piri and online on the site belarus 24.by the next two weeks will become bright in a sports way, it is the belarusian forum that will significantly expand its horizons. after all, the number of countries exceeds the number of participating states. cis organizers expect more than 2,000 years in belarus out of 23 states nine cis countries 14 countries of near and far abroad, including china uae cuba the largest sports delegations will be in belarus and russia for more than 480 years let me remind you for the participants of the games in our country introduced from july 3 without visas which will be valid until august 31st. athletes will compete for medals in 20 sports , starts will be held in 11 cities and will be enough for all regions of belarus, in total , about 240 objects will be involved in all. uh, the facilities are fully secured, high standard. uh , like the world championships of the european championships and like uh actually and the olympic games in terms of

creating the conditions for the athletes and i hope there will be certain records. first of all, we will root for our belarusian athletes, and we hope for appropriate, of course, support. fans. also, all the necessary conditions are created in all areas of food. uh, doping control medical support. uh, security issues, of course, the orcs of theta are in the field of view and our traditional traditional center has already appeared in stores with souvenirs from the second games of the cis countries branded merch was made by belarusian enterprises with an emphasis on quality and style , a guest card for participants , fans and tourists, was also on sale of the second games of the cis countries , its owners will receive the most profitable offers from the best restaurant in the hotel and cultural sites. the main advantage is significant. the poison of almost half a thousand organizations

throughout belarus, as for the competitions themselves, daily monitors the progress of the second games of the cis countries in information releases on our tv channel website, as well as in social networks. thanks to the review , svetlana chernova prepared the results and analysis of the main events of this week in the information and analytical program. main broadcast. all projects of our tv channel are available on the website www.blarus24.by, as well as in in social networks. i'm sorry to you. all the best. show tolerance and live together in peace with each other, as good neighbors combine

our forces to maintain international peace and security, use the international apparatus to promote the economic and social progress of all peoples. this is a quote from the preamble of the un charter . what are the goals of the united nations ? for bureaucracy. now i also drew attention to politicization this week, and our president alexander lukashenko instructed to intensify work on the international platform so that the voice of belarus sounds even louder, will it again become the same impartial organization that it was created in forty-fifth, and what today was the russian agenda in the draft question number one permanent representative of our country. he is the fishermen's valentine. hello valentin

borisovich, today it still remains the very unique platform where guided solely by common sense, speak exclusively on the case. he is 193 countries of the world, we should never forget about this. unfortunately, sometimes there is criticism. as for the un, you know it is extremely unconstructive without understanding that those decisions that are taken by the general cis are the decisions of the member states. this is not a decision of the bureaucratic structure, so the state votes in the general assembly depending on its own national interests and national priorities about it we must never forget. we are working very actively. and that's the purpose of our work at the un. it's working with government members. this is the uniqueness of this universal platform in that it is the only one , there are simply no more such platforms, it's wonderful, right?

each of the three countries, of course, has its own interests within the framework, which, in the context, which they accept their agenda, figuratively speaking, put forward. sometimes positions of interests may not coincide and contradict each other. and that's okay. this is correct, but at the same time recently, this has been paid attention, head of state. at this week's meeting with you, let's say, relatively speaking, pets appear in the organization within the framework, probably, and in whose interests the international agenda is being built. i look, and here we are discussing this issue with the president of russia secretary. he is a working body. they have already begun to work in terms of some preference for one or two states or the west or the east. that is, it somehow already turns into an organization. hmm, into such an organization. what? if you please, from large states are more dependent, this is not normal.

the situation will not change for the better, or , after all, in reality , the situation at the meetings is a little different. unfortunately, there are indeed events that are taking place in our region. they dictate much of the agenda. unfortunately, unfortunately, i say, because this conflict, for all its tragedy, is tragic for us, as neighbors, as a country practically involved in providing assistance, and for the people of ukraine in providing assistance to the russian federation, the conflict is not the only such there are many conflicts in the world. is there a certain fatigue in the member state? yes of course from this situation? are there any grievances at the fact that huge resources are given a lot of time to consider only one issue of only one conflict. yes of course, about favorites. well, you know, the fact is that

the un secretariat itself cannot determine favorites or non-favorites , this is the opinion and position of members on this platform. in general, belarus has with whom and what to talk about. of course, the voices of everyone. how these states the rest of the states relate to what we are saying in particular, this of course depends on the position of this or that particular state, but i can assure you that my communication is the practice of communicating with ambassadors. even from, let's say, so gently and not the most friendly countries, it shows that it treats with great attention to what we do and to what we say, how we vote, how we carry out this or that decision. how do we interact with our partners. and this all once again confirms that, of course, attention.

you can say absolutely total about how we behave in this international structure. so i think that this attention will definitely not weaken. here you are talking about voting a lot of criticism. it sounds to belarus that we always support the interests of russia in everything at the same time, if you look at the meeting, figuratively speaking, when a bloc of european states votes. of course, they support each other. if necessary to say that the same policy of double standards has also infiltrated the united nations. you see, it has not just taken root, it has always been part of the work both in the un and in other structures . of course, a state that is, for example, a member of the european union is tied, so to speak, within bloc discipline . of course, the state will

always vote the way the european union as a whole votes. union on the other side to blame for the fact that we are absolutely right. of course, we talk about this every time, every time we turn to it's attention because the vote is in support of someone. and this is absolutely. naturally, a thing, because any country has partners. there are allies, there are strategic partners and allies. you are right, uh, raising questions about what it is that countries vote differently. it's okay. this is naturally absolutely normal, because each side has its own national interests. priorities and the country votes and acts as it wishes to conduct its foreign policy. sometimes, of course, things are very funny are happening. when on some issues, for example, voting. well, let's say three votes against, for example, let's say the united states, uh, for example, ukraine and let's say the marshal

islands. well, you know, uh, when three votes, so to speak, in unison against everything else , uh, the composition of the united nations. well , at least this raises questions and how global interests are. here in this particular issue, the conditional marshall islands. this also raises very serious questions. but nevertheless, you see, such things happen and and in general we are used to it and calmly to this, you can still criticize the organization and is this criticism justified? unfortunately, we really. especially in recent times, we have observed a negative trend, when representatives of even the top leadership of the united nations organization of the secretariat of the introduced nations take one side or another in this or that issue or this or that conflict, which is not normal, because they must be impartial and should not take

sides in any situation in any conflict. journalists and one of these days you they said that diplomats are heroic fighting, in fact, work in the international arena is akin to a diplomatic war, and every meeting is a diplomatic battle. and if we already speak this language, then one of our victories, probably, is that the topic of the incident with the rainer plane is no longer raised at meetings, your merit. what are our other victories on the diplomatic battlefield. thanks for the recognition. actually. this is our collective, of course, the merit of the situation is quite stressful work, hard work, hard for us, uh, in the permanent mission, only including an ambassador for nine diplomats, and meeting u with the president, uh, he said that if

you would give 15 more employees, each of them would be loaded to the full program for us. and it is indeed a fact of work very much and the difficult thing now is that we have to deal not only with promoting, so to speak, our own initiatives and protecting our own national interests and priorities, but also provide very significant assistance friendly countries, our main task is to ensure that some issue on belarus does not become an item on the agenda of the security council. this is the most unpleasant thing in the general assembly. of course, unfortunately, in our country, uh, they are quite often mentioned in a negative way according to well-known ones. eh, now you understand the reasons for any issue that belarus initiates . it instantly, firstly, attracts interest, both friendly

and, so to speak, unfriendly, and active attempts are being made, if we are talking, for example, about a draft of some kind of resolution or er, or some sort of solution is being attempted . e, either to make some amendments that do not suit us to such a document , or simply to block it with us this year, it will be at the session at the upcoming 78th session and our draft resolution on combating human trafficking will be considered. this is our landmark initiative, and it was once announced by president of belarus alexander lukashenko from the rostrum of the general assembly many years ago in 2005 . e since then. this is an initiative that belarus is recognizable as its history began in 1945, belarus joined the organization as one of the founding countries. so it was highlighted.

the contribution of our people to the defeat of fascism today, 193 states are members of the organization belarus traditionally takes an active position, for example, alexander lukashenko at the 2005 summit took the initiative on the need to form a partnership to combat human trafficking, and in 2015, from the un rostrum, our president warned of the danger color revolutions. there are a number of directions and a number of initiatives which belarus is recognizable respectfully. we are actively working on the topic of the genocide of the belarusian people, the fight against the glorification of nazism in all its manifestations. well, of course, now it is very, uh, actively conducted. our job is to resist. sanctions pressure attitudes what do they think? this is a legitimate tool in any of my conversations with international officials, including the senior management of the secretary general's secretariat or his deputies in relation to

what i say and how a person reacts. of course, i see perfectly well that a person is absolutely aware that these things are illegal; this is supported within the framework of the general assembly at various committees. when considering some issues. this is supported by state members of most states and unfortunately, if we talk to even high-ranking international officials, every time they answer our questions about sanctions something like this is a bilateral problem, solve the issue with your neighbors with your partners and with others states. well, at the same time, one must clearly understand that those countries that they are talking about are our closest neighbors, which create, uh, the most serious

sanctions problems for the republic of belarus, but how should i put it delicately not entirely independent in decision-making and it is quite clear that it is necessary to conduct a dialogue on this topic with the leadership of the european union with the united states of america a and other key players. you can still often hear accusations against us that, allegedly, belarus has problems with human rights violations. is this the most ideal country, maybe someone is cited as an example? no of course, of course, everyone is well aware that there is not a single state in which these so -called human rights violations have not occurred to one degree or another. well, firstly, uh, every state should have the right to an independent path of development. we talk about it every time. what is necessary, first of all, it is necessary to observe basic human rights and this

is fully done in the republic of belarus on the right to life a decent life the right to education, but the right to health care, and so on and so forth and so on, when these rights are not respected in other states. i repeat once again that there are no ideal countries, before criticizing someone or punishing someone, you need to deal with your own problems , to ensure an absolutely decent life by your own country with your own population, the full fulfillment of these basic things, basic human rights for your own population, and then try to teach someone else's. unfortunately, a very popular topic and uh, and she very active, untwisted including his organizations. nations is all sorts of gender issues gbt failure. and so on and so on. you understand, when it is put at the forefront, when it becomes a basic human right and, in fact

, they talk about it the most, and when you are reproached for not doing certain things that a normal country can and should not do , we will speak absolutely frankly of course, every time we try level this criticism deal with this criticism based on examples based on facts and so on and so forth. that is why i said that a huge amount of work in the organization is also due to the fact that there is a need to very carefully monitor any documents submitted for consideration by this or that body, because there is such a practice. if some provision is recorded in a particular decision in a particular resolution and, for example, a country. well, let's say the republic of belarus in this case does not object to this wording. this turns into what,

er, the un language is called so, that is, when making a subsequent decision. if suddenly we start, uh, trying to counteract this, they tell us, let me but there are documents. right there it is written. you didn't mind when this document was adopted. you see, taking into account the composition of the limited number of diplomats, but it is quite difficult to keep track. we're trying to do it, we're going to do it, it's hard enough to keep track of the inclusions. here are these theses or wordings that are absolutely unacceptable for us in this or that document, how many documents a diplomat reads daily some pages, a large volume. trust me, it's big. and these are all very serious things, you know. some of them require an immediate response. if you've ever watched us perform. uh, let's say the general assembly

or at the security council, especially at the security council, we have chosen this tactic now, we are trying to sign up as late as possible. hmm, the last penultimate ones. e in the list of speakers in order to hear everyone and, if necessary, respond to some impartial words on some criticism addressed to us and you might have noticed, for example, during the speech. uh, the text prepared in advance is being postponed, because it is necessary to react to what was said in this hall. here in this regard. uh, you know, it is of great importance that there is trust, there is a credit of trust from the leadership of the ministry of state leadership to us, which allows us to literally add some things to the speech on the go , then what? trust me very, very, very.

many countries will not allow themselves when ambassador speaking, especially at the meeting of the security council move. to the left, a step to the right, well, there are serious consequences and everything is absolutely agreed upon, every word, every comma, of course, there are such things, there are such things, when it is necessary to make some kind of statement, which of course is agreed from beginning to end with the center, but otherwise we have the right to react. i always say that especially as a young diplomat. i always say be a diplomat, but very easy. you just need to know well the national interests of your countries, and be able to promote and protect them. we always respond very actively and constructively to the statement that belarus is allegedly the aggressor in the ukrainian conflict, but does this mood and this issue remain on the international agenda of the congress?

of course, one agenda remains the same. it will no doubt remain on the agenda, because there are a number of interested states, er, who will not let this issue die. i'm not talking about the fact that it's simple and the conflict, of course, continues on its own and is not visible yet. uh, prospects for a peaceful settlement. i understand that this conversation is likely to be very emotional usually. well , this conversation is going in a constructive direction , or if the prospects for what will come out in the near future, i mean a specific decision, how to resolve this situation? how to prevent the third world, of course, emotionally, because well, you can imagine, actually. this can be seen in the speech of, for example, the ukrainian permanent representative of the ukrainian ambassador. e, which is always quite emotional. sometimes they cross the uh of all faces.

so to speak, the diplomatic etiquette of the speeches of representatives of western states of course, accusations against russia are often full of accusations against us, and the speeches of representatives of the central european countries of our neighbors of the baltic states in poland are countries that are now from the eastern european group in the security council of albania, they are sometimes, you know , locomotives are running ahead, so to speak with accusations and so on searches. you know perfectly well that there are a number of now peace initiatives. uh, my deep conviction is that if there is an agreement between the russian federation on the one hand and the big west, let's say on the other hand, then this conflict can be very fast. stop, if we talk about security issues in general, and belarus is, let's say , at the epicenter of a geopolitical rift, of course, these issues are acute for us.

of course, we may be among the first to react to them, belarus stands for the peaceful resolution of any conflicts 8 years ago in the normandy four gathered at the palace of independence, where they discussed the conditions for establishing peace in ukraine from the first days, the aggravation of the situation in 2020, the second, our country again calls to the side to negotiate at the negotiating table, official minsk also considers it necessary to strengthen international security in 2017, the idea of ​​launching a new helsinki process was put forward initiative, was named helsinki 2 last year by the secretary general. the un received a message from alexander lu. it talks about the need for a dialogue of key players of the world on global security in the spirit of san francisco, how they reacted, that's what they are talking about and whether they began to somehow objectively discuss such a possibility of such negotiations , you know. well, for now, i can honestly say that while there is a substantive conversation on some details on some

, say, the logistics of organizing such an event, there are no conversations, at least no public conversations or private conversations. indeed, at every appropriate opportunity, we, of course, remind the state member of the organization of certain nations about this initiative of the president of belarus alexander lukashenko to hold a broad discussion of a wide-ranging dialogue meeting at. as we call we are now gone from this, helsinki helsinki two. we call it in the spirit of san francisco. the state is aware that belarus came up with this initiative from time to time. it's an idea. not necessarily with reference to our president, but it's mentioned in speeches. e individual e states, which is already good, because without the conversation of a broad diplomatic settlement of conflicts. e in the world. it's just impossible, you understand , diplomats are needed not to talk with friends, but to

talk even with enemies or opponents or opponents, whatever you like. you name it and any dialogue, even bad dialogue. it is, of course, much better than war, because people do not die. yes, you can to each other. it is vicious to look at, swear, throw , there are some objects, but still this is a conversation. it is still a search for some way out, some compromise, some solution. what initiatives belarus promotes, of course, in the first place, it is the fight against sanctions pressure. this is the fight against human trafficking. this is the protection of the natural family. protecting middle- income countries. naturally, the implementation of the agenda. e, according to the goals of sustainable development. does belarus have anything to say here? we can share our experience here. look, just drive down minskaya street or any other belarusian city and you will see the implementation

of this sustainable development agenda in action all economic uh social issues that are being addressed in belarus - this is the fulfillment of the goals. e sustainable development. and this is a priority , the president spoke about this. uh, belarus , alexander lukashenko, it is necessary to consider the prospect of our existence as a country precisely from the point of view of sustainable development, because without this development. we simply will not have a food security country on the international platform. do they generally speak in particular on the issue of fertilizer, the western state, the western bloc this issue they are trying to reduce it only to the question of fulfillment or non-fulfillment of the grain deal. we are talking about this issue. in a much broader format, including the supply of our fertilizers. i repeatedly. e, in her

statements on this topic, has repeatedly said that belarus provides at least 20% of world supplies. e, these e fertilizers in itself are provided with them and are ready to assist those countries that need counteraction in this product in this product. uh, all these sanctions measures regarding blocking supplies from belarusian potassium is one of our most-most-most important. ah, the challenges we face today. i think the upcoming big event in september is a high-level week of the general assembly. the un is a good opportunity to discuss all these important issues on the international agenda together without fail. naturally. we are from the nineteenth of september begins the high-level week we expect. the arrival of the belarusian delegation to this event , headed by the minister of foreign affairs of course , all these issues will be discussed in

speech at the general assembly. a large number of bilateral ongoing meetings with the leadership of the secretariat are to come. i assure you. these are all questions. everything we talked about today. here, all these questions will be reflected in the theses that will be announced by the head of the belarusian delegation. in addition, of course , a day before that, they will begin on their own to implement goal-sustaining development to implement the agenda 20-30. what is the number one question facing the country as a whole today on the site international platform, it is the number one question for you personally, as the permanent representative of belarus to the un, the world is the same. the main thing is the main goal. all of us, i really hope, would like to achieve this goal, and i repeat once again this regional conflict is not the only one, but nevertheless it is

a conflict that is happening on our doorstep and which directly affects us creates a lot of problems, inconvenience, people die, of course, i would like this conflict to end and the work of our mission. eh, in any direction. it is basically built around making some contribution to the end of this conflict and all related issues, but countering the pressure of sanctions. uh, resisting attempts to block the supply of our fertilizers and other goods. uh, any financial sanctions are absolutely illegal. but these are probably the main issues that our diplomats are constantly working on, and we will continue to do this, despite any pressure and any attempts, so to speak, to hinder or stop our work.