to implement, unlike the taliban in 2003, 2002, when they quickly left the cities and hid in the mountains, the kusits ​​will not do this and they will rather resist. in principle, it was said earlier that a break in trade on the red sea could lead to serious losses in the world economy. we remember how we monitored the situation in the soviet gulf, when a ship there blocked the possibility of the advancement of other judges, and this is a ship, and it was such a disaster, a disaster, now the red sea is not working, and no one is speaking, that we are in a catastrophic situation, that's why it is so, or just, well, no, no, they say, ready, vitaly, because in fact, if we are talking about that ship, well, that...

of course, it was such an accident, yes , but it was obvious, and at least it had a way to solve it, and in the end it was pushed out of place and pulled out, in this case there is no way to solve it, and here rather everyone states the situation that the problem is getting worse, yes , it becomes more complicated, and in this case egypt is not just hitting on... hey, he's already feeling the pretty serious consequences of this red sea blockade, uh, and growth is obviously to be expected as well, because i think the vast majority of cargo will go through africa anyway, not through the red sea, the sea, that something seriously increases the cost of any transportation in general. in short, we are returning to the times of vaska dagama. well, if we talk about

the situation that is currently developing in the middle east, and we can fear the further expansion of the conflict into iraq and syria, how do you generally see what is already happening today is being established, well, look, who knew that, for example, at the beginning of this year, let's say, these shiite groups, the guard corps. of the san revolution will carry out an operation and hit the american base, well , this may even be the case of belli, or let's say such a black swan arrived, and accordingly we more or less expected an answer from the americans, because if the americans don't, they won't be able to answer or not will want to answer, this will be a serious blow to american positions in the middle east, they love the strong there, that is, those who are ready to answer, if the war in

lebanon starts in... well, about which we have already talked a lot with zmala, then of course we can expect a serious serious escalation, and here the question actually still rests on iran, iran is behaving very strangely, that is, it used to the fact that he is waging hybrid wars, and in hybrid wars he is secure from the point of view of his territory if... that they find themselves faced with the choice of starting to intervene on a full scale in these conflicts, let's say lebanon or there syria, iraq, and inflict strikes on american positions from the territory iran, although they, as you know, that in principle , iran has already launched missiles on the territory of iraq, and well, i motivate, motivating it by the fact that they destroyed one there. i'm fed up and

of course all this can get out of control, that is , at some point someone's nerves will fail , and i understand that it will not be american nerves, but khmenei is a person who is obviously at such an age that he prefers rather die quietly than, at the end of his life , find himself in a whirlwind of events that he is unable to control. well, i think so the united states does not really want a direct conflict with iran, just as it does not want a direct conflict with russia, this is a joint approach, i would say so, yes, absolutely true, i think that here the interests of both iran and the united states of america coincide. against this background, they can negotiate, that is , how to do it in order to demonstrate readiness and strength and , accordingly , to demonstrate jagu-jagu for their allies, but at the same time not uh... not to clash lo foreheads, because

, well, again, we understand perfectly well , this is like the situation with the kushites, a ground operation, well almost impossible, on... with air strikes you can hardly achieve a quick result, and to top it all it is very expensive, yes, as you understand, all this costs a lot of money. likewise, the same with iran, a ground operation is not possible, but strikes on such targets are also unlikely to bring quick results, and what is important in this situation is iran's nuclear program, or not... it will speed up iran's nuclear program and will this not be an excuse for iran to quickly make a nuclear bomb and in this way demonstrate that they are protected and they could retaliate, such as against

israel or other american allies, if iran directly confronts ... a confrontation with america, in principle, if we talk about the iranian nuclear program, do you see the possibility of returning to some kind of agreement at all? well, uh, and yes and no, because the iranians still perfectly understand that their nuclear program and their preparation for a nuclear bomb, it in... still rather had such a deterrent factor, and maybe it is quite possible that iranians, well, up to a certain point, that is, i say that this is until there is no direct conflict, this is keeping

the americans, israelis and others in the region in limbo, the saudis also last but not least, this was such an excuse. trade, trade with them and we are seeing some results, some successes, because the resumption of diplomatic relations by saudi arabia and the beginning of some kind of interaction between these two countries was perhaps not least due to the fear of the saudis, precisely that the iranians in the end they can pull a nuclear one out of their pocket bomb and directly threaten, but the iranians and... also understand that the information about the presence of a nuclear bomb will be a direct and obvious threat to the americans and not only to them, this is a violation of the agreement, no matter how weak it may be, let's say, that is i

mean the agreement of the 15th year, but still it gives the iranians certain trump cards, thanks to which the iranians got out of many sanctions, under sanctions. and the violation of this agreement is a serious serious challenge that it can throw to all the countries that signed this agreement, so it is their restrains, on the other hand, maybe they will have no other arguments left, except for the demonstration of a nuclear bomb, well, of course, there are questions of missile carriers and many other things, because it is unlikely. the russians, i hope so, be careful, the russians did not transfer the technology of compact projectiles to them. thank you, thank you, mr. igor, igor samovalos, the director of the middle eastern studies center, was in touch with us, we will now take a break for a couple of minutes, but stay with us for the last, i would

say, dialogue of this program. why me here? i have sensitive teeth, eat ice cream - pain, cold air - pain, sweets - pain. the dentist prescribed lakalot sensitive, which effectively reduces tooth sensitivity. if i had known lakalot sensitive earlier, i would not have had to come here at all. lacalot sensitive - reliable protection against pain. there are discounts on perfectil original, 15% in psarynyk, bam and oskad pharmacies. laughter, physical activity, sneezing. even under such a small load. urinary incontinence can make itself felt. feminost uro helped me. thanks to the natural components of feminost uro helps restore control over urination both day and night. feminost uro - urination under control. ask at pharmacies. new york 19th century. this is luxury,

scandals and intrigues. gilded age from hbo. watch all seasons of the exquisite drama, in ukrainian with a subscription. turn on aristocratic on mego. there are 10% discounts on quiet soothing in psyllium bam and oskad pharmacies. we continue the politclub program on television. on the espresso channel, vitaly portnikov is with you. we are now talking about what happened at

the united nations international court of justice nations, where, as is known, there was a serious story with ukraine's claims against russia, we already have this judge and this is such a real serious conversation in the international court of the united nations. mr. expert, now i hope that we will have an interlocutor, but for now i will try to explain to you what happened at the un international court of justice this week. the international court of justice decided that it can investigate whether the russian federation really distorted the concept of genocide, but it will not establish whether the russian federation committed genocide against ukraine itself. that was the case ukraine violated. russia literally a few days after the start of a full

-scale invasion, and in fact it must be clearly understood that this is a decision that can hardly be called one that satisfies ukraine, but may not leave a stone unturned from the very idea that the russian federation adhered to when it justified his attack on our country. literally a few days after the full-scale. of the russian federation on ukrainian territory, ukraine filed a lawsuit at the united nations international court of justice nations, and the essence of this lawsuit was that russia abused the international convention on the prevention of genocide when it started a war with ukraine. i will remind you that the president of the russian federation, vladimir putin, in his numerous addresses to his compatriots, which he made on the eve of the attack on ukraine, said that the main goal of russia is to protect the residents. donbas from the genocide of the ukrainian so-called nazi regime. by and large

, it must be said that vladimir putin is saying this even now. and here there were questions. as far as in principle, these words of the russian president can be taken seriously. so, boris babin, doctor of legal sciences, expert of the association of reintegration of crimea, representative of the president of ukraine in the autonomous republic of crimea, is in touch with us. congratulations, mr. boris, nice to see you. yes, a former representative, of course. so, i want to understand, and you don't think that, after all, this lawsuit of ours was already doomed to the fact that it could not be decided completely, as i explained to the audience before you and appeared, well, actually two huge problems with gaga today, so two decisions that raise huge questions, and if you're talking about a case about genocide, so about the fact that... the aggressor really didn't have the right to use the category of genocide for a reason like

a reason like, as they did for a large-scale invasion, this case is really complicated , i actually have a different main question here, the fact that the probability is that the court will refuse to investigate the very issue, whether it will consider these accusations in... russia, or it won't be, is it legal, well, let's say this, is it illegal of course, is it covered by the convention or not, it's immediately, immediately everyone said that you know it, well, as in our country, you know, that's how it's customary to say , innovative, innovative, the lawsuit was filed in the most difficult conditions, these are the first days of great aggression, that is, everything here, as they say, is more or less clear, but there is another question, the question is why the lawsuit was formulated. precisely those claims that will be considered by the international court of justice. in fact, ukraine

in this lawsuit, it asks the international court to recognize that it did not commit genocide against its own population. of course, ukraine did not commit genocide against its own population. but, when all this is transferred to the legal plane in a competitive process, where the other party is the aggressor, and the observers are global co-terrorists, the question of the purpose of this process arises, because well... this process will not be about violations or something of the aggressor state, at this stage it is turns into, well, as they say, proving the fact that ukraine is not violated. and i, as a lawyer personally from... of course emphasizing again that ukraine, of course , did not commit genocide either in the east of ukraine or in another city, they still see that this development of the process will carry huge risks, both procedural risks, and risks of direct, let's say , direct russian provocations in the gas, and we they opened it all themselves, well, they opened the door to this, that is, this issue exists, it is, unfortunately,

very painful, and for lawyers, now, after our star team. did it all, they will take care of it for them. but here another question arises. with us, well, it can take a long time to tell, this is a personnel problem, a management problem of those persons who presented these lawsuits and before that worked with the un international court on behalf of ukraine. there is a risk here, you know, a huge one, which is the most frightening thing, that the same persons will continue to lead this case, and the same ones. individuals will prove that ukraine did not commit genocide in the east, everything seems simple, but let me remind you that the same individuals had to prove such an absolutely objective, obvious fact that russia in crimea racially discriminates against the crimean tatars, and by a strange coincidence they somehow prove couldn't, it worries me a lot, because i repeat, this is exactly what worries me,

that the team will be unchanged, that apart from awards and new positions, no one will get anything there, after... these decisions that were made, and what are you doing in general you explain that the court failed to listen to ukraine regarding the situation with the crimean tatars, because the prohibitions of the majlis of the crimean tatar people, as the elected body of the crimean tatars, were an absolutely obvious demonstration of what is happening to the crimean tatars after the occupation of the peninsula. look, everyone is here to all my criticism of that. the team that prepared this lawsuit, because i actually started criticizing it not this week, i started doing it in the 17th year, i said that the lawsuit regarding one-time discrimination was formed non-transparently, that a very narrow circle of people embraces the tactics and strategy of this process in ukraine, that everything was sold to one foreign law firm, and individual officials did

everything to make this firm a monopoly with the development of millions of dollars of budget funds. that is, all this immediately raised the question but after the decision on admissibility, i immediately made a prediction that yes, with regard to the convention on the financing of terrorism, there are really the same legal problems, really problems, well , objective, interpretation of this document, and we saw it in the decision of january 31, the international the court took a very formalist position, that only financing with funds and financing of terrorism and... the fact that we got at least something in this part is not such a shameful defeat, here, well, everyone predicted, well, maybe a slightly better result, but still something in this format, to win this entire part of the lawsuit, well, it was very optimistic, but regarding the racial discrimination of the crimean tatars, and even i had some optimism, because it was very difficult to lose, you know, because

the violations are obvious convention on racial discrimination against the crimean tatars, and they... simply could not prove, and here there is a complex of reasons, the first and the main, while they say about several tens of millions of dollars spent on the work of this company, so this money, they, you know , for some reason somehow did not lead to evidence, and these are not my wordless assertions, the court constantly says in this decision: not proven, not provided with evidence, one assertion, the second assertion, the third assertion. that is, if there were evidence, the court could, you know, twist something, but he simply says: well, dear, you offer to take your word for it, do you understand what this led to? the second, smaller reason, the reason in this situation, really separate to the dimensions of the claim, well , they were really like that, you know, in a competitive process, again, for an impartial court

, it should have been proved qualitatively, not simply prove, and prove qualitatively. well , for example, a rather difficult issue is the discrimination of the crimean-tatar language in schools, because unlike the ukrainian-language schools, which were simply destroyed, in crimea there is not one even on paper with the occupiers, so schools with the crimean tatar language of instruction, or if the subject is crimean tatar the language is there, it is a tool of the occupation, children are brainwashed there, militarization is there, there is repression against parents, but the very fact that these schools exist and to prove that there is... discrimination in the field of racial education is necessary in a very huge amount evidence, expertise, testimony, that is , the work here was really, you know, ambitious, but in other dimensions, in other dimensions, so ambitious. work was not needed, for example the discrimination of the crimean tatars in the field of torture, yes in the field, well, it is very simple, not providing translators in the crimean tatar

language for political prisoners, well, elementary, but you know, we have very smart, sunny lawyers who prepared this claim , they did not consider it expedient to consult with the public, to consult with experts, with those who go beyond these narrow lines of communication, these are two the main reasons that can be written off as negligence is my price. the condemnation of the team that prepared its lawsuit and conducted this lawsuit, and, unfortunately, there is a great lack of control over this team both on the part of society and on the part of the expert environment, in our country it is quite small and on the part of the higher authorities, but there are other dimensions , which, let's be objective, are to some extent beyond the responsibility of the authors and, let's say, the communicators of this lawsuit, if you are talking about the interlocutory letter, there is a problem, what a problem, the fact is that ukraine approved the law on indigenous peoples. people 3 years ago and two years ago, they established the procedure for legalizing the mejlis, a purely bureaucratic issue, it is not related to the political dimension, but precisely to what

the international court wrote about, that the mejlis is not a political body, that it represents the people, crimean tatars ethnos, leading people, even in a very wide circle of relations, and where there is a very wide circle of relations, there is also such a thing as budgetary financing of education, culture, and for some reason after... after the majlis, the majlis submitted these documents, to things, they chose to fulfill this precept, though indeed, well, it looked quite strange in general, but we have a single body of the korean people, a special legalization procedure was established, it was developed for a very long time, well, ok, there is a procedure, i submitted the documents, they went to the cabinet of ministers last summer, and the cabinet of ministers did not approve anything for six months. again, this is my evaluation, but i am sure that if the cabinet of ministers would have approved this legalization in time, this piece of paper would have been in the garage until the decision was made in at least a few months, and the cabinet could have done it, then it is possible for these arguments that we hear between the decisions of the international court

about the fact that it has not been proven that the midjlis represents the crimean tatar people, well , ukraine could prove it for a short time, and here it is the responsibility, to the great regret, of the government, which delayed, and by the way, it still has not approved this decision, i do not know whether they will be approved later, there are such gossips that very... someone was offended that someone was not consulted on the next street, the cabinet of ministers is on that street, but let's see, under any circumstances, this case is not, you know, not will disappear, will not be absorbed, all the same the authorities will be forced to explain why to the mijlis they did not give this document, to explain in court in international institutions, this is really not a good thing, but i repeat, it arises entirely due to the inaction of the fireplace, there are also such, you know, very unpleasant... factors of this kind are of the second level, but i still i will mention them, the first of these factors is the question of the specific attitude of the ukrainian authorities to

crimean tatar collaborationism. specialists understand what i am talking about, this is a painful issue, and if it were resolved more, let's say, consistently, perhaps these theses that were thrown representatives of the aggressor in the hague that the crimean tatar issue is a political one. that as if before the law because of political issues, precisely because of political issues we are all equal, in mainland ukraine, i mean, of course the court did not consider this issue, and here again, i am quoting almost the decision of the international court, more the third dimension is also a problem, in fact, stalin's department of the crimean tatars is mentioned several times, like, yes, it's bad, it was very bad, but... why does this arise, but not only because the aggressor, of course, has his own narratives slips by, and because ukraine

took a very ambitious step in the 15th year, we initiated criminal proceedings regarding the genocide of the crimean tatar people. there was a lot of pr, yes, well-known persons who later, by the way, were involved in scandals with the administration of former president trump, well, that’s it, so... they did pr, got positions in the prosecutor’s office, and then this case disappeared somewhere, as they say, sorry, off the radar, that is, well, sorry, you told the whole world that you would investigate the genocide of the ethnic groups, then the matter was divided somewhere, and you do not even publicly explain, although i, as a lawyer, know this situation in this case, it is very shameful, i will tell you so, and we will have more decisions of international institutions, unfortunately, against ukraine, in particular , i'm sure , because of this non... activity, but until i tell the fact itself, the case, i'm sorry, has disappeared from the radar, there are no court decisions, there are no general statements of the government's position, and what will

the international court do in this situation, what.. . the events of the 44th year, i repeat, if we had at least one court decision, that is the question genocidal practices, yes, there is a continuation of the corresponding practice by the aggressor, well, again, it would be different in gas, we, i repeat, yes in general, we did not complete a number of homework, both of a general nature, these are hurries, these are law enforcement officers, and special ones, this refers specifically to the evidence that was supposed to be communicated in the gas, and under these conditions, unfortunately, this decision, it even surprised me, because the most negative consequence of it and precisely the complete refusal of the international court in any recognition, any what kind of racial discrimination crimean tatars. as for ethnic ukrainians , it is a good thing that the un international court of justice could not turn a blind eye to a very simple fact, well , education in the ukrainian language or the ukrainian language has really been completely destroyed in the cream, it is impossible to ignore, this is racism in such a crystalline form, on the part of the aggressor, here there is recognition of the russian policy of the russians, this is not bad, it

is not... bad, it creates the prerequisites for international recognition in the future, precisely the genocidal practices of the aggressor and after the 22nd year, but this is not enough, and on again, this decision once again creates a huge circle of work for persons not involved in such a frankly non-victory of ukraine, because currently the crimean tatars, activists and experts, scientists are forced to develop a whole strategy to correct the mistakes made by the af. and, accordingly, the supporters of this lawsuit in order to still prove to the next international authorities, and we will do it, now we are forced to do it, that there is discrimination against the crimean tatars in crimea. what would you advise the ukrainian delegation, the ukrainian delegation to the ukrainian lawyers, who will deal with the proof, i would say, of the part of the accusations that the court

agreed to consider, we have literally two... minutes, so please, maybe you have some short ones, if we are talking about, if we are talking about those lawyers who represented ukraine , well, the best advice is to simply leave the position , write appropriate statements, if we see something else, we see that they declare that they won, this, you know, is the dunning kruger effect in in its pure form, or even worse, because when there is such a situation, instead of analyzing mistakes, instead of some kind of, you know, reflection, holding meetings, public... discussion, we hear that everything is fine, this is what worries me the most, that is, there is only one advice for those lawyers, just don't do it any further , give it to someone else, but for someone else it is necessary to sit down and think, it will be a very huge job, correcting the mistakes made. thank you, thank you, mr. boris, boris babin, doctor of law, expert of the crimean reintegration association, representative of the president of ukraine in the autonomous republic crimea was with us in 2017-2018. on the phone

, we talked about the very serious situation with the ukrainian lawsuit against russia in the international court of justice of the united nations in the hague. only part of the ukrainian demands have been satisfied, nevertheless the process will continue, we will monitor it. i think that from this conversation with mr. boris , you realized how serious is the task of those ukrainian lawyers who will continue to deal with this lawsuit, because even if the court that russia did not have any grounds from the point of view of the pseudo-genocide there in donbas for attack on our country, it will already be a serious slap in the face of russia from the point of view of international law, and i just want to thank you, dear viewers, for being on this broadcast, all the best to you, i wish you all a good night and new hopes, good luck.

next to me is pavel koval, professor of history, chairman of the foreign affairs committee of the polish sejm.

to function normally, obviously.