rather than a real concern about ukraine. any predictions of new actions or support from france could have been given months ago, underscoring the political nature of his statements. it's worth noting that french aid often falls short of expectations, a trend that should temper any hype about yet another pledge. at the same time, some northern european... countries such as estonia, finland and poland are taking tangible steps to address the situation. many other european countries are far from realizing the seriousness of the threat they would face without american support. macron's statements lack the necessary force and energy to demonstrate genuine commitment. if he was really seriously targeted, we would have seen deployed french troops on ukrainian soil a long time ago. however. his rhetoric

suggests that he talks more than he does: serious countries favor action over talk, while macron's approach seems built on rhetoric rather than real effort. regarding the united nations, it is important to recognize its limited effectiveness and impact. the un is now just a bazaar, behind which there is as much energy as any supermarket chain in europe. unfortunately, these are the same words without action. similarly , the european union has not fully realized the urgency of the situation and has not resorted to decisive measures. thus, despite the rhetoric and debate, there is little to indicate substantial change or meaningful action. the lack of concrete steps, such as the deployment of troops in ukraine , indicates that the current situation is bigger characterized by conversations, not real

transformations. thank you very much for this extremely important conversation in our dramatic time. mr. colonel, i would like to remind our viewers that espresso had a retired colonel of the british army, military expert glenn grant, on the air. greetings, this is svoboda live on radio svoboda. we have already come to the snake itself. the following shots may shock you. news from the scene. live kamikaze drone attacks. political analytics objectively and meaningfully. there is no political season. exclusive interviews, reports from the hottest points of the front. freedom life - frankly and impartially. you draw your own conclusions. events, events that

are happening right now and affect our lives. of course, the news feed reports about them, but it is not enough to know what is happening, you need to understand it. antin borkovskii and invited experts soberly assess the events, analyze them, modeling our future. every saturday at 13:10 with a repeat on sunday at 10:10. studio zahid with anton borkovsky at espresso. big air of vasyl zima, this is big air, my name is vasyl zima, and we are starting two hours of air time, two hours of your time, we will discuss many important topics with you today, two hours to learn about the war, right now we will talk more about the war, serhii zgurets is with us, and what is he doing the world, now about what happened in the world , yuriy fizar, yuriy dobrevecher will speak in more detail , please, you have the floor, two hours to keep up with economic news, time to talk about money during the war, oleksandr morchyvka with us. for news information

cultures, presenters, which have become familiar to many. natalka didenko is ready to tell us about the weather on the day of advent, as well as the distinguished guests of the studio. andriy parubiy, people's deputy of ukraine, was also the chairman of the verkhovna rada of ukraine. events of the day in two hours. vasyl zima's big broadcast, a project for smart and caring people. in the evening. on espresso. currently, the espresso tv channel will feature a figure of the russian opposition in emigration, a former member of the state duma, and a cult vlogger, mark feigin. glory to ukraine. mark, you are welcome. glory to the heroes, glad everyone welcome the audience. well, the population of the russian federation, i think, was waiting for its führer in order to analyze, so to speak, the new guidelines. and he started, so to speak,...

about fishing, you know, about headlights , painting the grass, about new heating lines, about some, i don't know, summer cooperatives, about anything, but not about the key, the number of pipes. i.e., at least a quarter of a million russian soldiers who died in ukrainian black soil, in principle, does not scare him, i.e., the system has gone into such a you know, cannibalistic stability , you know, there must have been several versions of this report, including or not including some sharp points, especially about the war in ukraine and some issues related to the international agenda, everyone was waiting for something to be heard in context transnistria, there were some reasons for this, because the kremlin was deliberately fomenting such a situation. this is not the first time that expectations are deceived in a good or bad sense, it's already common. and it looked like an ordinary pre-election campaign speech, on the eve of the so-called elections

on march 17, as a report on the work done. it looks something like this: parthos active, so familiar from soviet times. airports, gardening and so on. that is, in this sense , they went for a softer option, what was the reason for this, it is difficult to say. it seems to me that they decided not to make the topic of the war central, not to connect with it, to quietly pass the 2 and a half weeks remaining until the formal x-day, that is, the vote for the fuhrer, which will obviously be replaced. it doesn't matter how about... they vote, they will announce result: 70% turnout and 80% support for putin. therefore, they decided not to bother and decided to go through this moment purely bureaucratically. although someone will say why it was necessary to schedule this

performance on february 29, a leap day that happens once every four years, a very symbolic date for this. and we know that for putin the month of february, which... is so important, because he killed nemtsov in february, killed navalny in february, started a war with ukraine in february, that is, he could have done it on march 1 or 2, that is, he was elected date who believes in numerology maybe not by chance, we assume this, but with all that limited to a purely bureaucratic set, this is such a small blow off steam, because in general putin is convinced that everything is going more or less well, not perfectly, but more or less well. and echelons in refrigerators of russian soldiers somehow do not bake it, that is, we do not see any social feedback in principle. well, of course, yes, that's why he doesn't feel the threat and danger from this factor of the costs of the war, that is, a significant number

of dead servicemen, losses of personnel. does not arise, it is not the reverse communication he himself will not pedal this topic. or in some way to solve or restrain it, if the people are not indignant, then in principle everything goes more or less normally. judge for yourself, on the second anniversary of the war, zelensky speaks and talks about 31,000 dead ukrainian soldiers and at least five times as many dead russians. i think the ratio is correct. does anyone dispute whether this number is accurate or inaccurate? that ratio is quite real. moreover, western sources paint the same picture. and what about losses spoke from ukrainian sources? shoigu announced a single number of losses in september 2022. 5900 losses. after that, not a single

number was ever called. is it a coincidence, in my opinion, it is not a coincidence at all. that is, the topic of losses is taken away from. the cemetery of the mobilized, and that's all, it was proved , he hanged himself, i think that the hand of the lubyanka also played some role there, maybe not directly, but one way or another, that this morse or frost was rinsed by solov'ov himself, accordingly, this is a direct method , a direct attitude that we don't

talk about losses, losses don't exist at all, there is one somewhere hide, but in no case should this topic be menstruous, in any form, neither in bad, nor in... good, too, you know, judge for yourself, and why don't they put up monuments to the heroes of some in the cities, i know the information from russia, they are buried quietly, without fanfare, quietly buried, behind... buried , no fanfare, no television shows, we bury heroes, here we saw in ukraine when hearses go, military funerals go, people gather, get up along the road, we saw it, that is, farewell is a big one commemoration day, this is a very significant event for the city, small towns of ukraine, because people understand that young people died for the sovereignty, for the existence of ukraine, russia has nothing of all this, by the crackling of words, he... russia

needs it too would react, then of course they would somehow do something, if the people themselves do not demand answers for these two-year losses, it is not yet known how many will die, then why should he raise this topic himself, many western analysts said that there he ... one or the other, i don't know, there demonstrative or symbolic moments until the moment of reassignment, but no, we see that the spring-summer campaign is seriously, seriously heating up, i think so, there are grounds for this, why else? of course, it is important for putin to demonstrate military success, but all this is happening against the background of this disorder and wavering among ukraine's allies, in particular in the united states. we see, as we have predicted since... the year, that the november 2024 election campaign of the usa will not only affect the unity of the ranks,

the consistency, the continuity of aid ukraine. the allies assumed these obligations themselves, and not because ukraine bargained for something. they themselves took these commitments, they declared it themselves, for example, about the f-16, about etacams, and about other types of weapons, about 150 mm ammunition. it didn't work in one word , it doesn't happen, if you made a commitment, you're not some subject of international politics who is not responsible for your words, that's not possible here, if you said something, then do it, and what will others think allies, are already thinking when, after trump's speech in carolina, the europeans look at the cheering that trump, who is likely to be nominated, at least by the republican party, as the primary candidate. but we don't know what will happen in november, maybe he will win the election. he says things

that really confuse european allies. it turns out that the usa is acting as a guarantor, defender, major western power, leader of the free world. it is interesting, if this is true , then it will probably have a strong impact not only on ukraine, but also on european and other allies around the world. if they don't can agree in the congress. to provide funds, i emphasize this meager amount of funds, comparing what is spent on other programs in the usa, it shows the weakness, and not the strength of this main guarantor, the main ally of ukraine, as well as the main country of nato. therefore, against this background, putin has a tendency, which he sometimes hides, and sometimes not. of course, they think that the moment is favorable for some kind of attack along a wide front or in some of its sections. to achieve positional success until all that is happening in the usa ends, until

november is almost 8 months, during this time a lot will happen, probably the kremlin leadership connects its plans, military plans with this situation. mark, why was it necessary to remove navalny, the month of february is symbolism , but anyway, well, the man... was, you know, behind the urals, constantly sat or was kept in an isolation cell and so on and so on, that is, this is what happened here: i tend to believe the version that he himself expressed before it was expressed by fcb maria povchikh, who is such an important figure within the system of navalny's team, stated that some kind of exchange was being prepared, even if it was not about navalny, a decision had already been reached. because, you know, exchange is such a thing, i myself took an indirect part in the exchange of ukrainian

political prisoners, i know all this, agreed, not fulfilled, postponed, that is, there are many factors that influence, even accidental, not that big political, but i believe that the west tried to exchange navalny, tried to get navalny out of russian prison, why did putin kill him? first of all, he kills everyone, they tried to kill navalny in 2020, when they poisoned him as a rookie. in revenge, they killed prigozhin. many other people, why don't they kill navalny in advance? in prison, he would not be able to have any influence, and if he were free in europe or america, someone would be able to vouch for him. what was his biography and what kind of challenge would he throw to the kremlin? it's not a question of fear,

it's a question of how they see the solution to the problem. they see all problems as nails that need to be driven. circled, and now they held the elections the way they did, even their own candidate, nadezhdin, who was nominated, took and were not allowed to participate in the elections, although he was a completely controlled candidate, they decided to play it safe even in this matter, so why did they not play it safe in the matter of the main opponent of the kremlin. which navalny was. navalny really was an anti-system politician. we all understood with our minds that they would not let him go alive, they were upset over him a lot. but they released khodorkovsky at one time, and khodorkovsky plus or minus sat quietly. it's not that it's quiet, because khodorkovsky was released after all from another

time, the regime was different. now we are dealing with an almost finished... let me remind you, at the end of 2013, when khodorkovsky was formally amnestied, i don't remember exactly, it seems that this was the question. why was this done? because it was done at a time when moscow had to depict something with the olympics. at that time there was an olympics. back then , the authoritarian personalist regime of putin was fighting for some relations with... europe, allies, partners, now after the war, after half a million people died there in ukraine, what is the point of portraying something. i imagine well the conversation of patrushev, who is the main protagonist of all these brutal measures, and putin in a dispute with vaino, the head of the administration of the president of the russian federation, and krienko, the first

deputy in charge of domestic policy. what should we be afraid of? yes, they are war criminals, but by killing a person, we solved the problem, prevented riots during the elections, and took away some of the headache. we act like this now, we are now satraps, thieves, why should we portray anything? and this proves that they used to depict, and with khodorkovsky they also depicted. putin moved to another hypostasis, now he does not need to portray anything. one death of navalny turns into an ordinary single manifestation against the background of the statistics of the terrible war in ukraine, which is not yet over, this page is not closed. if they killed half a million, how many more will be killed in the next two years? that's what we're talking about, that's why it seems to me that when i felt this degree,

there was less reflection, that's all. other, that's all, well, but there must be a corresponding answer, so we understand that the procedure of putin's self-appointment will take place in a couple of weeks to the position he illegitimately occupies, and on the other hand, the question of recognition, so putin will appoint himself, you understand, even with the addition of the murdered navalny on his neck, you understand, and that , hiding our beautiful collective event, how will they address him, dear dictator , whether there is a respected person who for... drank power, illegally holds it by force and so on, that's how it will be, is it possible that because of this the whole thing should be removed, for example, from the security council of the united nations organization, due to the fact that the method is illegitimate seized power in russia, before navalny's murder, the version that will remain unresponsive was rather dominant, i don't think

we will hear from officials, for example, from the white house in washington or from the president ... and macron or anyone else, directly articulation of the topic of the elections and their consequences with a call not to recognize putin as a legitimate president. why? they then, i think, and now they will not remove the justification in the form of the fact that if we do not recognize him as a legitimate president, then how will we conduct peace negotiations? that is, not because they are not they consider it legitimate, because they know very well what the elections in russia are, they know very well what this regime is like. for them , the methodology of real politics is much more acceptable in view of the choice of means of response. you will say that it is possible not to recognize, and then to recognize, as was the case with lukashenka. here is another. situation, because putin is a significant threat to europe, so they don't want to anger him. here is a simple example, i and my colleagues talked more than once with senior and junior gutkov, with

other people, with representatives of the ministry of foreign affairs of france, with macron's adviser, they also talked about this topic, literally in the fall of 2023 they talked about whether they would recognize or not, how they would react, they unofficially told us that... this issue is complex and debatable. we asked if president macron could accept the russian opposition as an alternative to the self-proclaimed führer? and the answer was: "no", the subtext was: what's the point of draining putin? because by recognizing some alternative, you assume responsibility and risks that the west does not yet dare to assume in the general atmosphere "if it was a collective decision, then something could be done even in the un security council, but there is no unity? there is no unity, not on the issue of joining

some european armies in ukraine, there is no unity on the supply of weapons. look at the discussion between scholz and macron, there is no unequivocal unity regarding aid to the victorious end, which the american administration announced." there must be a general unity and position which is impossible now. mark, well i agree with that, it is an extremely important point, well, coming back before the exclusion of russia from the council of the un, there it would be possible to simply freeze its membership, so to clarify the circumstances, but, returning, so to speak, to one or another... changes, we understand, at one time, when adolf loizovich it started to really burn there, himmler started rushing around, and they didn't do anything with hitler, but

they started talking with himmler and himmler started to suggest, let's start releasing the imprisoned jews in the concentration camps, let me change that for you, let me change for you that, proposals and so on, well, it all started already literally a couple of months before the collapse, but we understand that in... it is not known what carlson came with and left with some kind of stack, in which documents, correspondence, you understand, were placed, between khmelnytskyi and oleksiy tsar, you understand, of moscow, and what , and what was really there, it is not known, maybe there were some secret plans, offers, i don't know, vouchers for a couple of billion bucks, who knows who searched that carlson? look, all these negotiations or long-distance relations, based on the long-standing connection and sympathy of moscow, and they are connected with trump. if we

for example, we are talking about the elections, trump himself declares that he is ready and able to negotiate with putin in 24 hours on the issue of ukraine. personally, i do not understand what is meant by this. because trump also has a limiter that he can't go to, for a number of different important reasons. he, on the other hand, leaves the opportunity to agree in the form of a compromise, that is, compromise as a tool: you are 20, we are 80. putin never negotiates like that, putin always demands 100%, this is his completely different tactic. therefore, make arrangements in the cayman islands or in other places in case of absence methodologies. trump, despite all

the claims against him and his eccentricity, honestly understands the rules. however , the price of issues is different in politics than in business. in business - this is monetary costs, and in politics - this is nuclear war. it's a reasonable scale, and i don't think they'll agree, so it's time for the real thing. spoke and it has not yet arrived. moscow will wait for favorable results of the elections in the usa, and they will see if there will be an opportunity to come to an agreement. but from the point of view of ukraine, the situation, let's say, does not change for itself, but in the foreign office is getting worse but again, everything will depend on those opportunities that arise, and they are not foreseen in connection with the elections in the usa. i leave some percentage that trump will not succeed. well mark, you see such a moment here, if trump has already been allowed to go this far, and no one, so to speak, no investigative

operatives is authorized, you know? the state of colorado did not come to him with handcuffs, you know, for all the miracles that happened, so he can safely drive to the finish line. on the other hand, we understand that, well, in in principle, the kremlin would be interested not only, so to speak, you understand, in trump, who, i don't know, closes american membership in nato on the continent and removes certain obligations from the united states. there's still that moment here, you know, oklahoma farmers starting to hit the roads. well, we see something similar now in poland, in france, in germany, we understand, this is the energy of the masses, it has always been used by the kremlin quite, quite successfully. well, not predictable at all, here already in the american press in separate ones publications write that the democrats also have their own plan, which is comparable to the storming of the capitol in the event of trump's victory, that is, unrest cannot be avoided in one case or another.

it. it should also be understood that there is an element of revenge: republicans who can succeed, that is, trump in the us elections, may well seek the satisfaction of revenge for what happened in the 2020 election and the associated storming of the capitol. we cannot say for sure how this will be received by the american society, whether or not it will overcome this division through trump's victory, because he is a schismatic. let's even say it directly. that a biden victory, had he stayed for a second term, would not have caused the kind of consequences that a trump comeback might. you see, the return of trump after what has happened in recent years, i do not undertake to predict, because it is connected with the processes that go deep inside the american establishment, which is afraid of the arrival of trump. maybe the supreme court will take it down or something else will happen, although i think the issue

will remain for... reminds me that american democracy is unpredictable and predictable, of course i don't wish that on anyone , but there are also such cases in american history, i meant that they can dare to take radical actions, but this is an exceptional option: not only kennedy was shot, they were shot at regen, for example, go figure it out too, then you... admitted that the madman shot. again, these may not be theories of language that are implemented, but may be the impulsive action of some separate from tension escalating elements within the opposing camps. probably closer to in the summer, we will understand where the movement will be, what the dynamics of the election campaign are, who has more chances, and from this there will be consequences for all players, as well as for the war in ukraine and for many other things, so we have to wait.

look, mark. i also wanted to ask you about the next, so to speak, false alarms and another smoke screen sent by certain russian unofficial and official persons, and once again they all remind about how they were ready in the kremlin, so to speak, to give in, to leave to the meeting and so on and so forth, but no, sneaky johnson, you see spoiled everything for them, we understand that this is delusion and propaganda, but they keep coming back to it, well, you know how the kremlin uses... it uses all the levers, but as for individual statements, i would not pay so much attention to them, because actions are important and the strategy that the kremlin is sticking to, and that is to pressure in seven possible ways, forcing the west to surrender ukraine. surrender of ukraine can look in different ways, first of all forcing the kyiv leadership to start

negotiations with moscow. acceptance of some separate conditions of these negotiations is a possibility the use of pressure levers not only in ukraine itself, but also in the west. and in this sense , quite strange information is already beginning to appear about the speaker of the house of representatives, trumpist johnson, about his separate connections with business and personalities. chair factory. ugh. yes, we have to wait and see. i can't anyway. to imagine that moscow does not act, does not use all the levers and resources to achieve its goal. they have always acted through their agencies, proxies, businesses and other sources. otherwise we we will never explain the perversions that are happening with elon musk.