PRESS RELEASES AND NEWS
Pages: ««« :: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 :: »»»
We consider claims that Russia may be conducting very low-yield nuclear tests as a crude provocation. This accusation is absolutely groundless and is no more than another attempt to smear Russia’s image.
Regrettably, such attacks through the global media have already become routine. As a rule, they are made when Washington wants to withdraw from yet another international treaty or was exposed of violating it.
Question: How would you comment on the recent article by "The Times", accusing Russia of numerous violations of rights of the Crimean Tatars?
Answer: As the Times authors themselves acknowledge, the so-called persecution of Crimean Tatars is in fact about suppressing the activities of the terrorist organisation Hizb-ut-Tahrir of "supression" of "Hizb Ut-Tahrir" members in Russia.
In the first part of the XX century, the UK political landscape saw the emergence of the far-right trends that were underpinned by some internal and external factors.
The increasing popularity of the far-right ideas in the UK was directly corroborated by the UK government, which deemed them as a mean to combat the spreading of Marxism in Europe. The fascist ideology flourished in the country in the 1930s when a number of new organizations, including anti-Semitic ones, emerged. The British Union of Fascists formed in 1932 turned out to be the most prominent.
Question: How can you comment on Russian position on the UN Resolution, based on the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legal consequences of the separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965?
Answer: The Russian Federation has backed the Resolution, because it is being considered as part of the process of decolonization.
Question: How would you comment on the statement by Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt accusing Russia of “targeting the critical national infrastructure” and trying to “change the result of elections” in many countries?
Answer: Over the recent weeks, both Mr Hunt and his ministerial colleagues including Home Secretary Sajid Javid and Defence Secretary Penny Mordaunt have been rather restrained in the way they spoke of Russia. Today, the Foreign Secretary has returned to the usual militant anti-Russia rhetoric that has nothing to do with the reality. As accusations against Russia over manipulation of US presidential elections or poisoning Sergey and Yulia Skripal are falling apart, Mr Hunt has turned to another well-known topic.
On 20 May “The Guardian” published a new leak concerning last year’s incidents in Salisbury and Amesbury. Its contents, based, as before, on information from “sources close to the investigation”, lead to following conclusions.
First and foremost, it becomes increasingly clear that the loud-voiced accusations against Russia made right after the incident by Prime Minister Theresa May in March 2018 were not supported by any facts. For many months, investigators have attempted to credibly corroborate the government’s interpretation of those events, but, apparently, without any success. If one is to believe the newspaper’s source, law enforcement professionals are getting frustrated by constant political pressure they are experiencing.
Frankly speaking, we again have a feeling of deja vu. We heard same calls and laments many times already, when reconciliation of Eastern Aleppo and Ghouta was in progress. However, let me ask why the “humanitarian troika” did not hurry to convene a Security Council meeting, when the so-called coalition was razing Baghouz and Hajin to the ground? Back then civilians died, air strikes destroyed civil infrastructure, including schools and hospitals. What about Raqqa? Almost no one bothered about the fate of this city that in fact was destroyed.
Q: How would you comment on the FT article of 17 May stating that “a US-Iran conflict would provide cover for Russia to further their ambitions”, in particular “to annex eastern Ukraine or take a chunk of one of the Baltic states”?
A: Such kind of “analysis” in the FT, well-known by its professionalism and strive for objectivity, is quite surprising.
Embassy Press Officer's letter to the Editor of the Financial Times regarding the newspaper's piece dated 17 May 2019 on the Crimea Bridge - “Russian bridge throttles Ukraine ports”.
Question: How would you comment on the BBC’s plans to make a drama about the incident in Salisbury which took place in March last year?
Answer: Undoubtedly, we will study this film carefully when it is released. At the same time we would like to recommend the filmmakers to rely upon real facts as well as official and credible information of the investigation. So far, no meaningful results of the inquiry have been presented either to the Russian side or to the public. In these circumstances, the film risks becoming another propaganda tool imposing on the audience the political version of the incident supported by no evidence.
Pages: ««« :: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 :: »»»
| 
