everything is quite simple on youtube, choose either yes or no, if you are sitting in front of the tv and watching us on tv, pick up your smartphone and vote, if you think that the office of the president of ukraine exceeds his powers, then 0.800 211 381, no, 0800-211382, all calls to these numbers are free, at the end of the program we will sum up the results of this vote, we have the director of the center in contact. of military and legal studies oleksandr musienko. mr. oleksandr, i congratulate you and thank you for being with us today. i congratulate you. so, rishi sunak is in kyiv today, and the security agreement between great britain and ukraine has been signed. president zelenskyi says that this is a historic agreement, and that if such an agreement had been signed in 1991, then there would obviously have been a war. the current one did not exist, after

the signing of the agreement, president volodymyr zelenskyi and the prime minister of great britain briefly outlined the main provisions of this document. let's listen. that is why the provided guarantees will be valid for a time until ours. joining nato, if it happens earlier than the term of the agreement created by us the security architecture will be effectively incorporated into the security system of the entire alliance. we have now agreed with britain on security in all areas, on land, in the air, at sea in cyberspace. this means more prosperity, more tanks, more missiles, hundreds of thousands of new artillery shells, training for thousands of ukrainian soldiers. £200 million will be allocated to

the production of hundreds of thousands of new drones, the biggest aid of any country. so, mr. alexander, this agreement is one of many agreements that, in principle, obviously ukraine can sign with representatives of the big seven, this was discussed at the nato summit in vilnius in july, here we are. the first agreement, let's break down this event and tell our viewers what ukraine gains by receiving such an agreement? it must be said that, in general , britain consistently supports ukraine and supports our naval war, which is quite effective against the enemy we see, and britain's goal is obvious, it is to prevent russia from dominating the black sea. oust them

from there, because russia poses a threat of danger and will wage war against ukraine, therefore they help us destroy the russian black sea fleet and liberate crimea, this is a strategic task, and as for the agreement itself, you see what its value is, the first thing, perhaps, that i could highlight, in general, is that such an agreement is in itself, that is, itself the fact of having the fact that we de jure fix what happened de facto, well, what do we have de facto? developed, we have a de facto situation where the countries of the west support ukraine, support it because of the fact that there is a struggle against autocracies, there is a struggle against injustice, there is a struggle against aggression and the struggle for the norms of international humanitarian law, the civilized world, but this is not documented anywhere on paper, that is, today, if you look at everything that is provided to ukraine, it is provided in principle. by the decisions of governments

, because they support ukraine, and you understand that this is why we often hear such formulations: what will happen if there are elections somewhere, the situation changes, the political situation changes, and someone does not want to support ukraine, as it is done before? and that is why the agreement is at least the smallest safeguard, and an argument that ukraine, well, it must be maintained, in any case, despite the fact that we have certain there, let's say ... memories of the budapest memorandum, everything, but, well, you see, this agreement is different, first of all, from the memorandum itself, the wording, and i think that this is the way to move, and that it is important to me that, in principle, from what was announced, firstly, it was immediately stated that this is not a replacement for nato, this is what i would like to hear, that is , that this is a mechanism that should operate before ukraine becomes a member of nato, when no matter what and when it happened.

the next thing is that, in principle, if you look at the general parameters, at least from what was announced and from what was written by the daily telegraph a few weeks ago, ah, ... british, revealing to us some of the secrets of what has to be signed, in principle, there is nothing that we do not know or that we do not see, that is, what i mean is that the provision of aid to ukraine is fixed, joint projects in the defense industry are fixed, and the status of training is fixed ukrainian military, supply and so on, that is, in principle in general... it is that the state that exists even now, that state is fixed somewhat with expansion, in that why expansion, because the defense-industrial complex, it involves increasing production, joint projects, and in any case it is about the fact that production and supply should be expanded, but

this is a fixation of the existing status quo, a signal to russia that britain is not backing down and remains with ukraine. and finally, cooperation in those projects that have already been started. well, by the way, it was today the reaction of dmitry medvedev, the deputy head of the security council of the russian federation, who said that if the british behave so brazenly, and they are our eternal enemies, meaning the russian federation, then the placement of their official military contingent in ukraine will mean an announcement. russia's war, i.e. moscow further concludes that if this agreement is signed and it is for ten years, then great britain can send a military contingent here, which can be on the territory of the ukrainian state, and on the other hand side, and what prevents great britain from making

such a decision outside of nato, that is, as a state, our partner can make such a decision and no one will prevent it. well, the thing is, you see. that somewhere in the enemy's camp they are thinking and thinking about different scenarios, they see where it is going, that britain's involvement, for example, in the operation in the black sea, well, it is there, because british missiles are transferred, those stormshadow, which, for example, was struck headquarters of russia's black sea fleet in occupied crimea, we know that britain will now help with surface drones as well as air. the british provide quite serious help to us in cyber support as well, that is, there are many things that are aimed at today, please note that for some reason russia was not encouraged by anyone to do this, but it was building

defensive structures and dugouts and trenches in the area even last year yevpatoria, which was then washed away by the elements, which was then destroyed by a storm in the black sea, well, for some reason they did it, though. it would seem that there are dangers from yevpatoria, and i want to remind you that the british and french landed in the times of the crimean war, precisely in the yevpatoria region, bypassing sevastopol, but then the fleet sank the black sea, and these are such, let's say, phantoms that they still remember as historical, and i think that it is not for nothing that they talk about it all the time, because i would not rule out that at some stage of this war , it might happen that... well, like when there was a battle for crimea, when we simulate certain scenarios, it would have already come to this, then ukraine would be helped by the international legion, fighters of the international legion in greater numbers, in particular, the british, who acted under the flag of the international legion

of ukraine. i would not rule it out, thus solving the issue of aid to ukraine, and then the next point, and we should also think about... that western countries, in particular britain and the united states, should in the future give them permission to host their military missions . even now, in order not to violate the constitution, it can be done by placing not military bases, stationary, but military missions and contingents, and these are different things, ah, with the permission of the verkhovna rada and the decision signed by the president, so this is also the future because i want to tell you that even membership. nato, this is important, but look at the example of finland: finland joined nato and immediately signed an agreement with the united states, allowing the deployment of aircraft on its own airfields and the use of ports on the baltic sea, in order to be able to further

hedge and guarantee its security . i do not rule out that some day a military mission , not a base, may appear, for example, in odesa, whether british or not. elsewhere, we are a sovereign state and have the right to act and make such decisions with our partners, and no matter what the bear does and no matter how it annoys him, no matter how he says, what? it is interesting that today's agreement between great britain and ukraine was signed by president zelensky after the visit of the baltic tour to lithuania, latvia, estonia, this is also an important sign and indicative sign, because these countries suffered in 1939 from the russian and soviet armies, and they know absolutely exactly what the soviet boot is on their land and... it is very important that the president zelenskyi won the support of these three countries, because these three countries are part of

the north atlantic alliance, they influence the decisions of the alliance, maybe they are not the main players, but at least they are members of the north atlantic alliance, and in latvia zelenskyi was asked about what he thinks about the war and whether the war will end in the 24th year, what he said. zelensky said that no one knows the answer to this question, and mentioned the predictions that the russians made that they would capture kyiv in three days, these were also opinions, i want to be correct - said zelenskyi, war, victory, defeat , stagnation depends on many decisions, many risks, many directions, but mostly on you and me, if we do not lose our stability, we will end the war earlier, if we do not lose our spirit, we can live with skepticism , but... about the country, and i am not ready for such a thing, i know that there are millions of people like me,

we are not ready to give up our country, and zelensky called to finish with putin until putin finished with all of us, well, he did said, at least it's a direct quote, according to you whether the world already hears it and whether it will listen to the fact that putin can end everything, not only ukraine. first of all, mr. sergey , with your permission, i will say a few words about the baltic countries , because it is important, because, first of all, they really support us tremendously, and within the framework of the opportunities they have, well, they give a lot, it is not only states, but also people who either buy cars or donate to the armed forces of ukraine, but the geopolitical aspect is just as important, i want to remind you that even earlier last year the president of ukraine visited the nordic countries. of europe , and there was just a summit of the countries of northern europe, together with ukraine, where we were also given

a rather significant aid package, and the countries of the north, they actually guaranteed their further support for ukraine, so it is very important, i would say that a certain geopolitical axis is being built, where we see that the countries of northern europe, well, very strongly support ukraine, that is, norway, sweden, denmark, finland. during this visit to the baltic states, volodymyr zelenskyi mentioned belarus, which could eventually join , of course, this is impossible as long as the lukashenko regime is in place, it is unrealistic, but in the future, we hope that belarus will change and change its course from pro-russian, which currently dominates the government there, to after all, to the pro-european one, we can build relations, and as for... understanding the world, i think that everyone is getting closer

to, well, even those who somewhere else thought that it was possible to agree on something with putin, to the fact that it will be generally difficult or little real about it to agree on something, and that russia will follow these agreements, but i would ask the question more globally, is it only putin himself, is he the only cause of this war, and is he the only one... the nature of this evil , aggression and violence, and to a great extent unfortunately no , and it is a great pity to say that such a war is supported by a significant part, at least for now, of russian society, and as long as there is this support, as long as there is this course, as long as there is finally no other concept, you see, russia can change when the concept of this state in one form or another in today's... borders in other borders , for several state entities, for three, i don't know, time will tell, it will change its nature

in general, the concept of existence, and when it focuses on internal problems, and will not solve his internal problems externally, and here it is, it seems to me that on the one hand it can happen very quickly, well , at least the situation with the handsome man was demonstrated, let him not finish, but it was an example of the fact that something could happen and something it began... to collapse there and in the process of this destruction, then something would come out in a certain way, or it may take time, because unfortunately, for now, this is the nature... it persists, that putin is on the throne, and they want to see such a tsar, most of them are there society, that's where i also see problems. mr. oleksandr, one more statement was made by volodymyr zelenskyi with regard to the planes that were destroyed, or rather, both

planes and helicopters. the allies handed over long-range weapons to the ukrainian military, with the help of which... the ukrainian military only 38 units of military aircraft were destroyed in a day , president zelenskyi said this during a meeting with representatives of the baltic mass media, let's listen to what zelenskyi said, the partners know that some of the weapons they gave us, some, i won't say which ones, but the partners listen and understand some long-range weapons they gave us, we destroyed 26 helicopters in a day. 12 planes that rose and then hit with missiles, against which these systems worked, we destroyed 12 at a time, it was just something, sir oleksandr, very briefly, maybe you understand what president

zelenskyi said, the partners must have clearly understood, that is, obviously there were planes and helicopters at the airfield, and we are in... or on these airfields, that’s right, i understand, i think that the helicopters we are talking about when we used atakams for 165 km, you remember, and then helicopters were destroyed in the occupied territory of ukraine, and planes, as far as i remember, there was also a case of atakams use and i do not exclude it, including that it was a stormshadow missile and probably more... than on the range is 300 km, and probably up to 450. i understand that volodymyr zelenskyi hinted to our partners that they should give us more such weapons, perhaps in this way the situation will change, including at those airfields where take offs take place there in the voronet region , in the rostov region, in the saratov region,

where these missiles can reach, why do you think the west is so cautious. gives these long-range missiles, by the way, richie sunak said today that the packages promised by great britain will have long-range missiles missiles, does this mean that the uk is considering such an option that these missiles will really fly to a long distance, i would not rule it out, especially since i am my own, let's say, this is my assumption, based on certain information, insiders and analytics , i would not rule out that a certain number of... missiles could have already been used by ukraine with a range of the stormshadow version of up to 400, 450 km against enemy military bases in the occupied crimea, that is, it was already possible, but the question here is that i i think that they will transfer and it is precisely these missiles that we are talking about, the fundamental question remains, will

we limit our actions to only the territory of occupied ukraine? part, will there be permission to strike on the territory of russia, well , i will tell you that this is actually an important element, because now it is also a test for the intervention, because the countries of the axis of this evil are aggressive, for example , north korea also transfers ballistic missiles to russia, which it has already struck on the territory of ukraine and will probably continue to strike, so right away this is a matter of serious escalation and... another solution is also a matter of escalation, the fact that writes the wall street journal, on duty about the deployment of nuclear weapons by russia to belarus, there are at least two serious reasons to which the west can respond, in particular, by allowing strikes with its weapons on the territory of russia, and this would, i think, be fair and justified, even before

those who say that ukraine should not be allowed to do this, because it could be an unnecessary escalation, so russia has already led to north... korea and iran may also join in this, there are such risks as well, that is why the west is here could just used, to use this excuse and say that it is not the west primarily playing for escalation, but russia, and the west is responding, helping ukraine to defend itself. mr. oleksandr, the issue of future financing and assistance, financial assistance by the united states of america to ukraine remains. not yet resolved, the united states of america has stopped supplying weapons and military equipment to ukraine due to the lack of budgetary funds for such programs, he said in a briefing. white house national security council coordinator john kirby, in this situation, is what great britain is doing, or is it the reinsurance of our

partners, well, that is, the british are insuring the americans in this situation and helping ukraine, or are the issues that are domestically political in the united states of america, they will be overcome in the near future, and ukraine will still... open, or rather the united states of america will open this package of 61 billion dollars for ukraine. i hope that they will open, that is, well, this situation, it cannot be undefined at all for a long time, after all, it is clear that, it seems to me that an agreement will be reached, after all, about the southern border and, accordingly, about aid for ukraine. because this situation cannot remain completely undefined, and the members of the republican party understand this , many of whom also supported and support

ukraine, but regarding europe, i must say that it is very important that europe also understands that the countries of the european union and in general, that they should also play a certain role in ensuring security in europe, because let's say: frankly, when certain politicians in the west are starting to talk about the fact that in 5 or 10 years russia will be at war with nato, will it be ready, or will they still use the wording, will they wage war in europe, then i have a question, where is russia now waging this war , isn't there a war in europe right now, isn't this a powerful aggression, when rockets fly, when there are such shellings, it's already a crisis, and there's no need to postpone it. what needs to be settled and decided today, and in this sense german chancellor olaf scholz is absolutely right to say when appeals to his fellow european

leaders and says that by february 1st , plans to increase support for assistance to ukraine should be provided, not just, let's say, stating what is there, but to increase it, because it is really important, and in fact it is very important for europe to look into... the potential and see that not everything in them is bad and exhausted from the point of view of the defense industry, opportunities, it can all be restored, it just requires political will, funds and it is necessary to work factories and production of the same weapons not not all european countries, but in germany, in france, in italy, in sweden there are, thank you, mr. oleksandr, it was oleksandr musienko, director of the military center. do research friends, we are live on espresso tv and also on our youtube and facebook platforms, for those who are currently watching us on youtube and facebook, please

like our video and also vote in our poll, we ask you today whether the office of the president is exceeding his authority, yes, no, please vote, on youtube it's pretty simple, choose yes or no if you're on air pick up your phone and vote if yes then... 0800 211 381 no 0800 211382 all calls to these numbers are free please vote at the end program, we will sum up the results of this vote. next up is glen grant, a retired british army colonel and military expert. mr. colonel, i congratulate you, thank you for being with us today. thank you for the invitation. mr. colonel, today president zelenskyi together with of britain rish sunak signed the agreement on military cooperation and on security, it will be in effect until ukraine joins nato. in the british government, this agreement

is called historic. mr. colonel, explain what is the historicity of this agreement? yes, this is a historic agreement, because usually great britain... does not do this, and if we remember, before the second world war, we had a similar agreement. this is something unusual for us, because we left the european union, of course, yes, we are still members of nato, but we are now talking about an agreement with a non-nato country, and of course there's some ... controversy in the uk asking why we're doing it, but i know that a lot of people i talk to,

they've welcomed this deal. because they believed that great britain was not doing everything it could for ukraine, so this is a historic agreement. rishuna says that in addition to the air defense system and anti-tank missiles, the aid package promised by great britain to ukraine also includes long -range missiles. does this mean that very soon ukraine. will get the right to use these long-range missiles, and these long-range missiles will fly to military targets that are outside the borders of the ukrainian state? very good question, and i'm sure that of course it was the lion's share of the discussion that was between the prime minister and the president of ukraine, and i want to say that... we don't

know what's going to happen, and we shouldn't to know, because if there are attempts to fire these missiles outside of ukraine, then it should be some kind of surprise, it should be a surprise, and of course, for ukraine, but ukraine needs to destroy the crimean bridge, which will change the course of the war, it will be a turning point for both sides. mr. colonel, one more question that... already follows from today's reaction of dmitry medvedev, the deputy head of the security council of the russian federation, who reacted to the signing of the agreement between great britain and ukraine, he said that in the event of the placement of their official military contingent in in ukraine, meaning in great britain, this will mean a declaration of war against russia, or, in

the literal sense, it may happen that russia will perceive the presence of the british military on the territory of ukraine as a declaration of war on russia, or is medvedev simply bluffing in this situation and trying to threaten great britain once again, i repeat, once again. it's an interesting question, i think that... russia has been talking for a long time about the fact that it is waging war with the west, with nato members, including great britain, so these words, which we hear again, have already happened, this is not something new, my view, which, such rhetoric is aimed at an internal audience, and especially for those

who are close to...putin, also maybe even someone they see as a potential successor to putin. of course, if they want to declare war on us, they actually declare it, this war after every step we take, aimed at helping ukraine. that's a great answer, mr. colonel, because the amount of how much medvedev has already threatened great britain, i already. i can’t count even on my fingers how much it is possible to place a british contingent, limited or unlimited, maybe it will be some officers retired british troops on the territory of ukraine in order to help the ukrainian state in its struggle for independence.

first of all, i want to say that in the short term, great britain will not station its troops, its soldiers on the territory of ukraine. yes, they can send certain advisers who will help representatives of the defense sector of ukraine. a week ago, industriously, when, talking about the mobilization, he said that... i actually had it , he asked me if i would recommend someone who could help the ukrainian military, it's about foreign ex-military or military analysts, and i said yes, of course, i actually, when we're talking about soldiers who were trained by our...