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 decades took the lives of more than 15,000 people in syria, a series of powerful aftershocks of magnitude 7.8 destroyed thousands of residential buildings in a race against time and in heavy weather conditions, about 80,000 rescue teams do not stop searching for survivors under the rubble of destroyed cities.

to assist in the elimination of the consequences of the earthquake, the belarusian rescuers 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 carried out a military reconnaissance mission, however, the balloon incident pushed 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

foreign trip since the start special operations in december in secrecy. he made an unexpected visit to washington however, after the revelations of the former israeli prime minister benat that moscow, at the beginning of the conflict, guaranteed zelensky 's security the need to pretend that the pal leaders were hiding from russian missiles in the bunker of leaders during meetings with european heads of state and government, zelensky habitually demanded new supplies arms and money. at the same time, as expected at the brussels summit, the european union did not give any promises of ukraine's early membership in the bloc. and today i would like to start a quote program for the commander of the us troops in vietnam, general william westmorelent, it is not the military who starts the war, it is the politicians who start the war, and we will talk about how and who of the politicians 9 years ago, ignited the war in donbass then frustrated all efforts to

establish peace in ukraine and eventually led to the biggest armed conflict in europe since 1945 to help understand this extremely complex topic. today i will be anatoly eye press secretary ministry of foreign affairs of belarus and people's deputy of ukraine oleg voloshin hello, we start our discussion with a quick question, in your opinion, were the minsk agreements a real chance for peace? oleg, i am convinced that they were, but the most important thing is that we have repeatedly talked about this, which is the only alternative. the implementation of the minsk agreements will be a big war, and, unfortunately, history has proven us right anatoly, you can talk a lot, yes, about the past, but uh, an unequivocal conclusion, as a professional, i will say, as a diplomat, that uh clearly were a real chance for peace and could be fulfilled. we are well aware

of the diplomatic work belarusian diplomacy has done in recent years to implement the minsk agreements. well, in your opinion, why was minsk chosen in 2014 as a platform for negotiations on the settlement of the conflict? yes, in the 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 playground plays a very big role for the success of the negotiations, therefore, it is always suitable for her choice. there were, of course, great discussions around the minsk site with special care, and there were many different proposals. where to hold these negotiations, but none 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 the venues offered were absolutely incredible. yes, where it would have been 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 earth, 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're of no other interest pr nothing pursued. we really needed peace in that land. let's go back to september 2014, when the first minsk agreements were signed.

remember the atmosphere that prevailed in ukrainian society and the mood that 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 urgent need to sign the minsk agreements. i want to remind you that there is such a multiple times. discussed. yes to zelensky was elected as the president of the world, and eventually became the president of the war. this is true, but the first to be elected, and in the conditions of confrontation in the donbass, as the president of the world was just his own petro poroshenko, he therefore won the first round. and what about the calculation of a huge number of ukrainians, and it was that he, as he promised in 2 weeks , would complete the anti-terrorist operation and ensure peace, moreover, my colleagues viktor medvedchuk, who did not remain yesterday from others , were then already in the spring intermediaries in negotiations and a ceasefire was then reached when

putin met with poroshenko a in normandy in june, when formal russia was considered given by 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 for that, there were 72 people who died at the end of june 2014, and on june 30, as i remember now, petro poroshenko was under the influence of his some advisers. hurray for the patriots and a number of western ones. e consultants. uh, i unilaterally withdrew from the peace process , bloody battles began, 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 did something there and i digressed to the side, but in principle, i am for peace and he had every chance here to be peaceful this peace plan, when to implement it right away, and by the way, the parliament at that moment, which consisted mainly of former regions and communists, even who certainly would have voted for the embodiment of everything that was in the first minsk according to you. but anatoly, it is widely believed that i say this without compromise - and so more in september 2014 and later in february 2015 in minsk, a large one. the war would have started in europe already 9 years ago, do you agree with this assessment there is a proverb? yes, rusak is smart in hindsight, so today you can evaluate. e in different ways, so that there would be a war or it would not exist. you have to understand that

thanks to the minsk agreements, what is most important , for example, a number of issues were resolved for us . that 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, the final ceasefire was also reached in 2020, initially. everything, it was thanks to the work of the tripartite contact group in minsk itself. that is, er, 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, but today if you do, even 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, perhaps then, someone was not completely ready 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 this case, everyone understands perfectly well what about the safety of citizens living on the territory of the donetsk luhansk people's republics. no one could have guaranteed it without 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 that the minsk agreements must be implemented? well, in fact, uh, for a long time, ukrainian society, seriously, seriously , did not need to be convinced of this, again, and poroshenko's victory in the first round in the fourteenth year and then his devastating defeat when almost three-quarters of 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, even remember, it all depends of how to phrase the question, how people turned off our opponents. or often manipulation they started telling there asking if you are ready to enter 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. and i suggested that we

formulate the question, uh, telephone voting, but not representatively. still, there's a lot out there. there more than 40.000 voted for the hour program. a question such was, are you ready to put up with the stay, and those separatists of the so-called donetsk supreme council earlier in exchange for the fact that these people would stop fighting against ukraine and stop the bloodshed in the donbass, and then 2/3 of those who voted said they were ready, because we have experience, for example, northern irish regulation, 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 the separation of northern ireland from the united kingdom inside the british parliament, than under the parliament you are trying to blow it up and when you speak in such terms. i just agreed to say ordinary ukrainians. yes, of course, yes, fir-trees-sticks. okay, there god is with him, even to western ukraine it’s one thing in theory to talk 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 an area after everything that has passed people shed blood, they say,

no, of course, let them have this autonomy conditionally, to be honest, therefore, in fact, and the ukrainian society was led where they wanted to lead those who were in power, they really, uh , want to meet you at one meeting. here i am finishing in june of the sixteenth year with political experts in international relations. petro poroshenko spoke directly. i take you expert political scientists. i call on the air to lobby for the need to fulfill the mission of the 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, uh, to the cameras and began to tell, that we were forced there 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 the political leadership itself. in hall e, what will happen as a result of non-implementation of the minsk agreements, this is what we see now. yes, then the decision would have been even more seemed to the states in the first place, as the person answering 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, the members of the contact group , which included representatives of ukraine, russia , the osce and the unrecognized donetsk and lugansk people's republics, signed the text of the minsk agreements, which were supposed to provide for an escalation and a peaceful settlement confrontation in the east of ukraine , we restore the chronology of events in our story. maidan in kiev and the overthrow of president viktor yanukovych were actually the beginning during the civil war, donbass refused to recognize the forceful change of power and demanded recognition of its linguistic and other features. the answer of the kiev authorities was the use of the army against those who disagreed to help the local militias. russia came, which delivered humanitarian aid to the population of donbass, and in september 2014

full-fledged hostilities were going on in the south-east of ukraine, minsk offered to become a platform for negotiations and already on september 5, 2014. a plan for a peaceful settlement was agreed in the belarusian capital, providing for granting the donbass a special status within ukraine, formally the regime of termination. the fire came into force on the same day, however, after a short, lull, hostilities continued and in january 2015 the situation seriously escalated. alexander lukashenko again took the initiative to hold peace talks on february 11, 2015, consisting of the meeting of the norman four leaders of russia , ukraine, france and germany agreed on a set of measures to implement the minsk agreements, but despite a significant decrease in the intensity of hostilities, the world donbass never came , 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 win time and improve the combat capability of the ukrainian army. with the support of nato, we didn’t want war and don’t want it, but it’s good that we recently found it, that president poroshenko spoke out. why did he need it? minsk is here these negotiations and so on. it turns out he was preparing for war, there is something before us, that we are to blame for something, well, he rode to the planet. today i am slapping this situation, and this was confirmed by ex-chancellor of germany angela merkel in an interview with a 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. they want us to live peacefully in our region, without looking, they are somehow looking at it from across the ocean, belarusians are ready for this. if they want to fight the last one, not a ukrainian, not a pole either, or mercenaries. well, it's their business, it's their right. bye. for example, i and our special services do not see that they are ready for full-fledged negotiations on human agreements. the ukrainian conflict, actively discussed in the world media, has become the cornerstone of world politics and will have great consequences, but usually serious analytics are not they undertake to accurately predict how it will all end, however, 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

the many processes that preceded the tragedy, since they put them in a completely different light, with these very words viktor medvedchuk's recently published article begins. it is with him. today we have the opportunity to communicate with us online viktor medvedchuk head of the political council banned in ukraine party 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 peace 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? you know, uh, the story that was shown on the screen of your studio right now, it is very revealing, but the story that you are now asking about is the age of peace. and to be precise , attempts at this peaceful settlement, they began long before september 14 and certainly long before february 15. they began in may of the fourteenth year, when, even under acting president turchinov, he turned to me with a request to negotiate with the leadership of these territories of donetsk lugansk 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 of 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 deal. and it was in mid-may to determine the range of these issues. so that 's the first question. this should be the establishment, silence and a peaceful truce of the cessation of hostilities, and then discuss all the issues that should have been put forward and, according to the idea of ​​​​the leaders of donetsk lugansk, whom i met on the eve of may 15, agreed with this on may 15, i outlined this information and the preliminary achieved agreements. uh, mr. turchinov, who said, you know, let's start with the fact that let them release all those who now is uh, from our side being held by that side. i phoned the head of the then territory. they said

victor vladimirovich we will gladly do this for each other. if the ukrainian side also takes 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 that, how e poroshenko became president on june 6 in normandy, where there was a meeting of the then president of the russian federation, e, putin, the president of ukraine , poroshenko, e, french president hollande, and e, chancellor merkel, they agreed to create the normandy 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 at the beginning of june, it was impossible to settle it, but this attitude suited everyone, and we took on this work; a tripartite contact group was created. it was around june 8-9. after that, at the request of poroshenko, i visited the territories of donetsk luhansk and agreed with 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 luhansk 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 begin 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, on the night of july 1, before i was supposed to fly out, and then meet in donetsk for and bring an osce representative to meet with donetsk with lugansk and, of course, together with the lord kuchma, poroshenko called me at night and said, i left the suspension of the anti-terrorist operations. she was has been suspended since june 23, since we agreed on peaceful regulation and decided to carry it out, and peace negotiations have been terminated, so you don’t need to go to the meeting. uh, tripartite contact groups along with the leaders. donetsk luhansk will not be started active hostilities. 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, the territories of donetsk and luhansk, this protocol was called the protocol on the implementation of the peace plan of president poroshenko and the personal initiatives of the president of the russian federation putin, and it was decided that these meetings would be in minsk after which they began with the so-called minsk agreements and minsk meetings. and i want to point out that for some reason i am sure, in addition to the fact that i know that they are president poroshenko, not the president. zelensky so far you have not said, including at one time thanks. thank you 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 to the ministry of foreign affairs of belarus to ensure that these meetings are held for 5 years and they

can 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 , they gathered at the e, a marathon that lasted 17 hours of the normandy head of state format representatives of ukraine, russia and the territory, which as a result ended with the signing of a set of measures, e. about the world on the implementation of the minsk agreements, that is, on all three agreements, on september 5, 19, and already on february 12, these minsk agreements. and the story that he 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 to delay time in order to prepare for a further time in order to to realize the political will that

was not on the implementation. the peace of the minsk agreements of the peace settlement is what speaks of the double morality of the leader of europe, then the leader of ukraine poroshenko, later today the leaders of zelensky who, despite the recognition of the minsk agreements, because zelensky also recognized them in the communique signed on december 9, 2019 in paris and how they were then everyone has already noted french president macron. e putin and merkel , all three of these agreements should have been fully implemented. however, from this they refused and zelensky refused in the first place because their attitude, their political will was purposeful and aimed at one conduct of hostilities in the creation of bridgeheads for confrontation. e russia, er, paukazskiy and, at will, wanted the west with ukraine to you 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 on the air the assassu program is authorized to declare the anniversary of the signing of the minsk agreements. was there a chance for the world ? would you like to connect fedor lukyanov , editor-in-chief of the russia in global affairs magazine, director for scientific work of the international discussion club, to our air? 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 not. are created when the situation remains in the development of the 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 by those who already? was he going into political retirement or is this a real reflection of the understanding that there will be no negotiations between the west and russia in the foreseeable future. well, first of all. it seems to me that this is whitewashing itself, or something, self-justification, uh, especially in the case of merkel, who 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 equated almost to a deal with the devil. she needs to justify herself somehow, and i am absolutely sure. e a little bit, imagining merkel er, as

a type of this person. uh, of course when the negotiations were going on, uh, the fourteenth in the fifteenth year of e, there were no special strategies of ideas. right now we are here, uh, we will deceive later and it was nothing like that. in my opinion , there was an attempt to shut up this one somehow black hole, they themselves were horrified, what was happening and it was necessary to somehow stop it. of course they acted from a position of interest. in ukraine, of course, but not in the sense that now we will deceive the russians, no one then thought about it 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 here, yes, here, shame on my gray head putin i didn't understand, but merkel says, no, we really understood everything. it was consciousness. it's pretty funny. well, in the case of

aland. i generally say this about it. it 's not serious that he generally acted as such a dog brought by merkel for entourage, but uh, from the point of view of hmm uh perspectives. 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 what mood you are in you read the news, the statements that come from the lips of merkel, er, from the lips of the same johnson. what is the motivation to say this nonsense in your opinion. well, you know, the motivation today is exactly the one that was said by me, dear fyodor lukyanov why? because it’s really so, because when they arrived in minsk they had the task of a peaceful settlement; moreover, you, uh, everyone should

understand what is at stake at stake was the authority of the two leaders of europe in this case, uh, the chancellor of germany and the president of france, and they just didn’t exchange money at that time could it be that guided them when they sixth. in normandy in normandy, uh, at the celebrations of the opening of the second front, uh, agreed to create this normandy 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 a political will poroshenko political will and urgent demands to poroshenko from the leaders of europe and the european union, all this would

have happened, but there was neither the first nor the second to the end. or, to be exact, to speak to the fullest extent, therefore, of course, they then pursued the goal of peace and gaining dividends and additional credibility, like what europe helps. yes, europe has done europe has 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 it was the first to talk about it, olande, which he gave a very precise 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 politics large-scale politician, despite the fact that she was already retired. well, poroshenko is from, as it were, under the barking

from the audience 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 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 of the fourteenth year and the verkhovna rada of the eighth convocation could do everything at the request of poroshenko and moreover, i remind you that then it was actually adopted law on local self-government in these territories and even an amnesty law was adopted, which was not signed by turchin as chairman verkhovna rada but that was all later, but then this is a political trade 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 the fifteenth-sixteenth seventeenth. and when 18 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 u said that i'm more in his circus because i think that this circus is not participating, i'm 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 never saw him again. 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, people stopped dying. all this was positively assessed and today, against that background, talking about the fact that they are with poroshenko well, consider this he, whom she led by the hand in front of my eyes. they allegedly led a covert operation to deceive everyone there. putin and everyone in the world were given a pause opportunity

well if that's the case it's not, but if so what then get out of moaning that there is a war you were preparing for it merkel and poroshenko want to show their importance that the ukrainian army. look, they are fighting against one of the most powerful armies in the world, because then we deceived everyone in minsk and the whole world was deceived, and russia, and so on, petty and vile, it doesn’t look like measurements already by this time, if we went, the way that putin proposed and the contract was signed today. uh, except for the crimea, ukraine was integral , there was no war. fyodor alexandrovich well, indeed, much is said about the fact that the minsk agreement was 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 particularly stretched partnership with russia here. do you agree that moscow did not waste time in vain. it seems to me that e on the one hand certainly, that is, all the things that were, for example, made in the economy. uh, if the same measures were taken, uh, in the fourteenth year on such a blockade, then it would probably be much worse, well, there is a settlement system and all that. 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 be much easier, maybe, but maybe not. and the main thing in another in my opinion. here is our conversation. he's a bit interesting from a point of view. eh, so here it is, but about the meaning of not a nasty path, 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 will end and how 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 all development in europe is the system security of relations between russia and the west, it would lead to a new clash, maybe in slightly different circumstances it could 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, uh, fyodor lukyanov expressed a rather skeptical opinion about the minsk agreements in general, but now quite often we even hear a discussion about whether minsk three is possible. in your opinion, is it possible for me to add, first of all , fyodor lukyanov, whom i respect, deeply respected, just two vivid examples of what has been said. so the first uh, the late minister of foreign affairs vladimirovich makei, during one of my reports somewhere back in 2020, said you need to be very careful, because our opponents will do everything to discredit

the so-called minsk over the next 3-4 years minsk process and minsk agreements uh, discredit why? because this process was successful, it could be done, and he says, they will do everything, this word merkel's statement and so on, in order to forget him in the end and completely discredit him, the second means in relation to the role. eh, one of the leaders of european countries here in minsk in his memoirs. this man devoted his memoirs to the seven years of his presidency with the minsk agreement, during which the bloodshed was stopped. yes , he devoted the first half a page and their main content was that everything that from minsk, here he wrote, which means, uh, he didn’t really like the treats. 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 it can all e, i can say that e belarusian diplomacy will definitely not stop working in this direction and of course, well, our sincere desire to establish peace on ukrainian soil is saved and this position is unchanged. what is your opinion on this. uh, i sort of systemically, of course, understand what uh, fedor lukyanov is talking about, and of course i agree that we are talking about the fact that, uh, the global hegemon in the united states of america that had this so-called uniprawl, yes , that is , a period in history when they totally dominated, they lose their dominance as the main let's say the violator of their calm control is, of course, the russian federation and although those who want to destroy american hegemony are much. more. this is true called honestly, the popular thermal majority, but russia 1 and most strongly challenged. this is hygiene.

naturally, in this sense, the clash between washington and moscow, and naturally about, first of all, ukraine as the most significant, and of the closest e, neighbors for russia in historical economic terms, there in demographic terms, and so on, well, it was inevitable, but in general consent but not agree in v. if you look a little from the inside, then what he was talking about, by the way, viktor vladimirovich we had a chance without fulfilling the minsk agreements to make. the main thing is that this conflict, at least on our ukrainian territory, should be prevented from changing the vector from the inside, because even with the agreements not implemented by minsk, which excluded a million voters in the donbass from the electoral process at the beginning of the twenty-first year, the option platform for life party came out on top place 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 would you, as a means of combating russia, have been changed it was when the west saw the issue of not even introducing the issue in ukraine as a whole, and therefore they were not implemented, because millions more voters appeared on donbass, then in general, the majority would be 100%. and and this is the key. that is, we had this chance even without fulfilling the myths of the agreements. ukraine could become different, but this is deeply neglected. let's pay attention to our viewers to a rather entertaining video in autumn 2019, president of ukraine volodymyr zelensky came to the village of zolote to volunteers and veterans who moved there in order to prevent the withdrawal of ukrainian troops from the village, we will hear a direct speech about honest decent relations. 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 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 an 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 putin so that he or even offer to take donbass is this a real

situation, could it be, 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 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 the position that the donbass is ukraine, so when the president of the russian federation took possession of vladimirovich putin, he said that the donbass is ukraine poroshenko tried from 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 milestone. all his pre-election programs of peace settlement of the situation in donbass satisfy the ukrainian citizens. in all their needs, bearing in mind, including primarily the population and the southeast. the southeast, like other regions , voted for the president of the world. 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 had to protect the voices of the western ukraine central ukraine which were against a peaceful settlement, which were

against the donbass anatoly well, i want a comment from your lips and in fact agree 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 at the last moment turned away and decided not to do this. here's to your view what was the key reason for this decision here 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. he specifically told us that yes, unfortunately, uh, the corresponding opinion was expressed by

the western partners. u now the president of ukraine in zelensky, that at this stage the peace talks. we need to stop in this regard. actually. they were discontinued because uh 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 reverent about this , we may not look so widely, we don’t look 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, indications as a result of which the negotiation process was stopped and to date, of course, uh is not conditions are being considered for its renewal. although of course diplomacy should work. and i, as an international journalist. i am trying to look for certain analogies in all situations, 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 crush signs kiev demanding and their implementation, because that supposedly europe cannot demand. from a 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 a direct speech in the ninety-ninth year - it was just the year when the west, at the head of the united states , destroyed international law, on which

today they refer to that, and then they opened pandora's box and showed that then there is the right of the strong and, uh, began to commit aggression, but on serbia, and he destroyed , uh, the center of belograd, bridges, infrastructure in the hospital, even children do not only speak about military installations, so now they are demanding from us that kosovo- mitohya, which they illegally from orgla from serbia, 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 can’t influence, they can’t influence kiev, they can’t influence many others, where their interests exist and when they say that it’s impossible to violate the borders of international law and so on, that 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 such analogies do not arise in western leaders why then the united states of america got away with everything, although the situation 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. from the moment i was elected as a deputy, i initiated the formation and headed the friendship group between the parliament of ukraine and serbian serbia and for me. really. well, the obvious analogy. yes, that is, we constantly constantly heard. uh, here's the western leaders that, well, we can't force kiev to enter a special status , not even autonomy. actually, special status. e to the constitution well, how is it a sovereign country, we will tell there

what to do now there are hostilities. 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. well, we would know there with my colleague. now they would delve into some historical examples, but 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 autonomous, yes, except for the recognition that this is already a misfortune, moreover, there in the north, kosovo live compactly serbs whom you now say the separatists, that is, kosovo , have separated forces from serbia, and the serbs living there now, who say, but at least they back serbia at least. you are separatists there now. it's just you some wild story. why is this happening? yes, everything in

in general, just yes, even in 2007, and in his famous mun 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 whole europe and ukraine in this. i mean, uh, unfortunately, and this is our failure. yes, we could not convince the majority in a different way, belarus resisted, but to make spheres of total domination of the ideology that is being developed in certain western capitals. and speech. today, not even about geopolitics. right now we probably don't have much time for this deep discussion , we are not even talking about geopolitics. we talk all the time 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 the national sovereignty, who want america not to be part of the global governance structure, they also didn’t pull in without it. juices, when the republicans correctly ask

the canoe question there, but why are you arming ukraine with 28 billion sent, and in nata themselves there are a lot of things not solved many problems. there are no accounts, there , uh, unresolved problems of schools, health care, and so on, but now the united states is headed by the globalist elite, which saw a reliable ally in the person of the same zelensky, and in parallel, while the war in ukraine is going on , the istanbul convention was ratified, the legislation is included concept of gender. we already have lgbt people in the ukrainian army divisions. we dismantled the church 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 is the family %, will affect the 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, as soon as on the channels that, uh, let's say, viktor vladimirovich supported which is connected with our political power. 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 are very hard as these forged in it all management named sura with very hard decals of the earth market. attempts to destroy traditional values ​​and so on. and these same structures that are associated with soros, they first of all declared us enemies here , roughly speaking, to be simple, but also pro-russian at the same time, and you know about russian lgbt activists, we probably had there would be fewer problems, but we are not so fortunate for them, therefore, naturally, it is natural to slander, supposedly for russia, but this is not the problem. we didn't want ukraine to become so , you know, new. uh, with hell 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 be heard from your lips of the code of administrative offenses, a kind of address to our belarusian audience summing up our discussion today. you don't have to trust anyone be conducted on the speculation that is now taking place in minsk, the agreements

played their role very seriously. uh, stop the escalation of the conflict. uh, they helped specifically people on the ground and could be completed to the end for this, everything was prerequisite, they were written quite normally and today ukraine could change itself from the inside, without those, uh, catastrophic and tragic processes that are now taking place there. e minsk agreements. e next. i want to say that when talking about a quarrel, it means global politics absolutely clear for us belarus it is quite obvious that we will not be put at rest for a long time precisely for this reason, independence. 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 meaningful discussion itself the conflict in the donbass needs to be and could be resolved peacefully, primarily through the implementation of agreements. 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 secretary edward gray what he said about the reasons for the start 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. if a fight is inevitable, you must be the first to speak like it is and always learn to work in real conditions. this is not good. this is not bad. it's just a fact we are a wonderful country. we have a wonderful state, wonderful vertical of power, but there is no ideal propaganda the genius of puppeteers is that they offer us a solution to problems that would not exist if these same puppeteers were not with us. the problem must be solved, and not gasp and hunt from them for the presence of a simple formula for both political and personal happiness, the author's view. igor dura to the main event in the country and the world. do not miss the new

releases of the propadanda project on the belarus 24 tv channel

. good evening on the air of panorama in the studio of ekaterina tikhomirova and sum up the results of this environment the society should be formed within the country, and not be imposed by forces from outside the law about civil society and akulitic parties expert opinion. the ghost of the iron curtain is leading lithuania down the path of self-destruction. vilnius, following warsaw, announced the closure of one railway border checkpoint on the border with belarus, and how the legendary sovetsky grad acquired the prefix bel