anton malyuta and anatoly dolotovsky sphere of interest. and that's all for today, watch us on the first information channel four times a week, from monday to thursday. good luck in your affairs and see you soon. hello viewer, my name is igor tur, this is my propaganda, let's begin! the attention of the whole world, and this is absolutely without exaggeration, was riveted on tuesday. belarus,

because the commander-in-chief visited the combined arms training ground near baranovichi, where the state committee-military industry demonstrated its developments of weapons of counteraction possible enemy. i don't think that all civilians in the world watched these footage of this visit with any special attention, but extremely attentive viewers are, naturally, the military and special services of the whole world, for whom the most important question is: what will the belarusians defend themselves with in case of war. here i... will make a digression about the importance of the work of those journalists who are next to the president, naturally, we heard and saw in maximum detail, and tactics, technical characteristics of each unit of weapons, and the current volume of production, possible volume, which is instantly achieved if the homeland demands it, but it should not be said publicly, because one way or another it constitutes a military secret, the preservation of which directly depends on the national security of the country, so all tuesday we were busy making sure that not a single... frame

was on tv, it seems to me that the viewer needs to understand this, well, in general, the atmosphere of the feeling can and even should be conveyed, i want to tell my audience, the viewers of propaganda, my personal conclusions: yes, not everything works out right away, yes, there are inconsistencies, desires of opportunities, but in general our defense industry is progressing at a colossal pace, and we already know how to produce a lot of things on our own that we wouldn't have even risked producing on our own a couple of years ago, but when... alexander grigorievich asked everyone to find us, and in some places forced us with a mandatory order, it turned out that we know how to do a lot on our own. the visit began, well, not with criticism, probably, but rather with skepticism from the head of the department that stimulated new accomplishments states. all the same, the targets will be discovered in advance, defined, this is all clear, but no one will allow you to train in combat, only once, by your decision, we will say which one. it can

be changed right on the field, no, you won’t show it in this one, let’s do it in this one, well, this is how it should be, naturally, like in combat, we strive for this, and there should be no show-off, i don’t need it, about the fact that no one needs show-off, no one needs the armed forces to be focused on colorful teaching, beautiful parades everything else, it seems to me, today, given everything that is happening in our region, this topic definitely does not need an addition, what is needed is... a result in everything, now we move on to the essence of what the president gathered the military and weapons manufacturers for at the training ground: the minister of defense, who is directly responsible for military security in the country, has justified needs for weapons and equipment, let's put it this way, viktor khrenin, to guarantee the repulse of any attempt to attack us, needs, i emphasize again, this is all conditional, 10.00 tanks, when needed, tomorrow is needed to guarantee the fulfillment of the combat mission, if suddenly they fulfill... it will have to be done

tomorrow, here, however, i will try to calm the viewers, there are no signals that another round of attempts to draw us into a direct combat conflict is visible, this is not observed now. if the minister of defense needs 10,000 tanks, he will naturally insist that they all must be delivered to the army immediately , he will be absolutely right, as the minister of defense. is our defense complex ready to deliver these the most 10,000 tanks, to modernize something, to buy something with the profit from the export of other types of weapons. to develop something independently, yes, in principle, i am ready, moreover, any enterprise in the defense sector, be it state or private, obviously, it very much wants to receive a large defense order, including an advance and full payment at the time of transfer of equipment for full armament, so, the armed forces have needs, the defense industry, well, there are opportunities, i am sure that this question may seem simple to someone, when the commander-in-chief simply needs to connect:

the well-connected needs of some with the capabilities of others, but like any other issue of national importance, this issue is much more complicated, because producing all the weapons and equipment that are ideally needed by the armed forces to solve their problems costs approximately many billions of dollars, and many more millions of dollars will cost the annual maintenance of all the weapons supplied to the army. does belarus have that kind of money, well, there is never much free money in a well-functioning economy it happens because in a well-functioning economy revenue is not accumulated, but invested in new projects to increase turnover and maximize profits in the future. this is what is happening now. in our economy, if it were critically needed right now, money would be found in any amount, but it would have to be taken from somewhere, that is, taken from other areas, from industry, from agriculture, from the social sphere, from our salaries by either stopping their growth, and our salaries are growing steadily, or

by raising taxes for us, that is, the army's needs can be fully satisfied only to the detriment of all other areas of the economy, this is important, of course, but in the event... if a war does not start at home, and this task is solved not only along the military vector, but along the diplomatic one, minsk in negotiations, albeit not public, but with everyone with whom it is possible to conduct these very negotiations, then it will turn out that we have invested many billions in, say, tanks that never made it onto the battlefield, this is it's great, of course, that the war didn't start, but the preventive readiness for it led to the fact that all other sectors of the economy received critical holes, as a result of which the economy stopped developing, went into stagnation, then went into regression, what belarus will definitely not participate in is the arms race, because the arms race itself, as we know from history, is also a completely working strategy for the struggle of one state against another, for the complete collapse of the second by the seizure of its key resources by the first,

the task of the president in this situation is to take into account all this takes into account the interests of all spheres, i will say it as directly as possible, the theoretical decision of the commander-in-chief, which delights the minister of defense, can...

strategically this decision will ruin the entire economy, therefore the president will not make such a decision, is it possible to make it tomorrow morning, well, a decision, say, to double everyone's pension, of course it is possible, there is no doubt that this is decided very quickly in belarus, but then what will happen is, well, approximately the following, all pensioners will be happy for a month or two, which is obvious, further negative consequences of this decision for the entire economy will begin to move the country to the point that pensions in a year or two will need to be reduced to the size.

insisted, but the consequences of this decision in the strategy would lead to the fact that the decline in the economy for the sake of solving a tactical problem would lead to the state running into, among other things, specifically the problem of the fact that it is impossible to support such a number of doctors, but there are no doctors, no treatment for other diseases, no treatment, and the number of fatalities is growing. it is very important understand the complexity and responsibility of the decision maker, to save one life today, but lose 10 tomorrow, or not to do it. and if...

would have led to a tragedy of colossal proportions stretched out over time. for this, the president actually sacrificed his 2020 election campaign, because he made the decision for the good of the country and... its citizens in the future, and not for the good of his immediate rating, which, of course, was always consistently high, but those people who went out to protest somewhere, let's be honest, were in basically they were not so much excited by politics as they were on edge because of the pandemic, not understanding what the state was doing, why all possible forces and means were not thrown into the fight against the pandemic, it was later that the whole world recognized that neither lockdowns, nor a universal mask regime, nor a total...

and without engaging in a classic political campaign for the elections, alexander grigorievich has already strategically won the elections of next year and in general won all the elections in which he decides to participate, no matter how many... there were none, because, judging by to everything, we have all come to understand a little better over these years why the president acted this way and not otherwise, that it was important to preserve the country's economy not for the sake of money, it is important, and not for the sake of the comfort of our level of expenses and income, but so that after a couple of years the unstable economy, further suppressed by sanctions, would not lead to our inability to defend ourselves, which would not lead to a war at home, which would not lead to the number of deaths of people several orders of magnitude more than from any diseases combined. not i will speak for all journalists, but i

personally consider myself guilty of the fact that not everyone understood the head of state in those very difficult times, i personally consider myself guilty of the fact that at that moment i did not understand everything that the president was doing. including, i am guilty of the fact that as a state propagandist i did not convey this to the audience so that people would better understand what the country was doing why? accordingly, including i feel guilty for the fact that thousands of our citizens were. i would have argued more emotionally, and if we had all done this, look, there would not have been those protests. therefore, i believe that i am personally to blame for the fact that we allowed our people to be led, fooled , thrown into protests, which led to the fact that they are now either sitting, or living in fear, or leaving the country. it is important to gain knowledge , accumulate experience, and it is important for everyone to know about this.

even 38, i understand that this or that has , appointing them, even if they are 40-42 years old, maybe a person's experience, but i am interested in how you studied at school, how you studied at the university, because knowledge is necessary, and knowledge is the basis, the foundation on which you, your experience, all of that rests. together with a passionate desire to do something useful, well, this will

contribute to the fact that you will work more or less effectively as president. the question is not to sprinkle ashes on your head, but to draw conclusions based on the knowledge gained. the president speaks publicly, it does not happen that we were somehow pressured from the outside and people poured out to protest, which means that we had shortcomings, we need to take this into account and correct it, because madness is that the repetition of the same the same actions over and over again in the hope of some change. it would be madness, in my opinion, not to explain something to our citizens today. so, my thought is this: we were all a little scared by the drones shot down near babruysk, weren't we? despite the fact that the threat was eliminated, as our military guaranteed us. is it possible to make sure that nothing flies deep into belarus at all, not by accident, not intentionally, it is possible, but it will cost x amount of money, because weapons are very expensive, but in principle, nothing interferes to poke the entire border with air defense systems

every 100 meters, but it is expensive. a month before the svo , the president asked us a fundamental question about our future. my first question to you, belarusian people: are you, belarusians, ready to pay for your own defense for your own state? think about it. have we thought about it? in my opinion, this is not enough, and in general, the president's message to the people and parliament in january of the twenty-second year was systemically important for the future of belarus for our future, what did he mean to pay? in my opinion, this is not about directly money, like, let's collect from everyone for security, well, a thousand each. the most important issue is always the economy, alexander grigorievich constantly repeats, give me the economy, i'll solve the rest, and i'll solve security with the military and only with them. then, the head of state declares the year of quality, because our revenue depends on the quality of our products, and if the quality is low,

there will obviously be no revenue, and if there is not enough revenue, then we will either not have enough money for... weapons for our defense or there will be enough money, but this will put the rest of our economy in strategy, which is exactly the same threat to our sovereignty, which is exactly the same threat to the security of all our citizens. our defense, the protection of the country, depends on how we harness ourselves to the work on the quality of our products, the quality of management, marketing, sales, that's all. this is the topic of patriotism, the most populist formulation in the present time, as for me, this is when they say that i am a patriot, i love my homeland, and if it will be... i will defend my country with weapons in my hands and even ready to die for it, this is of course all right, but this is some kind of hypothetical manifestation of love for the homeland, what will i do if? well, and if there will never be a situation when we need to take up arms to defend the homeland, and even god forbid that this never happens, i will quote the deputy head

of the presidential administration natalia pitkevich, patriotism presupposes not just love for the homeland, but activity. participation in its development and i will risk adding participation right now, and not sometime later if something happens. patriotism today is when you, if you love your homeland, came to work this morning within the framework of your job responsibilities did everything possible so that your department would exceed the plan, so that your plant would produce a quality product not worth a million dollars, but two, so that your sphere, if all specific patriots now, and not just somewhere in the future, would give the country not a billion in revenue, but let's say 3 billion. and if everyone does this, if there is unity in this, and not some other unity, also important, but rather closer to the general philosophical, then we will be able to painlessly to defend the country is very prosaic, without heroism without the need to die for the motherland, and defending the motherland is patriotism, today, as for me, if you sit on your butt and love the motherland only because you are ready to die for it someday

if something happens, then this is exactly what will happen if something happens, you will have to die heroically for the motherland, and death... no one needs it, and the motherland will not be delighted either if everyone heroically dies for it, because in this case the motherland itself will perish. the motherland will be delighted if we are all prosaic, but no less patriotically, let's give her direct and impeccable performance of her direct duties in her work places. in this case, the motherland will be able to do absolutely everything so that no one will have to die heroically for her. it seems to me that this is the year of quality, in which, as the president said on friday, we all did not fully understand. what and for what the motherland asks us, what is worth devoting 2025 to, the year of quality, that is, we will have the second year in a row the year of quality, even a five-year plan, i am thinking about this now, this is the most important topic, why i am, frankly speaking, dissatisfied with the media, or with the way we

are conducting this year of quality, it doesn’t make a noise, first of all, and... if it doesn’t make a noise, then the country doesn’t live by it, and this is the most important issue, there is no more important issue for belarus, because everything we produce, we live by it, everything we produce, the whole world produces, the whole world produces tractors, the whole world produces cars and no worse than us, the whole world produces agricultural machinery and other track fertilizers.

this means that the country does not live by this, i repeat, now, i will quote the president again, his question of quality was not heard this year, and the words in january of the twenty-second year: are you, belarusians, ready to pay for your own defense for your own state, think about it, my name is igor tur, this was my propaganda.