Lavrov once again accuses Baltics and Poland of "supporting Nazism", using a really convoluted argument of "rewriting history" and "equating liberators of Europe with criminals convicted by Nurember tribunal". This makes a good clinical example of how Russia defines "Nazism" - and it's not by referring to the actual neo-Nazi views which are tolerated as long as they with Russian imperialism. Russia uses the term "Nazism" dialectically - that is, anyone that opposed USSR after 1941 is "Nazi" merely because in that period USSR was part of anti-Nazi coalition. This way, Soviets happily indicted many leaders of the Polish resistance who fought with Nazi Germany since 1939 of "Nazism" based merely on the fact that they also opposed Soviet occupation of Poland. Russians of course conveniently ignore the period of Soviet-Nazi alliance 1939-1941 and the fact that Soviets committed their own war crimes and occupied whole countries, according to them the very fact that they then (forcibly) fought Germany should erase all that. In Russia, it's actually a crime (article 354.1 Criminal Code) to "spread false information about activities of Red Army during WW2", as long as it has not been recognised by the Nuremberg Tribunal. Of course, the Nurember Tribunal did not investigate Soviet war crimes, therefore any discussion of Red Army war crimes on the occupied territories, including Katyń massacre or NKVD prison massacres is, by definition, a "crime" in Russia. And also "rehabilitation of Nazism", because this is literally the title of the article 354.1 even if the word "Nazism" doesn't appear even once in the legal text of the actual article and thus any causal link between these two is not legally established. Instead, merely talking about Soviet war crimes automatically implies "rehabilitation of Nazism" in modern Russian legal practice.