about the war and what the world is about, two hours to keep abreast of economic and sports news, two hours in the company of favorite presenters, presenters who have become their mother tongue for many, as well as distinguished guests of the studio, events of the day in two hours, vasyl's big broadcast in winter, a project for smart and caring people, in the evening with an espresso. good evening, congratulations. my name is myroslava barchuk, this is a self-titled program, a joint project of ukrainian foam and the espresso tv channel. so, literally in the next few weeks we will be celebrating two such very dramatic anniversaries for ours for the country, for society, it is 10 years since the shootings on the maidan and at the institute, during the revolution of dignity, and the second anniversary of the full-scale invasion, it is such a time to draw certain... conclusions

, to understand, to speak, to manifest something that we could not to stop, being at such a frantic pace, and today i will try to do it with my guest, yevhen hlibovytskyi, member of the nestoriv group, director of the newly established frontier institute, my guest, yevhen, congratulations, good day, thank you for agreeing to come to talk, i know , what very recently, the ukraine 2020 forum took place . dimensions of sustainability, actually the frontier institute with partners organized this event, and it was really an event that had such a publicity, more than 100 leaders of opinions, environments tried to find the question of where we are now, in what state, where are the limits our stability and so on. let's start with how do you feel about the times and mood of today's society? i think that...

he is probably disturbing, and if at the beginning of the full-scale invasion, the ukrainians very clearly handed over the mandate to the state and with recognition of all the imperfection of the state, they said: okay, we fully support what the state is doing and are ready to include... in any management decisions that exist, then already in the 23rd year we see a retreat from this position and in the 24th year, i think we're seeing an even bigger pullback. perhaps the easiest way to see this is through the institutional trust index, which is the institutional trust measure that polling companies do all the time, we see that trust just reached unprecedented highs in... in 2022 and started to slide again in

23-mu-24, and institutional trust is very different from, for example, popularity, because it actually determines the level of influence of this or that state institution, and it determines with what power of persuasion, with what level of authority this institution can appeal to society, and actually a... ukrainians mainly took away institutional trust from the state, because they were wary of the toxic influence of the state on their lives, due to the fact that independent ukraine did not emerge as a result of the victory of the national liberation movement, as a result of the entire soviet system of state institutions, along with all the legacy, including

extermination of millions of ukrainians, and ukrainians were wary of state institutions from that time to this day, they actually learned, by taking away trust, to weaken the state and thus actually knock out the teeth of those institutions they were most wary of, and then feel relatively safe . the 22nd year is this return of trust in 23-24 years , society saw that the advance of trust did not lead to a fundamental change in the quality of governance, i.e. there was no more responsibility, no more accountability, and no less corruption and so on, that is, as a result of what began to be done in society, it began gradually weaken the state from within by taking away this trust. this process is on the one

hand logical, on the other hand very dangerous, because it is dangerous, because we are in the process of war, and excessive weakening of the state will not... increase security citizen, on the contrary, it can lead to the collapse of state institutions, and as a result, we are now in such a very precarious situation, a very unpleasant situation, we do not know exactly how society is, where there are limits beyond which one cannot stand, we do not understand what these levels are confidence is expressed, for example, in some digital indicators, there, for example, 12 or 15 or 20. but we understand very clearly that the current trend requires all subjects, from the authorities, from the opposition, from a significant part of subjects entities that serve them, for example, there is media and so on then, and so on, a fundamental change in behavior and actions, which are not based on an empty

declaration, but on actions to restore trust. and i understand very well what feeling you are talking about regarding the trust in... the authorities and state institutions in the 22nd year, this is when for the first time , perhaps in the entire history, that is, our life, yes, we felt that the state is not a stranger, what is it, that it is ours, that it protects, that we can do something together, yes, and we all began to trust the state and invest our efforts, the resignation of the volunteer, which took place a few days ago, that... it was also about the loan trust, yes, this is meritorious, this is trust, this is his own , this is a representative of the government, a representative of the state , which is ours, and here in society is this person who was trusted by many people,

regardless of whether he was really effective or not, but he had tremendous trust, and this person is taken away, what are the consequences, how dramatic can the consequences be? i think that at this moment it is too early to talk about what exactly the consequences will be, because there is also a certain credit of trust in general syrsky and in those who will now be in management positions positions, i think that the great, high level of trust in commander-in-chief zaluzhnyi was largely caused by the fact that he is for ukrainian society. looked like someone who feels the pain of ukrainian society, and this empathy, it is probably a very important component of building trust, we have a very traumatized society, the one who empathizes, the one who demonstrates his

empathy, the one who demonstrates, if you will, respect for the pain, it gets extra credibility, and accordingly, this demonstration was... er with on zaluzhny's side, ah, it was very different inside the armed forces, we now see how very different stories are seeping from the million ukrainians who are now in the army, uh, into civil society, and stories about empathy, mutual aid, brotherhood or sisterhood on on the line of fire, some fantastic stories of help, mutual aid, but also stories of... about indifference, about stupid deaths, about victims that could have been avoided and so on, that is, we have both a soviet and a non-soviet interface inside zsu, this a very patchy story, it looks very different, and since there are to a large extent these

extremes that are in competition, in opposition to each other, the question arises whether the change will lead to the strengthening of this ... more modern, therefore, trend, which is aimed at increasing dignity, which is aimed at preserving human lives, actually during the forum, there was such a very good formula of human- centric militarization, in fact, as a description of what, what we need to move, and the actual question arises, will there be more human-centricity, or on the contrary, we...

convert into mistrust, or vice versa , convert into trust after we see, i would say, the first actions that will allow us to talk about the fact that, for example, there is handwriting. uh, the new commander -in-chief looks like this, uh, uh, uh, of course, that , uh, the stories we hear from within the armed forces are disturbing, and the equally disturbing factor is that there is no, frank conversation with society with about why exactly such a replacement was needed. that is, to speak archetypally, we have a situation between zelensky and zaluzhny, which is very reminiscent. relations between kuchma and yushchenko, that is, on the one hand, we have a popular figure that

society does not actually know, society largely did not know who yushchenko was, and society largely did not know who luzhnuzh was, but because of objective and subjective objective factors, on the one hand due to the fact that we have the media restrictions that we have now, on the other hand due to the fact that the peculiarity of the actual army figures is that they are less public. but the consequence of this is that people project their expectations on this figure, and then, as happened with yushchenko, when at a certain moment the expectations were not fulfilled, they actually led to his crushing defeat in the elections in 2010, and the similarity of archetypes does not mean that we necessarily have to move in this canvas, that is, history can in some cases... follow precedents, in some cases set precedents, but it would be much better for society if

society understood what is happening, and in general what we see and what is disturbing, it the fact that there is some built-in desire within the state apparatus to objectify people, to objectify society, and it manifests itself in many factors, 30 sbushniks who monitor... journalists, this is a very bad signal, and it is not the head of the department who is fired , who allows this , the head of another department is fired, ah , when we talk about the relationship between the state and society in general, we do not see a frank, albeit closed, but frank conversation between sectors, that is, in fact, the forum, which was discussed that the military business, churches. civil society , analytical centers, universities, could

talk among themselves and compare their vision, and here i have, and here i have a very skeptical question, i saw these conversations, i understand what you were talking about, and this a lot of thoughts and ideas were generated there, and there was such a wonderful metaphor of a liner that was captured by pirates, and someone on this liner is already... fighting with pirates, someone is buying weapons from other liners, someone is sitting and drinking coffee does he play in the orchestra there, and i i forgot which of the participants said very well that it resembles a meeting of heads of condominiums, a burning ship, so my question is skeptical, whether these heads of condominiums will be heard by 5-6 effective managers of the bank, well, actually, i don't even think so. such a task, that is, it is not , relatively speaking, a gathering of people so that they write some appeal and this appeal is somewhere out there,

which means it got there and so on, it is rather a test of a common language, whether we from different sectors understand each other, whether we can feel , what one or the other says, and whether we can translate it in our language, and here such, i would say mixed feelings, because business speaks in... business, there are think tanks in their bird language, civil society in their own language, politicians who were present and government officials who were present in their own language, some participants are bilingual, which allows them to translate, but some do not, and if we compare the russian system, for example, and the ukrainian system, the russian system is vertically hierarchical, it is united around vertical shearing, the ukrainian system is so strong, we are talking about... coastal society, how strong is the connection between those who are on the horizon, and

what we saw is that these connections are very important to develop, including if we want to get democracy in the country, and maintaining democracy, we can put an equal sign between maintaining democracy and maintaining independence, because if we maintain democracy, democracy is a system that is sensitive to the voices of minorities, it means that every person within a ... country has a chance that his the voice will be important, will be heard. if we depart from this model, then suddenly there are those who say, wait, wait, wait, this is not my system. i don't have to protect her, and there is avoidance of responsibility, refusal to take part of the responsibility, refusal to take part of the risk and so on and so on and so on, so this this attempt to build horizontal communication, it is actually very

important from the point of view of the stability of the existence of the ukrainian state in general, although it may not be so from the outside, you think, a scientist cannot get along with a businessman, well, i am i just believe that a scientist and a businessman will get along, but i don't understand the mechanism of how these network connections and this understanding can affect the plane, which the crew and the captain of the ship lead in a sharp pike down, for example, yes or where it's just that they don't hear it in the captain's cabin. votes and the work of all these think tanks and so on, that is, i do not understand how in the conditions of, as you very correctly said, a single telethon, surveillance of journalists, dismissal of military commanders and not only, but also ministers and so on, without none explanations, yes, that is, in a situation that

looks like the principle of building a dictatorship and totalitarianism, so in what way? how to combine it and how to save the state, let's say this, i would make a disclaimer here, any democratically elected leader in wartime will seek centralization, so what may look like a simple desire to turn the system into an autocratic one can be part of a natural reflex that occurs when you need to have a more manageable situation. in crisis conditions, secondly, i am absolutely convinced that, if we face any consequences of totalitarian culture, then this is an echo from the past, we do not have political players who would seriously like to establish a totalitarian regime in ukraine, well, at least not from

the ukrainian side, that is, the russians establish totalitarian rules of the game, but there is none . imperfections of the system, but we are not talking about one way or another ready to use the destruction of millions of people, we are not talking about some such harsh things, so that is why , in order for the discussion not to be shaken and not to go to extremes, i try to do the same and i urge, i try to be myself. i urge others to be careful in these discussions, because otherwise we actually burn this trust and later, when we cry wolves again, others will not know if they are wolves or if we just want to draw their attention and so on and so forth . and if we talk about why it is important to get along horizontally, then the answer is simple, because in this way we

can transfer a mandate, transfer trust, transfer social capital to each other, because the concentration of... social capital in ukraine is of great importance for to determine who sets the agenda, and the agenda can be set by those with relevant authority if they have a high enough level of trust, but if they do not have a high enough level of trust, then the initiative in shaping the agenda will be with the citizen society, it will be in the church, it will be in someone else's, and actually the question arises as to who has more influence on the agenda, who determines it? in the civil society there is a lot of anxiety about what is happening in the state, because very it is easy to ensure the cooperation of all parties when the administration is popular, 70-80% support its actions and so on, but we encountered

the first serious defeat with the failure of the counteroffensive, waiting for the counterattack. of the offensive were overestimated, they were heated by the miracle that happened in the kharkiv region in the fall of 22, they were exacerbated by the fact that this global coalition is being built in support of ukraine and so on, and when we did not get the result we expected, suddenly changes began. in the attitude of citizens to what the state says, the number of people wanting to come, for example, to military bases has sharply decreased, and the level of trust. to state institutions began to trickle down, that is, we are seeing this very serious game changer. what

does the administration try to do in such a situation, what can the administration try to do in such a situation, it can try to continue what it did before, it can try to become more accountable, and here is the real question that is now standing at this critical moment, whether we can build a relationship where all parties, business, civil society, the church, there... and so on and so on and so on, we trust the actions of the political leadership, which has an enormous responsibility, or with some suspicion or with some reservations, and how do you answer this question , i am very interested, i answer him that it is difficult to build trust, because such stories as, for example, the story with mazepa with the business, such stories as the story with the surveillance of bigusinfo, such stories, they. do not help, do not help to establish this trust, and if they arise circumstances where, for example, the first persons pi under

the pressure of traditions try to protect themselves, and this, probably, in my opinion, is the most logical, the most logical reason why the reform of law enforcement agencies does not take place to the end, why the reform of the justice system does not take place, and so on, because then... ya feels terribly vulnerable and fears that in response to these reforms, she will actually suffer revenge from her successors. if we see that there are such fears, it is very important that all participants begin to behave in such a way that to allay these fears, but at the same time we see that the law enforcement agencies are limitless, we see that the court decisions are absolutely amazing. occur very often, we see that it is very difficult to see any coordination in a significant part of the executive power, how many ministries are without ministers,

how many embassies are without ambassadors, that is , failures occur where they should not occur, or such situations as, for example, there with the appointment, for example, the ambassador to bulgaria and so on, which simply cannot be explained in any rational categories, and this exacerbates not... trust at a time when there are much more important issues on the agenda, the unity of society in the face of the russian threat is an important issue, the transition from the sprint mode to the marathon mode, when we understand that the war is not for a year, not for two, for three- five, maybe longer, this means that completely different safety margins are needed, and now it is important to build these safety margins, and in order to finish with this block, to go to ... the commonplace, i will ask this again , the phrase sounded on the forum that war - this is a counter-revolution of the dignity that you put into it,

how the war sharpens what was actually won on the maidan, yes, how the war changes the social contract, and what is the danger, we had three social contracts during the independence of ukraine, the first social contract with which ukraine.. . gained independence, this is a soviet social contract, the essence of which is that citizens give up their rights in exchange for social security guaranteed by the state, the state did not fulfill these social guarantees, they became less and less and less valuable every time, and accordingly in a certain moment, a part of society appeared that said: we are leaving this social contract, we went to provide for ourselves on our own, and here... then there was an evolution of the social contract from the soviet to an intermediate one, the nestor group called it the social contract of corrupt consensus,

the essence which consists roughly in the fact that we, the citizens , do not ask the state difficult questions, and you , the state, do not ask us difficult questions either. we pay taxes, the corruption consensus agreement - this is a non-aggression agreement between elites and society, which was very strict. violated by yanukovych. and there was no way to turn it back and make it work. accordingly, the revolution of dignity takes place and the revolution of dignity leads for the first time in history to a social contract, which the nestorian group called the contract of dignity, the essence of which is that citizens and elites recognize that they together have responsibility for something very valuable and very important for all of them, for an independent state, and this independent state gives... security, gives us opportunities, gives us some quality of life, and for this it makes sense for us to cooperate, and accordingly we begin to get used to behave in such a way that it is

mutually beneficial for... us: citizens learn to behave to the state with respect, and not with fear and hatred, as was the case for many decades, the state begins to treat citizens with the same respect, recognizing their dignity, and accordingly, recognizing their dignity, and accordingly, if we look at the large number of all kinds various reforms that have been carried out, decentralization, digitalization, there is an educational reform and so on, these reforms are aimed at increasing dignity, now what is happening? a full-scale invasion begins , society goes into a zero -sum game mode, it's either you survive or your enemy survives, and the zero-sum game mode actually shrinks the space in which possible win-win is possible, and at that point there is the risk that citizens will also switch to a certain configuration, for example,

if... mistrust of the authorities is high, in the zero-sum game model of relations is also against the ukrainian state itself, and this is probably the worst thing that can happen, because the transition from a strategy of joint victory to a strategy of personal survival is a transition that weakens us all, well, in fact, it is a strategy of defeat, it's a strategy of defeat, yes, it's a strategy of defeat that can be delayed, that can't be right away, but, but there's nothing to cling to, that is... it's a strategy of disunity, it's a strategy that doesn't give the opportunity to build a solidary, joint action, and as a result of this we may at a certain moment risk reaching a point, and i especially emphasized that we are not at this point, that is, there is still enough trust in the system, that is, it is very important for us to be realistic and not cry wolves when there are no wolves yet, what must happen now, what must happen now, so that this strategy of defeat, it will not

work. in order for this defeat scenario not to start, well, such and such actions of each side in relation to the other side must take place, which will be able to give them the opportunity to establish trust from each other society, government society, society among themselves, business there and customers and so on, if a business, for example, behaves in relation to its customers in such a way that customers cannot trust the business, they turn their backs and go and buy . services or goods elsewhere, this business will burn out, right? the situation with its democracy is much more difficult, because especially when there are no elections, there is no possibility to change, for example, one team to another. this means that we must all admit that we are in the situation in which we are. like zelenskyi, don't like him, he is the legally elected and legitimate president of the country, he will be longer than his term, because

it is impossible to spend. elections during the war in such a way that they are recognized by the society itself, i am not talking about international ones, some international observers and so on, so that the society itself recognizes that these elections are legitimate, because a large number of people do not live where they are registered , it is impossible to ensure that neither the campaign nor the e-voting is normal, that is, in other words, we until the moment we win the war, we are er... in the configuration of the configuration that we are in, it means that in this situation we all have to behave in such a way that we do not give another reason to distrust ourselves, and that is very a complex obligation, because it obliges not only the administration, but actually what was very clearly heard at a certain moment at the forum was what the participants said about what someone should do in order to we

re... it's up to everyone, and this question, this question , and it worked inside at a certain moment correction, that is, both through the moderators and through other participants who said: "no, look, it's very easy to blame someone, the question is what are we doing, the question is whether we look far enough ahead, whether we understand , what we have to do here and now and so on, and i see some trends that generally seem to me to be healthy, for example, and..." i look inside the business environment, how the attitude towards paying taxes, paying taxes has changed , which until recently looked like a necessary evil, well, and in some cases the evil avoided is now starting to become a factor of responsibility, because the same business is the beneficiary of the benefits that taxes create, so after all, you and i all use supermarkets, go to...