Interview with Maria Zakharova, spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
Originally published in Current Concerns*, Issue No. 12, 16 June 2026
https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2026/no-12-16-june-2026/what-on-earth-has-become-of-germany
_On 28 May 2026, the German journalist and author Patrik Baab published an interview with Maria Zakharova, the spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, on his YouTube channel “Gegen den Strom”._1 _Baab had conducted this approximately 90-minute conversation during his stay in Moscow – following the US President’s trip to China on 14 and 15 May, but before the Russian President’s visit there on 19 and 20 May, before the Ukrainian bombing of a vocational college in Luhansk on 22 May, and before the Russian retaliatory strike on the Ukrainian capital Kiev on 24 May. The interview touches on a wide range of current and fundamental issues, and we recommend that you do not dismiss Ms Zakharova’s comments as Russian “propaganda”. Instead, you should reflect on what she has said. What is particularly striking is that Zakharova’s statements are serious, incisive and resolute – and they are also quite different from the polemical, vitriolic and aggressive outbursts of our Western warmongers. We have selected excerpts that deal with Germany and our approach to human rights violations in Ukraine._2 The risk of a direct war between Russia and the countries of the European Union (and NATO) has risen dramatically in recent weeks. German politics is playing a decisive role in this. There is still a chance to avert the catastrophe of a major war. This requires a different perspective on the past few years – indeed, a realisation of our own shared responsibility for the situation in which we find ourselves today.
Patrik Baab:
Following a meeting with Zelenskiy, Friedrich Merz was quoted by the press as saying: “The Russian Federation has no chance of winning this war [in Ukraine].” Does Moscow have the impression that this war is intended to be Europeanised […]?
Chancellor Merz is harming Germany
Maria Zakharova:
First and foremost, we feel that people like Merz genuinely hate their own people. Because everything Merz does, and everything people like him do, is aimed at ensuring that the citizens of Germany […] do not simply live worse lives overall, but live truly bad, very bad lives. And everything that Merz’s predecessors created – the true giants of the German economy, German science and German entrepreneurship – all of that has been destroyed. This feeling is very strong. And don’t think that this is just a figure of speech or a philosophical musing. It is a very practical observation of what the German leadership has actually been doing in recent years.
Up to a certain point, we could see that the people at the helm in Germany had, well, got some things right and some things wrong. Some things they did in partnership with Russia, for the benefit of both countries, and some things solely for their own gain, without regard for our country. But in any case, Germany’s interests were always the priority – as a nation, as a society, as a people.
But at some point in recent years, we have come to realise that everything the German leadership does not so much harm Russia – although it does that too – but above all harms its own industry, science, economy, entrepreneurship, education system and, ultimately, the German people themselves. […]
The Federal Republic of Germany’s export-oriented economic model is struggling with a decline in the competitiveness of German products on foreign markets, and this has been the case ever since the decision was taken to stop using energy sources from Russia. Who made that decision? It was precisely these German business leaders. Has Russia cut off supplies to Germany? No, right here, where you are sitting now, sat your colleagues from the German magazine Compact. That was about a year and a half ago. At the time, they asked me a direct question: Can Russia continue supplies by using the North Stream 1 and North Stream 2 pipelines, which have remained undamaged, to deliver gas to Germany? I have checked this with Gazprom and our experts, and they have confirmed that, yes, it is technically possible. Once the political and economic issues have been resolved, it would take around three weeks, perhaps a month, from a technical point of view. So, supplies could be resumed within a month. This means that it was not Russia that cut off gas supplies to Germany, but rather that Germany turned its back on Russian energy resources under pressure from its own politicians.
The German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy forecasts a further decline in Germany’s share of global markets. […] The foreign trade balance shows a negative trend: –1.4 per cent in 2025, –0.5 per cent in 2026 and, according to the current forecast, –0.2 per cent in 2027. All of this has, of course, also had an impact on the situation facing German manufacturers. To be honest, I was shocked by the following news. […] Apparently, Mercedes-Benz has announced that it intends to sell or make available part of its industrial – that is, its production – capacity for military purposes. This is, after all, a company that was one of the world’s most successful in the automotive and vehicle manufacturing sectors. It had fantastic prospects in the Eurasian region. I am talking about Russia now. After all, it wasn’t Russia that drove Mercedes out of our country, closed its dealerships or shut down its service centres. Mercedes left of its own accord. Why? Not because it was economically disadvantageous for Mercedes to remain in our market, but because German politicians forced Mercedes to withdraw. Now Mercedes is talking about possibly selling off part of its production capacity for military purposes. And why? Because they know full well that, in the foreseeable future, it will be impossible to recapture the market they themselves have abandoned. That market was immediately taken over by companies from other countries that didn’t leave. On the contrary, many of them came here when they saw that Mercedes had gone.
We have always regarded Germany as the country that is essentially seen as the driving force behind the European economy. According to the IMF, it is now the weakest link in the so-called G7. […] Just five years ago, I would have said that something like this could never happen. Germany, in particular, had the brightest prospects not only on the European continent, but worldwide. Why? The ability to work, the highest level of qualifications and professionalism – these were the basis for selection – and, of course, resources from Russia, combined with German technology. All of this together produced a fantastic result. […] All of that was destroyed in just a few years.
It is not we who are Germany’s enemies, but those who are currently leading Germany. Look, production volume has fallen by 5.3 per cent year-on-year. And according to German experts – these aren’t my figures; I’m referring to German experts – capacity utilisation is currently 5 per cent below the level that is normally considered a recession. If you think I’m pleased with these figures, you’re wrong. I regret this. Germany was one of our strongest partners. Economically speaking, yes, a true business partner indeed, but that is now a thing of the past. And I’ll say it again: has anyone attacked Germany? Has anyone occupied it? […] No, it is the citizens of Germany who have come to power, who promised prosperity and who have destroyed everything that Germany has built up over the last few decades. […]
May I ask a question? Not to you. I’d like to put a question to every German who will see this, who might spit at the screen or shout: “That’s Russian propaganda.” I’m just asking a question, and every German who sees, hears or reads it should answer it for themselves: Did Russia really do all this? […]
Patrik Baab:
What do you think? Is the Federal Republic of Germany already a direct party to the war?
Germany is belligerent
Maria Zakharova:
Do you really have no answer to that? Do you need any further confirmation of that? When it is Germany, in particular, that is arming the Kyiv regime in the first place, when the so-called Ramstein formula3 forms the basis of this arming, when representatives of the German state apparatus are personally coordinating the combat operations of Zelenskyy’s troops and the Kiev regime, supplying weapons and equipment, providing funds and exchanging information, then surely that is obvious.
I remember, about two years ago, perhaps a year and a half – yes, probably closer to a year and a half – on the fringes of the conference in Antalya, a piece of news literally sent shockwaves through the entire media landscape. It was about high-ranking German officers allegedly discussing a further attack on civilian infrastructure, on the Crimean Bridge and so on. Do you remember, these recordings were published about a year and a half or two years ago. That’s roughly how it was. What else can you call it?
[…] No one really doubts that Germany is fully involved in this. What is more, representatives of the Berlin establishment are saying this quite openly. They are not hiding it. They do not mince their words. They state quite clearly that the aim is to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia, and they are taking part in the hostilities on the side of the Kiev regime.
But that’s not quite right. They aren’t actually taking part in the fighting on the side of the Kiev regime. They are using the Kiev regime to achieve precisely what I mentioned at the start: their aim of inflicting what they call a strategic defeat on Russia. What other reasons could we possibly have for seeing things differently? I see no way of not calling a spade a spade. I simply can’t; I don’t have a single argument to refute your question. Not a single one. And even Berlin says exactly the same thing. And what they are doing is exactly what they are talking about. Both in the theory and in the practice of world history, this is described in exactly the same way. They are using the Kiev regime to, as they put it, inflict a defeat on Russia, to deal blows. Call it what you like.
[…]
Patrik Baab:
In the eyes of the public, at least in the West, the war in Ukraine takes a back seat to the problems in the Middle East. […]
No compassion for the victims
Maria Zakharova: That’s a brilliant line: in the eyes of the Western public, the conflict in Ukraine is taking a back seat because of events in the Middle East. Do you see? They’re worried about the Western public, but not about the people. They don’t care about those who have been killed, injured or maimed. They don’t care about the terrorist attacks targeting civilians, nor about the maimed children. They are only bothered that the conflict is being overshadowed.
But why, I ask, does this Western public not mind that their governments allocate hundreds of millions of euros and dollars to this conflict every week – yes, literally every week? By now, the figure has already reached billions, and that too amounts to tens of billions, which then turn into hundreds of billions of euros and dollars.
Why does this not concern the Western public? Why are they not interested in this fact? Why do they not care about the much-vaunted human rights, of which nothing remains in Ukraine? Absolutely nothing. These human rights have long since ceased to be observed there, and not only in relation to the Russian-speaking population, Russian citizens, people of Russian origin or Orthodox believers. Above all, these rights are being violated against Ukraine’s own citizens. Just look at what is happening there.
Forced conscription, mistreatment of people who have their own views on this situation, or who are exempt [from military service] or have health reasons that make service impossible for them. Physical abuse, even murder. Look at what is happening to freedom of expression. There is nothing left of it. There is only one perspective left: that of Bankova [the Ukrainian Presidential Office] and Zelenskyy. Everything else is to be shut down, put on hold and silenced.
Why is the Western community not bothered by the enormous scale of corruption? This is not simply corruption involving the theft of money in Ukraine. This corruption is linked to illegal trade, particularly in weapons, to the distribution of these weapons on the black market, and to a black-market transport network that has, in fact, even been enshrined in Ukrainian law. Why is the Western community not addressing the corruption that now affects not only those in power in Kyiv, but also Western leaders directly? Quite simply because it is obvious that neither Zelenskyy nor any member of his team could dispose of Western aid so freely if it were actually subject to Western controls or monitoring structures. If there were proper accounting practices in place there, with clear records of debits and credits, they wouldn’t be able to steal on this scale. Of course, this is corruption, and it is directly linked to Western advisers and sponsors. And it is precisely they who are at the centre of this corruption.
Why doesn’t the Western community care at all? Now they’re worried that the whole thing might somehow vanish into the shadows, but that’s a misrepresentation of the situation. Yet you were right to say it. That is precisely what concerns them. The shadows, not the substance of what is happening. But one must look at the substance. That is why we are discussing the actual causes of the crisis. That is why we are talking about what is really happening there.
[…] Everyone is only paying attention to the superficial trappings, do you see? The main thing is that the issue stays on the agenda, so that Zelenskyy can apparently travel endlessly to award ceremonies like the Oscars or to San Remo, to various song contests, to receive prizes for whatever, and to take part in various summits. What’s the point of all this? To provide a sort of ideological justification for what Western Europe has been doing for many years. In other words, he is being used as a sort of absolution for all the mistakes they have made.
And they are terrified that one day it will lose its shine and fade into the shadows. That is exactly what they fear. The worst thing is that they fail to realise that every day, every week, every month, they are funding terrorism – which has long since become international terrorism – with huge sums of money; that every day, children, women and the elderly are being killed with their money. People in hospitals, schoolchildren, people on the streets, every single day. And this is being funded by Western Europe. They ought to be horrified by this, but they aren’t, because the Western media don’t show them any of it. •
1
2 In the original interview, the question by Patrik Baab, which appears third here, was placed before the other two questions.
3 The “Ramstein format” (officially the Ukraine Defence Contact Group, or UDCG for short) refers to an international alliance of over 50 states led by the US. Since 2022, representatives of these states have been coordinating collective military and financial support for Ukraine, meeting for this purpose at the US base in the German town of Ramstein. The “Ramstein formula” determines the share of this support contributed by the various states.
Read the full interview excerpt (via Current Concerns, Issue No. 12, 16 June 2026):
https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2026/no-12-16-june-2026/what-on-earth-has-become-of-germany
Watch the original interview on Patrik Baab’s channel, Gegen den Strom: