well, the most interesting thing is that this statement was made just when another bridge was falling in lithuania itself, local residents. they even named everything that happens with the fall season, crossings in kaunas part of the interchange collapsed right onto the european highway over the past couple of weeks. this is the fourth collapsed bridge, the traffic has become more intense, so the interchanges naturally wear out and should be naturally repaired, but there is no money for this. but we have a nose of monuments and for military assistance to kiev. a meeting in the rammstein format or an armory zilch in brussels angered european officials, only eight countries declared their readiness to transfer their tanks to ukraine to rectify the situation, the head of diplomacy hurried with a barrel. this is the person who is responsible for the diplomatic solution of issues called on the european countries to transfer the stale tanks to ukraine and do it as soon as possible, but they are all in a fit of arms

unanimous euro mp, nichols, bluntly stated that peace in europe depends on peace in russia in europe cannot have peace without russia first you sent helmets to ukraine. now send tanks to kill russians. i'm worried about your safety. world health organization why did you decide to suspend further investigation into the origin of the coronavirus, allegedly due to problems with data collection in china , according to the telegraph publication according to experts of the organization, the chinese authorities allegedly interfered with the collection of data, according to the first investigation conducted by the who in the twenty -first year of covid -19 arose as a result of the spread of the virus among animals, it was later claimed that investigators were forced report a virus leak from a lab. according to us intelligence, the virus was not developed. china as a biological

weapon, and the chinese officials themselves did not have information about the virus until the first outbreaks of infection. well, on this i have all the new information at 15:00. all the very best. hello, on the air, the program sas is authorized to announce i am the host nadezhda sas i welcome you. i remember. 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, and the main events of world politics this week. i will tell you right now.

the largest earthquake in turkey in syria in decades claimed the lives of more than 15,000 people, a series of powerful 7.8 magnitude tremors destroyed thousands of residential buildings in a race against time, and in severe weather conditions, about 80,000 rescue teams do not stop searching for survivors under the rubble of destroyed cities. to assist in the aftermath of the earthquake belarusian rescuers also arrived in the republic of turkey. the american air force shot down the chinese rosstat for several days, hovering over the territory of the united states, official beijing claims that this is a meteorological probe that the biden administration accidentally brought into the airspace of the united states. on the contrary, he insists that the balloon was carrying out a military reconnaissance mission, however, the balloon incident drove us-china relations into an even deeper crisis, us secretary of state anthony

b. linkin canceled a visit to china with which joe biden had previously pinned hopes for some détente in his speech to congress. he said that he was offering china competition instead of conflict, and partnership is out of the question . president of ukraine volodymyr zelensky went on a european tour visiting london paris and brussels this is only his second trip abroad since the start of the special operation in december in an atmosphere of secrecy. he made a surprise visit to washington however, after the revelations of former israeli prime minister benat that moscow is still at the beginning of the conflict, the need to pretend that zelensky was hiding from russian missiles in the bunker of leaders disappeared during meetings with european heads of state and government zelensky habitually demanded new supplies of weapons and money. at the same time, as expected at the brussels summit, the european union did not give any

promises of ukraine's imminent membership in the bloc. and today i'd like to start a quotation program for the commander of the us forces in vietnam, general william westmorelent war non-military ones start a war, politicians start and we’ll talk about how and which of the politicians 9 years ago kindled a war in the donbass then frustrated all efforts to establish peace in ukraine and eventually brought the matter to the largest armed conflict in europe since 1945 to help understand this extremely complex topic. anatoly eye will be with me today, press secretary of the ministry of foreign affairs of belarus and people's deputy of ukraine oleg voloshin hello, we start our discussion with a blitz question, in your opinion, were are the minsk agreements a real chance for peace? oleg, i am convinced that they were, but the most important

thing is that uh, well, it was said many times that the only alternative. the implementation of the minsk agreements will be a big war, and, unfortunately, history has proven our posting. anatoly can talk a lot, yes, uh about the past, but uh, an unequivocal conclusion, as a professional, as a diplomat, i will say that u definitely were a real chance for peace and could be fulfilled. we perfectly understand what kind of diplomatic work belarusian diplomacy has done in recent years to fulfillment for the implementation of the minsk agreements , but in your opinion, why minsk was chosen in 2014 as a platform for negotiations on the settlement of the conflict in donbass, as in any complex issue, the reasons, of course, are complex. eh, and i 'll tell you more. e in diplomacy. who knows the history of diplomacy, the platform plays a very important role in the success of negotiations, therefore, it is always

chosen with great care. er, of course, there were big discussions. uh, there were a lot of different things around the minsk site offers. where to hold these negotiations, but not one of the proposals to one degree or another at that moment e did not suit all parties. uh, the only thing where all the factors converged was belarus of course here. objective on our side objectively uh, there was both geographical proximity and proximity. uh, mental with the ukrainians. uh, the logistical convenience of arriving here, because, of course, some of the venues were absolutely incredible. yes, where it would be necessary to fly for 9 hours, but the main factor, the main factor, uh, is that no one, like belarus at that moment , was so sincerely interested in peace on ukrainian soil, it was an absolute truth. maybe someone then skeptical about

this position. now you can be skeptical, but this is absolutely true, because the ukrainians. indeed, as the president says, people are not alien to us. hey, this is our region. and uh, we have a different interest, nor did pr pursue anything. we really needed peace in that land. let's go back to september 2014, when the first minsk agreements were signed. remember that atmosphere which reigned in ukrainian society and what mood was in the minds of the leadership of ukraine. i know that you have repeatedly discussed with petro poroshenko, then the current president of ukraine, the situation and the need for the urgent need to sign the minsk agreements. i want to remind you that there is such a multiple times. discussed. yes, so that zelensky is elected as the president of the world, and eventually becomes the president of the war. this is true, but the first who was elected, and in the conditions of confrontation in the donbass as the president of the world he was just his own petro poroshenko,

which is why he won in the first round. and what about the calculation of a huge number of ukrainians, and was that he, just as he promised , would then complete the anti-terrorist operation in two weeks and provide. uh, peace, moreover, my colleagues viktor medvedchuk, who is older than me yesterday, were there already in the spring as mediators in the negotiations , and then an agreement was reached on a ceasefire when putin met with poroshenko a in normandy in june, when formally russia considered to be a coup d'état. she could easily avoid such a meeting and not recognize the results of the elections at all, but nevertheless poroshenko was recognized as president. e of ukraine and russia made contact with him and there was every chance, when i’m not mistaken, there were 72 people who died at the end of june 2014, and on june 30, as i now remember, petro poroshenko was under the influence of some of his advisers. hurray for the patriots and a number of

western ones. uh, consultants, uh and unilaterally withdrew from the peace process began bloody battles, and for the slavic or sla. russian is spoken by the inhabitants of donbass for kramatorsk, and so on and so on and so forth, and by september of the fourteenth year it became clear that a full-scale big war was already underway, and then really , uh, largely thanks to, uh, the role of both alexander grigoryevich lukashenko and belarusian diplomacy in as a whole it was then possible to seat. e to the negotiating table. and then, again , poroshenko positioned himself as a person who is still tuned in to the fact that the guys are like that. yes there, maybe i'm something there and i digressed aside, but in principle, i am for peace and he had every chance of this mirny, this peaceful plan, when to implement it right away, having, by the way, the parliament at that time, which consisted mainly of former and communists, even those certainly would have voted for the embodiment of all that was in the first minsk according to you. but anatoly , it is widely believed that

i say this without compromise - then in september 2014 and later in february 2015 in minsk, a big one. the war would have started in europe 9 years ago, do you agree with this assessment there is a proverb? yes, rusak is clever to the back of his mind, so today you can evaluate. e differently, so that there would be a war. eh, or it would n't exist. uh, you need to understand that thanks to the minsk agreements, what is most important , for example, a number of issues were resolved for us . not a single child died. e was. uh, it means that the sewerage system has been repaired, people began to get access to water. actually. uh, a final ceasefire was also reached in 2020, initially. all. it was thanks to the work

of the tripartite contact group in minsk, that is, uh, the war was stopped. but at that moment there was a huge escalation in europe, where would it go without stopping the ceasefire without the minsk agreements, it is very difficult to say, but there were all chances, and today even if you engage in professional analysis. uh, of course, it is quite clear that those who want to ignite our region. there was a lot then and there is now. uh, maybe then, someone was not fully prepared and western players, but plans and desires. everything here was set on fire. actually, therefore, the minsk agreements also had every chance, 13 points of the letter of the law indicated the consistent implementation of each of them , a ceasefire from the troops, an amnesty election, and dali already gaining control of ukraine over the border. and naturally. ukraine in every possible way denied just such

a sequence and asked that control over the border be restored first, and then we will figure it out ourselves. well, in such case, everyone is well aware that the safety of citizens living on the territory of the donetsk luhansk people's republics. no one could guarantee it, neither the osce nor any other international organizations, especially not the leaders of the normandy four. oleg tell me if there was a chance. in what time period is it possible to push through to convince the ukrainian society that the minsk agreements must be implemented? well, in fact, uh, for a long time , ukrainian society is more serious, there was no need to convince of this, again, pobeda and poroshenko in the first round in the fourteenth year and then his defeat was devastating when almost three- quarters of the ukrainians. you spoke for zelensky in many ways. uh, because he was already associated with the person who will ensure peace in the donbas confirms that the majority

of ukrainians were in favor of a peaceful settlement ; moreover, you even remember. it all depends on how you phrase the question, how people turned off our opponents. or often manipulation, they started telling there , asking if you are ready to cede sovereignty there, that means, in exchange for peace there and so on, when we formulated, otherwise are you ready. i remember once in the studio of matvey ganapolsky, a journalist who was then popular in ukraine, a fugitive from russia. uh, i suggested we formulate a question. uh, telephone voting, but not representative. still, there's a lot out there. there more than 40.000 voted for the hour program. and the question was, are you ready to put up with the stay. e those, e separatists, the so -called donetsk supreme council earlier in exchange for the fact that these people would stop fighting against ukraine and stop the bloodshed on donbass and then from those who voted 2/3 say they are ready, because we have experience, for example, of the northern irish to regulate when tires, and the political wing and all the irish, republican armies and the british realized that it is better to have those who

come for secession northern ireland from the united kingdom inside the british parliament than under the parliament to almost blow it up. and when you speak in such terms. we just agreed, forgave the ukrainians, i say. yes, of course, yes, fir-trees-sticks. okay, there god bless him even on western ukraine is one thing in theory to speak there, we don’t want a special status for donbass there, it’s another thing when you asked if you were ready for donbass to have the usual status of the region after everything that has passed, to shed blood people say yes no of course, let them have this autonomy there conditionally, to be honest , therefore, in fact, ukrainian society was led where they wanted to lead those who were in power, they really were. e, although at the meeting you had one meeting. here i am completing in june of the sixteenth year with political experts in international relations , when petro poroshenko spoke directly, i urge you experts in political science, on the air, to lobby for the need to fulfill the mission of agreements to convince the hesitant, because this is the only chance to save the country. it was he who spoke behind closed doors, but went out to the cameras and began to tell us that they forced a gun at gunpoint and so on

literally to the full, a very short phrase, what i think if at that moment the ukrainian society, yes, and proper political leadership. in hall e, what will happen as a result of non-implementation of the minsk agreements, this is what we see now. yes, the solution would be even more seemed states. first of all, how a person answers, knowing the full information, sounded from the lips of the opposition. but for this they were branded and tried in every possible way to shut their mouths 8 years ago , on february 11, 2015, after marathon negotiations between the leaders of germany, france, russia, ukraine was agreed upon, and members of the contact group, which included representatives of ukraine, russia, the osce and not recognized donetsk and lugansk people's republics signed the text of the minsk agreements, which were supposed to provide for the escalation and peaceful settlement of the confrontation in the east of ukraine, we restore the chronology of events in our story. the maidan in kiev and

the overthrow of president viktor yanukovych were actually the beginning of the civil war. donbass refused to recognize the forceful change of power and demanded recognition of its linguistic and other features. the response of the kiev authorities was the use of the army against those who disagreed to help local militias. russia came, which delivered humanitarian aid to the population of donbass in september 2014 , full-fledged hostilities were going on in the southeast of ukraine, minsk offered to become a platform for negotiations and already on september 5, 2014. in the belarusian capital , a peace plan was agreed upon, providing for the granting of donbass a special status within ukraine, formally a ceasefire regime. the fire went into effect on the same day, however, after a short, lull in the fighting. continued in january 2015, the situation escalated seriously alexander lukashenko again initiated peace talks

on february 11, 2015, consisting of the meeting of the norman four, the leaders of russia ukraine france germany agreed on a set of measures to implement the minsk agreements, but despite a significant decrease in the intensity of hostilities, peace has not come to donbass now ukrainian and western leaders do not hesitate to say that they did not strive for peace. this document gave ukraine 8 years to strengthen the army, strengthen the economy and build a global pro ukrainian and anti-putin coalition. according to him , the minsk agreements were needed to buy time and strengthen the combat capability of the ukrainian army. with the support of nato, we didn’t want war and didn’t want it, but it’s good that we were watching it quite recently. that president poroshenko spoke out. why did he need minsk, these negotiations and so on. it turns out that he was preparing for war, that is, something will be blamed before us. here, that we are somehow to blame, well, i was preparing for war. so today

they disentangle. this situation was also confirmed by ex-chancellor of germany angela merkel in an interview german newspaper website. she admitted that in 2014 the conflict was suspended, but the problem itself remained unresolved, the minsk agreements were an attempt to give kiev time for these 8 years. ukraine was able to strengthen its potential after the start of the military conflict in ukraine, minsk has repeatedly called for the parties to sit down at the negotiating table. if they want us to live peacefully, he is not looking in our region, they are somehow looking at it from across the ocean , the belarusian is ready for this, if they want to fight the last not only ukrainian or something mercenaries. well, that's their business. this is their right. so far, for example, even our special services do not see that they were ready to negotiate on human terms as a full-fledged mainland.

the ukrainian conflict actively discussed in the world media has become the cornerstone of world politics and will have great consequences. but usually serious analysts do not undertake to accurately predict how it will all end, but in order to understand how it will all end. we need to understand how it all started. and here it turns out that it is unprofitable for many politicians to recall many trials that preceded the tragedy, because they put them in a completely different color, it is with these words that viktor medvedchuk's recently published article begins. it is with him. today we have the opportunity to communicate with us on the link viktor medvedchuk head of the political council of the party banned in ukraine opposition platform for life. hello viktor vladimirovich hello dear presenters dear studio i am glad to see and hear you viktor vladimirovich are talking

today in the minsk agreements. was there a chance for the world and you were not only a participant in those events, but one of the main negotiators from ukraine who made the agreements in minsk possible in principle in your opinion. why the matter was not limited to those minsk agreements that were signed back in september 2014. why didn't the fighting stop already then? you know, uh, the story that's being shown on the screen in your studio right now is very revealing, but the story that you're asking about right now is the age of peace. a to be precise attempts at this peaceful settlement. they are probably through long before september 14 and certainly long before february fifteenth. they began in may of 1914, when, still under acting president turchinov,

he turned to me with a request to negotiate with the leadership of these territories of donetsk luhansk on the issue of a peaceful settlement. and then i repeatedly visited in may, donetsk lugansk met with leaders, because those who conducted these negotiations before me at the end april. in early may , the leaders of these territories refused to meet with them even after receiving consent at a meeting with me. we discussed. or questions that were supposed to form the basis of a peaceful settlement, namely, then it was about setting a common agenda, a plan for action and starting negotiations. for this we agreed. and it was in mid-may to determine the range of these issues, to begin with the fact that the first question - this should be the establishment, silence and a peaceful truce , the cessation of hostilities, and then to discuss all the issues that should have been put forward and, according to the idea of ​​​​the leaders

of donetsk luhansk, whom i met on the eve of may 15, they agreed with this on may 15, i outlined this information and the preliminary agreements reached. uh, mr. turchinov, who said, you know, let's start with the fact that let them release all those who are now, uh, from our side, held by that side. i phoned the leaders of the territory then. they said viktor vladimirovich we will gladly make this mutual. if the ukrainian side will also take such an adequate step, but this will be the first issue on our agenda when i outlined this information. he said, uh, if they don't want any negotiations, there can't be, that's how the first stage ended, uh, in the month of may, these negotiations resumed in the month of june. after e poroshenko became president on june 6 in normandy, where there was a meeting of the then president

of the russian federation, putin, the president of ukraine, and poroshenko of ukraine, the president of france, hollande, and, e, chancellor merkel, they agreed to create norman format. on the seventh was the inauguration of president poroshenko 8. he invited me from zurabov to his office and said this issue should be settled within a week. well, that was funny. naturally, because in a week there is such a conflict that is to such an extent. already by this time, by the beginning of june, it was impossible to settle it, but such an attitude suited everyone and we took on this work, a tripartite contact group was created. it was around june 8-9. after that, i agreed with poroshenko's request to visit the territory of donetsk luhansk the leadership of these territories to hold the first meeting of the trilateral contact group.

then, by agreement between the heads of state of the already established normandy format, merkel suggested that i carry out these functions with the leaders of donetsk lugansk, and after several meetings , an agreement was reached on june 23 to hold the first meeting, where it was in the agreement to cease fire and start peace negotiations. on june 27 there was a second meeting where all this was confirmed and the third meeting was scheduled for the first of july. however, at night on july 1, before i was supposed to fly out, and then meet to donetsk for and bring an osce representative to meet with donetsk sluhansk and, of course, together with the lord kuchma, poroshenko called me at night and said, i left the suspension of the anti-terrorist operation. it has been suspended since june 23, since we agreed on a peaceful regulation and decided to hold it, and the peace negotiations were terminated, so you don’t need to go to the meeting. uh,

tripartite contact groups along with the leaders. there will be no donetsk lugansk active hostilities began. you know very well how they went through july-august, and this is ilovaisk mariupol and many other territories and thousands of dead, and then only on september 1. is everyone back at the negotiating table and on september 5 the first protocol was signed, which is called the consultation protocol, huh? between russia, ukraine and, e.g., the territories of donetsk and luhansk, this protocol was called the protocol on the implementation of the peace plan of president poroshenko and personal initiatives of the president of the russian federation putin and was it was decided that these meetings would be held in minsk, after which they began with the so-called minsk agreements and minsk meetings. and i want to note that for some reason i am sure,

in addition to the fact that i know that they are president poroshenko and president zelensky , they have not yet expressed gratitude, including at one time. to alexander grigoryevich lukashenko for providing not only a platform for negotiations, but also creating normal conditions for a peaceful settlement and making every effort, and he is the ministry foreign affairs of belarus in order for these meetings to be held for 5 years and they could con. successfully, however, this was never done, despite the fact that belarus created all the necessary conditions already on february 12. as it was rightly noted, the marathon, which lasted 17 hours of the normandy format heads of state, representatives of ukraine, russia and the territory, which ended with the signing of a set of measures, e on peace on the implementation of the minsk agreements, that is, on all three agreements, on september 5 nineteenth and

already on february 12, these minsk agreements. and the story that told, which took place. these are all those attempts during this period of peace. but as it turned out and as it appears from your broadcast. it really is. today there were attempts in order to delay time in order to prepare for a further time in order to realize the political will that was not to be realized. the peace of the minsk agreements of the peace settlement is what speaks of the double morality of the leader of europe, e.g., the leader of the then ukraine poroshenko subsequently today, lady zelensky, who , despite the recognition of the minsk agreements, because zelensky also recognized them in the commentary signed on december 9, 2019 in paris, and as they all noted then, the president of france macron. e putin and merkel , all three of these agreements should have been fully

implemented. however, they refused this, and first of all zelensky refused because their attitude, their political will, was purposeful and aimed at one conduct of hostilities , the creation of bridgeheads for confrontation. e russia, uh, paukazsky and, at the request of the west, with ukraine, so that russia would have problems and russia would continue. defend the interests of the people who live in these territories. yes, viktor vladimirovich , a story that had every chance of ending optimistically, but as they say in ukraine, may is the plague. i remind you that on the air the assassu program is authorized to announce the anniversary of the signing of the minsk agreements. was there a chance for peace

? work of an international discussion club? hello valdai fedor. hello , you have repeatedly emphasized in your publications and you have rightly pointed out that the frankness of western leaders about the fact that they introduced the russian leadership by the nose is a unique precedent, and usually in such things. well, honestly , they are not created when the situation remains in the development of a conflict. in ukraine, it has yet to be settled, and suddenly such revelations. we hear and trust is already zero at the moment. is it the search for momentary political gain those who already was he going into political retirement or is this a real reflection of the understanding that in the foreseeable future there will be no negotiations from the west with russia, but first of all. it seems to me that this is whitewashing itself, or something, self-justification, uh, especially in the case of

merkel , which is really in germany in the new political atmosphere that exists there, and in it, uh, any contacts with putin, uh, in the past are almost equated not to uh deal with the devil. she needs to justify herself somehow, and i am absolutely sure. uh, a little, imagining uh, merkel uh, what type of person is that? uh, of course, when the negotiations were going on, uh, 14-15, there were no special strategies. now we will deceive here and then and it was nothing like that. in my opinion, there was an attempt to shut up somehow this black hole, they themselves were horrified, what was happening and it was necessary to stop it somehow. of course, they acted from the position of the interests of ukraine, of course, but not in the sense that now we

will deceive the russians, no one will have time for them then didn't think now. uh, well, you have to justify yourself somehow. some like, for example, the president of the federal president steinmeier. they now repent and say i was wrong. i was wrong. i'm, yes, uh, shame on my gray head putin i didn't understand, and merkel says, no, we actually understood everything. it was consciousness. it's pretty funny. well, in the case of aland. in general, i’m talking about it like that, it ’s not serious, because he generally acted as such a dog, such a little dog brought by merkel for entourage, but uh, from the point of view hmm uh prospects. i think they are extremely deplorable, because to submit. that after that there will be some serious negotiations with them on the part of russia is difficult, but they are not going to conduct them. you are absolutely right viktor vladimirovich you are still with us please tell me, but with what mood do you read the news, the statements that

come from merkel's lips, from the lips of the same johnson what is the motivation for saying this nonsense in your opinion. well, you know the motivation today is exactly the one that said, dear me fyodor lukyanov why because this indeed, when they arrived in minsk, they had the task of a peaceful settlement, moreover, you, uh, everyone should understand that the authority of the two leaders of europe was at stake in this case, uh, the german chancellor and the president of france and just like that they could not exchange at that moment, it was this that guided them when they were the sixth. in normandy in normandy, uh, at the celebrations dedicated to the opening of the second front, uh, agreed to create this norman format , that's what they were after when they arrived on february 12 and

17:00. negotiations of the normandy format continued and subsequently they decided to do everything because if they could. and if we talk about whether the minsk agreements could be implemented, i categorically affirm that they could, if there was political will for poroshenko, political will and urgent demands on poroshenko from the leaders of europe and the european union, all this would have happened, but there was not a first, not a second to the end. or to be precise to the full extent, therefore, of course, they then pursued the goal of peace and receive dividends and additional authority, like what europe was europe did europe settled. well , then it was all nakshtal of what you are looking at. here's what happened, it was all pre-planned. and if and as far as i understand, he was the first to start talking about this, hollande,

to whom he gave a very accurate description. e your interlocutor, what he was, then and already the fact that he did not represent anything at all, when he wrote his memoirs , then she said about it, for some reason merkel, which, it seems to me, humiliated her authority. e world the politics of a large-scale politician, despite the fact that she was already retired. well , poroshenko is from, as it were, under the barking and the hall or from the concert pit, which he also decided to mark on this basis. i know poroshenko's mood well and i want to share it with you in order to fully appreciate this situation in the fourteenth and fifteenth. especially the minsk agreements could be implemented in one click, because the verkhovna rada of the seventh convocation, which terminated its powers in november december

fourteenth year and the verkhovna rada of the eighth convocation could do everything at the request of poroshenko and moreover, i will remind you that then a law on local self-government in these territories was actually adopted and even an amnesty law was adopted, which was not signed by turchin, as the chairman of the supreme we are glad but it was all later, but then this political trade is that poroshenko already understood that these territories would never vote for him. he developed passivity and apathy and a mood to settle. he had in fifteenth-sixteenth seventeenth. and when in the eighteenth year in one of the conversations. he told me. this whole story needs to end. i have to choose next year to win the presidential election, and then we will return to this and we will settle everything. i said that i am more in his circus, because i think that this circus does not participate, i am not going to go to minsk not intending to hold negotiations on the release of detainees and help peaceful regulation. i understood and explained to him.

after that, we are no longer with him. met. until he ceased to be president viktor vladimirovich you see, poroshenko's cynicism turned out to be contagious, because he struck from zelensky and many european leaders and the president of the republic of belarus alexander lukashenko is in solidarity with you. let's hear his primorye speech. the minsk agreements and the position of merkel, like others, including poroshenko, were then very serious. can you imagine, after the minsk meetings, the whole world said that, well, they finally took a step and signed these agreements, the war stopped, the war stopped people die. all this was positively assessed and today, against that background, talking about the fact that they are with poroshenko well, consider this, olund,

whom she led by the hand in front of my eyes. they allegedly led a covert operation to deceive everyone there. first of all, putin and everyone in the world was given a pause to prepare ukrainians for this war. if that were the case, that would be too much. just know, prepare for war. well, if this is so, it’s not, but if so, why then get out of moaning that there is a war going on, you were preparing for it merkel and poroshenko want to show their importance that the ukrainian army. look, it is fighting against one of the most powerful armies in the world, because then we deceived everyone in minsk and the whole world deceived russia, and so on, petty and vile, it doesn’t look like marks already by this time. if we went the way

that putin proposed and the agreement was concluded today. uh, except for the crimea, ukraine was integral, there was no war. fedor alexandrovich well, indeed, a lot is said about the fact that the minsk agreements were used to strengthen the ukrainian army. but if you look from the other side, in 2014-2015, in economic terms , russia was also much less prepared for tough sanctions pressure than in 2022 , the european union and the united states of america were internally stronger than china, but be more careful, and turkey, before the military coup attempt, did not partnership with russia was especially drawn to. do you agree that moscow did not waste time in vain. it seems to me that, on the one hand , of course, that is, all the things that were, for example, done in the economy. eh, if those if measures were taken, er, in the fourteenth year

, for such a blockade, then, probably, it would have been much worse. well, there is a settlement system and all that. eh, yes. on the other hand , militarily russia has prepared for this war, enough or not? i don't know i have big questions. it seems to me that ukraine prepared better in this sense, so the balance. we will probably never know. some of us say that it was necessary then to go to the end, and it would have been much easier, maybe, or maybe not. and the main thing in another in my opinion. here is our conversation. he is a little interesting from a point of view. uh, that means, here, and understanding the path traveled, but it seems to me that here you need to slightly rise one floor upstairs, look from above and, unfortunately, understand that these terrible events, which it is still unknown when it will end and than they were inevitable in one

form or another, because even if the minsk agreements were somehow political, they were still pushed through. i think that the very logic of the entire development in europe of the security systems of relations between russia and the west would lead to a new clash, perhaps a little in other circumstances it may be more favorable for russia, but it was inevitable, because we are witnessing tectonic shifts of a completely historical nature, alas. uh, such processes are diplomatic, like the minsk ones. uh, could have delayed, but not cancelled. thank you very much alexandrovich for your participation anatoly , please tell me, fedor lukyanov expressed a rather skeptical opinion about the minsk agreements in general, but now quite often we even hear a discussion about whether minsk is possible in three in your opinion. is e possible? i will supplement, first of all

, the deeply respected fyodor lukyanov, whom i respect. uh, just two vivid examples of what has been said. e, means the first e, the late minister of foreign affairs vladimirovich makei, during one of my reports somewhere in the year. back in 2020, he said you need to be very careful, because our opponents will do everything to discredit the minsk so-called minsk process and the minsk agreements over the next 3-4 years, discredit why? because the process was successful, it could be done, and it says, they will do everything so the word. merkel and so on, in order to forget him in the end and completely discredit the second means in relation to the role. eh, one of the leaders of european countries here in minsk in his memoirs. here is a man who devoted e in his memoirs, and there seven years of his presidency, he is the minsk agreement, during which the bloodshed was stopped.

yes, first of all, he devoted a whole half page and their main content was that everything that had changed. here he wrote what it means he didn't really like the treats. e wasn't there. it means frog legs and other, probably, dishes that he is used to. this is his kroly and how it means that they treated and actually relate to the ukrainians, er, and to these processes, moving on to your question. e. is it possible minsk-3, and in ukraine they say that they all need it. eh, i can say that the belarusian diplomacy will definitely not stop working in this direction, and of course. the sincere desire to establish peace on ukrainian soil remains unchanged. oleg what is your opinion on this? uh, i sort of systemically, of course, uh, i understand what uh, fedor lukyanov is talking about, and of course, uh, i agree that we are talking about the fact that uh is a global hegemon, the united states of america that had this so i call it not power

moment. yes, that is, a period in history when they totally dominated, they lose their dominance as the main one. let's say the violator of their calm rule is, of course , the russian federation. and although they want to destroy american hegemony in much. more. it's so called honest, popular the thermal majority, but russia was the first and most forcefully challenged. this is a hero. naturally, in this sense, the clash between washington and moscow, and naturally about , first of all, ukraine as the most significant a of the closest uh, uh neighbors for russia in history. economically there in the demographic and so on, it was inevitable, but in general agreed but disagreed. if you look a little from the inside, then what he was talking about, by the way, viktor vladimirovich medvedchuk , we had a chance without fulfilling the minsk agreements to make. the main thing is to really prevent this conflict, at least on our ukrainian territory, from changing the vector from the inside,

because even with the unfulfilled agreements in minsk, which excluded the electoral process, millions of voters in the donbas at the beginning of the twenty-first year, the option platform for life party came out on top in the ratings, and together with the sharia party, obviously close ideological positions, but if not for the majority, but at least some very serious part of the parliament, which would have transformed this entire basic vector instrumentalization of ukraine how you, as a means of combating russia, would have been changed it was when the west saw it that the question was not even in minsk agreements, the question in ukraine as a whole. uh, for this reason, the mitsusenia were not carried out so that millions more voters would appear in the donbass, then in general we would have a majority of 100%, and and this is the key. that is, we had this chance even without the implementation of the minsk agreements, ukraine could become different. but it was not allowed. let's draw the attention of our viewers to enough amusing video in the fall of 2019, president

of ukraine volodymyr zelensky came to the village of zolote to the volunteers and veterans who moved there in order to prevent the withdrawal of ukrainian troops from the village , we will hear a direct speech. now seriously already well , about an honest decent relationship. i 'm just speaking to you like a human being, and i have all the legislative rights to it. i'm telling you, it's not a harvest in any human way, boys. take away your weapons, zelensky's transformation is obvious to everyone today. and then the conclusion arises and there is a version with which i think many will agree that neither poroshenko nor the zelensky regime needed the return of the donbass, in principle, since this would mean the return to the political field of millions of voters who would vote for such a party in the next elections as, for example , the opposition platform for life. and in fact they would ensure changes in the course of development

of the state. viktor vladimirovich tell me, please, is there such information in the media that at one time there was a conversation in which petro poroshenko openly declared to vladimir to putin that he or even offer to take donbass is such a situation for real , could i want to tell you that such a situation took place, because this is confirmed not only in the media, but also by the relevant statements of those who, uh, had and have a reliable information about it. i can tell you about the fact that poroshenko has repeatedly said in a conversation with me, tell him to take it. to which he received an answer that at that time in those years putin constantly emphasized in his

official interviews to his official position that the donbass is ukraine, so when the president of the russian federation vladimir vladimirovich putin said that the donbass is ukraine, poroshenko tried to stop him, as they say, to breathe, it will be more accurate and more understandable, in relation to the donbass, because he knew he didn't need it. so, when he was elected as the president of the world and in the first round he received enough 54% of the vote. he spoke about the world. this was the main thing and the milestone of all his election programs, the peace settlement of the situation on donbas satisfaction of ukrainian citizens. in all their needs, bearing in mind, including primarily the population and the southeast. the southeast, like other regions , voted for world presidents. then he became the president of the war. every year

he confirmed this, and he understood that the peace program would not work for the new elections in the nineteenth year, because he, as president , actually did nothing for this. maybe he tried to do something, but he did not succeed due to the lack of political will, and therefore he already needs to was to save at any cost the voices of western ukraine, central ukraine which were against a peaceful settlement, which were against the donbass anatoly well, i want a comment from you, and you must admit that in march of last year. ukraine and the russian federation were as close as possible to signing the armistice, and we know the position of alexander lukashenko, who said in every possible way and says that negotiations are only peace - this is the key to resolving this conflict. but then

ukraine turned away at the last moment and decided not to do so. here, in your opinion, what was the key reason for this decision here you can not speculate on this matter. e hmm unfortunately, unfortunately, we know for sure, uh from reliable sources and not from one source, like several high-ranking people. she told us in detail that yes, unfortunately, uh, the corresponding opinion was expressed by the western partners. u now to the president of ukraine zelensky that at this stage the peace talks. need to stop and this connection. actually. they were discontinued because er i say the document was at a certain stage of completion. it was possible to discuss it at that moment, our head of state spoke. uh, it was very important to stop the bloodshed. we belarusians are always very sensitive to this, maybe we don’t look so broadly or so beautifully, but for us to stop the bloodshed, the death of people is a primary and main task. eh, and the parties were already close to this, but

others did. uh, instructions as a result which the negotiation process was stopped and today, of course, uh, there are no conditions for its resumption. although of course diplomacy should work. and i, as an international journalist. i am trying to look in all situations, certain analogies, of course, the current situation, which is connected with ukraine, is a conflict, it is unique, but for many years after the signing of the minsk agreements, we heard from western politicians that they cannot put pressure on kiev demanding, but their implementation, because ostensibly europe cannot demand. from sovereign country to change the constitution to grant autonomy to some regions, but in the case of the same kosovo, we see how the same europe directly forces a sovereign country to recognize the independence of one of its historical regions. entrance go and blackmail and threats. and now, do the serbs see how

hypocritical western policy, pursuing in similar situations, we received a completely different answer to this question from the head of the entire serbian movement of the patriots of the fatherland and the diaspora, the dragon stanovich clan. let's hear direct speech ninety-ninth year - it was just the year when the west, at the head of the united states, destroyed international law , which is so referred to today, and then they opened pandora's box, and it seemed that then there was the right of the strong and, uh, began to commit aggression, but on serbia, and he that’s why they destroyed, e, the center of belograd, bridges, hospital infrastructure, even children’s don’t talk only about military facilities, so for now they demand from us that kosovo-vitokhya, which they illegally from orgla from serbia militarily , that we recognize as an independent part , and kosovo

which has always and historically been beaten by the serbian part, when it is their interests, then they cannot influence ; and so on, that there russia committed aggression there and the like, and for this all the time do not forget that he made them to serbia, you are primarily a diplomat. please tell me what you think. why don't such analogies arise in the western leaders why then the united the states of america got away with everything, and the situation is stable in circles, let's say, uh, pro-western in russian and ukrainian food and belarusian. uh, audiences in a meme are different. you don't understand this differently. but this is just

a classic story. i just from the moment of the election of the deputy, but initiated the formation and headed the friendship group between the parliament of ukraine and serbia and the parliamentary serbia and for me. really. well, the obvious analogy. yes, that is, we constantly constantly heard, but western leaders that, well, we cannot to force there, kiev to enter a special status , not even autonomy. in fact, a special status, but in the constitution well, how is it a sovereign country, we will tell there what to do now there are military operations. yes , they say, well, how can we not speak to zelensky there. what is there to decide about crimea , even if it is at stake there, so we will be closer to the steps of thermonuclear. but we won’t tell anything, because this is a sovereign territory here at the same time, which is the most amazing. okay, we would know there with my colleague. now they would delve into some historical examples, well, in parallel, the same representatives of the same european union and the united states come to belgrade and tell the president to study there, serbia is ready to provide kosovo

with any total autonomy, yes, except for the recognition that this is already a misfortune the pain of it is there in the north, kosovo is living compactly serbs to whom you are now talking separatists, that is, kosovo has separated forces from serbia and the serbs living there now, who say, but at least they have left serbia back. you are there now separatists. it's just some wild story. why is this happening? yes, everything is very simple, and even in 2007, and in his famous munich speech, which everyone listened carefully, all this would probably not happen now, and president putin said, comrade wolf, listen to the eu yes, because there is an understandable interesting throughout europe and ukraine in this. i mean, uh, unfortunately, and this is our failure. yes, that we could not convince the majority in another way, belarus resisted, but to make spheres of total domination of the ideology that develop in certain western meetings. and speech. today, even non-ubiopolitics. we probably don't have much time for this deep discussion , even just geopolitics. we all say

america europe is in question. oh, why, for example , what is happening now and began with trump? yes, because trump is just the embodiment of those forces that remember what the christian roots of our civilization are, who respect the traditional family, who respect national sovereignty, who want america not to be part of the global governance structure, too, without it, the juices did not stretch when the republicans correctly ask the canoe question, but why are you arming ukraine with 28 billion? sent? and we ourselves have a lot of things that have not been solved here, many problems there are not a shield, there are, uh, unresolved problems of schools, healthcare, and so on. while the war is going on in ukraine , the istanbul convention was ratified, the legislation included the concept of gender. at us already there in the ukrainian army, lgbt units are being created. we are told that the church is being dismantled under the pretext of fighting the russian church. in fact, the basis is being destroyed. uh,

ukrainian society has traditionally been a conservative christian in a single street to ask what a family % seems to be, a union, men and women. naturally. here i saw one of your programs. there was a quote from lukashenka's rule when he said, as soon as i pointed to the door to mr. surov, i immediately started having problems in relations with the west. here, once on the channels that uh, let's say supported by viktor vladimirovich who is associated with our political force. after all, we are actually on the air. you are there, you know. as a presenter, we did not glorify russia better than others, but we criticized the swaras very harshly. we criticized very harshly. in it , all management named sura with a very hard radical market of the earth. attempts to destroy traditional values ​​and so on. and these same structures that are connected with soros, they first of all declared us enemies. here , roughly speaking, whether we are about quarrels, but also simultaneously pro-russian. we know such things about russian lgbt activists, we probably would have had fewer problems, but fortunately we are not like that, therefore, naturally, it is natural for us to slander, allegedly for russia, but this is not the problem. we didn't want

ukraine to become so, you know, new. uh, sodomy and mountains. this is the main problem and lukashenka did not allow it to be done in belarus this is absolutely true anatoly i would like the final word of today's program to come from your lips of the code of administrative offenses, a kind of address to our belarusian audience summing up our discussion today. there is no need to believe anyone to be waged on the speculation that is now taking place in minsk, the agreements have played their role very seriously. uh, stop the escalation of the conflict. uh, they helped specifically people on the ground and could be fulfilled to the end for this. the premise they were written in a completely normal way and today ukraine could itself change from within, without those, er, catastrophic and tragic processes that are now taking place there. this is with regard to the minsk agreements. e next. e i want to say that speaking of a quarrel, it means global politics

. belarus is completely clear to us. it is quite obvious that independence will not put us at rest for a long time precisely for this reason. unfortunately, it costs , it's expensive and there is a certain historical period when you need to endure and after that make a new start. i think we can do it. naturally. in ukraine, too , there will come the world of eternal battle peace we only dream of thank you very much dear guests. thank you very much viktor vladimirovich for participating in the program, as it seemed today's substantive discussion , the conflict in donbas itself should and could be resolved peacefully, primarily through the implementation of the agreement. named after the capital of belarus, it was necessary and possible. if only this conflict, those who are losing global hegemony did not consider for themselves the point of no return, which means the decline of western domination, prolonging this war, and not delaying the transition to a new system of international relations, gaining time for themselves, but paying with their lives,

completely different paraphrases the words british foreign minister edward grey , who told him about the reasons for the outbreak of the first world war , pulling this hook, all the states of the world were afraid of the present, and the united states was afraid of the future. thank you. well, now i am authorized to declare the minsk agreements were a real path to peace, from which they deliberately turned.