382, all calls to these numbers are free. next, we have yevhen magda, executive director of the institute of world politics. mr. yevgeny, i congratulate you, thank you for being with us today. good evening, mr. sergey. glory to ukraine. glory to heroes. today is quite a busy day in the verkhovna rada. the consideration of the great mobilization law, which should put an end to the pro', begins. over the main process that is now in ukraine, the process of mobilization, obviously this adoption of this law and these norms of this law will to influence not only society, every family in the present time, but also in the future, because the future of ukraine will depend on mobilization, on who will fall under mobilization, who will fall into the war and under what conditions and to what extent. zelenskyi spoke about the fact that... this mobilization, and about this mobilization

, western partners constantly tell him about the need to adopt such a law, when you already deal with this mobilization there. do you think our western partners could impose any conditions on ukraine regarding that ukraine should mobilize people more, that this law must be passed. that zelensky should also be responsible for the fact that mobilization and the mobilization law should work in ukraine? i don't think that such demands sounded directly, but i am aware of how the political system works in general, that is , in order for us to be able to talk about something, to demand something from our partners, we need to demonstrate that we have... what to brag,

we have something to show our partners. verkhovna rada for more than 770 days of large-scale of the russian invasion, it never turned into, you know, the kind of assembly line that issues the laws ukraine needs in wartime, sometimes ahead of schedule. and the fate of mobi. of this law in this case is very indicative, i would not like to comment on its norms before they have been finally adopted, but i think that the disappointment from it will be significant enough in society, but the problem is that it will have to be lived by and to work and carry out mobilization, so to a certain extent it can be said that...

a bad mobilization law is better than a complete his absence, i.e. the absence of his updates, and, to be honest, i don't quite understand the logic why at the last moment the question of mobilization and demobilization was actually torn apart, i understand that experienced military journalist dmytro lazutkin, who speaks as the press secretary of the ministry. about the fact that it takes another 8 months to develop a draft law on demobilization, he is already voicing his own position, it's just a matter of communication, waging a war since this commotion around the resignation of the stalwart, well, i'm afraid to make a mistake, but... good four,

maybe five months, and this is in the conditions of war, this is a huge period, it is simply put somewhere on the margins, that is, there is an opinion that it is not worth talking about it, there is an opinion that these are not topics that can be touched, for which, by which can be tied to the quality of the president, and accordingly this... creates a problem, because the president is the supreme commander, i have not heard words from zelensky's biggest critics that let him grab automatic weapons in his hands, run somewhere to the front, the truth is, there is no such thing anywhere was not, but both the president and the minister defense, and the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, they must constantly communicate with the tefi citizens. voters, hyphen,

potential, mobilized, so we're either saying that on... to the effort to create a wartime economy, to create a sufficiently militarized state, you just say right away that you're showing footage of the first days of a large-scale invasion, so now the situation is a little different , and accordingly we must create a system that works. in the interests of the state, we all have one ukrainian state, and there should not be any political ones in it priorities, some political games. in

the matter of mobilization, in my opinion, it is very important to show transparency and uniformity. because if there is mobilization, conditionally for the poor and avoidance for the wealthy, we will create a serious social problem within the state, absolutely precisely and honestly, we did not want to, and there are many, many questions regarding the process itself, the last time, the legal process. creativity and decision-making, we are talking not only about this law on mobilization, because there were decisions about what is limitedly suitable, taken away, will be suitable, unsuitable, in how will it all happen when people, well, according to the decision of the military medical

commissions, were recognized as such that they cannot be transferred to the category of fit, because they were only fit for that, then the question... regarding the reservation of criteria, who falls who does not fall under these criteria, that is , there are a lot of questions, and you rightly said that there was not enough communication and there is no such communication, but in this situation i understand that the leader of this process should be the supreme commander of the armed forces forces president of ukraine volodymyr zelenskyi, do i understand you correctly? well of course. it is logical that the president announces the mobilization, it is a rule of law, it is not a fiction, and when we see the process, well, how to say it more correctly, the transfer of arrows, when

they try to understand and show that anyone is involved in this process. deputies, the minister of defense, the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, but not the supreme commander-in-chief, then it looks ridiculous, because in the conditions of war there is an objective strengthening of authoritarian tendencies, i, as a political scientist, can say this, because the need for decision-making becomes more intense, and... many things that seemed normal yesterday are a little strange today, for me the strange thing is the more than 4,000 amendments to the bill on mobilization to of the second reading, that is, it means that

the deputy corps, in which the coalition still exists, was created by the servant of the people faction. or the monomajority created by the servant of the people faction is playing hot potato, shifting responsibility, shifting this bill from one hand to the other, let's go, let's go, let's go, and maybe we can decide on something, military experts will correct me, but judging by the timing, we currently... already have problems replenishing the ranks of the armed forces and receive new military personnel. the long decision on reducing the mobilization age from 27 to 25

years, and now the lengthy consideration of the bill on mobilization, they will, unfortunately, be both. actively not to contribute to the strengthening of ukraine's defense capabilities. well, we are waiting for the actual approval tomorrow the decision, as they say, is obvious, tomorrow it will be april 11. let's see if the parliament will still vote, because there are committee amendments, and the committee amendments, as i understand it, will be supported, all the other 400 amendments are now being voted on, but they are not get the right number of votes, let's talk about the signal that came quite important, eloquent, i think, from the united states of america, from the secretary of defense of the united states of america, lloyd austin, who warned. from strikes on russia's oil refining industry, he says

that ukraine's attacks on oil refineries in russia could affect global energy markets and called on ukraine to focus on attacks on military targets, this statement, frankly, i think, gives the full answer as to why congress does not vote for aid to ukraine, why everything... happens as it should happen, and why the ukrainians do not receive enough weapons from our western partners, in particular from the americans, because they do not consider the option of strikes by the ukrainian military on those enterprises, which help the russian army to wage an aggressive war against ukraine. austin says that you need to focus exclusively. for military purposes, but again, this requires attacks and quite serious weapons,

is this statement by the secretary of defense of the united states of america, well, significant, and does it give an understanding, and what, and what does the united states of america want next? of course, it is iconic. and you know, i'm glad that it was heard, although there later austin said that ukraine has a chance ... to preserve its independence and so on, but excuse the word, our western partners stopped being idiots, they directly called things by their names, is it not profitable for them, although the refineries produce gasoline, and ukraine does not have the opportunity to hit their oil rigs, it is true, but what is the point here, i want to remind you, i want to remind you of the words that were said

about ukraine, ukrainian servicemen, earlier, when the transfer of patriots to ukraine was discussed, remember, we were told that the ukrainians are not prepared enough to quickly take control of petra, there are not enough ukrainians prepared to quickly take over hyman, we now hear that ukrainian pilots. for a long time we heard that ukrainian pilots are not sufficiently trained to master the f16, so we are going back to the times when you can talk about the burden of an overseas person, well i can't say white because austin is black, so we have again military of the first class, american and lower class. everyone else, well, the logic is roughly the same, right? and so, well,

i think it shows that the westerners politicians did not learn from the lessons of world war ii and the front of world war ii, they did not you. of the so -called munich conspiracy. today is the anniversary of the anschluss of austria, the annexation of austria, they did not draw conclusions from this. they think that appeasing the aggressor is appropriate. i do not idealize the state of ukraine. i live in this country, like you, like millions of our fellow citizens, millions of our viewers.

only because western politicians are simply afraid of putin and are afraid to even admit their own fear, it is simply not fair, regarding the thousands of ukrainians who died in the fight against the russian invasion, and it certainly does not mean that the ukrainians would have... found themselves in their struggle, i have not heard such conversations that ukraine wants to stop and what who is there , aristovych, predicting that... we, together with russia, will attack the western world, but this is his private opinion, a person who is currently outside ukraine, and i will say something else, unfortunately, there is no such thing in the western world , realizing one simple thing: the future accession of ukraine to nato will turn into

will turn nato into a universal one. the mechanism for deterring war in europe, because the accession of the largest power of the continent with unique military experience, it will simply create conditions under which a new war will, well, have absolutely no sense. i understand that when talking with russians, it is difficult to talk about some. there is some logic, some arguments, but well, this is reality, we are the largest country on the continent, without us the non-european, non -euro-atlantic project will not be complete, and instead of realizing this, and instead of the necessary help to protect ukraine, we

they talk about the fact that our military cannot master the technology, we have, excuse the civilians. the residents dragged away the russian tanks almost with their bare hands, the first weeks of the large-scale invasion in those days when western aid consisted mainly of anti-tank and portable anti-aircraft missile complexes, so it is not for western politicians to talk about how and where to hit the ukrainians, you know, it reminds you.. . an offer to a victim of a robbery or a victim of a beating, to substitute the right cheek or the left side of the liver, so that it is more convenient for the attacker to hit? on the background the foreign ministers of france and great britain, stéphane sejournay and david

cameron, wrote a joint column in the telegraph in honor of this. the 20-year signing of the agreement between the two countries, which is known as the cordial agreement, or the entente, however, the entente was still there and russia was still in the entente, then, this is the fourth-seventh year of the last century, its leaders, well, it was before the end of the first world war, yes, yes, here, here, in this published column, the heads of the ministry of foreign affairs write that dark times have come in the world, so both countries should take... responsibility and do even more for ukraine's victory over the russian federation. to quote: we are both absolutely unequivocal. ukraine must win this war, if ukraine loses, we all lose. the price of failure to support ukraine now will be much greater than the price of repelling putin. mr. yevgeny, it looks like the leadership in supporting ukraine at the current stage

is being taken over by france and great britain, as scholz is afraid to give... taurus attack, long-range missiles, the united the states of america are still delaying allocating $61 billion in aid to ukraine, and the french and the british are saying that we should give support to ukraine and ukraine should win this war, but there is not one more sentence that russia must must be experienced. defeat, because to fight back against putin and russia must feel or suffer defeat, it is or lose, these are completely different concepts, in my opinion, or not? let us not expect from our western partners what they cannot say in any case for

by the laws of diplomatic etiquette, neither france nor great britain are... at war with russia, so they can't talk about russia having to lose, well, that would cause a reaction, i understand that this is a time when no one reacts to diplomatic notes, but all the same, it is we who must promote to the world the algorithm for dismantling russia, it is we, ukraine, who must talk about the fact that... that the russian empire, which pretends to be the russian federation, will definitely lose, and its peoples should get the right to self-determination this is a... duty, because we bear the burden of the war with russia, and only in this way can we

influence something, accordingly, this is a situation that does not, it does not fit into the formula, like honey, like a spoon , and do not forget that britain, mostly a maritime power, i fear that the british are now at the limit of their military assistance to us. france has a more powerful military industry, it is gradually expanding. but we need other countries and interaction with other countries, so we have to talk about loans with the united states, therefore, we should restore relations with poland and build cooperation with them in the military sphere. therefore, we should... be grateful for the ammunition found for us and understand that the war will not last two or three weeks, no one can say today exactly

when this war will end, the war, unfortunately, it will continue for a long time, and we we must focus on our own national interests, comparing them, of course, with the position of our partners. thank you, mr. yevgeny, for the conversation, it was the executive director. yevhen magda institute of world politics, friends, we working live on the espresso tv channel, as well as on our youtube and facebook platforms, for those who are currently watching us live on these platforms, please subscribe to our pages and take part in our survey, we are asking you today about mobilization, about whether you support mass mobilization in ukraine, yes, no, everything is quite simple on youtube, if you... watch us on tv, pick up your smartphone or phone and vote, if so 0800 211 381, no, 0800- 382, all calls

to these numbers are free, vote, at the end of the program, we will sum up the results of this vote, and we will actually see whether you, our dear friends, are in favor of strengthening mobilization in ukraine, we will be in touch later... oleksandr khara, diplomat, expert on issues of foreign policy and security policy of the center for defense strategies. mr. oleksandr, i congratulate you, thank you for joining the broadcast. good evening, mr. sergey, thank you for the invitation. first of all, mr. oleksandr, what do you think about mobilization, about the strengthening of mobilization, since we ask our tv viewers, therefore absolutely it would be logical to ask you what, what do you generally think about these processes that are taking place. in the verkhovna rada, regarding the adoption of the mobilization law, regarding how the mobilization system is built in ukraine? well, of course, this is a difficult question, and

there are hardly two answers, i support or do not support, because what other options can be, this is the first point, the second point, i understand, actually there is a certain, let's say, skepticism in society, against the background of the fact that that we see a delay in aid from our western partners, against the background of the fact that... that we are by and large we do not understand a clear new strategy in such conditions, on the one hand, europe has consolidated, supports us, on the other hand, we hear about the crazy plans of the future, perhaps the future president of the united states, that is, under such general conditions, this is one story, and another story, of course, that russia is not going anywhere and its goal remains the same, it is the destruction of ukraine as a state and... in fact, the ukrainian nation as such, therefore, on the one hand, there are no alternatives for strengthening mobilization, on the other hand, i understand that there are these questions, well and of course that

there is criticism regarding the content of the draft law and certain exceptions from it, and that is, in the eyes of the public , certain points may not look very fair and cause such criticism that we simply have no options on how to defend the state. further, but in what modality, it is clear that there can be a discussion here, and it seems that this discussion is already being developed by the secretary of defense of the united states of america, lloyd austin, who, at a meeting of the united states senate committee on armed forces, advised ukraine not to attack russian oil refineries factories, and focus on military objectives. let's hear what lloyd austin said. of course, these attacks could... have consequences for the global energy situation. i think it is better for ukraine to focus on strikes on tactical and operational targets that can

directly affect the current fighting. mr. alexander, what is lloyd dostin afraid of? i don't think that he personally, these theses were definitely formed and agreed upon in the white house, strategies, in fact, lloyd austin was and remains one of the biggest, most powerful such engines in the administration that understand the dangers to ukraine, i want to help, but what he voiced, well, in principle, it is a truism, it is clear that russia is... in terms of energy, a rather important country for the global market, and of course, any fluctuations in the price of oil, globally can certainly affect the ability or willingness of our partners to help us, and most importantly now during the elections in the united states, you can imagine that a few extra cents per gallon of gasoline in american gas stations, they will certainly not add positivity to the current administration, for

by and large...he's saying these things as part of the strategy, the failed strategy of the biden administration, which is to not push russia to escalate, to use nuclear weapons, or to attack a nato member country, and then, accordingly, it can be, say yes, unforeseen consequences, and the second is the failure of russia, that is, the collapse of the regime and possibly the disintegration of the russian federation, and all the forks are helping us so that we cannot use western weapons. russian territory, this is the first moment, and the second moment, of course, to we did not transfer the war to russian territory, but on the other hand, what can they do to us now, when we are fighting for our survival, and at a time when, on the one hand, the strategy of containing ukraine, it has failed, so we see that , and the main thing is that this administration is not able to provide ukraine with other things, such as air defense, to protect

our skies, and ... to somehow continue the war, so he simply said, well, he stated an absolutely understandable thing, but on the other hand, he did not deny our right, in fact, with from the point of view of international law, these refineries that supplied fuel for the armed forces of the russian federation, they are a legitimate target, that is, it is not a civilian, purely civilian object, well , by and large, you know, it is very reasonable to... our defense forces have chosen the targets, we are not destroying, well actually the oil infrastructure, they can sell crude oil to the foreign market and that way the price does not fluctuate much, but we are destroying the processing capabilities that can be used and are used in the actual for the purpose of waging this aggressive war, i am not talking about the history of warriors involving the united states, where they also struck

oil fields. infrastructure and here it is clear, because without top fuel it is impossible to use planes, tanks and cars, and it is clear that this is problematic for the continuation, if not of the war, then at least in certain directions of some operations. could what lloyd austin said be one of the conditions for ukraine to open the funding we expect from congress. united states of america? no, unfortunately, there is a dynamic of its own, and actually in terms of visits, as a result of the visit of the minister of foreign affairs of the united kingdom, mr. cameroon, he met with the possible president of the united states, donald trump. according to the results of this meeting, there was information from trump's office that the issue of ukraine and the plan were discussed.

trump's efforts to stop the killing in ukraine, that is, it fits very well with what we read in the washington post recently about his plan to pressure ukraine to give up some of our territories, in exchange unknown what. well, the second point is also eloquent, it means that cameron was going to meet with the speaker of the house of representatives in order to convince both the united states and europe of the need for... america to help ukraine, but such a meeting did not take place , and it was understood, they understood such, you know, a rather bold hint. i am not talking about the existence of one of the key trumpians in the house of representatives, margerin, who is threatening the speaker with removal from office, and actually the sabbath that is happening now, if you read on twitter, the accounts of these mages, that is, these trumpians, how they oppose, by

the way, very nice. financial times article, the: