[000:00:00;00] kyrgyzstan tajikistan georgia turkey iran and cancer kuwait bahrain qatar united arab emirates saudi arabia syria jordan lebanon tune your satellite dish to azerspace 1 satellite the channel's signal is broadcast in the clear and is available 24 hours a day every day. be with the tv channel belarus 24 and discover

belarus they like to live in the woods 13 years ago. we came here as a family, we wanted to buy a summer cottage for ourselves, but we decided to buy a small village here. they found themselves out of their own business and got on the gasket. i think i would have it insured. i protsevali not only ran away kissed the flying cages, and i am pleased with the coward that i have and he brought here, everything that is chopped, strong, we do almost everything together, but it’s wrong, though, it mows the grass. igor, i don’t take a scythe with us, it has never worked out. my goal is to convey the history

of my native land to a new generation of belarusians. i will also transfer shares to them, watch the draft policy on belarus 24 channel. is there the most promising position for defeating the enemy? while lies are speculations and secret meanings, the main goal is to break it to get it, and the companies between them against belarus and russia were developed and supervised, just with the participation of specialists not only from specialists in the usa and great britain in other leading countries, if you call yourself independent, then show your independence, show and prove

faith in what you are doing on belarus 24 tv channel. hello , i am authorized to declare, i am its host nadezhda sas greetings, i will remind you. this program is 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 vital countries, and the main events of world politics. these are weeks. we will tell you right now in moscow there was a meeting of the supreme state council of the union state alexander lukashenko and vladimir putin discussed a number of issues.

including the progress in the implementation of allied programs and the implementation of the provisions of the agreement on the creation of a union state, as the belarusian leader noted, all 28 allied programs have been implemented by almost 80%. continues to increase and last year's turnover figure rose 12% from 2021 to a record $45 billion to replace a failed attempt. western economic blockade in the course went military blackmail economic blockade could not succeed. it's just that they are so this is how much we decided to take us if we thought seriously , they would not have done it, because the economy, in principle, is self-sufficient, it did not work out economically, they began to purposefully put pressure on military relations. the rhetoric of the prospect of a global armed conflict in the spotlight intensifies, alexandra lukashenko and vladimir putin, the security of the country's union state will continue to increase cooperation in the defense sphere. a decision was made to develop a

security concept for the union state. this document intends to formulate the fundamental tasks of our interaction in the area of ​​growing tension on the external border of our states and sanctions and information wars have been unleashed against us. finland has completed the process of joining nato , as a result, the alliance's border with russia has doubled since 1947. helsinki consecutively pursued a policy of neutrality, earning on intermediary trade, it was not by chance that the system of agreements that fixed the post-war borders in europe was signed in 1975 between nato countries and the states of the eastern bloc, namely helsinki, but under the influence of the conflict in ukraine, the finnish elites decided to break all ties with russia and join hostile to her badly in moscow have already promised an adequate military-technical response to the actions of a neighbor.

law enforcement affiliated with the us democratic party moved in an open attack on donald trump last monday in new york, the former president was indicted on 34 counts. at the same time, according to polls, three -quarters of americans believe trump's persecution is politically motivated. the manhattan prosecutor's office accused politicians of forging documents in connection with the payment of money to a porn star for not disclosing information about their sexual relationship. clearly what is the pretext for claims against biden's most rated opponent? everyone found it ridiculous trump himself is doing everything to use the attacks prosecutors to strengthen their election campaign, the us presidential election will be held in november 2024. during a visit to warsaw, president of ukraine volodymyr zelensky made it clear that the merger of his country with poland could become a new reality in the future , there will be no political , economic or historical borders between our peoples , zelensky said, while he almost verbatim repeated the words spoken in may last year

by the polish leader andrzej duda, who recently visited minsk, the head of the foreign intelligence of russia sergey naryshkin. he said bluntly that, according to available data, the polish leadership is preparing to incorporate the western ukrainian lands into its state after the military defeat of kiev. the legendary chinese military strategist sun ze in his treatise the art of war wrote the rules of warfare is not to rely on the fact that the enemy will not come, and rely on what i can meet him with, not rely on the fact that he will not attack, but rely on the fact that i will make it impossible for him to attack himself, and indeed, this was formulated back in the 4th century bc, but how accurately the current moment reflects how belarus is preparing for the fact that the enemy may come and what role tactical nuclear weapons will play in preventing an attack, today's program will be discussed. i am glad to welcome

vadim borovik, a political scientist, who is already present in our studio. hello, good afternoon and alexander mikhailov, head of the bureau of military-political analysis. hello, by tradition, we start our program with millet blitz. do you want peace prepare for war? this again rule number one for own actors, or else you think otherwise vadim please, in general, if your opponent knows that if any unfriendly or aggressive actions follow from his side. and you can inflict unacceptable damage on him, then, naturally, as a rule, he refrains from using any weapons, your address or an act of aggression, and we know that no acts of aggression have been committed against countries that possess nuclear weapons, therefore, a preventive measure , good tactical correctly, nuclear weapons are weapons of deterrence in the history of the possession of nuclear weapons and the use of nuclear weapons. only one. eh, a fact, or rather, two facts of use

against military purposes. this is the bombing of hiroshiki nagasaki by american troops. therefore, so far not a single nuclear power has been attacked and nuclear weapons have not been used for offensive purposes over the past almost here, for years this has not happened, therefore, really. in the presence of nuclear weapons, one can not be afraid for tomorrow and indeed, for the republic of belarus , a key decision has taken place, which will be implemented in the coming days, months. and in fact, alexander devoted most of his message to the belarusian people, and alexander lukashenko devoted it to this. it was key because security, especially now in the current realities of the world. the division is taking place and any state understands with whom it is in alliance and against whom it is fighting , it is forced to protect itself, and the key , again, was said that we are defending ourselves.

how do you think? what are the reactions to your view, the most key among western states , i note that the message of alexander grigorievich to the people, well, the parliament of belarus and the people of belarus was looked at in russia very seriously and thoughtfully. moreover, now russia of the republic of belarus is bound by new nuclear relations. this is a very big responsibility of the two leaders of our countries, and indeed, the news that tactical nuclear weapons will be deployed on the territory of belarus in general caused a very big stir in the west. based on the bureau of baltic analysis, we monitor western networks western statements and reactions of the local electorate to the statement of their politicians. there was a very big and serious question from the inhabitants of europe to their politicians. what are we to do now with all this, what have you brought international relations to, which, in fact, is neutral, independent of

almost all geopolitical centers of power in the eurasian space, belarus is becoming a military player, that is, a military-political player, and in the geopolitical plane in which we are now, and the first of july, which putin designated lukashenko as the date for the deployment of tactical nuclear bombs. passov on the territory of the republic of belarus is also such a reminder by the euroleader, until july 1, you either leave the ukrainian case and stop following instructions from washington or move to a new plane of relations with the russian one that is, already a little hot head was cooled by this decision and naturally about opinions, yes, spineless europe of course, you can talk endlessly, but let's let's hear mr. borel's voice and his reaction . the deployment of russian nuclear

weapons in belarus will mean an irresponsible escalation and a threat to european security. and brussels is leading new sanctions against minsk, if the belarusian authorities do not stop what is happening, there is no need to scare me. i'm already scared. i already saw. eh, very much in this world. a lot oh, here they will deploy nuclear weapons in belarus, we are imposing sanctions against you, what we forgot about them, they have already been introduced alexander lukashenko e. vadim, you yourself were present during the message and addressed your question to the president, but what does the reaction say first of all. here the same borel in the whole european union understands that the jokes are already over and in fact the degree is so high. well, firstly, i want to support my colleague, everything is correctly said the only moment. we have never been aloof from any geopolitical processes. we were

at the very edge of the geopolitical divide and have always been involved in all geopolitical processes and are doing everything to ensure that our people and our country do not lose sovereignty and peace. because there are so many interests in order to destabilize the situation in belarus, and for this we are strengthening the joint grouping of troops, technically strengthening , we are conducting appropriate training on military personnel and e. listen when we talk about the return of tactical nuclear weapons to belarus. first, we are doing this strictly within the framework of international law, despite the fact that our partners under the budapest agreement have violated their obligations. i mean washington london they should have abstained throughout our sovereign history. here

economic pressure from interfering in our internal political affairs, on the contrary, they constantly did it, so they violated their agreements, and we are returning what we had on our territory and for now we are returning only tactical weapons thank you very much indeed moscow and minsk agreed to deploy russian nuclear weapons on the territory of belarus, a step, bright after all, the middle of 1990, domestic ammunition. they were located only in their field, and the americans, who continued to store charges in europe, were russian diplomacy criticized calling for the missiles to be taken home, and fate nosed us at the extremely important decision of moscow and minsk in more detail in our story on march 25th. vladimir putin announced the imminent deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in belarus, while moscow and minsk agreed to do this without violating international obligations on the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons. on the 3rd of april we start training the crew. and on july 1, we are completing the construction of a special

storage facility for practical nuclear weapons on the territory of belarus, we have already helped our belarusian colleagues to re-equip their planes with planes. e belarusian air force 10 aircraft. ready for the use of this type , the first we have already transferred in belarus to our well-known very effective complex without content, according to the russian ambassador to belarus, tactical nuclear weapons will be deployed near the border. with poland, in this way, the union state will increase the ability to ensure its security ; some of the belarusian ground attack aircraft have received the ability. to strike at enemy targets with means of destruction in in addition, the armed forces of belarus were transferred on the first day to the iskander m tactical missile system. it

can use missiles, both in conventional and nuclear versions, the reaction of the west followed immediately, for example, french president emmanuel macron during his visit to china stated that no country can place nuclear weapons on the territory of another country, in response, alexander lukashenko made a radical proposal. if they agree, then you need to display everything nuclear weapons to americans from five or six countries by the ledionaries and him, period. well, i'm generally a radical in this regard. i believe that nuclear weapons should be brought together in one heap in one heap to destroy them within uh, literally some time. that's all, and talk with your tongue. like, how can this comrade of ours do it? well, here are all the specialists, so let's collect the whole bunch and destroy it.

this is the best option. in the meantime, we do it the way we do it. they are russian tactical nuclear weapons in belarus - this is a protective a reaction to the current geopolitical situation and a response to the uk's statement about the supply of ukraine with ammunition with combined uranium, such weapons are considered dangerous due to radiation dust, which will inevitably lead to contamination of passive areas and create a danger to both local residents and the environment. in addition, many experts point out the double standards of the collective west, because the decision to deploy tactical nuclear weapons outside their country is well known to the united states of america for has been pursuing such a policy together with european countries for decades. why americans? pilots to use this type of weapon if necessary, we agreed that we did the same about intensifying negotiations on the return of nuclear weapons to our country alexander lukashenko said

during his message to the people and the national assembly, the president recalled that back in the nineties, when belarus was withdrawing from its territory soviet nuclear weapons the west dalma guarantees in the field of security, and then he himself trampled, in the circumstances and the military-political situation around our country, i have been optimized strongly negotiations with russian president putin on the return of nuclear weapons to belarus precisely on the return of nuclear weapons, which were withdrawn in the nineties and tactical nuclear weapons. it may not be limited, said the belarusian leader, if necessary , strategic weapons will be deployed in belarus a week ago, an order to the military to immediately restore the sites,

on which poplars were placed with nuclear warheads and i must say it will be necessary. putin and i will decide and introduce here, if necessary, strategic weapons, and they must understand this. i want to secure the belarusian state and ensure peace for the belarusian people. i want to note that in the plot it is quite clearly traced, the cause-and-effect relationship of this decision draws attention to this. now we will not only talk about this with the hotel demo, a military analyst, a former senior official in the department of defense. hungary kiwi program is worth the deployment of nuclear weapons on the territory of allied countries. could this be the reason

for washington's muted reactions to the decision to deploy russian tactical nuclear weapons in belarus then why are some european states so concerned about it? it is part of the us policy to launch an unprecedented military buildup in modern history. naturally, belarus perceives this as a strategic threat, given the difference in territory and population between these strange are not

through the deployment of nuclear weapons. i'm not sure there's some kind of threat here. belarus regarding the build-up of the country of poland in 2014 . i believe that the conflict is now escalating. i think that naturally, i understand that some countries see this step, unfortunately. this still contributes to the escalation for your answers, but in fact , vadim and what do you think, how

fair it is to say that russia is escalating the conflict of politics word fair, absent there is always the notion of expediently beneficial and doing. who are those who can afford to take certain actions in response without receiving, so to speak, an asymmetric reaction. look, when they even agreed on the caribbean crisis. we removed weapons from cuba. they had to remove the warheads, and in turkey, they put them in their place and did not follow through. we , uh, why were the us tactical weapons in europe at all, since the warsaw pact was significantly outnumbered and they considered tactical weapons. let's pay attention to the map of the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons in europe to the united states of america, please . that's what they were interested in, so that these tactical nuclear weapons make it possible to more effectively resolve some issues on the battlefield. it is necessary to remove the airfield with one charge enough and, accordingly, that was

such an option. ah, confrontation. but then we disbanded the warsaw pact organization. in principle, we negotiated in the vein that russia and nato would cooperate to interact nato, uh, assumed obligations, as they say did not sign. well, the takeaway was that they wouldn't expand, though. we constantly see the expansion of nato and, uh, it is approaching our borders, especially we see it in the baltic states and in poland, poland has generally turned into a shock fist, a potential threat to the allied state, therefore naturally, given the fact that on the eve of even this, putin and the russian the federation formally addressed the proposal. and this proposal was not just, therefore, not heard. it was vysmino in the media of western countries. it was evident that it was being carried out by the united states, an operation thought out, read for escalation. the most important thought is

the deployment of tactical nuclear weapons on the territory of belarus - this is a step where we want to escalate washington to dialogue. and here is what he said, the polish deputy marek sawicki let's hear , it's time to place nuclear weapons on the territory of poland, so that it also deters putin, we don't need to use it at all, but it's worth having it won't hurt to be in a state of readiness, it is also necessary to say that we will not give our consent, neither to partition nor to blackmail. yes, no matter how germany is now offended by the united states of america, but the key militant violin today is the alliance - this is certainly poland. how to respond to such statements alexander, the reaction has already sounded in the actions of our leaders, the leaders of russia , the republic of belarus, and i will remind you about the escalation. i will simply bring to this thought that until the thirteenth year, we watched

how nato was expanding, moreover, in the zero years the process just went at an irreversible speed , and the baltic states and hungary and other countries, that is, no one reacted to our statements , they said they laughed at one and mocked. well, the year is 113, when russia directly indicated to washington that they were deploying mk 41 launchers in eastern europe, which could in no way be used by installations for using anti-aircraft guided missiles. but as an offensive weapon. they can fire tomahawks. medium-range missiles and putin directly spoke about this to washington, they they continued to laugh, that is, they already placed launchers along our border and continued to laugh. this is after they expanded nato to the east. once they have created the infrastructure for nuclear weapons in six states of europe. let me remind you that greece also has storage facilities for nuclear weapons. for tiao. and there, too, can be placed ammunition. if necessary. again, according to our data, such

an infrastructure. the secret is being created in the baltic states on the territory of poland, work is already underway , engineering troops are working and enough one signal from washington to move additional ammunition there. excuse me when a year before the start of a special military operation in the spring of 21. washington began to officially supply ukraine with lethal weapons, javelins, nlows, and so on , armored vehicles, lethal weapons. opened a year before the special operation. this is who reproaches that we are something. they were engaged in escalation, and when ammunition began to enter the belgorod bryansk kursk, voronezh, rostov region, in the crimea of ​​the russian federation, what was left for russia to do to watch how heavy nato artillery is already hitting our people, by the way, nato production, that is, to stand and continue to look at all this, what should be the reaction. putin what reaction should

lukashenka have when heavy weapons are concentrated around his borders, first of all, the western border ? and on a permanent basis , us military personnel are being transferred, that is, american units with a division of the airborne forces flew here, but excuse me, something needs to be done. and the actions that our leaders are doing. they are absolutely adequate. these are situations, on the contrary, even here i am listening to the expert community. outraged, more gestures are needed. you understand that the way from lukashenka they are still soft politicians. it could have been even tougher, as washington likes to do. but you know, our leaders still respect international law. that's right vadim says, we do everything within the framework of international law, because our actions today will be judged by children and grandchildren in the future. and now the historians of the future will judge this conflict in our favor, they are in favor of the collective west, i also want to note that

american president john f. kennedy compared nuclear weapons with a domocles sword that waved over our heads on the thinnest thread and the presence of nuclear weapons. one of the parties deters the other from the use of nuclear weapons by the first, but for this the first party must be sure that the enemy has nuclear weapons in the technical ability, as well as the political psychological readiness of this adversary. to use nuclear weapons in retaliation is the unacceptability of the consequences of such. potential retaliatory nuclear strike for the state and society, and nuclear deterrence is detailed in our reference . the theory of nuclear deterrence assumes that any country that owns nuclear weapons will not use them as the first of fears of a retaliatory nuclear strike. however, nuclear deterrence can also be directed against

non-nuclear adversary, and then the state's nuclear weapons are interpreted as a unilateral emergency means of countering an attack by superior conventional armed forces or countering the use of chemical or biological weapons in a situation critical for the survival of the state . the caribbean crisis of 1962 is considered a classic example of nuclear deterrence, when the united states weapons, demanding the withdrawal of soviet nuclear missiles, but refrained from such use and stockpiling before retaliation. at the same time, the ussr at the time of the crisis had about 17 times less nuclear missile arsenal than the united states . however, even this ratio turned out to be enough to trigger the psychology of nuclear deterrence . and does the theory of nuclear deterrence work today like never before? vadim, of course, uh, it works, but listen, here in the usa they will act a little more cunningly. and we must understand this, they are still interested in dragging out this conflict. the economic weakening

of the russian federation is still at the ready. again i want to say that there are some hotbeds of fire along the perimeter of russia, we see an attempt and this will continue in georgia, afghanistan is on pause, the north caucasus and so on for good reason. for example, they invite armenia to the summit, democratic azerbaijan is not invited, that is, they constantly split the stones of the contradiction, their task is not to have a person in the kremlin who could order the use of any type of weapon, their task is to destabilize the internal economically serious lesson. those of our actions that we taking steps to move to belarus means, uh, tactical nuclear weapons - these are absolutely correct actions necessary and this is a good preventive measure. but here's what my colleague said. we are very responsible and careful in this matter. we must think to be responsible, but at the same time we need it. uh, it means a strategic initiative , and i asked the head of state the question that we should try to demonstrate a threat, not in nato europe, but on the territory

of the united states of america, for them it is very electrical pressure plays an important role. and now, if they again felt somewhere in latin america and hosted russia's tactical nuclear potential, then, perhaps, this is the pressure that the electoral masses would exert on washington to influence their decision-making. that is, maybe some other asymmetric actions. they are sure to have this option. but today we are with you. what we are doing today is fulfilling the scenarios of washington, i have been saying this for more than a year. because there was no need to get involved in this special military a provocation by the united states because they got involved according to washington’s scenario or it was necessary to do it this way, that is, there is only one option, either to do it in such a way that it was a high-quality jewelry war, it can only be effective quickly, and if it didn’t work out, then it’s a mistake. there is no time , so today we need to break their script, it is very profitable for him. i say it again, when the ministry of defense of the russian federation announces or the height of statistics on losses, washington applauds both sides. well done mutual destruction industry

mutual destruction of manpower and equipment. if you do this according to washington's scenario, today we need to demonstrate to two countries washington and london. this is one firm that runs europe today that they are existentially threatened. how to do it? we have to think, but a solution is being worked out, but for now we are with you and we are executing their scenario. nothing good will happen. alexander , but again, we are talking about the reaction of washington. can the us decision be made and rescheduled? nuclear tactical charges from bases, which are now in the same netherlands and belgium already in poland and lithuania as a mirror , again, next actions, or still a degree. uh, the voltage will be reduced. as you think, you know, uh, in general, the statement about the movement of tactical weapons on the territory of belarus, firstly, it has a sobering effect on the western elites. and we draw such and such conclusions based

on an analysis of the public reaction to the statement in russia and belarus and the response to the reactions in the statements of western politicians. they at a loss. they are confused. their cards are mixed up. they did not predict such a move on the part of our coalition, one must understand that the coalition of russia and its allies is working against the collective west and has entered into a very serious confrontation. perhaps stretched out for many years and it is right that we return in memory. in the second year after the caribbean crisis, in which our country won, we forced them to withdraw weapons from our continent. and it was precisely after the policy of the ghost that the soviet union was 30 years old. lived calmly, not being afraid of any military attacks yes, who on the planet would, uh, dare to fish. sorry to the soviet union after the caribbean crisis, when the americans wiped themselves off and took out their missiles and nuclear weapons. that is correct in our discourse, probably,

there is a need, a demonstration, first of all , of our military-technical capabilities. moreover , putin recently mentioned this. we have a nuclear test site on novaya zemlya where the tsar bomb of 58 megatons and a number of other nuclear weapons were once detonated. again us no longer holds back the treaty of the day, as we can hold back, when the americans place their nuclear weapons with their military and political allies along the line. nato, but how does the union state of russia belarus differ from the necessary ties within nato yes, nothing in fact, this is the same collective will to use the existing weapons and lukashenka correctly says that strategic weapons, so far, no one touches, and they are just be more afraid on us territory because it is with strategic weapons that we will hit america if, of course, she dares to start a nuclear war with our allied state. let's not even talk about it. i hope it's hello. this is not yet greece. the us

is the euro leader. and by the way, we can expect that the eu neighbors, in the light of new realities , will help to ensure that the same hot heads in poland and other baltic countries. basis, perhaps, as washington is now calm. that's when they talked about some kind of nuclear capabilities of russia in the black region of the black sea. yes, they immediately began to threaten and say that it would be unacceptable damage to the russian federation now they are calmly canceling the biden today. he says that today we are at the peak of economic development. everything is wonderful with us. and as they say, the americans are not nervous, as long as they say, so today we do not succumb to the provocation of the russian federation in this game. we don't play. we see that brussels is more worried. it was right next to them that they began to pull the blanket over themselves again with this card. they have already trampled germany in europe , now they want it completely already let's say deovulate. well, germany

almost came under the external control of washington, and of course, in this situation, there should be a very responsible policy. but once again i want to take us away from all these moods , which could not have been done the day before. here is this ssu. it's a shame to this propaganda, which convinced everyone that everything is simple, now i want us to take a cold shower and think, very pragmatically, very thought out. it must be understood that the chinese position will be very restrained and balanced considered. no one, it seems, will lie down, because the decision to deploy tactical nuclear weapons could be discussed with the same mr. xi jinping could agree, but listen to the correct site, bitterness answers my question in one. you asked a question that we cannot fully answer, taking into account all the nuances and international obligations. therefore, in this case it will not be absolutely correct, but you understand, trade between china and russia is 3%. all us 12 with europe over 30. let's trade comparison. you can not

get off. here is some kind of medicine. you cannot immediately replace it, you understand or not, taking into account all trade and economic relations, nothing is done quickly. therefore, the russian federation today must very clearly understand that a very large burden of responsibility is on the russian federation and in relation to belarus. it will put itself in very order, after all russia took on all the costs of this military operation. this is very decent behavior. and including often the presence in our russian market during largely compensates for our losses in western markets, but in this situation, we must understand everything. it may not develop for us according to such a favorable scenario, and i will even tell you more that a small tactical battle with tactical nuclear weapons in europe will be arranged by the united states. vadim, we will talk about this in more detail, we will tell our respected viewer. what is the difference between tactical and strategic? i remind you that on the air the program sas is authorized to declare we are talking about tactical

nuclear weapons and not only belarusian the iskander m missile system was handed over to the military. defense minister shoigu said on april 3 at a training ground in russia that it was possible to use nuclear missiles, which means training the belarusian calculations of the complex, as he noted, and by the way, alexander appeals to you to our esteemed viewer to explain enough, i see what is the difference between tactical nuclear weapons and strategic tactical nuclear weapons, they are of low power. well, of course, in comparison with strategic nuclear weapons e, we can give an example, let's say the power of nuclear ammunition, and based on, let's say, from the explosion of a nuclear bomb throughout russia. this was about 15 kilotons spent by violet tape, and let's say. compare it to the recent explosion in beirut. here is a very famous one. there was a picture of the whole world and watched about two kilotons, wasting the equivalent of power. here is this explosion of saltpeter made up, that is. here, look. we

will now turn our attention to our schedule. this is what the affected areas of the 100 kiloton ammunition look like. yes, that is, to understand an average of up to 30-40 kilotons, ammunition is called tactical nuclear weapons, usually in a larger e, more powerful ammunition already belongs to the category of strategic ammunition , because the use of such ammunition is already causing damage, and to the side that is used on the battlefield, so the damaging factors should not go in. they gave 15-20 km there, because tactically i found it possible use heavy artillery, not only aircraft and not only missiles to deliver ammunition, therefore 2-3 kilotons and here is the power of artillery tactical nuclear weapons, aviation ammunition and rocket ammunition have a more serious power. pay attention to the iskander m complex - this is a unique weapon, the rocket flies at high altitude, it maneuvers practically no e, it does not affect

the enemy’s radars, it accelerates. marches up to 6-7 mach numbers, that is, it overcomes the hypersonic barrier, which starts at about 6 mach numbers and in fact. uh, this complex, firstly , as an operational-tactical complex, that is, up to 500 km, hits everything and everything, again , first of all, it hits air defense systems and counter -battery equipment , enemy radar systems, that is, large powerful and technically equipped, essentially military bases that take place on the territory of eastern europe and, of course, the europeans who encountered the scanner back in the kaliningrad region, when russia first placed it there in our enclave, yes , which are surrounded, in fact. e nato then there was still a lot of hype when the europeans read the affected area, it turned out that it reaches the borders. france spain italy approximately this semicircle, now, when tactical nuclear weapons will be deployed in belarus and can be used

like missiles. so is the means of military aviation, especially since modern russian-made combat aircraft are in service with the belarusian air force, and for europe it is such a double shower. you understand the contrast first, kaliningrad now, belarus and what's next? and if the strikes are carried from the two territories of kaliningrad and belarus, then almost the entire european territory will be shot through, and then no america will help them, because so far there is no air defense system or air defense system of such a level to shoot down a rocket from a scanner once again emphasized the importance difference between tactical nuclear weapons and strategic ones, because even among experts i met the opinion that almost a missile is already flying to the united states, but it is important to note that we are not talking about intercontinental missiles yet. well, in belarus, firstly, now all experts agree

that the concept is blurred in many ways. and tactical and strategic weapons, and here even more emphasis is placed. as you rightly said at a distance and on the e-e application of the objectives of the application. that's right colleague said, as a rule, tactical nuclear weapons are used on the battlefield in such a way as to minimize losses for their own armed forces, so the charge is smaller and cause maximum damage. to avoid using confidential weapons. yes, that is, in order for you to dilute some settlement, you need hundreds of missiles, large accumulations of military equipment and forces. and you can use one or two charges to destroy this object, but you understand, tactical nuclear weapons, if they are used on a populated area, like strategic nuclear weapons in the same city and the charges can be even more than twenty kilotons, respectively, this will be a huge destructive force, which will be comparable, but natural. e is not so

powerful with the application it will be possible to deta. it would be more correct to say that in fact the deployment in europe on the border, so to speak, besides kaliningrad and uh on the border of uh, with uh, the european union and the nato bloc, tactical left-wing weapons pose a direct threat to these named capitals, and today they understand that aggression is already on address will be retaliated, which will cause unacceptable damage to these states. this is a serious preventive measure. once again i emphasize tactical nuclear weapons - these are small nuclear charges along with delivery vehicles intended for use on the battlefield or for delivering a limited nuclear strike. they serve to destroy targets in a certain area without large-scale radioactive contamination and tactical nuclear weapons. never used in a real military conflict, nuclear power. such as usa or russia believe that conventional modern weapons are sufficient to achieve tactical goals. and in addition, not a single nuclear power has so far

wanted to risk starting a nuclear war after the use of tactical nuclear weapons. and this is what is important in 1952 in the united states they tested a 15 km artillery atomic charge, and the history of tactical nuclear artillery began with this, we can look at the screen there and see how it all looks, but, to be honest. intimidating, despite the fact that the power is different, yes alexander, please tell me, if you speak about future plans. how can there be further development of relations between russia and the republic, belarus, within the framework of the union state? probably, we still need to say a few words about the development of start-3, because now it turns out that belarus is also connected with the russian federation in some way by the terms of this agreement.

it is quite complicated there, because we are already at the beginning of the pandemic. we do not conduct mutual, not sent mutual missions with the americans to control deployed nuclear weapons at strategic facilities. and in fact. that's for these three years of not observing each other , uh, there was a complete distrust of a complete misunderstanding. what to do next, because russia is ready for the monitoring commissions to send their missions and receive americans . the americans, in turn, dragged on for a very long time with an answer in the end. russia, in response to putin's message , which was delivered before alexander grigoryevich to our federal assembly, announced the suspension of russia's membership in start-3 belarus has not yet planned or deployed a strategic nuclear weapon on its territory weapon. we have to understand that from a physical point of view, nuclear weapons are a triad, it's not just, uh, intercontinental ballistic missiles. this is just rather the type of strategic weapon that is gradually becoming a thing of the past. here is already a kind of archaism. because

there is a submarine nuclear fleet and constantly cruising the international waters of our nuclear submarine, which carry nuclear warheads. they are precisely the most dangerous for the american continent, because we can strike as with east and west coast. again, our analysts calculated at the end of the soviet era that to destroy 80% of the us industrial potential and almost 100% of the us social capital, we only need about 100 ammunition of approximately 800 kilotons of tnt. that is, in principle, two or three nuclear submarines with a full ammunition load, maces with separating warheads and there are no us americans are well aware that they are against these weapons. their air defense systems will not work, and about american air defense in general. this is still for countries second and third world. this is not against russia , and even more so not against china already, because i remind you that since last year, china has become a hypersonic power and put

two hypersonic products into service. what the americans still cannot do, what russia did 6 years ago and 5 years ago, officially, by putting hypersonic weapons into service. and here such a rubicon arises when the americans reach the point of putting into service their own hypersonic carriers. that's when and this is 24-25 years according to our approximate calculations. here then the age of a completely different usa will come. first, they will try to dominate even more. second, it starts. in my opinion , a military conflict. with china, it is after this moment that they are pulling, they are pulling this story with china, because so far they do not have hypersound in the field of battles in the sea. china , of course, will sink their aurugs, very simply, and they will have nothing to intercept its hypersonic missiles, the americans will create their own hypersound and begin a very serious escalation in the asia-pacific region. this, by the way, in a sense, i did become the exit point for america from

the ukrainian case, because they will not be able to lead two companies of an offensive nature on different fronts . carefully studies the performance characteristics of american weapons, in general , he did it very carefully for himself, because they will fight with these weapons in 2-3 years, but, by the way, alexander, tell me, here we are talking about certain international treaties that previously worked after that. ah, they stopped working. naturally, the world community suddenly after the decision of minsk and moscow grunted that they had forgotten about the treaty, they were spreading nuclear weapons. but vadim was right when he said that these are nuclear weapons. it returns to where it already was, what we cannot say about the actions of the united states of america even earlier, that is, we understand. now, naturally, the borders are being redrawn. naturally, the hegemon loses its status, but besides this , some kind of

an international legal norm, in general, some definite scheme for the further work of the world society will have to build all the existing international legal norms. unfortunately, humanity lined up after the bloody meat grinder. the first world war were forced, then to negotiate. yes, the second world war is already the un and, again , they were forced to negotiate. and those were the exceptions. you see, you understand the world was divided. and i have said more than once the world was divided and the ussr and the usa acted in the paradigm of the winners the winner gets everything, you understand, and one block tilted one part of the world, someone else says that he tilted more fairly, but that block won - this is a fact and the united states today, as a winner, believes that as a winner all laurels are for the winner. you understand what the paradigm of their thinking is today, and now they had a chance, as a winner, to build a more equitable system of international relations, perhaps

retaining economic control to some extent, but providing an opportunity for other subjects. eh, feel comfortable. we today we understand that a number of countries in the world today are satellites of the united states of america, well, they are not even satisfied with the role of precious partners. even in the eu, they subjugated them a little, understand, what is south korea, even japan, also in many respects in economic military -military-political terms, primarily dependent states of the united states, and today the question has become, what are states like the russian federation? the action restored its economy military power political elite has changed its perception in the world. remember kozyrev who came to the united states and asked what russian foreign policy to bring or yeltsin who, uh, applauded washington for uh, the right instructions in building russian democracy. no, putin came, another political elite, and not differently perceive the international at first at the beginning of the 2000s, completely different relationships. could be fast because of you, it 's different oh this is the second economy of the world,

which is completely different, in general the philosophy is not 5.000 years consider themselves under heaven. and others countries are in a slightly different status do not forget about this and one moment. that's what russia should be ready for, and it is necessary to understand the situation very carefully. the americans know how to negotiate on time. remember the agreements with saudi arabia at one time and it’s not a fact that in the x-hour they may not agree in asia, this moment, which can put on the map the question of simply dividing russia in their interests, because the most important contradiction, while you are afraid of to say this until it is profitable for you, but in the fourteenth year i said, that more will strengthen the counterbalance of germany and everyone smiled on television here. poland is the main player in europe in the military world war. today , the president is talking about this in his message, and here you have russia, the main contradiction, overpopulated china , economic powerful, which has the potential and russia beyond the urals 14 million.

regions are often not settled in society. you know right here. let's vadim fight against the enemies who are but, but they are tomorrow they are today today you need to understand that the situation is very serious. and russian the federation should come out of this conflict so strong that it would be a worthy partner of china, not weakened, but strong, because any strong one not only said alexander lukashenko during his message. i think you have noted key words that were addressed not to the belarusian people, but to the ukrainian people and their leadership, my friends. sit down at the negotiating table, because if the russian military-industrial complex starts its work at full capacity. here, then no one will talk about anything. the chips will fly. i think alexander you will agree with me. i, uh, just add that the special operation was a forced measure, and we couldn’t do anything. i’ll already explain why you could

continue to sit and watch how they continue to stuff ukraine into attacking it with ammunition. to your heavy artillery, which is already starting to fire on the russian regions, imagine if shells would fly from the regions of ukraine bordering belarus on your villages, your villages , your cities, as we had in belgorod in kursk in bryansk in lukashenka i would not have carried out, i am more than sure that he would have started a military company after those very scandalous campaigns of the twentieth year, which belarus also observed with russia and were very worried about the status of the president of belarus, whether he would withstand pressure, we watched with pressure from europe how they hit belarus and so on, how they pumped their money, and i remember very well the twelfth year in russia because i was presenting a rally on poklonnaya gora, which was about the state anti-bog and i was in the midst of all these events 11 years ago, and how much money exactly we had then for the coup, which did not take place. i won't speak now. well, all this money

knows makfu, all this money passed through him, and our position. they were walking that's when the bandits in the twelfth year. du only failed to pull off what he managed to pull off in kiev and failed to pull off, then in minsk a very similar story. i want to say that if the special operation had not started, now, if we continue to watch all this the disgrace that has been going on in ukraine since the nineteenth year, because , to be honest, we hoped that zelensky would be more adequate than poroshenko, he himself is from krivoy rog, he is from eastern ukraine, he speaks russian. by the way, he speaks ukrainian worse than russian. but what did we get in return for a controlled puppet. this is the topic of our colleague program, but unfortunately, let's be absolutely right. the only moment. i generally agree with you. you are right in everything , the only moment when we say we were forced. we've already lost, you know, us took out we did the winners will be judged. god forbid, i'm on the side of the russian federation, we

were forced to. this is already a bad second of 500,000 casualties on both sides dead and killed. why is the position of alexander lukashenko to sit down at the negotiating table, because now ukraine has received the latest weapons and the accumulation of military force. russia as they say, it will launch to its fullest. how many millions? will we put more? and what is the motivation of the majority of citizens of the russian federation of ukraine? it is not high enough, not high enough, but and uh, most of the townsfolk understand the fighters on tv. we have a lot on tv. especially, which even the military departments did not pass, but you of any officer who passed the army, at least, did not even fight. ask and i remember i was at the military department. colonel. he says, listen, here you are arguing and swearing, and i , the guys of your age, carried away the table in my arms, you understand, why did the president of belarus say that enormous damage is being done to the infrastructure of the economy, the demographic will be a catastrophe, the criminalization of society and so on - this

bypasses a sharp blow to both the pro-russian federation and belarus. why, congratulating the president of belarus that they need to sit down at the negotiating table, they will start a question. how many bones under these, the negotiating table will be there knows we put an end to it. thank you very much, dear guests for our discussion. she couldn’t say no more . of course, i would like to complete our program with an expression of confidence that deterrence will fully work and it will never be a matter of real use of nuclear weapons. it will come that those who in the western capitals are too carried away by life in the moment will think about the eternal and, of course, i will not leave you without a philosophical quote, and this time again from the work of my beloved viktor pelevin why did life become so cheap, dostoevsky thought yes, from that that cheap death used to die in battle 20,000 people and it was remembered for centuries, because each of these 20,000 had to be personally slaughtered by someone

to release the guts that did not tremble with one battle. the huge army of demons living in the human mind was fed. and now to killing 20,000 is enough to press a button for a demonic feast is not enough. thank you. well, now it is authorized to declare threats to the security of belarus from the west they forced minsk to resort to nuclear deterrence the information struggle and the clash of ideology on journalists have a huge layer of responsibility, they fix the reality of a new format of international relations, where every step has diplomatic significance, these exits should

not make us weaker, but stronger, so that people of different points of view can hear each other, if we do not want to hear each other, for what it is important to meet is not getting super profits from the sale of natural resources. there's something else enrichment of some units. yes, and what, in other words, you did for the motherland , see how you develop your native country on belarus 24 tv channel. they work at the largest machine-building enterprises in belarus, i am over 55, i am not ashamed of my age. i do not look at my age, trying to work and benefit people felt, what is innovation in my eyes,

there was a new technique time dictates. uh, move to develop something new, they stop on the spot , it will not be difficult for them to talk about how giants of agricultural machinery are created from scratch . and they go through there until the paint finishes. this is a beauty salon for technique project one day. i am very satisfied with life, i see the tractor doing its job, watch on