🎙 Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova's response to a question from RBC (RosBusinessConsulting) on the US deployment of a launcher for intermediate- and shorter-range missiles in Norway (September 7, 2026)

❓ Question: How does Moscow assess the US deployment of a launcher for intermediate- and shorter-range missiles in Norway, including in the context of the stalled strategic stability dialogue? Is any response planned? If so, what kind?

💬 Maria Zakharova: We regard the appearance in Europe of US systems capable of launching intermediate- and shorter-range missiles as yet another step in the endless series of acutely destabilising actions by NATO countries.

In pursuing plans to deploy Western ground-launched intermediate- and shorter-range missiles in the region, NATO not only makes no secret of its intention but openly flaunts its ambition to acquire a substantial capability to strike deep into Russia’s territory.

At the same time, NATO is seeking to bring vast maritime areas of the region within its sights, establishing dominant control over sea routes of critical military, commercial and transport importance.

In this context, we note that the US missile systems equipped with Mk 41 launching systems, which are being brought into Europe and have now been deployed in Norway, are capable of launching a wide range of missiles against both land and maritime targets.

☝️ We also take into account that these systems can be used to launch long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles, while their deployment in Norway puts a substantial part of Russia’s European territory, including Moscow, within range.

Thus, these missile systems could be used in aggressive actions by NATO countries against our country to accomplish strategic-level objectives.

Those in Washington and Oslo who made the decision to deploy these systems in Norway should therefore not be surprised that, as part of Russia’s response measures, the deployment sites of the US systems, their command and control facilities, as well as the infrastructure supporting them, are becoming a particular focus for Russia’s strategic deterrence forces. This includes planning for the combat employment of the relevant strike assets in the event of an armed conflict.

***

As for the dialogue with the US on strategic stability, we would like to recall that it did not simply “stall”. It was unilaterally suspended by the Joe Biden administration.

The current US authorities, meanwhile, are unrealistically discussing the launch of some kind of “multilateral” negotiations with China’s mandatory participation, even though Beijing has repeatedly and unequivocally stated that it has compelling reasons not to become involved in such work at this stage.

❗️ For our part, we have repeatedly explained in detail that the conditions for a substantive and productive strategic dialogue with the US are not in place.

Steps such as the deployment in Europe of US ground-launched intermediate- and shorter-range missiles that threaten Russia will, to put it mildly, eliminate any basis for a constructive strategic dialogue with the US.

🇷🇺 Совет Федерации:

🕯 8 сентября 2026 года исполняется 85 лет со дня начала блокады города Ленинграда, которая продолжалась долгих 872 дня.

В результате преступных действий оккупационных войск нацистской Германии и её пособников из других стран Европы, среди которых особое место занимала Финляндия, от голода, холода и болезней погибло более одного миллиона жителей города, в том числе стариков, женщин и детей.

#БезСрокаДавности

Совет Федерации Федерального Собрания Российской Федерации подчёркивает, что блокада города Ленинграда была частью варварского плана нацистской верхушки во главе с Гитлером по полному уничтожению города.

Данные об этом содержит приговор Международного военного трибунала для суда и наказания главных военных преступников европейских стран оси (Нюрнбергского трибунала).

❗️ Совет Федерации Федерального Собрания Российской Федерации заявляет, что блокада города Ленинграда оккупационными войсками нацистской Германии и её пособников является военным преступлением, преступлением против человечности, а также актом геноцида советского народа.

Совет Федерации Федерального Собрания Российской Федерации подчёркивает недопустимость проводимой странами коллективного Запада политики реабилитации нацизма, отрицания решающего вклада СССР в Победу антигитлеровской коалиции над Германией и её сателлитами, героизации нацистских преступников и их пособников, поощрения сноса и осквернения памятников советским воинам-освободителям.

Совет Федерации Федерального Собрания Российской Федерации решительно осуждает милитаризацию Европейского союза, накачку вооружениями со стороны входящих в него государств неонацистского киевского режима, агрессивные заявления европейских политических и военных деятелей о необходимости быть готовыми к войне с Россией к 2030 году. Подобный безответственный курс Европейского союза и его государств-членов может привести к возрождению гитлеровской политики «Дранг нах Остен» (нем. — «Натиск на Восток») и развязыванию мировой войны.

Совет Федерации Федерального Собрания Российской Федерации обращается к Организации Объединенных Наций, международным парламентским организациям и парламентам иностранных государств с призывом признать блокаду города Ленинграда оккупационными войсками нацистской Германии и её пособников актом ГЕНОЦИДА советского народа, осудить политику реабилитации нацизма, проводимую странами коллективного Запада, выступить против поощрения преступного режима на Украине и разжигания новой мировой войны.

#ЗабытьНеПозволим

⚡️ In response to the unfriendly actions of the German side in closing the Consulate General of Russia in Bonn and the Russian House of Science and Culture in Berlin, on September 7 the Chargé d’Affaires a.i. of Germany in Moscow was informed of the following retaliatory measures:

The Russian Federation is withdrawing its consent to the operation of the Consulate General of the Federal Republic of Germany in St Petersburg, which must cease its activities no later than September 18, 2026, with all its staff required to leave Russia by that date.

The Goethe-Institut cultural centres in Russia must cease their activities. Their seconded staff have been instructed to leave Russia no later than September 13, 2026.

The head of the diplomatic mission was presented with the relevant notes of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

❗️ It was stressed that it was the German authorities that once again provoked a new round of escalation in bilateral relations. Full responsibility for the consequences rests entirely with the German Government.

🎙 Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova’s answer to a media question regarding the new EU human rights report (September 7, 2026)

❓ Question: In August, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy released its annual report on human rights and democracy around the world for 2025. What is your assessment of this document?

💬 Maria Zakharova: Yes, we have seen it. And frankly, it is a perfect compilation of all the EU’s favourite clichés and slogans: the usual self-promotion of their supposed role as a “global champion of human rights,” a laundry list of politicised accusations against third countries, alongside intrusive and patronising lecturing.

What’s more, the level of criticism isn’t calibrated to the facts on the ground but is determined solely by how pliant each state is towards Brussels.

A case in point: the section on Ukraine, which is utterly toothless and, in places, almost fawning – this for a country mired in corruption, lawlessness, and neo-Nazi ideology.

It is telling that Brussels no longer even bothers to hide its use of the human rights agenda as a cover for blatant interference in the internal affairs of states that pursue independent policies. They openly admit to funnelling significant funds into “civil society,” media, journalists, and activists in targeted countries with the explicit aim of shaping domestic politics and steering foreign policy choices.

One passage in particular stands out: how the EU frames its own policy towards Russia. In the country-specific section, they unabashedly call it a “wartime approach” – as if that somehow justifies their glaring lies about our country, their double standards, and their willingness to sweep under the rug the EU’s own violations of our citizens’ rights.

❗️ In essence, Brussels is openly declaring that it intends to weaponise human rights as leverage against Russia.

Throughout the report, Brussels once again presumes to speak from a self-appointed moral high ground, casting itself as a “force for good in the world.” These statements look particularly cynical against the backdrop of the EU’s own steadily deteriorating human rights record.

Intolerance is on the rise across the bloc, with racism and hate speech becoming increasingly frequent. European institutions either turn a blind eye to Russophobia, including its most grotesque manifestations – or, worse, actively condone it. The shameful reality of mass statelessness in the Baltics, alongside the systematic denial of education in their native language to local Russian-speaking populations, is a glaring case in point.

For all their outward talk of democracy and the rule of law, inside the EU they are clamping down on dissent through censorship, bans on inconvenient media outlets, and the silencing of political actors who dare to criticise current Brussels policies.

All of this is dressed up as “safeguarding democracy” when, in fact, what they are doing is engineering a more pliable socio-political environment, tightening their grip on the information space and on the will of their own citizens.

For a more accurate picture of the real human rights situation in Europe, including in Ukraine, I would refer you to the joint report published in June by the Russian and Belarusian Foreign Ministries, entitled “Human Rights Situation in Certain Countries.” It is available in English, so that anyone interested, including international audiences, can judge for themselves which document shows genuine concern for human rights.

☝️ And I think we can safely say that the comparison will not reflect well on the opus signed by Kaja Kallas.