Zakharova's Weekly Briefing Selections

Delivered on Friday the 12th, here are some selections from Maria Zakharova’s Weekly Briefing for Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The massive Ukraine Update is omitted. Let’s jump right in:

Results of the NATO summit in Washington

The meeting of the heads of state and government of NATO member states in Washington on July 9-11 was designed to demonstrate the transatlantic unity of the "collective West" in the year of the alliance's 75th anniversary. The invitation of a wide range of partners was allegedly necessary to show approval and firm support for the activities of the North Atlantic bloc, imbued with the Cold War mentality.

But something went wrong. For some reason, the "festive atmosphere" did not work out. Russia has again been declared a threat to the bloc "in all operating environments." Given that our country has again been chosen as a target or the target, the implementation of regional plans aimed at countering Russia on the eastern, northern and southern flanks of the alliance continues. The United States and its allies approved further steps to militarize the European continent, build up the capacity of the military-industrial complex and accumulate military capabilities near the Russian borders. Washington "rushed in" and announced on the sidelines of the summit the deployment of intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles in Germany, previously banned under the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles.

The long-term task of the alliance remains to inflict a "strategic defeat" on Russia. At the same time, it was announced that the "fate of democracy" is being decided on the battlefield of the Ukrainian conflict. What democracy? What we see in the West has long since turned into the dictatorship of liberalism; on the territory of Ukraine - into a nationalist frenzy.

As it was said during the NATO summit, its outcome will "determine" the future of all global security. The biggest risk to NATO is the possibility of a Russian victory, and the alliance "cannot allow that." Apparently, there are fears for the fate of the Organization in the event of an unfavorable outcome for the West of a special military operation.

NATO continues to use Ukraine as an expendable material in the geopolitical confrontation with Russia. The decisions agreed at the summit are designed to encourage Ukrainians to continue hostilities. Those Ukrainians who still remained on the territory of Ukraine and those who have not yet been caught at home, apparently, will face the same fate.

The ostentatious unity on the issue of Kyiv's accession to the alliance, which NATO tried to demonstrate, was bursting at the seams. Details of disagreements between the member countries of the alliance over the volume and timing of financing of Ukraine, the process of its accession to NATO have appeared in the media. On the eve of the summit, a public appeal by 60 authoritative American political scientists was devoted to this topic, urging not to bring Kiev closer to membership in the bloc.

As a result, Kyiv was promised an "irreversible" road to the alliance. I don't know what kind of "irreversible" road it is. The only association that appears is the road to the cliff. Now, in order to reveal the meaning of what they are talking about, they call this "irreversible" road to the alliance by a new term. It turns out that this is a "bridge" to the alliance. However, its "length" has not yet been determined. But for the Kyiv regime, I will reveal a "military secret": this is really a "bridge" to NATO. Only it is divorced, from all points of view: at any time when it is beneficial to the Westerners, it will be raised, and when the West needs it (no one will ask either the Kyiv regime or the citizens of Ukraine), they will unite it again. And it will be like this all the time.

There is also a symbolic meaning. Indeed, the "bridge" to NATO is a drawbridge for Ukraine, because the citizens of Ukraine are "divorced". It's a pity, it's a shame, but we need to admit it.

The results of the summit unequivocally confirm that the United States and its allies consider NATO as the main tool in the struggle to maintain world hegemony in the form of the notorious "rules-based order" and are trying to prevent the emergence of a multipolar world by all means. Everyone who pursues an independent sovereign policy and is not ready to obey instructions from Washington is declared adversaries or enemies. The ambitions to "rule the world," as the US President said, are camouflaged by the need to "defend democracy" against the alleged "authoritarian alliance" of Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.

What kind of democracy are they going to defend? The only people from whom democracy or NATO countries need to be protected are from themselves, and first of all, from Washington.

In order to insist on its own formulation of protecting democracy from authoritarian regimes, Washington and its allies intend to expand cooperation with like-minded countries, primarily the Pacific Four – Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Japan, and are taking steps to strengthen their influence in the Middle East, Asia and Africa.

Let me remind you that this is the North Atlantic Alliance. What is it doing in other parts of the planet? If you again hear phrases about what strengthens security or guarantees something to its new members or partners, ask Brussels: who did the alliance and its collective bureaucratic structures, individual member states help to maintain security, prevent catastrophic developments, man-made disasters or help with their elimination, maybe respond to new challenges and threats, helped to overcome international terrorism? Have you ever heard any of this in their track record? No, only total destruction and disasters.

Despite all the attempts at the summit to effectively demonstrate NATO's achievements over the 75 years of its existence, it did not work. There are simply no achievements to boast of. All the activities of the Alliance are still reduced exclusively to fanning confrontation with Russia, with those countries that NATO has declared "unconstructive" or "axis of evil", those who do not obey their will.

Much of NATO's effort remains focused on the total destruction of Europe's security posture, of which there is little left. Now, apparently, they decided to finish her off. The alliance's aggressive rhetoric and provocative actions are driving it into a dead end from which there is no way out. Perhaps that's why they say that Russia literally existentially threatens their existence. It is not us who threaten them, it is they who are doing everything to really shorten their life. NATO has no prospects. The summit in Washington once again confirmed this.

US President's remarks at the NATO summit

This is not the business of the foreign ministries of countries other than the US State Department. But what US President Joe Biden said from high rostrums, appealing not to his own internal problems or to the issues on the NATO agenda, but to literally all other countries and peoples, talking about global problems of mankind, is the business of the foreign ministries of other countries. The natural reaction of the international community just a couple of hours after Joe Biden's notorious "press addresses" is very indicative. This was the main news and the result of the NATO summit. Apparently, the US State Department and the current American Administration conceived it as a confirmation of the capacity of George W. Biden, his competitiveness as a presidential candidate. It turned out differently. They only aggravated the situation, especially after President Joe Biden named Vladimir Putin the President of Ukraine and Donald Trump the Vice President of the United States, who has the potential to lead the United States.

What does this mean? About the fact that for several years now, a monstrous picture of the "merging" of the American deep state, US official structures and the Western "mainstream" media has been unfolding before the eyes of the whole world. For many years, they hid the true state of affairs in the White House and manipulated data on the US President's condition. Just as they hide the situation around Ukraine from the American public. Just as they tried to manipulate the world public consciousness about what the United States really did on the territory of Ukraine. How many times have they carried out anti-constitutional coups there, changed regimes, sponsored internal political changes in Ukraine in order to eventually create another conflict on the European continent.

In the same way as they (I would like to emphasise once again that this is a "link" between US government agencies, the deep state and the mainstream US media) manipulated the situation and information around US President Joe Biden's health and physical condition. In the same way, they manipulate other international topics. And the further it goes, the more terrible the picture that the whole world is now observing.

In recent years, we have been witnessing a real merging (not just a "link") of the propaganda and political tools of the Western neoliberal global elite in all spheres. First of all, as far as our country is concerned. In the West, public opinion was manipulated in the same way in order to demonise Russia and distort our every step. We are seeing the same in the interpretation of the events in Ukraine by the US, British media controlled by Washington, London and the "collective Brussels".

Just as the US media hide data and real facts about the US President's condition from their own citizens, they also hide information, for example, about the side and from whose positions the strikes on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant are being carried out, pretending that they do not know who is shelling it. When it is no longer possible to hide it at all, they begin to invent literally tall tales that this is anyone but the armed forces of Ukraine. Although everyone already knows that it is the Kyiv regime that is shelling the ZNPP.

For many years, the US media, using the same principle as they manipulate data on US President Joe Biden's condition, manipulated the information that there is allegedly no Nazism, nationalism or Russophobia in Ukraine. They knew there was. They were well aware that the US government was sponsoring this with colossal injections, fueling this nationalist "bacillus", but they kept silent and pretended that they knew nothing about it.

Now they are doing the same thing as they are doing with Joe Biden, talking about how capable he is and how "sharp" he is behind closed doors, using the same "templates" they are talking about the legitimacy of Vladimir Zelensky and citing some completely untrue facts in order to support the legitimate, legal and legal side of communication with him. Look at how the American, British and Brussels media manipulate the history of the state of the American President and you will understand how they deal with information of an international nature.

The problem of the current elites in Washington is not only that they do not know how they will solve the problem with the elections. Their global delusion lies in the absolute certainty that the institutionalized "lie machine" they lead continues to work and will work under any conditions, no matter what they do, be it the occupation of Iraq, the destruction of Libya, the unconstitutional coup in Ukraine and the incitement of conflict in Europe, they will get away with anything. You just need to press the "air" button of your American and British media and the whole world will see the completely different picture they need.

But in the era of multipolarity, cross-border media and social networks, it is the images with the doomed expressions of US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Adviser John Sullivan, who watched with horror from their seats at what US President Joe Biden was bringing. They can no longer hide lies. Just as they will "fail" in their propaganda about the situation in Ukraine.

Developments in Moldova

The Maia Sandu regime is taking steps to completely sever ties with Russia. The interests of Moldovans, who maintain close business, humanitarian and personal contacts with partners in various regions of our country, are simply not taken into account.

On July 4 this year, under pressure from the authorities, the Moldovan air carrier Fly One was forced to introduce new rules for transportation on the Yerevan-Chisinau route. After the termination of direct flights with Russia in 2022 at the initiative of the leadership of the republic, this route has become the most popular for flights between our countries. Now, before flying from Yerevan to Chisinau, the air operator is obliged to transfer passenger lists to the Moldovan authorities, who decide who to allow on the flight. In addition, additional security measures have been introduced when entering Moldova, and the limit on the transportation of currency has been reduced to 3 thousand dollars.

Inside the country, the authorities are pursuing a policy that Moldovans are increasingly calling "pre-sale Euro tuning".

The artificial de-Russification of Moldova continues. This is happening against the backdrop of the same artificial, barbaric, “DeMoldavziation” of Moldova. On July 5, the country's parliament registered a bill that abolishes the mandatory translation of legislative acts into Russian. Thus, Russian-speaking citizens are put in the position of "second-class" people. Recall that 80% of Moldovans speak Russian to one degree or another and use it in everyday life. There is an important difference between what Maia Sandu is doing with regard to promoting the Romanian language and everything related to Romania, and the way Russia is promoting Russian. There is not a single example of our country's demand to replace a language that is traditional state or working language for a certain part of the population with Russian. For those for whom Russian is their native language, it is important to preserve it, but not to replace others with it. Look at what Maia Sandu is doing. She abolished Moldovan, "re-registering" it as a Romanian language.

This is a significant difference in our approaches, not only in language, but also in humanitarian policy. In general, in international relations. This is a pro-Western, liberal ideology of cancellation, replacement with what is beneficial to them, and the destruction of everything that was dear to the local, indigenous population, majority or minority, and has been passed down for generations as values. Our approach is to harmonize, reasonably combine, preserve the cultural code and heritage of the peoples living in a particular territory.

Repressions against the opposition are gaining momentum. On July 3 of this year, during a protest near the court building in Chisinau, the leader of the Chance party, A. Lungu, was detained. Opposition deputies are not allowed into the parliament meeting room, criminal cases are opened against them, and their offices are subjected to constant searches.

Measures are being taken to tighten control over the "unreliable". In particular, the idea of establishing "territorial anti-terrorist councils" is being discussed. According to local experts, this mechanism can be used against persons who participate in protest movements. Does it remind you of anything? In the same way, those who were in the opposition and disagreed with the election results were called "domestic terrorists" in the United States, noting their obvious falsification.

Under the guise of a course towards joining the EU, the development of the territory of Moldova by the North Atlantic Alliance is proceeding at an accelerated pace. On June 17-28, the NATO Peace Shield 2024 exercises were held on the territory of the republic, and from July 8 to 19 of this year, the Moldovan military are taking part in the fourth seminar of the NATO regional staff exercises Regex-2024. With the active assistance of the alliance, the National Army and the military infrastructure of Moldova are being modernized, and reservist musters have become more frequent. All this contradicts and undermines the neutral status of the republic, and it is clear where it comes from – from the West.

The destructive anti-Russian policy causes a sharp rejection among ordinary Moldovans. It is indicative that during the presidency of Maia Sandu, more than 200 thousand people, mainly young people, left the country. According to experts, if this trend continues, then after 2029, more Moldovans will be born abroad than inside the country. And those who will be born inside the country will no longer be Moldovans - immediately Romanians.

In Moldova itself, the protest movement is expanding. The actions of the authorities are pushing the residents of the republic, and then the opposition parties and movements, to consolidate in order to preserve the country's sovereignty and national identity, to defend the right to be called Moldovans and speak the Moldovan language. A noble goal.

Russia has always advocated an equal and mutually respectful dialogue with the Republic of Moldova. History proves that close cooperation with our country has always been a guarantor of the true independence and well-being of the Moldovan people. We are committed to developing a dialogue with our Moldovan friends, who do not believe in myths about a certain "Russian threat", "Moscow's hybrid war against Moldovans" and other unsubstantiated narratives that the West is putting into circulation. Moldovans know the truth and what they are fighting for – for their identity, the future of their children, future generations.

Creation of the Alliance of the Sahel Confederation

On July 6, the first summit of the Alliance of Sahel States was held in Niamey, which was attended by President of Burkina Faso Ynica Traoré, President of the Transitional Period of the Republic of Mali Ahmed Goita and President of the National Council for the Defence of the Homeland of the Republic of Niger Alain Chiani. The heads of the three countries adopted the Niamey Declaration, in which they officially announced the creation of the Confederation of the Alliance of Sahel Nations. The goals are defined: consolidation of efforts to ensure security and solve socio-economic problems of the members of this association.

The priority areas of cooperation within the framework of the Alliance are the creation of the collective armed forces of the Sahel states to combat terrorist groups, the implementation of major joint projects in agriculture, industry, trade, the financial sector, including the creation of the Investment Bank and the Stabilization Fund, the implementation of coordinated measures in the field of foreign policy, ensuring the free movement of people, goods and services.

We consider the establishment of the Confederation as an important step towards finding effective ways to counter Islamist groups in the Sahara-Sahel zone, as well as to achieve sustainable development. Invariably, proceeding from our fundamental principle of "African solutions to African problems", we believe that this initiative of the leaders of Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger fully meets the interests of the peoples of these states. We are convinced that the creation of the Alliance of Sahel Confederation will have a positive impact on the establishment of a new regional security architecture.

Russia reaffirms its intention to continue to provide the necessary support to the countries of the Alliance of the Sahel States, including assistance in improving the combat capability of national armed forces, training military personnel and law enforcement officers, as well as developing mutually beneficial trade and economic cooperation with these states.

Question: How would you comment on the upcoming Armenian-American military exercises Eagle Partner (July 15-24), which, according to the press service of the Armenian Defense Ministry, are necessary to prepare a unit of the Armenian military to participate in peacekeeping missions?

Maria Zakharova: This will be the second time. This causes nothing but regret, especially against the backdrop of Yerevan's de facto "freezing" of its activities in the CSTO and public attacks against the Organization. No matter what "peaceful" – in this case, "peacekeeping" – goals the Westerners declare, the main task is obvious – to create a springboard for the implementation of their own geopolitical projects. In fact, it is even better to say projects, because we are talking about adventures. The appearance of the Americans in the South Caucasus, as we have repeatedly seen in various parts of the world, will only fuel the remaining conflict potential in the region and create new dividing lines. Unfortunately, this is not just a trend or fortune-telling. This is evidence-based analysis.

Westerners are maniacally dragging Armenia into various formats of interaction in and around the South Caucasus, sharpened, first of all, against Russia and Iran. Through involvement in maneuvers and training programs under their auspices, they impose NATO standards of the Armed Forces on the republic. This leads to the reformatting of the entire security system of Armenia and, as a result, the acquisition by the Westerners of additional levers of influence on its domestic and foreign policy.

Russia has always been and remains committed to its allied obligations, including in terms of ensuring Armenia's security, and is striving to find mutually acceptable solutions. At the same time, such steps by Yerevan, which are becoming systematic, undermine the prospects for the functioning of the proven mechanisms of interaction in this area.

Question: How would you comment on statements in the media by a number of Swedish politicians that "the latest legislative initiatives in Georgia are inspired by Russian normative practices, are anti-democratic and alienate the country from membership in the European Union," as well as on Stockholm's readiness to increase funding for pro-Western Georgian NGOs in this regard?

Maria Zakharova: I will not talk about double standards. I will tell you about the facts.

In June of this year, Canada adopted the Law on Countering Foreign Interference. The entire process of passing this law by the two chambers of the Canadian Parliament took a month and a half – an unprecedented speed for such an important change in the legal regime within Canada. This law provides for the creation of a register of foreign agents; restrictions on embassy staff; the creation of the Office of the Commissioner for the Control of Foreign Influence. Thus, the Trudeau regime has pushed through an improved and toughened version of the US law on foreign agents (FARA) through the parliament, which agrees to everything.

And what did the Swedish media say? That the latest legislative initiatives in Georgia are inspired by Russian regulatory practice? Can the "enlightened" Swedish media repeat the same about Canada and its foreign agents law? Why don't they write that Canada's latest legislative initiatives are inspired by Russian regulatory practice? Or they are "looking at the roots": they know that it all began in the United States, which took its 1938 "foreign agents" law "covered with dust and mold" and began to apply it "right" and "left" and with particular frenzy and politicization against those who were a "threat" to them.

Swedish politicians are in line with their overseas colleagues. Of course, we have recorded statements by Swedish politicians, in particular, former Foreign Minister Ann Linde and current Minister for Foreign Trade and International Development of Sweden Josif Forsel.

For Georgia, its leadership will say to what extent they consider such assessments of Swedish politicians appropriate and whether they consider it an attempt to interfere in the internal affairs of the country.

For our part, we note Stockholm's increasingly stupid and shameless manner of trying to communicate in this way in an international format. This is how they talk to one of the focus states of the EU's Eastern Partnership policy. It seems that Sweden's recent accession to NATO has added aggressive ambitions to this once neutral and respected country on the world stage, and now the Swedish authorities do not hesitate to talk to their "partners" who dared to make sovereign domestic political decisions from a position of strength, using, among other things, financial and administrative levers.

For everyone in Stockholm who is concerned about the laws on foreign agents and considers it out of the ordinary, there is a proposal – talk with the same tone with Canada and the United States: how dare they develop and apply the law on foreign agents. Why Georgia? Now the Swedes have NATO partners – true "equal" partners. They can afford such rhetoric against them.

We can devote one of the NATO meetings to the problems of laws on foreign agents and discuss.

Question: Recently, more and more often from the West, mainly from the Baltic countries and Eastern Europe, and now at the NATO summit, the following statements have been made: that Russia will certainly attack NATO after it wins in Ukraine. Such statements are heard more and more often. They justify injections into the military industry, the supply of weapons to Ukraine, etc.

Maria Zakharova: Let me remind you that President of Russia Vladimir Putin spoke very clearly on this topic at a meeting with foreign journalists at SPIEF, stressing that such rhetoric is thrown in "to fool its own population and maintain its imperial position."

In the final declaration adopted at the NATO summit in Washington on July 9-11 of this year, Russia was once again called a threat to the bloc "in all operating environments for the long term." It's not that. Russia is not preparing to attack NATO, and the North Atlantic Alliance is following the path of constant escalation of tensions. They are escalating, they mention Russia in this capacity in the documents. This is being done to justify its existence, replenish budgets, ideologically fuel election campaigns, and now to strengthen Washington's control over its European satellites and support for Joe Biden's ambitions, which is doomed to failure (this is obvious after the summit in Washington).

Let me remind you of the aggressive steps taken by NATO led by the United States. They indicate that the aggression is not coming from Russia, but from the "collective West". One look at the world map allows you to see how Western countries have expanded their military capabilities and approached the Russian borders. They "promised" not to expand "one inch" to the East. Look at what came out of it.

At first, representatives of NATO member states denied the very existence of such promises, said that this was not recorded, this topic "did not come up" in a serious context during the talks, and everything that was said on the sidelines was misunderstood by our country. Then the memoirs of the participants in those events, memoirs, publications of participants in the negotiation process, officials began to appear. They began to declare that oral assurances might have been given, but there were no written official documents. True, then they did not talk about them either. Transcripts of official negotiations began to appear. This amazing "collective amnesia" says a lot. After the publication of Der Spiegel magazine, it turned out that none of this was true.

According to declassified archival documents, following talks in Washington on February 2, 1990, Foreign Minister and Vice Chancellor of Germany Helmut-D. Genscher and US Secretary of State J. Baker said: "We have agreed that there is no intention to expand NATO's defense zone to the East. This applies not only to the GDR, which we do not want to include, but in general." During the talks in the "two plus four" format (negotiations with the participation of the GDR, Germany, France, the USSR, Great Britain and the United States), the representative of the Federal Republic of Germany, J. Chrobog, said: "We have made it clear that we will not expand NATO beyond the Elbe River. Therefore, we cannot offer NATO membership to Poland and other countries." Let me remind you that the meeting took place in Bonn on March 6, 1991.

Since then, Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary have been admitted to the alliance in 1999, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia in 2004, Albania and Croatia in 2009, Montenegro in 2017, and North Macedonia in 2020. Finland joined the alliance in 2023, followed by Sweden a year later.

As for the United States, in 2003, Washington, I stress, unilaterally terminated the Soviet-American Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. In 2019, it was the United States that withdrew from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty). This was done not by Russia unilaterally, but by the United States. And the course taken by Washington to destroy the Open Skies Treaty ended with the unilateral withdrawal of the United States from it in 2020.

These facts testify to the true attitude to obligations, the peace agenda, international stability and security. They talk about who is really promoting an aggressive approach and who is not.

As for Russia, I would like to emphasise once again: there is no need to come up with any aggressive plans against NATO and its members. If NATO has such plans, then we must talk about it honestly.

Question: The NATO summit ended on July 11 in Washington. Earlier (July 10), Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian said that "the Chinese side resolutely opposes NATO's breakthrough in positioning the regional and defensive organization, provoking confrontation in the Asia-Pacific region and undermining regional prosperity and stability. China calls on NATO to do more for peace, stability and security around the world." What is Russia's position on the communiqué signed at the NATO summit in Washington, and how does Moscow assess it?

Answer: I agree with the first part of my Chinese colleague's statement. As for the phrase calling on NATO to invest more in peace, cooperation, etc., I think that it was said to encourage everyone to friendship, peace and cooperation. But the reality is that NATO simply cannot do it. This task is not "hardwired" in the budget and doctrinal setting of the alliance and is not part of its essence, existence and goal-setting. It is useless to expect this structure to contribute more to peace, cooperation and development. It is probably worth conscripting. It was created as an aggressive military-political bloc of the command-administrative system of management.

Question: Last week, the SCO summit was held in Astana, where Azerbaijan took part in the SCO Plus format. Many now agree that this summit was historic and formed the backbone of a new coalition. Can you comment on this?

Answer: The Shanghai Cooperation Organization has firmly established itself as an authoritative and influential regional organization that has a global projection, taking into account the goals and objectives on the agenda. Its potential is excellent and steadily increasing. This is an indisputable fact.

The formation of the SCO began with an agreement between Russia, Kazakhstan, China, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan to work together in the interests of strengthening security and stability in the region, creating conditions for fruitful mutual multilateral cooperation. Now this platform already unites 10 member states, including Belarus, which gained this status on July 4 in Astana, 14 dialogue partners and 2 observers. The geographical area of the SCO covers almost the entire Eurasian continent from South Asia to the Middle East and Europe.

The secret of the SCO's attractiveness is obvious – the commitment of the member states to such basic values and ideals as pursuing a sovereign, independent policy, the desire to search for collective solutions, and respect for the right to choose their own development model.

The high-level events held in the Kazakh capital once again demonstrated the relevance of the SCO in the current difficult international situation as one of the new centers of power. The documents and decisions adopted at the end of the meeting of the Council of Heads of State of the Member States, including the Astana Declaration, the Proposals for Improving the SCO's Activities, the Initiative on World Unity for a Just Peace, Harmony and Development, and the Strategy for the Development of Energy Cooperation until 2030, confirm our common intention to promote and enrich the role of the SCO in shaping the architecture of equal and indivisible security, fruitful cooperation and development in Eurasia as one from the supporting pillars of the multipolar world order.

This attitude was taken up at the meeting in the SCO Plus format dedicated to the development of multilateral dialogue in the interests of sustainable peace, which was held with the participation of the leaders of Azerbaijan, Qatar, Mongolia, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Turkmenistan, as well as the UN Secretary-General and the heads of a number of other international organizations.

The most important principle of the SCO remains openness, non-targeting of other states and international associations, equality, the firm commitment of the participants to work together for the benefit of their peoples – everything that is laid down in the UN Charter, but taking into account regional realities, goals and objectives. We are convinced that the consolidation of interaction between the member states and dialogue partners, one of which is Azerbaijan, observers, and other interested states will confidently move the SCO towards achieving these goals.

Question: Will Moscow comment on Armenia's decision to raise the level of relations with the United States to a strategic partnership? Armenian leader Nikol Pashinyan made such a request to President Biden in his message on the occasion of US Independence Day on July 4.

Maria Zakharova: The main thing is for US President Joe Biden to understand what they wanted to say to him by sending a corresponding address. Judging by his reaction during the NATO summit in Washington, there are questions.

I have already touched on the attempts of Washington and NATO to get into the South Caucasus above. Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin also commented on them in an interview.

I would like to note something else. Russia has never made its friends and partners face a choice "with us or against us." This contradicts our basic guidelines. The shameless style of the Westerners, on the contrary, implies complete disregard for the interests and concerns of those with whom they are establishing a strategic dialogue. Ukraine is a classic example in this sense. And not only it.

Do the Armenian people realize that such partnerships do not mean in practice the provision of protection, guardianship, assistance and assistance on the declared scale? The true idea of this mechanism, if we discard beautiful speeches, is to create conditions for the transfer of this or that country under the external control of the United States. In other words, they will help with decision-making, but they will use your territory, resources, opportunities without taking into account your own interests, but to please Washington.

The selfishness of the Americans is visible at least by the zeal with which they took up Armenia. Previously, such activity was not noticed for them. Although earlier this country also experienced many difficult historical moments. What prevented the United States from showing generosity, helping, providing some opportunities? Exchanges of visits have been put in relay mode. The other day, the head of the US Agency for International Development, Samantha Power, visited the republic (where she is "success"), who again announced assistance. Which of these will be provided? The Americans promised many things, in particular Serbia, but Belgrade did not receive anything. Maybe not the current authorities of Armenia, but they will still have to pay - in Washington they always ask for every cent invested. And now they have learned to ask for every cent they promised, even if it was not provided. Who, how much and how will compensate the United States for their "care" and "attention"? Good question.

Question: Israel continues to bomb Syria, thereby essentially helping terrorists. Israeli Air Force aircraft once again attacked the port of Baniyas on the Syrian coast. How could Russia, given its presence in Syria, influence such Israeli behavior and stop strikes on the territory of a sovereign state? How can Russia help Syria defend itself against such strikes?

Maria Zakharova: The whole world knows how Russia is helping Syria.

On the night of July 9, Israeli aircraft attacked a facility in the vicinity of the city of Baniyas in the Syrian province of Tartus under the pretext of placing weapons depots there allegedly intended for Hezbollah.

We have repeatedly assessed Israel's unprovoked strikes on the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic, and we categorically condemn such irresponsible actions. They increase the likelihood of an armed conflict in the Middle East and push the region towards a dangerous abyss. In April of this year, it was already on the brink of a "big war" after the outrageous strike by the Israeli Air Force on the building of the Iranian Consulate in Damascus and the subsequent reaction from Tehran. We urge the Israeli leadership to abandon aggressive military actions against Syria and disregard for international law, which is fraught with dramatic consequences.

We would like to draw attention to the fact that Israel's attacks on neighbouring States under the pretext of preemptively eliminating threats to national security are not condemned by all members of the international community. Those who could try to stop such a development of events, primarily Israel's strategic partner, the United States, as well as its Western allies, do not do this, remain silent and take for granted Israel's regular missile and bomb strikes on the territory of a neighboring country, with which it is in a state of ceasefire established by the relevant UN Security Council resolutions, which have been going on for a number of years. The presence of the US military in the area east of the Euphrates and their "flirting" with terrorist elements have been postponing the prospect of normalising the situation in this state for many years.

For its part, Russia is making every effort to prevent large-scale escalation. We are working consistently with all regional players, including Israel, and we urge them to abandon the logic of confrontation. Our country has concrete, well-known proposals both in terms of settling the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and normalising the security situation in the Middle East. They are still "on the table". We are open to discussing them with the countries of the region. [My Emphasis]

The situation continues to ferment. The media and elite volt-face on Biden’s abilities ought to be a massive shocker that some have noted, but how many have really noticed and understood what it means? Yes, China was incensed at its treatment at the NATO Summit, although it should’ve been anticipated. And of course, the double standards were gigantic. Unfortunately, the events Maria reports on week after week are almost constantly of the same variety. One question that occurs to me is at what level was the veracity of reporting within NATO nations on the NATO Summit? How many in Europe are aware of the fantastical gaff(s) Biden made? And is European media now promoting fear of Trump? I’m surprised no questions were asked about Russia’s views on Hungarian PM Orban’s activities. As usual, the English version of the briefing appears at the MFA’s English page 48-72 hours after its delivery for those wanting to read the entire report as well as those made previously. Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin's interview with Rossiya Segodnya noted and linked above will be translated and published here as it supplements information provided above and answers additional questions.
*
*
*
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!