaceful settlement, and divides the money that is allocated for this very murder of Ukrainian citizens.

In Ukraine, a frantic struggle against historical heritage continues. Often the most blasphemous methods are used. A few days ago, it became known that the Kiev authorities demolished a monument to the crew of the Soviet armored train "Tarashchanets", which stood at the burial site of members of this crew during the Civil War.

We have already said that everything that is happening in Ukraine now under the auspices of the Zelensky regime, the Kiev regime, is literally a copy of what the Third Reich, the Nazis and the Nazis did during the occupation of Kiev in 1941-1943. Just like the monument to Nikolai Shchors in Kiev. Having failed the "counteroffensive", Kiev's neo-Nazis continue to take revenge on the heroes who fell a century ago. Such impotent anger.

It has already been said that this inhumane and anti-Christian policy of the Zelensky regime is met with resistance from local residents. Recently, the media reported that in the Lviv region, people who are not indifferent to their true history did not allow the authorities to demolish a monument to a Soviet soldier.

A few days ago, the 80th anniversary of the first trial of the Nazis and their accomplices in the USSR, which took place on December 15-19, 1943 in liberated Kharkov, was celebrated. They were tried for brutal crimes against the civilian population. During the occupation in the city, Hitler's reptiles killed more than 26 thousand Soviet citizens. Kiev's neo-Nazis are using the same methods today, but just like their fascist idols, they will get what they deserve.

UN General Assembly adopts a Russian resolution on combating the glorification of Nazism

On December 19, the plenary session of the 78th session of the UN General Assembly adopted the traditional Russian resolution "Combating the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance." 118 UN member states voted in favor of this most important document for the entire international community, 49 voted against and 14 abstained. A total of 38 countries from all regions of the world have co-sponsored the resolution. Earlier in November of this year, the document was approved by the Third Committee of the General Assembly.

The resolution condemns any actions aimed at revising the results of World War II and consigning its lessons to oblivion, including attempts to cast doubt on the decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal, to equalize the rights of victims and executioners, and to desecrate the memory of those who died in the fight against Nazism. It rejects attempts to glorify the Nazi movement, neo-Nazism and former members of the Waffen-SS in any form, condemns the construction of monuments and memorials, the holding of public demonstrations in order to glorify the Nazi past, the Nazi movement and neo-Nazism, as well as through the declaration or attempts to declare members of this organization and those who fought against the anti-Hitler coalition, collaborated with Nazi movements and committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, national heroes and members of national liberation movements.

At the same time, we are deeply concerned about the increasing attempts and cases of desecration or destruction of monuments erected in honour of those who fought against Nazism during World War II. In addition, it condemns the measures taken in certain states, including at the legislative level, to ban symbols associated with the victory over Nazism.

Who do you think could have opposed this? Of course, the same NATO "axis" and the very NATO member countries that literally every day either demolish monuments to the heroes of World War II (for us, the Great Patriotic War), or approve of it. Now they are applauding the Nazis, who were involved in the murder of people during World War II personally.

For the second year in a row, the countries of the "collective West" voted against the key Russian initiative at the UN. What for? They seek to isolate Russia in foreign policy and are ready to sacrifice even ethical considerations and suffer reputational costs just to be against our country. That's not the only reason. There's more. They are indeed struck by the bacillus of Nazism, which manifests itself in neo-Nazism, which was not cleansed then, but has blossomed luxuriantly in recent decades. In many ways, they relied on those who were among those who did not end up in the dock in various countries: in Eastern Europe, in the CIS. They decided that this would be their driving force, including against our country.

We regard the vote against the resolution of the former Axis member states Germany, Italy and Japan as an irresponsible step that casts doubt on the sincerity of their earlier statements about their awareness of their guilt for unleashing World War II. Such actions also do not correspond to the obligations of these states to adhere to the goals and principles of the United Nations, which they assumed when they joined the world Organization.

In addition, the position taken by Germany, Italy and Japan, as well as a number of other states that fought against the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition during World War II, clearly showed the prematureness of discussions and proposals regarding the exclusion of the wording about "enemy states" from the text of the UN Charter. What kind of additional and expanded role for these countries in the work of the UN Security Council (such ideas were voiced in the context of Germany and Japan) can we talk about in principle if these countries vote against the basic principles laid down in the UN Charter?

The results of the vote on the Russian resolution will be decisive for us in developing Russia's position on supporting the candidacies of states applying for election as non-permanent and permanent members of the UN Security Council, including within the framework of discussions on the expansion of this body, which, according to Article 24 of the Charter of the Organisation, bears "primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security".

On the results of the meeting of the heads of state and government of the EU countries and their statements on the need to speed up the transfer of missiles and ammunition to Ukraine, as well as to supply more air defense systems

We have already given a detailed assessment of the results of the EU summit in Brussels on December 14-15. I would like to note once again that the failed policy of the outgoing EU leadership has plunged the once peaceful and successful association into dependence on the United States and into the abyss of European conflicts. The U.S. military-industrial complex, the financial and banking system, and other industries have been happily profiting from the militarism of the European Union and its senseless economic and military support for the Ukrainian neo-Nazi regime since 2014.

At the same time, the interests and capabilities of the EU member states that are experiencing an economic crisis as a result of self-isolation from Russia are increasingly diverging, including in matters of further sponsoring the bankrupt government of Vladimir Zelensky. He sees the continuation of the conflict with Russia as the last chance to stay in power.

By investing all its efforts in serving Washington's global dominance, the European Union is weakening, completely losing the ability to implement an independent foreign policy, and wasting its political and economic weight in the world. It is deteriorating security in Europe by its own actions. And it is not only about the fact that the arsenals of the EU countries are being emptied for the tasks of a hybrid war with Russia, and the national armed forces are left without weapons and ammunition, but also about the fact that the "black market" of weapons is filled with smuggled goods from Ukraine, which then "surface" in other regions of the world, including the Middle East. Then representatives of the EU countries lament what is happening in the Middle East. Some kind of absurd logic. We have repeatedly pointed this out, as well as explained the risks to the internal security of the EU, in particular to civil aviation, as a result of the chances for local criminal and extremist elements to get their hands on anti-aircraft systems.

All the more surprising are the self-suggestions of EU leaders about plans to continue military support for Kiev, while neither the overstretched EU economy and industry, nor the Kiev regime and its Armed Forces are able to produce the results announced in high offices in Brussels, Kiev, Washington and London. As everyone understands, for the United States and NATO, and therefore for the European Union, which plays the role of their "wallet", it is important to drag out the process of hostilities in Ukraine "as long as it takes", up to the last Ukrainian. It is unlikely that residents of EU countries, as well as ordinary citizens of Ukraine, are ready to put up with such inhumane conditions and treatment.

Update on Moldova

We continue to monitor the developments in Moldova. We see that the decision of the European Council on December 14-15 to start pre-accession negotiations has become a reason for official Chisinau to rejoice, reminiscent of a feast during the plague. There are statements about a certain "victory", "the triumph of freedom and independence", "the return of Moldova to the European space", from which it was "torn away by the Empire". And before that, Moldova wasn't in Europe, was it? Where does it work then? Part of which continent? This is absurd. I also have a question for the ideologists and all those who say all this on the instructions of Maia Sandu. When Britain left the EU, what did that indicate? That these are commemorations of freedom and independence? Britain's withdrawal from the European continent is also an intrigue of the Empire, but this time, apparently, of Russia? Or how? Are you completely confused in Chisinau?

In an effort to curry favor with the EU grantors for the "advance" issued, which, by the way, does not bind either Brussels or EU members to anything, Chisinau has stepped up anti-Russian rhetoric and activities.

On December 15 of this year, the pro-Western majority in the country's parliament pushed through a draft of a new National Security Strategy, in which Russia is absolutely unfairly designated as "the most dangerous and constant source of threats to <... > for statehood, democracy and prosperity of the country." This is after many years of mutually beneficial cooperation, supplying our resources, employing Moldovan citizens who returned home with the funds on which their families and loved ones lived. They are also part of the well-being of Moldova as a country and a state. After that, we are declared the most dangerous and persistent source of threats?

In this context, it is useful to recall that the "Empire", that is, the Russian Empire, and then the USSR, played an important role in preserving the national identity, socio-economic, cultural and humanitarian development of Moldova. Being part of the USSR, Moldova overcame the post-war devastation in the shortest possible time, increased its economic potential and straightened out the demographic situation. After 1945, more than 500 industrial enterprises were built in the republic, and its population increased from 2.46 to 4.36 million people from 1940 to 1990 – by 77%. The numbers speak for themselves.

And vice versa, the time "not with Russia" for Moldova turned into the dismantling of industry, the degradation of agriculture, the impoverishment of the population and depopulation. That is, everything that we are witnessing today and which in fact is a serious "threat to the state, democracy and prosperity of the country." This is the fault of those who tear Moldova away from its beneficial relations, whether with Russia or other countries.

It is no coincidence that the decision to start pre-accession negotiations with the EU was perceived by the Moldovan public much more restrained than by the republic's leadership. The people of the country see what is happening and what the European Union is turning into. Yes, some decades ago, it really seemed to be a symbol of security and well-being. And now what? Is this the assemblage point of mobilization capabilities for the militarization of the European continent and the escalation of the situation? The people of Moldova see the transformation of their country into a part of the European periphery, cut off from Russia, which is historically and spiritually close. They see how their country is being dragged into the conflicts that Washington and Great Britain have fanned on the European continent in recent years with exactly one goal – to stop its well-being and prosperity.

Our country has never posed a threat to the friendly Moldovan people. We remain interested in maintaining and developing multifaceted bilateral ties. We are sure that the people of Moldova share this sentiment.

European Union adopts new anti-Russia sanctions

On December 19 of this year, the Russian Foreign Ministry published a statement on retaliatory measures to the twelfth package of EU sanctions against Russia. Questions keep coming. I would like to dwell on this subject in more detail.

On December 18 of this year, the European Union, ignoring the clear and unambiguous position of the world majority opposing unilateral coercive measures, approved another "package" of illegitimate anti-Russian sanctions. The very package that they have been discussing so much has finally been approved. Probably, they are under the illusion that Brussels is able to emerge victorious in the sanctions confrontation imposed on us.

Meanwhile, it is becoming more and more obvious that any attempts by the European Union to cause irreparable damage to the Russian economy with its restrictions are absolutely futile and fatal for itself.

Our country has not only withstood the unprecedented financial and economic onslaught of the West. These are not sanctions or restrictions, but a trade war that Washington and London unleashed ten years ago against our country with the help of the EU. On the contrary, the Russian economy, regardless of what was planned there and how they imagined it, has developed a powerful "sanctions immunity", has become more stable and is developing successfully. This year, Russia's GDP will increase by 3.5%. The real sector of our economy is growing at a faster pace.

But the European Union, on the contrary, cannot withstand the consequences of the anti-Russian sanctions imposed by itself. It's not our choice. Not only were we against it, but we also urged the EU and individual member states to follow the path of mutual cooperation, mutually respectful dialogue and mutually beneficial cooperation. We have proven in practice and have proven to everyone for a long time that we are a reliable supplier of resources and a partner in many joint projects. In the Eurozone, GDP growth by the end of the year will be 0.6%. The European Union is falling into recession. Just the other day, the EU statistical office Eurostat published fresh data on industrial production in the European Union - over the past 12 months it has decreased by 5.5%, and in the Eurozone - by 6.6%.

Whose economy do you say is bursting at the seams? Who tore up whose economy? Here are the real data and facts.

After all, sooner or later, all these Brussels officials will have to explain to their citizens why all this was started for the sake of inflicting a "strategic defeat" on Russia and what it all led to, why all this was done in vain and where billions of euros, dollars, etc. went. In this way, Washington is simply cracking down on its European competitors, getting them hooked on buying American energy resources and weapons at fabulous prices and consistently depriving them of their industrial and technological base. What is happening to the EU is a direct consequence of the political lack of will and puppet behavior of the majority of the EU elites. But that's their choice. Another thing is that no one delegated this to them. I'm talking about their countries and their citizens.

As the latest round of anti-Russian restrictions was agreed upon at the last meeting of the European Council, it shows that the once sovereign European states (that is, some of the elites) no longer have the right to choose. Today, in order for the EU majority to "rubber-stamp" the sanctions decision that Washington needs in the first place, dissenters and doubters can simply be asked to walk out the door.

Apparently, the restructuring in the European Union, necessary for the next wave of admission of new members, led by Ukraine, has already begun. So is the mandatory process of economic convergence between the EU and the candidate countries. Only now, as it was before, they are not catching up with Brussels, but the European Union is sinking to their level of economic development. And the anti-Russian restrictions that hit the EU economy only contribute to this.

No new sanctions "packages" of the European Union, no matter how much it churns out, adopts and develops them, will not cancel the obvious fact that our country is confidently moving towards achieving the goals of the special military operation. And the sooner the EU accepts this as a given, the better it will be for themselves.

EU sanctions against Russia's Znanie society

A crazy thing that Brussels has come up with is sanctions against the Russian Society of Knowledge. This is symbolic. Just listen. The European Union has adopted sanctions against knowledge. This is what truly symbolizes the state of mind in Brussels. Knowledge is under sanctions there.

We are talking about the all-Russian educational organization "Russian Society of Knowledge". In these very papers, which were stamped in Brussels, it is separately stipulated that this society was created by the "President of the Russian Federation." Indeed, in 2015, this organization was established by the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation to popularize the achievements of science and education, promote a healthy lifestyle, as well as educate the younger generation in the spirit of traditional values.

So what is Brussels opposing? What's not to like? The fact that knowledge and science are popularized in our country, and not anti-science and illiteracy? What do we deal with the problems of young people? Don't like it? Yes, indeed, unlike the West, we are fighting to educate young people, not to debilitate them. If you don't like traditional values, look at what all these new ethics and normalities have led to.

Surprisingly, prominent foreign figures of science, education and art regularly speak at the events of the Society. Maybe Brussels opposed this? Maybe they believe that their own citizens should not join such platforms. It is much better to gather for some gatherings on the problem of changing the sex of children or lowering the age limit of children who should be changed their gender. Apparently so.

This step defies common sense, logic and understanding and is another Russophobic trick aimed at severing the humanitarian ties of the Russian Federation, as they believe. One gets the impression that the European bureaucracy is actually fighting not against what is created by the President of Russia, but against everything that is aimed at education, health promotion and personal development.

Such interference in the development of scientific, educational and youth cooperation clearly indicates that our Western opponents (in fact, unfriendly regimes), in the heat of their common desire to "cancel" Russia and exclude it from global processes, are ready to politicize any sphere, be it education, culture, sports or healthcare. I would like to remind Brussels and all those who have caved in under its auspices and at the behest of the United States that you do not have a monopoly in these areas. You lost them a long time ago. Even leading positions in these areas. You have no right to dictate anything to anyone.

We are fully convinced that the EU's destructive policy in these areas of international cooperation will play against them, as well as all the sanctions that have hit, unfortunately, the people of the EU countries. After all, judging by the number of international events being held in Russia, it is quite obvious that the restrictions imposed on us are not able to slow down the development of domestic education and science.

Ban on broadcasting Russian Ambassador's interview to Bulgaria

On December 16, the programme council of the Bulgarian National Radio banned the broadcast of the already recorded interview of Russian Ambassador to Bulgaria Elvira Mitrofanova. It was about the current agenda, exactly what was happening on the streets of Sofia, in particular, about the barbaric demolition of the Monument to the Soviet Army in the center of the Bulgarian capital. Let me remind you that this act caused indignation among the Bulgarians themselves.

Ella Mitrofanova answered journalists' questions. It was an interview, not a keynote speech, not a speech, not some written theses. It was a lively conversation. We talked about the special military operation, about the development of our country. In other words, the issues on the agenda – bilateral relations, regional and international agendas.

The interview also talked about sanctions. After all, Bulgaria also adopts anti-Russian sanctions. Why not talk? Why can't the ambassador of the country against which these sanctions are being imposed answer the question of a Bulgarian journalist about how our country is coping with this?

What do you think? The decision to ban, made under overt political pressure, was implemented. The interview did not come out. This is a shameful act of censorship.

At the same time, media regulators began to look for some grounds to evade responsibility for the act of censorship and, incidentally, self-censorship. They began to pick out lines, letters, expressions in some documents that allow them to cancel recorded interviews. The hypocrisy of the current Bulgarian political elite and the forces behind it and behind it, who everywhere talk about their alleged commitment to freedom of speech, teach the whole world, all regions and continents how to build democracy, work with journalists, and give interviews. In fact, they are actively clearing their own information space of any assessments that do not fit into the template of Euro-Atlantic propaganda.

I would like to note that the Director General of the Bulgarian National Radio, M. Mitev, explained the refusal to broadcast the interview of the Russian Ambassador by non-compliance with editorial standards and rejected accusations of censorship. How's that? Does the person who is asked questions have to answer according to the theses agreed in advance with the media? Or does the Bulgarian National Radio give all guests manuals describing the high standards of this medium?

Attempts to silence the truth and cast doubt on the objective historical processes associated with the sharp weakening of the West's global influence are doomed to failure. Such a panicked reaction suggests that Sofia is at least aware of this.

I would like to say that there are truly independent media outlets in Bulgaria that defend the principle of pluralism of opinions not only in words and during conferences, but in deeds every day through their work. Interested Bulgarian citizens can always find adequate coverage of the situation on alternative information resources.

I will say the main thing. Why wasn't they given the opportunity to publish Ms Mitrofanova's interview? Because the political leadership of Bulgaria is less popular with the Bulgarian people than Ella Mitrofanova. That's the real reason. Because she speaks on the basis of facts, knows history, and is not afraid to tell it. She does this professionally and with respect for the peoples of Bulgaria, for the history of Bulgaria and the Bulgarian people, for the peoples of our country, for our common history.

It enjoys authority among people who rely in their assessments and judgments on facts, dates, figures, and not on propaganda manuals, with which they have been fed and "regaled" for a long time. All this is being prepared somewhere in Brussels, in NATO laboratories. That's why it was canceled. They would not have been afraid of her authority, her knowledge, they would never have canceled it.

If there was something that could be disavowed from Ella Mitrofanova's interview, on the contrary, we would do everything we could to make the interview wider, so that later, for example, it could be ridiculed or anti-fakes published. But it told the truth as it is, based on facts. There was nothing to disavow. Not a single word of untruth was spoken. They had nothing to do. The political leadership of Bulgaria, which professes the anti-Russia logic imposed by NATO, understood that this interview would be pinned to the wall and that there would be no arguments to challenge Ella Mitrofanova's words in any way. That's why they canceled the interview. There are simply no other reasons.

The Q&A session now follows with the first two being about Ukrainian Nazi-like abuses of ethnic Russians within Latvia and Moldova:

Question: How would you comment on the information that has appeared in the media that, according to the Latvian Interior Ministry's Office of Citizenship and Migration Affairs, about 1,000 Russian citizens living in this Baltic country who have not complied with the Russophobic requirements of local migration legislation may be deported in the near future?

Maria Zakharova: This issue has stirred up not only the regional, but also the entire global media. Russian citizens who do not sign up for a language exam to renew their residence permits and do not have close relatives who are citizens or "non-citizens" of Latvia are deprived of their residence permits and ordered to "voluntarily" leave the territory of this Baltic state.

Today, more than a thousand of our compatriots living in Latvia fall under this measure. At the same time, this figure is not final – the Migration Service continues to process documents received from Russians and verify the information with the database of the Latvian Border Guard. In the near future, the number of Russian citizens who have not been able to "legalize" in Latvia on time may increase.

Formally, this category of persons retains the right to appeal against the decision of the migration service both in pre-trial and in court. The period of stay of Russians who use this option will be automatically extended for the period of consideration of such an application. In addition, it is possible, if there are "valid reasons" (state of health, the need to care for sick relatives, the implementation of issues related to property), to request a "deferment" for departure for up to one year. However, this, of course, does not cancel Riga's plans for the Russians. These are absolutely discriminatory actions linked to the nationalist course of this country.

According to human rights activists, Russian citizens who have not passed the "filtration procedures" have already begun to receive letters with an order to appear at the migration service by January 10, 2024, to receive official notices of expulsion "against signature". After the delivery of this document, this person is obliged to leave the territory of Latvia within 30 days.

Of course, I will also talk about the political work that will continue, and about the political reaction of our country. But I would like to talk about the main thing. In connection with the possible expulsion of Russian citizens from Latvia, our agencies and regions have been instructed to prepare to resolve issues related to their accommodation, employment, pensions, etc. I want them to know about this.

If the ruling regime in Latvia does take barbaric actions against Russian citizens, we will seek their condemnation from the international community. But this, of course, is not enough.

We will intensify the measures against Latvia in addition to those that have already put this Baltic country and its population in an extremely distressed situation.

I want to say again – we do not abandon our own! We do not give offense to people who are bullied on the basis of nationality.

Question: How would you comment on Moldovan Prime Minister Dimitri Recean's statement that Russia's decision to make it easier for Moldovan citizens to obtain Russian citizenship is an attempt to "recruit cannon fodder for the Kremlin's war against Ukraine"?

Maria Zakharova: They don't understand what they're talking about anymore. They have reached some kind of absolutely logical, and perhaps even mental, dead end. They themselves are worsening the lives of their citizens. They are doing everything they can to ensure that the citizens of Moldova suffer from a number of measures they are taking. They humiliate the dignity of their people, denying them the right even to their national language.

When they see how other countries help their citizens and compatriots, it causes them to feel wild anger, anger at the level of (I would say) animal instincts, but they do not want to offend animals. The Russophobia of the Moldovan leadership began to take on even more grotesque forms.

I wonder how people who say this in Chisinau will be able to explain to their citizens the ongoing mass distribution of Romanian citizenship to the residents of Moldova?

The majority of the citizens of the Republic of Moldova have great sympathy for Russia, to say the least, love. They still see our country as an attractive place to study, work, medical treatment, tourism, leisure and, in general, for their own future. It is no coincidence that the Moldovan diaspora in Russia numbers several hundred thousand people.

Question: Earlier this week, the United States and Finland signed an agreement on defence cooperation. It includes U.S. access to a number of Finnish military facilities and joint exercises between the two armies. Earlier, Sweden and the United States signed a similar agreement: the American contingent can be located at 17 military bases of this country. What, in your opinion, is behind such actions by NATO, led by the United States? How can this affect the situation in the region in the future?

Maria Zakharova: Yesterday we published a comment on such steps by the United States and Finland and said that the Finnish ambassador to Moscow had been summoned to the Foreign Ministry. He was told that the responsibility for turning the zone of good-neighbourliness in the region into a zone of possible confrontation lies entirely with the current authorities in Helsinki. It's not our choice. We did our best not just to propose, but to develop good-neighbourly relations with Finland in practice. Everyone understands this very well.

I would like to emphasise once again that exactly what we warned about from the very beginning is happening. Now control of the region is actually passing to Washington. There is a rapid military development of the territories of the two countries by NATO states, and this is despite the fact that Sweden has not yet even joined the alliance.

The Americans get maximum access to military facilities in Finland and Sweden. At the same time, they will have unlimited opportunities to use them for their own purposes, which will not coincide with the goals of the inhabitants of Finland, the indigenous population of this country and the national interests of the state. All this happens with complete impunity. The U.S. military can only be prosecuted by its own authorities. They operate on the territory of these states without control.

It is obvious that there is a build-up of military potentials in a previously peaceful region. Who needs it? Finns? Swedes? To the people who live there? Of course not. They don't need it. They are forced to do so.

We warn you that we will take all necessary measures to protect the interests of national security.

Question: Maia Sandu said on Pro TV that she believes Russia will try to prepare new attempts to destabilise the country in the spring. Will such statements help Moldova get a "ticket" to enter the European Union?

Maria Zakharova: It is very strange, and in fact even ridiculous, to hear something from a person who is the head of state and at the same time has a passport of another country about interference in the internal affairs of the country she leads. That's funny. It's dualism, bordering on bipolar disorder.

We are tired of the Moldovan leadership's unfounded accusations against Russia. I talked a lot about this today. We hear all this regularly. We are answering and will continue to respond to this. To what extent this is already turning into a state of pain, even the citizens of Moldova have appreciated.

All this anti-Russian logic of the Moldovan leadership has several dimensions. Work on "rocking" the internal situation. The pro-Western leadership of this country does not need this stability in relations between our country and Moldova.

The second point. The ability to always justify one's own managerial miscalculations, the inability to ensure the fulfillment of pre-election promises, to blame everything on the "hand of Moscow" (as they say), the Kremlin, another invented story.

We see how the rating of trust of Moldovan citizens in their own leadership is decreasing. This guide is trying to find some excuse or come up with some story to explain why this is the case.

It is a big question whether anti-Russian statements and Russophobic actions will help Chisinau get a "ticket" to enter the European Union. Everything that was announced, as French President Emmanuel Macron said after the European Union summit, does not lead to anything binding, is not binding, is not legally binding. This is a political move. Again, I quote Emmanuel Macron, who said that full-fledged membership is a completely different thing, and that practice shows that the negotiation process can last indefinitely, overgrow with new requirements and recommendations, and have no final result.

We see how many countries have been negotiating with the EU for almost decades on approaching possible membership with the EU, fulfilling all the requirements and receiving a refusal.

Question: White House spokesman John Kirby said that the United States is concerned with the Israeli authorities about the incidents involving civilian deaths in Gaza. He also said that killing civilians in Gaza was not part of Israel's plans: "They are not trying to deliberately kill civilians." How would you comment on these statements?

Maria Zakharova: It seems to me that such a statement could be made by a person who simply has no ideas (or he had them, but lost them) about decency, honour, humanism, law, and legality. Lack of conscience may be the only justification for such statements.

Question: Could you also give a general assessment of the US position on Gaza, given that it vetoed another ceasefire resolution and the US Secretary of State visited Israel with military support?

Maria Zakharova: If you are asking us about our assessment of the US position on the situation in Gaza in the light of the veto of another ceasefire resolution in the enclave and so on, the position of the US leadership, the establishment – those who draft it – can be described as anti-Semitic.

Both Israelis and Palestinians are Semites. Everything the U.S. does is directed against both Israelis and Palestinians. U.S. policy in the region is leading to the death of both. And moreover, to the intensification of the crisis in the Middle East. Not to de-escalate the situation, but only to deteriorate the overall situation and create risks for the future of the region that could have a truly fatal result.

Question: The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is escalating. It has now spread to the Red Sea, where Yemen's Houthis are taking action against international shipping. The United States plans to conduct an operation there with ships from the countries participating in this plan. What, in Russia's opinion, should be done to end this conflict and prevent it from expanding further in the region? I know that you have just spoken about this, but perhaps you could tell us more about it.

Maria Zakharova: That's a powerful question. The main thing, indeed, is at the right place. Do you know why? There is not a grain of sarcasm here. Our position is consistent. We do not change it based on opportunistic considerations. Indeed, we take into account the realities on the ground and the changes that are taking place, but at the same time we build our position on principled foundations.

What is this principle when I speak of the fundamentals? These are the interests of the people inhabiting this region, the peaceful coexistence of peoples who, unfortunately, for a long time in their history, unfortunately, fought and had great problems. Based on this, we proceed from the premise that the decisions (I am referring to the plan or the global road map) are contained in the very same international legal documents, resolutions of the Security Council, the General Assembly and the decisions of the relevant conferences.

Much of this has been implemented, including with the help of the Quartet of international mediators. Alas, this way of implementing what the countries and peoples agreed on (primarily at the UN), everything that was enshrined in the form of binding Security Council resolutions and General Assembly resolutions, was unfortunately blocked by the unilateral actions of the United States to replace international legal formulas and international legal norms for the settlement of the entire situation in the Middle East with its own (as they say) domination. For them, it was another testing ground for the implementation of their own vision of the development of the situation. They've pushed everything and everyone aside. They pushed aside the Quartet of mediators, promised a lot to Israel as their strategic ally, guaranteed security, resolved issues bypassing and in violation of international law, helped with weapons and money, and endless assurances of their own "might."

All this led to the collapse of the situation. In particular, the realization that one country that is not part of this region, which for some reason constantly endows itself with the functions of moderator and "regulator" of the entire movement in international relations, prevents the de-escalation of the situation both in the short and long term.

It is necessary to understand (as Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said) that it is necessary to develop additional diplomatic tools. As you know, the Quartet did not include the countries of the region. Of course, it is necessary to supplement this new diplomatic toolkit with the presence of regional players. We need to implement everything that was agreed upon. It is a two-state model with two states in peace, with East Jerusalem as its capital. Everything for this is available.

Unfortunately, this is hampered by Washington's political will to impose its vision of the development of the situation in the region.

Question: You mentioned that Jews and Palestinians are all Semites, and the word "anti-Semitism" probably doesn't make sense. They mentioned Josep Borrell, the jungle and the blooming garden. We have talked about this many times before.

There is the word "Zionism" and "Zionists." These words are rarely mentioned. Probably, they were in Soviet propaganda or ideology. Perhaps it makes sense to raise these words now, when one nation considers others to be "jungles"? When tens of thousands of children are exterminated and no one in the West says anything about it.

Maria Zakharova: I think it makes sense for the whole world to stop juggling words and engaging in double standards.

If there are human rights, then every human being has them. Not just any particular nationality or citizenship. Everyone has them. If it is about protecting the fate of children, then protecting the fate of all children, regardless of what kind of blood flows in their veins. [I’d like to triple emphasize this.]

I have already spoken about this, but probably not from the rostrum of the Foreign Ministry. Let me take the liberty of doing so.

I suggest that everyone, literally the whole world, take the fastest and absolutely free test for nationalism. Whether it exists, whether you are affected by it or not. Ask yourself: In order to feel empathy for a suffering child, do you need to know their nationality? If so, you are sick. [And this last sentence, quadruple emphasis.]

Question: What is Russia's attitude to the growing US presence in the Red Sea? Does this have anything to do with President Vladimir Putin's visit to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates?

Maria Zakharova: I have already commented on this issue today.

I just want to add to what has been said that any presence must have its purpose and its result. We see how the United States has increased its presence in the entire region: in the form of attacks on countries, aggression against sovereign regional states, interference in internal affairs, in the form of colour revolutions, arms supplies, and manipulation of conflicts in the region. We can see where all this has led.

Over the past few decades, the increase in the U.S. presence in the region has never led to a way out of the crisis, but only to its aggravation. Each time, long-standing conflicts flared up with renewed vigor. We have seen the growth of the US presence in the region in various areas: military, political and financial. There were a lot of plans: the use of hybrid schemes to get out of long-standing crises. Unfortunately, we can see what all this has led to.

A terrible crisis that has been unfolding before our eyes since October 7 of this year. There is no prospect of its imminent completion or even de-escalation. Now everything is balancing on the level of whether, God forbid, this crisis will expand further.

We are doing everything we can to prevent this from happening. This issue should be approached from the point of view of goal-setting. What will the U.S. presence bring to the region? Greater stability, security, crisis resolution? Or will it all end with the opposite results, as always? [All emphasis mine]

Most of the commentary on the Palestine issue was also posted on the current MoA Palestine thread as I awaited the completion of the transcript. IMO, all of Zakharova’s outstanding comments about the Palestine Crisis must be taken within their complete context as the situation existed prior to 7 October and has developed since. After all, this isn’t the first time the Zionists have waged Genocide on Gazans and others living within Palestine, while Maria is about to become 48, has a PhD in History and has been Russia’s MFA spokesperson since 2015, meaning she knows and has seen much. But to dwell on Maria’s words is incorrect; what must be dealt with is the current situation and the reasons for its existence, which is well spelled out above, although its deeper historical base isn’t addressed. Again: “We need to implement everything that was agreed upon. It is a two-state model with two states in peace, with East Jerusalem as its capital. Everything for this is available.” Well, not quite; what’s lacking is the force—legitimate under current international law meaning it’s ordered under a UNSC Chapter 7 Resolution—to make the Zionists comply with the law. And to obtain that UNSCR will require no vetoes cast by the usual suspects to defend the Zionist’s Genocidal Project that the Global Majority is trying to prevent from occurring and to finally solve the continual destabilization caused by the chronic Palestinian Crisis.

*
*
*
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!