Antonov said the situation in Ukraine is not on the agenda of Russia and the United States

Ambassador Antonov: Russia and the United States did not discuss the situation in Ukraine at the talks in Geneva It was only mentioned during the Russia-NATO Council meeting in Brussels as a secondary issue, Ambassador said

Russia and the United States did not discuss the situation in Ukraine during the talks in Geneva, Ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov said, his words are quoted on the page of the Russian diplomatic mission on Facebook.

“This issue was not on the agenda of Russian-American negotiations in Geneva, but was only mentioned as a secondary topic in consultations with NATO in Brussels»— he said.

Russia is trying to obtain security guarantees from NATO, primarily concerning the refusal to move the alliance to the east. On January 10, 12 and 13, Russia held talks with the United States and its allies in NATO and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). However, no compromise was reached.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that Russia cannot veto Ukraine's entry into the alliance.

President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said that Russia needs “precisely legal, legal guarantees,” since the West has not fulfilled its verbal obligations: NATO will not move east.

December 17, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced the draft treaties with the United States on security assurances; and agreements on security arrangements with NATO. They relate, in particular, to guarantees that the alliance will not move further to the east, the concentration of strike offensive weapons systems near the borders, the accession to the alliance of states that were previously part of the USSR, including Ukraine, the conduct of any military activity on the territory of Ukraine, as well as other states of Eastern Europe. , Transcaucasia and Central Asia.

After unsuccessful negotiations with the US and NATO, Russia requested a written response to its proposals.

Follow RBC on Twitter Get news faster than anyone

< img class="aligncenter" src="" alt="Antonov said that the situation in Ukraine is not on the agenda of Russia and the United States"/>


Peskov denied Russia’s involvement in cyberattacks on Ukrainian sites

Photo: Natalia Gubernatorova

Russian presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov said in an interview with CNN that Russia is not involved in cyber attacks on Ukrainian state websites .

Peskov added that the Kremlin is aware of the accusations against Russia, but there are no grounds for them. Earlier, law enforcement agencies of Ukraine stated that Moscow was involved in the incident.

On Friday, press secretary of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry Oleg Nikolenko spoke about cyber attacks on state websites of Ukraine. He pointed out that the websites of the ministry and other government agencies were inaccessible due to a hacker attack. Later it became known that personal data was not stolen, despite the assurances of the attackers.


Nuland announced 18 scenarios of sanctions and about the “acute pain” waiting for Russia

Nuland: The US has prepared 18 scenarios of sanctions in the event of a “Russian invasion” of Ukraine According to the Deputy Secretary, the sanctions will be activated “very quickly” in the event of a Russian invasion of Ukraine. At the same time, she added that Washington is ready to continue the security dialogue

The United States has prepared 18 different scenarios for sanctions in the event of a “Russian invasion” to the territory of Ukraine. This was stated in an interview with the Financial Times by US Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland.

“I'm not going to preliminarily talk about 18 different scenarios. <…> I'll just say that my allies and I are ready to inflict sharp pain very quickly if Russia takes this [aggressive] step in any form, — she said.

At the same time, the Deputy Secretary of State added that from the US point of view, “the door for a diplomatic solution is still open,” and Washington continues to work on a written response to the proposed security guarantees to Russian officials. “We believe we can reduce tensions and make some progress on some of these issues through diplomacy,” emphasized Nuland.


Since the fall of 2021, there have been reports in the Western media about a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine. Russia denied all accusations. The Kremlin noted that the movement of troops across the country— it is her internal affair. Russian President Vladimir Putin, in turn, spoke about increased NATO activity near the Russian borders.

In mid-December, the Russian Foreign Ministry sent proposals on security guarantees to the US and NATO. They contained a clause on the non-expansion of the alliance to the east, in particular on the obligation not to accept Ukraine and Georgia into the bloc. Negotiations on them with Washington and NATO took place on January 10 and 12, the next day the discussion took place at the OSCE site. The press secretary of the Russian president, Dmitry Peskov, following the results of the talks, said that they were unsuccessful.

On January 12, the US Senate published a draft of a new package of sanctions prepared by the Democrats against Russia's national debt, the banking sector and the leadership countries, including against President Vladimir Putin. These restrictions are also provided for in the event of an “invasion”; Russia against Ukraine.

Last December, Secretary of the Security and Defense Council of Ukraine (NSDC) Oleksiy Danilov said that so far there were no signs that the “invasion” inevitably. On December 30, he again stated that there was no threat. “If we talk about a significant buildup [of Russian troops] that some foreign media insist on, then I will say again that we do not see this. To date, we do not see any threats to open aggression from Russia,»,— emphasized the Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council.

Subscribe to RBC FB Get news faster than anyone else


“Destroyed for sure.” Washington assessed the risks of war with Russia

Against the backdrop of growing tensions in Europe, American experts are trying to understand how the hypothetical armed conflict between Russia and NATO will end. According to the Atlantic Council, which has been advising the White House and the Pentagon for more than half a century, Moscow has serious advantages. The conclusions of the analysts are in the material of RIA Novosti.

The main obstacle

The author of the document is Scott Cooper, a former pilot of the US Marine Corps of the carrier-based electronic warfare aircraft EA-6 Prowler. This is a rather rare case when Washington's foreign policy is publicly commented not by a congressman, senator or civilian expert, but by an officer, albeit a retired one. There is no Russophobia in the report, only a cold analysis of the international situation and an assessment of the military potential of the parties. The pilot is convinced that it is useless to butt head-on with the Russian Ground Forces. The only chance to win is to gain air superiority. .jpg” alt=””Destroy guaranteed.” Washington assessed the risks of war with Russia” />


REvil hacker group liquidated in Russia after US request

The FSB reported on the liquidation of the REvil hacker group after a US request FSB officers detained hackers in five regions of Russia at once and found almost 0.5 billion rubles from them. and currency. Information about the hackers was passed on to the Russian intelligence services by the Americans. Biden called for action against Putin's hackers


The REvil hacker community has been liquidated in Russia, the press service of the FSB said. Hackers attacked the information resources of foreign companies.

The FSB noted that the reason for the search was the appeal of the competent US authorities, “reporting the leader of the criminal community and his involvement in attacks on the information resources of foreign high-tech companies by introducing malicious software securing, encrypting information and extorting money for its decryption.

The operation took place in Moscow, St. Petersburg, Moscow, Leningrad and Lipetsk regions. More than 426 million rubles were confiscated from 14 hackers, including in cryptocurrency, 600 thousand US dollars, 500 thousand euros, 20 premium cars.

“As a result of the joint actions of the FSB and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, the organized criminal community ceased to exist, the information infrastructure used for criminal purposes was neutralized. Representatives of the competent authorities of the United States have been informed of the results of the operation, — reported to the FSB.

The detainees were charged with committing crimes under Part 2 of Art. 187 “Illegal circulation of means of payment” Criminal Code. Not only the hackers themselves were detained, but the infrastructure they used was also neutralized, the FSB specified.

Cybersecurity was one of the topics of the summit between Russian and US Presidents Vladimir Putin and Joe Biden in Geneva in June 2021. After the talks, Biden said the presidents had agreed to work out which targets should not be subjected to cyberattacks. He said that he had proposed to Putin a list of 16 infrastructure sectors against which hacker attacks would be banned.

Putin, in turn, said after the summit that, according to American sources, most cyber attacks in the world come from US territory.

In a July 2021 phone call with Putin, Biden urged Russia to take action to stop hackers operating on its soil, “and stressed that he is determined to continue to fight the broader ransomware threat.” The President of the United States promised that Washington would take the necessary measures “to protect its people and its critical infrastructure in the face of an ongoing challenge.”

The Kremlin then reported that Putin announced Russia's readiness “to jointly suppress criminal manifestations in the information space”, but in the last month there were no such requests from US departments.

In 2021, there were several major cyber attacks against US businesses and companies that brought them to a halt. One of the loudest— attack on the network of the largest pipeline network on the US East Coast for the supply of gasoline, diesel fuel and other petroleum products Colonial Pipeline. The pumping of oil products was stopped for several days. In June 2021, all the factories of the largest meat producer JBS S.A. were shut down in the United States due to a cyber attack.

These attacks in the United States were often associated with “Russian hackers”. So the FBI reported that cyber attacks on the branches of the world's largest meat producer JBS were organized by the hacker group REvil, also known as Sodinokibi. In November 2021, the US Treasury imposed sanctions against Russian citizen Yevgeny Polyanin and Ukrainian citizen Yaroslav Vasinsky. The department stated that Polyanin and Vasinsky are directly related to the REvil hacker group.

In April 2021, the Taiwanese company Quanta Computer— one of Apple's main suppliers. As Bloomberg reported, hackers planted ransomware and demanded to pay them $50 million. REvil tried to get money from Apple, saying that after Quanta Computer was hacked, hackers gained access to the company's latest developments and threatened to publish them.

< p>

Subscribe to RBC Twitter Get news faster than anyone else


The likely reaction of Russia to the entry of Ukraine and Georgia into NATO is revealed

Already today, NATO from Estonia can reach St. Petersburg with rocket artillery

The decision on membership of Ukraine and Georgia in NATO has already been made. This was announced on Friday in an interview with the Italian newspaper La Repubblica by Alliance Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. He clarified that the problem is only in terms. They have not yet been determined and depend on how quickly these countries can bring their armed forces up to NATO standards.


What might these timeframes be? What threatens us if Ukraine and Georgia are still accepted into NATO? And what might Russia's response be? To these questions «MK» answered the leading Russian military expert, member of the Expert Council of the Board of the Military-Industrial Commission, editor-in-chief of the Arsenal of the Fatherland magazine; Retired Colonel Viktor Murakhovsky.

– «NATO Standards» such a limitless concept that the Alliance can include countries and armies that absolutely do not meet any standards, the expert says. – Here the decision is made according to the situation that is beneficial specifically for the United States and NATO. 

Did when the Baltic countries – the former Soviet republics joined NATO, did they meet at least some of its standards? Of course not. The same applies to the countries of Eastern Europe – the former members of the Warsaw Pact, for example, Bulgaria, Romania. They, too, were inconsistent with the military structure, decision-making processes, and command and control of NATO. Not to mention equipment and weapons – they entered the bloc with old Soviet weapons. That is, when it was beneficial for the United States, nothing stopped them from accepting these countries into NATO. So all the talk about standards and alignment with Alliance structures is it's all just a figure of speech. 

Murakhovsky refused to openly comment on specific military and military-technical measures that Russia could take if Georgia and Ukraine join NATO, because, according to him, the situation here largely depends on Moscow's political decisions. At the same time, he clarified that the “remote threat” already exists on the borders of Russia.

– From the center of St. Petersburg to Estonia, 180 km. And now Estonia, along with other countries, is buying the MLRS and HIMARS multiple launch rocket systems from the United States, which calmly cover the entire St. Petersburg. There are generally less than 70 km to Pskov. And when we talk about the fact that such countries as Ukraine and Georgia are appearing in NATO, then for us this simply poses a new direct threat. In addition to all those strike weapons and missile systems that already worry us today, a ground military group will be present at our borders. The enemy will be practically in the same place where he stood in the 17th century when he threatened Smolensk, Moscow.

Naturally, we are not ready to look at everything that happens indifferently. Our retaliatory measures on this score are not yet pronounced aloud and are not submitted for general discussion. But I will say this: we will focus on an asymmetrical response that will create a threat directly to the United States itself, and not to some kind of Ukraine.


Russia’s victory in Kazakhstan: the Russophobe minister changed his shoes

But how much do words mean in politics

Since it is now fashionable to talk about “influence” and talk about Russia’s geopolitical moves in the post-Soviet (and not only) space with a thoughtful, knowledgeable air, let’s just look at Kazakhstan. There, Russia saved the regime, and the Russophobe Askar Umarov was immediately appointed to the position of the main ideologist – the Minister of Information and Social Development – as the saved. On Friday, an interview with Umarov came out, where he says that his Russophobia is a thing of the past.

Photo: < p> There is no point in citing those statements that were immediately remembered by Umarov immediately after the appointment. There is also about the “Rusnya”, which has no place in Kazakhstan, and about the colonialists, and about someone else's Victory Day … A classic set.

It is understandable that this causes indignation among the public, which is not accustomed to doing fact-checking. But suddenly – is it fakes, an element of the information war or black PR? However, the reaction of our state structures followed.

The emotional Rogozin said that Umarov was not expected at Baikonur, the intellectual Primakov, head of Rossotrudnichestvo, said that such an appointment is, of course, the business of Kazakhstan, but he will not cooperate with Umarov .

Finally, the Russian Foreign Ministry also spoke out: “statements of a nationalist nature, and this includes xenophobia, incitement of hatred, and so on, which rightly caused an exacerbated reaction among the citizens of both Russia and Kazakhstan, we consider unacceptable.”

And only Peskov said that Russia is ready to work with all the ministers appointed by Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, and even with Umarov, who made “embarrassing, incorrect statements.” And it will be possible to judge, they say, his work by his statements in a new status.

And Umarov’s statements in the new status followed: he treats Russia, its history and culture with great respect, the Great Patriotic War is not a stranger, Victory Day is celebrated with “special feelings”, “language patrols” in Kazakhstan against Russian speakers are not a general trend and already received a legal assessment, and so on. And all “accusations and conclusions based on emotional and incorrect skirmishes in social networks more than 10 years ago are understandable, but exhausted. This virtual rubbish has long since decayed.” Well, he just flipped out. Or changed shoes?

When was Mr. Umarov more sincere – speaking about “Russian” in emotional skirmishes or under pressure from his superiors, who ordered him to correct himself? He even agreed to give this interview only in writing, apparently so that emotions would not overwhelm (although he claims to be fluent in Russian).

What any self-respecting country that cares about its people for abroad and its own interests – would set the conditions for its assistance – during the crisis in Kazakhstan it was not done. Well, well, there was no time, it was necessary to act quickly. But why leave quickly? What prevented me from saying – our paratroopers will still be here, but for now, can you recognize Crimea? Or will you make Russian the second state language (and not just official for the document flow of local governments)? Or a Russian military base would not hurt. But you never know what else …

But what in fact? The Russophobe minister says that he is not like that. How much do words mean in politics?

That's all “influence”. Zero.


Political scientists have proposed exotic methods of answering Russia to the United States

From new bases under the US nose to artificial tsunami near California

After the completion of the main negotiations between Russia and the US, NATO and the OSCE, it became clear to everyone that the situation had reached a dead end. As expected, the West did not accept our proposals. The NATO Secretary General hints at the reality of membership of Ukraine, Georgia, Sweden and Finland in NATO. Political scientists and military experts spoke about how Russia should behave in such a situation and how events could develop.

Photo: Gennady Cherkasov

The editor-in-chief of the National Defense magazine, Igor Korotchenko, in his Telegram channel, proposed to start by placing special forces bases in Nicaragua and Cuba, along with mixed air squadrons. In Cuban Cienfuegos, in his opinion, it would be worthwhile to place a naval base capable of receiving warships and submarines armed with Caliber and Zircon cruise missiles. True, Korotchenko did not specify how ready Cuba is for such an option.

Aleksey Kiryatsev, an expert at the Ukrainian Center for Analytics and Security, believes that “the Kremlin is preparing another conflict that could be a blow to the image of the United States as a world leader, and NATO as an organization capable of ensuring peace in Europe.” Namely… set fire to the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Like, for this, President Putin is purposefully pumping weapons into Serbia.

Apparently, the Ukrainian expert “forgot” who in 1999 fired on Belgrade with cruise missiles and cluster bombs and who was then categorically against this operation.

Chairman of the Presidium of the All-Russian Organization “Officers of Russia”, Hero of the Russian Federation, Major General Sergei Lipova believes that the security of our borders is under threat. We allegedly tried to negotiate peacefully, but this did not lead to anything. The Western powers, in his opinion, took into account only their own interests for too long and became insolent, so “the time has come for Russia to defend its principles.”

“Our task is to prevent the provocation of conflicts on our borders. Now it all depends on how far the West is ready to go in its provocations,” he told MK.

But political scientist Yury Baranchik in his Telegram channel suggested using weapons based on new physical principles – climatic, seismic, causing an earthquake or an artificial tsunami somewhere off the coast of California. That's when, he believes, everyone will immediately get worried and begin to agree on security issues.


Mysteriously disappeared: how the USSR and tsarist Russia hid the deaths of top officials

Two kings and three general secretaries were lost

The mysterious disappearance of the ex-leader of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, about whom nothing has been known for many days since the beginning of the unrest in this country, has given rise to Lots of rumors and speculation. Meanwhile, in the history of the Soviet Union and Imperial Russia, one can find similar situations when the head of state suddenly “disappeared in time and space” for some period, and people did not know if he was alive and where he was.


One of the most famous such precedents was the “illegal business trip” to Europe, which Tsar Peter Alekseevich arranged for himself at the very end of the 17th century.

Then the young Russian sovereign came up with an unprecedented tactical move. In the spring of 1697, he left the country incognito and visited several European states as part of a large Grand Embassy. It was officially headed by General-Admiral Franz Lefort, General Fyodor Golovin and Duma clerk Prokofy Voznitsyn, and the tsar was among the retinue of more than fifty nobles accompanying them, hiding under the name of the constable of the Preobrazhensky regiment Pyotr Mikhailov.


During his absence, the sovereign entrusted the rulers of the country to his closest associates – Prince Fyodor Romodanovsky and boyar Tikhon Streshnev. It was these two nobles who did the “sovereign court and business.”

The common people in Moscow, and even most of the boyars, nobles and military commanders who are not very significant in their positions, did not know for quite a long time where the “hope-sovereign” was located and why they don’t drive along the streets of Moscow to the Kremlin and from the Kremlin now ceremonial royal trains of numerous carriages, accompanied by horse guards.

As expected, as a result of such ignorance, various rumors began to circulate among loyal subjects. They drugged the tsar-father with an evil potion and keep him in the cellars behind strong locks … The young sovereign left to bow to the holy places … They killed Pyotr Alekseevich, and in return for him soon the prince-Caesar Romodanovsky will declare himself the ruler of the country …

These rumors were partly dispelled when reports began to reach from Western Europe through foreigners that the Russian Tsar was identified in one of the members of the Great Embassy. However, finally all the speculation about the supposedly sad and even tragic fate of Tsar Peter was dispelled only by his return to the Mother See from a long European “business trip” in August 1698.

A lot of rumors and legends were generated by the sudden disappearance of Emperor Alexander the First.


According to the official version, he died, returning from a trip around the empire, in Taganrog from a very sudden “fever with inflammation of the brain” on the morning of November 19, 1825. The secret message about the death of the monarch was delivered to St. Petersburg only on the 25th – with a clear delay: after all, horse couriers could have rushed to the capital earlier.

A few days after that, the capital's Governor-General Miloradovich and three other initiates were in the know did not disclose the information. On November 27, a prayer service was even served for the sovereign's health. Only after a while did public reports of the death of the monarch appear.

However, even the subsequent delivery of the body of the deceased monarch to St. Petersburg and the magnificent funeral ceremony held did not stop the spread of numerous rumors about the real fate of Alexander Pavlovich. They began almost immediately, as soon as the death of His Imperial Majesty was announced.


According to some rumors, the king was killed by some “fiends.” In another version, the emperor managed to avoid death, and instead another, similar person was killed, who was brought in a coffin and buried under the guise of Alexander in the tomb of the Peter and Paul Cathedral. And then the rumor began to prevail that the king, they say, deliberately played out his death, and he himself hid from the world in order to devote himself to serving God. Until now, this version continues to excite the minds: Emperor Alexander the First did not die in November 1825, but staged his death and since then began to impersonate the elder Fyodor Kuzmich, having moved away from the life of the capital to Siberia and lived for almost 40 more years.

In the Soviet period, there were several cases when the authorities concealed information about the fate of the “first person” from citizens for some time. All of them are connected with the death of the next leader of the Union.

The first such precedent, according to some historians, was marked when Stalin died. According to official information, the “leader of the peoples” died on the evening of March 5, 1953 from the effects of a cerebral hemorrhage. This information was made public on the morning of March 6. However, there are alternative versions, according to which the death of the “master of the Kremlin” – and, perhaps even it was a murder – came three days earlier: on March 2. And, therefore, for several days information was carefully concealed from the citizens of the country: all this time, the closest associates of the deceased Generalissimo divided power among themselves.

By the way, a similar delay occurred with Stalin's wife Svetlana Alliluyeva. As you know, her life was cut short tragically: the wife of the leader shot herself on November 7, 1932. But official reports of death (without indicating the cause) were published in the central newspapers only on November 10 and 11.

Brezhnev became the next of the general secretaries who, after his death, “fell out of time” for some period. The Soviet “super-order bearer”, who ruled the union for more than 18 years, peacefully rested at the Zarechye-6 state dacha on the night of November 9-10, 1982. On the morning of the 10th, the employees of the dacha discovered that the General Secretary had died. This was immediately reported “upstairs”. However, the Kremlin decided to slow down further dissemination of such information. As a result, for the citizens of the USSR, Leonid Ilyich remained “alive and well” for another day. However, some clear hints of the unfortunate event that had taken place nevertheless followed. On television, they urgently changed the program, excluding all entertainment programs. The most noticeable was the disappearance from TV screens on the evening of November 10 of the traditional and beloved concert in honor of the Day of the Police. So many residents of the country guessed: someone “at the very top” was gone. But Brezhnev's death was officially announced only on the afternoon of November 11.

Events developed very similarly after the death of the penultimate in the history of the General Secretary of the CPSU K.U. Chernenko. This is how one high-ranking foreign government official recalled this: “On the evening of March 10, 1985, when Konstantin Chernenko died, the radio and television of the Soviet Union did not interrupt their evening programs. The news of the death of the Soviet leader would be the first news of the day around the world. But it didn't. The masters of the Kremlin have decided to withhold the announcement of Chernenko's death until a successor is chosen.”

We had to “slow down” the most important information for quite a long time. After all, it was necessary that all the “main characters” of the Communist Party gathered in the Kremlin. For this, some of them had to urgently interrupt their important foreign visits and fly to Moscow. For example, Politburo member Vladimir Shcherbitsky broke off on an urgent call to the Soviet capital from the American San Francisco, his colleague Vitaly Vorotnikov interrupted his trip to Yugoslavia … These unexpected “marches” of the highest party functionaries of the USSR immediately made their foreign partners suspect that the Union became the next General Secretary. However, the official authorities in the Land of the Soviets stubbornly kept silent. And in the news there was information about current events without mentioning any state of emergency in power structures.

For the time being, even in the radio and television broadcasting grid, there were no noticeable changes. Judging by the programs broadcast on the air, Konstantin Ustinovich continued to be in working order. For example, the 9 o'clock evening news program broadcast comments on Chernenko's response to a letter from American war veterans.

But nevertheless, indirect signs appeared. On the morning of the 11th, getting ready for work, many Muscovites found that their usual humorous radio program, which traditionally starts at 7 o'clock, had disappeared somewhere. And those who watch TV early in the morning found that for some reason, instead of a sports program, they were shown a documentary film “about nature” on the screen. the first person” in the USSR.


A breakthrough is far away: a week of negotiations between Russia and the West ended inconclusively

The meeting within the framework of the OSCE did not refresh the relations of the parties

Negotiations of the member countries of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) ended in Vienna – the first in the beginning of the year and under the chairmanship of Poland, replaced Sweden on 1 January. Neither politicians nor political scientists expected breakthroughs from the meeting, but the very context of the last summit remains no less important: the meeting of the OSCE Permanent Council symbolically ended an extremely active week of dialogue between Russia and the West, which unfolded at various venues. Together with experts, we evaluated the results and prospects of this process.

Photo: AP

Even the very fact of Poland's presidency for Russia, if not of critical importance, turned out to be in any case an extra “hairpin” on the part of the collective West. It is known that relations with Warsaw in Moscow in recent years have been at a critically low level, and Polish officials do not miss the opportunity to publicly release negative comments about the Russian Federation. The situation is approximately the same this time: in particular, Polish Foreign Minister Zbigniew Rau, who currently holds the post of chairman of the OSCE, said that the risk of war in Europe at the moment is the highest in the last three decades. Russia was not directly named as a source of instability, however, given the general sentiment, as well as the presence of a Ukrainian representative at the meeting with the expected rhetoric, it is hard not to see an obvious hint in the words of the Polish minister.

As for the already mentioned Ukraine, the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the republic, Dmitry Kuleba, devoted almost his entire speech to journalists (the meeting of the OSCE Council itself was held behind closed doors) devoted to the Russian role, the topic of “Kremlin aggression” and how strong and consistent the support provided by Western countries of Kiev. “Partners fully share the position of Ukraine: the principles of the OSCE, enshrined in the Helsinki Final Act, are unshakable, including the right of states to freely choose which organization or union treaty to be a part of,” the minister said, obviously implying both European and pro-NATO aspirations his country. For Russia, the possible eastward expansion of the North Atlantic Alliance remains one of the most painful and fundamental issues, on which there has been no compromise with Washington (de facto playing the first role in NATO) for many years.

In general, the OSCE meeting did not bring any sensations, either in a positive or negative sense, and, in fact, almost no one expected them. Few political scientists have tried to link, partly not without reason, the January 13 talks with the meetings that preceded them just a few days earlier at the Russia-USA and NATO Russian Federation sites, but even in Moscow this sequence was assessed as an accident. “This is nothing more than such a coincidence in the triad (negotiations)…,” noted, in particular, Russian permanent representative to the OSCE Alexander Lukashevich on the eve of the Vienna summit. “Of course, we will use this meeting to once again talk about the philosophy of our initiatives in the field of European security, taking into account the rounds of negotiations.”

Earlier, the meetings with Western partners were evaluated by the press secretary of the President of Russia Dmitry Peskov. According to him, they were ineffective. Moscow and Washington, like other capitals of the NATO countries, failed to reach new agreements. The only positive signal can be considered, perhaps, only the fact that the discussion did not come close to possible new anti-Russian sanctions by the United States and the probable response of the Kremlin: if the parties could not get closer, then at least at the moment they avoided an outright escalation. The unabated coronavirus pandemic obviously played an important role: in the context of the rapid spread of the Omicron strain, issues of health care and mutual assistance in terms of developing and supplying vaccines partially replaced military-political issues.

“The essence of all these negotiations was the path their participants would take: they would quarrel again, or they would agree to look for common ground,” the head of the Center for International Security of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations said in this regard in a conversation with MK. RAS Alexey ARBATOV… – In my opinion, despite the persistence of tension, so far everything speaks rather in favor of the second option. The rest is nothing new: Ukraine again accused Russia of what is happening in the Donbass, Moscow responded to Kiev with mutual reproaches. As for any breakthrough solutions, none of the parties could have counted on them, especially at the summit within the framework of the OSCE. It is noteworthy that Lukashevich, before the meeting in Vienna, tried to minimize the possible overestimated expectations of the observers. According to the Russian diplomat, a significant part of the summit was devoted to voicing by Poland its plans of work as the OSCE chairmanship state, and not to acute and urgent world problems.

International relations expert Vladimir FROLOV, in turn, believes that the meeting on January 13 was just a “decoration”, and the main issues were raised at the Russian-American talks three days earlier. “The main point on this path was Geneva (it was there that representatives of the Russian Federation and the United States met on January 10. -“ MK ”), the analyst recalled in a conversation with us. “Everything became clear there already. The negotiations did not produce results on the main tracks for Moscow, but have at least outlined opportunities for new narrow agreements in areas such as arms control or, for example, on limiting military exercises in the most destabilizing formats.However, even in the most optimistic case, further discussion of the identified problems will take months, if not years, with that they do not solve anything for the Russian Federation in a strategic sense. With this in mind, Frolov believes, both Moscow and Washington will again make a choice in favor of further escalation, including in order to attract the attention of partners. An effective solution to the accumulated problems is theoretically possible only at the level of presidents: at least, this is clearly what the Russian side wants, the expert believes. However, the American establishment is still hardly ready to give US President Joe Biden such powers, the MK interlocutor concludes: this will obviously drag out the process. According to Alexei Arbatov, it is also impossible to rule out new negotiations in the short term, at least at the level of representatives of the heads of state, but their conduct will depend on the political will of the Kremlin.


EU extends economic sanctions against Russia until July 31

Anti-Russian sanctions were adopted by the EU countries in relation to the financial, energy and defense sectors of the Russian Federation.

The European Union decided to extend the sanctions against Russia for a period of six months until July 31, 2022. This follows from the statement of the EU Council.

Note that the extension of economic sanctions against the Russian Federation was adopted during the December summit against the background of Russia's alleged refusal to follow the Minsk agreements.

In addition, the Council of the European Union also urged the Kremlin to return to the implementation of the Minsk agreements.

Recall that anti-Russian sanctions were adopted by the EU countries in relation to the financial, energy and defense sectors of the Russian Federation.

They were first introduced in 2014 after Russia joined Crimea for a year, but subsequently they were repeatedly extended every six months.

In particular, the sanctions provide for restricting access to the primary and secondary EU capital markets for a number of Russian banks.

Also banned hit and any financial assistance in intermediary relations with sanctioned banks. In addition, the import and export of dual-use goods from the defense sector, especially in the energy cluster, is prohibited.

Earlier, Topnews wrote that the Kremlin spoke about the consequences of US sanctions against Putin.

Join to our group in VK to keep abreast of events in Russia and the world


Four planes with peacekeepers returned to Russia from Kazakhstan

Feature Protests in Kazakhstan amid rising gas prices

Four aircraft with Russian paratroopers who took part in the peacekeeping mission of the CSTO countries returned to Russia from Kazakhstan, the RF Ministry of Defense reports.

Il-76MD military transport aviation made their way from Alma-Ata to the Ivanovo-Severny airfield. 

Earlier it became known that the defense ministers of the CSTO countries signed a decision on organizing the return of peacekeepers from Kazakhstan. All contingents, except for the Kyrgyz, will be taken out of the republic by aircraft of the Russian Aerospace Forces. 

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu on Thursday announced that the withdrawal of peacekeepers who helped the neighboring state cope with the riots should be completed on January 19.< /p>

Recall that on January 6, against the backdrop of pogroms, peacekeepers from the Russian Federation, Belarus, Armenia, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan began to arrive in Kazakhstan at the call of the authorities. On January 13, allied forces began to leave the country. 


In the United States, Russia allowed an attempt to invade Ukraine with the help of sabotage

Sullivan: intelligence assumes that Russia will “fabricate” a pretext for the invasion of Ukraine Such information, according to the assistant to the President of the United States, has intelligence. They admitted that Russia would try to “fabricate” a pretext for invading Ukraine, accusing Kiev of preparing an attack on its troops

Jake Sullivan

US intelligence has evidence that Russia intends to “fake” pretext for “invasion” to Ukraine, US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said during a briefing.

“Our intelligence community is processing data that Russia is working to fabricate a pretext for an invasion, including sabotage and information operations, accusing Ukraine of preparing an attack on Russian forces in eastern Ukraine, — he said, pointing out that Secretary of State Anthony Blinken spoke about it. Sullivan recalled that the US “saw it in 2014.” He also noted that the United States would be ready to voice data on the Russian “scenario” against Ukraine in the next 24 hours.

According to him, the threat of “invasion” Russia into Ukraine “remains high”, although US intelligence has not yet come to a definite opinion about Moscow's intentions.

Sullivan noted that in the event of Russian military aggression against Ukraine, Washington is ready to strengthen the defense of its allies in Eastern Europe. “We have been clear both to Russia and publicly about several other options, and these include changes in military forces and capabilities that the US and NATO will deploy to the allies on the eastern flank in order to strengthen and strengthen the reliability of the allies’ defenses on their territory,” ; he explained.

In addition, the United States will “substantially strengthen” the support they are now providing to Ukraine, the assistant to the President of the United States warned.

At the same time, he stressed that Washington is in favor of a diplomatic solution to the Ukrainian issue, however, if Moscow decides to go the other way, the United States will “respond accordingly”.

Earlier, the media wrote that the United States would provide $200 million in military assistance to Ukraine, which the administration of President Joe Biden approved secretly. It has such powers over a state that is “in danger.” As part of its support for Ukraine, Washington will give it a radar system and maritime equipment, Politico wrote. CNN, in turn, reported that the new aid package provides for the sending of the same defensive equipment as before, including small arms, ammunition, protected radio stations, medical equipment.

In addition, the United States reported that it was studying the option of sending military to the countries of Eastern Europe, if relations between Russia and Ukraine escalate even more, up to a military confrontation.

The Russian authorities have repeatedly denied the intention to invade the territory of Ukraine. Moscow claims. that she has no “aggressive plans”; in relation to other states and emphasizes that the movement of troops on its territory does not pose a threat.

Subscribe to VK RBC Get news faster than anyone else


Oslo told Russia about NATO exercises amid security talks

Norway has notified Russia of a NATO exercise following security talks In addition to the Norwegian military, forces from 28 NATO and partner countries will take part in the exercises. The maneuvers will take place in the spring in Norway. The notification came two days after Russia-NATO talks on security guarantees alt=”Oslo told Russia about NATO exercises amid security talks” />

Norway has notified the command of the Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy about the Cold Response-2022 military exercises in the North Sea and on the territory of the kingdom, the press service of the fleet reported. In addition to the Norwegian military, the forces of other NATO member countries will take part in them.

The maneuvers will take place in March and April. They will be attended by about 40 thousand Norwegian military, as well as about 28 countries that are members of NATO and partner countries of the alliance.

Lieutenant General Yngve Odlo, Commander of the Operational Command of the Armed Forces of Norway, informed the Commander of the Northern Fleet, Admiral Alexander Moiseev, about the exercise. Odlo assured that the military forces of his country “strictly adhere to the Vienna Document on Confidence and Security Building Measures, adopted at the OSCE Forum in 2011, and stand for the transparency of major military exercises.”

Moiseev, in turn, thanked Norwegian Lieutenant General and wished safe maneuvers, the press service of the Northern Fleet noted.

Cold Response exercises have been held in Norway since 2006.

On January 12, in Brussels, for the first time in 2.5 years, a meeting of the Council of Russia— NATO. During the meeting, the parties discussed Russia's demands for security guarantees and NATO's non-expansion to the east.

After the talks, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that Russia could not veto Ukraine's entry into the bloc. He stressed that all members of the alliance are unanimous in this opinion. Deputy head of the Russian Foreign Ministry Alexander Grushko, who represented Russia, in turn said that the expansion of NATO “does not erase the dividing lines, but transfers them.” towards expansion. He noted that it is in the common interest to maintain the regional configuration that exists today.

Stoltenberg also stressed that Russia must ensure de-escalation in the framework of the Ukrainian conflict, but assured that NATO is ready to sit down at the negotiating table now. Grushko noted that first Kiev must fulfill its obligations under the Minsk agreements.

Subscribe to RBC FB Get news faster than anyone else


In Germany, they said that disconnecting Russia from SWIFT will hit the West

According to the WirtschaftsWoche portal, Oliver Hermes, head of the German Eastern Economic Committee, said that the idea of ​​disconnecting Russia from the SWIF system, if implemented in practice, would cause serious damage  Western countries.


The official recalled that Russia is not Iran, and it is much stronger integrated into the global economy.

"Disconnecting Russia from SWIFT will create significant problems in the Western market," Hermes said.

He also recalled that the "exception" The Russian Federation from the Western world will help strengthen its ties with China, which is an extremely dangerous trend.

“In this case, Moscow will increase its economic sanctions with Beijing … and the West will not receive any gain”, – summed up the head of the Eastern Committee of the German Economy.


Russia to conduct a one-time census of the Amur tiger population

One-time registration of the Amur tiger in Russia will take place after & nbsp; 5 February, said the head of ANO & nbsp; & nbsp; Amur Tiger Center & raquo; & nbsp; Sergey Aramilev, & nbsp; reports RIA Novosti. & nbsp;

The specialist noted that the exact date of registration will depend on the snowfall, after which at least five days should pass, since during this period the animals move little. & Nbsp;

A working group has been created to observe the tigers. will work in the & nbsp; Amur Region, & nbsp; Khabarovsk Territory, Primorye and Jewish Autonomous Region. & nbsp; & nbsp;

Let's add, the last time the survey was carried out in 2015, 480-540 Amur tigers were identified. The Amur tiger is an endangered species, about 90% of all individuals in the wild live in the Khabarovsk Territory and Primorye.


Lavrov told what Russia expects from the West after unsuccessful negotiations

Lavrov: Russia expects the United States to respond in writing to Russian security proposals Moscow will wait for a response from the United States on its proposals, Lavrov said. Russia relies on agreements that guarantee the existence of alliances for the sake of “indivisibility of security” and not to the detriment of the security of other countries, he added

Sergey Lavrov

Russia is awaiting a written response from the United States to Russian security proposals. This was stated by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in the Big Game program. on Channel One, RIA Novosti reports. The program will be aired at 22:30 Moscow time.

“ The Americans promised us to try, but we told them that they need to try very hard, to make their counter offers next week. Stoltenberg, NATO Secretary General, on behalf of the North Atlantic Alliance also volunteered to put his reaction on paper, '' & mdash; said Lavrov. After that, he said, Washington's proposals will be discussed with the President, the Foreign Ministry and the Ministry of Defense.

Lavrov also noted that “ NATO and Americans categorically reject '' Russia's right to seek non-expansion of the alliance. “ But our position is not based on NATO documents. & lt; … & gt; It [position] is based on documents adopted at the highest level in the OSCE, including the Istanbul Summit of 1999, where the freedom of choice of alliances is directly conditioned by the need to ensure the indivisibility of security so that no one takes any measures in their own interests to the detriment of the security of any other state '; , & mdash; he explained (quoted by TASS).

Lavrov's interview will go on the air the day after the meeting of the Council of Russia & mdash; NATO, which, according to the Kremlin, was unsuccessful.

That Moscow is waiting for a “ concrete written formulation '' after two rounds of talks between Russia and the United States, the press secretary of the Russian President Dmitry Peskov also said. According to him, in two meetings & mdash; in Geneva on January 10 and January 12 in Brussels & mdash; there were “ positive nuances '', but they were not the main purpose of these consultations.

On January 10, a meeting of the delegations of the Russian Foreign Ministry and the US State Department was held in Geneva, following which Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov announced that the parties had failed to agree on Moscow's key demand for NATO & mdash; about the non-expansion of the alliance to the east. According to him, the proposal to give Russia legal guarantees in this regard has caused serious objections from the United States.

The requirement to guarantee the non-expansion of NATO to the east and non-joining the alliance of the countries of the former USSR, as well as the clause on the prohibition of military activities on the territory of Ukraine, were in the draft security guarantee treaty that Russia sent for discussion to Washington in mid-December. As Ryabkov stressed, Russia needs “ iron, legal obligations, not promises, but guarantees '' the fact that Ukraine and Georgia will not become members of NATO.

On January 12, negotiations of the Council of Russia & mdash; NATO, which became the second in a series of meetings to discuss security guarantees.

After the talks, the US Senate published a draft of a new package of sanctions prepared by the Democrats against the Russian national debt, the banking sector and the leaderships of countries, including against President Vladimir Putin, Prime Minister – Minister Mikhail Mishustin, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu. Restrictions are provided in the event of an invasion of Ukraine.

Press Secretary of the Russian President Dmitry Peskov is “ extremely negative '' appreciated the appearance of this document. “ Especially against the backdrop of ongoing negotiations. Negotiations, albeit unsuccessful, '', & mdash; he said.

The third meeting dedicated to the topic of security will take place on January 13 within the OSCE.

Subscribe to RBC's Twitter Get the news faster than anyone


Russia denied the US demands to “return the troops to the barracks”

Lavrov: We will not even discuss US demands to “return the troops to the barracks” Moscow does not intend to discuss with NATO or the US the issues of moving troops across Russia, the demand to “return them to the barracks” will not be considered, the Foreign Minister said. Earlier this position was announced by a representative of the Kremlin

Results of consultations between Russia and the West in the OSCE. Live broadcast

Security consultations were held in Vienna at the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. This is the third part of negotiations between Russia and the West. Alexander Lukashevich, Russia's Permanent Representative to the OSCE, talks about the results

Subscribe to Twitter RBK Receive news faster than anyone


State Department called an alternative to “unprecedented” sanctions against Russia

The State Department expressed the hope that Russia “will choose diplomacy” and the US will not have to impose sanctions. The US hopes that the sanctions will remain hypothetical and Russia will choose diplomacy. At the same time, there are no signs of de-escalation on the border between Russia and Ukraine, the State Department said. Earlier, the West threatened Moscow with sanctions in the event of an invasion of Ukraine

Political scientist considers negotiations between Russia and NATO to be ineffectual for Ukraine


The head of the Ukrainian think tank, political scientist Andrey Zolotarev expressed his disappointment with the concluded talks between Russia and NATO. According to the expert, this summit did not bring any positive results for Ukraine.

Zolotarev reproached the Alliance for simply “ playing for time '' in it, giving Ukraine promises to join NATO.

< p> “Promises to accept Ukraine into NATO are akin to the expression“ either the shah dies or the donkey dies, ”he said.

The issue of a peaceful settlement of the situation in Donbass did not become clear during the discussion, Zolotarev said. .


Political scientists predicted adversity-2022: coronavirus, White House and rising prices

Next year, foreign policy will largely determine domestic policy

At the beginning of the New Year, 2022, we decided to find out how political scientists see it. It is clear that none of them traditionally wants to act as oracles, and therefore we asked them not what would happen, but which of the quite obvious events or trends could become decisive for domestic politics and the political situation around Russia next year.


-The most important thing is negotiations with the US and NATO, which are related to foreign policy, but will certainly influence domestic policy too: this will concern Ukraine , security guarantees (for Russia – auth .), etc.

The second important event, it now determines everything, is the question of ending the pandemic: is Omicron a new wave of the pandemic, or is it its final act, what will be the mortality rate, will there be a need for more tightening (antikoid measures – auth .), etc. For a long time this issue did not play a big role in the domestic policy of Russia, but at Putin's press conference at the end of last year it became clear that this had already reached the highest level: protests of some part of the population, political forces, including against restrictive measures related to the pandemic.

The third is the issue of inflation, price increases, world price conditions, primarily for food. The fourth question is, of course, energy prices, the entire energy situation.

And there is no getting away from this, much will depend on what is happening in the United States. Therefore, the most important topic for all countries, and Russia in particular, is what will happen in November at the midterm elections, and whether they will be the threshold of some serious civil confrontation in the United States, as a result of which events that are important for all countries, without exception, may occur. This, of course, is the question of the dollar, the need to create some new reserve currencies, at least in the context of the crisis in the United States, and the general situation in the world, due to the fact that the question of power in the United States is suspended – in relation to 24- m year, and this will already be indicated in the 22nd.

It is difficult to say about other important circumstances. It is obvious that party life has come to a standstill a little (in Russia – auth .). It is there, but … “New people” only reveal their own face. It is clear that mainstream political life does not concern parties.

-The Geneva Treaty is designated as a starting point. Although I do not hope that there will be some kind of reset in relations with the United States and NATO. Given what has been said, it is clear that in relations with the United States and the collective West, much is determined by their reaction to Russia's demands for security guarantees. But since this story is unlikely to end with some kind of breakthrough, we will expect the concept of a besieged fortress, in which we all find ourselves, which means that we cannot expect some kind of democratization in the country, or neutralization.

Moreover, it is quite obvious that since the president's press conference was criticized against the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, related to the party's position on vaccination and quar-coding, it is clear that the Communist Party will remain under pressure.

There will be few elections this year. Probably the key and most noticeable ones are municipal in Moscow. But here pressure on the Communist Party of the Russian Federation can backfire, strengthen the position of the Communist Party, it can become a beneficiary, because here it looks like the main opposition party and the beneficiary of the protest vote.

From the point of view of the economy, the main question that may be asked this year is whether it will be possible to keep the price level and what will happen with the growth of incomes of the population. At the press conference, it was sounded that a stake is being made on three development tools: digitalization – I completely agree, increasing labor productivity – who is against it, and infrastructure projects. But they are troubling because these projects often do not create jobs for Russians. The infrastructure is being built by guest workers, who eventually transfer money abroad. That is, the allocation of money for infrastructure projects does not mean that there will be an increase in the income of the population. And the sounded positive assessment of the Central Bank's policy says that tough monetary policy is considered correct. This means that we are talking about curbing the growth of incomes or pensions, so as not to unwind inflation. I wish there was a middle ground.

With regard to politics. It is clear that it is important to implement the law on a unified system of organizing power. It is very interesting how effectively the new system will be built, how the regions will react to it, because the country is diverse, it is difficult to sew everyone using the same patterns or to heal according to the same recipes. In fact, we have completed the transition from federalism to a centralized unitary state. Now the federal authorities are responsible for everything. Relatively speaking, a power vertical has been built in which it is impossible to push everything onto bad mayors or bad governors, it is impossible to appoint switchmen, because this is a unified system of public power. At the head is the president. How this will affect the work of the authorities is an interesting question.

An equally interesting question is whether political competition will develop in our country. Or criticism of the Communist Party, etc. says that it is coming to an end, because it is not the time to compete with each other, when it is necessary to unite and unite in the face of pressure on Russia from outside. In addition, the regions were given the opportunity to abandon the proportional-majority system in favor of the majority system, and to reduce the proportion of party lists, or even abandon them altogether. That is, will it not finally finish off the party system of Russia.

Well, as for the long-term planning, which the president spoke about. It seems to me that there is a big problem with the image of the future. And the next year could be devoted to finding or promoting an image of a real future that can be trusted, which will return people to the optimism lost during the pandemic.

And again, I would like to believe that the pandemic will end this year, because it affects literally everything. After all, for example, the pandemic was the reason for the introduction of three-day and electronic voting. At the same time, it is important to understand that people no longer believe so much in the value of stability, since some already have nothing to lose, and the demand for change, one way or another, is growing. The question is how the government will respond to this request. The nightingale is not fed with fables. How much money has been invested in raising wealth is interesting, but people are interested in how much money is in their wallets and what prices are in stores.

– Decisive actions by Russia to ensure its security in the direction of Ukraine. This will be the main event that will largely determine the future fate. This is an event on the scale of the one that happened in 2014. It is most likely that Russia will recognize the DPR and LPR, and will deploy its troops there as a guarantee of security. Will it recognize the DPR and LPR according to the version of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, or according to the version of Crimea – that is, recognition, and in a few days acceptance into Russia, will it recognize them within the current borders, or within the boundaries of the current Donetsk and Luhansk regions? But for this it will be necessary to defeat the grouping of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. But these are completely different events.

Either it will be only the DPR and LPR, or the North Crimean Canal will also be unblocked, which is quite logical: if the grouping of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is defeated, why not carry out the unblocking of Crimea. If control is taken not only over Mariupol, but also over Kherson, then the question arises why not take control over the entire coast (Ukrainian – auth .) Of the Black Sea and go to Transnistria in order to resolve this problem. And that means that Odessa goes to Russia one way or another. And if Odessa leaves, then why leave Kharkov? In which, if there is a free referendum, 80% will vote for reunification with Russia.

How much the armed forces will be used, how much the West will be included, how strong the sanctions will be, these are the main events that will determine the future fate of Russia. The lack of tough action, after such an ultimatum, which Putin presented, will also have serious consequences.

The influence of elections and party processes is 2-3 orders of magnitude less. The modern Russian party system functions normally, a small part of the opposition is fixed within the framework of the completely non-radical parties of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, the SR, and the Liberal Democratic Party. Events will take place there. First, there is an attack on the Communist Party of the Russian Federation – a conflict has arisen with the leadership of the party. In addition, a new type of party has been created – New People. This is a cyborg party, an artificial education. Now, according to the version of such a cyborg, a combination of digital technologies and living people, they will try to reformat other parties as well. Now the reformatting of the SR is clearly taking place, a new group has been introduced there, mainly political strategists, with the help of which this will be done. The same is the Liberal Democratic Party, with Lebedev's departure they will try to seize the moment. Plus the Communist Party of the Russian Federation will also be reformatted. These processes will be very active. To what extent it will be possible, I do not know.

The influence of covid as a factor will increase. This is due to the fact that the antwaxers managed to defeat the authorities, they were forced to yield. Maria Shukshina has more subscribers than Margarita Simonyan, and almost like Vladimir Solovyov. The authorities wanted to introduce quar codes on transport, but there was such a powerful attack on the deputies that they broke down: spare us, this is another decision, like raising the retirement age, we will not be forgiven. I don’t know what they will do. Maybe the decoy Cossacks will lead the anti-Vasser movement, or maybe they will be banned, or they will establish a dialogue with them, create places for them in the Public Chambers. This is perhaps the first time that some social groups have been able to defeat the authorities in recent years. People are tired, the problem will be very difficult to solve.


Antonov called calls for “crippling” sanctions against Russia a provocation

Ambassador to the United States Antonov announced US attempts to influence Russia against the background of negotiations According to the diplomat, under the pretext of sanctions, the American side intends to influence Russia against the background of negotiations on European security. At the same time, he pointed out that it is better for countries to build pragmatic and equal relations

Anatoly Antonov

Behind the United States' calls for the introduction of “ unprecedented '' sanctions against Russia in the event of an escalation of the situation in Ukraine is an attempt to influence the Russian side against the background of negotiations on European security. This was stated by Russian Ambassador to Washington Anatoly Antonov, his words are quoted on the diplomatic mission's Facebook page.

“ It seems that American politicians launched the myth of the 'imminent Russian invasion of Ukraine' through the press. and now they themselves are overcoming their own phobias. Moreover, for the requirements of legislators, “ it is more painful to punish '' our country is an attempt to influence Russia against the background of ongoing negotiations on European security '', & mdash; he noted.

According to Antonov, similar calls for the alleged “ crippling '' sanctions against Russia and the country's top leadership are provocative and unpromising. “ Do not intimidate us with restrictions '', & mdash; he added.

The diplomat also pointed out that the Russian side opposes confrontation and intends to build equal and pragmatic relations between the two countries. He noted that threats from Washington undermine international security and will not benefit the American people.

This week, security talks between the United States and Russia took place in Geneva, as well as a meeting of the Council Russia & mdash; NATO in Brussels. At them, the parties, among other things, discussed the requirements for security guarantees presented by the Russian Foreign Ministry. The projects contain a proposal to abandon the deployment of military bases on the territory of the countries of the former USSR, as well as to exclude the further expansion of NATO to the east.

At the end of the meeting in Brussels, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that the discussion was “ difficult. '' According to him, the council passed “ at a defining moment for European security. '' Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Glushko, who represented Moscow at the talks, once again stressed that Russia is not planning military aggression against its neighbors. He also warned that “ if NATO goes over to a policy of containment, then Moscow will pursue a policy of counter-containment. ''

Russia's security proposals were made against the backdrop of statements by Western media and politicians about an imminent “ invasion '' Russian troops on the territory of Ukraine. US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said in early January that NATO would strengthen its position in countries bordering Russia if it “ attacks '' to Ukraine. The United States also allowed the sending of military personnel to Eastern European countries in the event of an aggravation of the situation.

In addition, a day earlier, the US Senate published a draft of a new package of sanctions against Russia in the event of an escalation of the situation in Ukraine. For example, it hit top officials, including President Vladimir Putin, key banking organizations and Russian sovereign debt.

In Russia, accusations of a troop buildup were repeatedly denied and indicated that the country had no plans for a military invasion to the territory of Ukraine. Vladimir Putin previously said that it is NATO that is “ making dangerous attempts to conquer Ukrainian territory. ''

Subscribe to RBC's Instagram Get news faster than anyone


What NATO and Russia have agreed on: video of Stoltenberg’s speech

A meeting of the Russia-NATO Council has ended at the NATO headquarters in Brussels. This is part of the meetings between Russia and the West. RBC broadcasted the speech of NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg after the talks.

Subscribe to RBC's Instagram Get news faster than anyone


Russia and NATO discussed the resumption of the missions in Moscow and Brussels

NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg announced his readiness to resume the work of missions in Moscow and Brussels Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, following the meeting of the Russia-NATO Council, expressed his readiness to restore the work of missions, since the alliance “believes in dialogue”

Jens Stoltenberg

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that Russia and NATO discussed the restoration of the missions in Moscow and Brussels, RBC correspondent reports.

“ We have made it clear that we are ready to restore the NATO representation in Moscow, as well as the Russian mission to NATO, because we believe in dialogue, '' & mdash; he said.

Last October, Reuters and Sky News reported on NATO's decision to expel eight members of a Russian mission to the alliance. As the TV channel specified, the bloc will also abolish the posts of two more Russian diplomats. This decision was due to “ hostile actions '' Moscow. According to NATO, the deported officers worked for Russian intelligence. Thus, the composition of the country's permanent mission to the alliance should be reduced by half: out of 20 people, ten will remain in Brussels.

In response, the Russian Foreign Ministry announced the suspension of the work of its permanent mission to NATO. The activities of the military mission and the information bureau of the alliance also cease. We decided to keep in touch with NATO through the ambassador in Belgium.

Meeting of the Russia-NATO Council Russia & mdash; NATO in Brussels & mdash; the second of the three security summits. On January 13, the OSCE will hold talks in Vienna.

Stoltenberg also noted at the end of the meeting that the allies in the alliance are unanimous that Russia cannot prohibit Ukraine from joining NATO. Earlier, US Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman at a meeting of the Russia & mdash; NATO reiterated that every country has the right to choose its own path. She wrote about this on Twitter.

“ Today at a meeting of the Council of Russia & mdash; NATO, I reaffirmed the basic principles of the international system and European security: each state has the sovereign right to choose its own path '', & mdash; She noted.

On January 10, the first talks between Russia and the United States on the security guarantees sought by Moscow took place in Geneva. They were held in a closed format and lasted almost eight hours.

The main topics were Russia's demands to abandon NATO's eastward movement and Western concerns over the concentration of Russian troops on the border with Ukraine.

Subscribe to Instagram RBC Get news faster than anyone


NATO denies Russia the right to veto Ukraine’s accession to the alliance

NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg: Russia cannot veto Ukraine's accession to NATO At the meeting in Brussels, NATO's position remained unchanged: third countries will not decide who can join the bloc and who cannot. The guarantees that Ukraine and Georgia will not join NATO were one of the main requirements of Moscow

NATO allies agree that Russia cannot veto Ukraine's entry into the alliance, and are ready to support Kiev. About this after negotiations with the Russian delegation in the framework of the Council Russia & mdash; NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said in Brussels.

“ All members agree on the key principle: that every state has the right to choose its own path … The Allies also agree that only Ukraine and 30 NATO allies can decide when Ukraine is ready to become a NATO member, '' & mdash ; Stoltenberg said.

He clarified that Russia cannot veto Ukraine's accession to NATO.

The talks with the Russian delegation, which lasted about four hours, Stoltenberg called it difficult, but useful.

“ We had a frank and open discussion on a wide range of issues, of course, with a focus on tensions in and around Ukraine. But the meeting was helpful & raquo;, & mdash; said the NATO Secretary General.

This meeting of the Council of Russia & mdash; NATO is the second in a series of security assurance talks. The first was held in Geneva between the delegations of the Russian Foreign Ministry and the US State Department, the third is expected on January 13 within the OSCE.

After the talks in Geneva, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, who heads the Russian delegation, reiterated that Russia was opposed to NATO's eastward movement. According to him, Moscow does not trust the alliance and insists on “ reinforced concrete, legally significant guarantees '' rather than promises that neither Ukraine nor Georgia will join the bloc. The diplomat called it a matter of Russia's national security.

US First Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, representing the American side, in turn reiterated that the United States “ will not allow anyone to close the door of NATO to another country. ''

Responding to concerns The West on the 'invasion' Russia to Ukraine, Ryabkov once again ruled out the possibility of aggression against a neighboring state.

President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said that Russia needs “ exactly legal, legal guarantees '', since the West has not fulfilled its verbal obligations. As an example, he cited “ verbal assurances given '' the fact that NATO will not move east, nevertheless, according to him, the opposite was done.

On December 17, the Foreign Ministry released draft agreements with the United States on security guarantees and agreements on security measures with NATO.

They focus on guarantees of NATO's refusal to move further to the east, concentrate offensive weapons systems near the borders, join the alliance of states that were previously part of the USSR, including Ukraine, and conduct any military activity on the territory of Ukraine, as well as other states of Eastern Europe, Transcaucasia and Central Asia.

Putin pointed out several times that if the US and NATO missile systems appear in Ukraine, their flight time to Moscow will be reduced to seven & mdash; ten minutes, and in the case of hypersonic weapons & mdash; up to five.

Secretary General of the alliance Jens Stoltenberg, in turn, ruled out that the bloc ever made promises not to move east.

Subscribe to RBC Instagram Get news faster of all


In the US, they started talking about dependence on Europe in a possible conflict with Russia

“We cannot deal with foreign policy threats alone”

The only way for the United States to deal with the growing power of Russia and China is to strengthen its relations with European states militarily. The American edition of The National Interest wrote about this on January 12.


According to the experts of the publication, over the past few years, mutual cooperation between the United States and Europe has encountered great difficulties. “America has made serious strategic and tactical mistakes in managing the alliance,” the article says. “They have created an ever-growing European distrust of US foreign policy. Because of this, at some point, Europe stopped considering America a reliable ally. ”

According to the publication, both the administration of former US President Donald Trump, which was skeptical of Europe as a military ally and belittled its real capabilities, are responsible for this, as well as the current government of Joe Biden. The spontaneous retreat from Afghanistan, as well as the creation of a trilateral defense alliance AUKUS with Great Britain and Australia, which they forgot to notify the closest NATO allies, like France, about which they forgot to notify the closest NATO allies, like France.

“Only two decades, America enjoyed the feeling of superiority over the rest of the world, but at some point she lost the palm to other states. It must be admitted that now the United States will not be able to cope with foreign policy threats alone, especially when there are several of these threats, ”the author of the article concludes.

Experts believe that the US armed forces will not be able to cope with Russia and China, so the United States must join forces with Europe. For example, for the European Union to contain Russian troops while the US military takes over the Asian theater of operations. At the same time, the United States will not mind the deployment of European troops in the Indo-Pacific region and the organization of joint military exercises in Asia, as this will allow both armies to improve interaction with each other.


The point on which Russia and NATO are able to agree has been named

Expectations from the meeting in Brussels are disclosed

A meeting of the Russia-NATO Council has begun in Brussels at the headquarters of the North Atlantic Alliance. The negotiations were based on the proposals of the Russian Foreign Ministry, which were formalized in the form of a draft agreement and officially presented on December 17 last year. The document expresses Moscow's ideas and vision on issues of interaction with the alliance, as well as stability and security on the European continent. The expert expressed expectations for the consultation.

Photo: AP

The Russian delegation at the meeting of the Russia & ndash; NATO Council (NRC) was made up by an interdepartmental commission of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defense. The diplomatic service is represented by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko.

During the dialogue, the parties gathered to discuss issues related to European security, risk reduction and arms control, as well as the refusal to further expand NATO at the expense of the former Soviet republics. As early as Thursday, January 13, consultations will be held at the Vienna platform of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

“ Russia insists in the draft agreement on security guarantees that NATO does not expand further to the East , – comments Nikolai Topornin, Associate Professor of the Department of European Law, MGIMO … – & nbsp; First of all, this means non-inclusion of Georgia and Ukraine in the alliance. Further, it is proposed that NATO does not deploy any serious military contingents near the Russian borders and does not conduct full-scale military exercises that are far beyond the usual framework.

Moreover, the idea is expressed that the North Atlantic Alliance should return to the agreements that were reached in the 90s – even before its large-scale expansion at the expense of the countries of Eastern Europe took place. There are also minor issues related to transparency, the non-deployment of additional intermediate and shorter-range missiles, as well as the non-deployment of new NATO and US military bases. & Nbsp;

In this case, is it worth counting on the conclusion of at least minimal agreements? The fact is that the document of the Russian Federation has already been widely discussed not only in the United States, but also in the European Union. The EU said that agreements cannot be reached without the participation of leading European states. In principle, the Americans also insisted on this.

However, with regard to the issue of non-expansion of NATO, the main demand of Russia, here all as one in the West declared: no third party can dictate to the alliance who to accept and who not. It has a so-called “ open door policy '', which assumes that all states that agree with the NATO charter and fall under its criteria can become members of it in the future, by the decision of the participating countries. This is the main position, and on it I do not see even the smallest changes. '' & Nbsp; & nbsp;

According to the expert, Georgia and Ukraine at the moment are unlikely to count on the fact that they will be able to join NATO. However, this can happen in 10-20 years. In any case, Kiev is persistently moving towards this: it is carrying out appropriate reforms, interacting with the alliance, accepting its weapons and military concepts, and gradually rebuilding its army in an American-European manner. It can be assumed that in the near future Ukraine can succeed in this direction. Then the question of its acceptance will really arise.

“The position of the Russian leadership here is principled,” Nikolai Topornin continues. – & nbsp; Russia does not want to see Ukraine in the NATO camp. But, if you look, we have neighbors from among the former Soviet republics, the same Estonia and Latvia, which have long been members of the alliance, and Russia has not experienced any upheavals in this regard. She did not demand that these countries leave NATO. & Nbsp;

Although, frankly, from Narva (the most eastern part of Estonia) to St. Petersburg is less than 300 km. That is, for any missile this is a flight time of 3 to 5 minutes, which is much more dangerous than if, for example, some launchers were deployed in Ukraine.

This is an example of the fact that we are quite calm we can coexist with NATO countries and not experience any particular threat. We worked great with them in the 1990s and 2000s, conducted joint exercises and even made joint plans to integrate military forces for greater strategic stability in Europe. After 2014, the ships dispersed at sea, and the situation became extremely conflict. ''

The positions of the parties do not coincide here, the expert emphasized. Therefore, it will not be possible to reach agreements on NATO enlargement. However, there are more opportunities to achieve greater stability in terms of non-deployment of intermediate and shorter-range missiles.

“ At one time, the Americans torpedoed the INF Treaty, withdrew from it, but it is extremely necessary for both European countries and Russia, '' Nikolai Topornin noted. – & nbsp; I think that there is a ground for closer interaction. However, these issues can only be resolved if there is goodwill on both sides.

I see the potential for agreements. But this will require meticulous work at the level of experts, specialists from the Ministry of Defense, the General Staff, NATO structures, which will obviously take at least several months.

In any case, the NATO-Russia Council has not met since 2019 of the year. Previously, there were always contacts between the parties. Recently, our relationship has dropped to zero. We had to close the Russian representation to the alliance in Brussels, and the NATO information office suspended its work in Moscow.

Therefore, the current consultations revive the hope that a new communication channel will be established and the dialogue will become more constructive. I'm not sure any compromise will be found today. Rather, it will be an introductory meeting with more clarifying accents in their positions on issues of military-strategic stability in Europe. ''


“The unreal nature of the proposal.” How the USSR and Russia were not allowed into NATO

Plot World history with Andrey Sidorchik

The problems in relations between Russia and the West could be resolved if they were not on opposite sides of the barricades, but within the same bloc. Such thoughts are not often heard in NATO countries today, but there are still supporters of such a position.

“ Maybe NATO really should open its doors to everyone, including Russia? ''

Retired Norwegian General Robert Mood in an article published by Aftenposten, suggested changing the current approaches to relations with Moscow. According to the general, in the three decades that have passed since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has not been accepted in the West as a full partner. Moreover, we are talking not only about diplomacy, but also about the attitude towards Russians in general.

“ I also don't remember seeing at least one film or TV series where the Russians would be positive, and the Western characters & mdash; negative. Western culture is promoting the US and Western Europeans as something undeniably good. And at the same time cultivates the image of Russia and Russians as something unambiguously evil, vile and primitive. We distort reality, portraying it as the main villain, and the United States and the West – & mdash; impeccable defenders of democracy '', & mdash; quotes the words of the Norwegian general of Radio Sputnik.

According to Mod, it is necessary to act differently: “ Maybe NATO really should focus more on defense and open the door to everyone, including Russia, urging its members to abandon bases and nuclear weapons outside their own territory? Unless we start thinking differently, we are likely to quickly lead to even greater conflicts and wars in both the short and long term. ''

The idea of ​​our country's membership in NATO is by no means the know-how of a Norwegian general. For the first time this topic was discussed 70 years ago, and on the initiative of the Soviet Union.

“ To keep the Soviet Union out, Americans & mdash; inside, and the Germans & mdash; in a subordinate position & raquo;

Immediately after the end of the Second World War, Western countries, primarily the United States and Great Britain, set out to reduce the influence of the USSR in the world. Speech by Winston Churchill in Fulton, which actually proclaimed the beginning of the Cold War, was the prologue to action.

March 17, 1948 five Western European states & mdash; Belgium, Great Britain, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and France entered into the so-called Brussels Pact, the key provision of which was the creation of “ collective self-defense ''. Germany was considered as a possible aggressor in the event of the return to power of the militarists, however, first of all, the USSR was considered as an enemy.

On April 4, 1949, 12 countries, among which were the signatories of the Brussels Pact, the USA, Canada, as well as Denmark, Italy, Norway, Portugal and Iceland, signed the North Atlantic Treaty. Its anti-Soviet essence was not hidden, neither then, nor now.

First NATO Secretary General Ismay Hastings formulated the purpose of the organization's existence rather succinctly: “ To keep the Soviet Union outside, Americans ''; inside, and the Germans & mdash; in a subordinate position. ''

During NATO's 65th anniversary celebrations, then NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rassmussen stated: “Sixty-five years ago this month, NATO was created in a dangerous world. As the shadow of the USSR thickened over Europe, 12 countries on both sides of the Atlantic have banded together to defend their security and core values: freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. ''

do we join NATO? ''

Indeed, it was the noblest association: yesterday's allies of the USSR in the fight against Nazism (USA, Great Britain, Canada), together with those who were allied with the Third Reich (Italy), as well as those whose independence was paid for with the blood of Soviet soldiers (Norway ), were preparing to put an end to the “ dangerous Bolsheviks. '' With a country that not only made the greatest contribution to the victory over fascism, but also suffered heavy losses in this struggle, incomparable with the losses of other European states.

At the same time, the North Atlantic Alliance was not a response to similar actions of the USSR & mdash; There was no pro-Soviet military bloc in Europe at that time.

At the same time, Western diplomats in conversations with Soviet colleagues insisted: NATO is exclusively defensive in nature and thinks only about “ protecting the world. ''

When Turkey was included in NATO in 1952, again declaring the peaceful nature of the organization, Joseph Stalin in his usual ironic tone, he remarked: “ Shouldn't we join NATO then? ''

The legend of Soviet diplomacy Andrei Gromyko has publicly declared more than once: “ If this pact was directed against the revival of German aggression, the USSR itself would have joined NATO. ''

Soviet note and Western response

Gromyko became the ideological inspirer of the Soviet Union's attempt to join NATO, which took place in 1954.

On March 31, 1954, the USSR government sent an official note asking for admission to the North Atlantic Alliance. The document said: “ The North Atlantic Treaty Organization would cease to be a closed military grouping of states, it would be open for the accession of other European countries, which, along with the creation of an effective system of collective security in Europe, would be of great importance for strengthening global peace. ''

The West's response was overwhelming: “The unreal nature of the proposal is not worthy of discussion.” However, the United States was ready to consider such a possibility in the event that the USSR abandoned its bases in the Far East, the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Germany and Austria, and Moscow signed a number of arms limitation treaties on Western terms. At the same time, the “ collective West '' He was not going to undertake any obligations.

Calling things by their proper names, the USSR offered a surrender, akin to the one that Mikhail Gorbachev later went on , and then continued Boris Yeltsin … But the Soviet leaders of the 1950s, despite their many shortcomings, were not idiots.

On May 9, 1955, West Germany was admitted to NATO. That is, in violation of all previous agreements of the member countries of the anti-Hitler coalition, they made the country that initiated the Second World War a member of the military bloc.

Five days after the admission of West Germany to NATO, Moscow made a retaliatory move & mdash; The USSR and the socialist countries created the Warsaw Pact Organization for Peace and Security in Europe. The Soviet alliance, whatever one may say, was only a response to the actions of the West.

Yeltsin's big goal

The collapse of the socialist bloc and the USSR gave birth to a new reality. In which, in December 1991, Russian President Yeltsin sent an appeal to NATO, announcing joining the North Atlantic Alliance as one of the goals of his foreign policy.

In Russia in the early 1990s, the idea of ​​NATO membership was indeed discussed, but the general background was negative. And there was no clear answer to the question & mdash; if the Cold War is over, why do you need a bloc that was previously conceived against the communist Soviet Union?

Today, from the published correspondence of Western diplomats, it becomes clear & mdash; both the United States and Europe understood perfectly well that any NATO expansion to the East would be perceived by Moscow extremely negatively. All the main Russian political forces saw this as hostile actions towards Russia, and Washington was well aware of this.

Agreeing to Russia's NATO membership could have changed the entire history of international relations, but the West found it more logical to act as the victor in the Cold War. & mdash; that is, ignoring Moscow's opinion on this issue altogether.

“ Maybe look at the option that Russia will join NATO ''

Today it's hard to believe, but his career as President Vladimir Putin started out as a politician with a very pro-Western outlook.

While still acting. head of state, in early 2000 in an interview with BBC he said he was considering Russia's membership in NATO: “Why not? I do not exclude this possibility & mdash; in the event that Russia's interests are taken into account, if it becomes a full-fledged partner. ''

The same topic was discussed at the talks with US President Bill Clinton … In 2017, Putin recalled it this way: “During the discussion, I said:“ Maybe look at the option that Russia will join NATO. ” Clinton replied: & bdquo; I don't mind & ldquo ;. But the entire delegation was very nervous. ” One could even say that he went against the opinion of the majority of Russians, believing that relations with the West were extremely important for the future of Russia.

“ We have a fair right to ask frankly & mdash; Who is this enlargement against? ''

In 2004, the so-called 'fifth NATO enlargement' took place. The block included not only the former socialist countries, but also the former republics of the USSR & mdash; Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

No one was going to take Russia's opinion and interests into account, getting off with general words about “ partnership ''.

In his famous Munich speech in 2007, Putin bitterly stated: “The process of NATO enlargement has nothing to do with modernizing the alliance itself or ensuring security in Europe. On the contrary & mdash; this is a serious provoking factor that lowers the level of mutual trust. And we have a fair right to ask frankly & mdash; Who is this expansion against? And what happened to the assurances given by Western partners after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are these statements now? … Now they are trying to impose on us new dividing lines and walls & mdash; even virtual, but still dividing, cutting our common continent. Really, it will take many years and decades again, a change of several generations of politicians, to & bdquo; make out & ldquo; and & bdquo; dismantle & ldquo; are these new walls? ''

The speech of the President of Russia was considered aggressive in the West. But Putin just called a spade a spade, having ceased to pretend that our country is satisfied with such a situation.

The West responded in 2008 with the Georgian attack on South Ossetia & mdash; an attack carried out by an army trained with the help of NATO instructors and equipped with weapons from the Alliance countries. The attack on Tskhinvali was the first open military challenge to Russia. And this challenge was accepted.

The conciliatory idea of ​​the Norwegian general is unrealistic for just one reason – & mdash; The North Atlantic Alliance, created against the USSR, has always seen an enemy in Russia as well. The enemy, which is so necessary for both politicians and merchants, because the image of a “ threat '' so easy to play in elections and when receiving budgets.


“Don’t look at the faces of the strong.” The Russian Prosecutor’s Office turns 300

For questions from AiF answers the former Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation (2000-2016), Prosecutor's Office historian Alexander Zvyagintsev.

From “ Petrov's nestling ''

Konstantin Kudryashov , Alexander Grigorievich, for a significant part of your life you have been studying the history of the prosecutor's office, have written dozens of books, several scripts and even plays, in 1996, thanks to your efforts, a gallery of all Russian prosecutors general appeared in the building of the Prosecutor General's Office. Do you know how it all began?

Alexander Zvyagintsev: October 22, 1721 Peter I took the title of emperor. Then Russia celebrated the victory in the Northern War, regained access to the Baltic Sea. Reforms were in full swing in the country. But the emperor wanted the transformation mechanism he launched to work quickly and smoothly. He saw that the country needed a new state institution, headed by a person with the broadest powers, subordinate only to the emperor & nbsp; and performing three main tasks: to suppress any extortion, to monitor the implementation of laws and control the state apparatus. And on January 12, 1722, Peter signed a decree on the establishment of the Russian Prosecutor's Office, and on April 27 – & mdash; “ On the position of the Prosecutor General '', whom the emperor calls not only “ our eye '', but also “ solicitor of state affairs. ''

From that time until the October Revolution of 1917, this post was held 35 people.

Pavel Yaguzhinsky. Photo:

& mdash; And which of the prosecutors of tsarist Russia would you single out?

& mdash; There were many worthy ones. One of the brightest prosecutors general was the first of them, the favorite of the emperor, Count Pavel Yaguzhinsky … Knowing several languages, he was famous for intelligence, eloquence and secular demeanor. At the same time, he was not inferior to Peter in hard work and was not afraid to boldly express to him everything he thought. The emperor needed an independent figure who could not only react to violations of the law, but also prevent them. Therefore, the attorney general had the right to report to the sovereign at any time. Yaguzhinsky died 11 years after Peter. In the last years of his life, he experienced both downs and ups, but he never had such an influence as in the times of Peter the Great.

The second Prosecutor General I would mention was Alexander Vyazemsky … He was already appointed by Catherine in 1764 and personally wrote him an instruction, which, in particular, said: “ I really love the truth, and you can speak it without fear of anything. And to argue against me without any fear, if only that good would produce in business. And I will add to this that I do not demand any kindness from you, but the only sincere treatment and firmness in business. Then the villains you will be in fear, and the good people & mdash; in patronage.

In fact, Vyazemsky served as ministers of internal affairs and finance. He went down in history by ordering to take into account financial expenses and income for each year, that is, it was on his initiative that the drafting of the annual budgets of the empire began. He also participated in the famous provincial reform of 1775, during which Russia was divided into provinces, acquiring a harmonious and precise administrative management. President of Finland Mauno Koivisto in his book “ Russian Idea '' noted that in those years the Attorney General was actually the Prime Minister. It was Vyazemsky, who served as prosecutor general for almost 30 years, who began to appoint prosecutors in the province and demand from them regular reports on everything that happens there. Many of his approaches to the prosecutor's service became the forerunners of modern prosecutorial activities.

On September 8, 1802, Emperor Alexander I issues a manifesto on the establishment of ministries. From now on, the duties of the Prosecutor General have been entrusted to the Minister of Justice. The first to be appointed to these two posts was the poet Gavriil Romanovich Derzhavin … He was categorically intolerant of embezzlement, deception and machinations and instructed the servants of Themis: “ Your duty is to preserve the laws, not to look at the faces of the strong, not to leave orphans and widows without help, without defense. ''

Derzhavin himself wrote that he began to serve “ with all diligence, honesty, all kinds of diligence and disinterestedness. '' But for his adherence to principles, he quickly made many enemies for himself and a year later was dismissed from service. “ You serve very zealously '', & mdash; the emperor rebuked him. “ And I can't serve otherwise, & mdash; Derzhavin answered. & mdash; Sorry & raquo ;.

Portrait of the Minister of Justice and member of the State Council Nikolai Valerianovich Muravyov. State Russian Museum, St. Petersburg. Photo: Public Domain

And another prominent figure who combined the posts of Minister of Justice and Prosecutor General was Nikolai Muravyov , “ the most talented of the Prosecutor Generals, '' as his contemporaries called him, who worked from 1894 until the first Russian revolution 1905 With his active participation, the new rules of legal proceedings & ndash; a single court for all estates, an open and adversarial trial with the participation of lawyers and prosecutors, to which, if necessary, the jury could also be involved, & mdash; spread throughout the empire.

In general, in the history of Russia there were many people who devoted their lives to serving the Fatherland and the Law.

The era of revolutionary legality

& mdash; Who would you single out among the prosecutors who left the biggest mark in history after the 1917 revolution?

& mdash; The institution of the prosecutor's office in Soviet Russia was liquidated after the revolution. Although in the anti-Soviet governments and the White Army, the prosecutor's office remained throughout the years of the Civil War. By the way, the word “ prosecutor '' then preserved miraculously. It was suggested to call them “ fortified treasures '' & mdash; “ fortifiers of revolutionary legality. '' But Lenin, shortly before his death, insisted on the previous name.

The first Soviet Prosecutor General Dmitry Kurskiy. Photo: Public Domain

In May 1922, the State Prosecutor's Office of the RSFSR was created. The first prosecutor of the republic was D. I. Kurskiy. And on June 20, 1933 the Prosecutor's Office of the USSR was formed. The first prosecutor of the USSR was I. A. Akulov , a man of crystal honesty, who was shot in 1937.

In total during the years of Soviet power there were 11 prosecutors, and since 1946 & mdash; general prosecutors of the USSR (including the prosecutor of the Supreme Court of the USSR P.A.Krasikov ) and 19 & mdash; RSFSR. Many of them were notable figures, and yet I would single out N. V. Krylenko (Prosecutor of the RSFSR 1929-31, People's Commissar of Justice 1931-38), as well as two prosecutors of the USSR: A. Y. Vyshinsky (1935-39) and R. A. Rudenko (1953-1981).

Krylenko, whose name is associated with the entire history of the formation of the organs of Soviet justice, was from the breed of sacrificial revolutionaries, fiercely hating class enemies, believing in the possibility of building a socialist paradise on earth and ready to shed rivers of blood for this. The organizer of the first revolutionary tribunals, he was known as a brilliant orator and polemicist, in whose speeches considerations of revolutionary expediency were decisive.

N. V. Krylenko, 1918. Photo: Public Domain

At the same time, Krylenko was a very versatile person. It is difficult to find another among Soviet prosecutors who would have such hobbies far removed from jurisprudence, in which he achieved true mastery. By the age of 50, Krylenko was not only a leader in legal science, but also a famous climber, who more than once stormed impregnable mountain peaks, sometimes even alone. He wrote several books about his campaigns. In addition, he was involved in the development of tourism, led the Society of Hunters and the country's chess organization. He was also a fan of Esperanto and even wore a green Esperanto star on his chest. Often, he ended processes shortly & mdash; “ Shoot! '', & mdash; and pronounced through repeated “ rrr '' and 'metallic' (“ under Trotsky '') voice. There is a well-known phrase allegedly uttered by Krylenko when he was the prosecutor of the republic and at the same time the head of the Union of Hunters: “ I have been given a mandate for both animals and people. '' Shot in 1938

Another notable lawyer of the Stalin era & mdash; Andrey Yanuarevich Vyshinsky. A very educated, even talented, but one hundred percent man of Stalin, ready to fulfill without batting an eye any of his instructions. Yes, he did not wait for instructions, he himself foresaw. It was he who first picked up the leader's thesis that under certain conditions, “ the law will have to be set aside. '' His teachers can be called the leaders of the French Revolution, who operated not so much with evidence as with pompous eloquence, appealing not to the law, but to the interests of revolutionary expediency. It was he who breathed new life into the thesis, which was then hypertrophiedly exploited by the repressive machine: “ Confession of the accused ''; the queen of evidence. '' As a result, Jaguarovich, as his subordinates called him behind his back, even survived Stalin and died in New York in 1954, as the USSR's representative to the UN. Buried at the Kremlin wall.

Roman Andreevich Rudenko. Photo: Public Domain

In 1953, Roman Andreevich Rudenko, was appointed the Prosecutor General of the USSRwho has worked in this position for 27 years. In the history of the prosecutor's office, this was a whole era, and a humane era. Even before his appointment as Attorney General, his surname became known all over the world: it was he who acted as the main state prosecutor from the USSR at the trial of Nazi criminals in Nuremberg in 1945-1946. Rudenko had his own account of the Nazis: one of his brothers died at the front, the other ended up in a concentration camp, and the third was seriously wounded. He headed the investigation team in the case of Lavrenty Beria , the commission for the rehabilitation of victims of political repression. Along with Georgy Zhukov he initiated the adoption of the resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU “ On elimination of the consequences of gross violations of the law in relation to former prisoners of war and members of their families. ''

Many prosecutors did not return from the war. They were replaced by yesterday's front-line soldiers, among whom there were 14 Heroes of the Soviet Union. In 1947 B.V. Kravtsov began to work in the bodies of justice. In 1960 he was appointed first deputy prosecutor of the RSFSR, after 7 years & mdash; Prosecutor of the RSFSR, and from 1984 to 1989 held the post of Minister of Justice of the USSR.

And not so long ago, a monument to A. M. Rekunkovu, the Prosecutor General of the USSR from 1981 to 1988. He also came to the Prosecutor's Office after the war, only in 1944 he received four orders and was wounded twice. He rose from the assistant to the district prosecutor to the prosecutor general of the country. Under him, investigations began in the USSR in cases that caused a huge public outcry. The most notorious cases were cases of corruption in the Krasnodar Territory and Central Asia. The attorney general supervised them personally.

For a year & mdash; 5 million hits

& mdash; What merits of the prosecutor's office of the new Russia would you mention?

& mdash; The modern history of the prosecutor's office dates back to January & nbsp; 1992, when President Yeltsin signed the Federal Law 'On the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation'. The first prosecutor general of Russia was V. G. Stepankov . The times were difficult, separatist sentiments intensified in some regions, and hostilities began in the Caucasus. Representatives of the prosecutor's office took part in the restoration of the constitutional order, bringing the statutes and constitutions of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in line with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, largely thanks to them, the unity of Russia was ensured.

Since 1991, we have had 9 prosecutors general. The prosecutor's office itself today has 51 thousand employees. According to the current Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation I.V. Krasnov, in 2020 the prosecutor's office received 5 million applications from citizens, for 9 months of 2021 – & mdash; 3.7 million. During this time, prosecutors received 910 thousand people at personal receptions. All of them are focused on ensuring that each of the appeals is considered and, if there are grounds, measures of the prosecutor's response are taken.

The very word “ prosecutor's office '' comes from the Latin take care. It is the concern for the interests of citizens, the protection of their rights, and assistance in difficult situations that are becoming one of the main missions of Russian prosecutors today.

By the way – How and when was the Day of the Worker of the Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation established? – In 1995 A. N. Ilyushenko performed the duties of the Prosecutor General, – says Zvyagintsev. – Having studied my memo on the history of the creation of the Prosecutor's Office of Russia and having read the first volumes of historical research presented to him, he practically reacted to my report – about the establishment of a professional holiday for the employees of the Prosecutor's Office. And for the first time he announced this on May 28, 1995 during a solemn meeting on the occasion of the formation in 1922 of the State Prosecutor's Office of the RSFSR. True, the decree on the holiday was signed by B.N. Yeltsin on December 29, 1995 already under Yu.I. Skuratov.