17 November 2018
Moscow: 05:45
London: 02:45

Consular queries:  
+44 (0) 203 668 7474  

258 days have passed since the Salisbury incident - no credible information or response from the British authorities                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     250 days have passed since the death of Nikolay Glushkov on British soil - no credible information or response from the British authorities



Briefing by Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s talks with Minister of Foreign Affairs, Regional Integration and International Trade of the Republic of Mauritius Seetanah Lutchmeenaraidoo


On November 12-14, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Regional Integration and International Trade of the Republic of Mauritius Seetanah Lutchmeenaraidoo will pay a working visit to Moscow. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will have talks with him on November 14. The officials will discuss topical issues of further developing bilateral ties in the political, trade, economic, humanitarian, cultural and other areas and promoting a mutually beneficial partnership in transport, fishing, tourism and personnel training.

They will also conduct a detailed exchange of views on international and regional issues, with an emphasis on preventing and overcoming crises in Africa and the Middle East, as well as countering international terrorism and piracy in the north-western Indian Ocean.


Belarusian Foreign Minister Vladimir Makei’s working visit to Moscow


On November 14-15, Foreign Minister of Belarus Vladimir Makei will make a working visit to Moscow at Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s invitation.

The officials will discuss a broad range of issues of bilateral cooperation, and a schedule of forthcoming political contacts, as well as compare their positions on urgent international and regional issues.

They will focus on prospects for cooperation in integration associations, such as the EAEU, CIS and CSTO, bearing in mind Belarus’ presidency of CSTO later in 2017.

The ministers will pay special attention to cooperation in international organisations, including the UN and OSCE.

Among the most important topics on the bilateral agenda will be reviewing the draft of the Russian-Belarusian intergovernmental agreement on mutual recognition of visas and other accords linked with the entry of foreign citizens and stateless persons to the territory of the member-states of the Treaty Establishing the Union State, designed to create a legal foundation for the crossing of the Russian-Belarusian border by citizens of third countries.

Based on the results of the talks, the sides plan to sign a programme of coordinated foreign policy action of member-states of the Treaty Establishing the Union State in 2018-2019, and a plan of consultations between the foreign ministries of Russia and Belarus in 2018.


Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming talks with Argentine Foreign and Worship Minister Jorge Faurie


On November 16, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will hold talks with Argentine Foreign and Worship Minister Jorge Faurie.

We pay special attention to this visit, which we see as a good opportunity to continue the dialogue on enhancing this comprehensive strategic partnership. The ministers will discuss priority topics on the bilateral agenda, as well as a number of international and regional issues and will examine the schedule of upcoming high level contacts.

Argentina is our longstanding and reliable partner. We appreciate its active participation in world affairs and its firm position on strict compliance with the principles of international law. Special attention will be paid to enhancing cooperation on multilateral platforms, in particular, at the UN, the WTO as well as the G20, where Argentina will hold the chair next year.

An important aspect of Russia-Argentina relations is trade and economic cooperation, characterised by a gradual increase in bilateral trade turnover. A prerequisite for progressive development in this respect is the successful implementation of joint investment projects in such promising areas as energy, including nuclear power, exploration and peaceful use of outer space, and the creation of a transport infrastructure.

We hope to expand cultural and humanitarian projects with Argentina, enhance our information cooperation and mutual media presence. We place particular emphasis on cultural projects, which I’ve already mentioned, and which we discussed during our foreign ministries’ first ever press service consultations, held not long ago. We have many things to discuss, as well as specific proposals from us and from Argentina.

We expect Argentina’s national team to come to Russia to take part in the 2018 FIFA World Cup. A friendly match between the Russian and Argentinian teams is set to take place on November 11.


Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming talks with Mexican Secretary of Foreign Affairs Luis Videgaray Caso


On November 17, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will have talks with Secretary of Foreign Affairs of the United Mexican States Luis Videgaray Caso in Moscow.

The meeting of the foreign ministers of our countries is the result of progressive development of the trust-based bilateral political dialogue, which gained additional momentum after President Vladimir Putin’s meeting with Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto on the sidelines of the BRICS Summit in Xiamen (China) on September 3-5, 2017.

Mexico is an important partner of Russia. In the international arena, our countries consistently stand for building a democratic and just world order, based on the principles of equality and mutual respect, strengthening the central role of the UN in international relations, global peace and security. Both countries have been constructively cooperating in various multilateral organisations, such as the UN, G20 and APEC.

The ministers will discuss a wide range of issues on the bilateral agenda, including opportunities to enhance and diversify trade and economic ties as well as to extend cultural and humanitarian cooperation. They are also planning to exchange opinions on the current international and regional topics.

We believe that the Russian-Mexican talks will add momentum to the entire range of bilateral cooperation, including political dialogue and multi-faceted partnership in practical areas, and will contribute to coordination of our countries in the international arena.


Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s meeting with participants in the Dialogue in the Name of the Future research and educational programme of the Alexander Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund


On November 17, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov will hold an annual meeting with participants in the Dialogue in the Name of the Future research and educational programme of the Alexander Gorchakov Public Diplomacy Fund. This project has been carried out since 2011 and is intended for young foreign and domestic experts in international relations.

We attach great importance to dialogue with members of the research and expert community, who represent a wide range of positions and views on the world politics. We believe that an open and free discussion in this format will enable researchers to familiarise themselves more profoundly with Russia’s approaches to the resolution of pressing international issues and will help allay the myths about our country that are being pushed forth by our opponents in the information space.

During the meeting, the Minister will share his assessments of the international situation, dwell on priority fields of the Foreign Ministry’s work and answer questions from participants in the Gorchakov Fund’ programme.      


The situation in Syria


With the assistance of the Russian Aerospace Forces, the Syrian army is completing the elimination of the hotbed of international terrorism on Syrian soil. The Russian Federation continues to give Syria comprehensive aid to promote the speedy normalisation of the situation and help create favourable conditions in order to overcome the consequences of the protracted devastating crisis and the armed conflict.

The Russian side is making strenuous efforts, including during contacts with the UN and various international partners, towards preparing and holding the Syrian National Dialogue Congress. We hope that the Congress will become an important landmark on the path to restoring the unity of the ethnic and religious diversity of Syrian society, asserting the principles of national reconciliation and political and state building.

Today, the media have reported the fall of the last major ISIS stronghold in Syria, the city of Abu Kamal. Earlier, not far from there, Syrian army personnel met with Iraqi forces, who cleared the city of Al-Qaim of ISIS militants on the Iraqi side of the border.  

The city of Deir ez-Zor has been fully liberated. Life there is gradually returning to normal. The Syrian authorities are putting maximum effort into organising the restoration of the socio-economic infrastructure and paving the way for the return of civilians to their homes.

Nevertheless, the level of terrorist threat remains high. Disjointed ISIS units continue provocations and terrorist attacks. On November 4, Russian journalists and also sappers, who were clearing the area of mines, were injured in a remote controlled land mine explosion. On the night of November 5, a suicide terrorist drove a car bomb into a refugee camp northwest of Deir ez-Zor and detonated the explosive device: more than 100 people, predominantly children, women and elderly people, were killed or sustained injuries.

We have seen a considerable increase in UN humanitarian supplies to de-escalation zones. Russian service personnel from the Reconciliation Centre are assisting in the safe passage of UN aid convoys. Simultaneously, the Russian military regularly conducts its own humanitarian operations in various parts of the country, bringing food and essential goods to the needy and helping restore schools and hospitals destroyed by the terrorists.

The Russian side continues to work to bolster the ceasefire regime all over Syria. The life of civilians across most of Syria is gradually improving and becoming peaceful. But Jabhat al-Nusra militants and affiliated groups are actively trying to disrupt these efforts. On November 7, terrorists committed a huge provocation in the Eastern Ghouta de-escalation zone: central areas of Damascus came under a massive mortar attack. Several mortars hit the area where the Russian Embassy is located. In November, terrorists launched yet another mortar attack from Eastern Ghouta on a number of suburbs and districts of Damascus.

We again urge international and regional parties to provide active support to the Syrian people, not in words but in deeds, in finding solutions to the conflict and to send humanitarian aid to the hardest-hit areas of Syria without bringing forth any preliminary conditions to the Syrian Government.


Discussion of the Joint Investigative Mechanism’s seventh report at the UNSC


On November 7, the UN Security Council met to discuss, among other things, the seventh report of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW)-United Nations Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM) on the use of chemical weapons in Syria, as well as the prospects for extending its mandate.

You may have studied Russia’s assessments on the issue, which are available in the public domain. We took note of the remarks by JIM head Edmond Mulet, who praised the JIM’s methodology to high heaven and portrayed its work as professional and impartial. However, he did not respond to any of our specific questions concerning the fact that the conclusions of the JIM report are at odds with a strictly scientific approach.

Mr Mulet’s perseverance in asserting that the sarin gas that was used in Khan Shaykhun has “Syrian origin”, which is inconsistent in terms of theoretical science, as well as logic, is still incomprehensible. A simple explanation is being offered: the chemical composition of Khan Shaykhun samples coincided with the characteristics of sarin DF precursors that Syria included in its initial statement on the Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Strangely enough, all other possibilities were ignored. This logic is all the more amazing given that after Syria submitted to the OPCW information about the methods of synthesising binary sarin, as well as considering the fact that the OPCW has samples taken from Syria’s former stockpiles, this formula has long ceased to be a secret. It may also be recalled that the DF precursor was destroyed aboard the US Maritime Vessel Cape Ray, where samples of it were also taken. Moreover, it would also be appropriate to recall that according to comments made by Russian experts at a Foreign Ministry briefing on November 2, the sarin of this chemical formula can be not only industrially manufactured but also mixed in the backyard.

As for Nikki Haley’s remarks at the meeting, as always, there was nothing new there: groundless accusations against Damascus of using chemical weapons and inappropriate innuendos with regard to Russia, which does not do the US permanent representative to the UN any credit either in terms of diplomatic ethics or from the standpoint of common sense.

For our part, we believe that common sense dictates that we should cast our minds back and analyse the way US diplomacy pushed through the decisions on Iraq at the UN and the UN Security Council, among other places, accusing that country of maintaining and building up weapons of mass destruction.

I’m sure you remember the harsh polemics – the same as now, without any rules, any diplomatic ethics – that were raging at the UN with regard to “Saddam Hussein’s criminal regime” that was allegedly developing weapons of mass destruction, planning “global domination” and collaborating with terrorists.

Here are just a few quotes, including especially for the benefit of the current US permanent representative to the UN. We know that our American colleagues who are appointed to these diplomatic posts, among others, have no idea about what their predecessors said even recently, let alone decades ago. Here are several remarks made by US officials at the UN Security Council between 2002 and 2003.

For instance, John Negroponte, US permanent representative to the UN at the time, alleged that Saddam Hussein’s regime had used chemical weapons against its neighbours and its own citizens; he lied about the development of weapons of mass destruction; he signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and then moved ahead with developing a rather serious nuclear weapons programme.

US Secretary of State Colin Powell said they knew that Saddam Hussein was determined to retain his weapons of mass destruction and produce even more of them: “Saddam Hussein has chemical weapons. Saddam Hussein has used such weapons. And Saddam Hussein has no compunction about using them again -- against his neighbours and against his own people.  And we have sources who tell us that he recently has authorised his field commanders to use them. He wouldn't be passing out the orders if he didn't have the weapons or the intent to use them.”

Remarks by permanent representatives of any country at UN Security Council meetings are available in the archives on the UN website. Make an effort and take a look. Does this remind you of anything? It certainly sounds familiar to me.

This could have been chalked up just to a factual mistake, ignorance or unreliable information, not a deliberate attempt to mislead UN Security Council members. However, the memoirs by former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, which came out recently and contain revelations regarding the dubious evidence used as grounds for launching a military campaign against Iraq in 2003-2011, caught our eye. According to Mr Brown, the United States deliberately misled the British, concealing from them a top-secret report prepared by military intelligence back in 2002 that seriously called into question the existence of WMD in Baghdad. In other words, the US leadership (including, of course, US diplomats) concealed information even from its closest partners and allies.

According to Gordon Brown, the document (he said he learned about it only last year) indicated that the US military had not found the facilities in Iraq where biological weapons were manufactured, tested or stored, nor did they prove that Baghdad had the capability to manufacture chemical agents. The report noted that the United States also had no reliable information regarding Iraq’s nuclear programme (it was acknowledged that 90 per cent of that analysis was based on inaccurate intelligence data). Moreover, it called into question Baghdad’s ability to make long-range missiles.

The insistent, forceful and sometimes even brazen way US diplomacy is talking, including at the UN Security Council, about Damascus and the Syrian leadership using chemical weapons is reminiscent of its tactics from the early 2000s. However, those were not mistakes! This is a systematic, programmed action to push through its geopolitical interests. Whether these interests were geo-strategic and geopolitical or whether they were the interests of certain political forces and representatives of the US political establishment in those years – this is a good question.

Frankly, I would like to ask this: maybe this time, too, there was a certain secret report by the US intelligence community about which we will learn some time later? But right now the end – i.e., blame Damascus for something it did not do – justifies the means.

Unfortunately, all of this is happening in keeping with the best traditions of certain representatives of the US political establishment. Still, questions are bound to come up over the methods used by our partners across the ocean.


Collection of biomaterial of Russian citizens by the Pentagon 


We have received many questions from the media about the collection of biomaterial of Russian citizens by the Pentagon. At first there were many satirical and sarcastic remarks made about this in the internet and responses on this score. However, when relevant comments came from US power agencies the laughing stopped. People started asking for an explanation as to what is going on.

We are concerned over the reports that the Pentagon is studying biological material of Russian citizens, collected on the territory of this country. Note, this is a military agency and it is worth drawing the attention of those who were laughing to this important fact. This is not cooperation between, say, healthcare ministries or exchange of information between research communities. The Russian Ministry of Healthcare said that US colleagues have not approached it with this matter and does not conduct any cooperation with them. The Pentagon’s official explanations sound unconvincing and only evoke more questions that will be raised.

 We believe the Pentagon should present convincing evidence so that the relevant studies by the US Air Force do not violate relevant norms of international law.

This transparency is essential because of the Pentagon’s tarnished reputation in the biological field. There are plenty of examples and you can read about them yourselves. If need be we can publish some additional material on this topic. It is enough to recall the recent incident with the shipments of live anthrax by Lothar Salomon Life Sciences Test Facility (LSTF) at the US Army’s Dugway Proving Ground in Utah. They were sent all over the world, including to US foreign military facilities for aerosol experiments.

Lack of transparency in the Pentagon’s medico-biological activities and its close attention to Russia and adjacent states makes it necessary to enhance biological security.


The International Criminal Court’s inquiry into the situation in Afghanistan


We have noticed the reports that the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is seeking a formal investigation into the situation in Afghanistan.

Russia is consistently demanding criminal proceedings against those who are guilty of civilian murders, torture, cruel treatment and attacks on civilian infrastructure facilities.

At the same time we are not sure that the ICC that has failed to act as a really independent body of international criminal justice is capable of conducting an unbiased investigation into the situation in Afghanistan. Indicatively, it took the prosecutor over a decade to dare to decide on a request for an inquiry.


Closure of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia


We assume the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) will complete its activities before December 31 of this year in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 2329 (2016).

Russia has repeatedly noted that the ICTY is considerably politicised and biased in its inquiries. The civil war in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s is a tragic page of world history but the ICTY is still trying to present its one-sided anti-Serb interpretation of these events.

The ICTY’s attempts to surreptitiously blame nations, governments and states for various crimes are provoking tension and mutual mistrust in the former Yugoslavia and bring to life long-standing problems as well as  ethnic contradictions in the region.

It is also alarming that the ICTY is ignoring the fundamental rights of defendants. There are many examples of this conduct. For instance, recently it refused a request for the temporary release of the former Bosnian Serb military leader Ratko Mladic for medical treatment in Russia despite the deterioration of his health and Russia’s guarantees to the Tribunal.

The ICTY has not become an effective mechanism of international criminal justice, either. Being an ad hoc tribunal, it existed for over 20 years and spent billions on its activities. Russia repeatedly voiced its serious concern over the extension of the term of its activities by the UN Security Council.

In this context we expect the ICTY to complete its activities as soon as possible and transfer without delay all outstanding cases to the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT). We assume the IRMCT is an ad hoc instrument plus we insist on its strict observance of standards of justice, including the terms of criminal proceedings.


Latest developments in Ukraine


We have received numerous requests to comment on developments in Ukraine. We have published many comments. I will venture to give a comprehensive answer to all these requests taken together.

The day before yesterday, Sergey Lavrov mentioned the latest example of the Ukrainian nationalists’ barbaric behaviour in Kiev, where they vandalised a military monument by pouring cement over the monument’s Eternal Flame. The following day we received reports about yet another vicious act in Ukraine, where vandals damaged a monument to the servicemen of motorised units who perished during the Great Patriotic War in Melitopol. We are shocked by the cynicism and inaction of the Ukrainian authorities, who close their eyes while extremists insult the memory of those who died fighting Nazism. We hope these crimes will be properly investigated and that those responsible will be brought to justice.

We also feel compelled to react to other news from Ukraine, where another bout of anti-Russia hysteria seems to be gaining momentum. It looks like almost everyone in the Ukrainian authorities considers it their duty to pitch in.

The tone is set by President of Ukraine Poroshenko. The other day, he signed a law under which Russian performers’ tours in Ukraine must be vetted by the “judges of the arts” from the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU). In other words, Ukraine will now live under the total censorship of the current Ukrainian security forces, the very same “blue uniforms [of gendarmes]”, to whom Mr Poroshenko bid farewell so bombastically when he announced that Ukraine had been granted visa-free travel to the EU. I suggest he should read the poem from which he quoted again.

The Ukrainian cabinet is doing its bit as well. On November 8, it adopted a decision, which was streamed online, to withdraw from the February 8, 1995 Russian-Ukrainian intergovernmental agreement on the procedure for the mutual deliveries of weapons and military equipment, components and spare parts, as well as on repair and military services. Judging by the broad coverage of this event, the Ukrainian authorities have run out of pretexts for highlighting their “uncompromising” anti-Russia position. It is a logical development. We have long been talking about this. Kiev’s policy is leading it into a dead-end, because nationalists will continue to demand new evidence of compliance with the instructions they issued to the new authorities during the bloody Maidan protests. We already see this happening.

A special place in this parade of inadequate ideas belongs to the old Maidan initiative for severing diplomatic relations with Russia. This far from new idea is regularly revived at a time when public attention should be drawn away from the accumulating problems. There is a clear link between the two. Everyone can see a connection between severing diplomatic relations, introducing visas and many other initiatives of the so-called Ukrainian establishment and attempts to divert public attention from the problems ailing Ukraine. None of the Ukrainian politicians stop to think about the consequences of the latest initiative, primarily for the millions of Ukrainians, including those who work in Russia.

We continue to monitor developments in Ukraine. We still hope that common sense will prevail, but it is a dying hope.


The first anniversary of Moldovan President Igor Dodon’s electoral victory


Before the briefing we also received a question from Accent TV, a Moldovan channel. The question is this: November 13 marks the first anniversary of Moldova electing a president who favours improved relations with Russia. The relations themselves have fared differently during this period. On the one hand, trade has grown, and people in Moldova are happy with the trade amnesty. On the other, Russian diplomats have been expelled and experts and journalists have been deported. How do you assess this anniversary from the point of view of progress in Russian-Moldovan relations? What is Russia’s policy towards a country with an actual duality of power in foreign policy guidance?

We are ready to answer this question. November 13 marks the anniversary of Mr Igor Dodon’s election as President of the Republic of Moldova.

President Dodon has taken a number of steps to re-establish cooperation between Moldova and Russia, the EAEU and the CIS.

President Vladimir Putin held six meetings with Igor Dodon this year. A stable dialogue has been established on a broad range of issues, a dialogue that makes it possible to look for solutions to the most urgent bilateral problems.

Agreements reached as a result of the meetings between the two heads of state have boosted bilateral trade and economic cooperation. Moldovan exports to the Russian market have grown significantly and we have managed to solve a number of problems facing Moldovan migrant workers in Russia.

In March, President Dodon applied for EAEU observer status for Moldova. In April, President Dodon and Chairman of the Board of the Eurasian Economic Commission (EEC) Tigran Sargsyan signed a Memorandum on Cooperation between Moldova and the EEC.

His efforts to promote a dialogue with Transnistria deserve praise. He held two meetings with Transnistria head Vadim Krasnoselsky. There is some progress in dealing with a number of practical issues related to a Transnistria settlement.

Regrettably, the internal political confrontation between the branches of power in Moldova today makes it impossible to implement President Dodon’s initiatives in full and to tap into more of Russian-Moldovan cooperation potential.

Moreover, the Moldovan Government and parliamentary majority have taken a number of steps lately to restrict the President’s powers. There are also some openly anti-Russian actions. Nevertheless, Russia is open to long-term development of friendly, partner relations with a neutral Moldova, relations based on long-standing historical ties between our peoples. We hope that the current difficult stage in the country’s development will be surmounted.

We wish success to both President Igor Dodon in his activities for the good of the Moldovan people and the strengthening of Russian-Moldovan cooperation and to all of the friendly Moldovan people.  


Latvia’s plans to grant World War II participant status to persons who fought on both sides of the front


On November 2, the Saeima (Parliament) of Latvia approved the second version of a bill on granting “World War II participant status” to persons who had fought on both sides of the front. The bill aims to “recognise the merits” of Latvian citizens who had fought in World War II. At the same time, the document’s authors do not care whether these citizens had sided with Nazi Germany or the Anti-Hitler Coalition. Therefore Latvian authorities have made another step towards whitewashing Nazi criminals and have equated soldiers of the Waffen SS’ Latvian Legion with Red Army veterans who had liberated the world from Nazism.

In turn, we have responded with indignation to this report. This is by no means the first instance when official Riga openly glorifies Nazi criminals, while persecuting Soviet Army veterans. But the Latvian authorities cross another red line each time. We consider it absolutely unacceptable to doubt the results of World War II and the verdict of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal that had recognised the SS as a criminal organisation. The second version of the bill On Granting the Status of WWII Participant proves convincingly that the process of substituting specific concepts is assuming increasingly uglier forms. The blasphemous nature of this initiative is obvious. We are expecting to hear an adequate assessment on this matter from specialised international organisations, Latvia’s European Union partners and veterans’ organisations.


Statements by Republic of Macedonia Prime Minister Zoran Zaev to Montenegro’s Antenna M radio station


We have read statements by Republic of Macedonia Prime Minister Zoran Zaev about alleged plans of his liquidation under a “Montenegrin scenario” during his November 5, 2017 interview with Montenegro’s Antenna M radio station.

We believe that not only do such statements amount to groundless insinuations and manic conjectures, but, in principle, they resemble an attempt at sacrificial self-advertising. Most importantly, these statements are detrimental to Russia-Macedonia relations and they obviously contradict Skopje’s official readiness to engage in constructive cooperation with Russia.

The ‘horrors” being voiced in this manner simply serve as a means to cover up the rapid accession of Balkan states so far remaining outside NATO structures to the alliance. A recent political crisis in the state of Macedonia was largely provoked for precisely this reason. Russia has never interfered in domestic affairs of the Republic of Macedonia.


Unveiling monument to Vitaly Churkin in Republika Srpska (Bosnia and Herzegovina)


On November 6, a monument honouring Vitaly Churkin, the late Russian Ambassador to the United Nations, was unveiled in East Sarajevo, in Republika Srpska (Serb Republic, Bosnia and Herzegovina). The ceremony involved representatives of the Republika Srpska Government, the Russian Embassy in Bosnia and Herzegovina, non-government organisations as well as public activists.

We are grateful to the Eastern Alternative public association, Republika Srpska leaders and East Sarajevo authorities for implementing this initiative.

We would like to note that, during the darkest periods of the crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as during the difficult period of the post-conflict settlement, Ambassador Churkin did his best to make a constructive contribution to ending the bloodshed, defending peace and stability in Southeastern Europe. A respectful attitude towards his legacy in the Balkan region makes us feel even more confident that the nations of this region that has experienced extremely tumultuous ordeals will continue to move steadily along the road of mutually beneficial cooperation, inter-ethnic and interfaith coexistence as well as respect for fundamental principles of international law.



To be continued...




13.11.2018 - Embassy’s statement concerning Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet in London

We have taken note of Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet in London on 12 November, of which a significant part was dedicated to Russia. Unfortunately, we did not hear any “new approach” to Russian-British bilateral relations, mentioned in the British media a day before. A number of unsubstantiated accusations against Russia were again put forward by the Prime Minister, ranging from “attacks to undermine international security” to the “use of a chemical weapon on British streets”. The statement that the UK “remains open to a different relationship with Russia” was, in line with the traditional British style, made conditional on a number of categorical demands. For our part, we have been pointing at the unsatisfactory state of bilateral affairs for a long time. Russia and Britain are in an urgent need of genuinely equal, mutually respectful and result-oriented cooperation, befitting two Permanent Members of the UN Security Council sharing a special responsibility for global affairs.

06.11.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning new claims on alleged links between members of the Russian community in the UK and intelligence services

Question: How would you comment on the claims in the British media that “half of the Russians in London are working for Russian intelligence”? Answer: Those publications are based on a report by “Henry Jackson Society”, an organisation that does not hide its anti-Russian position. But even this superficial and irresponsible report has been distorted by the media affiliated with the current Conservative government for the sake of sensation and a further increase of Russophobic sentiment in the British society. A non-committal phrase – “Reflecting the level of paranoia within London’s Russian community, interviewees and interlocutors suggested that anywhere between a quarter and a half of Russian expats were, or have been, informants” has been transformed by the media into a categorical statement: “The study said there were as many as 75000 Russian informants in London”.

01.11.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning “An Invisible Chain” speech by the UK Foreign Secretary

Q: In his speech at the “Policy Exchange” think tank UK Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt has dwelled on the shifts in the global balance of power. Do you agree with his assessment? A: We believe Mr Hunt’s view on the trends in global development is right in principle. The centre of the economic power shifts to the East, the BRICS countries as well as a lot of Asian economies are on the rise, and with economic power comes greater political influence. The speech reflects growing awareness in the UK political classes that the place and role of the West in the shaping of the international order is in decline. The world is changing rapidly, and the UK will have to adapt to the new reality.

01.11.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning the statement by UK Permanent Representative to the United Nations Karen Pierce on Ukraine

Q.: At the UN Security Council Briefing on 30 October UK Permanent Representative to the United Nations Karen Pierce claimed general elections in the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic to be illegitimate and a clear breach of the Minsk Agreements. How would you comment on this statement? A.: The elections in the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic scheduled for November 11 are held to fill the power vacuum after the assassination of Alexander Zakharchenko, which cast suspicion on Ukrainian destabilizing activities in the east. This murder must not result in a halt to daily life in the region, people in Donbass need to carry on with their lives, making ends meet under constant blockade and the threat of the use of force from Kiev. The proposed elections have no bearing on the Minsk agreements, which pertain to municipal elections.

31.10.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning the statements by Prime Minister Theresa May in Norway

Q.: On 30 October UK Prime Minister again claimed that Russia “deployed chemical weapons” in Britain. How would you comment on this statement? A.: We strongly reject these insinuations. Another portion of accusations of Russia is a far cry from reality.

29.10.2018 - Joint Statement by China, France, Russian Federation, United Kingdom and United States

We, the nuclear weapon States recognized by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, reaffirm our commitment to the Treaty, in all its aspects, fifty years since its signature.

28.10.2018 - Joint Statement by the Presidents of the Republic of Turkey, the French Republic, the Russian Federation and the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany

President of the Republic of Turkey H.E. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, President of the French Republic H.E. Emmanuel Macron, President of the Russian Federation H.E. Vladimir Putin, and Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany H.E. Angela Merkel gathered in Istanbul on 27 October 2018 for a Quadrilateral Summit on Syria.

26.10.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning publications on cyberattacks

Question: Recently there have been numerous publications in British media regarding alleged Russian hacker attacks against the UK infrastructure. Has the Embassy received any evidence from British officials on this? Answer: The Embassy has not received any official evidence from the British side on either of these publications. We believe this clearly shows that there is nothing behind them.

25.10.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning the investigation of the death of Nikolay Glushkov

Question: Does the Embassy have any new information regarding circumstances of the death of the Russian citizen Nikolay Glushkov in London on 12 March? Answer: Unfortunately, we have to state once again that the British side evades any sort of cooperation with Russia with regard to the investigation of Mr Glushkov’s death.

22.10.2018 - Embassy Press Officer’s reply to a media question concerning comparisons in Britain between Russian and Saudi Arabia’s reactions to high-profile incidents

Question: After the reports concerning the death of the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the British media have been drawing parallels between the actions of Saudi Arabia and Russia. Are there any good reasons for such comparisons? Answer: We have already stated that we would not be commenting idle talks. It is for journalists, not diplomats, to speculate on this kind of issues. However, we have taken note of yet another article by Boris Johnson in “The Daily Telegraph”, where he compares the death of Jamal Khashoggi to the so-called poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury. In particular, he insists that Saudi Arabia and Turkey should – and rightly so – provide the public with as much information as possible concerning the exact causes of the journalist’s death.

all messages