britain is not opposed to ukraine using its weapons to strike russia, will this be a turning point in the war? and the help provided by western countries, we are talking about this on the bbc live from london, i am yevgenia shytlovska. during two years of full-scale war, western partners provided weapons to ukraine with one condition: not to use them for strikes on russian territory. it was so until now. british foreign secretary david cameron actually lifted this taboo. he came to kyiv and declared that ukraine can do this with british weapons for its own protection. as for the ukrainians, in our

opinion, it is their decision how to use these weapons. they are defending their country, putin invaded them, violating international law. they are forced to take measures. we do not discuss the relevant caveats. let's be absolutely clear. russia attacked ukraine, and ukraine has the right to retaliate against russia, including on russian territory. this is ukraine's decision. ukraine has this right. russia strikes on the territory of ukraine, so it is clear that ukraine feels the need show that she is defending herself. this is to drive the russians out of the country and have the ability to strike back. britain provides ukraine with stormshadow missiles, which have a range of approximately 250 km. these are cruise missiles that are designed to hit large buildings and complexes, such as port infrastructure, headquarters, warehouses, bunkers, missile sites, airfields, bridges and... the military has already struck

occupied crimea with these missiles, so in september, they hit at the headquarters of the russian black sea fleet in sevastopol. and britain earlier announced that the stormshadow missiles would be included in a major aid package of half a billion pounds, that's more than $600 million, more than 1,600 attack and anti-aircraft missiles, including a new batch of stormshadow cruise missiles, but their number was not disclosed at the time munitions, air defense equipment, drones and engineering means, and by the way, during his visit to kyiv... david cameron said that britain plans to provide ukraine with more than 3.5 billion dollars of military aid every year, as much as is necessary, these were the words of the british minister of foreign affairs. and my colleague zhana bespiyadchuk is in touch with us, she is joining us from kyiv, zhanna, you followed david cameron's visit, his words, as long as it takes, britain will support ukraine, that's how much it is. greetings, zhenya, yes, when the british say that

support ukraine as long as it is necessary, then the next question that logically arises after these words, actually, and what is meant is support as much as it is necessary for ukraine to win this war, or as much as is necessary for ukraine to survive in it, it retained its statehood, retained control over most of its territories, i.e.... this is essentially one of the key issues in the entire history of western support for ukraine during the russian aggression, and if it is enough to look objectively at the dynamics, the speed of the arrival of western weapons to ukraine, if we look objectively at how decisively these or other decisions were made, not only by the british. leaders

, and they just did it decisively enough, and the american and other european leaders are also talking about long-range weapons for ukraine and about sending f-16s to ukraine, it is better to say that ukraine will really be supported as long as it is necessary for it to survive, but this is hardly rhetoric about support for a complete decisive victory, there is a caveat here. well, in the same way, cameron talked about such a long strategic partnership, about a partnership for 100 years, from such a distance, his words that ukraine can use british weapons to strike russia, to what extent can this be a turning point in the war? first, it's worth it take into account the fact that usually such agreements are not announced immediately after they have been approved, that is, we can assume that this... decision was actually made earlier, and

now for certain reasons they decided to make it public to announce it, we can talk about , that this is... a very clear signal for russia, for vladimir putin, that the west is ready to resolutely support ukraine, to give it carte blanche for military operations, first of all it is about targeted strikes on the military infrastructure in russia, and this is the first point, the second , the return of this what else is the decision, that in fact it hides an indirect recognition of the fact that russia... is able to circumvent sanctions and quite successfully, is able to continue, despite international pressure and restrictions, to establish the production of long-range weapons, repair its planes, military aviation, support, etc., etc., and accordingly use these weapons for

mass regularly, therefore, as sanctions are not effective, it is necessary to act ... obviously by other methods, and one of the most understandable and effective from a military point of view, it is precisely this is the task of such strikes on the military infrastructure, on logistics, on the reserves of russia, but there are still limitations, that is , it is still a distance of 300-500 km, if we are talking about missile weapons and more about weapons, previously the united states provided ukraine with missiles for attacks from large... not medium, like before, but those that can reach a distance of up to 300 km, so the united states can allow ukraine to use these missiles for military purposes in russia? it is clear that any such decisions, and even more so, the public announcement of these decisions in

in the american case, it depends on the elections in this country, the presidential elections, in the fall, and therefore until... the usa decides on the next head of the white house, such decisions are unlikely to be made public, we have seen how difficult, how long the american congress approved the aid package for ukraine, and this decision, well, it may not have been significantly more difficult than the decision to officially openly allow ukraine to use american weapons on russian territory. jeanne, please stay with us as we talk about western aid, it is still important to remember the latest statements of the french president, emmanuel macron. he recently delivered a lengthy two-hour speech in sirbon on the future of europe, and

said: "we cannot allow russia to win in ukraine." if this happens, russia will not stop, europe may perish. these were macron's words, so it is necessary to produce more and faster, these are his words regarding defense. complex, and now in a follow-up interview with a british publication, macron repeated that europe should not reject the opportunity will send troops to ukraine. earlier, such an idea of ​​his was categorically rejected by germany and other countries. if russia wins in ukraine, could any neighboring country be a target for russia? macron repeated this again in his interview in a british publication in russia, and macron's statements and british minister cameron's statements were not missed and talk about dangerous tensions and escalation. such the javanese are called very dangerous and see in them a tendency to inflame tension, this was the statement of the kremlin spokesman. russia repeats that this measure is fighting against it ukraine, and to confirm this, an exhibition of captured western weapons was opened on red square in moscow until may 9. the

bbc's steve rosenberg has seen what it looks like. these are the war trophies of the kremlin and moscow flaunts them, putting them on display. this western military equipment. was sent to ukraine to help it on the battlefield, but was later captured by russia. among the trophies are huskies, a british armored vehicle, now a museum exhibit in moscow. there are also tanks here. this american ebrums was badly damaged near the ukrainian village of avdiivka. now he is a trophy at this military show, like the german leopard tank, which also went to the russians. it's unbelievable and jaw dropping. says natalya, it's amazing to think that our boys managed to collect all this, she adds. there was great interest from the russian public. russians crowded around the equipment to look around and take pictures. family weekends have never been so strange.

so why put it all on display? i assume that the russian authorities have two goals. the first is to reinforce the kremlin's narrative that in ukraine... russia is being fought by the west, it is no wonder that it was russia that invaded ukraine, and at the same time, there is also a large element of gloating here. the russians are increasingly confident in the course of the war, and their main thing. the message is written on the wall over there, you can read it, our victory is inevitable. russia was not the first in this. ukraine also exhibited russian military equipment captured on the front line. moscow may have self-confidence and impressive military equipment, but this does not guarantee it victory. the west promises ukraine more help russia, in turn, threatens to collect even more trophies. ukrainian intelligence believes that the russian military has an order to seize something in ukraine before the victory day celebration in moscow

on may 9, or if that fails, before putin's visit to china in a week, deputy head of military intelligence of ukraine vadym skibitsky said in an interview with the british publication , he says that russia has not given up its intention to seize the entire territory of donetsk and luhansk regions and, according to him , april and may are a difficult time for ukraine, and the russians use it, and we return to the conversation with my colleague, the bbc correspondent. in kievychuk, zhanno, if we summarize this interview of the representative of the gur economist, now, according to him , the situation is the most difficult. intelligence of the ukrainian army voiced several such absolutely clear messages, and so far not so clearly spoken for western

audiences, i would say so, but at the same time very important things for the ukrainian audience, first of all, indeed, he openly admitted that the situation is the most difficult, it is developing, let's say, in an unfavorable direction for ukraine, that is... basically, these words can be interpreted as follows, the intelligence representative said, he, of course, diplomatically voiced this, but still, that ukraine is not winning at the front, at the moment, and this is the first moment, secondly, he also spoke about the fact that there will probably be a need to negotiate with russia, and this may happen in the second half 2025, there are still no such public statements at all. about what is with russia we will have to negotiate, they were almost

taboo, at least within the country for their own audience, the ukrainian authorities did not voice this, now we have heard about it, and of course, without any details, it is difficult to imagine now how it is consistent, for example, with the intentions of the current ukrainian authorities to attract to responsibility above the military... the political leadership of russia in the international tribunal for war crimes, crimes against humanity, i.e. these are fundamentally incompatible tracks, but the situation is dynamic, it changes at the front and in the country in general, and we heard such important things, it was also said that russia can take advantage of the fact that the formal five-year term of office of the president... volodymyr zelenskyi will appear in may this year and there will be russian propaganda, the authorities will try to

pedal this topic, this can be expected, spoke about the fact that russia will try to isolate ukraine on the international arena, but in the end, one of the messages precisely for the western audience is that ukraine is indeed restraining the russian army. it ensures europe that vladimir putin has the resources, time, army, for planning some attacks, military operations in one form or another, and in relation to the member countries, accordingly, europe should thank ukraine for this with support, even greater support, and in particular armed. zhana, thank you, and vadym skibitsky also said that... the biggest unknown factor in the war now is whether it is europe, whether the europeans will find the ability to help ukraine more. well,

that concludes the issue, see you on tuesday. congratulations, friends, the second part of the program is live on the espresso tv channel. the verdict is today, like every friday with us journalism club, and today we will talk about such things. media chaos in the information department. the scandalous deputy bezula continues to attack public affairs. will the independent broadcaster be forced to withdraw from the single telethon? journalists return to the parliament. zmi representatives will be allowed access to the verkhovna rada again, but with restrictions. why are broadcasts of plenary

sessions not resumed? artificial intelligence service in the ministry of foreign affairs. consular information for the media. now a virtual spokeswoman is commenting, will a digital official have credibility? about this and other things we're talking for the 45 minutes we have ahead of us. but before we start our big conversation with my colleagues, i offer you a survey, friends, today we ask you about whether artificial intelligence is needed in government communications. so, yes, no, everything is quite simple on youtube, or your own version of the answer, please write in the comments. if you're watching us on tv, pick up your smartphone or phone and vote. if you believe that artificial intelligence is needed in government communications. 0800-211-381, no 0800-211382. all calls to these numbers are free, vote, at the end of the program we will sum up the results of this vote. i would like to introduce today's guests of our

studio, they are my colleagues, olga musafirova, correspondent of the new newspaper europe in ukraine. danyliuk yarmala, journalist, political observer, media consultant and author and host of youtube channels showbiz and censornet, oleksiy mustafin, historian, publicist and media manager, ladies and gentlemen, i congratulate you, thank you for joining our broadcast today. thank you, congratulations, so, so as we ask our viewers what they think. about this artificial intelligence in government communications, let's exchange opinions in the format of a blitz poll, is such artificial intelligence necessary in government communications, of course you can joke about the fact that when there is no ordinary intelligence, artificial intelligence is used, well, let 's ironize about it, so let's in principle let's exchange thoughts, what do you think about it, let's start with olga musafi, firov. well,

sergey, you almost got my point. i wanted to say exactly that and that, well, actually, intelligence will never exist, even if it is artificial. thank you, oleksiy. well, you know, artificial intelligence, that's why it's called artificial, because it can't work without, natural human intelligence, so it doesn't solve anything by itself. and the emergence of the use of artificial intelligence, especially when it is presented as almost the main feature, it shows precisely that the people who are engaged in this do not really understand how artificial intelligence works, on the one hand, on the other hand, it seems to me that this testimony

shows that people do not fully understand what is communication, communication is primarily about... feeling and trust, artificially it will never inspire trust and never be able to inspire sympathy, so it seems to me that it is called, thank you oleksiy, maryna, how do you feel about the new spokeswoman of the ministry of foreign affairs, because well our actual question about whether artificial intelligence is needed in the government's communications, i will push it away... marina, well, to be honest, listening and looking at her is much more pleasant than a number of active servants of the people. very short, but very precise. thank you, marina, and, ladies and gentlemen,

because during the last week there was a lot of talk and a lot of comments about the situation. there is a discussion around the social whole, a political torpedo, maryana bezugla is already torpedoing the public and there is barely a post, she mentions the public there, but literally as soon as she called the public to leave the telethon, she turned to the broadcaster, pointing out the inefficiency and unreasonableness of the expenses, for according to her, it is not in line with their values, you will be listened to and looked at the same as you are now. more than two dozen of your channels are watched, which financed by almost uah 2 billion through a budget of 3,000 employees, of whom more than 400 have reservations as employees of a critical facility. infrastructure according to your own information, when the telethon consumes an additional 1.5 billion from the budget, you have a separate budget for 2 billion, stop supporting what does not

correspond to the values ​​and principles of the public, is it still more profitable to take funds from two sources, well, it's a pity, ladies and gentlemen, that maryana bezugla didn't put, well, she didn't say a completely logical already logical chain about the fact that those half billions from the budget of the telethon are not going to public television, but to oligarchs' television, and this is also a rather strange story. olga, how do you perceive this whole discussion about social issues, does it mean that if mariana bezugla starts torpedoing, then as bezugla says through the mouth of the president's office, it seems to me that it is simple. this is, you know, a test stone for how society will perceive, unfortunately, i have the feeling

that society does not really discriminate, well, that is, it knows that there is only one marathon, it is already in two with a hook years, it has already been imprinted on the matrix, and to select it is public or something. another thing, if they say that there are armored personnel carriers from the front who are taking money, then this immediately causes negative emotions in the average viewer, which means that instead of sending money to drones for the needs of the army, it is given to some scumbags, who are still and armored from the front. this arises, you know, a situation of devaluation, a very important link of journalistic work, because thank god, well,

here i am a little biased, because i, i i am a supporter of the social, and several times it so coincided that i came on a business trip, actually orienting myself. to the materials of public affairs, and you know, to the credit of my colleagues, i could not, in fact, i did not set myself such a task, but i did not find a single, not a single distorted fact, not a single distorted story, this indicates that people work very quickly and very high-quality, and when you start with... torpedoing them now, it immediately comes to mind that there is some, well, some political motivation behind it,

which means that the social is starting somewhere, or already it came very hard on those on the callus, which could not be touched, my first reaction was exactly the same. thank you. olga, marina, you, i saw on your page in social networks, how you laid out the public, as a powerful information machine, talked about it, studied how many youtube pages there are public in different regions, what is the volume of their audience come on, it's a really big broadcaster, no matter what, i understand that with public, well, hardly any tv channel can... i mean with this network the huge one that covers ukraine, what can you say, zelenskyi’s team is striving

for what they declared that we don’t need journalists, well now we can transform it a little and say, journalists who are not accountable to us, uncontrollable, we don’t need them, ah... here is the story, we all understand that public broadcasting, by law, it has funding from the state budget, and i can say that public broadcasting, what is its essence, it was conceived as such a broadcaster, where communities will receive news about themselves their funds, but for a long time in the office of the president of ukraine, they believe that if something is financed from budget money, read from... the tax money of ukrainian citizens, then a priori all these people should be such waiters and maids of the ukrainian government, that is, they are obviously triggered by plots, which...

prepare social media branches, and i must admit that a number of branches work simply very qualitatively, they have very cool editorials, about myself i can note those editorials that i always read, watch and find news, for example, public chernivtsi very, very qualitatively working out public chernihiv, makes incredibly cool news, stories, discussions, for example, the best story about the repression of the russians in the village of yakhidny, known to everyone, was just made by the forces. local journalists, or i really liked, for example, the three-part documentary film battle for chernihiv, which was filmed by the chernihiv branch of the social chernihiv, it was really a very high-quality work, and if you look at it that way, what will we see there, the journalists of the social branches tell stories about their communities, about people, about heroes, about prisoners, they they raise very interesting topics, for example, from

the extreme interview that i really liked, it was an interview with the public in chernivtsi, where a very talented young journalist gave a cool interview to the bishop of the ocu, where he explained various topics related to customs before easter, and it was something like that, you know, absolutely cool, because we all understand that the russian orthodox church has dug in so powerfully in bukovina, and that is why such information is very necessary, but we understand that zelensky's government ... thinks about his fate after war, about how to win the next election, and they really want to have a controlled common broadcaster, and for example, i 'm of the opinion that it's very important for them to impose their vision of peace, the end of the current war, and certainly with such decentralization media under the auspices of a public broadcaster, it will not be possible to impose it on stupid peasants, stupid peasants for my information,

right? banks consider those people who live outside kyiv, and they want to impose their own version of victory on them, this is absolutely, i think such a decision is a failure, because i know a lot of public journalists, we grew up with them in different years as specialists in the media, and they are absolutely professional, very cool people who very often, i want to reveal a secret to you, worked part-time in different years, for example, during elections, when they took place in the parliament and... i will not begrudge volodymyr zelenskyi and his team if one of the offended journalists decides to help some politicians build completely new political forces in the regions. these nakhids of maryana bezuglai, they are quite so cunningly constructed, i will remind you that the first the social post appeared on april 24, and she specifically threw into one basket the tv channel radu, the tv channel freedom, mentioned

there... and the television marathon, and of course, if you do not understand the topic of the media very well, you may think that all dermaids , everyone there has made armor for themselves, fattening on ukrainian money, but i can say that there is a huge difference between the public and tv channel rada and fried. council and freedom is nothing more than a money launderer for people close to the bank, for example, such characters as cyril tymoshenko, the public is really plays a very important role, and i think... i think that media professionals can agree that the public branches have proven themselves very, very well just in full-scale war, because you know, when i need to find a story about bilopol, i know very clearly , that this plot made public sums, and as a woman who works in the city hall told me today, this is the only editorial office that goes to ours, i apologize, and films there

plots about people who... are broadcast today . thank you marina. oleksiy, you know about television and public, non-public, about one that is in the hands of big media groups and big tycoons. what do you say, this attempt, which is now there, does it mean that all other channels are controlled in one way or another by zelenskyi's office, publicly. although everything is not controlled and this means this large pool of large tv channels that are in a single telethon, which have a single policy, and obviously there is one center that manages this single information policy, well, i would not say that there is one center , in fact, long-standing discussions about the creation sop