"There is always a possibility for a peaceful settlement"

There is a regime change or a change of political figures in a number of countries. Western politicians are beginning to recognize the inadequacy of past approaches, but they are still guided by double standards, including in the issues of the Ukrainian and Iranian-Israeli conflicts. Maria Zakharova, Director of the Russian Foreign Ministry and official representative of the Russian Foreign Ministry, told Izvestia at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum about why nuclear facilities are being attacked, how the balance of power in the world is changing and whether Russia will establish relations with the EU in the future.

"The worst thing that is happening now is attacks on nuclear and nuclear facilities"

— The conflict between Iran and Israel has been the hottest and most discussed issue in recent days, it is becoming more destructive every day, and the consequences are becoming more irreversible.

— You said the Iran-Israel conflict, but let me remind you: the attacks, attacks, and bombings were from Israel. Israel as a whole as a state or as a leadership — this needs to be dealt with separately, but you need to be accurate in your assessments. Because we are now seeing a unique situation where Tehran's retaliatory strikes, which are always emphasized as a reaction to aggressive actions by the Israeli side, are presented by the Western community as almost an attack. But on the other hand, haven't we seen a similar pattern in relation to our country over the years?

When seven years of attempts to suggest to the world to insist on the implementation of a political and diplomatic solution to the situation around Ukraine were rejected. The analytical calculations ended with the supply of weapons to the Kiev regime, the pitting of parts of Ukrainian society and the division of Ukraine into parts. And then everything was reversed and presented to the world community as almost an attack by Russia. Therefore, I want the words to stand in their positions the way they should be, as it reflects reality and reality.

— Now the escalation continues every day, intensifying. At this stage, do you think there are any other ways to stop this diplomatically? And what could Russia do in this situation?

— We made a statement literally on the eve of this situation, understanding much of what is happening in the region, on international platforms, and on the platforms of international organizations, including the IAEA. We have said that we are ready to provide our mediation efforts, in particular, in the dialogue around the Iranian nuclear program. Let me remind you that its peaceful nature has been repeatedly emphasized and reconfirmed by the IAEA inspectors.

We proved ourselves in this capacity when the deal on the Iranian nuclear program was concluded. We show mediation efforts and are in contact with all the countries of the region, because, firstly, we know how to do this, and secondly, we always do it well. Our mediation efforts are always highly appreciated by the parties.

The third thing, which is also very important, is that we really have a focus on achieving results through political and diplomatic means, when we are involved as a mediator, an intermediary of a country that provides good services when it is in demand. We have such an experience. We do not have what is called a "stone in our bosom", there is no desire to play around or make the situation worse. All these options have been offered repeatedly, and the parties have taken advantage of some of them, but Israel has moved on to the actions that we are witnessing. Are there still opportunities? A lot of people are talking about this — of course, they remain. The worst thing that is happening now is that attacks are being carried out on nuclear and nuclear facilities and peaceful civilian infrastructure. I am not referring to military facilities, but specifically those related to the peaceful development of atomic energy.

This is a scary, monstrous game that can lead to unpredictable consequences. Predictably, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs made a statement about this just yesterday, and our representatives at the international venues of both the IAEA and the UN are talking about it. Therefore, there is always an opportunity for a peaceful settlement, for the use of diplomacy. And we have discussed this in detail in the relevant statements of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

"For them, attacks on nuclear facilities are the absolute norm"

— Speaking of Israel's actions, it seems as if it has an inexhaustible carte blanche to violate all international norms and laws. Just the other day, there was a strike on the Iranian television center — zero condemnation. There are absolutely public talks about the murder of the country's spiritual leader — zero condemnation. How can this be explained?

— This can be explained by several factors. Firstly, those notorious double standards, which, in fact, demonstrate the absence of any standards. This is not just double standards in assessments and approaches, it is the destruction of standards, raising to the standard only one's own desire, one's own narrowly selfish short-term interests of a purely political nature. For example, related to electoral cycles or crisis situations.

You can see what adventures the West is taking, pushing all its satellites to solve their situation here now. We're going back to the fact that this is a nuclear power game. Every day, the IAEA records the extent of damage and destruction of nuclear facilities, and the background is measured.

You are talking about the television center and you know that every time we react as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, just as people involved with journalists in our work, we always react, go to the defense, emphasize that we protect not only our journalists, but also journalism in principle.

In this case, the strikes that are being carried out on Iran's nuclear facilities have put all other issues on the back burner. Because here we need to talk about the threat to both the region and the world as a whole, and not just about the fact that human rights or international law are being violated in one particular segment. This is an existential question.

Recall the Fukushima accident, when the technologically and scientifically highly developed state of Japan has been unable for many years to overcome the consequences of a sufficiently local disaster caused by man-made causes. The exclusion zone, the sarcophagi, the people who cannot and will not be able to return to those areas in the near future, much less to the normal life that these areas have been characterized by for many decades. And here is a deliberate attack with the desire to either destroy or somehow damage so that it has fatal consequences. That's what we need to talk about.

Journalists show the world what is happening. Without them, we will not know about civilian casualties or destruction. Therefore, this category is always singled out separately. But even against the background of all this, they miss the global problem, the tragedy of the fact that there are nuclear facilities in the optics of the sight. Not by chance, not by chaotic blows, not by fragments, but by hitting them on purpose. The whole world is wondering when and how this will end. But everyone understands perfectly well the price of this.

For so many years, we have been drawing the attention of both the international community and the West, which sponsors the Kiev regime, to the fact that Bankova, Zelensky, are targeting the Zaporizhia nuclear power plant and not only. What have we heard from the international community? They don't see where the shells are coming from, they don't understand what's going on there. Experts, observers, and IAEA staff are there, and monitoring information is published by experts every day. And still no conclusions are being drawn that would unequivocally indicate the guilt of Zelensky, the Kiev regime and the entire junta in deliberately damaging the nuclear power plant. Because it's related to your first question. It turns out that there is a certain global elite for which there are no borders anymore. For them, attacks on nuclear facilities are the absolute norm, which is unacceptable, because it can lead to catastrophic consequences.

We need to ask the question directly to those who sponsor, cover, and politically support this whole thing. After all, we have not heard a single surprised phrase or a single question from the West. And what happens if these missiles reach their targets and end up in warehouses, in reservoirs containing the very material that carries radiation? No one asked a question.

They care about everything — they get on the agenda of countries, they are ready to ask how business and non-governmental organizations around the world are doing, who is passing what law, how it may affect some small group, and so on. But when the security of not just a region, not one country, not a small group of countries, but the security of the planet is at stake, no one has a single question.

How many reservoirs, seas, and waters associated with the world ocean are located in this region? This is not a desolate desert, not another planet, this is something that can really lead to a global catastrophe. I have not heard a single comment from any Greenpeace (listed by the Ministry of Justice as an undesirable organization) or from conservationists on some western continents. Neither government organizations are worried, nor public figures. This indicates a deep defeat of the standardization of everything that the West talks about, their standards turned out to be false standards, their goals, values, their slogans, their slogans turned out to be just a screen behind which they do what they do.

"It's all turned into a mental infirmity."

— Consultations between the Russian and American delegations on the elimination of irritants were supposed to take place on Monday, but suddenly the United States canceled these consultations. What exactly happened?

— I did not see them explain in any way, they just said that at this moment they could not implement those proposed dates, so we are waiting for their proposals on new dates, on new logistics. They have a lot of problems right now that they have to deal with on the fly. Perhaps this explains it.

— These were not supposed to be the first consultations, there have already been certain negotiations. Two rounds were held: on February 27 and April 10 of the current year. Are there any interim results that can be summed up?

— It is impractical to summarize the results globally, and not because it is too early. The question should not be raised, given the damage caused by the previous administration's bilateral relationship. Although it seems that the Biden administration is such a general Obama—Biden administration, for all this liberal part of the American political establishment, which is actually a liberal dictatorship, judging by the results of their anti-creation.

Therefore, the damage is enormous, the blockages are monstrous. There is a lot of work ahead, so we will not rush to summarize the interim results. Now we are waiting for a new proposal from the Americans.

— In 2022, all Russia-NATO meetings were suspended. Are there any signals from the American side regarding the restoration of work in this format and does the Russian side allow its resumption under any circumstances, given the current relations with the entire NATO bloc?

— It didn't happen all at once. We heard the first such global "stop car" signal in 2014. Although before that, there was a situation in 2008, when during the Georgian-South Ossetian conflict, instead of dialogue and discussion, instead of substantive work to stabilize the situation, everything came to a protracted pause. But the global shutdown of the dialogue occurred after 2014. Then, in 2016, the meeting of the Council of Russia and NATO was resumed, but it led to just an attempt to lecture us, rather than somehow discuss pressing problems in a dialogue format, much less look for a way out of them.

In January 2022, there was a contact that was supposed to launch a discussion of Russian proposals and materials submitted to NATO, the OSCE, and the United States of America. Unfortunately, this led to the opposite, and NATO refused to discuss relevant Russian approaches. This happened in multiple stages, and each time after another pause or, conversely, a demonstrative declaration that they were ceasing all interaction with Russia, the Russian side said that it had created this docking mechanism for this purpose.

Despite the fact that we have our own goals and objectives, and they have their own, we created the docking mechanism not to fantasize about the impossible, but to solve pressing problems. This is the very platform where you need to discuss everything that is happening, how to overcome differences or how to come to some kind of interaction. From that side, this mechanism was perceived differently: as an opportunity to endlessly not even teach us something, but directly accuse us, engage in demagoguery or create some kind of veils of cooperation.

Regarding strategic stability, the NATO words "strategic" and "strategy" are no longer related to security or stability, but are linked to the phrase of inflicting, as they put it, a strategic defeat of Russia. Here we need to look for the answer to the question of what's next.

If they stick to this logic, it's a path to an absolute dead end for them. But it is necessary to remove words from these phrases, put them in the right positions and abandon the logic of a dead end, failed and untenable in principle. They have no authority to inflict strategic defeats or deterrence on Russia or anyone else, and we see how they are now being mistaken for China and other countries. No one has delegated this to them. They do not rely on the will of the people, on broad support, on their positive experience. So until they start using words correctly, what kind of interaction discussion can there be?

They devote all their meetings in all their numerous formats only to how to harm our country, how to throw more weapons and money to those with whose hands they are trying to inflict this most contrived strategic defeat on us. It takes all their mental strength, but in fact it has turned into mental weakness.

— Now we see that the Baltic Sea is becoming a new springboard for the war with Russia.

"Is it new?" Many scientists and historians have said that the tragedy of the Baltic lies in the geopolitical situation — I don't think so. The issue is not geography, but the possibility of pursuing a nationally oriented policy. We see examples of other countries, for example, the European continent, which do not have a huge territory, and their economies have never been among the top three or five leaders of the European Union, but which defend their national interests, do so on the basis of the will of the people, hear them, rely on national legislation, international law and do not allow themselves to be manipulated..

They cannot claim to have some kind of magic wand to resolve all contradictions, but at the same time they defend themselves and do not go off at the peak of violating international law and Russophobic obscurantism. Therefore, I think it's not a question of geographical location, it's a question of inability.

And now, after the strategic defeat inflicted on the Baltic countries by NATO and the European Union, everything has been destroyed: the Baltic economy, science, industry, education, culture, and, of course, public administration has been reduced to just the EES viceroyalty. After that, it is very difficult to defend national interests, unfortunately, this has happened to them many times in their history. They did not take advantage of the unique opportunity they acquired while in the Soviet Union, when everything was created through collective efforts over several decades. They got real freedom to create, develop, build, teach, create. Now it's all lost. Therefore, do not think that this is their first time.

Their industry, economy, quite harmonious coexistence within their republics, languages, culture, literature of various ethnic groups and nationalities did not conflict with each other, did not come into any dissonance, everything developed. And the national cinematography, and literature, and theaters, and all-Union, other nations and nationalities were not clamped down. But I say it again, they've lost it all.

"It is necessary to eliminate the root causes of the conflict"

— Let's talk about the negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. Have you resumed direct dialogue to resolve the crisis?

— The President of the Russian Federation personally proposed this, voiced it, and created a mechanism from the Russian side. And we must pay tribute, he stood up uniquely, despite all the provocations from the Kiev regime and Westerners. There were all sorts of things: terrorist attacks, monstrous statements, insults, and obscurantism, but this proposal was implemented. This is a unique historical moment that will go down in the history books.

— Despite all these provocations, does Moscow see an opportunity to work out this peace treaty with Ukraine?

— We announced both the goals and objectives of the special military operation, initially we talked about the priority of a political and diplomatic settlement, and we were open to the negotiation process in 2022 and now. Therefore, we know, as the country's leadership said, what we want.

On June 14 last year, the President of Russia announced the main approaches at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of our country. This creates an appropriate negotiating framework and leaves no questions about our approaches.

— One of the most pressing questions about the negotiations is how to ensure that, in the event of a settlement, the story of the Minsk agreements does not repeat itself?

— To do this, it is necessary to eliminate the root causes of the conflict. Indeed, there is a seven-year history with the Minsk agreements. It was a real roadmap of how to get out of this crisis, but it was destroyed by the West. Germany and France first of all. The Kiev regime listened to the advisers from the White House, Biden, Nuland all the time.

Now we need to deal with the root causes, as the Russian leadership says. Now this idea is being quoted and developed by representatives of various world powers.

— Can Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov join the negotiations between Russia and Ukraine? Are any proposals for negotiations at the highest diplomatic level being considered?

— The fact is that the delegation, which is approved by the President of Russia, includes Deputy Foreign Minister Galuzin. Before that, in the 22nd year, Rudenko was in charge of this area. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is involved in these negotiations. Medinsky heads the negotiation team at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and is present at all negotiations, gives his part in the working process, comments, and builds contacts with other countries.

— Does Russia see an opportunity to resume dialogue with the European Union after the end of the conflict in Ukraine?

— On May 11, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that sooner or later Russia may begin to move towards restoring constructive relations with European countries. This idea developed more than once, when, as Sergey Viktorovich said, they would get over it when they abandoned their Russophobia and realized that they had reached an impasse. They have already understood this, and even statements were made at the seven that they recognize the need to change their policies.

We need to reconsider the monstrous story of inflicting strategic defeats on some countries, and stop using sanctions - and in fact, a trade war — as a tool to overcome our own crises. We need to be honest with our citizens, call a spade a spade, and not try to solve our problems at the expense of others, and try to "divide the world into a beautiful garden and a jungle again." This is their direct speech, Borrel talked about it.

Do not alter the resource map of the world in your favor in order to once again try to secure an imaginary advantage, and so on. When they get it all right, then we'll figure out how to do it. But so far, every day they only rave about imaginary strategic defeats of Russia or other countries, come up with new sanctions, endlessly deny rights to others, replacing them with rules, and engage in some kind of dystopia.

— But it still looks like there are fewer such politicians in Europe.

— Because reality is visible outside the window, and when people in Western European countries look up from their screens with the propaganda that has been imposed on them for the last 10 years and go outside, they see reality. They see it when they receive appropriate tax notices about their social and other obligations, when they realize that all the figures that were announced by their government, all the plans are unrealizable and have not been implemented yet. They start asking questions. Another thing is that now it is not very possible to do this in Western Europe.

Ask questions, get an answer, and you can get a deadline for that. German journalists tried to get an answer to the question of whether gas supplies via Nord Stream 1 and -2 could be resumed along those lines that were not damaged. And the next day, they were literally outlawed by the German government.

All this leads to the fact that in a number of countries there is a change of regimes or a change of political figures. Another thing is that the propaganda machine that has been formed there only works in the mainstream. They are not allowed to look either to the left or to the right. We started with Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear peaceful facilities, and this is also presented by the Western mainstream as Iran's alleged aggression against Israel.

— The first Russian-Arab summit is scheduled to take place this fall. Is there already an understanding of who will take part in it?

— Yes, this has already been said many times. Messages have been sent to all the leaders of the League of Arab States and its Secretary General on behalf of the President of the Russian Federation inviting them to participate in the first Russian-Arab summit.

It was also announced that it is scheduled for October 15 this year. Preparations for this event are underway. There are a huge number of topics — geopolitical, political, and economic — on the entire agenda that can and should be considered, discussed, and analyzed by this group.

— The new Syrian authorities have terminated the investment agreements of 2019. According to this document, the management of the seaport of Tartus was transferred to the Russian company. What is the fate of other joint agreements signed under Bashar al-Assad?

— You understand what times Syria is going through, but at the same time we have established a dialogue with the current authorities, with those people who came to power. We support him through the Foreign Ministry, resolve the pressing issues on the agenda, and engage in dialogue in the long term. Therefore, work is moving forward. Quoting the Russian President, Russia intends to do everything possible to preserve Syria as a sovereign, independent and geographically integrated state. Now this is the first task, including for Syria itself. But we also defend our interests.