to help you too, if you compare it with what was and what is now, it's just heaven and earth, further, not all european countries are in this kind of state, in the state of rezevo oponi, the countries of scandinavia, i remember everything, everything great , they will arm themselves, finland, sweden, well , they were armed enough, the poles are actively modernizing their army, because they understand simple things, by the way, they do not buy german weapons for some reason, because they have suspicions, there may be nuances with the supply of german weapons and so on, so in comparison with what happened, yes, yes, but i have the feeling that they strained from here, and now it turns out that they have to strain even more, and then you already know, they are not ready and not ready to admit real things, it doesn't matter to me things, this is a familiar situation, as you know, the situation between the first and second world wars, the same was the situation in europe in reality, when britain did not... want to invest money,

for example, in the development of its own weapons, then defense stagnation, defense-stagnation , why do we need an army there, yes, let's not be that to do and so on, they only started investing in the production of weapons in 1937, in fact, and this saved them, france, for example, also did not want to invest anything, they, well, there, the communists were actively working on dismantling the walls , they started investing in production only in the 39th year, but you don't know that anymore, that's what i read in churchill's memoirs, as the prime minister said in the 35th year, you won't force me , to invest in the army, well , simply because there will be no more war, or so banerheim's memories too, well, it would seem that finland, which in the 18th year had just survived the onslaught of the bolsheviks, monerheim, who headed it, he comes to the head of the national bank of finland in the 31st year, says the necessary. money for the army and for fortification

, what does he say, and what does it mean, we will spend money now, and suddenly there will be no war, well, well, you can imagine what the elites were also like, and it ended with finland enduring three wars in reality with the soviet union, the first blow was in the 39th year, the second in 1941 and 1944 they lost 10% of their territory, the soviet union took them away. access to the north sea , more precisely to the ocean, they had an access to the ocean, there they have a port not only to the baltic sea, they took it, they were forced to mobilize almost the entire male population in order to repel the attack, they the voice was terrible, because there was no one to work in finland, well, they are generally a food-deficient country and so on, so in this case, what is happening is still in comparison... with what is, it is still

plus or minus, which is good, but, but we must , but we must take into account that there may be trends, trends in europe, especially when the parties that will profess the reduction of aid to ukraine will win, here we see in the netherlands, this is what i wanted to ask, do you think it is real that against the background of the existing situation, it is possible to talk about a reduction, whether it is still slow, some faster, some slower, like britain, at first rushed with help, now it is not very audible. france began to say that we, we, we, will give something, and something still, especially, you know, we must proceed from the fact that we must first of all rely on our own strength, find a resource, yes, build our own weapons, first of all, produce the maximum number of weapons so as not to depend primarily on the whims of various partners, why look, you well, you say, i'm just hearing it for the second time and you 're saying it, and you know, here everyone, as you said, tensed up for the second time.

the nato military defense complex, and it obviously can’t produce that much, either it doesn’t want to, or it doesn’t want to get it from the warehouses there, you understand, and you offer it to a small ukraine has 20 million people to do this, we have no way out, sorry, please, no, but from the point of view, from the point of view of rationality, we will not be able to issue the same cypress on the mountain as it was on february 24 last year, if we didn't start for ourselves and there wouldn't have been that help, so our first survival is a question of us, and i ask you as a diplomat, but it can't be, i apologize, i 'm interrupting, but it can't be the case that as soon as we start producing their weapons, they will see that we have begun to produce them there in commercial quantities, and then they will screw your crane, absolutely, you correctly said that we are at war with the largest nuclear power, with the largest conventional power on the european continent, 140 million women are offensive, these are not facts, yes, that is , ukraine too, despite the fact that we are for the most territory. countries of europe, we are definitely not

that developed, britain, france would not have survived such a war, maybe finland would have survived alone, taking into account their, let's say, this landscape and plus the readiness of the owner of such and such a war, it seems to me. well, to this problem we are discussing, the first moment, not for all the states of europe, this war is exceptional, for us it is, for the poles, for the baltics, the finns understand it, for the rest of the world, europe, more precisely, it is from a different point of view, for example, the germans broke through, they have to to give credit, they are in second place in the supply of weapons after the united states, they seriously began to increase aid to us, but it is not enough for us in that amount, and even more so we want the same torus in order to be able to solve the crimean problem, you that is, the first the question is that each looks differently. second, the theory of victory , which was in the minds of the strategists in different capitals, was different, you remember how they said, we will give weapons to the ukrainians, so that they would later diplomatically solve some issues with russia from a better position, and give us

quietly for several reasons, the first one was that they did not want an escalation with russia, of course, the second point is extremely important, it is actually that they did not want the conflict to drag on, and it seemed that it would be worse for the russians, they would understand that they could not go further, they are chasing the arrows of negotiations, now they have realized that this is impossible, and we saw it there at diplomatic events, it is a pity that the propagandist lavov was allowed in skopje, because the diplomat lavrov died a long time ago, probably in 2008 , this is the second point , yes, which is extremely important, the theory of pre-victory, which is the western victory strategy, which was inadequate to the situation, which failed, and the third is the current theory of victory. they tell us, well, and ours, the honorable deputy asks ours, that is, general zaluzhnyi, and our western partners, well, at least in mass media information, they ask, well, what is your theory of victory, we have such a theory of victory , we have goals, and for goals under goals we have resources, first of all human resources, this is

a complex, let's say very, very delicate matter , but we don’t have a material base, so what you give for our military goals, we will plan operations, that is, we are extremely dependent on... our western partners in numbers, and thanks to zaluzhnyi’s article in zaikonmsty, he says that overcoming this asymmetry, i need a technological advantage so that we fight with technology, not by people, more, and that's actually the answer, the previous strategy failed in the west, the reluctance, let's say, of escalation and the desire for diplomacy, there is no new strategy yet, there are already difficulties, well, first of all, with american help. that is why we are in such a situation, but the most important thing, of course, is to show that we have the will to resist, this is the first moment, the second is to solve this issue and publicly, whether or not there is a conflict between the military and political leadership, this is extremely important for us, for ukrainian society, as well as for our partners, and the third - the west is listening to this, the west is waiting

for answers to this question, well, to be honest , when was the head of the president's office in washington, i think he was asked this question , because there are already rumors, that there are disagreements, they were, i hope that he answered , and in accordance with his answer , the situation is now happening, that is, there is no reason, because there are cracks, that's what, it 's maidan-3, yes, well, there will be no maidan 3, but i mean, this is that idea, that project , which lies on lubyanka, how to shake ukrainian society, otherwise it is not impossible, only killing a wedge, between the military and political leadership, and there are grounds for criticism, well, less of our... military, more of our political leadership, because it is responsible for many other things there, there is, of course, that this is a key moment, national unity, regarding plans, the same thing, we must honestly say that we can solve the main strategic tasks, but we need such and such means, and the article, in fact, is the first such brick

in this matter, now we need to work to provide us with the very systems that will give us qualitative advantage , there is only one positive point, since they mentioned, for objections, that there is no plan, there is no strategy, this is about us, yes, and here, some said, yes, they answered in the usa and in nato, no, they say, in ukraine there is a strategy, but i think it is normal, father, in principle, confirmation of partnership relations, here is another thing, what we talked about yesterday is that we need to develop a joint strategy now, because since we are connected resources with our western partners, we need joint. strategy and military and political strategy, some elements of strategy, i think there are, especially political elements, here is the activation of the european integration of ukraine, according to nato there is no definition, let's say this, there is a half step forward, but a decisive step, such a powerful signal to russia that the topic of

ukraine's membership in nato, it will not be discussed , and the course will continue to include ukraine in nato, but there is no such signal yet, the west is only ready for such a gradual evolutionary model, and this is not enough now, and as for weapons, yes, now, i think, we need to decide what weapons we need , which is qualitatively new technical level, the support of ukraine is needed, i think that work on this is already underway and the visits to ukraine by the ministers of defense of the usa and germany, i think that some other visits are also a confirmation of the fact that, in principle, they are already working on this, the main thing is not, let's say that it happens faster, so that it is not too slow a process. ugh, you are talking about nato, they are moving so slowly, feeling the ground under their feet there, this is again not to frighten someone there to the point of the red button, to such a fright, i think what is here... actually there is a red line, there are fears and yes, yes, yes, and well, we understand,

this is the usa first of all, the biden administration, and to some extent germany, the old stereotypes still dominate here, what if admitting ukraine to nato is a risk of direct war with russia, and finland, no, finland, they understand that this is not such a key moment for them, these are completely different things, because ukraine, ukraine. for them, this is a key country, well , for many reasons, firstly, it is part of their imperial history, they believe that, well, as you know, serhiy plokhi has a series of books in relation to the gate of europe, the lost kingdom , it explains how the moscow principality positioned itself among other princes, that they are the direct heirs of volodymyr's kievan rus, that is, for them in political science there is such a concept as the core of the empire, the core... kyiv, crimea, are the core of the empire for them, and the core

of the empire cannot exist, beyond the borders, further, but look, look at history, and when the russian empire began to dominate europe after all, only after they managed to seize ukraine, that is during there peter the great, this is when they worked systematically, then they got direct access to the european ones, then they became, then they became an empire, and therefore the question here is simple, when they say that this is their existential question, they are not lying, they are not lying, because they understand why the war is going on, they understand that it is stupid in finland, well, it is not so cold, not hot, yes, that it is there, that it is not, but ukraine, and especially if belarus is also excluded , russia loses its influence on european politics, virtually forever, that is, it turns into an asian one. state is not known at all, because look, the russians have always positioned themselves, they

positioned themselves, in the west they said that we have, we are generally a semi-asian country, in asia they said that we have connections in europe, that is, they are always torn apart, further these trade routes, they are always pozizionovat there along the volga, for example, the route from china, when there are them they are thrown out of europe, and what you trade, you have nothing to trade in reality, because the influence is in you? from this, here, see, here in relation to this, and the activity of ukraine on the territory of russia, it deprives them of their influence, well , look, this one, yesterday, more precisely, today , i read a report there that the sbu had detonated the trans-siberian bomb, twice already, yes, twice, moreover, and look what it is now a question arises, now the chinese are looking at this , they, they understand, in order to have influence, well , including the russians, it is no longer enough, now it is necessary to negotiate with kyiv, because kyiv already has its own plans regarding the russian federation, and i will say regarding weapons , will there be

they will cut, if , if we produce, they will not cut, on the contrary , there are risks, if we do not produce it ourselves, i will tell you, because the west, they have such a mentality, we still do not understand the mentality of the west, the west is built on the other hand, if you help yourself, then they help you, because these people are independent, a demonstration of their ability, but i always remember, you know, look, trump formulates his own position regarding ukraine, if they do not produce weapons, then they don't want to win if they don't want to win why should the taxpayers of the united states of america pay for it why is it the protestant ethic it's something that made america great you protestants did why work hard work honestly work for you you will be helped when you help yourself. this means that we are only beginning to help ourselves, and we still need to understand the details, the weapons that we will

produce can be used on the territory of russia, and which are supplied to us by partners, then it is not a fact, it is not possible to understand the production, no, but this still an open question, and here it is question, we still need to understand that i read interviews of our soldiers who are undergoing training in nato, but i often meet them, they talk there... they ask, well, the training is over, they say, but where are the drones? and the use of drones and so on, and we still do not have this in our protocols, that is, we must understand that our industry must be the most sensitive to... because we are at the forefront, and theirs, well, there are private companies, you know, well, we won't make it today, it's not cold there, it's not hot and so on, and they don't even order this, because they haven't worked out this tactic yet, and the russians, the russians are moving forward, they saw why such articles appear, because they see that the russians are switching to military rails , they see

that the russians are studying the experience, i.e. the journalists , there they already see from some publication that the russians are switching to military rails, and there the pentagon and brussels do not see that the russians are switching to military rails, we return, i work as the devil's advocate , every friday, i am someone's lawyer the devil, it turns out at the moment, look, look, you know this, this is how the position of israel often says, how could they miss everything there, the question is that the military and this, they also see a lot , the question is that there is political will , and the political will of the west is still paralyzed , because we need to strain, we need to reduce social expenses, what arguments can there be, how, how to wake them up, but really, it looks like only germany has woken up, only poland, poland , only poland is now waking up, starting to wake up, here she is

they said correctly, it will not rearm, look, they are conducting procurement, but look at poland's recent procurements. well, literally a year already there they increased it by so much, and they spend more, and the germans increased it and do not spend it, that’s what the problem is, they had 45 billion, when nothing was working in the bundesfere, you know that, to the institutional capacity, about which he also often tells us that they have increased the amount, until now, how are the backpacks changed there, yes, i guess they read a lecture, how good we are, it’s like a business, you know, yes in you know them, after this last fact, when the president was standing in the burning sun of this guard who was supposed to meet him in qatar, and for the humiliation of the germans, i understood that they already had this gene of resistance and struggle removed from them for a long time, you understand, then you know, look, it doesn't really go anywhere, it doesn't happen, you know, some things are a little worn, and it will appear so quickly, you can't even imagine, we have

a whole delegation flown to the united states of america, they are talking about different states, dispersed there in towns and villages, grind... with the american voters, with the people, and with the american people, they explain why the ukrainians are fighting and explain why their money is necessary, necessary, and they say that we are yours, not you, today, what they told us, how they make money on our wine, yonder bastards, so he says that first we told them that your propaganda, which says that you take everything out there, all your wallet, no, it is not so, you have a small percentage of everything there, then your propaganda, which says, that it's all right. ukraine, no, actually, everything is there you have production in the united states of america, and you yourself are interested in that , because your jobs are being created, well, it is at the level of talking to people, but at the level of talking to the congressmen who will vote on the budget of israel and ukraine on the fourth, what should be said in order to finally convince them, to allocate this amount

, nevertheless, if you allow me, it seems to me that it is much more important to talk to the voters, to those political activists, than to the congressmen, the first point, there is the trump factor, it is quite unpredictable , maybe, if he becomes the president, maybe it will be good for us, and he will just go crazy and say , i will give everything necessary so that, maybe i am interrupting you as a diplomat, but the important thing now is to send gantsov to trump and talk to people affiliated with trump, the ukrainian authorities, wait, because there are voices in the middle saying that you are playing this game again between clinton and trump, it is absolutely normal practice when talking to both those and those, i.e. always when americans, hate, here hate comes from different sources, it is absolutely normal to come and talk to different people, and in the state

of the republicans, we have three people with whom, this is trump, his entourage, of course, but she is not very adequate in relation to to ukraine , this is a landing party, most likely he will lose to niki gelli, we need to talk there, although she is the best candidate for us now, and the last one, just last week, the koch brothers, and this is a large, powerful, let's say, business structure with an expanded electoral structure, that is, they are there, just thousands of people go door to door, e-mails, there are advertisements and all that, they moved away from airstrikes and now they will be financed, she is a traditional republican. traditions of the x-ray type in relation to russia, and this is very good for us, but what i want to say is that there are inadequate ones, first of all in the house of representatives, it is matt gates, it is margery green, and there are several... others, they will do anything against aid to ukraine, they are demagogues, and they will not accept any arguments, because it is fashionable to say, why, we have a war on the southern border, and we

give something to ukraine, as if you can kill mexican migrants with haimars, that is, it is demagoguery, but you need to go to the voters in these problem states, because there will be emotions there, and you should not go to the deputies, i believe that you should go in teams , when there is a representative of religions. when people will tell that we were in the basement in donetsk there in the sbbu, and i am for example the same protestants, people will understand this, and i will say that i am a farmer and johnny was taken from me, those chechens are anyone, yes, or they beat and destroyed that grain, as they did, it will work, our arguments that... you spend there , roughly speaking, 50 cents a day to help ukraine and save our lives, it will not work, because most of the trump electorate, i advise you to watch the film the network

76- th year, about the phenomenon of the media and actually this is the phenomenon of trump, they exclusively perceive, let's say, emotions, and that's why it should be, and the military should also be, to say, i defended the homeland, yes there and because how else, they will understand this, and and what you said, i, it is also correct, well, it is correct, with staffers, i.e. the employees of the offices of senators and congressmen, it is normal in the white house to talk like that, say, look there, although the white house understands all this very well, that we have to talk to the white house, it is actually about changing their strategy, that they should not be afraid of a collapse of russia or the red button, they should work as it was during the cold war, nuclear deterrence, the second point, the fact that it is russian territory, this restriction should... be removed, we cannot win a war when everything is falling on our on ours on our border, we have to hit at least 100-200 km there, that means infrastructure, mr. oleksandr, you say,

they understand everything, because the sdb has been postponed again, i understand that it will not happen this year, this is the white house, this now, it's this administration, absolutely, because if you look at how there is crazy progress with the germans, and with the national security council of the united states, they first gave us javelins, stingers, because the ukrainians will fight like upa. then yes, then they were afraid of escalation, they gave something to us, from us there are also arguments, we hit the strategic leaders of the russian federation, according to the russian doctrine of nuclear deterrence, it was adopted 4-5 years ago, from the point of view of deterrence , they can use weapons if there is a danger to the very existence of the russian federation, well, this is such a general phrase, but the most important thing is strikes against the means of strategic deterrence , we did it and no one pressed the button, because there is american deterrence, there is the january statement of the nuclear five, yes, china, there are signals from china

, and actually, we have to convince biden , most likely those people who form his projects, strategies, that it is necessary to change this , it is necessary to be leaders in escalation, you must be, actually set the tone, and not react and be afraid to react, that russia, you must understand that both you and it will be good for the world that in the 24th year this war will end with the victory of ukraine, and you will not hand over this problem in the 25th year, maybe to trump and there or to desantis, and it will be a loss for the united states and the world as a whole, so i think , there are arguments, but of course you have to work with it, for three months therefore, when i interviewed president zelenskyi, i asked him a question, well, there were still warm memories of vilnius and that not so unpleasant moment, and after zelenskyi’s tweet, and i ask him, if we do not join the next summit in washington to nato, and the president says, no, i, if we don't join nato next year, he

says, well, there will be another one, which means the nato summit, obviously, at the next one, obviously at the next one, we will join, yes, but here are the movements for nato and on the european union, which have been taking place in recent weeks, and these posts are in different publications, regarding which leg we have to drink in nato, and then a friend will step up, please tell me whether these are the links of the same chain, and, whether, whether the questions regarding nato have become agitated among us, does it seem that to washington we they want to be drawn into at least some strategy and some algorithm according to nato, look at what can be the first and what can be the second, well, i think that, well, look, if we start from the practice in general, which countries can enter into it. well, what are their, for example , unstable borders, which are not defined, then you can enter e if you do not have a part you control, this is cyprus, it is in the eu, but not in

nato, because it is part of cyprus. occupied by turkey in 1974, that is if we speak generally, but i do not agree here that we are not going, we are already going to nato, and for this, we must understand what we need, we need, first of all, security guarantees and oblige trying to help us, and this was said just at the vilnius summit, and pay attention to how russia reacted then, well, they started to panic, yes, they panic, why, because they... i understand that there will be talks with nato won't be, it's like that, you know a spherical horse somewhere in a vacuum, ever and so on, and they know that the issue of territorial integrity will always stand before joining nato, this is a key question, why, because security must take place at certain borders, right? and when under biden and together with zelensky they began to discuss these guarantees, they understood what it is, i will tell you what it is, if it is pressed,

and this is the main thing: what should be done first with the americans, then with the british, canadians, by poles and others, it is actually, in fact, ah, an obligation to a specific country to help ukraine without the mediation of nato , without the blocking package of hungary, which did not go anywhere in nato, including, and in fact this is the scheme of israel and egypt, they, by the way , the americans also help, there is a specific... obligation regarding the country and what the russians also were afraid that if this agreement will be pushed through, and we must first of all agree on this, yes, for the first time, an american, this means that the scheme that the russians are thinking about trump will come and trump will change everything, although i think that you know that, that the situation regarding trump, well, it is also beneficial for trump, he he is against nato in general, he is those, well , you have security forces, he will not be able to change the agreement,

because this agreement will be... with the united states of america, and further, if it passes, he canceled some agreements, no, no, yes , it's so simple, if it passes through the congress , it won't be so simple, let's go too, it's not that the act ended, it can be canceled, and when it is concluded, it's already a big question, then, it's weapons and help, specifically, that's what we need need, we need, that we need to determine why we need to get security, and on the task of getting this a security umbrella, the specific obligation of countries to help us, here is what we can do now, at this, at this, at the nato summit, an invitation, of course, we would like to, but we must, yes, the program is a maximum, but, but we must understand the reality is that, with a high degree of probability, it can be said that until territorial

integrity is ensured within the limits of the 1991 year, the members of nato won't be able to do anything, what does the eu give us? and parts do not even constitute, when they begin to tell us that parts can be it's intelligence, it's called, we talked with a military expert, he explained it on his fingers, he says, look, now we're joining nato with the part that is, tomorrow they're taking avdiivka, no, we're not joining, i'll tell you that we will not enter, i will tell you, there will not be a war, there will not be, there will not be, and there will not be, i will tell you that it is impossible, it is impossible, i answer you, purely theoretically, but purely theoretically let's say, if we say that we admit there, they will demand that we officially give up these territories, yes, i don't think that no, they won't be , no, and i will answer you further, in order for security, for security to be responsible on these borders, demarcation must take place on the territory of ukraine, in fact new borders, what is this means that we should enter into

negotiations with russia. about the new borders , and they will never agree to it, because they will say, in finland, 10% of the territory goes, no, wait, it was, it was a completely different reality, it was before the second world war , let's go, and before the signings, in 75, in 75 was signed, precisely helkhinsky, a treaty was signed on the inviolability of borders in europe, which russia is successfully doing now... it was a completely different reality, then the borders were divided, well, excuse me, after the second world war, poland gave part of germany to odar, took gdansk, in germany took köningsberg and so on, that is, it is a completely different situation now, so we must proceed from the fact that we should first of all have weapons and guarantees, yes, the fact that negotiations are now successfully underway on the diplomatic line,