the well-being and prosperity of the russian federation depends now and for many generations to come today in the 21st century. our geologists are faced with ambitious tasks to achieve maximum economic efficiency in the extraction of mineral minerals, to introduce new methods of developing deposits, but at the same time, it is imperative, observing the highest environmental standards, the state clearly understands that geology today is one of the foundations of technological sovereignty. it has long been not only gas oil coal, for example, without rare earth metals cannot be created, not a single computer can fly into space. it is here that we need to ensure a breakthrough for the future, realizing the responsibility to our descendants.

see you in a week on the senate program. hello friday evening , i’m alexander koreevsky, time to sum up the main political results of the outgoing week.

the general assembly continues its work in new york. un, the main political event of this week. well, the work schedule of our delegation clearly shows no there is no isolation of russia, and there is no sign of it. today we spoke with the chairman of the federation council committee on international affairs, grigory karasin. he is participating in the forum. grigory borisovich i greet you. thank you for taking the time, and i understand that your work is in full swing, and it’s morning in new york. it's evening in russia. well, or our day is evening. ah, how the work is going, for you to especially note now, we are here monitoring, of course, many, many developments, and various statements have been made. what would it be for? you paid special attention to me yesterday , september 21st. uh, there were a lot of meetings.

sergei viktorovich with colleagues from cuba egypt yemen thailand, brazil saudi arabia pakistan and a lot of others thus lavrov’s sarcasm that everything is difficult here with isolation, which, uh, seems to be confirmed to us , the russian minister has a kidney under him, and spoke at the council of ministers dedicated to the summit of the future, which will be held in 24. met with the ministers of the council for interaction and confidence building measures in asia, this is with well, so-called, and in the evening lavrov had a meeting with the general secretary of the assembly. and at it there was a frank and, frankly speaking, difficult conversation on the issue of interaction between the russian secretary, the organization there and the main one for us.

the goal is interaction based on the un charter, frankly speaking, with the aim of stabilizing the international situation as a whole and a substantive discussion of measures for understandable and i want to emphasize transparent cooperation in solving existing problems, including the crisis in ukraine under the word transparency. in this case, i mean a very specific understanding of what everything a secretary does. the un should know. e members, especially a permanent member of the security council, so that there are no surprises, these are not easy times, so surprises are not welcome. they must be clear and known to all responsible members of the organization. sorry, but sergei viktorovich saw some kind of mutual understanding. eh, this was discussed somehow. or this has not yet been commented on. well, i'll tell you this. we will be understanding i’m happy with this answer, but it’s quite

possible to do the work, seriously. well, grigorievich agreed, that means, well, in general , the interest in our position of desire to receive uh assessment information from our first hands from a sketch of today's problem is confirmed, a look at the real possibilities of moving the international community away from the language of intimidation of the essence. well, towards such predictable real cooperation. this is probably the most important thing to draw up regarding today. i'm just going to talk briefly about the plans, because it's very interesting, so, uh, the minister will have new meetings. he'll perform. now he is already performing. apparently. e to the meeting of the participants of the so-called group in defense of the un charter a. then there will be bilateral contacts with colleagues from nicaragua

, hungary, serbia, bolivia, mexico, iraq and a number of other countries. participation in the astana format is planned; a meeting with the leadership of the international red cross will not be enough. eh, what does this have to do with all this? difficult meetings, as if exchanging information and discussing where move forward together the main task that sergei viktorovich sets in all these conversations is to put the international agenda on a constructive track and abandon collective attempts. the west to reduce everything to such an open confrontation. judging by the reaction of partners in the world, outright irritation is growing with the impudent demands of ukraine, which is increasingly trying to beg from the collective west without visible support. well, and besides this, of course, finances and weapons. do you

know about the meeting that took place in zelensky with biden and finally looks into tomorrow, which will be the last working day. uh, with the participation of uh, the russian foreign minister means, uh. it will be, perhaps, for all of us and for, uh, summing up. very significant, since along with meetings. there will still be a couple of meetings with colleagues from iran, gayan, and so on . but it is on saturday that sergei viktorovich will speak as part of the general political discussion at the current session of the general assembly, that is, he will speak from the podium and then soon. after this, he will hold his final press conference where he will share his main assessments. this week of high politics is the main assessment. the conversations took place, so let's wait for this speech and press conference. the last day promises to be

interesting and, most importantly, significant with assessments and a view of the future and so on. i'm sorry. i understand that, of course, the results will be summed up tomorrow, but nevertheless there will be some intermediate points. it seems to me that you can already voice it, but in general you mentioned it. uh, zelensky will meet with biden, and with members of congress. what do you still think? this was such an educational manner on the part of the americans in relation to zelensky, such behavior was not provided with a common platform, as a year ago in congress, but there were such statements quite harsh, that is, and this can be assessed as some kind of educational procedure took place with zelensky but money and they will still give the weapon as much as he asks for, or this is not the way to put the question. well, i ’ll tell you this thing, what i know from these reports and about what happened in the building of the united

nations zelensky and his team. great the collective west is already fed up with what concerns the meeting with biden, in my opinion, it was held in the template manner of a petitioner and a creditor. few people were impressed. eh, the endless complaints, requests and reproaches from kiev have clearly become boring, hence the decrease in counter- emotions from western donors. by the way, the very fact of endless travel. the leader of the current kiev regime around the world has begun to raise many questions among our foreign partners. uh, some are skeptical about this, some are expressing irritation. uh, someone right he also supports quite a few of them, but during his trips he threatens him. which are becoming more and more tough, few are impressed

. they are a little fed up with all this rhetoric. eh, all these menacing statements. this, by the way, concerned his rather pale speech at a meeting of the un security council, so there are no impressions, but, we must understand that arms supplies, well, still pose a danger to our guys for conducting combat operations. this should not be underestimated and it would be necessary to clarify the position with some that was clear in our former colleagues and partners in the west, that this idea has no prospects, but another topic, for sure. we are already live on our channel. ahh. we talked a little about this hot on the heels. what is the name of the event in karabakh? and now the situation looks different than it did a few days ago. back, how would you, uh, still characterize the situation.

uh, will it still be possible to consolidate this peace, uh, which was achieved, including thanks to our peacekeepers, uh, and these negotiations that our president is conducting with the leaders. e of both countries, but at the general assembly is this topic still being actively discussed or is it still happening, but for now it’s going on somehow in the background. no no, this topic was actively discussed; moreover , it became a subject yesterday. this was a separate meeting of the security council, in which our representative took part, and , by the way, the foreign ministers also took part in it. eh, the mirzoyans bayramov of armenia azerbaijan well, the statements were very diverse, as always , someone scolded someone, someone threatened, and so on. but if we draw a general, sort of general semantic line, it means it was great that all this it sharply worsened on september 19, that is , literally a few days ago. and first of

all. uh, the humanitarian situation in nagorno-karabakh has worsened, which means our russian peacekeepers have taken over. so once again the main blow. we know that there are those who died while fulfilling their duty . it should be noted that the russian peacekeeping contingent continues to conscientiously perform their duties. the main task is to help people who receive the necessary assistance for protection, but with the active mediation of our peacekeepers, september 20 was achieved an agreement on a complete ceasefire and a complete cessation of hostilities - this is important. yesterday, on the 21st, negotiations began in the city of yevlakh with the participation of our peacekeepers. again, and of course, the conversation you mentioned between president putin and pashinyan and aliyev, where the main parameters of the settlement were discussed, played a decisive role. at least, so to speak

, a ceasefire and the creation of a predictable situation and the situation should, of course , develop in this direction in the direction of destocking and normalization of all aspects of people's lives, but here it should be noted that accusations of suspicion begin, but the starting point of everything that happened was recognition by yerevan. yeah, in october last year and in may of this year, 23 nagorno-karabakh, part of azerbaijan now needs to work primarily on the tasks that we have already talked about. in general, russia is interested in a calm, predictable situation in the south caucasus. these are our close neighbors and partners, but much depends on the will and readiness for political decisions of the leadership of both parties, and on the part of the international community measures are needed to facilitate this ; they are noisy curses. threats in the style of what is already known. now we have josep

boreil in our country, who also performed yesterday. in a word, we are in a situation where we need to consolidate the positive tendencies of a ceasefire, bring them to diplomatic negotiations and conduct the work of concluding some kind of interstate or some other document. to ensure that such clashes of bloodshed do not recur in the future , roughly speaking, the task at which, in my opinion, the entire international community must work , but once again i want to repeat that a lot depends on the readiness of the leadership in yerevan and baku for this. well, let's see how events will develop for you. thank you for taking time away from work and telling us about what's happening in new york. well, i think that all the topics that are being raised now are extremely important and we will condemn them more than once. thanks a lot. our opponents are trying

to use the un mechanism for their political interests. in particular the international court of justice, one of the five main structures of the united nations , this week resumed hearings on the case, which was initiated by ukraine last year. what is it about. we spoke today with a member of the international legal council of the russian ministry of foreign affairs, president of the russian association of international law, anatoly kapustin. hello, thank you for taking the time , definitely follow the un general assembly, of course. our delegation is actively working there. we're just talking about this they said, and of course there are different un bodies in the organization. he uh, and there is such an international court of the united nations where but this week there were hearings, and genocide and so on. here. please tell me a few words literally. what is this dear international institution doing? and how is everything

going on there? what are we talking about in general, so that it is clear to tv viewers. well, the international chest, good afternoon alexander , and once again the international chest - this is one of the main organs of the organization. uh united nations uh, thick, he uh indicated there are only five such organs. this is the security council, the general assembly, the economic social trusteeship councils, the international court of justice , the fourth, and then the secretariat. this is the statutory body. this means that his task is to consider disputes between states and not all state ones, which means that it is specified in a state without members of the un who and other state ones who are participants in the statute of the international court. so the court is kind of tired of this court, which is an inactive part moreover, but it is separately numbered and separately attached to the charter. uh, this court was conceived, so to speak, as a body that should resolve

legal issues at the request of the main bodies of organizations and mainly this uh, the security councils of the general assembly number also considered disputes between states, relying on existing sources of international law, such as international treaties in which the state you participate in are international customs as evidence of general practice. well, and a number of auxiliary so-called means for determining, uh, the existence of the corresponding rights and obligations of states. these include general principles, legal doctrine, that is, the opinion is known to scientists in international law. well, lately, hmm e, acts of emotional legislation have in reality been brought into analysis and uh resolutions, mandatory and even recommendatory ones of international bodies of international organizations, first of all,

of course, general in fact, he is in which sets out certain collective positions of the state on some. by international law, this body itself was conceived precisely as a body that should have the so-called optional jurisdiction, that is , voluntary jurisdiction, a state that is a member of the organization of exchange nations and at the same time participants with documents of the international court must make a special statement about that they agree to be considered. e of their disputes by this court, that is, without the consent of the state. that is, yes general principle. yes, without the consent of the state. it cannot be brought to participate in the process in court for consideration. uh, any dispute with other member state. that is, some kind of arbitrage turns out like this. yes, not quite like the arbitration court. now i hmm still. this means, as if an exception to this general rule is provided, that many states can

make a special declaration of recognition in advance about recognition by this jurisdiction, as on any issue. how about individual specific issues that cannot, for example, submit to this court for consideration in this case, any other state can apply to the court with a request to consider a dispute with this state, even if it itself does not participate, or rather, has not made such a mandatory statement, the court will accept for consideration and the second second second method - this is when international treaties, e international treaties, provide for the possibility of considering disputes over this interpretation of these treaties by an international court, but there are different approaches, most often these articles are also falsative if the state made no excuses. to recognize jurisdiction under this agreement in a specific case, then, in principle, the other party cannot attract. eh, if a dispute arose, it was considered by an international court. so to speak , there was such, uh, formed structure.

which would be to not allow the use of the court. uh, as a means of justice, so to speak, as some kind of body for impartial consideration of all kinds of issues in order to use it against any state interests. well, there are two groups of countries. e members. some of them recognized in advance the jurisdiction of the international court with special statements. these diplomatic notes are kept in court. uh, others, uh, are recognized only under certain agreements. and third. eh, it doesn’t apply to any issues at all, a mandatory legal beige question is that, besides this, the court, as i already said , can give an opinion, a non-obligatory so-called advisory opinion, in which it explains certain provisions of international law upon requests. the general assembly of security councils or all of them, the consent of any other bodies and international organizations. this is

the external one, so to speak. yes, this outer shell. having explained in detail, now two questions arise. the first is the decision , after all, they are, uh, recommendations. as i understand it, in the end it turns out, and the second thing is , well, it’s real, what’s happening now, in the russia-ukraine case, as a disposition. well, i have to correct your idea a little. the thing is that i collided here you establish that uh he makes two types, well, more, but the main ones are two types. the first is a judicial decision on disputes between states. only states can be a party to the dispute, not international organizations, and no other persons can be parties to the dispute; only the state can be a party to the dispute. this is the first and second thing, that the decision is the final decision, they are mandatory and, after the speech comes into force,

it is mandatory for the state. that is, it cannot be said that these are some kind of recommendations or such. that’s why all the decisions are, uh, they definitely publish them, so to speak, for general viewing, there and so on. here's the thing about the mechanisms. e execution, then these bailiffs, where will judge dredd come, where will he come? where does it come from? yes, there are no bailiffs as such, that is, the court follows the classical doctrine of international justice and what developed back in the nineteenth century that there is no external authority over the state, and therefore the state must voluntarily comply with the court decision. this is how it is usually done. well, it happens there delays, well, there is a situation, so to speak, when a state refuses to comply with a certain state, and in this case it has set out the prescribed procedure for appeal. e elections, so to speak , it’s up to the state to the security council, and the security council can recommend that the state implement the principle of the decision. this

is how to say e. on the one hand, e is not very tough. but on the other hand, it still provides. uh, more or less the activity of the court during the practice here was actually the result of many cases when the state refused to comply. this is about five or six cases, but most often it is still outside the borders. as they say, before the courtrooms. they find some options and uh negotiate, uh so that uh, those proposals to the front, so to speak, the conclusions that the court made were uh, or accepted and uh, the dispute is settled. so, as for the current one, uh, here, uh, and sarky. here's the presentation. uh, they were looking for complaints against the russian federation of ukraine. about accusing us of applying the genocide convention. uh, action uh, related to a special military operation in ukraine is

just another method. eh, well, the west has used such methods over the past well , almost 10 years to 8 years, to be precise, and has used them more than once in relation to the russian federation, trying to find various kinds of methods in order to, what is called , nail it to the wall. our state and show how bad it is through judicial means. well, the court is still traditionally personified in the public consciousness whether it will be international or national. eh, with something like this hmm well some kind of justice is more like that, yes, objective yes, objectively and therefore, so to speak. every kind of manipulator, so to speak, including at the state level, is trying to use this means in order to accuse someone of something like that mechanism, so the initiative was from ukraine. but everyone understands that the speech is the same as in previous decisions against. more precisely, his appeals against russia

were, of course, large ones behind his back. uh, european western powers, first of all, of course. here they are apparently, so to speak, i decided that the genocide convention could somehow be used against the interests of the russian federation in this situation, but objectively speaking, then objectively, of course, there are no grounds for applying the genocide convention in relation to the situation that has developed today in ukraine not available why? well, the convention provides. what is 10 years ? what is genocide? genocide is, so to speak, the deliberate destruction of some group or large group? yes this is the population some particular state, people or yes, well, as a rule, however, the sign is in the form of murder there in the form of uh all kinds of, so to speak, torture, torture and uh, military

methods or not providing an opportunity for survival. there is deprivation of allowing means of subsistence and so on and so forth. well, in this situation, of course, in relation to ukraine - this is in no way another matter that ukraine itself has been dealing with over the past 10 years. uh, actually committed autogenocides against uh, the ukrainian part of the population and there are, for example, in ukraine in attitude of ukrainians. i don’t think they will be able to find any facts, or the russian state said that it was necessary to destroy all ukrainians there. this is nonsense for a healthy, normal, mentally normal person, you are russians, ukrainians there. it is complete nonsense that ukrainians are the same. eh, well, a significant part of them are russian. yes, and there are the same surnames, the same names, so to speak, and with rare exceptions there are different emotional groups, and the ukrainian western ukrainian ranks are different. where uh, so to say there are such differences from russian, so

to speak, yes, that’s really all. everyone understands this, but nevertheless, the trial is going on, and we already have a minute left. so, uh, as i understand it, this procedure is lengthy and it will last for some time. well , for now we won’t pretend the case is a court decision. yes, yes, yes, several years. well, now we are in the preliminary stage. uh, you see, uh, the encounter establishes a rather complex procedure for the work of this court, there is something secretive about it. yes, so secret but quite an important meaning. yes. e often, when the state goes to court. well, in our situation it is not very typical, because often, so to speak, someone blames each other, in this case. we won't exchange it. although in relation. e two republics. eh, these kinds of accusations were said to be being made, but we didn’t go to court with this, we wanted to do it ourselves. often the state

reaches a very high, so to speak, intensity of passions, what is called the peak of the ipogi, they turn. so the court is slowly considering everything so that the possibility spend and perhaps, so to speak, the state themselves will look for some kind of peaceful means in this case, so why should the court first decide the issue of the admissibility of the complaint, that is, accordingly , for the complaint on a formal basis. that is, it must be based on some kind of international treaty. i spoke either customs or other sources. energy must be based on the consent of the parties, which must be expressly expressed. uh, consent to participate in this process, and when everyone has been heard, uh, accusations and objections to the substance, that is, both on legal grounds and on e grounds. eh, opportunities so to speak. uh consideration of state consent. after this, it moves on to the next stage,

which will be possible there in a few months. and maybe even in another year. the consideration rules used to be generally very long there, up to 5-80 years. now they are trying to decide a little faster. questions 3-5 years. uh, there is a procedure for considering the case internationally saturday. they time is not in a hurry, no one is rushing them . they carefully study all the documents and, based on the discussion, so to speak, an appropriate decision is made . anatoly yakovlevich is huge for you. thank you for such a clear explanation, we will monitor developments. all the best, we'll keep an eye on it. thank you bye. we have reached the donetsk people's republic. when such people come, they bring a lot of good things and not with weapons in their hands, sergei, he goes and shines. just like that, the halo behind them is all for the front. everything for victory we filmed the first episode with him.

and after this day, seryozha had to leave for this ill-fated car. he went there with joy that he could bring our soldiers what they needed. we made exactly the same armored car and sent it there to the donbass . there were a lot of people in the ranks of my unit.