it became known that recep tayyip erdogan, the turkish president, will pay a visit to the united states in may. what should we expect from this visit, because, if i'm not mistaken, the presidents have mostly recently been talking on the sidelines of some international events they attended, and of course on the phone. well, i think that recep erdogan needs to be rebooted. relations between the states, although i think they can take a break, but i see that he wants to go there already at the peak, that is, of his political power, now it is important local elections, and this is to win big cities in the opposition, and based on this you can go, well, since he has already said that this is his deadline and he will no longer run for president, that is... now

he can think about the eternal , about the future, about this state of turkish-american relations, and erdoğan wants to go down in history as a person who will perform some huge act, that is , such a political act, and i think that a dialogue between biden and erdogan, if you you want to ask if it could be a ukrainian issue, but do you believe, mr. igor, that... erdogan never says never, yes, that is, we will not be swamped anymore, well, i think that most likely it is, but of course in in the case of me, i understand your skepticism, no , it’s not skepticism, it’s just an attempt to understand how, for whom, for whom he will leave the turkish language, that ’s the way he puts the question, and well , i think he will find someone, and i i think that we will stop now, just for this we need a choice.

win local elections in order to to make sure that the future of his recipient will be clear, but if not, then no, then he will stay, here is actually another interesting aspect of the participation of both america and turkey in the north atlantic alliance, in the alliance itself, at least for us from the ukrainian position, very often it seems that these are such two poles, yes. and the vision of each of the states of its role in nato and nato, in general, the role of nato in the world can also be different. and it is actually the day before the american elections, where donald trump actually has a good chance of winning looks skeptically at the prospects of america's participation in nato, at least he declares it rhetorically. in this context, what could erdogan's visit to the states be about?

well, there are quite a number of issues, yes, starting with bilateral relations , ending with the war in the middle east, and the syrian issue, the kurdish issue, the war in ukraine, the future of nato, that is, in fact, in fact, turkey wants to have such an exclusive right, or some separate position that ... is recognized by other members of the alliance, given its position, given its involvement in middle eastern affairs, and obviously erdogan wants to choose such a right for himself, for his country. ugh. if we talk about how the situation in the middle east will develop in general now, i don't see any additional threats here due to the fact that the united states, for the first time, i think, recently. history did not veto the resolution

of the un security council regarding the ceasefire, there is such an obvious conflict between israel and the united states, all that we never discussed, is it true, such a topic as we warned about it, i warned about it in an article in mirrors, weeks, what could it be, yes, and there were too many signals, that is, actually , it was absolutely not a surprise for me, well , such things, so to speak. there were several resolutions, but in the recent ten-year history there, remember the resolution on israeli settlements in the occupied territories, then the americans also abstained, it was under obama, but what about this resolution and this position in general, it is clear that this resolution is carried by such non-binding character, but it is such a concrete signal that the americans are categorically against those plans which... was built by netanyahu, and that style

of behavior of netanyahu, as mr. no, does not suit washington anymore, after such, as you can see, sharp escapades from the side. from netanyahu's side, they still agreed that there should be negotiations and a softening of the tone, and so it seems that things have moved on, and at least there is a chance that the gas war can stop, and it will for the benefit of all. thank you, mr. igor, for your comments, igor simivolos, director of the middle eastern studies center, joined the saturday political club. now let's make a short one pause and in the second part of our conversation, as we always talk with vitaly portnikov about the main thing. there are 10% discounts on lisobact in pharmacies plantain you and save. try flebodia 600.

pink french pills for acute hemorrhoids. plebodia 600. treat hemorrhoids without any side effects. there are discounts. on mebicar ic tablets - 10% in psarynyk, ban and oskad pharmacies. there are 15% discounts on anti-catarrhal drugs in pharmacies . an unusual look at the news. good health, ladies and gentlemen, my name is mykola veresen, sharp delivery facts and competent opinions. and in america they also say, let's go. we will have better roads and even better ones. a special look at the events in ukraine, there will be some katsaps on the border of kyiv and beyond. what kind of world does norman dream of, can we imagine it? all this in an informational marathon with mykola veresny. saturday 17:10, sunday 18:15 at

espresso. vasyl zima's big broadcast. two hours of airtime, two hours of your time. two hours to learn about the war, and how does one live? world, two hours to catch up economic news and sports news, two hours in the company of favorite presenters, presenters who have become a native language for many, as well as distinguished guests of the studio, events of the day in two hours, vasyl zima's big broadcast, a project for intelligent and caring people, in the evening at espresso. the premium sponsor of the national team represents. united by football, stronger together! 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, front society, and more feedback, you can express your opinion on the bad day for help. telephone survey, turn on and turn on, the verdict with serhiy rudenko, every weekday from 20 to 22 at espresso. we, the security service of ukraine, fight to protect every ukrainian and repay the enemy for all crimes and lives taken. every day we hit the invaders in the most painful places. we are sinking the russian fleet. and burn military facilities, destroy the occupiers and their equipment by the thousands at the front, eliminate war criminals, detain agents and traitors, and our strikes will be more stronger until the time of victory comes.

sbu, the enemy is doomed, retribution is inevitable. premium sponsor of the national team - represents united by football, stronger together. we continue the saturday polyclub of khrystyna yatskev and vitaly portnikov. well, mr. vitaly, last time you and i talked about the reasons and consequences of what happened in the moscow suburbs, crocos city holl. this week, many nuances have changed around this whole story, but the most important thing has not changed, in principle, blaming putin, ukraine itself for what happened, trying to put us in one row with terrorist organizations, and it is possible to appeal to the world, look who

you support, but they create what they create in the territory of our country in connection and cooperation with the idol, how effectively do they succeed in this farce on yours? i think it does not work at all, maybe such an idea existed in the first stages of the story with this terrorist act, but even in the domestic context. russia, it does not really help, because russians see on their screens persons, so to speak, of a completely different origin, and to understand how all this is related to ukraine, especially without any specific facts, when representatives of the russian special services just talk about it, but you know, when they accused sintsov, his comrades and so on of terrorist acts there, they at least showed specific people who did something there did, prepared some terrorist acts and sabotage, here they can't even present a single person, no proof. cannot suppress, moreover, it is absolutely obvious that the positions of the russians in this story, they

look quite conventional in connection with the warnings american and british special services, well, about the fact that there were no real threats from ukraine, but there was a threat of a terrorist act, american, british, public intelligence warned about this, they ignored it. and you remember that just a few days before the terrorist act, president putin said that it was aimed at inciting panic among the citizens of the russian federation. well, it seems to me that it is more a demonstration of unprofessionalism. russian special services either unknowingly or knowingly, precisely in order to blame ukraine, they failed this terrorist act. yes, you've heard these. the words of the minister of foreign affairs of the russian federation, sergey lavrov, which he said in an interview with the newspaper izvesti, that

the statements of western politicians about the non-involvement of ukraine in the terrorist act of the city hall district are becoming intrusive. ugh. how is it? this means that they actually fail to achieve any other result. this is an absolutely obvious thing, which, i think, understood that they are very unhappy with their own situation an attempt despite what bortnikov and patroshev say, lukashenka's role is also very interesting. well, the man actually frankly says that they went to ukraine only because they could not come through our border, so the signals from oleksandr hryhorovych that russia is bluffing about ukraine's participation are also quite clear, why is he doing this? i think at first he just wanted to show how serious security is. its own territory, even across the belarusian-russian border, which is absolutely

incomprehensible at all, where it is located, yes, or it is absolutely correct, there is no real border there, of course in this situation it can be clearly said that he thought about the fact that he had to show how everything is fine with him, not a single terrorist will pass, well, this did not coincide with those statements. which came from the russian leaders, they simply did not coordinate, if you will, this whole, uh, their common line, or maybe they really didn't need it, maybe it's like that, you know, they think that everything they say will be perceived the way they want, well, if perceived that way, if they want, then they can not delay for a very long time, not make any information plans, not agree with lukashenka, well, or they know, they agreed on their level, in russian, and there they talk about something with lukashenka. "he is not an internal russian speaker, let him say whatever he wants, this is a good question, because it was really the first hours

after this terrorist act, when it became known that the russians accused these terrorists of going to the ukrainian borders, that they detained near the ukrainian border, someone just said from observers, well, it's strange, why would terrorists go to the most guarded border in russia, even if you imagine that they have someone waiting for them there? , what a window, in such a situation, and they could absolutely calmly pass through the border, which is not guarded by anyone, the border of russia and belarus, and they too, by the way, it was a logical remark, because then lukashenko said that they were going there , that's all, as if they were detained on the way, i think that we need to monitor what is happening around everyone. following the versions of both the russian investigation and what other civilized countries will say about it.

i would like to return to the topic of the last interview of the president of ukraine volodymyr zelenskyi, in my opinion, it is extremely important, in some moments it is somewhat different from what we could see and hear before. in particular, they touched on the issue of possible negotiations with russia. federation with vladimir putin, or so i read it, and you disagree with me now, what is it about? president zelenskyy assumed that it does not apply to all territories of the ukrainian state. there may be a purely military scenario, that if we talk about the return of the territories that were occupied by the russian federation in 2022, there may already be some negotiations, or at least some contacts, about the return of the territories previously occupied by russia. to what extent does this change the previous strategy,

at least officially announced by the ukrainian state? i think the president zelensky didn't... he said that, he said that president putin, in the event that ukraine manages to reach the conditional line of 2022, will want to talk, will want to be ready for negotiations, because he says that putin no longer wants any negotiations, he does not want to talk to anyone, says zelensky, but if we go to the line of 2022, he will want to, his position in russia will weaken, and he will want victory. ugh, that's all, that was it, it wasn't said that we would want negotiations in such a situation, it was said about putin's position, and it seems to me that these words , they are primarily addressed not to the ukrainian, but to the american audience, that is, president zelensky is trying to talk to the congress in a situation where we have already talked about it in detail, when the congress will once again consider

the issue of aid to ukraine. i will tell you right away that all these words do not affect me at all. everything is very simple: either the republicans will decide that the lack of aid to ukraine undermines donald trump's position and creates certain problems for them in the campaign, and then they will vote for help in one form or another. they have no problem voting for aid, it is enough to put this issue before the house of representatives, and if it is a new law, and not one that has already been passed by the senate, before the senate. if they decide it's not in their best interest, and that's what, say, donald trump would think. you can give 144 interviews, no one will notice them. this is not what is in the republican establishment, it is not just a matter of public opinion. the republican establishment does not understand they understand perfectly well what is happening, but

they are just trying to understand how what is happening helps or hinders them to win. this is the main thing. priority , and they will deal with ukraine after the elections, if they win them, if they don't win, then there will be a zone of responsibility for biden, it's not their problem either, that is, they don't risk anything from their point of view, if it is possible to prove the opposite, an interview is possible it is aimed at this, to prove the opposite, it is possible to appeal to the voters of these same republicans, well, this is all, all that can be done, therefore by and large, zelensky is saying to those who... believe that this war can be ended by negotiations, well, if you don't give us weapons, you give us the least chance to hope for some negotiations, because putin doesn't want negotiations, but if you give us weapons, if we free at least part of our territory, then putin may want negotiations, if you bet on it, and then we

will decide with you whether to hold these negotiations or not, and if he does not want negotiations, then what the meaning in general is in... all these theses that you say, what is there need to end the war at the table for victories? you know my position, i don’t think that all these lines at all, i said this in 2022, this is also a completely conditional thing, well, what is the line for february 24, 2022, it now exists exclusively in our imagination, because the russians created fortifications are further than this line goes, it is true, and now we can talk about this line as such a conditional line. a clash between russia and ukraine in the event that this line is not extended, so to speak , by, say, the offensive actions that the russians are currently trying implement, that is, it is, conditionally speaking, a line of russian fortifications and there should be a line of ukrainian fortifications, and armies can stop on this line if

they do not have the strength to break through these lines of fortifications, if there are not enough fortifications from that or another then the army has the ability to break through and establish a new front line there, this is the whole story, there is no other story, you can invent the line of the 22nd year, you can invent the state border line of 1991, this is our idea absolutely coincides with international law, but again, this does not mean that this is perceived by the russians as some kind of line on which something should end, i... i repeat again that for the russian federation, neither the line on february 24, 100 2022, nor the line on august 24, 1991, the lines of any state border of ukraine or demarcation with ukraine are not, are not considered, uh, well, this is just

a fact, this is a fact that simply characterizes the policy of the aggressor, which means that it is possible some kind of conditional line from the point of view of the russians today, this is the border with ukraine along the administrative borders of donetsk, luhansk, kherson, zaporizhzhia, etc. this is the conditional line of the state border between russia and ukraine for now, because if the russians capture another village in some other region, they will hold a referendum there, they will consider the line of the state border with ukraine, there is no other region, mykolaiv or kharkiv, it is all a delusion, i do not even want to discuss this delusion, but the question is that we are negotiating with people who live in in this world, here is just a simple simple example, you are dealing with a person... who lives in the world of his schizophrenic dreams, this person thinks he is napoleon bonaparte, which he is not, or vladimir putin or volodymyr

zelensky, which he is not, or your there is a father, let's say, who knows how you live, and this is not your father, this is a stranger whom you just saw on the street, on the street. if this person is in a psychiatric hospital, taking the appropriate course of treatment, being monitored by paramedics, you can to be ironic you would think that a certain person, well, she is sick, it's a pity, she considers herself the emperor of france, russia, austria-hungary, it doesn't matter what. if this person is not in a lunatic asylum, he is in his office in the kremlin, he has a huge army, special services, a nuclear button, a population that considers his policies absolutely correct and votes for them, or simply does not pay attention, then of course you can call this person crazy all you want, but your survival is yours fate depends on this person and on his perception of the world around him, and if you want to negotiate with this person, you

must be aware that his perception of the world is fundamentally different from yours, and he will be ready to tolerate so much that it, how much does it take and pay, how much does it take for her vision of the world, which is different from reality, to become a reality, even if for this it will be necessary to destroy people or destroy some ee... relatively speaking, critical infrastructure objects, etc., russia does all this, putin does all this, he does not see any problems in it. so what does that mean? it means the simple thing that the idea that if we occupy some territory occupied by the russians automatically means that putin wants to negotiate with us, it may not work. ugh. and you will have to be ready for that too. both here and in the west, they are constantly looking for some kind of formula. where is the border or collision line on which putin will be ready to say, can i answer this question for you? the line after

which putin will be ready for negotiations with ukraine is called the line of depletion of russian resources. if they understand in russia that they do not have sufficient military, technical, demographic and economic potential for leadership. war with ukraine, they will initiate negotiations from any position in which they will be, and will be ready to sacrifice any territories there, which they are absolutely not interested in, they are interested in the destruction of the country itself and any other interests, for the sake of this that of ending this war as soon as the demographic, economic, social and technical resources of the russian state. you can say absolutely clearly that the war will end within a week, some naryshkin patrushev will go to washington, not kyiv, agree on this with

the americans, it will only remain for the minister of defense of ukraine and russia to meet and sign a cease-fire agreement, then the process of political settlement will begin, discussion of the question of what to do with the occupied territories, etc., until the moment, as long as it is... this resource is there, the war will continue. now the question is how many russians have enough of this resource? if this resource is enough for a year, for a year and a half, the war will continue for a year or a half, if this resource is enough for 10-15 years, and we will have enough resources to confront russia with the help of the european union, with the help of the united states, the war will continue 10-15 years without any hope of its end, and one must clearly realize this. because it is the whole recipe for the end of the war and it was talked about in february 2022, such wars end when

the resources of the parties are exhausted. or one of the parties, or both parties, there is no other recipe in nature for the end of such wars except the exhaustion of demographic, economic, military and technical potential. do the heads of state decide when the war will end? no, because they are simply faced with the fact, they come to them, relatively speaking, in our version to president putin, and say: mr. president, we have such a ... situation that we have no shells, uh, we have no more missiles, we have no one else to mobilize, we are forced to stop payments to state employees, we are forced stop paying pensioners, we have no oil revenue, we have no gas revenue, if we go to war for a few more months, your power mr. president is in danger because country after country is about to collapse, then president putin picks up

the phone, joe or donald , or it could be the next president, it could be after this term there, it will be there in 2029, it doesn’t matter what the name of the new american president will be, serhiy can come to you, he has something to say, and the american one, well, let him come, or maybe we'll just meet somewhere in abud, we hear that he is flying to washington, but if there is no such thing. if putin meets with some nebulous shayga and someone else and they say that the currency is stable , we get money for oil, there are people for another five years, we are still holding out, well, what is he, what is he, what is he risking, mr. vitaly, we are with you talked about the fact that there is a high probability that putin very often receives questionable information from his circle, that the people who

serve... the regime are not interested in providing objective data to the russian to the president, it is true, but when there is a situation related to the collapse, they will find an opportunity to inform him about the situation, they will not be afraid, because if they do not inform him, this collapse will simply occur, uh, well, here is the question, or you you inform him and do something together, or you run away without permission to washington, or you will simply be killed and imprisoned there, ugh, a collapse is growing, do you understand? comrades of the crowd of muscovites, who will not have bread and heat there, but again, we are talking about an absolutely empirical situation, which now does not exist, does not exist, does not exist i'm just explaining what the real formula for ending the war is, we're always discussing this question, the formula, and all the time we're trying to find some line, on the 22nd, as the president just said, putin will want negotiations on the line on the 22nd year, the state

border of the 91st year. putin will want to change the line of 1991. in the fall of 22, we said that it is enough to take back the only regional center they captured, kherson, and they will be ready, ready, but the truth is that the possibility of negotiations is not should be connected with territorial ones gains or losses, and the possibility of negotiations should simply be associated with a sufficient number of resources. the conduct of a war by each of the parties, if our strength lies in the fact that the west will continue to help us, that the west is set there for 10-15 years of further assistance to ukraine, then for the ukrainian state these are serious problems, it is demographic, economic, political, social exhaustion, we must understand that in 10-15 years we will not come out of the war stronger, we will be able to survive as a state, but it will be a completely different state than the one in which we lived in 2022, in general to

the ukraine in which we lived in... the year we will never return. on february 24 , 2022, this ukraine died under the blows of russian troops and we can only build a new ukrainian state , post-war ukraine, whenever this construction began in the 20s and 30s of the 21st century , we must do everything so that this new ukraine, which will emerge from the terrible, exhausting war, will be a strong and successful state for those citizens of ukraine , who will choose to stay on its territory. it is also necessary to understand what it is not everyone who lives today , today in the ukrainian region of the state, many will simply not live to see this new state, many will want to leave it, but we will fight for every citizen who will make a choice to live in such a dangerous post-war situation, in any case, in any case, if the west helps ukraine, if ukraine is a fortress of those who actually protect the civilized world in...