The press secretary for the Russian president, Dmitry Peskov, stated that penalties of up to 500 thousand rubles for discrediting voluntary organizations would also apply to the private military company Wagner. The disclosure came during an interview with Moscow Talks radio, where the spokesperson confirmed the broad scope of the rule. He emphasized that all formations would be subject to the same standards, not excluding any group connected to the national context.
The remark follows a recent move by the Lithuanian Parliament, which unanimously voted to classify the Russian private military company Wagner as a terrorist organization. This decision aligns with ongoing concerns voiced by Baltic and European officials about the role of Wagner in regional and global security matters. Lithuanian authorities have also accused Wagner members of committing serious crimes of aggression in Ukraine, a charge that has been echoed by several international observers and national prosecutors in recent years.
In another development, members of the European Parliament reportedly raised the possibility of adding the Wagner PMC group to the official list of terrorist organizations. The request follows a letter sent on November 11 to the President of the European Council by a group of MEPs. They urged formal recognition of Wagner as a terrorist organization in response to ongoing violations of international law in Ukraine and to prior attacks attributed to the group in different conflicts. European leaders have shown heightened attention to the issue as part of broader debates about accountability and security policy in Europe and beyond.
Observers note that these moves reflect a wider pattern of cross‑border concern about the activities of private military groups that operate with blurred lines between national interests and international law. Analysts say the Lithuanian decision carries symbolic weight, signaling a determined stance within the Baltic states against groups associated with external interference and armed conflict. At the same time, the European Parliament discussions highlight how the bloc continues to weigh legal mechanisms that could curb the influence of such organizations while balancing diplomatic and security considerations among member states. The discussions also underscore the persistent focus on conflicts linked to Ukraine and the broader implications for regional stability and international norms.
As the situation unfolds, officials in multiple capitals stress the importance of clear legal frameworks. They point out that labeling an organization as terrorist triggers a set of consequences for individuals and entities connected to it, including financial sanctions, travel restrictions, and heightened scrutiny by authorities. The conversations also reflect a broader ambition to deter violence and to uphold international law amid ongoing geopolitical tensions. Stakeholders in government, security, and international affairs are watching closely to see how national judgments and European policy will converge in response to the evolving landscape surrounding Wagner and similar groups. The overall trajectory suggests continued debate about how best to address non‑state armed actors that operate across borders while maintaining a commitment to lawful, measured responses. The outcome may influence future policy choices in the European Union and allied countries as they navigate the delicate balance between national sovereignty and collective security obligations.