we will risk against the obvious even. if we make a mistake, we will remember it for the rest of our lives. we think it's mold, you know. and where is it, more precisely already. yes? you know , there are different options, watch the intellectually entertaining tower project on our skin day tv channel. we sew away millions of emotions. we can rejoice to be angry with diolya with mind jasom our emotions. we are not in the mood, music showing our emotions will choke us and yana, who has already eaten with us, becomes an integral puzzle of our life. here

is the clever girl, the music is tired, that she finds not i will express the windy border where the music is silenced for a place of 1.600.

naimuna does not want to interrupt the run and drag the anchor. whisper, the leaves are shining, the sun, like holy fractions, our lives are formed. i would like to have a closer look at this world. and every day to discover something new it would be so. 'cause we cut it out with love. out of love for belarus, the program

sas is authorized to declare i am the presenter nadezhda sats greetings. this is a program for those who want to better understand what is happening in the world and understand how these processes, events, people will affect the life of everyone and the life of the country, but the main events of world politics this week. i will tell you right now. for the first time in 5 years, north korea test-fired a ballistic missile over japan, a potential nuclear weapon carrier, flew 5,000 km and fell into the pacific ocean in response to the usa and south korea conducted test launches of missiles in the sea off the coast in the dprk the party won the elections in latvia the current prime minister of the country a new unity, while the parties representing the russian-speaking minority do not were able to overcome the five percent barrier. there is

a suspicion that this was a manifestation of the radically anti-russian course of the current government, the economic crisis continues to demolish the government in europe with early elections scheduled for november 1 in denmark, as well as in neighboring sweden, the center-right coalition has every chance to change at the helm of the social democrats. the idol was overthrown as soon as the businessman ilon masked in a series of tweets to appeal to the leadership of ukraine with a call to strive for an early conclusion of peace and respect for the rights of the inhabitants of donbass and crimea determine their future, like millions of yesterday's ukrainian fans. they anathematized him. and this despite the fact that the complexes provided to the masks for free, starling provide the ukrainian army with access to the internet and play a huge role in coordinating its actions, the unexpected peacekeeping activity of the billionaire. observers attribute

it to a desire to outshine trump, who recently offered to mediate between kiev and moscow. yes, fear of mutually assured destruction turned the cold war into one of the longest in history . history of mankind without big hot wars , and many are accustomed to thinking that it will always be this way, this gave rise to the so-called strategic frivolity, when the factor of nuclear weapons began to be completely ignored when making key foreign political decisions, but this is a mistake and worth it. she may be too expensive. in fact, how we can all avoid such a spectacle around the world and how great the risks of such a scenario are, we will talk today in our

program. and andrey vladimirovich savinykh, chairman of the permanent commission on international affairs of the house of representatives of the national assembly of belarus good evening and sergey borisovich stankevich political figure candidate of historical sciences. thank you so much for being with us today hello and indeed. i would like to start with a rather direct and tough question: do you personally fear a nuclear war. naturally, i am afraid, and moreover, as an expert, i am sure that a nuclear war is now very likely. and this probability increases over time, well, do not be afraid of a nuclear war. maybe just irresponsible man, so oh, such a prospect can not please anyone, but i contend that the whole talk about nuclear war is, in fact,

the western information agenda. they are trying to impose this discourse on the whole world, and the possibility of a nuclear war. she, of course, may have risen, but not enough to blindly follow their narrative. yes, the people do not like to talk about big troubles, so as not to invite the elites, they still can afford to do it, and the worst can and should be said what to prevent about why the terrible topic of the nuclear apocalypse has returned to the world agenda. in our story , we look together for the first time since the cold war in the world again talking about the threat of nuclear war. after all, the risks of such a development of events are true, older than the bombing of hiroshima and nagasaki by the americans showed the reality and, most importantly, the consequences of the use of nuclear weapons by the united states as a country that is the only one in the

world. i applied it, created a precedent by this, and now they are actively using it to intimidate and achieve their goals, although i went and nuclear blackmail we are talking not only about the encouraged shelling of the zaporozhye nuclear power plant. what threatens a nuclear catastrophe, but the statements to some high-ranking representatives of the leading nato states about the possibility and admissibility of using weapons of mass destruction of nuclear weapons against russia about the threat of nuclear war were also stated by the minister of foreign affairs of belarus vladimir makein at a high- level meeting of the un general assembly in new york unprecedented the level of tension and distrust, entailing an increase in risk military confrontation makes nuclear weapons and the threat of their use almost as real as more than 70 years ago , it is necessary to intensify dialogue between countries possessing nuclear weapons in order to commit the

process of nuclear disarmament to a multilateral and irreversible character. however, such a scenario is unlikely to suit the west from the united states america has long made it clear that it is interested in the world only according to its rules and with its orders. and if for this you need to unleash a nuclear war, then the goal. justifies the means we feel that right now we have the ability, the effectiveness, to contain and respond to any unforeseen circumstances, and also to fulfill what president biden strongly emphasized today, that we will protect every inch of nato territory as history shows, it is rarely about protecting our territories take colonization indians or endless wars. yugoslavia olivia syria afghanistan every time the us published scandals and conspiracies for political reasons and for their own benefit the states have always used force to intimidate and imposing a certain mindset. other countries, nothing has changed. and now they just changed their goal,

alexander lukashenko told her, we know about systematic deliveries to the united states and other nato countries through the polish airfield. armament and military equipment daily arrive there about a dozen sometimes more american transport planes in the states want to weaken and remove everything from the international arena of russia and its ally to get closer to its main competitor china at the same time to increase the dependence of the european union on the united states if you see the us will not meet the us the european union will destroy america, as us secretary of state anthony blinkin said washington has already begun to work out preliminary steps in case russia may use nuclear weapons. what are these steps? of course, they kept silent, but one point

from the nuclear doctrine of the states can put everything in its place. the document says that the united states needs to make sure that potential adversaries are fully aware of the consequences of not being the first nuclear weapons, but there is also an internal reason for the failure of the economic crisis in afghanistan and the unsuccessful middle east tour in this situation. all this made biden a weak political figure, not only among the population and the opposition, but also among democratic allies, who are most likely to lose early elections to congress. therefore, biden decided to play a new caribbean crisis. true, with the exception that he must come out of it as winners. these would be persuasive arguments for his constituents. however, the american government does not take into account one play with fire most often leads to a fire. yes, indeed, playing with fire most often leads to a fire and it is important to note. and

that the fear that accompanied the final phase of the cold war disappeared from the public space andrey vladimirovich what do you think, is an incremental exchange of nuclear strikes likely today, because sometimes you cautiously open the media in the morning and are afraid to read something there, because rates. now it is so high you need to be very careful not to case to avoid the worst. you are asking a very difficult question, which is not easy to answer, but on the one hand, i can say with confidence that the united states of america is using this nuclear threat as a means of psychological pressure. as a serious tool or weapon of mental warfare against their opponents in this case, the peoples of russia and belarus and here is the

discourse that they throw into this space. after all, it was originally built on the assumption that supposedly someone would use nuclear weapons. weapons and the united states and then they will definitely answer. it's already a construct. this is already a definite turnaround. and this is where you need to look. e truth, the second point, i support the opinion that the most sane part of the american establishment. this is, uh, the army leadership, and they understand very well what nuclear war means. and then who, in your opinion, does not understand, er, and his team. i think everyone understands. it's another matter how this argument is used. these arguments are also used as a cover for this element must also be taken into account. an

act was committed, uh, international terrorism destroyed, uh, two or three threads of the nord stream, in fact. nobody doubts that it was in the interests of the united states of america, but the fact itself. uh, this terrorism needs to be covered up, attention must be diverted from it. as a result, public attention is switched to the threat of nuclear war. yes, just because of the simple discussion of this topic, the likelihood of a nuclear war. rather, the possibility of it increases, but still i believe that it does not exceed 2-3%. yes thank you. eh, here. i would also like to point out that there is a paradox, and it is that the best way to control the escalation. it doesn't allow it. now you see sergei borisovich as an opportunity for this because, unlike the

caribbean crisis, when it was very difficult to build a dialogue, now there are all public methods. yes, to provide it, but this does not happen opportunities for diplomatic dialogue. just no, unfortunately not on the line, moscow washington is not on the line. moscow kiev uh, the truth is fortunately preserved uh, closed channels of special communication, both between political centers and moscow washington and between military departments. e russia and america, these channels work, but they work mainly so that the parties can warn each other. uh, that's it, that is, there is no dialogue. well, there is no condition for effective dialogue. that is, where we could not exchange accusations and threats, reach some result of diplomatic nothing. this is not in this connection, uh, the conflict is a military conflict on the territory of ukraine.

only, but the territory of ukraine is on the rise. i believe that the likelihood of using tactical nuclear weapons. in this conflict has exceeded 70% and will be above 80% during the coming winter. i would like to add alexei anatolievich gromyk, director of the institute of europe of the russian academy of sciences, chairman of the andrei andreevich gromyko association for foreign policy research, alexander anatolyevich, to our broadcast to our discussion. hello. i am glad to welcome you. hello, thank you for the invitation repeatedly meet the opinion that although the threat of the use of nuclear weapons is prohibited by the un charter, a clear articulation by the relevant powers of the conditions and scope of the use of nuclear weapons, on the contrary, can serve the cause of peace, forcing international authors to still be more

careful and whether it is correct to interpret the recent statements of vladimir putin through this prism firstly, i would say that there is no ban on the use of this or that offensive system in international law . there is no such thing. i am the nuclear doctrine of all countries five countries on the official so-called nuclear club and the nuclear doctrine is public or not public, but nine, and the countries that possess today, uh, nuclear systems. and we know that in history, and nuclear weapons were used for military purposes, it was all-russia. not nagasaki in august 1945. since then, there has been no uh in the doctrines, none

of the countries of the official nuclear club has written anywhere that uh is a strategic nuclear uh weapon, but is aimed at winning uh in a conflict, uh, everywhere philosophy this hmm means. the e of the military is to keep the enemy from attacking e, his side. we must not forget that in the senal of many u.s. countries, russia is no exception. uh, there is a large number of tactical nuclear weapons. and here it must be said that today the situation is in some ways directly opposite to what existed during the years of the cold war. yes, on a confidential basis, the advantages of the

soviet union in europe were on the dates, and now we have the opposite picture. when in conventional weapons nato in europe has a multiple superiority over the conventional armed forces of our country, and it is no coincidence that the central storage warehouses in russia contain, e, the largest and arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons from the nine countries, and in this regard, of course, on our map yes, and alexei anatolyevich, we would like to demonstrate with our viewers so that they understand the scale of the disposition of forces, the number of nuclear weapons in countries and, in fact, on how many and where, it will be possible to place

in states that border on one or another state of the enemy and the situation will depend on us. to ensure peace or war sergey borisovich how can you characterize the current situation that is developing? well , colleague alexei gromyko correctly pointed out the difference, firstly, in conventional weapons , nato’s multiple superiority in conventional weapons and armed forces over russia in europe. and besides, also on the difference between strategic nuclear weapons and tactical nuclear weapons, of course , speech. now we can talk about the use of tactical nuclear weapons. i would even single out another such subspecies of a weapon on the battlefield. such field nuclear weapons, that is, these are, uh, mines and artillery shells. in nuclear version, they fly up to 50 km.

the distance is applied directly on the front line or in the middle rear of this kind, huh? more soviet-era funds have been accumulated. uh, firing their delivery is uh howitzers and uh, large-caliber mortars underwent serious modernization in russia from the seventeenth to the twentieth year after polygons. they have been tested multiple times enough. successfully, however, nuclear charges were not used. and this argument can become the last, decisive argument if, in the course of an ordinary military conflict , a threat really emerges, such a serious defeat that will threaten the existence of the state or other vital interest, and i assume. this is not my recommendation. this is not my desire. i am generally a pacifist by nature, but i predict that it

can come to such arguments as tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield, and if turning to the topic of signals, the resumption of nuclear tests andrei vladimirovich can be perceived, and comment on sergei borisovich's statement because you are not a pacifist, you are a defeatist. i completely rule out the possibility of russia using tactical nuclear weapons. it is not possible where , relatively speaking, russia will use such a tactical grain of weapons, in fact, on its territory and on the people whom the president of russia called the fraternal people. this is a typical american substitution. here is the argument american propaganda which unfortunately is replicated by certain circles in russia, i

can say with confidence that russia is never the first to use nuclear weapons to gain tactical superiority. on the battlefield. i am well aware that russia is confronted with the potential of nato and that in ukraine the main conflict is carried out with the support of e nato states and they share and intelligence information and supply weapons, nevertheless. even nato is trying not to escalate this conflict because that they perfectly understand that this is a road to nowhere, no words of defeat sounded from me and it sounded uh, that means a second. if there is a threat, there will be a threat. eh, so let me remind you what e said, the actual president of the russian federation. he said that russia will protect e not only the state of its existence, but also its territory by all and

available military means. it's an obvious formula that includes nuclear weapons, uh territory. russia has grown in recent days and in this newly annexed territory there are hostilities. that is, it is not just a threat to this territory. these are already military actions and an attempt to return these territories by force from those that have gone from ukraine to russia, which is not a direct reason that corresponds to the president's statement. and he didn’t say at all that russia was going to swing. e with this, but with weapons for every reason and in any case, eh, but once again i want to say e without this argument. uh, you can get drawn into a conflict of attrition, uh, which in the end will really threaten the existence of the russian state and its integrity. and what do you think of the resumption of nuclear

testing, can be taken as a signal whether this demonstrates the determination of any state, because this is also on the agenda. there were enough conversations. yes, i predict that russia is most likely in favor of withdrawing from the 1996 comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty and that nuclear weapons testing at the northern test sites will be resumed. e tactical nuclear weapons, because they have not yet exploded, and er, there will be a desire to see how it works. here. eh, this step. this is already a step of fairly close time from my point of view. how true. in your opinion, what the current generation of western leaders has lost is that sobering fear that we talked about at the beginning of the program and allows itself strategic frivolity, which at some points even borders on recklessness. just a two-loop

control system. outer loop is government presidents who uh, real do not make fateful decisions, they carry out the agenda that is brought to them. uh, well, let's say corporate-financial elites, which are the main center of government in these countries. so here's the problem, the biggest problem is that we are now, uh, or coming close to a phase crisis, when the entire global economy, uh, is facing, uh, a stage of very serious transformation. and alexei anatolyevich, i would really like you to comment on part of that discussion, a witness who was and answered the question. uh, regarding the fact that during the cold war it was the leaders of european countries who were the first potential victims of a possible clash. they, in turn, play the role of a

damper, which, in fact, softened the confrontation between moscow and washington, why now we don’t see on the contrary. hawks who are ready to aggravate these relations to the utmost, today in europe the situation very ambiguous, because on the one hand. as we remember, the states under and trump withdrew from the treaty banning medium -range and shorter-range missiles in europe and e, conducted e tests of such e, missiles and them, in principle, now nothing e does not prevent the prospect of two or three years from placing such missiles in europe and there are a number of countries in europe. uh, for example,

poland, which i do not exclude, would not only be against, but would be happy if such missiles appeared on their territory, uh. so it seems to me that today it is necessary not to to rely on some kind of dancher factor in europe, but exclusively in moscow and washington , to take steps to not directly close hands with a closed friend, but to make sure that this nuclear genie does not escape from the bottle by any means. uh, because in general it is clear to all serious specialists, all serious military and politicians, that today there is no mechanism. uh, k, which could u guaranteed u limit the use of weapons of mass destruction, determined by the theater military action, and, by the way, about the lessons

of history. it is interesting that during the caribbean crisis of 1962, it was the revolutionary leaders of cuba who spoke from the most irreconcilable positions and pushed moscow to escalate about the moment when the world was closest to a nuclear catastrophe. our history story. the world was already close to a nuclear war during the caribbean crisis in 1962, it was at this time that relations between the ussr and the usa escalated to the limit, everything began with the socialist revolution in cuba led by fidel. castro then relations between havana and washington escalated due to the nationalization of american enterprises by the cubans. at the same time, in parallel, the country began to establish relations with the ussr, therefore cuba became the next state where moscow

deployed its missiles. the government set up a naval blockade, which, according to international rightly considered an act of war the situation was heated to the limit, to avoid catastrophe. khrushchev wrote a letter to kennedy. he offered to dismantle the rockets with the condition of a guarantee of safety. and the regime in cuba however, the truce did not happen the next day an american reconnaissance aircraft was shot down over cuba. on the same day, a soviet submarine collided with the us navy. then on the night of october 27-28 , 1962, kennedy and the us attorney general met with ussr ambassador anatoly dobrynin, after which kennedy sent to kremlin message. he gave guarantees of non-aggression against cuba and promised to lift the naval blockade on the condition that the ussr withdraw its ballistic missiles from cuba. as a result, both parties we managed to find a compromise. experts note the merit of andrei

gromyko in this at that time he was the minister of foreign affairs of the ussr diplomat. i found a worthy way out of the situation at a time when the world literally hung in the balance. his manner, communication and ability to achieve goals gained worldwide fame after the caribbean crisis between moscow and his washington began construction. the ranks of opponents of the war began to grow rapidly in the world, after which a number of international laws were adopted to limit the use and storage of nuclear weapons. international politics also became more careful not to provoke another similar incident in the future. however, today the world is going through another period of confrontation. soviet missiles that were deployed in cuba and their range, the situation in 2022 is completely different caribbean crisis arose solely due to the deployment of medium-range missiles in turkey and, in fact, the

creation of a strategic threat to the soviet union if this step had not been taken. it didn't happen. you don't want to be placed in cuba, but you know, shuus be in my place. now , no one wants to understand the concern of the russian federation; everyone has forgotten about it; moreover, it is necessary to take into account equally the interests of all states and respect the principle that underlies e. the security policy and belarus of russia literally from that very caribbean crisis, a it is precisely that it is impossible to ensure one's own security at the expense of the security of others , it is indicative that now russia's main ally in europe is belarus, and here it is consistently in favor of détente. actually, what we will not say, but in the period

when the cuban leaders, on the contrary, spurred on. yes, for some such decisive actions and peaceful negotiations, which the president of the republic of belarus speaks of and, for the first time, provided a platform for them. how do you see the role of official minsk in the current conditions, because everyone they understand that the official role of minsk i first of all see as an ally of russia why because this is a serious confrontation and either we will all enter into a rational dialogue that will allow us to make a mutually acceptable decision, or we will all be together, including the united states of america in a very difficult situation. i naturally have the hope that we will find a constructive solution, as it was e during the cuban missile crisis, but beyond any doubt.

it should be on mutually acceptable principles teach with the interest of all participants. listen, it's very important that everyone refers to the cuban missile crisis as a positive example. what was the cuban missile model ? yes. uh, the soviet union one morning i woke up and saw missiles in turkey aimed at moscow 10 minutes to fly to moscow but there is no missile defense, what should i do? the soviet union, he creates a response. the threat of placing a missile in cuba, that is, is escalating. you think you have huddled and achieved de-escalation, that is, you have achieved the removal of the threat. uh, that moment a model is a certain model and a precedent, and a positive precedent at that. as my colleague says, when you go for an escalation, you raise the stakes, you create a retaliatory threat and, thanks to this, you come to a compromise. i do not rule out that such a model may arise in the current military-political

conflict. here allow me to literally replica here. i think that is just the solution to these problems. here, as you say, yes, the escalation, or rather, the salad situation, it is just not connected with the use of nuclear weapons for russia, it is primarily connected with mobilization, and not mobilization into the army, amobilization of the economy. with the development of the military-industrial complex and, to a large extent, it is connected with the nationalization of the elites who govern the russian federation, and this, in my opinion, if this set of measures is carried out, this will become the solution that will allow not only not to lose. well , relatively speaking, stand your ground how many years is your competing plan calculated? if you are addressing me as a citizen of the union state of russia and belarus, i

think that these questions, unfortunately, are the union state will have to decide very quickly, no more than a year, a maximum of two, and i can assure you that such a concept as mobilization in the republic of belarus has already been implemented under mobilization. i understand the ability of the state bodies of the republic of belarus of law enforcement agencies to unconditionally protect their own territory by causing irreparable damage to any enemy who encroaches on our land on our world. well, then we will prove once again that both russians and belarusians. they take a long time, but they go fast. let's go yeah colleagues, indeed, there is a lot of speculation in the western press about what real actions

moscow can take, and moreover, to reassure the public, all the scenarios discussed relate exclusively to the territory of ukraine . although in their statements, representatives of the russian leadership. nowhere was it said that their warning concerned exclusively low-yield tactical nuclear weapons or directly on the front line. but before we discuss other scenarios. i ask you to display excerpts from the nuclear doctrine of the russian federation on the principles of its applications. four conditions for the use of nuclear weapons by russia, the first, if there is reliable information about the launch of ballistic missiles attacking the territories of russia or its allies. second, if nuclear weapons and other types of weapons of mass destruction were used on the territory of russia or its allies, third, if the enemy acts on critical state or military facilities of russia, the failure of which will lead to the

disruption of the response of nuclear forces, and the fourth in terms of aggression against russia with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is threatened. and that's why it's always here if yes, here the western press says that russia is determined to have a nuclear war. or , for example, the use of yes, but nuclear weapons are always meant taking into account the current international situation. its use on the territory of ukraine why are we talking exclusively about this, if the range of missiles is completely different, this may not affect ukraine, but other participants in the conflict who support ukraine is provided. really. i agree that it is not necessary to reduce. uh, the hypothetical possibilities of using nuclear systems on the territory of ukraine and experts just

talk about what hypothetical, uh, scenarios suggest in the first place. uh, the use of such systems is not in ukraine , but if this conflict develops into a military clash into a direct military clash between uh, russia and nato member countries, and then uh, one or another side can cancel such e systems not on the territory , uh ukraine a in almost any point of the world, depending on which scenario will be involved. i would also like to say that russia has been in the west for many years. uh, they are often accused of allegedly adhering to the doctrine of escalation for the sake of

d escalation, that is, russia is ready to increase the stakes, including the use of nuclear systems in order to put pressure on the enemy and force him to take a step there back and defuse this or that situation, but it seems to me that the niubin crisis, not what is happening now, does not indicate the fact that russia in its strategic thinking is there with this idea of ​​​​escalation, for the sake of de- escalation. let me remind you that in the sixty- second e, it was not the soviet side that escalated the situation in europe, this step was made not by russia, but by the united states, which is the soviet one. uh, the union planned to do it here in cuba to equalize these nuclear ones, and the potentials of their threat reminded me that really

nuclear, uh, weapons after 1945 in doctrinal terms, uh, everywhere uh, were supposed only as a containment system this is the limiting factor. is the threat of nuclear retaliation supposed to be a threat of credibility, and so we see one side and the other send signals that they are serious? yes, it refers to the possibility of using doomsday weapons, but every time everyone emphasizes that this will be done only if the fundamental interests and issues of life and death for a particular country are put, uh, over the edge. i want you to summarize today's, and emotional in some ways even complexity there is no discussion, the discussion is difficult. agreement, but

i want to do it again. alexey anatolyevich let me down well. uh, by and large, the result highlights one very interesting thing, which is the general conflict between the united states and russia as the two main nuclear powers. all the same , things are quite unlikely, on the other hand, we see a huge amount of talk about the use of nuclear weapons, including more tactical ones. very often, instead of arguments, we use the assumption we can expect most likely, and so on. this is a very, very dangerous path. thank you andrei sergeevich, please, the final word is that it was impossible. last year. unfortunately, what seems impossible this year has become possible this year. unfortunately it may become possible next year, because therefore the responsible analyst and expert

is obliged. e, looking at the current situation , extend the line from the past through the present to the future and draw conclusions not according to the principle. e hmm to calm everyone down and say that everything will be fine. this is a classic principle. yeah, u speeches like that public e, current politicians. but still, to warn about real risks and threats, but not to disorganize and intimidate anyone, but exactly the opposite, to organize and prevent these threats, which we clearly understand. thank you very much to all the participants of today's program. that was incredible. interesting and something to think about . i would like to quote from one very strong and worthy of being reviewed now a film about konstantin lopushansky letter from a dead man. it's time finally admit that the whole history of mankind this history, protracted

suicide. living matter, which cosmic chance endowed with the ability to think and which did not know what to do with this random fatal ability, period and did not find a better use for it, as the creation of the most effective methods of total suicide. sas is authorized to declare. threats of full-scale nuclear war between the great powers no, not yet.

belarus is a strategic territory for the west and ukraine it would be strange to assume that nato troops are concentrated near our borders , they will be disbanded in an instant, and ukraine will forget about its plans to occupy the part of belarus that bandera has been nurturing for many years, no matter how strange it may sound to someone, but there is documentary evidence of this and these plans for many years, hatched secretly and were not voiced aloud. and given the current military-political situation near our southern borders and the rhetoric of ukrainian officials. the napoleonic plans of zelensky and his team willy-nilly. yes, pay attention, as well as the fact that the western neighbors are not in a defensive mood at all. on the contrary , the weapons that are collected from our borders are of an offensive nature, but for the west and ukraine and this is different, and with you i am ksenia hello belarus for ukraine and our

western neighbors we need a loyal and anti-russian expert opinion of one of the main ukrainian political scientists yuriy romanenko it sounds like we need a loyal belarus in the future, a member of the union bloc, which will include even more a number of other countries, this may be the union of only ukraine and belarus but for us, now belarus is the number one goal in our foreign policy in the immediate periphery, because by solving the issue of belarus we will begin to resolve the issue of russia romanenko's journalism is not only a threat, but also calls for a coup in belarus and overthrow of the current government, in fact. it just continues the process launched among the ukrainian elites back in 2020. and after that, these people will convince us that they did not interfere and do not interfere in the politics of our

republic. as an option, you can recall the not yet forgotten post of yermak, the head of zelensky's office where he says in no uncertain terms that a ukrainian attack on belarus is just around the corner. are they prepared for the consequences of their own decisions and do they assess the scale of these consequences for them? back in 2018, during the main meeting of ukraine. nsky stages are equal to the nazis, because the meeting is called bandyrov's readings , the following theses were voiced and documented. all other ethnic territories of ukraine were distributed by the bolsheviks to the puppets of moscow, a large territory of ukraine was under the occupation of today's russian federation also in the north, a significant territory of ukraine was included in the ussr, we are talking about the northern part of polissya and breschen with the cities of mozyr and brest, so 1/3 of the territory of ukraine today is outside the borders of the state, ukraine the united ukraine should cover the territories

where the independence of the ukrainian state was proclaimed throughout the 20th century, but let me remind you again. please note that ukrainian nationalists are interested in our southern territory. why is the process of restoring the cathedral of ukraine and about this they they say from year to year in 2018 it was noted that the south of belarus could become a springboard for the introduction of russian troops into ukraine, but they did not speak. under what conditions, in the opinion of the same nationalists, in such a po , ukraine turns out to be among the unfriendly states of the west among them, therefore, they choose a strategy in advance under which the eu can take the side of the independent, if ukraine takes an aggressive stance towards the kremlin, then ukraine will be considered, as a subject of geopolitics, and not the trophy of the european union and in particular poland, therefore, the task it's easy to make friends against a common enemy and

for a while forget about the desire to gather a united ukraine and take ours from moldova romania poland in this case belarus in alliance with russia is unprofitable. it is beneficial as an ally of ukraine and the coalition of the west because it is easier to get closer to the borders of the russian federation and, by the way, representatives of the right of radical parties recognize that the war and it was the war that was started by the first, ukraine years old. we were given so many weapons now, not because we are good, as they say it helps us. the west because they want good for us, because we fulfill the tasks of the west, because it’s fun for us to kill and it’s fun to fight, and yes, there is no nazism in ukraine, but how to explain that the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, general zaluzny, prefers to wear bracelets with a swastika recently in his on twitter, he posted this photo. this is the original, where

it is clearly visible when enlarged. what kind of ideology does the command of the ukrainian army promote when choosing jewelry with a cursed bent cross kill punishers and fascists, therefore genocide and enslavement is their way to provoke our military, it is quite profitable for ukraine to remember and only the story of the drone that collected intelligence at the brest training ground and the case of accidental crossing of the border by a military helicopter. there, the ukrainian side denies that something like this took place , including the espionage of ukrainian diplomats when they themselves collected data on the movement of russian equipment on the territory of belarus on the state of the belarusian army, as well as recruited people for this and these are proven facts. marty, the number of ukrainian diplomats was a little over 20 people, half of them were career employees of the main intelligence directorate of the ministry of defense of

ukraine and the foreign intelligence service of ukraine, which violates the rules in the host country of the depression, emphasizes that ukraine has chosen the path of aggression against belarus contrary to normal diplomatic relations. as an example, at the end of february, a representative of the embassy comes to the chairman of the ukrainian diaspora in gomel and asks the movement of military equipment across the territory of belarus, other issues related to svo, films, to appear, i’ll say tanks are standing, there, uh, armored personnel carriers, they’ve already gone to stand in case not the only one doesn’t drive anything along the street. well, in the morning, it’s very much about the equipment, but yeah, there are gas stations, including setting up veil traps to fix military equipment of military echelons. these are just a few examples of behavior or activities that i remind you about the ukrainian side that espionage in the interests of another state is pursued by law. this is article 356 of the criminal code of belarus and threatens from 10 to 20 years in

prison. and the other day ukraine went to belarus igor kizim was handed another note about the plan in our foreign ministry. kiev to strike at belarus, which, of course, the foreign ministry pretended not to understand. what is at stake, the department became in a pose and stated on the official website, they say. this is a provocation and another tricks of russia i have already said that in ukraine today it is not just a matter of discussing the planned application. attacks on the territory of belarus, of course, this is absolutely not for ukrainians need to. well, why else would they open the second front on e, on our southern borders on their northern ones? well, why is this madness from the point of view of the military, but, nevertheless, the process has begun and the owners are pushing them to tie up the war against belarus in order for us to go there

we have seen this for a long time and i warned about it. not only our public, but also, as they say, the world community. we saw this, we knew we created battalion tactical groups and we created and we worked out the defense of the southern borders, what are we doing? and now it is well known and nikki zimni have ukraine do not deny that a grouping of up to 15,000 military personnel will be deployed to the southern border of belarus will have engineering equipment for roadblocks and firing positions, barriers have been set up on road directions. in addition, kiev is reconnaissance in the belarusian territories of troops and facilities and at the same time, as always, are in the position of the victim. ukraine nikola did not go for taxes on the territory of belarus ukraine never planned to attack the territory of belarus and these are all the threats that they continue they are completely baseless.

the problem is that the ambassador does not finish speaking, apparently, they do not tell him everything and do not fully bring him up to date. this is typical for the authorities of ukraine in relation to its representatives in belarus, therefore, the rhetoric varies no matter what and no matter what the ukrainian authorities say, we know about the work of the information intelligence services of ukraine and not only against belarus in 2020 , and now take at least the so-called journalist and yours, who was recently convicted of spying for ukraine, he worked with his well-known already in belarus using fakes, the center for information and psychological operations collected information of interest to the ukrainian side. at the same time , he worked, allegedly as a journalist at one time. the bf activists participated in protests in 2014, began to position himself as a supporter of the right sector, went to ukraine , where he participated in the euro maidan of the disorder, the kiwi was the editor of the ukrainian page of the publication of the

informanopaum. the resource was created by the seventy- second center, worked for information and psychological operations, under the curator from kiev for performance of assigned tasks was rewarded. and the task was to collect information about cooperation between russia and belarus in various areas of the situation, the armed forces of our country looked for the berkutites who moved from ukraine to belarus after the maidan about ivashin , periodically received tidy sums leader, the dominant parties in poland , kachinsky spoke in favor of deploying nato nuclear weapons in poland in an interview with polish radio, the head of the right-wing fair party said that this issue had already been discussed before usa but why the situation around belarus, we have already stated, remains tense. especially in the west, the opinion is being implanted that the belarusian army will enter into a special military operation on the territory of ukraine

directly. in the latest data , having succumbed to these stuffing, the military-political leadership of the north atlantic alliance of irada of european countries is already openly considering options for possible aggression. against our country up to a nuclear strike, but for us this is not news. i warned you long ago that their goal today, it’s not that we don’t fight on the side of russia directly in ukraine , so that, god forbid, we don’t launch a nuclear strike and so on. no, this is the main, main goal. it remains from ancient times to draw us into the war and at the same time sort it out. what is interesting from russia and belarus? so this is what yaroslav kachinsky, too, during his trips to later says that pis today is similar to the regional army

, and the role of the regional army on the territory of western belarus during the great patriotic war and almost 10 more years. after that, we already know well, but in addition to historical claims to belarusian western lands. poland also did not leave, just as it did not forget about those who fought in the vc on the territory of belarus, duda presents them with awards, and they, in turn, recognize him as their president. i wish our president andrzej dude much health, dear mr. president. i adore you more than life to understand. veronica sebastianovich. the colonel of intelligence of the regional army actively maintains relations not only with the consulate in grodno , but also with the akivites themselves in poland, the opposition to the current authorities. do you think there are former scouts in whose interests such people work today, and how should we real belarusians patriots treat their

position and recognition as their president the head of an unfriendly state against us . how many of them and how they raised their children, who are they enemies or law-abiding citizens of the belarusian state and how will they act in the event of an attack on belarus, just like the war and post-war years, their comrades slaughtered and burned the belarusian villages of the enemy all the same. to know in person, but we want peace, we are preparing for war, or it's different, but i was with you ksenia lebedeva see you in the next program.