appreciate bypassing for our dry belarus 20 tents

what should be the focus of our society to criticize, you can argue , you can and should argue this development of the country, but within the framework of the constitution, this is our main task.

what is the sovereignty of belarus, this is the originality of our constitutional system, there is no need to be afraid of this, there is no need to peep and copy anything from anyone, and how to be ahead of the curve in the changing architecture of the world, they have a clear understanding of where and where we are going from here to all of us what is needed for to be the most efficient way. in fact, belarusians belong to a great civilization. you can call it an east slavic civilization . a professional look at the current events from the opinion leaders in the project is objective, do not miss it on belarus 24 tv channel . nil elevich

hello on the air, the program sas is authorized to announce its host. nadezhda sas greetings. 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 each of 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, be that as it may, the incident with the balloon drove us-china relations into an even deeper crisis, us secretary of state anthony blinkin canceled a visit to china on which hopes for some détente were earlier made by joe biden 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 an unexpected leaf washington however, after the revelations of the former israeli prime minister benat that moscow had guaranteed zelensky at the beginning of the conflict security, the need to portray a theater of russian missiles hiding in the bunker of leaders disappeared during meetings with european heads of state and government zelensky habitually demanded new deliveries 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 would like to start a quote program by the commander of the us forces 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 which of the politicians 9 years ago, ignited the 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 . today i will be anatoly eye, the press secretary of the ministry of foreign affairs, belarus and the people's deputy of ukraine oleg voloshin hello, we start our discussion with a blitz 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, uh

about the past, but uh, an unequivocal conclusion, as a professional, i will say, as a diplomat, that u were definitely a real chance for peace and could be completed. we are well aware of the diplomatic work belarusian diplomacy has done in recent years to implement the minsk agreements, but in your opinion, why exactly 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 site plays a very important role in the success of negotiations. therefore, it is always chosen with great care, of course, there were great discussions around the minsk site, 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 of the venues were absolutely incredible. yes, where it would take 9 hours to fly, but the main factor, the main factor, uh, is that no one like belarus at that moment was so sincerely interested in peace in the ukrainian land, it was the 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 the atmosphere that prevailed in ukrainian society and what the 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 to be elected, and in the conditions of confrontation in the donbass, as the president of the world , he was just his own petro poroshenko, that's why he won in 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 e peace, moreover, my colleagues viktor medvedchuk, my eldest yesterday, from others , were then already in the spring intermediaries in the negotiations and then an agreement was reached on a ceasefire when putin met with poroshenko a in normandy in june, when formal russia is considered to be this 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. 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'm something there and i digress to the side, but in principle, i'm for peace and he had every chance here to peacefully this peace plan, when to realize it right away, and by the way, the parliament at that time, which consisted mainly of former pits and communists, even who would certainly have voted for the embodiment of everything that was in 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 already 9 years ago, do you agree with this

assessment there is a proverb? yes smart rusak hindsight, so today you can evaluate. e in different ways, so that there would be a war or it would not 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, the final ceasefire was also reached in 2020, initially. all. this it was thanks to the work of the tripartite contact group in minsk itself. that is, it was, 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, perhaps then, someone was not completely ready and western players, but plans and desires. here everything was set on fire. actually, therefore, all the chances were also minsk. agreement 13 point - the letter of the law indicated the consistent implementation of each of them, the ceasefire from the troops, the holding of elections, the amnesty 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 which case everyone understands perfectly well that the safety of citizens living on

territory of the donetsk luhansk people's republic? 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 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 , poroshenko's victory in the first round in the fourteenth year and then his devastating defeat when almost three-quarters of the hide you said 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 enter sovereignty

there, that means, in exchange for peace there and so on, when we formulated, otherwise are you ready. i 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. and the question 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 will stop fighting against ukraine and stop or bloodshed in the donbass and then from those who voted 2/3 they said they were 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 act 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 said goodbye to ordinary ukrainians. yes, of course, yes, fir-trees-sticks. okay, there god is with him, even in western ukraine it’s one

thing to talk in theory there, we don’t want to go there the special status of the donbass is another matter when you asked if you were ready for donbass, after everything that has passed, to have the usual status of an area to shed blood, people say, no, of course, let them have autonomy there, conditionally, this is if to speak honestly, therefore, in fact, and the ukrainian society was led where they wanted to lead those who were in power, they really were. e, although at a meeting. here you were at one meeting. here i am completing in june of the sixteenth year with political experts international affairs. 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 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 actual political leadership. e. in hall e what will happen in the result of non-implementation of the minsk agreements, this is what we see now. yes, the solution

would be even more 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, 12, 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 the unrecognized donetsk and luhansk 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 eastern 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 answer of the kiev authorities was the use of the army against those who disagreed to help the local militias. russia has come carried out the delivery of humanitarian aid to the population of donbass 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. 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. they did not continue in january 2015, the situation seriously escalated alexander lukashenko again took the initiative for peace talks on february 11, 2015, consisting of the meeting of the normandy 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 assert 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 according to the minsk agreements, they 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 just recently. president poroshenko spoke out. why did he need it? minsk, these negotiations and so on. it turns out he was preparing for a war something before us, that we are somehow to blame, well, he was preparing for the planet. today, this situation is being disentangled , and this was confirmed by ex-chancellor of the federal republic of germany angela merkel in an interview with the german newspaper zeid. 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. they don't look at our region. there, they somehow look at it from across the ocean to the belarusian ready, if they want the latter, and then the ukrainian is not already there, a pole or something like mercenaries. well, that's their business. it's their right, for now. for example, me and our you don’t see the special services that they were 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 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 the many processes that preceded tragedies, because they put them in a completely different light, 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 hosts dear studio i am glad to see and hear you, viktor vladimirovich, today we are talking about 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 then? you know, uh, the plot that was now shown on the screen of your studio, it is very revealing, but the story that you are now asking about is the era of the peace settlement, and if the attempts of this peace settlement were accurate, they probably long before september 14th and definitely long before february 15th. 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 the leaders, because those who conducted these negotiations before me accepted in the end. in early may , the leaders of these territories refused to meet with them and after obtaining 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 issue 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 on the idea of ​​leaders donetsk lugansk whom i met on the eve of may 15 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 head of the then territory. they said viktor vladimirovich we will gladly make this mutual. if the ukrainian side also takes such an adequate step, but this will be the first issue on our agenda, when i stated tsuchin about 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 poroshenko became president on june 6 in normandy, where there was a meeting between the then president of the russian federation, putin, president of ukraine poroshenko, and french president hollande, and 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, 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, at the request of poroshenko, i visited the territories of donetsk lugansk, agreed with the leadership of these territories to conduct the first meeting of the tripartite 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 due 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 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. donetsk luhansk will not be started active hostilities. are you good you know how they went through july-august and this is ilovaisk mariupol and many other

territories and thousands of dead and then only on september 1st. 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, 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 and initiatives of president putin of the russian federation, and it was decided that these meetings would be in minsk, after which the so-called minsk agreements and minsk meetings began. 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 the time of gratitude. 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 he is the ministry of foreign affairs of belarus to these meetings were 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 head of state of the normandy format, 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 on february 19 and already on february 12, these minsk agreements. and the story that was told, that took place. these are all those attempts during this period of peace. but as it turned out, how

furious with your broadcast. it's really. today there were attempts in order to buy time in order to prepare for further war in order to realize a 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, the leader of the then ukraine poroshenko, subsequently today the leaders of zelensky who, despite minsk agreements, because zelensky also recognized them in a communiqué signed on december 9, 2019 in paris, and as they all noted then, french president 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 in the creation of bridgeheads for confrontation. e russia, e, paukazsky and at will wanted to you west with ukraine so that russia has problems and russia continues. 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 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 , 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 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 , 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. e a little, imagining merkel, uh, 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. now we will deceive here later 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 a position of interest. in ukraine , of course, but not in the sense that now we will deceive the russians, they no one thought about it then 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. i generally say this about it. it's not serious that he generally acted as such a dog brought by merkel for entourage, but from the point of view of hmm 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 , at the celebrations dedicated to the opening of the second front, they agreed to create this normandy format, which is exactly what they were after when they arrived on february 12 and 17:00. continued normandy format negotiations 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 credibility, like what europe pomo. 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, 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 barking and the hall or from the concert pit of which he also decided to mark himself on this basis, i know poroshenko’s mood well and i want to share with you in order to fully appreciate this situation both 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 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 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 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 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 this is not so, but if so, why then howl out, that there is a war you were preparing for it merkel and poroshenko want to show their importance, that the ukrainian army. see fighting against one of the strongest armies in the world, because we then they deceived everyone in minsk and the whole world was deceived, and russia, and so on petty and disgusting. it doesn't look like measurements already by this time, if they 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, then in 2014-2015, in economic terms, russia was also much less prepared for a tough sanctions pressure than in 2022, the european union and the united states of america were internally stronger than china and externally, and turkey , before the military coup attempt, was not particularly drawn to partnership with russia. 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. uh, if the same measures were taken, uh, in the fourteenth year on such a blockade, it would probably be 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's a bit interesting from a point of view. uh, that means, here, but about the meaning of the path that has not been traveled, but it seems to me that here we need a little go up one floor, look from above and, unfortunately, understand that these terrible events, which it is not yet known when it will end and how they were inevitable in one form or another, because even if the minsk agreements were somehow politically , but they are still sold. i think that the very logic of the entire development

in europe, the security system 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 observing 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 is possible in three. 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. means the first, the late

minister of foreign affairs vladimirovich makei, during one of my reports somewhere back in 2020, he said you need to be very careful, because our opponents will do everything to discredit the so-called minsk in the next 3-4 years process and the 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 regarding 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, firstly, he devoted a whole half page and their main content was that he wrote everything from minsk, which means, uh, he didn’t really like the treats. it means frog legs and other, probably, dishes

that he is used to. it's crawly it and how it means that they were and actually are related 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 do it all, i can say that belarusian diplomacy will definitely not stop working in this direction and, of course, our sincere desire to condition peace. this position is preserved on ukrainian soil. not treason. what is your opinion on this. uh, i sort of systematically, of course, understand what fyodor lukyanov is talking about, and of course i agree that we are talking about what uh uh, the global hegemon in the united states of america, which had this so-called unicrawl, yes, that is, the period in history when they totally dominated, they lose their dominance as the main let's say the violator of their peaceful governance is, of course, the russian federation and although those who want

to destroy american hegemony in much. more. this is the so-called private popular thermal majority, but russia 1 and most strongly challenged. this is a hegemotif. naturally, in this sense , the clash between washington and moscow and naturally, about ukraine, first of all, 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 consent well, if you look a little from the inside, then what by the way, said viktor vladimirovich, we had a chance to do it without fulfilling the minsk agreements. 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 minsk unfulfilled agreements that excluded from the electoral process a million voters in the donbass 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 party clearly close ideological positions, but if not for

the majority, but at least some a very serious part of the parliament, which would transform this entire basic vector instrumentalization of ukraine how you, as a means of combating russia, would be changed just when the west saw it. you are simply no longer an issue in ukraine's agreements in general, and therefore they were not fulfilled, because millions more voters appeared in the donbass, then in general the majority would have been 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 a profound moment. let's draw the attention of our viewers to a rather entertaining video. in the fall of 2019, president of ukraine volodymyr zelensky arrived in the village of zolote to volunteers and veterans who had moved there to prevent the withdrawal of ukrainian troops from the village hear a direct speech about honest decent

relationships. 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 a conclusion arises and there is a version with which i think many will agree that neither poroshenko nor zelensky's regime needed the return of donbass in principle, since this would mean the return to the political field of millions of voters who would you vote in the next election? for such a party, as an example, the opposition platform for life. and in fact they would ensure a change 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 told vladimir putin that he or even offered 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 has 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 his official position that the donbass is ukraine , and so when the president of the russian federation vladimir vladimirovich putin said that the donbass is ukraine poroshenko

tried from him, as they say, to die, it will be more accurate and more against the donbass because he understood that he did not need him. 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 pre-election programs, the peace of the settlement of the situation in the donbass, the satisfaction of ukrainian citizens. in all their needs, bearing in mind, including primarily the population and the southeast. and 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 didn’t succeed due to the lack of political will, and therefore he already had to save at any cost the voices of western ukraine, central ukraine, which were against a peaceful settlement, which were against the donbas anatoly well, i want a comment from your lips, 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 at the last moment turned away and decided not to do this. 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, as if several high-ranking people. we were specifically told 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. we need to stop in this regard. 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 are always belarusians we are very anxious about this, maybe we don’t look so broadly and not 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. e, indications as a result of which the negotiation process was stopped and today, of course, e does not see the conditions for its resumption. although of course diplomacy should work. and i, as an international journalist.

i try in all situations to look for a certain analogy, 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 by demanding, but their implementation, because 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 do the serbs see how hypocritical the western politicians, pursuing in similar situations, we received a completely different answer to this question from the head of the entire serbian movement of patriots of the fatherland and the diaspora, the dragon stanovic.

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, which is so referred to today, and they then opened pandora's box and showed that then there is the right of the strong and, uh, began to commit aggression , but to serbia, but he destroyed it, the center of belgrade, bridges hospital infrastructure, even children’s don’t talk only about military facilities, so for now they demand from us that kosovo-vitohya, which they illegally from the orgla from serbia militarily, so that we recognize it as an independent part, and kosovo , which has always and historically beat serbian part, when these are their interests, then they cannot influence, they cannot influence kiev

, they cannot influence many others, where their interests exist and when they say that, as it is, they cannot violate the borders of international law, and so on, what is there russia committed aggression there and the like, and during 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 similar analogies arise in western leaders, why then the united 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 the deputy was elected, but initiated the formation and led the friendship group e between the parliaments of ukraine and serbia and the parliamentary of 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. 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 the crimea even if it's at stake there, here we will be getting closer and closer to the thermonuclear step. 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 , 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 it is already the misfortune of this fish is there in the north, kosovo lives compactly, the server to which you now say separatists, that is, kosovo forces have separated from serbia and the serbs living there now, who

say, but at least they will remain back to serbia. you are separatists there now. it's just some wild story. why is this happening? yes, everything is very simple, and even in 2007, and his famous mune speech , which everyone carefully listened to, that all this would probably not happen now, and president putin said, comrade wolf, listen to the eu yes, because there is an understandable interest to the whole of europe and to ukraine in this. i mean, uh, unfortunately, and this is our failure. yes, that 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 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, so that they don’t pull from it juices, 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 a lot of problems. there are no accounts, there, uh, unresolved problems of schools, healthcare, and so on , but now the united states is headed by the globalist elite, which saw the same zelensky as a reliable ally, and in parallel, while the war in ukraine is going on , the istanbul convention was ratified, the legislation included the concept of gender. we already have lgbt units in the ukrainian army. 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 conservative christian in a single street to ask what a family 99% 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, as soon as on the channels that, let's say, were supported by viktor vladimirovich , who is connected 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 it very harshly. swaras. we are very hard like these forged in her all the management named sura with very hard decals of the earth market and she is trying to destroy traditional values ​​and so on. and these same structures that are connected with soros, they first of all declared us enemies , that is, roughly speaking, if we were about quarrels, but also at the same time pro-russian and you know about russian lgbt activists, we probably would have less problems, but we have them now they are like that, therefore, of course, they naturally stigmatize us, supposedly for russia, but that's not the problem. we didn't want ukraine to become so, you know, new. uh, soda and mountains. this is the main problem and lukashenka did not allow it to be done in belarus. absolutely right 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 the minsk agreements 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 were. 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. i want to say that, speaking of a quarrel, it means global politics . belarus is completely clear to us. it is quite obvious that we will not be put to rest for a long time precisely because of this reason for independence. unfortunately, it is expensive and there is a certain historical period, when you need to survive and after

that, take 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 , the conflict in donbas itself should and could be resolved peacefully, primarily through the implementation of agreements. called by name the capital of belarus 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 told him about the reasons for the start of the first world war by pulling this hook.