from the earth to the air to the lord god, what problem does not take one world, world and world. in the traditionally structured and clear message of lukashenka , a special place is always assigned to the world of security , when militaristic scissors are chopping the planet more and more sharply

. one must be on the alert to defend one's land and any attacks on independence. a soldier or a foreigner is not friendly. we are set to cross our border. if it follows, we will react symmetrically adequately. well, why use nuclear weapons if our fugitive banners are ahead of them, and behind them, that the first division that i said, where they have already set a goal in belarus , will go into our territory , we have enough other weapons to resist this. but, if we see that behind this lies the destruction of our country, we will apply everything that we have questions that we conducted throughout the country on the eve of the message also showed people are seriously concerned

about the issue of peace and our security, which is more, which is logical against the backdrop of an unprecedented increase in military threats, if it’s blazing around, it’s hard to think about something else belarusians are used to the world, and it ’s still great even if it has become a kind of banal reality for someone, belarus well, maybe the only one or one of the very few examples of the post-soviet space, where, of course, this is largely the merit of the president personally. lukashenko because, looking around the perimeter. we see how the former soviet national republics, and without exception, could be observed, if there were no burning conflicts many hot civil conflicts. that's this creeping confrontation. e, nezhitnicheskogo june 25, 1945, belarus signed the un charter and became a full

subject of international law. yes, minsk was then part of the ussr, but everyone appreciated the contribution of our people to the common victory. it is a pity that the memory of the west is selectively short. although even then washington was worried about its influence, and not for the general architecture of the world, the requirements of the soviet leadership, but for membership in an international organization, 16 soviet ones. the republic seriously alarmed roosevelt in a message received by stalin on september 1 , 1944, the us president expressed concern about this position of the soviet government. he stressed that it could not be accepted by the united states and other major countries, according to roosevelt , a danger was created for the implementation of the entire project to create an international organization. simply put, he was afraid that the united states would lose the rose. a troll from an organization that is just being created, but even he had to admit that for the onset of peace, belarus did a lot, as a result, only two republics of the ussr became separate founders. we and ukraine

what happened to the second country, you know by whose efforts the expert community also used the phrase security donor in relation to belarus. and in general. this is a rather capacious definition, which, in its depth, emphasizes the whole complex of belarusian e-peace initiatives that we observed during the soviet period. and this is justified, and the desire for peacekeeping understanding of security and stability as one of the highest values, but fast forward to during the period of independent belarus, only in the first years of independence, minsk signed about a thousand agreements, conventions, protocols of treaties and memorandums. trying to live by the rules and respect partners in the nineties, belarus expanded by a meter a network of nine missions , representative offices, 58 embassies, contacts of more than a hundred countries, we joined the osce, the ebrd, the euro-atlantic

partnership council and many other organizations with one goal to provide the architecture of the world with a strong foundation, while alexander lukashenko has always adhered to a clear position on this no wars of barriers and sanctions. here is the famous speech of the presidents in istanbul at the osce summit. we are absolutely convinced that the conflict situation cannot be resolved by military means, especially bypassing the un security council the ussr did not shed a single drop of blood , unlike, for example, those in conflict in nagorno-karabakh yes, in the nineties and themselves it was hard, but peace comes first . in 1992, the osce minsk group was created to resolve the conflict between baku and yerevan

; still managed to stop the bloodshed. however, work. the minsk group continued until the last outbreak in the region in 2020 to actively solve the problem minsk tried along the line. the csto needs to talk , the belarusian leader insistently urged in his time, when, in my opinion, we chaired. in once again, vkb, i took up this issue. i went to kilhama and talked to him in a friendly way, and i asked him a question so jokingly, i say, ilhamdushki, well, we need to help armenia, if you agree, and it was about five and a half or six, there these regions of azerbaijani regions, which were. uh, as they stated it was captured by the armenians, the armenians admitted that this is not our land, it is azerbaijani, except for karabakh

. well, or rather, it would have been returned, when i proposed to do this, these areas of the war would not exist. ilham would not have. well, roughly speaking, the motivation to start this war. well, you asked, probably, they gave the status of karabakh, but they would have decided in a calm regime, but at the same time, it wasn’t the hearts that agreed, it wasn’t then that nikol shiryan, lukashenka was frightened by these words, the journalists began their materials in the ninety-ninth, the young president of belarus , despite the actual threats nato flew to yugoslavia even under the bombardment of democratic missiles. the first was ready to support the people close to us, if only the senseless war would end. i wonder what the first cleaning nato military representatives not only did not guarantee security to belarus, but also sent fighters towards belarus then the belarusian president said in an interview with journalists that he arrived in serbia in hope.

to bring closer the onset of peace in the country, but it’s better that the united states did not stop at the destruction of yugoslavia june 3, 2006 montenegro was divided in 2008, kosovo was playing with fire, minsk said a unique combination of factors that developed around, kosovo the collapse of yugoslavia ethnic cleansing crimes against civilians, and also continue the period of administration of this territory by the un structures makes the case of kosovo special, kosovo cannot be considered as a precedent for any other situation in today's world , the classic is different after a few months, when russia recognized abkhazia and ossetia, george w. bush called this a violation of international norms . already in 2010, when it became obvious that the west only wants vossolite from belarus. we have begun to actively build bridges to asia creation of the eu

work along the lines of the sco, but peace must be achieved all the same together, as an example, the negotiations of the norman four on ukraine in minsk, negotiations were held in the palace of independence, the presidents of russia, ukraine, france and the german chancellor tried to reach an agreement for 16 hours, as a result, the parties agreed to cease fire in the donbas on february 15, 2015, then alexander lukashenko will note we will do everything to stop the bloodshed in the minsk agreements, we decided to derail with a new round of conflict, minsk again invited us to negotiate, but the west is dictating something else now and poroshenko and merkel's lamps, adjusting to the conjuncture in unison, solidified the absurd, we won time for ukraine, saying that no one really wanted peace, except for our country. or in general, yes, the chancellor in germany, it’s not they who decide, uh, the issues and prospects

for the development of this ukrainian conflict, the ukrainian conflict , as well as the so-called external ukrainian president, uh, well, just like the previous poroshenko, completely different forces are controlled these forces, let's say , are not the forces associated with the european union with germany was there with france with other guarantors of low agreements for more than 2 years, belarus provided a platform for a contact group on ukraine, which we received criticism in return saying that minsk ignores human rights, but minsk did not snap back and was always open this year. we hosted a large-scale parliamentary assembly of the osce assemblies then gathered 700 representatives from fifty- seven countries in 4 days of work , the minsk de