[000:00:00;00] so, now there is a great desire in the united states to restore this mechanism, and many in washington generally believe that the resignation of the minister of defense of the people 's republic of china is to some extent a signal that china is ready to restore such a mechanism, and the united states needs such a mechanism, exchange of information, even in the military sense, what the consequences of this attack may be, this time. the minister of foreign affairs of the people's republic of china, wang yi, speaks about the need to create a mechanism for regulating differences, this is a chinese one interest, american interest is a mechanism for informing the military, and chinese interest, interest - a mechanism for resolving differences, for the americans to talk about these problems that divide them, so as to always

find... moments of a certain softening of the situation. this is the main content of this summit. the creation of such a mutual mechanism, which would not allow to reach a critical point. that's all these two powers can agree on right now. and that's what's worth dating for. because the public can reach some. i would say critical points, then this point must be prevented, that’s all, and it means that now it is clear that joseph biden and xi jinping are aware of this for some reasons of their own, maybe the economic character first of all, they are also aware of this, everything else, i don’t see any real opportunities for coordination of interests, and yet, in your opinion, such summits are an understanding, you know, the dictatorship of democracy itself understood that

it understood what some oxymoron was said now, but why could the soviet union and the west create a model of peaceful coexistence, by and large this model was torpedoed only putin's russia. one way or another, the soviet union and the united states, back when china was a poor country that could not claim the role that china claims today. they were creating a mechanism for peaceful coexistence, at least when vladimir putin appeared. ugh. it was peaceful all the time. coexistence, first of the soviet union, and then of russia, certain mechanisms were created to discuss differences, mechanisms were created to resolve difficult situations, such as, say, the status of west berlin, west berlin looked like this, i would say critical a point of misunderstanding between west and east, as ukraine now looks like, west berliners, but

the soviet union and the united states... along with great britain and france debated for decades what the status of west berlin should be, and eventually came to the situation of a de facto free city with from the point of view of international interests, or a federal land within the federal republic of germany not recognized by the soviet union. it ended without a war. and imagine that you live in west berlin and are being watched all the time the day when president biden came to us and said that he was actually here. ukrainian, so it was, two famous speeches in west berlin, joseph, john kennedy and ronald reagan, i am a berliner and mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall, here is a great example of such coexistence, because on that side stood the secretaries of the berlin district committee of the socialist united party of germany and it seemed that the price is an instrumental moment,

such as the caribbean crisis, but in any case such a mechanism existed, with russia this mechanism was actually completely destroyed, precisely after the attack on ukraine, although, as we remember, the president of the united states, joseph biden, tried to support this mechanism until the last moment, until february 24 of last year, he tried to talk to putin all the time, now such a model of the mechanism is being created, it may be more relevant, why, because one way or another. china has institutions that russia does not have, china has the standing committee of the politburo of the party central committee, china has the central military council of the communist party of china, all of these are collective leadership bodies, of course we are aware that they have enormous power, personal, but the institutions work one way or another, the problem of modern russia is that the soviet mafia, internecine, and clear

functions... the leadership of the russian federation as such does not have, we say all the time about putin's meetings with the members of the security council of the russian federation, but the question arises, what can these members of the security council actually do. we saw an open meeting when putin decided to attack donetsk and luhansk oblast of ukraine, allegedly, when he recognized the independence of the so-called, he was lost and did not know what to say, he simply went ahead, they already had a special operation in several points, and he missed the first and immediately moved to the second, naryshkin came out, that was it, you know , the famous story about absolutely. ottafonlets came to the sss office of heinrich gimbler to tell that someone was conducting negotiations from this wonderful tape, the negotiations were authorized by

rex führer himself, and he was saved by the case there, so the same thing happened there, this standantrer, fsb naryshkin, came out and instead of saying that i was in favor of recognizing the independence of the dpr, lpr, i said. i am for the war, in fact, no, accepting them into russia, the war, it was, it was the third point, the first point is the recognition of independence, the second point is the war, and the third point is that people give signals, send to the astral, the west, what will happen, is the person who is the interlocutor of the west, he could want to send a signal from himself, putin saw that the standard-bearer was playing some kind of dangerous game, that's why he stuttered, because he wanted through his head...' turn to the west, that's what will happen, and he basically, we now understand that he said what they planned, just a few months earlier, that is, the plan was simple, then they enter, and then they annex the east, just like that, and

the south, well, so what, but in any case, these people did not show any desire for discussion, for discussion of the situation, for speeches, if we consider that this is such a new politburo. then we now read all the minutes of the meetings of the politburo of the central committee of the communist party of the soviet union where people who had power, not the kind that the general secretary has tskartsia, but the real power, they spoke and said, you know, i to him, i believe that there , we listened to the opinion of the comrades, my position is that we must support the resolution introduced there by comrade ryabov, and the position is such that it is that means comrade ustinov's position, let 's vote, of course. as a rule, most members of the politburo supported the general secretary, but there were situations when the general secretary said that he did not have a position, well, by the way, this was also the famous story of the withdrawal of soviet troops to

czechoslovakia, which voted for the troops, but could have voted differently, and then the troops would not have entered, and this is a perfect example of how it all works, of course, the last word is in the first person, but people can express themselves about their positions in the state duma of the russian federation. so, well, that means that there is no collective leadership in russia as such , collective leadership that would be consultative in relation to what the führer likes, that's what lost adolf hitler when he was there in 39 planned his offensive operations, reichs marshal, henry göring told him that führer we cannot fight on two fronts, and he immediately said, listen, get out of here, you idiot, and everyone understood that there is no need to... argue, when the head of any state becomes such a führer and his staff can't tell him the truth, uh, that means, but you and i very often talk about the fact that little

will change on the part of the russian federation in relation to ukraine there, putin or anyone else, it doesn't matter at all, as if the system will continue its existence, if putin does not it will happen, hypothetically, of course, but again , the system can. to continue its existence if putin does not become, but there may not be putin , but a person is inclined or forced to create a model of collective leadership, then we get what was in the soviet union, or hurrah, let's try to agree with the europeans on alternative energy routes, bypass ukraine, marginalize it, they themselves will come in 5 years, why should we escalate now, when we will get them anyway, in principle, so that such a conversation from... in february 2014 in the kremlin, then now we would most likely have a pro-russian leadership in ukraine, so this was an absolutely real development of events for us, but so russian politicians who said that they

did not understand why it was necessary to annex crimea, who said that the east should be used as a tool to reduce the consequences of the maidan, these people were all marginalized. they are gone, we know that these people were there, we know their names, we know that they have lost putin's trust, from this moment on no one offers putin alternative options, again like that. competitive, alternative options, you should have two approaches on the table, preferably four, and you should choose optimally and listen to different people with different positions, when it all boils down to what the person who comes to your office says, listen, volodymyrovych , the question is only one: to kill them with a rocket or with a cannon? well then, and we got lucky with that to a certain extent, because what if, if they. it does not sound strange, than, well, no, well, clearly, they are simply

not crimea, and not crimea and not donbas, but the trojan horse, the government of national agreement after the maidan, once in 2002, not a blitzkrieg, but a real war, a small game, not a small group of troops that should have landed in gostomel and parade with columns from belarus, but a real army that would capture kyiv simply by its numbers, or not capture kyiv , but. any army can capture a city of a million, we know that from the lebanon war , from the israeli army at the walls of beirut, that's another story, but in any case it was a much greater danger, but when you agree to the obvious adventure, because an alternative to disagree with the adventure is lose your seat, even if you are aware of the situation, we now know very well the person who was aware of the situation in principle, let's say in 2022, we know the name of this person. of russia, he simply

disappeared from public space, and i can cite many such examples, but in the 14th year, i would say such an example was mykhailo zurabov, ugh, the russian ambassador to ukraine, in the 22nd year there was dmytro kozik, they certainly did not advertise their views, but they at least tried to convey to putin, being his absolutely loyal associates, about what could be an alternative approach to solving the problem, so both wanted to solve the problem. who will risk their future, here is the whole story for you, by the way, we in ukraine also need to understand this, i keep saying, it was taken off the tongue, i actually wanted to ask if these trends are not proportionally smaller, but at least a little characteristic and for us, well , why do i keep saying that we need a government of national security or some kind of military cabinet, in which the president of ukraine volodymyr zelenskyi

would be next to petro poroshenko, or with yulia tymoshenko or zelenskyi had alternative plans to solve the problem, so that people in the military cabinet did not stand up and say: listen, you are simply delighted with your abilities, mr. president, you are a real leader, a moral leader of the people, they said, you know, maybe mr. president, there is another approach to this story, let's consider it, you can go this way, or you can go that way, these may be wrong positions, by the way, we read, by the way, we read the transcript from... acting as the president of ukraine oleksandr uchinov made decisions related to the russian invasion, to resist or not to resist, there were very different opinions , there were very different opinions, but performing the duties of the president at least he could rely on different opinions. when a politician relies on only one opinion , his own, and the environment does everything possible simply to strengthen this opinion not with their own positions , but with an imitation of the position, this leads to defeat, it should not be assumed that this is possible at all, there is no coach for everyone, that is imagine that these are

two amazing chess players, but they play exclusively relying on their own ideas about the game, no one can say, you know, it is possible to rearrange this piece here, but when there are three grandmasters behind the candidate for the champion, the title of world chess champion, two of whom were already champions, then they can him. on the other side is the same or an applicant with the same grandmasters, if there is no one, then it helps you, let's say this, mother of god, i know, this is partly a very advantageous position, not to let anyone in, so that no one is heard, and then say, but i i didn't know, they didn't tell me, i didn't have this information, well, putin does it so often, it's true, he starts spying on someone all the time, but what is it, why wasn't it reported?

our situation, that is why i believe that it would be very useful, that if the president of ukraine had an expanded, let's say, composition of the national security council or some narrow military cabinet, as in israel with the participation of politicians from various political parties, it is not would simply add legitimacy to the government, which it obviously needs now, it would add opportunities for variable politics, not variable politics, it's not politics, ugh. to our commander-in-chief, yes, to the supreme commander-in-chief, it is the military leadership in our country that informs, in this regard, this week there were a lot of informational insinuations, regarding, well, you know, such a confrontation between politicians and the military in the mountain, but less so, it concerns exclusively war, i don't think that any of our military gives any political advice, but i, i think that now the war is the main thing, because again, what is war, one way or another, it

mirroring, consultations around the war, these are some, consultations outside the political field , given that now ukrainian politics is a war and there is, but there are still questions, i did not see, to be honest, in all of them. in these discussions about how to call the current situation of some big disagreements between the president and the head of the zsu, well, because the only thing i saw, what it means there, they quote zuluzhno, who said about the impasse, zelensky is quoted as saying that out of nowhere, zuluzhno does not say that we are in a blind corner, he says that there is a way out, if there is no way out of the deadlock, he says that the positional war is a deadlock, we need to turn it into maneuvers. because the positional war cannot be the state of the situation forever, if it turns into a permanent one, the situation that we are observing with you is such a very serious test, and if we are only a prescription, you see, it is like medicine, you

are prescribed medicine, you you end up getting them, it could be some very rare medicine, or expensive medicine that you are trying to buy money for, and then you have them...' and you don't recover, you need new drugs, well, at least you need them, but a prescription is not yet, you understand, a prescription, it's not yet recovery, it's only a prescription, and before recovery there can be different ways, ugh, i don't see anything here that speaks of what, the only thing, of course, i don't think that political figures, officials have a voice, to advise the military to say something, what not to say, it's wrong, i in general, i think that this is wrong, not even because officials should not advise the military, but because there is no political confrontation with the leadership of a belligerent country, public, this again speaks of a lack of consultation, if you could do all this by opposition through the media, you thus admit that

there is no platform for discussion in your own apparatus, and this is very dangerous for yourself, well, finally, one cannot help but remember what is happening in poland now, a country that has a reputation as our unconditional ally, our support, and actually, i would like it to be like that, after all, it does not take away, it does not take away us from some common problems that need to be solved, as they say, volhynia is different , we have a position on the volhynia tragedy, let me remind you, but it is very strange to feel that poland is now basically on the same page with hungary, even somewhere, regarding our entry into the future, except besides, we have a blockade on the border, the transporters are currently behaving the same way as the farmers behaved a few months ago, i thought it was election fever, but obviously there are some deeper problems, well, internally in poland, the polish situation is political for them continues, who defended his

freedom in the fight against cruel empires and above all with the russian , soviet empire, so we sincerely congratulate our polish friends on this holiday and wish that there will never be polish statehood again, but i have to say that i do not think that the position that we we are talking about the position of poland regarding the tamgumization of european integration, this is the position of an official, the deputy minister of foreign affairs of poland, a few weeks will pass, and this person will not work in the ministry of foreign affairs, this person appeared in the ministry of foreign affairs of poland only because party leaders, law and justice were, i would say, specific ideas about diplomacy, and the fact that they managed to create difficulties with poland's two main partners in europe, with germany and with ukraine, because ukraine was in difficult relations before the start of the war, this once again speaks of the diplomatic fiasco of the polish right and their entire camp, politicians, that they suffered an absolutely head-scratching diplomatic fiasco and their

activities, which yaroslav kaczynski did not tell about there, did not benefit the polish statehood and the polish people, this is a verdict that was clearly and clearly signed by the poles and the voters. now regarding relations, and of course all these problems will remain under any polish government, because there are national interests, there are interests of agricultural producers, you know, like interests of carriers, there are interests related to the policy of national memory. we can have our own interests, poland can have its own interests, this is generally normal. the main thing is that these interests are resolved in such a way that it contributes to strengthening, and not to the deterioration of our bilateral relations and our european integration, because our european integration is largely to the benefit of poland should be interested in our european integration, as i have always said, one will always remain a suburb of

the civilized world, and if it becomes, then will be one of its centers, so we will be in the vicinity, but we have such a fate, because we have such a border with russia, we cannot change geography, we cannot, geography cannot be changed, but poland can change geography, with our participation, therefore the main thing we are also interested in ukraine's entry into the european union, poland, slovakia, hungary, romania, if it is said that it does not correspond to their national interests, and how it does, by the way, if we talk about nato, the same can be said , these are tens of kilometers that will separate them from the center of tension, so let's not tell each other fairy tales , i believe that we should solve all these problems in such a way that they contribute to the strengthening of relations between the ukrainian and polish peoples, the main thing is that this in fact, the fact that we already live in the one of the world, millions, had business here before these tragic events, i really hope that when

the war ends, everything will be restored on an even larger scale for obvious reasons and that poland will take an active part in the reconstruction of ukraine, this polish-ukrainian world already exists, it is functioning, and this is one of the best , i would say, civilizational achievements, which is connected with...' what the ukrainian and polish peoples have succeeded in these decades, states, of common interest, so that ukraine remains ukraine, so that poland is poland, that's all instructions, we are ending this broadcast with khrystyna yatskiv, thank you khrystyna, thank you very much to vitaly portnikov for the answers to the important ones, and we will meet in our next programs, stay with us and victory and peace to you,

good luck. what did you drink an antibiotic, did you take an antibiotic, did you drink, gavrilo, you are also sick, sick, drank an antibiotic, it was in your stomach.