Could Russia invade Ireland

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation

 

On the upcoming meetings of the Foreign Minister of Russia, Sergei Lavrov, with the Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan, Djikhun Bajramov, and the Foreign Minister of Armenia, Ara Aywasyan

 

As we announced in the previous press briefing, another meeting of the Foreign Ministers' Council of the CIS participating states will take place on April 2 in Moscow. I would remind you that Belarus will preside over the CIS this year.

On the agenda are questions covering the main directions of cooperation in the CIS. Participants in the session will exchange views on current regional and international issues, discuss prospects for deepening extensive cooperation in the Organization's format, including in the human rights and humanitarian fields.

The most important event takes place tomorrow. Meetings on the fringes of the Council of Foreign Ministers began today. On April 1, there will be separate meetings between the Foreign Minister of Russia, Sergei Lavrov, and the Foreign Affairs Heads of Azerbaijan and Armenia, Djikhun Bajramov and Ara Aywasyan.

During the talks, questions of bilateral cooperation, the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh, the course of implementation of the agreements of the leaders of Russia, Azerbaijan and Armenia of November 9, 2020 and January 11 of this year, several regional and international subjects will be discussed.

As there were many questions before the press briefing, I would like to draw journalists' attention to the fact that these are separate meetings that take place independently of each other.

Press releases will be published after the negotiations.

 

On the upcoming visits of the Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, Sergei Lavrov, to the Republic of India and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan

 

On April 5 and 6, the Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, Sergei Lavrov, will be visiting New Delhi on a working visit, during which he will hold negotiations with his Indian colleague Subrahmanyam Jaishankar.

The Heads of Foreign Affairs will discuss the current state of bilateral relations, the preparation of the upcoming meeting at the highest level this year, including cooperation in the fight against the Covid-19 pandemic, the main issues on the regional and global agenda, the approaches to cooperation Assess Russia and India in the international arena, including on such multilateral platforms as UN, BRICS (where New Delhi will chair this year) and SCO.

On April 6th and 7th, Sergei Lavrov, the head of the Russian Foreign Office, will visit the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, during which negotiations will take place with the Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Shah Mehmood Qureshi.

The current state of affairs and the prospects for the development of bilateral relations, including the possibility of further strengthening cooperation in the areas of trade and economy and anti-terrorism, are to be discussed in detail. There will be a deep exchange of views on current issues on the regional and international agenda with a focus on the Afghan problem and cooperation on multilateral platforms, including the UN and the SCO.

 

On the visit of the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, to Kazakhstan

 

The working visit of the Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov to the Republic of Kazakhstan will take place on April 7th and 8th. Negotiations with the Deputy Prime Minister, Foreign Minister Muchtar Tleuberdi are planned for April 8 this year.

The heads of the foreign office will discuss a broad spectrum of questions of bilateral cooperation, the problem of cooperation in integration associations, especially EAEU, CSTO and CIS. Particular attention should be paid to the joint fight against the consequences of the coronavirus infection and to promoting the solution of the tasks set by the presidents of Russia and Kazakhstan to restore and expand our international connections in the post-Covid period.

The sides will exchange views on the prospects of Eurasian integration, processes of cooperation in the Caspian region. The ministers will coordinate assessments of the situation in Central Asia from the perspective of the security risks arising from the instability in neighboring Afghanistan and the activities of radical extremist organizations close to the region.

 

On the visit of the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, to Egypt

 

On April 12, the Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, Sergei Lavrov, will be visiting the Arab Republic of Egypt on a working visit. He will meet with President Abd al-Fattah al-Sisi and negotiate with Foreign Minister Samih Shukri. The prospects for the further development of mutual cooperation in the political, commercial, cultural-humanitarian and other areas as well as the situation in the region of the Middle East and North Africa are discussed.

In Russia, great attention is paid to maintaining a high level of cooperation with Egypt - one of our leading partners in the Middle East and North Africa region, relations with which have always been built on the basis of friendship, respect and mutual consideration of interests.

A meeting between the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and the Secretary General of the Arab League, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, is also taking place in Cairo.

 

On the working visit of the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, to the Islamic Republic of Iran

 

On April 13, the Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, Sergei Lavrov, will come to Tehran on a working visit at the invitation of the Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mohammed Jawad Zarif.

The heads of foreign affairs of Russia and Iran intend to deal with the whole complex of issues on the bilateral agenda, first and foremost their trade-economic component in the context of the implementation of the most important joint projects in the field of energy and transport and the prospects of developing cultural-humanitarian ties between Russia and the Islamic Republic of Iran and further cooperation in the fight against Covid-19.

It aims to continue exchanges of views on a range of topical international issues, including the situation surrounding the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on the Iranian Nuclear Program, the situation in Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen and the Persian Gulf.

 

On the 25th anniversary of the unity of the peoples of Russia and Belarus'

 

The day of the unity of the peoples of Russia and Belarus is celebrated on the second day. On that day, 25 years ago, the Treaty on the Formation of the Community of Russia and Belarus, which was the first step towards the signing of the Treaty on the formation of the Union State in 1999, was signed. These documents determined the guidelines for further Russian-Belarusian cooperation on the basis of centuries of common history and friendship between the fraternal peoples of our countries.

A quarter of a century ago Moscow and Minsk decided, voluntarily, to establish a politically and economically integrated community “to unite material and intellectual potentials to develop the economy, create equal conditions for increasing the standard of living of peoples and spiritual development of personality” (Article 1 of the Treaty 1996).

The progress made in building the Union state is evident. Many things have become so firmly entrenched in ordinary people's lives that they are taken for granted. These are the same rights for citizens of Russia and Belarus in the areas of medicine, social and pension provision, education, exercise, residence and job creation.

Our countries are effectively implementing important joint initiatives in the fields of trade, defense, humanitarian, scientific engineering, and others. In the international arena we implement the initiatives that are important not only for the sustainable development of Russia and Belarus, but also for the whole world community. We fight common challenges and threats together.

We are ready to work together with our Belarusian friends on the whole spectrum of the bilateral agenda to ensure the stable development of our countries.

 

On the great terrorist attack in Mozambique

 

On March 25, more than 100 ISIS-affiliated fighters carried out an armed attack on the city of Palma in the province of Cabo Delgado in northern Mozambique.

Several dozen people were killed, including foreigners who were working on a gas field there. There are also reports on missing persons. According to the Russian embassy in Maputo, there are no Russians among the victims.

As of March 30, Mozambique's armed forces and police were able to regain control of the city. There are still individual attacks by the terrorists in some districts of Cabo Delgado province. In general, the situation in Mozambique is stable.

We firmly condemn this bloody crime, the victims of which were peaceful people. We express our condolences to the relatives of the victims and wish the injured a speedy recovery.

 

To the interview with Sergei Lavrov for the TV program "Großes Spiel"

 

An interview with the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was published for the TV program “Big Game” today. The text and video can also be found on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs website. A large part of this conversation is devoted to current realities in the world, including the interaction of the largest international players. It was an interesting, sharp conversation that reflected the current state of international relations.

 

To the US State Department's annual report on the human rights situation in the world

 

A new US State Department report on the human rights situation in the world was recently published. In our view, the United States should primarily devote such reports to itself, but for now it focuses on the situation in other countries. If you look at this rather large, but generally rather meaningless document, which is devoted to Russia, among other things, you get the impression of déjà vu.

As happens every year, the document is teeming with double standards for assessing the human rights situation in different countries, which are cynically divided into “good” and “bad” - depending on whether they match the strategic attitudes of the US follow or have their own idea of ​​how to live and develop. It is easy to guess which countries are among the “sinners” and what the allegations are against them, even without reading the report. One cannot help but ironically perceive the declaration that the US administration would resist violations of human rights, no matter where they should happen and no matter whether the culprits are partners or opponents of the USA. In my view, Washington should deal primarily with its own authorities: the Pentagon and other armed structures as well. Whatever they do in the world, it leads to human rights violations, and not in isolated cases of this kind, but on a global scale.

In this context, we recall a report by the Chinese State Council, published in 2020, which was devoted to human rights violations in the USA. this document was not a cliché but contained facts which convincingly show that the situation in the United States is out of control. The “stress factors” were the corona outbreak, the political unrest, various conflicts between different ethnic groups and the escalated social division in society.

Although the USA does not provide an overview of the human rights situation within itself, it speaks within the framework of political rhetoric and, if this is favorable for it due to the economic situation, of the division of society and of violations of human rights. But at the international level they do not raise these problems.

An important factor was reflected in the Chinese document: US citizens' confidence in the national electoral system has plummeted to a 20-year low.

Given Washington's response, it can be concluded that the US's megalomania is even greater when it comes to compliance with human rights standards in their own country.

We have often seen the US and its allies interfering more and more intensely and openly in the internal affairs of other countries. As Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in one of his recent interviews, the US - and the West in general - have forgotten how to use traditional diplomacy and are now only using sanctions as their main instrument. They are driving an ideologized agenda aimed at maintaining their own dominance - by curbing other countries. This policy contradicts the objective tendency in international affairs.

Using the pretext of fighting for human rights, the US and its satellites are imposing illegitimate, unrealistic sanctions that violate human rights in other countries. That's absurd! But that is an important element of current US foreign policy.

In order to establish as objective a perception as possible of the situation regarding human rights in the world in Washington, we suggest that the American side familiarize itself with the analyzes of the human rights situation in the United States, which are published in the corresponding annual reports on the website of the Russian Foreign Ministry are published. There are many interesting facts to be found there.

We call on Washington once again to concentrate on eliminating its own disadvantages (including in the area of ​​human rights) instead of imposing double standards on other countries and instructing other countries.

 

On the migration crisis in the USA

 

Here is a specific example of what we mean when we talk about problems in the US that are more important than any global overviews of the human rights situation in the world.

The migration crisis that broke out on the US-Mexico border is gradually turning into a humanitarian catastrophe. The situation calls for urgent interference from the UN and other international structures, human rights organizations and all people who cannot remain indifferent when they see children suffering in appalling conditions.

The reality is shocking: there are currently around 18,000 minors in overcrowded deportation facilities, which are not suitable for people to stay longer. There is a lack of funds and resources to accommodate them there under normal living conditions. The children were basically driven into "cages" where the sanitary conditions are poor and where the corona infection spreads. The children have to sleep on the floor.

And her parents are literally storming the southern US borders. More than 100,000 people have now been arrested. According to American media, up to 1,000 people illegally cross the border every day. About 50,000 illegal immigrants entered the United States in February and March, many of whom were criminals and drug smugglers. The police expect the number of refugees in the border area to reach one million by the end of the year.

We assume that Washington’s dealings with migrants (especially minors) in temporary residence centers can be classified as a gross violation of its international human rights obligations. It concerns Articles 6 (right to life) and 7 (freedom from torture) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the Convention against Torture. The conditions of residence of illegal immigrants can be assessed as torture and inhumane treatment in many respects, and the situation there naturally requires the attention of the relevant international control mechanisms - the Human Rights Committee and the Anti-Torture Committee.

We hope that the US media will not only shed an objective light on this issue, but make it a central issue. We know that American society pays great attention to human rights and their observance in other countries. It would be nice if freedom of expression in the United States served a good cause and was good for the American people.

I understand this issue is not that important to the US State Department. This is of course not "Alexei Navalny's leg", to which every briefing is dedicated. But the fate of 18,000 children is at least worth paying attention to.

May I remind you that the USA is the only state in the world that is still not a party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child - the universal instrument in the field of children's rights protection.In addition, they are still not part of two of the largest migration control agreements that were agreed within the framework of the UN: the Global Treaty on Refugees and the Global Treaty on Safe, Orderly and Legitimate Migration.

With its "games" on the subject of migration, which is and remains acute for the USA, the new administration has apparently opened the "Pandora's box". The humanitarian crisis that has erupted in the country before the eyes of the whole world, which claims the role of the greatest advocate of democratic values ​​and human rights, is a stark example of how the demagoguery in the run-up to elections and the meaningless promises to all people that need help to get wrapped up can indeed lead to human suffering, with the authorities simply left helpless. After all, it is shameful and inadmissible to hold children hostage in one's own domestic political disputes.

 

On US interference in the internal affairs of other states

 

It is time to bring up the subject of US meddling in the domestic affairs of other countries. The United States itself, namely the current US administration, provoked us to do this.

“Interference” is a very politically correct term that does not fully reflect what it is actually about. This is not just Washington's meddling in the internal affairs of other states at various historical times. This is blood on the hands of various US administrations.

We have already mentioned the subject of US interference in the internal affairs of other countries. It is evident that most of these cases occurred during the Cold War. But even now there is something to think about.

At that time, the ideological opponents who were interested in consolidating their geopolitical positions tried to establish “their own” governments in one country or another. After World War II, Europe, which was split between two blocs, was basically all clear, and therefore different Asian, African and Latin American countries usually took place.

The political motives of the US administrations to which they were directed are very often intertwined with economic interests. By wanting to get traffic routes and natural resources (especially oil and gas deposits) under their control, they camouflaged their intentions with supposedly "good causes": human rights issues, promotion of democracy, security issues, etc.

The containment mechanisms, such as the UN, often proved to be ineffective as a barrier to the White House's attempts to shape the political map of the world in its own way.

We do not want to turn our briefing into a "lecture on the international situation," but I still have to cite some facts about US interference in other states' internal affairs over the past few decades - and the consequences of that action.

On September 11, 1973, there was a coup in Chile with the direct participation of the USA, in which the democratically elected President Salvador Allende was supported, so that Augusto Pinochet came to power. His dictatorship lasted 17 years and was accompanied by shootings, cruel reprisals and deep rifts in Chilean society.

It is also worth mentioning the activities of the US secret services, which helped the new military government to come to power in Guatemala in 1982. In 1983 their military intervention in Grenada followed. In addition, in 1984 the Americans helped finance the guerrillas in Nicaragua that fought against the local government. The fact of the open interference of the USA in the internal affairs of this state was confirmed by the UN International Court on July 27, 1986 in The Hague - as part of the investigation into the "Iran-Contra" affair.

In 1989 there was an armed US intervention in Panama. One of the reasons was that the US did not want to fulfill the agreement signed in 1977 to transfer control of the Panama Canal in 20 years (1999). President Manuel Noriega was arrested, who had worked closely with the CIA since the 1950s and had been essentially one of the main covert suppliers of arms, military equipment and money destined for the forces across Latin America who were providing support enjoyed the US. Manuel Noriega was exported to the USA and sentenced there for extortion, drug smuggling and money laundering. He was sentenced to 40 years in prison and ended up serving 17 years in the United States.

According to various sources, from 515 to several thousand people died as part of the US intervention in Panama. After the intervention began, the members of the UN Security Council condemned the US invasion of Panama, but the US, UK and France used their veto power and the passage of the relevant resolution was blocked. The Organization of American States condemned the US intervention in Panama and demanded the withdrawal of US troops from that country.

A striking example of such behavior by Washington in the international arena is still Cuba. The Cuban people have been defending their right to their own development for more than 60 years by constantly having to repel Washington's attacks on their sovereignty. Let me remind you that it all began in 1961 when the US mercenaries attempted to invade Cuba. This went down in history as the "Bay of Pigs Invasion". Despite the condemnation by the international community, including the UN General Assembly, the blockade of Cuba, imposed by Washington in 1960, which was followed by numerous administrative measures to tighten the sanctions regime against Havana, in particular the Torricelli Act of 1992, turned into an undisguised economic aggression Helms-Burton Act of 1996, etc. The inclusion of the "Island of Freedom" on the US list of countries that support terrorism sees it as an absolutely unscrupulous double standards game.

The most recent example of US open and cynical interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states is the situation around Venezuela. For several years we have been observing attempts to “strangle” the economy of this country through sanctions, by inciting the Venezuelan armed forces to overthrow power, by organizing an armed invasion from abroad so that the legitimate government of this country is disempowered.

In 1992 in Angola, the USA financed the campaign of “their” presidential candidate Jonas Savimbi, who nevertheless lost the election. Before and after the election, the US provided him with military aid so that he could fight the legitimate government. This conflict ended up killing 650,000 people. The official reason for supporting the guerrillas was to fight the communist government. In 2002 America got the coveted benefits for its companies and no longer needed Savimbi. The US asked him to stop fighting, but he refused to do so. As one US diplomat said: "The problem with dolls is that they don't always move when you pull the strings." In the end, Jonas Savimbi was killed in skirmishes with government forces.

In 1998 the US claimed that the Al Shifa factory in Sudan had been commissioned by the terrorist Osama Bin Laden to manufacture chemical weapons. This object was shot at with cruise missiles and it turned out to be a common pharmaceutical company producing medicines for malaria in Sudan. 90 percent of all pharmaceuticals in the country were produced there. This rocket strike caused the deaths of tens of thousands of people: there were simply no medicines to treat them.

And do you know what is most interesting? According to an investigation by the "New York Times" in 1999, it was proven that the decision to strike the rocket at this factory had been made without sufficient cause. What is more, the US State Department de facto forced an assistant to the Secretary of State to destroy a report prepared by analysts from the intelligence agency of the foreign agency, which testified to the unsuitability of the arguments for the attack against this pharmaceutical company.

We have already talked a lot about the role of the USA and its satellites in the Balkans in the 1990s and 2000s, including at our previous briefing. Without going into details now (you know the details were terrible), I am simply saying that the US job was to make the political regimes in the Balkans as loyal as possible to American attitudes. Instruments were used that Washington and its allies later used in other parts of Europe, particularly in the former Soviet republics. In Yugoslavia, people provoked dissatisfaction with the difficult socio-economic conditions in which the country lived at the time, largely because of the controversial "outer wall of sanctions", which the West did not, despite the relevant agreements, even after the Dayton Peace Accords were signed in 1995 abolished. The unification of isolated opposition forces and currents was stimulated from outside. As a result, Slobodan Milosevic was forced to leave his post after the unclear results of the sordid election campaign, which was marked by outrageous pressure from the US and its European like-minded people and street protests.

Iraq, 2003. The alleged association of Saddam Hussein's regime with international terrorism became the official pretext for the US invasion (without the approval of the UN Security Council, by the way). The CIA also claimed that Iran had weapons of mass destruction. It later turned out that these were all lies. Colin Powell became the symbol of this campaign with a piston in hand that appeared in the meeting room of the UN Security Council.

Saddam Hussein was caught by US forces and executed in December 2006 by order of the Iraqi Supreme Court. A new government came to power in which representatives of the Shiite majority played the leading role.

It must be said that US troops spent a total of nine years in Iraq. According to Western media reports, between 2003 and 2011 (when US troops were withdrawn) between 100,000 and 300,000 peaceful civilians were killed - and there is documentary evidence of this. And according to various non-governmental organizations, that number was many times greater.

Libya, 2011. The UN Security Council passed Resolution 1973 on March 17, legitimizing military interference on the pretext of saving the country's residents because the authorities had brutally suppressed the armed opposition. This gave NATO, especially the forces at the head of the alliance, the possibility of air strikes against the regime that had been in power for 40 years. The civil war in Libya resulted in Muammar al-Ghaddafi being overthrown and killed in October 2011.

According to the British newspaper The Daily Telegraph, around 20,000 people, including civilians, have died on both sides. The number of refugees in the conflict area reached 180,000.

According to a UN report from 2012, the negative effect of the Libya crisis (mainly because of the refugee crisis) was felt in all countries in the region: Algeria, Chad, Egypt, Mali, Mauritania, Niger and Tunisia.

If Americans think it possible to blame or offend other countries, they should think about their own history. And they don't have to read books to do that - that's complicated. They just have to look at their own hands.

 

On the climate agenda being enforced by the US government and Russia's top environmental policy priorities

 

One of the first foreign policy decisions taken by Joe Biden as US President in January of this year was Washington's return to the Paris Agreement. This move showed the direction of the new US administration not only to accelerate the country's transition to the eco-railroad, but also to try to position itself in the avant-garde of the global conservation movement.

Let me remind you that literally a few months before the US's sensational return to the Paris Agreement, on November 4, 2020, it officially withdrew from this multilateral agreement. In our opinion, the Paris Agreement is a reliable international legal basis for long-term climate regulation. At the same time, we express the hope that Washington’s politics will now be at least somehow predictable and not dependent on the interests of the American political establishment.

The Russian Federation attaches great importance to climate protection, is an important participant in international processes in the environmental field and makes a significant contribution to the formation of global nature conservation mechanisms. At the same time, we advocate a depoliticized, responsible and non-declarative approach to the problem of global climate change. We think that every state is entitled to independently choose an optimal model of "green" change depending on the national conditions of socio-economic development. We consider any attempts to impose artificial environmental standards to be counterproductive.

We think that the environmental issue is one of the areas where the approach of Russia and the US to solving several issues on the relevant international agenda may be coincident or obvious. The Russian side said several times that overcoming the difficult nature conservation challenges of today is only possible through cooperation. We express the readiness for an equal dialogue as well as on the expert as well as on the political level.

 

Appointing former UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Executions, Agnès S. Callamard, as the new head of Amnesty International

 

We became aware of the information surfaced in the foreign media about the appointment of the former UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Executions, Agnès S. Callamard, as Secretary General of the well-known human rights NGO Amnesty International. We would like to wish Agnes Callamard success in his new post and express the hope that, in carrying out her duties, she will be guided not by the interests of a particular group of states but by objective facts and true expectations of the people.

The Russian Federation has always assumed that the questions of the appointment of new experts for the bodies of the special procedures of the Human Rights Council are not politicized and do not require a single reaction from the states. But recently there has been a clear tendency for international human rights non-governmental organizations and intergovernmental human rights monitoring mechanisms to function as communicating vessels - human rights experts simply flow from one post to another.

Amnesty International and other large international non-governmental organizations are one of the largest “suppliers” of specialists for the units of the UN Secretariat, filling the positions of the UN control mechanisms, including the posts of the special procedures of the Human Rights Council.

One of the former Amnesty International directors Irene Khan is now the Human Rights Council's Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression. There is also a process to be seen in an opposite direction - an example of this is the new appointment of Agnes Callamard.

In this context, the question is logical - what objectivity can one speak of when assessing the human rights situation in individual states when special rapporteurs of the Human Rights Council are “professional critics” of the state power structures from representatives of civil society? The facts of influencing such organizations are also known.

We consider such a situation to be quite problematic, requiring a great deal of attention and discussion in intergovernmental format.

 

To the explanation of former MI6 general manager Alex Younger

 

Alex Younger (Former Director General of the UK Secret Intelligence Service (MI6)): “Our job is to persuade Russia to conclude that whatever the intended benefits it may derive from its actions, ultimately they are not worth the risks are. And how will we do it according to our rules, according to our laws and values, and be successful in doing so. I warn Russia and every other state that wants to undermine our way of life from underestimating our determination and the possibilities and possibilities of our allies ... "

In Great Britain and in the western world, many speak of certain values ​​on which this world is supposedly based. We did not expect MI6 representatives to speak out on this matter.It is now clear where such values ​​are formed in Great Britain.

You want to understand what exactly it is about. What are the values ​​that are so actively protected by London? Do these values ​​include the use of torture and other serious violations of human rights in so-called “anti-terrorist operations” in other countries, including those directly involved in London? British military murdered peaceful residents in Afghanistan? Are these the values ​​you defend? The lie about the alleged weapon of mass destruction in Iraq (which we were talking about today), "false intelligence data", for which Tony Blair later had to apologize? Tony Blair had simply apologized for the annihilation of hundreds of thousands of peaceful citizens. There was no material compensation, no political or other responsibility of this state, which was one of the flagships of the illegal, criminal operation in Iraq. Is that also the value they are defending? WikiLeaks' Iraqi dossier, which testifies to massive crimes against civilians by the British military - is that also a value? Are you defending that? You do this for free.

Does the UK judiciary want to fight dozens of outright scammers, including Russian citizens quietly residing in the UK? Is this value also protected? We have heard a lot, especially recently. Indeed, the British financial center has become a global “laundry” of criminal revenue, money exported not only from Russia but from other countries as well. Are you defending this value?

Now for British values ​​in a historical context. Volumes have been written about the crimes of London during the colonial era. We paid a lot of attention to this topic at one of the previous press briefings. We talked a lot about it, but especially at the press briefing on April 19, 2018.

Perhaps the British Enlightenment was referring to values ​​as freedom of expression? That is probably a value that should be protected. Maybe he's being threatened. Do we want to see that? But here, too, facts show that this value is also cynically exploited in Great Britain. He was simply trampled on. Violating the principles of freedom of expression and media pluralism is a normal practice in Britain. Archival documents show that it wasn't always like this. At the press briefing on February 26th, we already spoke about the fact that the Russian media had to do with open discrimination at a number of events. Let's remember the 2019 Global Conference on Freedom of the Media. Media were not left there. Recently we drew attention to the publication of the documents - the "British files", according to which the British government, through intermediaries, is funding news magazines and bloggers operating in the Russian-speaking internet area.

Your task, as we have been able to ascertain from the materials that have not been refuted, is to create the conditions for regime change, to undermine Russian policy at home and foreign policy. Both large UK companies and many public relations firms are participating in this large-scale operation.

What is the situation with the US “most important strategic partner”, whose opinion London takes very much into account, to say the least, and with whom he has strategic relationships? What about the values ​​in this duo? Let's look at the most recent (if you take it broader, the briefing will not be enough, it will take a few years) events.

It is about the electoral process in the country, which others like to teach about compliance with human rights and electoral standards. But what about the fact that around half of Americans (this is the information provided by US structures) have doubts about the legitimacy of the elections that took place? These disagreed people, who think that their “elections are stolen”, are now being expelled from the social networks, blocked, and declared to be “internal terrorists”. Criminal proceedings are initiated against them. Is it one of the above values ​​that should be defended?

British society seems to be skeptical about this (we come to this conclusion based on what we see and read).

The more people say that we are trying to attack or have an aggressive policy towards Western values, the more questions we will ask about what values ​​they are, because it is impossible to understand them.

 

To Creation of the post of Special Representative on Freedom of Expression Problems and University Research in the UK Department of Education

 

We noticed that the UK Department of Education created the post of Special Representative on Freedom of Expression and Research at Universities. I thought that this would be another rapporteur or appointee on foreign issues. But that is not the case. There is only one problem in Britain, it is a collapse of freedom of expression.

Under the new post, the relevant UK Government representative will pursue cases where freedom of expression is violated in universities and student associations, and penalize organizations that restrict teachers and students from expressing views and choosing research . The new commissioner will also be responsible for reassessing issues related to the dismissal or disciplinary punishment of teachers if these sanctions have become an expression of the violation of liberty.

This decision is presented as a reaction of the authorities to the increasingly frequent demands of the teaching staff and the expert community to get the "left intellectual culture" at British universities under control, the so-called "woke culture" or "cancel culture" aggressive forms accepts.

The results of opinion polls also testify to the sad situation surrounding freedom of expression at British universities. According to the British sociological institute Civitas, 35 percent of all universities are in the “red zone” when it comes to freedom of expression; 51 percent are in the “yellow zone”, and only 14 percent of educational institutions have no censorship.

In general, it can be said that the intense cultivation of strange values ​​(some call them "neoliberal", some others do not classify them at all) on British soil has consequences that terrify the British establishment itself. In a sense, the fact that London has finally seen the scope of the problem and is now focused on solving this huge task is comforting. Let's see what the results will be.

On the other hand, what do you want from the British universities on Downing Street when everyone can see how the British leadership deals with freedom of expression? The situation around Julian Assange, who was persecuted for political reasons, is worth mentioning. Nobody put up with his journalistic activities. Everyone can see how freedom of expression is manipulated - the British establishment controls a number of gossip papers. What can you expect from the teachers and students when the government sets the tone ?!

 

On Canada's new anti-Russian sanctions

 

Canada has again imposed anti-Russian sanctions over the reunification of Crimea with Russia. It all shows the painful stubbornness of the Ottawa authorities, who refuse to accept objective reality. There is only one recipe: Give up the illusion that you can force the Crimean people who voted “to return home” to give up their historic choice.

The attempts by the Canadian authorities to dictate how sovereign countries live and what values ​​they should adhere to destroy the reputation of Canada itself by provoking their confrontation with ever new important international actors. The Russian Federation will not leave Ottawa's escapade unanswered, which is currently being prepared.

In this context, we consider the decision of the People's Republic of China to be entirely justified to impose sanctions on official persons and structures of Canada - for interference in China's internal affairs.

It is really ridiculous that the sanctions are imposed by a number of countries in the western "mainstream". In this context, it is worth mentioning, for example, Australia, which seems to have learned in 2021 that the Kerch Bridge exists. That's something like satire! I understand that Australia is very far away, but there is now mass media, social networks, messengers, etc. It is no longer the case that you only found out about such a large construction site many years later. It's really funny.

But on the other hand: Why do we actually wonder? If you were guided by the declarations of the authorities in Kiev that the bridge would not exist, then you probably did not believe that it would be built. But now you've finally found out.

 

To a new historical fake by the authorities in Kiev

 

After the representation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia in Simferopol, we noticed a new fake by Ukrainian propagandists. On March 25, a two-minute video devoted to the history of Crimea was posted on one of the official Ukrainian Twitter pages. However, pictures are shown that had nothing to do with the peninsula.

The propaganda machinery of the Kiev regime repeats the same mistake over and over again.

In the past, when telling stories about the tragedy of the Crimean Tatar people, a photo was used that showed the Hitler soldiers had sent Jews from the ghetto in Lodz, Poland, to a concentration camp. With this, the Ukrainian embassy in Washington drew attention in 2019. And in 2020 the US ambassador to the OSCE caught it.

This time the colleagues in Kiev did it: They signed a picture from the archives of the US American Holocaust Museum in such a way that the people on it would have been "deported by the Stalin regime".

This fake was exposed and addressed by the mass media (including the media in Crimea) - and the forgers have removed this video.

But when something like this gets into public space, one has to think about what will be presented during negotiations, what "reports" are presented to international structures, what falsehoods the regime in Kiev has come up with about the current situation in Crimea.

 

To the Accession of Montenegro and North Macedonia to anti-Russian EU measures

 

The EU commissioner for foreign and security policy, Josep Borrell, said on March 30th that some non-EU countries had joined the European Union's new Russia sanctions, which are being adopted in Brussels in the context of the so-called " Causa Navalny ”came up.

It is remarkable that among these countries, whose unfriendly position is by no means surprising, there are now North Macedonia and Montenegro.

In both Skopje and Podgorica they assert that they want to maintain and consolidate normal relations with Russia, and in Montenegro they must be restored after years of decline. One speaks of the willingness to take care of appropriate conditions, and at the same time explains the reasons why one had to embark on the “fairway” of the anti-Russian western course. One refers to the alleged demands on the EU candidates who have to follow the foreign policy decisions. In other words, you are allegedly being forced to support steps that you haven't decided to take.

We are closely monitoring the attempts by our partners in North Macedonia and Montenegro to decide on their policy towards Russia. Unfortunately, the so-called “solidarity of sanctions” by Skopje and Podgorica shows once again the inconsistency and dependence of our colleagues in the Balkans.

We are always open to a fair, equal and respectful dialogue, whereby the sides take each other's interests into account. And the consumption-oriented approach, including clumsy maneuvering for the purpose of solving cyclical problems in the interests of “cooperation” with third countries, only destroys trust and hinders the development of bilateral relations with Russia.

 

On the decision of the Court of Appeal of Lithuania on the "Events of January 13, 1991"

 

The final decision of the Lithuanian Court of Appeal on the rigged case “On the events of January 13, 1991” aroused outrage. Former Soviet military, party and state officials were sentenced to long prison terms after being charged with crimes they did not commit. These include Russian citizens on trial, Yuri Mel and Gennady Ivanov, for whom the sentence has been tightened.

The guilt of all "accused" has not been proven, the principle of the presumption of innocence, the prohibition of the retroactive force of the law, the right to a right to a judicial investigation have been violated. In this context, one wants to ask prominent human rights and international organizations, including those we spoke of today, how do they assess the lack of desire of the Lithuanian authorities to find the real killers of the January 13, 1991 tragedy in Vilnius?

A shameful “court” takes place in the country that actively fights for the observance of human rights in neighboring states. According to the logic of the Lithuanian leaders, the authorities can arbitrarily manipulate the judiciary for political purposes on their own territory, which is considered to be the “area of ​​democracy”.

We express a determined protest regarding the violations of the rights of the Russian citizen, Yuri Mel, who has been in the Lithuanian prison for more than seven years and has now been sentenced to three more years. We will encourage the filing of an appeal to the Supreme Court by its attorneys and further referral to international judicial bodies. We draw the attention of human rights activists to the use of the judiciary in Lithuania for punitive actions and creating unbearable conditions for entertainment for an innocent person who suffers from serious chronic diseases.

Will there be tweets from the heads of state of the EU countries on this subject? Maybe there will be a special press conference of the special rapporteurs? Will there be a protest against such acts by non-governmental organizations around the world who are so concerned about human rights? Let's see.

We demand from the Lithuanian repressive regime the immediate release of the innocent Russian citizen, Yuri Mel.

The criminal acts of Vilnius will not be without consequences.

 

For Independence Day in Senegal

 

On April 4th, the Republic of Senegal will celebrate the 61st anniversary of independence.

Senegal passed a difficult phase of colonial dependency and slavery on the way in which it came into being. In 1444, members of a Portuguese expedition were the first Europeans to reach the mouth of the Senegal River. Later control over the country was established by the Dutch, the English, and then the French. In the middle of the 17th to the first half of the 18th century, Senegal was transformed into a base for the colonization of West Africa, and the island of Goree became a regional center for the slave trade.

The independence movement of Senegal was formed in 1914-1918. In 1948 the formation and organization of the national political associations took place, on the basis of which the Senegal People's Bloc was created in 1956, headed by Leopold Senghor - the future first president of the country. Senegal's independence was declared on April 4, 1960.

Today's Senegal is a dynamically developing state that aims to play a significant role in African and international affairs. In 2020 Dakar will take over the presidency of the Pan-Continental Association - African Union.

The Russian-Senegalese relations have a stable friendship character and are developing continuously. Last year Senegal became a major trade partner in West Africa. We all share the spirit of Dakar towards expanding the entire spectrum of bilateral cooperation.

We are convinced that the fruitful mutual ties will continue to be established in the interests of the peoples of our countries. We would like to congratulate the people of Senegal on their national holiday, wish them new achievements, peace and prosperity.

 

On the current situation around Covid-19

 

We would like to note a hardly consoling dynamic of the spread of the novel Covid-19 infection on a global scale. I am now talking about global trends. As of March 31, the global number of infected people rose to almost 129 million people, the total number of pandemic victims is more than 2.8 million people.

Against the background of the current alarming situation, we would like to draw your attention to this again and renew our recommendations for Russian citizens planning to travel abroad. The operational staff for the prevention of the infiltration and spread of the novel coronavirus infection in the Russian Federation announced the resumption of regular services with Venezuela, Germany, Syria, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Sri Lanka since April 1. Since April 1, the number of scheduled flights with Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Egypt, Cuba, and UAE has also increased. Since the beginning of April, flights to other countries from the airports of Barnaul, Belgorod, Volgograd, Voronezh, Kaluga, Krasnodar, Lipetsk, Nalchik, Orenburg, Saratov, Sochi, Tyumen and Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk have been approved if the established sanitary-epidemiological requirements are met.

Since every trip abroad today is associated with an imminent threat to health, we once again call for the most balanced and careful planning of trips.

In urgent circumstances where you have to go abroad, we recommend reading in advance information on the websites of our ministry, embassies, operational staff, other ministries and services, among others, as well as any requirements made by the authorities of the country of residence (sometimes also transit country), among other things in view of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic.

 

From answers to questions:

Question: The European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell said that Russia and China are joining forces to resist and reduce dependence on the Western world, and above all that Sino-Russian rapprochement rests on renouncing democratic values ​​and combating that they consider “interference” in their affairs. In addition, Josep Borrell recorded a "hostile character and strategic intentions of Russia and China" by calling for a "European strategic autonomy". How does the Russian Foreign Ministry rate this statement and, among other things, the charge against Russia for "hostility"?