some second part was relatively important for russia in matters of future conflict resolution , with the exception of the kiev agreement with london on security , well, this is a story it’s not new a few months ago, when they had clashes over whether to accept ukraine into nato or to the european union, and not everyone was in favor, not everyone was happy, everyone understood perfectly well that this was another, completely senseless , irresponsible step, a risky step for european security, well, just like that, you know, a semi-finished product , the conclusion of bilateral agreements with individual western countries was invented, i heard about what is contained in...

this is a continuation of the genre, quarter 95, now, maybe it will be called something else, mm, we we do not object to the agreements that other countries conclude with ukraine, but this does not change our goal at all, this was confirmed just the other day by president putin, we will be the targets of a special military operation,

we see the fulfillment of this prophecy, there are no, there are no hopes for that that russia will be defeated somehow, well , this has already been said many times, those who did not study history, and there are many of them in the west, and geography too, of course, they know little,

the libyan, libyan air force will not fly, they never flew, therefore, there was no even far-fetched reason to use force there, but the country was bombed, turned into a black hole, to this day no one can put the libyan state

back together, and a huge number of refugees poured into europe, from which it suffers, the americans do not the british suffer too suffer, in the direction of already...

ask, but one country, called iraq, made a decision several years ago, which reads: dear gentlemen americans, thank you very much, you stayed with us here, your military bases were here, let us somehow we’ll finish this and we’ll take you home, but the americans just don’t leave, just recently the following words were heard again from baghdad regarding:

such semi-closed contacts with the participation of the united states, israel, individual arab states, but somehow all these contacts don't assume direct dialogue between palestinians and israelis, but they assume that somehow the grown-ups, so to speak, will somewhere agree on how to continue to live for the palestinians and then... if successful, only a direct dialogue that needs to be resumed, he went , it was difficult, but progress was still achieved , it will be presented to them, it will not have any support from the international quartet, the quartet

of international mediators, we have invariably advocated for the activities of the quartet, these are the usa, russia, the un and the european union, necessarily.

let's see, we'll see, life should

probably teach all our western colleagues, and the countries of the region, first of all, should insist that they live here, and for them the security of all the states located there is of decisive importance, advice from outside, probably no one gathers, is observed in gaza, therefore

, to see relapses of the violence that is now happening without the creation of a palestinian state, the palestinian people will continue to feel disadvantaged, will continue to live in conditions of injustice. and of course generation after generation of young palestinians will feel this injustice and pass it on to their children, we need to put an end to it, and that end should be the creation of a palestinian state, i really hope that the israeli leadership will come to this conclusion eventually, while now not everyone there believes this is acceptable for...

the first who recognized the independence of israel, there are now about 2 million citizens who are at the same time citizens of russia, immigrants from russia, we, of course, are not indifferent to this, we are ready to play an active role in ensuring a full-fledged settlement that will guarantee israel’s security in the context of...

in the context, of course, of the conflict with the west, against the backdrop of

washington’s openly hostile policy. thank you. well, a lot has been said recently about the prospects for resuming a strategic dialogue with the united states ; this topic comes up every now and then in conversations, in contacts with the media, but talk.

u.s.a. washington has set a course for unbridled anti-russian expansion the charged nato bloc, expansion into the post-soviet space, was provoked by

the conflict around ukraine, and we, as you know, did not put up with its use. who for centuries lived in the territories developed by their great-grandfathers and great-great-grandfathers and which these territories always remained russian land, part of the russian world, and they wanted to turn kiev into a tool for destroying

this history, this shared memory and destroying any ties between...

you see how former commanders of us forces in europe, and hodges and breedlove recently gave public advice.

they teach little, they will support kiev , and they used to say as much as necessary, now they are already saying as much as possible, this is already such a nuance, reflecting a slight change in the assessment of the situation, well, for god’s sake, it’s theirs, it’s their business, we , well, for example , please, where was it before,

findings, this suggests that the west does not want any constructive solution that would take into account the legitimate concerns of the russian federation, but such a destructive policy, which of course headed by the united states, has led to a very deep, well, frankly speaking, degradation of russian-american relations leading to a radical change in security circumstances.

well, the same thing happened with the treaty on conventional armed forces in europe with the new start treaty itself, due to the fact that the united states created unacceptable conditions for their implementation; it was the american side, let me remind you of this , that at one time froze the bilateral strategic dialogue, citing unfavorable military-political background, they canceled - in my opinion in the spring in the fall of twenty the second year round, which we were ready to hold, but suddenly, not so long ago, they again

remembered the importance.

certain positions, these are the people who are in power, which is why we consider american ideas unacceptable, by the way, they do not, do not hide their intentions, but when talking about strategic stability, it is not the nuclear component of military confrontation, not nuclear forces, put out of the brackets , to consolidate the serious quantitative advantages that the collective west has in this area, so we do not see in the conditions of the driven washington's hybrid war against russia, we do not see any grounds not only for additional joint measures in the field of arms control to reduce strategic risks, but in general for...

a course towards comprehensively undermining russia's security and our interests and from demonstrative public disrespect for ours fundamental interests, well, in addition, any hypothetical, hypothetical interaction in the future on strategic stability would require the united states to be prepared to consider this topic,