🎙️ Russia’s Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova’s answer to a question from RIA Novosti regarding the IOC’s refusal to accredit the agency’s correspondents for the 2026 Winter Olympics in Italy (November 15, 2025)

❓ Question: Recently, we learned that the International Olympic Committee refused to accredit RIA Novosti correspondents for the 2026 Winter Olympics in Italy. The IOC explained its decision by saying that it had already distributed “a certain number of accreditations” among Russian media organisations and just cannot issue more. What would be your comment regarding this situation?

💬 Maria Zakharova: The IOC continues to ignore to basic principles of the Olympic movement in an effort to serve the Western Russophobic agenda.

This institution is to blame for the fact that Russian journalists have to face such restrictions once again when covering global sporting events such as the Olympic games.

For example, in July 2024 the Organising Committee of the Paris Olympics denied accreditation to several Russian journalists, including from RIA Novosti Sport and Izvestia International Multimedia Centre by referring to a decision of the French authorities.

In August 2024, the Organising Committee of the Paris Paralympic Games referred to a verdict of the French authorities to deny accreditation to four TASS correspondents.

Each time the Olympic movement’s executives hide behind the position of the host country, positioning themselves as obedient agents.

However, whereas previously the IOC referred to the position of the host country with feigned modesty and awkwardness, now it makes up non-existent reasons on its own for denying our correspondents access to competitions.

The gist of the argument that several Russian journalists have received accreditation to 2026 Winter Olympics looks ridiculous and shameful even to an outsider.

☝️ This awkward excuse is nothing but another manifestation of the Russophobic position conscientiously and consistently spread by this organisation. This has a deplorable effect on the Olympic movement and Olympic ideals which are based on rejecting any kinds of politicking in sports, including in elite competitions.

By conducting the flawed policy of double standards and discriminating athletes on ethnic grounds, the IOC officials have de facto trampled upon the fundamental principle of “sports outside politics” as set forth by Pierre de Coubertin in the Olympic Charter.

By acting this way, the IOC officials insult athletes and their fans all over the world, since their jingoism deprives them of the last opportunity to follow the competitions, which should be available to anyone.

We expect the appropriate international organisations (the UN, UNESCO and the OSCE) to give a substantive and unambiguous assessment of the IOC's biased policy, which once again grossly violates the principle of equal access to information and media pluralism for the sake of serving the vested interests of some pseudo-democracies, including Italy, the Olympic host country.

❗️ If they ignore this shameful incident, we will regard their inaction as another example of bias and dysfunction.

🎙 Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's interview for the documentary film “Nuremberg” (November 16, 2025, Moscow)

Read in full

❓ Question: How and when did the idea of creating the International Military Tribunal arise? What role did the Soviet Side play in its organization and conduct? Why was the USSR’s position – from the very beginning insisting on the necessity of a tribunal – initially irrelevant to the UK and the US?

💬 Sergey Lavrov: It was the Soviet Union that acted as the main driving force behind initiating the discussions, and later the establishment of the Tribunal.

The issue of ensuring the inevitability of punishment for Nazi criminals was first officially raised in a Soviet note in November 1941.

In 1942, the Soviet Government issued a special statement calling on all countries to cooperate in detaining, searching for, extraditing and bringing Nazi criminals to justice. <…>

This idea took its final shape in Yalta and was legally put on paper in London in October 1945, when the tribunal was established. Its Charter was signed, forming the legal basis for all subsequent work.

I would note that throughout these efforts the Soviet Union acted independently. It did not simply rely on the hope that an international body would someday be created and would “restore justice”.

In 1942, the Extraordinary State Commission for the Investigation of Atrocities Committed by the German-Fascist Invaders and Their Accomplices was established. It collected facts, materials and witness testimonies, and organized several trials during and after the Great Patriotic War, including in Krasnodar, Kharkov and other cities. The experience gained through these judicial initiatives was actively used at the Nuremberg Tribunal.

<…>

The initially restrained attitude of the Anglo-Saxons towards the idea of creating an international judicial body reflected concerns that the proceedings could “touch upon” the question of the origins of the war – why, after the Versailles Treaty, the countries that were supposed to restrain Germany under Hitler ended up cooperating with him. <…>

Our Western colleagues did not want to delve too deeply into history, lest it become widely known and openly discussed again. At the time, these facts were well understood.

It must be recognized that, eventually, the correct understanding of responsibility prevailed, and the arguments of the Soviet Union – the main initiator and driving force behind the creation of the Nuremberg Tribunal – were heard and accepted. Our role here is absolutely indisputable.

❓ Question: In your view, what is the historical significance of the Nuremberg Trials in the post-war years? How did they influence the evolution of the world order?

💬 Sergey Lavrov: The Judgement of the Nuremberg Tribunal contains principles that were formulated for the first time during the proceedings.

⚖️ They formed the foundation of modern international law.

They abolished the “right of the strong” and affirmed the inadmissibility of the use of force and violations of humanitarian principles in any conflicts.

The principle of inevitability of punishment for war crimes, aggression and crimes against humanity – including genocide – was articulated internationally and universally during the Nuremberg process.

It was later organically reflected in numerous conventions adopted at the UN and in other formats.

It also found reflection in the principles of international law that underpin the work of the UN International Law Commission.

Of particular importance is the Nuremberg judgement’s affirmation that crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes are not subject to any statute of limitations.

❗️ Nazi ideology, the Nazi Party and structures such as the SS (Schutzstaffel), SD (Sicherheitsdienst) and others were banned forever.

Regrettably, these elements of the judgement are now undergoing severe tests and are often violated.

#NoStatuteOfLimitations