MIL OSI Translation. Region: Russian Federation –
Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming meeting with OSCE Secretary General H. Schmid
On June 21, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov is scheduled to meet with OSCE Secretary General H. Schmid, who will be in Moscow to participate in the IX Moscow Conference on International Security at the invitation of Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation Sergey Shoigu.
The agenda of the talks includes a wide range of issues of the current work of the OSCE in three “dimensions” of security: military-political, economic-ecological and human rights. It is planned to discuss the role of the OSCE in helping to resolve regional conflicts in its space. This will include, among other things, the internal Ukrainian settlement in terms of the activities of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine and the OSCE’s coordination of the work of the Contact Group, in which representatives of Russia and the OSCE are assisting Kiev, Donetsk and Lugansk in the implementation of the Minsk Package of Measures. The parties will exchange views on the current state of affairs in the Transnistrian, Nagorno-Karabakh settlement and at the Geneva discussions on stability in the Transcaucasus.
It is supposed to consider the work of the OSCE executive structures, including its institutions – the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, the High Commissioner on National Minorities and the Representative on Freedom of the Media.
Russia has consistently advocated increasing the authority and effectiveness of the OSCE. As the world’s largest regional organization, it has the necessary potential to play the role of a platform for an equal dialogue between the participating States in order to jointly respond to common challenges and threats, and prevent and resolve conflicts.
Sergey Lavrov’s Participation in the High-Level Dialogue Dedicated to the 25th Anniversary of the Asia-Europe Forum
On June 22, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov will take part in the High-Level Dialogue through the Asia-Europe Forum – ASEM – 25 Years: Strengthening Partnership between Asia and Europe in a Transforming World.
ASEM is a useful mechanism for practical cooperation in the common Eurasian space, where the demand for progressive methods of constructive, non-conflict interaction is growing. The efforts of Russia as one of the coordinators of the Asian group of the association are focused on this vector of development of this platform.
We continue to work on a number of specific initiatives and applied projects of a very different profile that are already being implemented and are just being launched within the framework of ASEM. A separate emphasis is on combating the COVID-19 pandemic, which was dedicated to the focal statement of the foreign ministers of the Asem “five” coordinators (Russia, EU, Germany, Cambodia and Singapore) adopted in September 2020, and addressing the challenges of post-crisis recovery. We are raising the issue of building up cooperation in the areas of e-commerce, creating transcontinental supply chains, intelligent transport systems, supporting small and medium-sized businesses, women’s entrepreneurship and modernizing remote areas. The areas in demand are information and communication technologies, science and education, as well as volunteering as a new socio-cultural phenomenon.
The agenda of the upcoming meeting and ASEM as a whole organically fits the topic of expanding the integration contour of Greater Eurasia through the addition of the potentials of the main centers of regional development – the Eurasian Economic Union, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the European Union.
We hope that the Dialogue will help determine key guidelines for the further evolution of ASEM, including in the context of preparations for the 13th summit of unification in Cambodia.
Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming meeting with Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jose Arreasa
On June 22, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov will hold talks with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela J. Arreasa, who will be in Russia on an official visit.
Russia and Venezuela are linked by a strategic partnership, based on equal and mutually beneficial cooperation, bonds of friendship and mutual sympathy between peoples. Last year, the countries celebrated the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations, this year marks the 25th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation.
The upcoming visit to Russia of the head of Venezuelan diplomacy is evidence of the dynamically developing, despite the pandemic, bilateral political dialogue.
The parties will discuss the development of the situation in Venezuela and around it, a wide range of issues of bilateral cooperation, primarily on countering coronavirus infection. Currently, there are regular deliveries of the domestic vaccine “Sputnik V” to this country.
It is also necessary to conduct a thorough exchange of views on current topics of the global and regional agenda, cooperation in the UN and other international platforms, which is built on the unshakable basis of our countries’ respect for the norms of international law, including the principle of protecting sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs.
Sergey Lavrov’s upcoming meeting with President of the International Committee of the Red Cross P. Maurer
On June 23, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov will meet with the President of the International Committee of the Red Cross P. Maurer, who will be in Moscow on June 21-24. to participate in the IX Moscow Conference on International Security.
During the meeting, Sergey Lavrov and P. Maurer will discuss global humanitarian challenges and efforts to contain the coronavirus pandemic, as well as a traditional exchange of assessments of the current humanitarian situation in hot spots.
The dialogue between the leadership of the Russian Foreign Ministry and the International Committee of the Red Cross is maintained on an ongoing basis, invariably bears a constructive and meaningful character. We presume that the upcoming meeting will serve to further deepen our cooperation.
Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia D. Mekonnen on a working visit to the Russian Federation
Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov will hold talks on June 23 with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia D. Mekonnen during his working visit to Moscow.
The meeting will discuss the key areas of Russian-Ethiopian cooperation in the political, trade, economic and investment spheres, educational and humanitarian fields.
It is planned to consider topical topics of the modern global and regional agenda, the problems of resolving crisis situations on the African continent, the situation in the Horn of Africa region.
A number of issues of preparation for the second Russia – Africa summit, scheduled for 2022, will also be touched upon.
Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s participation in the IX Moscow Conference on International Security
June 24 this year Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov will take part in the IX Moscow Conference on International Security, organized by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.
In his speech at this representative forum, the Minister will touch upon the most pressing problems and challenges in the field of ensuring and maintaining global and regional security and stability.
Sergei Lavrov’s upcoming talks with Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Guatemala P.Brolo
On June 24, talks will take place in Moscow between Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov and Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Guatemala P.Brolo, who will pay a working visit to our country.
Guatemala is a promising partner of Russia, cooperation with which is traditionally based on mutual respect and equal consideration of each other’s interests. In 2020, our states celebrated the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations.
During the talks, the ministers will discuss a wide range of issues on the bilateral agenda, including the possibilities of building up and diversifying trade and economic ties, deepening cultural, humanitarian, scientific and technical cooperation, and improving the legal framework. Particular attention is supposed to be paid to the problems of combating the spread of the new coronavirus infection.
An exchange of views on the most pressing international and regional topics is envisaged. The issues of the development of the dialogue between Russia and the Central American Integration System (CAIS), in which Guatemala presides in the second half of 2021, will be discussed.
About the Russia-USA summit
Anticipating the questions of the connected correspondents, we will answer the questions we received before the briefing. A number of questions were connected with the Russian-American summit held yesterday in Geneva.
All assessments were given by the leadership of Russia. In addition, I would like to draw attention to the interview of the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Russia S.A. Ryabkov on the issues of strategic stability and interaction between Russia and the United States in this area. It is published on the website of the Russian Foreign Ministry. We set out in detail not only our approaches, which you know about, but also the prospects for working in this direction with our American colleagues.
Everyone is interested in the question of the Ambassador of the Russian Federation to the United States A. I. Antonov V. V. Putin in the United States. We assume that he will spend the next working week in Washington.
Active work has already begun on all the issues identified by the President of Russia during yesterday’s press conference as tasks for the Russian Foreign Ministry.
About the G7 Summit
We watched with interest the G7 summit in the UK on June 11-13.
On the whole, one can understand the desire of the leadership of the G7 countries to revive this once authoritative forum, to give it a new meaning. This is not so easy, because the Group of Seven is an association of the leading states of the West. As US President Barack Obama once liked to say: “This forum has become regional.” It seems to me that this is the way to be treated. There is neither Russia nor China. Although, the forum devotes a significant, if not a very large, share of its attention and time to these countries.
The relevant work, however, is quite possible within the G20, which, in addition to the G7, includes the BRICS states and other centers of world development.
We note that in order to consolidate the G7, a “value-oriented” agenda is being used. On this basis, discussions were lined up in Great Britain, decisions were made on a wide range of issues. However, the so-called G7 values are by no means universal and are not necessarily shared by the majority of members of the world community. Moreover, it should be noted that within these countries, too, there is no broad consensus on a whole series of the very values imposed through the institution of the G7 in the information-political manner on the world community.
It cannot but cause concern that by their actions the leaders of the G7 are pursuing a new dividing line in international affairs. This time – in the plane of confrontation between a small group of countries that proclaim themselves “democracies” and all the rest. Through this prism, the Group of Seven submits its proposals aimed at overcoming the COVID-19 pandemic, reforming the global trade system, protecting the environment, and combating climate change.
We are not sure that such an approach will yield sustainable positive results, will generally work to strengthen the genuine multilateralism embodied in the UN and its Charter, above all the principles of equal and mutually beneficial cooperation of all states.
As for the discussion that took place and the corresponding passages of the final communiqué on Russia, then, as expected, we saw nothing fundamentally new. A well-known set of confrontational attitudes has been reproduced. If our colleagues cannot express themselves otherwise, we cannot forbid them and, in principle, we do not want to. It is obvious that endless exercises in anti-Russian rhetoric do not help to improve the atmosphere in relations between the West and Russia. This, incidentally, also applies to China, to which the G7 has presented a whole list of unceremonious demands and claims in line with the Western intervention in the internal affairs of independent states. The same unconstructive approach has been demonstrated in relation to our allied Belarus, a number of other countries that apparently do not fit into the Procrustean bed of the notorious democratic standards.
For all that, we have heard the thesis about the G7’s striving for stable and predictable relations with our country. We hope these are not empty words, but the sincere desire of the summit participants, and it will be backed up by the West with concrete practical actions. We have always demonstrated stability and predictability in international relations. For our part, we reaffirm our readiness for reciprocal steps – of course, strictly on the basis of equality, pragmatism and mutual respect.
On the results of the NATO summit
The results of the NATO summit held on June 14 this year in Brussels is expected and predictable for us. The alliance is obviously dreaming of a global role. Prepares for a rivalry with China, whose “aspirations and assertive behavior” has been declared a challenge for the Euro-Atlantic. Every time you read all these final documents from year to year – about threats, challenges – years pass, and these threats and challenges are not confirmed. They, it turns out, come from completely different directions, connected with other problems. Great lines come to mind: “And he, rebellious, asks for storms, as if there is peace in the storms!” It seems to me that this NATO summit and its final documents were again inspired by this poem.
Threats were voiced to apply Article 5 on collective defense in the event of an “attack in space” and attacks in cyberspace. As for cyberspace, we hear about it regularly. On the “attack in space” – what do our NATO partners expect there? It would be interesting to develop this idea.
This lowers the threshold for the use of force, worsens the security situation for all countries, and seriously complicates the prospect of reaching universal agreements aimed at preventing the use of outer space and the cyber environment for non-peaceful purposes. In an ideological sense, it is a claim to unite the “democratic world” in opposition to “autocracies”, including China. On this, apparently, a new ideological concept is being built. No more and no less.
With regard to Russia, the alliance is still in the “reality” it has invented. Again we hear about some “aggressive actions” by Russia, which in the communique of the meeting are called a threat to Euro-Atlantic security. The bloc’s position on Russia remains frozen, a destructive, so-called double, approach in the form of “containment and dialogue” remains. I wonder where this worked for them?
The leaders of the alliance countries argue that NATO has allegedly tried to build partnerships with Russia for more than 25 years. We were accused of disrupting this process, violating the values, principles, trust and obligations set forth in the agreed documents on which the relations between Russia and NATO are based. Among the complaints against us – “military build-up”, provocative activities, including near NATO borders, sudden large-scale exercises conducted without notification, the deployment of dual-use missiles in the Kaliningrad region, strengthening military cooperation with Belarus and, even more ridiculous, “Repeated violations of the airspace of NATO member states”. Our proposal for a mutual moratorium on the deployment of medium-range missiles in Europe with the possibility of verifying its implementation has been declared untrustworthy, with a complete refusal to discuss it. Another act of the “theater of the absurd”.
Russia is again being asked to “adhere to international law and its obligations.” Until, allegedly, Russia does this, the alliance will pursue a course of “containment” of our country, incl. through a forward presence on the “eastern flank”. At the same time, everything that is being undertaken by the alliance convinces us that it allegedly does not contradict the Russia-NATO Founding Act. They say that “the alliance does not seek confrontation and does not pose a threat to Russia,” as if it is not the alliance that draws more and more countries into its “networks”. As if not its members regularly conduct thousands of exercises (and not only on their territories), bring their military potentials and infrastructure closer to the Russian border, and their total military spending has already exceeded $ 1 trillion and make up more than half of the world’s total.
During the summit, the heads of state and government of the member states instructed the NATO Secretary General to start updating the strategic concept of the bloc, which is planned to be adopted at the next summit in 2022 in Spain. We hope that it will reflect the real realities of our time, and not the fantasies of some members of the alliance. I would like to believe that a structure with such a rich history will be able to move from artistic images to factology. Although, how can NATO do without the “threat from the East”? Judging by the results of the summit – nothing at all. Or you need to radically change something.
On the joint report of the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy J. Borrell and the European Commission on the EU policy in relations with Russia
We have received a number of questions from the media regarding the joint report of the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy J. Borrell and the European Commission on the EU policy in relations with Russia, published on June 16.
The date was chosen, as the source said, in my opinion, in Brussels, at least affiliated with the EU institutions, was chosen without calculating and comprehending that a Russian-American summit is taking place on that day. I never knew that the dates for the publication of such documents were chosen without thinking. The first case in our practice.
We got acquainted with the content of the mentioned document. Let me remind you that it was prepared jointly by the head of EU diplomacy J. Borrell and the European Commission on behalf of the European Council to develop the “strategic review” of the EU’s priorities in relations with Russia initiated at the level of EU leaders. We proceeded from the fact that, based on the results of this work, Brussels and the key EU capitals would rethink on the basis of their long-term interests the current EU line on the Russian track. Since 2016, it has been built around the well-known “F. Mogherini principles”, the implementation of which led to stagnation and collapse of the architecture of relations. This strategic rethinking could be the basis for a fresh start to enhance predictability and stability. We know that there is a demand for such a positive scenario in the European Union. And this is natural. In a highly competitive world facing an unprecedented surge of global cross-border challenges, the unification of the efforts of all interested players is more important than ever.
These were just expectations. In reality, we state that the intellectual contribution made by the European structures does not bring closer the prospect of normalization between the two largest neighbors on the European continent. The content of the report is ideologized. It can hardly be called a comprehension of the fundamental interests of the Europeans in the refraction of relations with Russia. The authors focused mainly on the formation of an idea of Russia divorced from reality, sharpened to create a myth about the “threat from the East.” We have just said that this is NATO’s terminology, now we are talking about the EU. We talked about this before, that, unfortunately, NATO is already more and more destroying the independence of the European Union. This is also obvious in this document. The “narratives” about our country that migrate from document to document have nothing to do with either the state policy of the Russian Federation or the interests of Russians.
The triad of principles of relations between the EU and Russia recorded in the report, which sounds (perhaps for the Brussels bureaucracy this is a normal language, but for traditional diplomacy, frankly speaking, it hurts the ear) as “rebuff, shackling and interaction”, which J. Borrell previously voiced following a visit to Moscow in February of this year, it was formulated in the spirit of the rhetoric of the Cold War, when the notorious deterrence was elevated to an absolute, and today it is once again rising to the shield. Such principles, of course, cannot serve as a basis for constructive and stable relations between Russia and the EU, taking them beyond the framework of situational interaction. And even more so – to build a “renewed partnership” in the future, which the authors of the report call for. There are a lot of contradictions in this document.
The groundless accusations heaped about projecting some “hybrid” and other threats to the interests and integrity of the European Union are categorically unacceptable. Their far-fetchedness is evidenced by the fact that Brussels itself avoids launching a professional dialogue with us on the topics of cybersecurity and countering disinformation that are allegedly causing them concern. We are ready to discuss this at any level, in any format, at a time convenient for our partners. It was offered more than once. Unfortunately, there is no response. Then they talk about their concerns in their reports.
The European Union is trying to position itself as the “guardian” of international law. However, his interpretation of the Minsk Package of Measures, approved by UN Security Council Resolution 2202, creates the impression that the EU has not read this document, which is fundamental for an internal Ukrainian settlement. And it clearly states who are the parties to the conflict. And the EU has completely forgotten the provisions of the declaration of the heads of state of the “Normandy format” of February 12, 2015, which clearly states that the leaders will contribute to the implementation of the “Package of Measures” by using their influence on the relevant parties. EU members do not exert any influence on Kiev in this direction and, moreover, encourage the sabotage of the Minsk agreements by the Kiev leadership.
The EU prefers to ignore the fact that the reunification of Crimea with Russia, as well as the conflict in southeastern Ukraine, became a natural result of the pushing of the EU’s Eastern Partnership policy, which puts the countries of the common neighborhood in front of an artificial choice between Russia and the EU, as well as direct support the unconstitutional coup d’etat in Kiev in February 2014. Let me remind you that its instigators from the first day announced steps to expel all Russians from Crimea, which left the inhabitants of the peninsula no choice other than the one that they made as a result. With regard to human rights commitments within the OSCE and the Council of Europe, we recommend that European structures, before presenting unsubstantiated claims to Russia, resolve the egregious situation with the violation of the rights of the Russian-speaking population and open censorship of the media in the Baltic countries and, for example, Ukraine. There are plenty of facts, they are all regularly transmitted by us to our partners, but there is no clear reaction to this.
In general, the philosophy of the report developed in the depths of the European structures shows that many in the EU would like, while continuing to reshape the world according to their own patterns, based on their understanding of true values, to build interaction only on the basis of their “only true” beliefs. At the same time, they believe that if it does not work out, then it is necessary to fence off dividing lines, ultimatum demands, unilateral and illegitimate sanctions in the international legal sense. The forecast of further deterioration of relations between the EU and Russia, included in the report, is difficult to perceive other than as evidence of an unwillingness to abandon such an archaic approach and ideology of bloc confrontation and one’s own “domination”, “righteousness in everything,” “exclusivity,” etc. The inertial adherence of the European Union to the conceptual channel of NATO and the United States is striking, the document pays special attention to coordination with which on the Russian track. What kind of “strategic autonomy” can we talk about in this case?
We are open to interaction with the EU on an equal and mutually respectful basis. We do not intend to avoid the painstaking work of finding common ground – in the interests of all residents of the European continent (the report recognizes that Russia and the EU are linked by common history, geography and human contacts). It is a pity that this is recognized only on paper, and the EU does not fulfill its functions in this direction in deeds and practical steps. We are guided in this by the fundamental Helsinki principles of non-interference in internal affairs, cooperation between states and the conscientious fulfillment of obligations under international law. Only existing disagreements should not be our agenda in the future. This is not the only thing worth doing.
In the report presented by J. Borrell, there is still an understanding of the importance of maintaining a Russia-EU dialogue in a number of areas, such as health care, climate change, digitalization, science and education, countering transboundary challenges and threats, and resolving international and regional issues. Their list is consonant with our idea of promising areas of converging interests in relations with the EU. We are ready to work together in these areas, if the political will matures for this in Brussels. But for this, those who are responsible for the Russian direction of the EU’s foreign policy are advised to stop looking at what is happening outside their Brussels offices through the “keyhole” of ideologized approaches. To open our eyes to the multilateralism and diversity of the formed polycentric world order, in which Russia will continue to play a creative and responsible role in accordance with its national interests. This is what Brussels needs to do.
On statements by the Commander-in-Chief of the Swedish Armed Forces
We drew attention to the statements of the Commander-in-Chief of the Swedish Armed Forces M. Buden in an interview with “Swedish Radio” on June 12 this year. about the increased threat to national security, in connection with which, in his words, the scenario of an armed attack on the country cannot be ruled out. Commenting on the NATO agenda, approach and ideology, we have already spoken today about phobias that dominate the sense of reality. This is the very case, because Russia is again named as a source of potential aggression.
Recently, we have seen that such groundless statements by the Swedish military leadership are distinguished by enviable regularity. They are dedicated to the need to prepare for a war with Russia. We perceive this as a purposeful campaign to inflate phobias to the brink of paranoia in Swedish society about the Russian military threat. Apparently, few people in the Stockholm archipelago already believe in the myths about “foreign submarines” that were associated with our country. Now the Swedish military needed new contrived arguments to justify the ongoing military build-up in Sweden, unprecedented even by Cold War standards.
It is regrettable that the Commander-in-Chief of the Swedish Armed Forces M. Buden, like other Swedish military officials, does not mention that Stockholm has been ignoring Russia’s proposals for several years to resume the military dialogue frozen at the initiative of the Swedish side in 2014 to strengthen mutual trust … Instead, the command of the Armed Forces of non-aligned Sweden is increasingly stepping up interaction with NATO, including conducting joint exercises in the immediate vicinity of Russia’s borders, during which they are working on countering the so-called comparable adversary, including simulating attacks using nuclear weapons. It is noteworthy that the statement of the Swedish commander-in-chief was made by him against the background of the active phase of the ongoing exercises of the North Atlantic Alliance “Baltops” with the participation of Sweden, during which, among other things, American strategic bombers B-52H are involved.
On the militarization of Kosovo
We record with concern reports of US supplies of arms and military equipment to the authorities in Pristina. The United States thereby openly undermines international efforts aimed at ensuring peace and stability in the Balkans. The militarization of the self-proclaimed “Republic of Kosovo” is incompatible with them.
Washington’s plan is to create an “army” in the province, which is a direct gross violation of the provisions of UN Security Council Resolution 1244. This fundamental international legal document provides for the dissolution of any Kosovo Albanian paramilitary formations and allows the presence of an exclusively international peacekeeping contingent on the territory of Kosovo.
We call on everyone who is not indifferent to the fate of the Balkans and the future of this sensitive region to prevent steps fraught with its destabilization and the accumulation of an explosive conflict potential.
To the 80th anniversary of the beginning of the Great Patriotic War
Eight decades separate us from the terrible, tragic day when the Nazi invaders treacherously attacked our country. The outbreak of the Great Patriotic War claimed many millions of lives and left its mark on every our family. On this day, July 22, we bow our heads to the memory of the victims.
There is still time before this date, but I would like to remind you that, speaking about these days and preparing for them, we again think about what brought us to the fatal line. The main reason is the aggressive, misanthropic essence of Nazism and the policies of the Axis countries. The implementation of their aggressive plans was facilitated by the connivance of the leading powers of that time, who were trying to solve the problem of their security, as the Munich agreement showed, at the expense of the security and sovereignty of others, the desire of Western “democracies” to turn the vector of aggression to the East.
In this light, assertions about a certain “identity” of Nazism and communism, attempts to impose equal responsibility for the beginning of the war on Germany and the USSR, to equalize the executioners and victims, to silence the decisive contribution of the Soviet Union to the destruction of the Hitlerite military machine, to diminish the feat of the soldiers-liberators of the Red Army is not as decisive as it really was, to do everything to belittle him.
Such judgments are offensive to Russia, they desecrate the memory of millions of citizens of our country who died in the fight against fascism. As Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasized at the meeting of the Russian organizing committee “Victory” on May 20 of this year, we cannot leave such actions without a reaction, without a worthy answer, we will do everything so that future generations will preserve the truth about the war, a sacred, grateful attitude towards her heroes, towards her ancestors.
About the International Forum of Russian Compatriots “June 22, 1941 Victory will be ours!”
The Russian Foreign Ministry and its overseas missions will hold a number of events. Given the epidemiological situation, they will be mostly held online. We invite you to join them.
June 19-23 this year in Minsk and Brest under the auspices of the Government Commission on the Affairs of Compatriots Abroad, the International Forum of Russian Compatriots “June 22, 1941 Victory will be ours!” will take place, dedicated to the 80th anniversary of the beginning of the Great Patriotic War.
More than 80 representatives of the Russian diaspora, leading an active social and social life in the foreign community, from about 40 countries, will take part in the event. Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation A.Yu. Rudenko will take part in the opening ceremony of the forum. Among the speakers are E.V. Afanasyeva, a member of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on international affairs, E.A. Primakov, head of Rossotrudnichestvo, and other representatives of executive authorities, Russian NGOs and patriotic foundations. During the discussions, the main attention will be paid to the issues of consolidating our diaspora on the example of common historical memory, the fight against falsification of history, and the patriotic education of the younger generation.
An important element of the program will be a visit by compatriots to the Brest Fortress, laying flowers and participating in a requiem meeting on its territory.
To be continued…
EDITOR’S NOTE: This article is a translation. Apologies should the grammar and / or sentence structure not be perfect.