no one would rule it out so strongly if putin or one of his fellows would appear at the g-20 meeting. moscow acts through many of its confidants and through open public players, such as china in particular. after all, what is china declaring now? that moscow must participate in the negotiations, that negotiations without moscow have no force. by the way, i am not sure about this, and if it were n, the problem is not in moscow and not even in ukraine, the problem is in the west, what is he ready to do, what is he not ready to do? well, in swiss format, regarding the peace formula zelenskyi, where the preliminary conditions of the negotiations are foreseen, this is the liberation of the occupied territories. moscow, let's say, would take part, even if this condition were removed, let's say this, but only with moscow. in

its current state, it is possible to negotiate whether it is ready for diplomatic or some other compromises, let me show it, let's say they would throw in publicly, it must be done publicly, without reference to a specific person, anonymously, that they are ready to consider the possibility that we will leave some territories, but it is necessary to do publicly, it cannot be done as lavrov hissed to sullivan, to someone... zelensky and putin are not ready. there is no feeling that it is possible to start negotiations, and zelensky should join them. but if there was some catch, some opportunity to announce that compromises are possible. but there is no such thing. i am sure that it is not accidental. sometimes

they didn't say afterwards: we, as it were, assumed obligations, were ready to implement them, but could not during the negotiations. no, moscow does not assume such obligations in advance, she insists on the points about geopolitical realities, demilitarization, not joining nato, security conditions, language, etc., we called it many times. therefore, even if russia comes to switzerland at china's insistence and china will be an observer there. it would not change anything, especially until moscow clearly and directly declares its readiness for compromises and determines the direction in which compromises are possible. without this, no format, even initiated by china, because there was a statement by the ministry of foreign affairs that they also wanted to hold a conference, and istanbul offers itself as such a point, but so far no movement is visible. and if we talk, for example, about the parameters of moscow's ambitions, their key story is about... returning

to the table of big politics, which is impossible by definition while the war against ukraine continues, and accordingly, what would the kremlin be ready for to exchange, so to speak, what things they would be willing to go to, well , in particular, that is, they freeze, withdraw troops and instead begin some kind of, i don't know, another big civilizational story, where they return russia, or not? i do not see no compromises on the part of moscow, it is ready, it is ready to exchange everything for air all the time, well, we will conclude an agreement on our terms, and then we will not go to kyiv or kharkiv, according to putin's memorandum of december 21st, you will demilitarize, demilitarize half of the nato countries that joined in may 1997, what they demanded to be defined in the agreement with washington and the agreement with nato, the fifth point , i don't seem to remember anymore, that's all. and then we

will not go to the soval corridor and storm moldova. first, who moscow will believe. who will believe that she keeps her obligations like a normal person. only military power creates the conditions for the implementation of such agreements. if there will be nato soldiers everywhere, then yes, there is nowhere to go. well, that's the first thing. second, these proposals are negotiable. although they have already been rejected, in particular with regard to putin's memorandum back in january 22, on the eve of the war, only based on the results of the war in ukraine? how to talk with moscow about a major security agreement now, if the war in ukraine is not over? this is impossible until agreements are reached regarding ukraine, all other agreements are impossible. because it is ukraine, if it is occupied, if it is surrendered by the west to the eu.

will become a platform, a platform for further attacks on eastern europe, from this point of view, negotiations should first take place here. how far do ambitions go? moscow. stretches her ambitions as far as her imagination reaches. these are specific things. here we see games around transnistria and kisheniv. could there be an attack on kishenev from moscow? just as it was in ukraine attack and aggression, the same can happen to moldova, why not? next, do they want to break through the suval corridor to their enclave in the kaliningrad region? of course, what they want, they declare it directly, can they implement the same ambitious plans in transcaucasia? well, of course it is, president macron and his game, mark, how do you see it and how far will the french president be willing to go. as for shoigu's conversation with the french defense minister, probably, that is, i don't know for sure, what is hidden from us is not the public part. the conversation went on

about the french contingent to be sent to ukraine and about its safety there. as i imagine it, they are probably trying to hear a response from russia. is it ready to provide security, for example, will they be stationed in odessa, will it be some kind of military base, will it be fired upon by missiles, apparently the conversation was about this, and it was publicly reported that they discussed the consequences of the terrorist attack, the ukrainian trail and other security issues, but it seems to me that the most important thing now is precisely this question: macron is playing his game, it is very important for him to bring it to the end, because why did he then declare this on february 26 and talk about it many, many times, repeated, called on, conducted public discussions, responded to moscow's claims, do you remember the phrase about the fact that we also have an atomic weapons, it has to end with something in politics in general, whoever says something and does not implement it, at least partially, at least ritually, is a big loser. in fact, i suspect the game is on. macron's doctrine

consists in at least a ritual presence in ukraine in order to be able to accept for himself the main role in ending the war in ukraine. it is clearly moving away from the united states because the united... political situation for the united states and its role in europe in order to highlight its role to enhance it. but again, there are so many risks, dangers, and macron is not fully aware of all of them, that is, he says, we will deploy 500 or a thousand french legionnaires, he says: up to 200 on the territory of odesa, so you will not fire rockets? moscow says: no, we will not fire, and it fires, and macron will find himself in a situation where he will have to justify the death of the french military the situation shows that the kremlin has no remaining internal brakes, i.e.

some processes that they would fear within the russian federation itself. yes, i think that it is possible that they are now using the slaughterhouse in croke from city hall in a pr plan. yes, with your goal, if in the event of something certain trends begin, well, conditionally speaking, if the mobilization and the next phase in the russian federation do not go well, then you can twist, twist, twist again and go at full speed along the stalinist rails, but the question is, to what extent will this system be ready to withstand this stalinist vibration? the totalitarian system moves exactly according to its pattern, repression is increasing, it is obvious and... they have no other option, because repression is a part of such systems. according to the old saying: fight your own so that others are afraid, that is , repression is like a machine of a ministry, some kind of industry, it has to work, it has to grind, if it has no work, then why is it there, this whole power unit,

it needs to be given tasks, tasks - get rid of disloyal elements. it is possible to interpret and interpret who is disloyal very widely. and from the outside it is a war, they export war, and what else do they have to export, because then the justification appears why putin is unchanged, why he should be changed by his children, the closest environment, because how, who can we trust such a burden in in the form of war with neighbors, we have the task of imperial expansion, it does not matter whether it is real or mythical, then the power reasonably remains eternal, as in north korea, there without the regime goes to militarism. logically lame, and so there is always the threat of the usa, south korea, the destruction of the north korean republic, the experience of marxism and chukhezm. and here, of course, the system is drifting towards its final design, as a totalitarian ideology is very important for a totalitarian system, and war is this

ideology. militarism is an ideology. and here is a very important point, you mark noted. war as an ideology, it is a war in general, i don't know whether it is a collective anglo-saxon or not, is it a war against ukraine? washington regional committee or kyiv? yes, yes, no, here is the second one. another: they consider kyiv a branch of the washington regional committee, its subdivision, it's all together, they are fighting the west through ukraine. another thing is that ukraine has an independent interest, because ukraine, that is why such a war is impossible, for example with kazakhstan, because it is important for moscow to defeat such an alternative, a slavic more western one, in order to show that the slavs cannot live apart from as in the pan-slavic space, which is moscow. the slavs of the former ussr, primarily

ukraine, cannot become part of the west the anglo-saxon world. otherwise, it will demonstrate an example that without wars you can live normally, even well, take care of your own country, without having aggressive plans from the outside, because this is exactly what will happen to ukraine if it joins the eu and nato. and where should ukraine direct its aggression and why? there is no such idea. in the west, in general, moscow is struggling. thank you very much, mark, for this extremely interesting and informative conversation, i want to remind our viewers that mark fegin, an activist of the russian position on emigration, a former member of the state duma, a well-known video blogger events events from happening right now and affecting our lives, of course, the news feed reports about

them, but it is not enough to know what is happening, it is necessary to understand. antin borkovskii and invited experts soberly assess events, analyze them, modeling our future, every saturday at 1:10 p.m., with a repeat on sunday at 10:10 a.m. studio zahid with anton borkovsky at espresso. well , now oleg hrybachuk, former head of president viktor yushchenko's secretariat, former vice-prime minister for european integration, will work on the air of the tv channel of ukraine, and the co-founder of the chesna movement, glory to ukraine, mr. oleg, congratulations, glory to the heroes, an extremely serious earthquake in the office of the president, a number of leading specialists, in different positions, with different biographies, different history of relations with volodymyr zelensky from positions in this case was preceded by the resignation of the secretary of the national security and defense council

of ukraine oleksiy danilov, so some explanations were made there in connection with the transfer to a more suitable position, so to speak, so as it turned out, the head of the diplomatic representative office in moldova. well, actually, i don't perceive it as some kind of tsunami at all, it's something like a light spring breeze that... ir trofimov, well, these are the people who led volodymyr oleksandrovich to the podiums of all olympians under the white hands. when it was, it was in the pre -yermakov era, and before the yermakov era, it ended a long time ago, and therefore i agree with those who say, not without reason, that in fact, with these decisions, yermak, like the cuckoo that laid, that is, yermak in the form of eggs, which in due time. got to the bank street, hatched and everyone called others. here it is also important to understand that

there are two categories of leaders of the president, those who believe that they simply have to ensure his work, not to interfere with the public and the cameras, but to ensure that the president has the most well-thought-out policy, for him to be aware of what is happening, to provide him with versatile, multi-vector access to information, and there are others, they believe that they are not the first, but also not the second, so there are others, they always have, and it is very interesting, for example, i had three deputies, my successor viktor bologa, there were already 11 or more of them there, but yermak also has a dozen of them there now, maybe more, and therefore, when these deputies are replaced, it means that it is definitely not zelenskyi’s decision, because zelenskyi is quick, not most likely, and i know for sure... that only yermamak communicates with the president and

no one besides yermak, especially some of his deputies, of whom there are a dozen, they have neither access nor influence, the situation with the chief is more interesting, because he is the chief , he formally, i was surprised that he still had this status, but he was called an assistant, or even the first assistant to the president, the first assistant to the president, so and so i went through it, as i transitioned, i did this, i cleaned this position. viktor yushchenko, because i had two deputies there and that was all, but this position was given to leonid kuchma, where the first assistant was serhiy lyovachkin, who is still there. is in ukrainian politics, and bankova knows him well, he survived, and medvedchuk, who was there, well, the personification of evil, a bad policeman, a good policeman, for example, viktor yuchenko and dear friends of viktor yuchenko communicated with president kuchma through lyovachkin, and it was done for balance, it is obvious that shefir, when he came, as one

of the president's biggest friends, he did not take this function in order to somehow balance there with bohdan or. something else, and most likely zelensky trusted him the most as a friend, and that is why he talks about such issues as contacts with oligarchs, that is, some very sensitive, intimate for president zelenskyi issues, intimate in quotation marks, were decided by the chief, but the chief after that attempt , about who probably already forgot about him, he left, and in fact, i think, this could not have been the decision of yermak, but it should have been a mutual decision of shefir and zelensky, because well, this function is simply from... in war conditions, but that's how everyone these personnel reshuffles, i am sure, they were initiated and controlled by yermak, and this is a very harmful construction for president zelensky, because he was and remains a monopoly of yermak in terms of who he meets, what he receives information, who can have access to it

zelenskyi, and among other things, this also explains the situation with the secretary of the national security council, because... in the constitution of ukraine , the national security council is the body, the only body, which is mentioned in the presidential institute, because there is no office, secretariat, administration of the president , nothing is said about it there, and the national security council is really the body that the president, the president who believes in a collegial decision, who wants to make policy, hear all the arguments there, this is the body that allows the president to gather at the highest levels of... government members, politicians and anyone, really, whom the president considers important and influential, and therefore those presidents who are prone to collegial decisions, and we had very few of them, they could use the national security council, the best national security council was constructed at that time by volodymyr horbulin, and i worked with him, i tried

to return that format of the council, but it is important to understand that the decisions of the national security council come into effect by presidential decree. of ukraine, and if egos begin to be measured there, the head of the secretariat or the head of the presidential administration and the secretary there the national security council, the secretary of the national security council, always loses, because there were a number of examples when even some decisions there were formally approved on a real security basis, and this is such a big round table, there are many people who speak, someone keeps the minutes, well, somewhere there something is like in the verkhovna rada it is written to the council, but the final document is issued by the president's office, the president's office, the president's administration, and that's why at some point, danilov probably had this, because danilov went a little into independent swimming, not a little, he is so serious about independent swimming, he is there it became uninteresting, he the maker started working, and it was a matter of time, and it is obvious that on this basis he had problems with yumak, because danilov

, most likely, did not agree on his public statements there for the last six months and could have been something else. is a source of influence on the president, who yermak did not like, i think that this, and besides, danilov himself was simply there, allowed him to be there, it was visible, mr. oleg, i would like to ask you, that is, the departure of the shefir, trofimov's departure means that the presidential term will be somewhat narrowed communication with different, so to speak, certain directions, yes, well, because shefir is also a private direction, trofimov was responsible for the other. regional politics, yes, if yermak has, i don't know, i think there are 10 or how many deputies, well, that means that none of these deputies, i insist on this, really does not affect anything there, he cannot leave one-on-one for a meeting with the president and convey to the president some of his point of view, there is

a firm stand there, that is, such an office structure, where there are a dozen or more deputies, she says that the head of this service does not delegate anything to anyone, it’s just so different, it’s such a labyrinth, you know, a variety of different positions, people are responsible for something, but they submit all documents and all proposals to the head of the office , and he already, if he deems it necessary, can give access to the body there only in his presence, or support this or that idea, because if you delegate, well, there should be one or two deputies there, and these deputies... you have to really work, you have to meet every day, like we did with all department heads and discuss the agenda, this is definitely not the case at the bank now, and therefore i share the point of view. those people who say that this is in fact a strengthening or such a reservation of the monopoly of the head of yermak's office on access to the president, well, there is nothing new here, we

already had such people, we had tabachnik, we had medvedchuk, they all ended badly in after all, both those people and those presidents around whom such a monopoly was created, because this monopoly can be called differently, can be called a bubble, you can call it a bunker, when you really lose touch. uh, with the outside world, and when the president delegates too much to you, and the opportunity to check the quality of your analytics or, well, there is no one who can act as an alternative, i don’t know, critic or offer some other options, and that’s why this this pernicious formula, it, well, look at the degradation of putin, there is far to go, any president who freezes or ferments in one and the same thing. it is not inevitable in one and the same place intellectually, politically degrades, or begins to make, so to speak, certain transformations, well, in particular, we remember, there was

bohdan, there is no bohdan and so on, there may be some kind of wider front, i don't know of changes, maybe consolidation, that's how we have rate, we have an office, we have a national security and defense council, and maybe there will be some kind of, i don't know, synergy, the second point that worries me is the feeling that somehow we have there... is it self-resetting, or is it resetting itself with the help of someone's determined will, the key body, the verkhovna rada of ukraine, yes, well, the rating is sociological the agency made a study, evidence of a drop in trust in the parliament, and at the same time we understand that there is a decrease in trust in the president as well, that is, during a war, a decrease in trust is not good, it is a certain danger , and we remember very well how important functions the parliament has always had be able to perform, our viewers or listeners, many of them will not agree, because they don't like our deputies, they call them,

the viewers call them whatever they want, because to the deputies, we haven't seen any broadcast of the meeting of the president's office there , right, and we don't know much there about how the government works, maybe they will show a couple of minutes of the opening of the cabinet and the prime minister will say something, but we see a lot of stories, because the deputies have their own telegram channels, they conduct their own communications... there are just some public scandals, a lot of attention, and this attention is mostly not positive for the parliament, although i confirm that the entire turbulent history of ukraine in the most tumultuous times, when it seemed that now our ship ukraine will simply crash on the reefs, precisely the parliament acted as the navigator who conducted between with these reefs, i recently met an mp i know there and the main question, i say, is the most depressing thing there, he says that it is impossible for you to actually go abroad, because it sounds very humiliating

. very, i will not describe this project, but the project is absolutely normal, a person works for him, the project works for ukraine, he needs to do it somewhere in the baltics or in warsaw, and then go to brussels somewhere, and he says , which is very humiliating, you have six months there, stand in line before... the speaker to explain, and you will be released, if there is a meeting there conditionally in warsaw, and then you still wind up in brussels, then you will have to explain the reports there, because it is monitored by the border guards, that is, this factor, about which has already been said, it turns out that he is for many unconscious deputies, because what do you influence then, well, you obviously do not influence the government, because all this is already done there by the president's office, you are not, you do not have a broadcast, you cannot have any information there . influence, because the marathon is there has a clear list of who to invite and who not, and as a result many deputies simply do not see any sense in the fact that they are

deputies, well, those who came to earn money cannot earn, because there is someone to earn without them, they were simply wiped out , you can earn money only if you give a lion's share to the main center of power there, and this is not the parliament, this is the president's office, that is, you have some schemes to interfere, this is also, this is also for an amateur, and if you... want something in the country to change, then you perfectly understand that you are nobody and your name is nothing. and zelensky's meeting with deputies, and many people have already confirmed this, it was a monologue of the president, and the deputies could not insert their 5 kopecks there, that is, the obvious crisis is such an internal one, and plus they do not see their future, usually, if you are a deputy, well , every politician wants to see his political, well , not everyone, but many who want to see their political future, they do not see it here, they are... not understanding, most of them will not get any lists there, what will happen with the elections, it is unknown, in a word, they are demoralized, they have no influence on the government, on they do not influence the voters, well, they have

to do whatever they are told. or to crawl there on one's knees, but the question is, well, on the one hand, the parliament did not constitute some, i don't know, serious competitive center, yes, on the other hand, it was an insurance center that could sometimes fulfill missions lightning rod, that is , we understand, there are unpopular decisions, collective responsibility, it very often , you know, blurs this specific responsibility, but, here we understand that something is going on. i don't know whether it is conscious or not an unconscious campaign of discrediting, so , accordingly, perhaps smells of one or another electoral moments, although we understand, well , what the constitution says no, that's what we want and are trying to do, so it's already obvious that let's remind ourselves that this is the first time we have a parliament, in which the president had a single majority, as a political power, we have never had such a thing during the years of independence, well

, not for the first time, traditionally about... presidential power, after a few years of the president's tenure in office, begins to crumble, and what the closer to the elections, the less influential it is, and there is already a competition for who will be the next presidential force, and this is where problems arise, because it is already clear that the servant of the people as a brand has already served his purpose, he has a chance there there is no repetition of success, and for the streets... these banks, on the one hand, i would really like to see some, well, young blood, for example, if people from the list started coming to the parliament, then it would be guaranteed, well, in normal political power, it would be guaranteed by those people who are in the team, who are there well, who share the ideology of the conditional party, but we know that probably a third of the deputies are the current servants of the people, those who compiled these

lists never thought in their lives. these people will get into the parliament, so there are a lot of completely random people there, and you can assume the quality of those who are even lower there, because you just had to fill in 450 or how many 300 people there and they wrote rubbish there, so this is also not a solution, and and accordingly none of the presidents, this is also not news, each of the presidents did not want a strong parliament, well each of the presidents was annoyed by the parliament, they tried to control him, to somehow coexist, but this is a very difficult story, and there is also shmyhal, and someone else may come instead of shmyhal, or do you think that these are premature talks about replacing the head of the government, well - first of all, he is already a record holder, his prime minister is a record holder, and secondly, from those rumors out there, and this is what i believe, i believe that yermak sees himself as a prime minister at night, well, because he understands how much is possible it's a little

like following zelenskyi everywhere... controlling everything and such types of heads of secretariats as yermak, bologa, tabachnyk, medvedchuk, all of them had this vision that after, they understood that you cannot be in this position forever, for them it was a dream to become prime minister, in my opinion, none of the heads of the administration became prime minister, but perhaps in the current conditions yermak has such a dream, that is , such legalization would not be very beneficial to yermak, because then he would have to be really responsible for something. he is not responsible for anything now, well, you haven't seen him take responsibility for anything, there are some, he, he, he does not answer, there is no job description for him, we do not know what he can be asked for, journalists write about the fact that he is such a recruiter who places his friends in bread positions, but it will not end in anything, so whether it will be good for the country or whether it will make a difference, i don't know, because it will most likely lead to

an inevitable conflict. and again from the point of view of management, the management will not improve, because i do not imagine a ermak, but a head of the cabinet, collegial, who will to listen there, where they will have some meetings there, to talk about some things, to listen to opponents, that is, to cooperate with the parliament, it is very difficult, with those individuals, look, why did these changes take place right now in the spring? yes, that is, they could have happened, i don’t know, three months ago, they could have been postponed for another couple of months, well, but it went, there was such a process and it went quite quickly, although i say, i repeat, nothing portends the possibility or perspective of the same parliamentary elections, that's it you mentioned the meeting of the president with his faction, yes, well, it could be different, i don't know, warmer, more promising, that is, it would be possible to somehow show the great prospects.