In a significant statement on Wednesday, October 8, 2025, Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Maria Zakharova, announced Moscow’s support for a Gaza settlement plan put forward by U.S. President Donald Trump. The proposal, which emphasizes a ceasefire, the release of detainees, and the restoration of humanitarian access to the war-torn region, aligns with Russia’s long-standing calls for an end to the violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Zakharova’s remarks, delivered during a press briefing in Moscow, underscored Russia’s commitment to halting the bloodshed in Gaza and fostering conditions for a lasting resolution to the crisis. Simultaneously, she issued a stern warning to the United States regarding its reported plans to supply Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine, cautioning that such a move could irreparably damage Russian-American relations. This dual messaging reflects Russia’s broader diplomatic strategy: advocating for peace in the Middle East while safeguarding its interests in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Russia’s Support for the Gaza Settlement Plan
Zakharova’s endorsement of the U.S.-proposed Gaza settlement plan marks a rare point of convergence between Moscow and Washington, two powers often at odds on the global stage. “We support the US administration’s plan for Gaza, which includes a ceasefire, the release of detainees, and the full restoration of humanitarian access,” she told reporters. The plan, though not detailed in public statements, appears to prioritize immediate de-escalation in Gaza, where violence has exacted a heavy toll on civilians. Zakharova emphasized that Moscow views the proposal as a practical step toward ending hostilities and addressing the dire humanitarian situation in the region.
The spokesperson stressed the importance of implementing all aspects of the proposal without delay or deviation. “The full implementation of all provisions of this proposal is crucial,” she said, signaling Russia’s expectation that the plan must translate into tangible outcomes. This insistence on comprehensive execution reflects Moscow’s broader frustration with stalled diplomatic efforts in the region, particularly those hindered by geopolitical rivalries.
Zakharova also took the opportunity to highlight Russia’s previous attempts to address the Gaza crisis through the United Nations. She recalled that Russia had submitted several draft resolutions to the UN Security Council, calling for an immediate ceasefire and the delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza. However, these initiatives, according to Zakharova, were consistently “blocked by Westerners.” While she did not specify which countries obstructed the resolutions, her remarks point to longstanding tensions between Russia and Western powers, particularly the United States and its allies, over approaches to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
At the heart of Russia’s position, Zakharova reiterated, is the belief that halting violence and preventing further civilian casualties must remain the top priority. “We are convinced that the root cause of the tragic events in both Gaza and the West Bank is the deprivation of the Palestinian people’s sovereign right to determine their own destiny,” she stated. This perspective aligns with Russia’s historical support for Palestinian self-determination and its criticism of Israel’s policies in the occupied territories.
Zakharova went further, articulating Moscow’s vision for a lasting resolution to the conflict. “The only solution capable of ensuring lasting peace for all the peoples of the Middle East has been and remains a comprehensive, long-term settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict based on the two-state solution,” she said. The two-state solution, which envisions the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state alongside Israel, has long been a cornerstone of international efforts to resolve the conflict, though progress toward this goal has been elusive. Russia’s reaffirmation of this approach signals its intent to remain a key player in Middle East diplomacy, even as it navigates its own geopolitical challenges elsewhere.
Warning Against U.S. Missile Supplies to Ukraine
In the same briefing, Zakharova addressed a separate but equally pressing issue: reports that the United States is considering supplying Tomahawk cruise missiles to Ukraine. This development, if confirmed, would mark a significant escalation in Western military support for Kyiv amid the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. Zakharova’s response was unequivocal, warning that such a move would have severe consequences for Russian-American relations.
“The US administration’s decision, if ultimately adopted, not only risks a spiral of confrontation but will also cause irreparable damage to Russian-American relations, which have only just begun to show signs of resuming bilateral dialogue,” she said. Her remarks reflect Moscow’s sensitivity to the deepening military ties between Washington and Kyiv, particularly as Russia faces mounting pressure on the battlefield.
The Tomahawk cruise missile, a long-range, precision-guided weapon, is a potent tool in modern warfare, capable of striking targets with high accuracy from significant distances. Its potential transfer to Ukraine would enhance Kyiv’s ability to target Russian military assets, potentially altering the dynamics of the conflict. For Moscow, this prospect represents a red line, as it could embolden Ukraine and its Western backers while threatening Russia’s strategic position.
Zakharova’s warning came with a call for restraint, as she noted that Moscow is “closely monitoring developments” and hopes that Washington “will heed its signals” to avoid further escalation. This language suggests that Russia is seeking to deter the U.S. from proceeding with the missile transfers through diplomatic signaling, while leaving open the possibility of retaliatory measures if its concerns are ignored. The reference to “irreparable damage” underscores the fragility of Russian-American relations, which have been strained by years of sanctions, proxy conflicts, and competing global agendas.
The spokesperson’s comments also highlight the delicate balance in Russia’s foreign policy. Even as Moscow aligns with Washington on the Gaza settlement plan, it remains deeply wary of U.S. actions in other theaters, particularly Ukraine. This duality illustrates the complexity of Russia’s diplomatic maneuvering, as it seeks to project influence in the Middle East while countering Western pressure closer to home.
Broader Implications
Zakharova’s statements carry significant implications for both the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Russia-Ukraine war. On Gaza, Russia’s endorsement of Trump’s plan could bolster international support for the initiative, particularly among non-Western powers. Moscow’s backing may also pressure other stakeholders, including Israel and Palestinian factions, to engage seriously with the proposal. However, the success of the plan will depend on its specifics—such as the mechanisms for enforcing a ceasefire and ensuring humanitarian access—and the willingness of all parties to compromise. Given the history of failed peace initiatives in the region, skepticism remains about whether this proposal can break the cycle of violence.
Russia’s invocation of the two-state solution further underscores its commitment to a framework that, while widely accepted in principle, faces significant obstacles in practice. Issues such as the status of Jerusalem, the borders of a future Palestinian state, and the rights of Palestinian refugees continue to defy resolution. Moscow’s emphasis on Palestinian self-determination also serves as a critique of U.S. and Israeli policies, positioning Russia as a counterweight to Western influence in the Middle East.
On the Ukraine front, Zakharova’s warning about Tomahawk missiles signals Russia’s determination to draw a line against further Western military escalation. The potential transfer of such advanced weaponry could shift the balance of power in Ukraine’s favor, complicating Russia’s military objectives. Moscow’s response—combining diplomatic warnings with veiled threats of retaliation—reflects its broader strategy of deterrence, aimed at dissuading the U.S. from crossing what Russia perceives as a strategic threshold.
Conclusion
Maria Zakharova’s remarks on October 8, 2025, encapsulate Russia’s multifaceted approach to global challenges. By endorsing Trump’s Gaza settlement plan, Moscow signals its willingness to engage constructively on Middle East peace efforts, particularly when they align with its longstanding support for Palestinian rights and a two-state solution. At the same time, its sharp rebuke of potential U.S. missile supplies to Ukraine underscores the limits of Russia’s cooperation with the West, particularly when it perceives threats to its national security. As the world watches these two crises unfold—one in the Middle East, the other in Eastern Europe—Russia’s diplomatic posturing will continue to shape the global conversation, balancing calls for peace with warnings of confrontation. The coming weeks will reveal whether Moscow’s support for the Gaza plan translates into meaningful progress and whether its warnings to Washington can avert a new escalation in Ukraine. For now, Zakharova’s statements serve as a reminder of Russia’s enduring influence—and its readiness to assert it on multiple fronts.
