exactly, this is exactly how it looks, that is, relatively in the air there were a dozen a50s, and somewhere 3-4 of them have a50s and somewhere six a, on the contrary a50, but just 3,4, and 6 a50u, and we have already in this time damaged one in belarus and destroyed it there. two in the air, this is very important, and they destroyed, maybe two, even before that il-22x, this is important, plus the syrians fayya helped us in syria with friendly fire, they shot down their own allies with il-22s, that is also in the fleet we know that somewhere in the black sea fleet there are 80 warships, and already 30 or sunk, or uranium applied. that is, these are the positive

results of the actions in the air and at sea last year, unfortunately, on land it is not yet working and the situation at the front is not easy, but still there is a prospect of supplies and the city of supplies has already moved in terms of shells, ammunition, well, there are other supplies other equipment, as the americans have already stated regarding... and f-16 and long-range missiles, as they are called missiles, although the range there is 300-500 km, and where there are thousands - these are short-range missiles , up to a thousand, here are the statements, but they are waiting for the americans did not accept the decision of the congress, the germans, if the long-range missiles were also passed in the parliament, and this is the tauros, to hand over the tauros, that is, the approaches. but it will be implemented when

our defenders have these weapons. mr. igor, we understand that now we are talking about decisions, which of them have been adopted, and some of them are still maturing, about discussions, nevertheless, until the moment when they really become weapons samples and appear in the hands of the defense forces, some time will also pass, this week david arahamia made a statement, in particular that if our partners do not hurry. with the transfer of weapons and the corresponding aid to us, then we will have to do with people, and the mobilization may be on a larger scale, do you confirm as a military man that the lack of weapons can be covered by the number of people, if so, then isn’t that what the russian federation is doing in this war, no just people, this is such a wording, wording, maybe somewhere...

everything is harsh, but there are objective laws of war that say that we, or anyone, which state, is fighting in smaller numbers servicemen, not just people , but servicemen, that is, trained people, uh, that means more weapons, less servicemen, which lacks modern weapons, then solving problems of such a level, such a potential, can be done at the expense of having more servicemen with the weapons, which the state can provide them, and other things, this was not invented by us, not now, it was both hundreds and thousands of years ago, if you like, it exists now, so it is urgently necessary to solve the issue of mobilization in order to to provide servicemen and replenish our brigades, which are currently engaged in heavy combat operations on... the front line, and on the other hand,

it means that there should be supplies from the allies and work as an enterprise of our military-industrial complex, that is, our homeland in the first place, huh , if we talk about how, in principle , ukraine can act now after the russians killed the pilot who, one might say, delivered this mi-8 helicopter to us, that person was killed. all other russian pilots see this too, who might want to participate in this company, what about us do after this story? to work further, well, that is, some opportunities were provided , they were closed, he was there under a different name, surnames, but the very line of behavior, well, it should be borne in mind that the kgb, as a result of the fsbshniki, just like that, this story is not... only, it it was clear

from the very beginning, and this person himself had to be very, but there the line of behavior was different. and that is why, unfortunately, it ended tragically in this way, that is, do not unnecessarily tarnish this history, war, experience, including a negative one, here it is necessary to keep in mind continue to work, thank you mr. igor, igor romanenko, founder of the charity fund zakryye nebo ukrainy, deputy chief of the general staff of the armed forces of ukraine in 2006-2010 was on... on our air, he was our first interlocutor in this saturday polyclub, which is dedicated the second, the second arms, it should be said , i think, the second arms of russia's great attack on ukraine, we will now take a break for literally a couple of minutes, but please do not

switch, because we have important conversations ahead, the verdict with serhiy rudenko, from now on in a new two-hour format, even more analytics, even more important... topics , even more top guests: foreign experts, inclusion from abroad, about ukraine, the world, the front, society, and also feedback, you can express your opinion on the evil of the day with the help of a telephone survey, turn on and turn on, the verdict with serhiy rudenko, every weekday from 20 to 22 at espresso. we continue the saturday political club and our guest today is the head of kyiv. security forum of the prime minister of ukraine in 2014-16 arseny yatsenyuk, congratulations, good evening, good evening, well, let's start , considering what we are saying on the day of the second movement of russia's attack on ukraine, the first months were months, and tragedies of enthusiasm

at the same time, because there was a huge help of civilized education, it increased, increased, increased, increased with every month, and now it seems that the reverse process has started , and the question arises, how? , so print of course, full-scale war, only the beginning of the war was on february 20, 2014, of course, i agree, we can talk about 10 years, that is, it is 10 years of war and two years of full-scale war, when putin realized that he simply cannot eat ukraine in 14 in 2011, regarding external aid, unfortunately, it happened as expected, and... it was objectively clear that democratic societies would then enter their internal democratic so-called process. this is not authoritarian russia or china or any other country where there is no debate about where to go give money, or give money for social expenses, or give money for aid to 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. will actually lead the process of struggle against criminal putin's russia. starting with the sanctions that were introduced, i think we can have a discussion about the effectiveness of these sanctions. at once i can tell you 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 expected that, but the americans gave 75 billion dollars, this is both military aid and economic aid. the 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 watched. just some interviews, i don't want to name names, otherwise they will be severely offended, they started telling me that no, no, you know, there's ukraine, there's no question of ukraine, there's only a question of the border, it's a lie, it's not true, there the issue of ukraine, well, now we see it in person, no need to fool around, and you should not fool yourself and people, and on the contrary, 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 americans. friends , and you know this, because thanks to your help , ukraine stood up and thanks to your help , russia is half-disarmed, except for nuclear weapons, and it will take at least 5 years for russia to restore its potential and again pose a threat to nato in the volumes that she represented 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 it, a republican, let's call it a conservative publication, it is already putting pressure on republican congressmen and personally on pro-trumpists, let's say it, talking about , which must be accepted. aid package in ukraine, and the day before yesterday, for example, the washington post had a very good op-ed that explained to the republican party why it is beneficial for them vote for the ukraine package if they want trump to be elected, we don't know who will be elected because he, they put it very simply, if you want ukraine to lose and trump to face, the next president of the united states states, with the problems of the actually lost war in... europe, well, 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 looked, you vitaly also this in his broadcasts several times talked about the fact that they are collecting votes for the so-called special mandatory petition, if it can be translated like that, and i had a conversation yesterday and today with two high-ranking americans, well, to tell you that they greatly amused me, i can't 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, one of them said that it could drag on for months, to which my reaction was, guys, well, we are in principle and so on the border, so now in the democrats have already collected 213 of the required 218 votes, they have one more there, which is now you are a democrat in new york, then it will be 214, because the vote of the past and former congressman is counted, and now

the question is, what a wonderful system , it turns out that it is written there, so in principle there is a possibility that they will collect 218 votes, and then naming the speaker, who, let's say, the pro-trump speaker johnson, this issue will be put to a vote, if it is not, it is necessary frankly speaking, as of today... the europeans are not able to replace the american aid full stop, it is unrealistic, but please tell me, mr. arseniya, today i had work with a military expert, who noted that the russians have drawn their conclusions purely in the military sphere since these two years, we are doing , of course, too, but we understand that we have not only a purely military plane, we as a country will draw and have already drawn certain conclusions, because the russians are so restructured. the economy, on military rails, no matter how many sanctions there are, by the way, about them, they find

the ability to finance the war, have we done enough to this task? let 's break it down into a few questions, the first is about the sanctions, very briefly, the sanctions were unprecedented, now i will tell you that basically the result of the sanctions is unprecedented for russia itself, it's something that no one expected, if you look at the state of the russian economy , then it has enough funds to finance the war and it has enough funds for this year and next year, so there are various forecasts that the russian economy will overheat, come on let's see what will happen there in two years , what will happen with the russian economy, as of today, russia has found ways to circumvent sanctions, this is a fact, we can talk a lot about it, what needs to be done in order not to circumvent it, 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 before the disaster, as of today, has also not happened. why i am talking about this is in response to your second question, did we draw conclusions, when we had a discussion about the fact that we were fighting against some nefarious enemy, i always listened to it with amazement. that is, first of all, it means that we somehow do not... overestimate ourselves, that is, it is a way out that we are fighting with complete idiots, who are not one of the largest armies in the world and are not some nuclear state and who are not four times larger us, and which are not ten times more armed, ammunition, that is, this means that, firstly, we somehow humiliate ourselves, and secondly, that we we are unrealistically looking at the size of the challenges before us, so whether the country has drawn conclusions, i hope that a large part of the country has very clearly realized. that overestimated expectations are as big a problem as, in principle, overestimated pessimism,

because we cannot fall either way, you know, because there will be panic, and there will be euphoria, and panic and euphoria is the shortest way to defeat, but there is a little problem with realism, so i always, i will tell you frankly in your opinion, i can praise portnikov, this there was such a condition, it was such a condition of the ether, well... in principle, i practically do not listen to ukrainian media, well, frankly, that is , western media, but when i listen to vitaliy, there is such a clear scum. a complete line of thought, and there is realism, and it is extremely important that this realism comes throughout the country, it is very unpleasant, it is very bitter, it is bitter and unpleasant, as is any truth, but it is the only medicine, and this is the only formula to win, that's why yes, in principle, the changes have passed, but there is still a long way to go before we

we really realized the full scale of difficulties that awaits us. because the war won't end in 2024, i don't know how it will end in 2025, not to mention that the hope for any quick resolution, much less the hope for any negotiations with russia, is essentially absurd, it this is complete absurdity, there is a diplomatic settlement, well, all this diplomatic settlement will be reduced only to putin's demands for capitulation, listen, i remember lavrov, by the way, in the 14th year, they just... forgot: lavrov meets with john kerry, this is the secretary of state at that time of the united states of america, they were not far from the same package of demands in the 14th year that 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, these are all his public statements, there was the status

of the russian language, that is, there was actually a formula there. how to dismantle the ukrainian state, destroy the ukrainian state, that is why little has changed in them, more precisely, nothing has changed in them, putin has no plans in relation to ukraine in any way have changed, and the west must now realize that biden rightly said that this is a struggle of democracy against autocracy, democracy now has only one formula for winning, one and only, it is ukraine's victory in the war with russia, ukraine's loss in the war with russia. will have such consequences for the west that they cannot even imagine today, that is why they must invest in their security, we protect their security, but if you have already mentioned these demands of lavrov and in general about 2014 as the beginning of the war, eh , let's go anyway let's try to understand why there was no

big attack in 2014, well, you should analyze that, because you were the head of the ukrainian government at that very moment, i remember the meeting of the council very well.' of security and defense, just in those days when the possibility of a major russian attack on ukraine was discussed, you were there, you calculated these options, it was real, we all thought that what happened in 2022 could happen immediately after the maidan , all the more so since there were no presidential elections yet, there was such a transitional period, why they were not held then dared such a big attack, 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 full absolute legitimate power in the country. why didn't they dare then? first of all, they were convinced that ukraine would fall in 2014, because the amount of difficulties, well, simply unparalleled difficulties, that we faced, well, when the entire combat-ready army was 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 country. when there are only 10,000 dollars in the accounts for the whole state, it is clear that they expected that ukraine would fall by itself, this is the first. second, i think that they also had a plan that related to the autonomous republic of crimea. they expected that out of these 500, and they knew that there were 500, that most likely ukraine could send 500 there to the territory of the autonomous republic of crimea, and that's military servicemen, yes, that's what they have. there was already a military group then around 2000, 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, maybe ukraine will go to crimea,

they will put everyone there, because russia was fully prepared, and then they will quickly seize everything. including kyiv, this was their first option, the second option was that we would not be able to form volunteer battalions, the third option that we will not be able to stop this wave, it is not separatism, a wave of generally pro-russian state rebellion, in the entire territory of ukraine, for example, as it happened in kharkiv, when they were able to stop it, their fourth option was that the authorities in kyiv would , as in the 18th year, it seems that the government in kyiv has changed 10 times, that's why the government will go back and forth. transition, that is, they had other hopes, they did not expect that ukraine would gather, society would gather, volunteer battalions would appear, and that no decisions would be made, which... will be self-destructive solutions, plus they weren't 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 that we would today gave this interview in this studio. vitaly asked what hindered them then, well , the lack of the kerch bridge, which is logistically very difficult for them, they built the infrastructure to add, but the fact remains the fact, plus, you understand, when they dragged. time, yes, including these ill-fated minsk agreements, it is every day, every day added stability to ukraine, because if it were not for the period from 14 to 19 years, 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 will tell you, 22 -th year would be as it was, as it was written in the reports of the cia and bnd in german. intelligence, kyiv would fall in a few days, but the americans in 2014 were generally aware of the scale of the situation that could arise, why did they behave so cautiously

with putin, the president himself, you must frankly to say that they didn't just not understand, but they were in such a state of not understanding what to do, they just saw the president then, however, literally from the first week i immediately flew then. there were several meetings with the president of the united states in the general office , which was successful, then it was possible 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 bunch, then it was possible to vote for the organization ob' for the first time united nations, i i know your ske, i have the same one, 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 know, the time will come when russia everyone will be legally responsible for the crimes committed, but there is a general understanding, vitaliy, what

to do about it, listen, i was in all the capitals of europe and our key western allies, well, believe me, the mood in their offices was ten times worse, than in the prime minister's office, at least we knew what to do, we have no other option, but you know, to the general one. pictures, we will tell you a story about how i had to convince some countries of the european union, because i don't want to name the prime ministers and presidents, that the guys are not green men, so they believed that it was me i am serious, they are, some of these people believed that this is the so-called self-defense of crimea, i am saying that these are not the little green men, you studied 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 in general suffered the most during the second world war, because it was the main theater of hostilities, and which had to completely rebuild its entire politics and economy, to actually take the side of ukraine against russia, and then merkel would come for the first time. now i will tell you three or four times, she and i had a key disagreement with merkel, this is about the nord stream, about everything to the other, in principle we were on the same page, yes, we must give her credit, so and so and so 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 are you making yourselves hostages, you are completely, well... exposing us, you are making us defenseless against russian aggression with this northern stream? well, today, on the anniversary of the second anniversary of the large-scale invasion of ukraine

, the prime ministers of canada, italy, belgium, the president of the european commission, as well. 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 one of them very well. with mr. vitaly, who noted that after what happened in the 90s, the budapest memorandum, which did not really protect ukraine, ukraine may suddenly lose, this will only lead to the fact that most countries will start acquiring nuclear potential, because it will be science for everyone, those are safe the guarantees that are being signed now, as far as they can provide... in general, from any aggression in the future, well, let's start with nuclear weapons, what you quoted vitaly, in principle, this was my main message in

2014, when i spoke... at the podium of the united nations organization, 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, did not having nuclear weapons and having a paper that is not legally bound, we received aggression from the person 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 well , the united states is the first to co-sign this memorandum. now about these security guarantees: first, i want to state very clearly that this is not in terms of legally binding security guarantees. what is a security guarantee for me? this is plus or minus a distant revision of washington's fifth article treaty, that's at least what they have...

the united states with israel, when there's a very clear amount, it's $3.75 billion every year for a decade, whatever the administration is, whether it's republican or democratic or whatever - what else, what else cannot be there, israel receives this amount, why, because this document is signed and it is legally binding. the second part of security guarantees is generally the direct participation of the armed forces of the guarantor state. in the war on the side of the country that received guarantees, then it is called legally binding guarantees, and it is now, it is not that, it is not that i am saying it now, in an article before independence day a year ago, i specifically wrote what is legally binding security guarantees, that they have to be ratified by parliament, they have not been ratified , i would not completely nullify the role of these documents, because for me this is a political act,

a political act, but... political obligations of the signatory state to continue supporting ukraine, and this political act will further require a legal act each state, which signed it in its parliament during the voting of its own budget, during the voting of its own defense order, that is, it is a completely different story, which involves the annual political process, that is why it is so politically this is a political declaration of support. of ukraine in ukraine's war against russia for its independence. we signed an association agreement 10 years ago, by the way, it is worth mentioning that this is part of the crisis, and now we are approaching negotiations with the european union on membership. and with that, a lot who just doesn't realize it. we have been living in the economic regime of a member state of the european union for two years after that. and it turned out that this life in the regime of member states of the european union became the source of a huge crisis in relations with poland and

other states allied to us. listen, our european partners did not expect that ukraine is a really competitive country on their market, primarily for agricultural products, but we must say that this is not only a problem for poland, we must frankly admit. now in general on the european a wave of, let's call them, farmers' protests rose up in the union. what is the struggle for? first of all, there is a struggle for a good program, this is, let's call them, a program. agricultural subsidies of the european union, there the total volume of this program is 60 billion euros, so that you understand that this is 40% of the total budget of the european union, that is, polish farmers receive a direct budget subsidy from the funds of the european union, money comes from this amount, only 20% of all farmers of the member countries

of the european union. these funds, and 80 they receive either less or nothing, so the first reason why the wave of farmers' protests rose is the fight for european union money, the second reason why the wave rose, new environmental standards were introduced there, and starting with pesticides and ending there with the so -called green deal, which ursula fonderden just carried out, so it increased the burden on the agricultural sector, and that is why they rebelled against their governments. in the matter that, therefore, it is necessary to reduce the burden on the agricultural sector. the third, the third is this ukrainian factor. i looked at the internal media. what do they do? so, they write, for example, that the european bank for development and reconstruction finances ukrainian agricultural companies. they gave the figure that during the past year the european bank for development and reconstruction financed about 1 billion dollars in total, for all ukrainian companies, and this provides an opportunity.

sky companies due to the fact that the first are cheap.