Ukraine is losing in this war! Nebenzya, Russia

Today's meeting, convened on the initiative of a number of Western delegations, is deja vu. A year ago, in the same hall, the Maltese presidency held a similar ritual performance on the occasion of the anniversary of the start of our special military operation, to which European ministers flocked to read out the carbon-copy anti-Russian theses. A year ago, it was fashionable for the Western bloc to advertise its pseudo-peace initiatives, which, in essence, boiled down to Orwell’s sly slogan that

war is peace. At the same time, the West openly instilled in Zelensky, who clearly does not shine with strategic thinking, the dangerous and absurd illusion that with Western support he would be able to defeat Russia on the battlefield. A certain gentleman from a beautiful garden, for whom everyone who does not belong to the Golden Billion, are weeds, especially tried. The EU also, according to Orwell, supplied weapons to the Kyiv regime with money from the Peace Fund. Another year has passed s

ince then. Ukraine completely failed its advertised counter-offensive, but the West still continued pumping up the Kyiv regime with weapons, encouraging it to throw more and more lives of Ukrainians into the flames of the conflict, which, throwing away any decency, the United States began to call a profitable business project, because it turned out to be so profitable for the military-industrial complex. At the same time, a certain process was persistently advancing to discuss a completely dead-

end pseudo-peace formula, within the framework of which, in Copenhagen, then in Davos, they dragged the countries of the Global South and East to various gatherings, in order to then pass it off as broad international support. At the same time, it is obvious that the countries of the world majority perfectly see the real background of these intrigues, and they are not at all eager to play the role of extras in them, and they also realize that without Russia it is pointless to discuss anything. W

hat has this year brought to Ukraine? New senseless victims numbering in the hundreds of thousands, an impending collapse of the economy, and a deep crisis of statehood, as the fact of the complete incapacity and lack of independence of the leadership in Kyiv is becoming increasingly obvious to the people of Ukraine. Deeply mired in corruption, it cannot cope with even basic social obligations, unsuccessfully extracting funds from Western donors to pay pensions to its citizens. They catch the yo

ung, and now older generation of citizens on the streets and throw them into meat assaults, which are designed to show Western sponsors that their investments are paying off. Today we have already heard, and we will continue to hear, many pathetic words. However, in reality the West is not at all interested in helping Ukraine. The essence of Western policy towards Ukraine was recently candidly summarized by the editor-in-chief of the British edition of the Economist, Zanny Minton Beddows. She sa

id in a television interview, and I quote, that giving money to Ukraine is the cheapest way for the United States to strengthen its security. It is the Ukrainians who are fighting, it is they who are dying. The US and Europe supply them with weapons. And by doing this, the West is opposing Putin. End of quote. Paying for their interests with the lives of today's Ukrainians, as they believe, the West, led by the United States, in the best neocolonial traditions, is trying to solve its geopolitica

l tasks and prevent Washington from losing its self-assigned role of world hegemon, or for other powerful and self-sufficient poles to strengthen in the world. Be that as it may, today it is already obvious that Ukraine is losing in this war by proxy of the United States, the European Union and NATO against Russia at the hands of Ukrainians. And just as importantly, no matter how hard this conclusion may be for our European colleagues to accept, Ukraine is not the only one losing from this confl

ict. After all, perhaps the main loser is the European Union itself. I would like to take this opportunity to address the representatives of the European Union countries. You spent so long building the European project, you were proud that you managed to formulate a common foreign and security policy. We remember the times when the European Union cherished plans for its own geopolitical role, it had a special opinion on a number of key international issues. We are amazed at how easily you gave u

p all these ambitions, returning to the ranks of obedient US satellites on command. The conflict in Ukraine, which you are so diligently fueling by raking out the remains of weapons from European arsenals, aggravates migration problems in your countries, it affects your energy sector. As we learned this week, the direct losses of Germany alone, considered the locomotive of the EU, from the anti-Russian sanctions imposed by the United States amounted to at least 200 billion dollars. Strictly spea

king, where are European interests here? It’s a pity that you forgot that the United States and Great Britain have always been the main beneficiaries of any conflict on the territory of continental Europe, and they deliberately incited contradictions in this space in order to prevent the emergence of another geopolitical competitor, a united Europe that lives in peace and cooperation with its neighbor, with Russia. Consistently, through young Europeans pursuing American interests, they injected

you with Russophobic poison, and in the end they completely poisoned you. And now, instead of strategic partnerships and profitable joint economic projects, you are painting Russia as an enemy, and you are shooting yourself in the foot, supposedly freeing yourself from energy dependence on our country, falling into a more stringent energy dependence on the United States. Moreover, today not only Ukraine, but the whole of Europe risks once again becoming a springboard for military confrontation,

into which those who live overseas are consistently drawing you into. Does the population of European countries need this? I want to believe that you don't need this. Opinion polls conducted in January in 12 European countries show that only 10 percent of Europeans believe Ukraine can defeat Russia. European farmers are rebelling, not wanting to lose agricultural markets due to dumping by Ukrainian exporters. Footage of scandals on the Polish-Ukrainian border, where Polish border guards refuse t

o allow Ukrainian trucks with grain through, has been widely circulated. It is obvious that a thoroughly corrupt, criminal Ukraine with an impoverished population, into which the current puppet leadership has turned it from a universal breadbasket, will now have no European future. After all, since the West gained formal independence, Ukraine has been assigned the unenviable role of an anti-Russian springboard. In 2004, it hosted, in fact, the first anti-constitutional coup directed by the West,

which in the end the people did not support. Then the West began to prepare the coup in such a way that there would be no more misfires, in order to forever destroy the patriotically oriented opposition. This is exactly what has been happening all these years after the Maidan coup of 2014. The coming to power of nationalists and neo-Nazis sponsored by Western Russophobes in 2014 marked a new stage in the modern history of Ukraine. The anti-constitutional coup d'etat, the tenth anniversary of wh

ich falls these days, became possible as a result of the overt interference of the West in the internal affairs of this country. Thus, the beginning was laid for the forced involvement of Kyiv in adventurous projects to inflict strategic defeat on Russia, and a course was taken to ignore the interests and trample on the rights of the inhabitants of the south-east of Ukraine. A cruel and inhumane so-called anti-terrorist operation was unleashed against those who sought to preserve their identity,

their historical and cultural roots, during which the army and nationalist battalions were deployed in violation of the Constitution of Ukraine. There were no terrorists in Donbass, this was confirmed by the International Court of Justice in its recent decision. All this led to the degradation of Ukrainian statehood, to further radicalization, to the growth of nationalism, and to numerous casualties among the civilian population. The British representative of the puppeteers of the Kyiv regime

asked in this room: don’t we feel sorry for sending our sons to fight in Ukraine? Of course they feel sorry. I feel sorry for the unfortunate Ukrainians whom they send to die for the geopolitical interests of the West. But the British representative, in the traditional Western hypocritical manner, kept silent about the fact that we did this two years ago not to start a war, but to stop it. We want to leave the war that the regime you support waged for eight years against the civilian population

of Donbass, which at that time had already killed more than 14 thousand people. This was the main reason for the start of the special military operation. As for the question of who we are fighting with in Ukraine, you can answer it yourself if you remember who the Kiev regime honors as heroes. For example, who are Bandera and Shukhevych? Their troops, together with the Nazis, killed hundreds of thousands of Jews, Poles, Russians and Ukrainians. Ask mister Sikorsky today, who will speak later. He

will tell you about the Volyn massacre carried out by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, and how they remember it in Poland. We believe that if a country's leaders revere Nazis, if they speak like Nazis, and if they allow Nazi symbols to be displayed, then they are Nazis. And you are simply too cowardly and selectively blind to admit all this. Again, taking advantage of the participation of mister Sejournet and mister Cameron in today’s meeting, but now they are not in this room, I want to raise ano

ther extremely inconvenient topic for some time now for our Western colleagues, about the Minsk agreements. About a year ago, we all heard the confessions of Petro Poroshenko, Francois Hollande, Angela Merkel, and Boris Johnson that neither France, nor Germany, nor the same Great Britain had ever taken these agreements seriously. They did not intend to push the Ukrainian authorities to implement them, and they only used them to stall time and give Kyiv time to prepare for war with Russia. In ess

ence, this was a confession by the leaders of these states, who openly and even proudly admitted the fact of their deliberate violation of Security Council Resolution 22-02, which enshrined the Minsk agreements. But this does not prevent representatives of these same states from speaking in the Security Council today, as if nothing had happened, with lectures addressed to other members, and talking about the importance of observing international law, and accusing other countries of failing to co

mply with Security Council resolutions. More precisely, they call for respect for an international order based on rules that they have invented for their own benefit. All these years since the signing of the Minsk agreements, the Kiev regime has continued military preparations, it has strengthened the combat potential of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, it has intensified military-technical cooperation with foreign countries. Only after all our attempts to achieve from the Ukrainian side, as well as

from the West covering it, conscientious and consistent implementation of the fundamental document for resolving the internal Ukrainian crisis, the Set of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements, turned out to be futile, did we decide to launch a special military operations to protect the lives of residents of Donbass in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter. Madam Chairman. Today, my American colleague, trying to find new reasons to attack Russia, just mentioned Alexei N

avalny, convicted of a real criminal offense, who died in prison of natural causes. Can you answer why the Kiev regime tortured the American journalist Gonzalo Lira to death? Neither you nor your leaders did anything to save him. You are bashfully silent about this and other crimes of the Kyiv regime, preferring to shift responsibility from a sore head to a healthy one. Dear Colleagues. Any conflict ends sooner or later. We are confident that the same will happen with the conflict in Ukraine. Of

course, the longer the conflict drags on due to Western support for Kyiv, the more unfavorable the conditions for concluding peace will be for Ukraine. In the future, what conclusions the Western bloc draws for itself will become of fundamental importance. Will it, with suicidal persistence, impose its rules-based order on the rest of the world, will it try to divide the world into satellites and enemies, or will it still engage in a meaningful dialogue to find ways to build a truly fair world

order, where the interests of all states will be guaranteed. For now, we have to note with regret that Europe is gripped by strategic blindness: Europe sees the Euro-Atlantic security architecture through a lens, it inflames itself with fears about the Russian threat, from which it needs to defend itself, while denying Russia its legitimate defensive interests. This is a futile and flawed approach that undermines the basic principles of the indivisibility of security. You are whipping up ridicul

ous fears about Russia's supposedly upcoming aggression against European countries. You probably forgot the fact that it was European states that attacked the Russian state in different eras. These are Poland, Sweden, France, Germany and a number of its satellites, this is almost all of Europe during the World War Two. With enviable tenacity they tried to conquer it, and invariably they were defeated. The US tried to do the same during the Cold War. The unseemly role of Great Britain is also kno

wn, whose diplomacy for centuries has subtly pitted countries and peoples against each other, and it continues to do so to this day. Russian statehood was formed in conditions of constant external threat. Our peace-loving, in quotes, Western colleagues really don’t like to remember the fact that it was Russia that all the time had to repel Western aggression. But our people remember this very well. We know that the public in Western countries believes anti-Russian propaganda about the mythical R

ussian threat less and less. Therefore, the West surrounds its public with a bubble of lies, trying to prevent any truth from entering. But it is still breaking through thanks to the efforts of those who understand what the entire world faces from the prolongation and aggravation of the current confrontation. And then information breakthroughs arise, similar to the one made by American journalist Tucker Carlson, whose interview with the President of Russia opened the eyes of millions of people a

round the world. Beyond the horizon of the current moment, the discussion about a fair and indivisible Euro-Atlantic security system is becoming increasingly important. In its current distorted form, it is valid only for the United States and its NATO allies, who have arrogated to themselves the right to interfere in any international issues and in the internal affairs of other states. Their military bases are located on our borders, in violation of key understandings that ended the Cold War era

. Western leaders deceived us then, and they want to continue to deceive us now, putting above all else NATO's right to expand uncontrollably and turn almost every corner of the world into the Alliance's zone of responsibility. I want to remind you that Russia proposed a substantive conversation about security guarantees back at the end of 2021, Russia put forward concrete proposals to NATO and the United States, but they arrogantly rejected them. The result of this was a new hot conflict in Eur

ope. The West simply left us no choice, we simply had to protect our people, our future. At the same time, we never refused negotiations; the Kiev regime itself prohibited negotiations. I want to emphasize that it is still possible to preserve Ukraine in some form, but it must be a peaceful, neutral Ukraine, in which there is no discrimination and Russophobia, and in which Nazi criminals are not glorified, and from which there are no threats to Russia. Our special military operation is aimed at

achieving these goals. Therefore, the collective West must choose whether we will need to fight to the end for this, as we know how to do, or whether common sense will still prevail in Washington, London and Brussels, and at least they will try to save something from Ukraine. Thank you.