internal democratic so-called process. this is not authoritarian russia, or china, or any other country where there is no discussion about where to give money, whether to give money for social spending, or to give money to help ukraine. and in principle, i am surprised that the western world lasted two years. by the way, putin did not count on this, just as putin did not count on the fact that immediately after a full-scale invasion, the western world would gather in a heap and the united states of america would lead the process actually fighting against putin's criminal russia, starting with the sanctions that were introduced, i think we can have a discussion about the effectiveness of these sanctions. i can tell you right away that the effectiveness of these sanctions should not be overestimated, but they are doing their job. and finally, the key thing is the supply of weapons and financing to ukraine. the total volume, see how the americans are lagging behind the europeans today in general, by the way. the paradox is that everyone expected america to be the leader, at least i always was. but

the americans gave 75 billion dollars, this is both military aid and economic aid. europeans, taking into account the 50 that they will give in the next four years, they gave 107 billion dollars. that is, what is happening now? now it's happening in the united states, and i think the key issue right now is the united states of america, actually the election campaign. and when our high-ranking officials started there, i just watched some interviews, i don't want to name names, otherwise they will be severely offended, they started to tell. that no, no, you you know, over there in ukraine, it’s not a question of ukraine , it’s only a question of the border, it’s a lie, it’s not true, it’s a question of ukraine, well, we see it now, we don’t need to fool ourselves and people, and vice versa, if you appear on american channels, you appear with a clear message, and this message is as follows: aid to ukraine is not charity, dear american friends, and you know it, because thanks to your help, ukraine has survived. and

thanks to your help, russia is half- disarmed, except for nuclear weapons, and it should be at least 5 years for russia to restore its potential and once again pose a threat to nato in the volumes it posed before a full-scale war. therefore , the first question is true, the first one is about elections, the second one is about ukraine. the third thing that pleases me is that today i looked at the wall street journal, this is a publication that, well, let's say this, a republican, let's call it, a conservative publication, it is already exerting pressure. on republican congressmen and personally on pro-trumpists, let's say so, speaking of that it is necessary to accept the aid package for ukraine, and the day before yesterday, for example , there was a very good op-ed in the washington post, where it was explained to the republican party why it is beneficial for them to vote for the package for ukraine if they want trump to be elected, we we don't know who will be elected, because he, they formulated it very simply, if you... you want ukraine to lose and trump

to face the precious next president of the united states, with the problems of a virtually lost war in europe, then you don't vote, then you will be personally responsible, like the republican party and today's candidate trump, for the defeat of ukraine. that is, there is a certain movement there, and i even watched, you vitaly also said this several times in your broadcasts about the fact that they are gathering votes for the so-called special mandatory petition, if it is translated that way. and had a conversation yesterday and today with two high-ranking americans, well, to tell you that they greatly amused me, i will not tell you, but at least at least they gave some clarity, and one and the other gave the probability of voting more than 50% for the aid package to ukraine, ah, one of them said that it could take up to two months, to which my reaction was, guys, well, we are basically already on the edge, which means... now the democrats have already collected

213 of the necessary 218 votes, they have one more, which is now won by a democrat in new york, so it will already be 214, because the vote of both the past and former congressman is counted there, and now the question arises, what a wonderful system, but it turns out that it is written there, so and in principle there is a possibility that they will get 218 votes, and then changing the speaker, who is, shall we say, pro-trump ... speaker johnson, this issue will be put to a vote, if it is not, frankly, as of today europeans are not able to replace american aid, period, this is unrealistic, but tell me, please, mr. arseniy, today i had a meeting with a military expert, who noted that the russians drew their conclusions from these two years purely in the military sphere, we do, of course, too, but we understand that not only a purely military plane. we have it,

we as a country will draw and have already drawn certain conclusions, because the russians have restructured the economy, on military rails, no matter what the sanctions are to... things about them, they find an opportunity to finance the war. have we coped sufficiently with this task? let's break it down into several questions. the first, regarding sanctions, is very brief. sanctions were introduced unprecedented. now i will tell you that, in principle, the result of the sanctions is unprecedented for russia itself, it is something that no one expected. if you look at state of the russian economy, it has enough money to finance the war. and at least she has enough of these funds, both for this year and for the next year. yes, there is a year. various forecasts that the russian economy will overheat, well , let's see what will happen in two years, what will happen to the russian economy, as of today, russia has found ways to circumvent sanctions, this is a fact, we can talk about it a lot, what should to do in order

not to circumvent, but on the one hand sanctions cut off russia from high-tech equipment and technologies, which were not supplied anyway, were not supplied to russia, on the other hand... the fall of the ruble to the extent that everyone predicted and the russian economy, to the catastrophe, as well as today, did not happen. why i say this is in response to your second question, did we draw conclusions, but when we had a discussion about the fact that we are fighting against some nefarious enemy, i always listened to it with amazement, that is, firstly, it means , that we somehow underestimate ourselves, that is, these are the exits that we are fighting with full of idiots... which is not one of the largest armies in the world and which is not a nuclear state and which is not four times more than us and which is not ten times more in weapons, ammunition, that is, this means that we, first of all, somehow humiliate ourselves , and secondly, that we are unrealistically looking at the size of the challenges before

us, so whether the country has come to conclusions, i hope that a large part of the country has very clearly realized that inflated expectations are as big a problem as in principle for... higher pessimism, because we don't care you can't fall the other way , you know, because there will be panic, and there will be euphoria, and both panic and euphoria are the shortest way to defeat, but there is a little problem with realism, so i always, i will tell you frankly in your meter, i can praise portnikov, it was such a condition, it was such a condition of the ether, well, in principle, i practically do not listen to ukrainian... media, well, i say frankly, that is, western ones, well, when i listen to vitaly, there is such a clear consistent line of thought, and there is realism, and it is very important that this realism comes across the country, it is very unpleasant, it is very bitter, it is bitter and unpleasant as

any truth, but this is the only medicine, and this is the only formula for winning, here, so yes, in principle, the changes have passed, but... but it is still a long way before we really realize the full scale of the difficulties that await us, because the war will not end in 2024, i don't know how it will end in 2025, not to mention that the hope for some quick solution, the more hope for any negotiations with russia are essentially absurd in their own right, this is a complete absurdity, there is a diplomatic settlement, well, that's all a diploma. listen, i remember, lavrov, by the way, in the year 14, everyone just forgot, lavrov meets with john kerry, he is the secretary of state at the time of the united states of america, they were not far from the same package of demands in the year 14 , which was

made public in the 22nd year, there was not the accession of ukraine to nato, there was the so-called actual federalization of ukraine, which is all public. his statements, there was the status of the russian language, that is, there was actually a formula for dismantling the ukrainian state, destroying the ukrainian state, so little has changed in them , more precisely, nothing has changed in them, putin's plans in relation to ukraine have not changed in any way, and the west must now realize that biden correctly said that this is a struggle of democracy against autocracy, there is only one in democracy now. there is only one formula for winning, it is ukraine's victory in the war with russia, ukraine's loss in the war with russia will have the following consequences for the west, which they cannot imagine even today, so they should invest in their security, we protect their security, but if you

already mentioned these demands of lavov and in general about the year 2014 as the beginning of the war, let's still try to understand why in 2014, there was no ... major attack, well , you should analyze this, because you were the head of the ukrainian government at that very moment, i remember very well the meeting of the national security and defense council, just in those days, where the possibility of big on... to russia to ukraine , you were there, you calculated these options, it was real , we all thought that what happened in 2022 could happen immediately after the maidan, especially since there were no presidential elections yet, there was such a transition period, why did they not dare to make such a big attack then? you mentioned the presidential elections, another demand of lavov was the postponement of the presidential elections, which were scheduled for may 25, that is, they did not want a full , absolutely legitimate one. why don't they then did you dare? first of all, they were convinced that ukraine would fall in 2014, because

the amount of difficulties, well, simply unsurpassed difficulties, which we faced, well, when the entire combat-ready army is 500, this is the official data signed by the then military leadership for the entire country, for the entire country, including crimea and the entire continental ukraine, when there are only 10,000 dollars in accounts for the entire state. it is clear that they expected that ukraine would fall by itself, this is the first, the second, i think that they also had a plan that concerned of the autonomous republic of crimea, they expected that of these 500, and they knew that there were 500, that most likely ukraine could send there 500 to the territory of the autonomous republic of crimea, and this is military servicemen, yes, this is despite the fact that they already had a military group of about 20,000, by the way, they did not violate the agreement that yanukovych extended, that is, they

are extremely cynical monsters, from the point of view of international law , they did not even violate the number of military personnel who were stationed on the territory of the autonomous republic of crimea. and they thought so, which means that maybe ukraine will go to crimea, they will put everyone there, because russia was completely ready, and then they will quickly seize everything, including kyiv. this was their first option, the second option that we will not be able to form. volunteer battalions, the third option is that we will not be able to stop this wave, it is not separatism, a wave of pro-russian rebellion in general throughout the territory of ukraine, for example, as it happened in kharkiv, when they were able to stop it, the fourth option they had was that the authorities in kyiv will be like since the 18th year, it seems that the government in kyiv has changed 10 times, that is, the government will go back and forth, that is, they had other hopes, they did not see... that ukraine will gather, society will gather, volunteer battalions will appear and that no decisions will be made, which

will actually be decisions of self-destruction , plus they were not ready yet, if they were ready in full force, as they are ready in the 22nd year, well, unfortunately, i am forced to state that it is unlikely would we be doing this interview in this studio today. vitaly, asked what hindered them then, and also the lack of the kerch bridge, which was logistically very difficult for them. and there are still many things that can be added, but the fact remains the fact, plus - you understand, when time dragged on, yes, including those ill-fated minsk agreements, it added stability to ukraine every day, every day, because if there had not been a period of from the 14th to the 19th year, when for the first time in the history of ukraine, ukraine began to finance the army, in general, it created 5% of gdp, when the state was brought to order. well , i'll tell you, the 22nd year would be as it was, as it was was written in the reports of the cia and bnd of german

intelligence. kyiv would fall in a few days. but did the americans in 2014 even realize the scale of the situation that could arise? why did they behave so carefully with the road, first of all, the president, i must tell you frankly that they did not just not realize, but they were in such a state. not understanding what to do, i just saw the president then, although, literally, i immediately flew, then i had several meetings with the president of the united states in the general office, which was successful, then it was successful to introduce sanctions, then it was possible to get aid packages, the americans did not give non-lethal, lethal weapons then, but they gave non-lethal weapons, that is, they kept a lot, then it was possible to vote for the united nations organization for the first time, i know your skeptic. i have the same opinion, but at least there is at least some legal document, this is the so-called resolution 100, which condemned the illegal annexation

of crimea, because i say this for future generations, you understand, the time will come when russia will be equally legally responsible for what was done crimes, but of general understanding, vitaliy, what to do with this, listen, i have been to all the capitals of europe and to our key western allies, well, believe me, they had dozens of moods in their offices. worse than in the prime minister's office, even though we knew what to do, we have no other option, so, you know, to the general picture, we will tell you a story about how i... had to convince in individual countries of the european union, because i do not want to name the prime ministers and presidents. about the fact that the boys are not little green men. so they believed that it was a green man, i mean it, they are serious a significant part of these people believed that this was the so-called self-defense of crimea. i say, these are not green men. did you learn the history of the second world war? this is the russian regular army. and

imagine what was happening in germany at that time. which was always focused on russia and had this feeling of guilt towards russia for the second world war, forgetting that ukraine actually suffered the most during the second world war, because it was the main theater of hostilities, and which had to completely rearrange its entire politics and economy, in fact against russia and take the side of ukraine, and then for the first time merkel came already then, now i will tell you three or four times, she and i... had a key disagreement with merkel, it was about the northern stream, about everything else, in principle, we were on the same page, yes, you have to give her credit, yes, yes and yes, and frankly say that the most key thing, where we radically diverged, was the northern stream, she said that it was a business project , and as mrs. chancellor said, this is pure geopolitics, not only that you are yourself

you are holding us hostage, you are exposing us completely, you are making us defenseless against russian aggression. this northern stream, well, today , the prime ministers of canada, italy, belgium, and the president of the european commission arrived to mark the second anniversary of the large-scale invasion of ukraine. regular bilateral agreements of a security nature, framework documents, have been signed and do not require ratification by parliaments, so the question is their effectiveness. i remember very well one of the broadcasts with mr. vitaly, who remarked that... after what happened in the 90s, the budapest memorandum, which did not actually protect ukraine, ukraine can suddenly lose, this will only lead to the fact that most countries will begin to acquire nuclear potential, because well, it will be a science for everyone, right? the security guarantees that are being signed now, to what extent they can

protect us in general from any aggression in the future, well, let's start with me... weapons, that's what you quoted vitaly, in principle, this was my main message in 2014, when i spoke at the podium of the united organization nations said, look what is happening, we got rid of the third largest nuclear potential in the world, by getting rid of it, we got conditional guarantees, there is no word guarantee anywhere, but the budapest memorandum, as a result, not having nuclear weapons and having a paper that is not legally bound, we received. from the one who signed this memorandum and who directly forced us to get rid of nuclear weapons, that is from russia, and we did not receive a real amount of help from those who were to co-sign this memorandum, that is united states first, now on these security guarantees, first i want to be very clear that this is not in terms of legally

binding security guarantees, what is a security guarantee to me? this is plus or minus a remote version of article five of the washington treaty, this is at least what the united states has with israel, when there is a very clear amount, it seems 3 billion 750 million dollars every year for a decade, which, whatever administration, whether republican or democratic or any other, which there can be no other, israel receives this amount, why, because this document is signed and it is legally with'. the second part of security guarantees is generally the direct participation of the armed forces of the state that is the guarantor in the war on the side of the country that received the guarantees, then it is called a legally binding guarantee, and this is not what i am saying now, in an article for independence day a year ago, i specifically wrote what legally binding security guarantees are, that

they must be ratified by the parliament, they are not ratified, leveled... these documents i would not completely, because for to me, this is a political act, a political act of the political obligations of the signatory state to continue to support ukraine, and this political act will further require a legal act of each state that signed it in its parliament when voting on its own budget, when voting on its own defense order, i.e. this is a completely different story that is engaging. the political process is annual, that is why it is so political, this is a political declaration of support for ukraine in ukraine's war against russia for its independence. they signed another 10 years ago the association agreement, by the way, it is worth mentioning that this is part of the crisis, and now we are approaching negotiations with the european union, about membership, and along with this,

many simply do not realize this, we have been living in an economic regime for two years member countries of the european union after that, and it turned out that this life in the regime of a member country of the european union became the source of a huge crisis in relations with poland and other states allied to us, because, paradoxically, listen, our european partners did not expect that... ukraine is real a competitive state in their market, primarily of agricultural products, well, it must be said that this is not only a problem of poland, it must be frankly admitted. now , a wave of farmers' protests has risen throughout the european union, let's call them that. what is the struggle for? first of all , there is a fight for the cap program, this is, let's call them, the program of agricultural subsidies of the european union, the total amount of this program is 60 million. so that you understand that this is 40% of the total budget of the european union, i.e.

polish farmers receive a direct budget subsidy from the funds of the european union, it comes from this amount of money, only 20% of all farmers of the member states of the european union receive these funds, and 80 receive either less or nothing, so the first... why did it rise a wave of farmers' protests, this is a fight for money from the european union. the second thing is that there was a wave, there were new environmental standards, and starting with pesticides and ending there, the so-called green deal that ursula fondeden just did, so it increased the load on the agricultural sector, and that is why they rebelled against their governments on the issue, which means that the burden on the agricultural sector should be reduced. the third. the third is the ukrainian factor , i looked at the internal media, what they are doing , it means that they write, for example, that the european bank for development and reconstruction finances ukrainian agricultural companies, they gave

a figure that during the last year the european bank for development and reconstruction financed around 1 billion dollars in total for all ukrainian companies, and it gives the opportunity for ukrainian companies due to the fact that the first is cheap money, and the second is that here... there are no such environmental standards, let's call them that, and other production standards, yes, there is no green agreement, to sell cheap products in the member states of the european union , it was taken to the flag and carried away, so look, in this situation, exactly what, what must be done, exactly, then it is necessary to conduct immediately behind closed doors, i emphasize, behind closed doors, not at the border, behind closed doors, very calm, but... well, even evil ones, you know, and purposeful negotiations on how to solve this problem today, and not just today, but what we will have tomorrow, because this

problem will be ten times more difficult during the negotiations on ukraine's accession to the european union, so in principle we are already confronted with the reality of ukraine's accession to the eu, it is highly competitive and a difficult struggle, please tell me that our government delegation came to the border, and no, did it surprise you in any way , it did not surprise me at all that the polish did not come look, i surprised you that ours came, what do you see, i speak culturally, i was not surprised that poland did not come, that's why i will be so cultured, you know, i won't, i won't criticize the government, i will say this, that it is extremely important now that the ukrainian government delegation comes to warsaw and together with... the new prime minister donald tusk, who has a very complex coalition, you have to look realistically, he has a coalition of three parties, one of these party is a peasant party, the name of the peasant party comes from the peasant party

party from the word village, and if the village means agrarians, and if agrarians, then in principle it means that he also has issues from an internal political point of view, and therefore it is extremely important that they in warsaw find a way to come to an agreement there, it is very it's difficult, i can say this not from books, but because... i remember well how i conducted negotiations on ukraine's accession to the world trade organization, god bless you, but i know for sure that if you approach professionally with arguments , this fight is definitely winnable, as far as one can hope in principle now, that western countries will reformat their support for ukraine, what, what to do with it? you understand, vitaly, what i see now as the biggest problem. including, by the way, for agrarians, that we have elections for the european parliament in june, look, and this completely plays into the hands of all

right-wing radicals and isolationists. what should we call them, primarily in europe, and also isolationists, this is the well-known policy of franklin delano roosevelt, we know roosevelt only as the winner of the second world war war, we forgot that the united states was isolationist and generally refused, a special act was passed in the congress of the united states, which prohibited the supply of weapons to europe, for development initiatives absolutely yes, uh, i don't remember what year, whether it's the 33rd or the 39th, i don't want to be wrong now. yes, that is, we forget about it , so basically, what i see now, the trends are not good, but this trend is called democracy, and now democracy, world democracy is in chaos, here i see the chaos of world democracy, on the one hand, i i see a certain unity of world totalitarianism, but all is far from lost, and i emphasize once again that the gains of democracy today are only in one plane.

gains in ukraine and the fall of democracy , i think so, maybe someone will say that i overestimate the role of ukraine, no, i underestimate it, and the fall of the free world now lies exclusively in the plane: ukraine wins or loses, and therefore, when we are helped, it helps not only us, it helps them, each of them, because the fall of the western world, they even cannot imagine what will happen. that is, in general, these are changes in the financial system , economic flows, foreign trade , all these are other players, this is a blow to the dollar, you understand , then, that is, this is a blow to industrial production, this must be explained in the united states to voters, republicans, and with examples, in including explaining that look, thanks to this money that you didn't allocate, and if you allocated it, you would get jobs, you would get additional taxes, look at all

the world's ... arms companies, look at the rate of growth of the shares of companies that make weapons, lockin martin is an american, 70% increased shares, german ryan metal increased by 300, 368, something there is almost four times, that is , it has a direct effect for them, they just need it right to explain on the fingers, to go to fox news and cnn channels and in principle in this way... those who are now officials, about ukrainian politicians, whether we have enough professionals and whether the quality of their work is sufficient in this sense, it is not news that i am not a supporter of volodymyr zelensky at all, but i must note that during the last two

years... he has his the qualities that he had, the qualities of a speaker, the qualities of an actor, he used in a way that no one would have used, look, this is a fact, and we must, we must recognize and respect the facts, and the way he worked as a tribune, she definitely deserves respect, now we are looking at the second part, that is, the president tribune, it's in principle, it's generally normal, but here is the executive part. well , it needs realism, pragmatism, professionalism. ugh. well, right away, the question arises, to what extent the west hears our arguments, maybe we still haven't learned to speak with the west in the language of the west's interests. you and i are basically working, you know, almost like a message box. that is, you need to talk to them in a language that they understand. so, the war criminal putin talked to...

a commentator, not a journalist carlson, in a language that no american understood at all, well, it's true, not every american is interested in rurik's life over breakfast, that is, maybe this is the wrong analogy, from the point of view, by the way, from the point of view of the texts that zelensky spoke, but again, i must admit , well, there were generally there, there were some generally just wonderful historical texts, that’s a fact, but... now you have to direct your work to what americans call grassroots, that’s it, it’s the grassroots, the grassroots, the grassroots, that is, sit next to everyone , that's what the americans told me, they say, you have to sit near every congressman, just next to every congressman, and talking to him in a language that he understood in his so-called district, then he says, in principle, you can get additional support, so it is extremely

difficult at the moment. work and - besides.