playing, it should be with the military, it should be with the people in the rear, they should gradually accustom themselves to the idea that tomorrow there will be russian troops here in your place, and you will need to do something about it, i am not saying at all that the people there should not be such thoughts, but in general , a person differs from an animal in that he has a variability of thinking, of course, if you think that the russians can break through somewhere and take over your region, well... do you think that you will be in this situation do, join the partisans or leave the region, but in you may have another option, that the ukrainian troops will liberate the region that is nearby, and you should also think about what to do in this situation, on the contrary, you may find yourself in a much safer place than the one in which you lived, all in any options are important in war, life, death, release, capture, death with everyone who is on the front, who is not on the front, this is war. that is, there is no need

to imagine that anything can happen to every person who is on the territory of ukraine during the war, and to each of these options, both positive and negative, you need to be ready, and you don't need to be demoralized, i say this all the time, this is the most important moment, because if you get demoralized, you think that the russians have already won. one more point, the russians can prepare ukrainian society for the future, this is also an absolutely correct calculation. well, let's say the war ends, and they already understand that, in principle , they will not have such great success in the war, but they have to create the impression that it was just about, just about, but by some miracle we left and met the lord in the desert, and he told us that everything will be fine, it didn't happen, not for objective reasons, but... it just somehow didn't

happen, they lacked a little bit, which means that this society is coming out of the war , and it immediately votes for those forces that we talked about with you at the beginning of our program, which say, we will have normal relations with russia, we will coexist with it, that is, you here in this context allude to georgia, so by the way georgia, by the way georgia mr. vitaly. very rightly said that georgia, remember, 2008, the attack on georgia, in fact the annexation of 20-20% of its territory, this is abkhazia and this is south ossetia, which are now actually occupied by russia. we understand that after that, several years pass, and in georgia they receive a huge amount of trust, forces that, well... even if they don't directly declare

that they are evil, at least they don't say so, they are somewhere like they say somewhere in the middle we will meet, somewhere we will normalize relations, but really i agree with what is the big threat is that russia also works for the future, that is, russia works in a hybrid way, russia never works only with military means, this is the state security committee, they don't even know how to do it otherwise, they know it much better than to fight, they sit for days and weeks and all these plans are drawn up by different departments, for different options, for different development of the situation, and i always hear that ukraine cannot become georgia, because georgia had a short war, and we so long, well, first of all, what does v mean georgia had a short war, georgia, of course , had an intense short war, but in georgia there was a conflict with russia from the late 80s, early 90s, people were beaten on rustavelli avenue with these. sapper shovels, a well-known

story back in soviet times, once upon a time there was a war in abkhazia, a real one on the territory of abkhazia, which ended with military ethnic cleansing, the expulsion of almost all ethnic georgians, with the exception of those who lived in the gali district, this is the majority of the population of the autonomous republic, two, during the 2008 war there was ethnic cleansing of georgians on territories of south ossetia, three. that is , in fact, all the time we are talking about a different type of conflict, they were in such a confrontation all the time, president eduard shovarnadze was taken out of the war zone by helicopter so that he would not be captured by the troops, which at that time were led there by the future leaders of the chechen national resistance. there is shamil basayev and others who fought there with the russian army together against the georgians, speaking between us, we forget about it. but still the facts of history, and

the then head of the council of ministers of abkhazia of autonomy, appointed to shovernadze, he was shot, we all these facts on... that we don't remember, we don't know them, because then ukraine was not interested in anything, we were all friends with russia, let him do what he wants , in transnistria, in abkhazia - this is a brotherly people, yes, three three peoples, that's why, that's why georgia did not evoke any special compatriots in most of our compatriots with you at that time, and less with that, and more than that, there were our compatriots who fought on the side of transnistria against moldova, remember the national radicals are ours, so i won't. now to recall history, i'm just telling you that georgia moved to normalization with russia after about a decade, no 20 years, 20 years of historical, historical and military trials, ethnic cleansing of people who lived in hotels for decades,

dreaming of getting to their native places, did not get anywhere, and i generally believe that the formula is completely different: the more difficult the war is, the more... society has a request for normalization, but i have a big question, why it turned out to be so serious in georgia, if the war was so short, and i answer to myself, because they lived for 20 years, because the war was long, because they lived in tension, cold, lack of light, lack of water, ruin, civil conflicts... moscow, you can say , from gamsakhurdia to saakashvili, and then there was a war under saakashvili, and they just don't want anymore, they just want to live normally, and i will remind you that the person who canceled the visa regime for citizens of the russian federation was exactly mykhailo saakashvili, when you are the president say no

ivanishvili's business, to attract russian tourists, business, to have money, to live normally, everything, and now we see that some part of the people is showing up again. which says: no, we don't want to live normally if we don't have freedom, but this is a new stage, so the russians, understanding all this, are preparing us for exactly such emotions, you see, and then, in principle, the coming to the authorities in ukraine, and 80% of the votes in the elections, from uzhhorod to the cities in the east, let's be careful to say. inevitable, everyone who will go to vote will have only one the idea that he should never be called to the tcc again, his wife will have the idea that he, her husband should never be called to tatsk, his mother will have the idea that her son

should never be called to the tcc, no one else has any ideas it won't happen if you tell them, listen, i'm peter petrovsky. "i will make it so that we, that russia will never fight with us, we will remember, be proud of our military successes, honor our defenders, but there will never be another war, you will not have to fight, because we will build a completely different system to each other, i will become the president in 20 years, you will take me out of the bank, simply because i have already dried up in the presidential office, you understand, this society will have a century for so long. before the war, the problem is that , in fact, these thoughts that you are talking about now, they are already being discussed somewhere, in a whisper, so to speak, by individual people, and the audience will not let them lie, that in fact, people somewhere, somewhere, somewhere they say

that yes, well, the main thing is that there is no war, well, it is russia who played it constantly, remember the year 2014, first the party... war was declared on the right sector, some kind of myth, which was inflated on all russian tv screens, but there were some opposition leaders there, yatsenyuk, klitschko, tsyagnebok, who went to negotiations, tried to maintain the situation, about they were talked about as politicians, yanukovych fled, the people's front, created by yatsenyuk and his associates, became the party of war, and petro poroshenko began to appear as normal constructive politicians. and his party, because it was considered in russia, which means that they are more capable of capitulation, when it turned out that this was not the case, poroshenko was declared the leader of the war party, but a completely constructive person, well, volodymyr

oleksandrovich, we will meet with him, and suddenly volodymyr oleksandrovich, after the first meeting, when it turns out that he is not going to surrender, is also the leader parties of war. that is, they are constantly trying to demonstrate to ukrainians that anyone who defends national interests and does not capitulate to russia, even if there are different ideas about... is the leader of the war party, that national interests - this is war and if you want peace then vote for the leader of the peace party, who is the leader of the peace party? volodymyr vladimirovych will tell you, he will take out the name and everything from the envelope, and they are trying to create it all the time, and you see that they are changing these leaders of the war party, some people win in the political struggle with others, because they position themselves as the leaders of the party . of peace against the leaders of the war party, constructive people, and as soon as they just say, well, we are

ukrainian politicians, we will not give you ukraine, well, everything is the leader of the party, but why is the leader of the war party, and because we are at war with those who do not want to give us ukraine, simple logic, and it is dangerous, i say, this is necessary, no matter when the war ends, let's say this, andriy, we need to prepare for this , because otherwise we would have... such a belarusian-hungarian-type country, well, we will actually return to the hybrid version that was, let's say, until 2014, the hybrid version, because we also have to understand one thing that in the end all the same , the ultimate goal of russia will be the liquidation of ukrainian statehood, and all the same the ultimate goal the goal will be war, in whatever form it would be... no no no no it would not be because because russia generally believes that this statehood may

not be loyal, but integrated, these are different types of ideas, well, that is, by and large , it can statehood can be preserved in the belarusian version when you clearly understand, this is what josep borel talked about today, i think, or yesterday at a lecture at the university of oslo, that there can be a government like the belarusian one, that is, a government. such will provide their territory as a bridgehead for russian troops, well, a base in sevastopol, well in general, it is already on the territory of russia, as putin thinks, well, that means in uzhgorod, somewhere else to have bases there, and they, you are an independent state, you have a president medvedchuk or some other chuk, but you, we just have our bases guarantee you peace, we will not attack you because our troops are already here. and they will not attack us either, do you remember the last time this was used,

we had mr. pabriks in the program, we have such a term that the soviet union occupied the baltic countries, but this is not quite so, that is, the occupation took place, but it was not external, because initially the governments of the baltic countries signed an agreement with the soviet union on the placement of its military bases on the territory. latvia, lithuania and estonia, and then many people said, let's say, finland, which was against this, and what, what are you sending soviet troops to you, what do you want to get in general, and moscow said the opposite, well, why should we do something with your sovereignty, when our military is already at your bases, well, that is, sovereignty is already limited, when, when military, when the military, conventionally speaking, of the occupying state or any state are on the territory, on the territory

of the state that they want to occupy, this is essentially a limitation of sovereignty, and what we had in ukraine with the black sea fleet, what we had, it happened in the baltics, they left the barracks one fine day, they didn't have to stand up at the border and break through the border, if you have such an internal one and we left the barracks in... at the end of february and at the beginning in march 2014, a similar situation arose, this is a good example, yes this is the idea, and many of our compatriots may like this idea very much, who will say, listen, well, if they have bases here, they will not fight with us, if they have everything here anyway, everything is fine, we still need to put up a monument to pushkin so that they calm down, so why insult pushkin, by the way, about the monument to pushkin, and here there is one more threat besides that. which consists in the fact that, unlike georgia, ukraine

was all the time in this informational, informational, informational , civilizational, informational, media occupation you can call it different, that is, when even now in 2024, today, may 4, many of our compatriots still continue to consume what product, russian, i believe. or something like they said, if there are people of an older generation who have stopped doing it, then young people who watch, let's say, tiktok, they watch its russian-language samples and... and the russians are already actively working on this, because they understand everything, i would say, the charms of this situation, i can already see people saying on tiktok, oh, i am out of politics, this it's already happened, i don't want to talk about politics, peace to all, they are the same people as we are there too, well, what can they do and what can we do, they

don't want their atm, we don't want our atm, what separates us at all , russia, if it used to come through the tv. today it comes through social networks, through tiktok, through youtube, through various paid platforms, including russian content, which, unfortunately, is understandable for many of our citizens, and many of our citizens, they think, well if it is understandable, if it is available, if it is free, if it is close to someone in spirit, listen, well, there is no politics there, there is none. these red stars on the forehead, that’s right, there aren’t any, but, well, what ’s the matter, we are all people, as they say, the confidant, confidant of the president of the russian federation, kharikh burdok kharlabov, the confidant of the president of the russian federation, vladimir putin, never about it you have to forget, all these people who act in comedy skits, who

say be with me, like join me, like crimea, hahaha. and you are not there politicians, it's a joke, and that's how the mentality changes, because what is basically a tragedy becomes simply, conditionally speaking, the subject of someone else's joke, and people usually change the mentality, which then gives the opportunity to make a profit on this ground, even as one's own shameless populist, here, too, there is an important thing that this whole, i would say, talk of the times of the club of cheerful and resourceful people, it is the general council. this is the triumph of stupidity, and this triumph of stupidity is still used to keep people from having any real civilizational landmarks, and it is a huge the problem, a vivid example, until recently, everyone was watching the popularity of the so-called russian series "the word of a boy", so absolutely, absolutely russian technology,

fesbeshna, and technology, because it was filmed for essentially fund money. who shoots, who supports documentaries and feature films, about the occupation of ukraine, that is, this is a purely fsb project, and, unfortunately, there will be many more such projects, but why in order to convince young people that we are all the same, you or we have a gang in kazan, someone has a gang in ryazan, and you have a gang somewhere in some town in the east of ukraine. what, what are we fighting for, anyway? it’s all politicians, it’s all zelenskyi, you understand, they still say that zelenskyi, zelenskyi did not fulfill the minsk agreement, zelenskyi started a war with russia, they are about the same thing, by the way, they say about zelenskyi that they before his election they talked about poroshenko,

absolutely sure, there will be the next president, it will be the same, but you elected him. for him to make friends with us, he bastard does not let you live as long as you have left to live, including these years are selected, so it is true, it is difficult to fight with this, precisely because people themselves have to make this choice, and they do not want to fight, as for us, what steps must be taken by us as a society, as the government, as possible by certain institutions, individual state , in general, how? state in order to avoid this scenario that you and i have been talking about for the last 20 minutes, and the scenario in the political plane, the cultural plane, well, and then in the end we understand the military plane, what should we do, except to fight, besides to fight, but if the scenario that you just voiced, that you and i

just laid out for our viewers, escape from this world does not transform. on russia, because, as valery zaluzhnyi absolutely accurately said in his time, a small soviet army will not defeat a large soviet army, and a small soviet union will not defeat a large soviet union, it does not happen, uh, you see, there is nothing surprising in the fact that they can states with very similar regimes fight each other, think of the war between the people's republic of china and the socialist republic of vietnam, about which everyone spoke sarcastically on both sides. red flags, this is also a very, very instructive story, did not divide some large part of the territory, or did china want to stand up for its chinese who lived on the territory of vietnam. and they started a war, but the task of this war in both countries was not to change the social order, anything like that at all, but simply to show who is

the boss, who is the main state here, after which, after the end of the war, they continued to communicate as if this war had never happened, and that there is also a very important moment that needs to be said, this is such a... real story, we are still at war with russia in a civilizational way, because we are not just fighting for identity, for freedom as part of this identity, so i believe that when we say that russia is a dictatorship, it is effective, let's create something more effective, authoritarian, with control over information, with a marathon, with a vertical of power, how much do we all talk, yevhen magda is talking about today, about a government of national unity. why should we share power with anyone, why should we have anyone at all

share powers, when we know everything better than everyone else, and understand everything better than everyone else, that's how putin lukashenko thinks about himself, why do we need a diversity of opinions about what the state should look like, if we can completely control the entire information flow, but now we say again, here are the results of your control. that people are starting to get depressed because the same tv channels that told them the day before yesterday that tomorrow everything will be fine and the war will be over and you don't have to worry about anything at all, but if you went for border, you guys, you don't have one, you don't put a burden on our economy, because we wouldn't feed so many people, now they say the opposite, you have to understand that there can still be occupied territory, everyone will serve and you must serve and not invent illusions that you can somehow survive this war, and in this way, let yourself say that we can, and if you went abroad, then you

are hardly a traitor, i am not even talking about men , now protsenovik in general, because those who stayed here are people who really love ukraine, well, what about you, if you didn’t get rid of these 80 mln 10 million people who went there, how would you even survive in the first years of the war, these were the people who lost... all very often , houses, flats, property, you had no money to pay them, no money to live on, no housing for them, no nothing, and now you blame them for leaving when you yourselves were unable to provide for the existence of the territory , which is controlled by the legitimate government of so many people, you yourself called the people to save themselves, why is this changing on the same channel? and if there was diversity, then there would be a discussion, not about the war, you understand, again, i generally think that about the war and the course of military operations, this is also everyone's favorite pastime, one must speak

very carefully, but one must speak about what is happening with public life, it is necessary to discuss, it is necessary that one tv channel has one idea about ukraine in the future, another another, and then we need to have a clear understanding that we have a chance to change the government after... the war is not to confirm the authority existing so that if people believe that the government has failed in 2022, that they could have clearly signaled this during the election, and that requires a free press, and that requires political competition, and that requires shared responsibility, a lot needs to be done now because otherwise, you understand, we will turn into a soviet-russian civilization even before the end of the war, and then we will simply be in the russian orbit, look at georgia... a candidate for membership of the european union, georgian society voted for membership in nato, was a supporter member, yes, there there were 90% of people in favor of it when we had 30,

why did it get in the way, what did it guarantee? we must clearly understand that none of the sociological sentiments that we currently record in sociological surveys do not... guarantee us the fact that ukraine will simply turn into a russian political, cultural and economic province faster than it seems to us, and we at the same time can be considered candidates for the european union, and moreover, let's not forget, we can even become members, let's not forget that these e-data, polls, people's opinions can change, that is, we are actually measuring people when, during the active phase of the war, the temperature fell. and when we, conditionally speaking, the war stops, ends, here any wording can be taken, we can have or receive completely different data, by the way, about

from... responsibility, i believe that this should really include responsibility , but in addition, those people who dragged the russian peace here, we have de facto, the people who dragged the russian peace to ukraine, they are not completely responsible for something, some of them still sits in the verkhovna rada, some of them still vote, some of them changed their colors as if they were patriots, some did not completely change their colors, but in fact they are already slowly starting to drown in favor of such a light russian world, and this is also a big problem. one more question that we have, we talked not only about such a social problem, we also talked with you just now about the informational and cultural influence of russia, which has always been one of the key influences on the ukrainian audience , on ukrainian society, on different, moreover stratification dimensions of ukrainian

society. what should we do with this, how should we now or now, in the future, in the coming years, make it so that in ukraine we change this russian cultural and informational influence, what should it be, ban something or propose something, build some kind of conditional wall from it all considering we can't ban tiktok there, or at least not yet? because we 'll see what else the united states of america will do, right? but what should we do here, what should be a comprehensive approach from your point of view so that there is no russian peace in ukrainian heads and so that this russian peace does not flow from ukrainian monitors on phones, computers, and tablets? the first issue is popularization, these are grants for the production

of ukrainian products. state grants, sponsors' grants, we must, let's say, help people who want to make a ukrainian product, this must be an important component of cultural policy, not only in cinema, not only in science, but also in social networks, the more ukrainian tiktok there is, the less there will be russian, the there will be more quality product, we saw it on quotas, on radio broadcasting, on all qi, about all these things. the sooner this issue will be resolved, firstly, secondly, what also needs to be done, by and large we already have only a few classes in which the russian language is studied throughout the country, the russian language ceases to be the language of instruction, so we just need to be understanding towards process, when it ceases to be the language of everyday communication, it is not one year, it is 5, 10, 15 years, but the state and society must

simply realize that this... the process must to develop by maintaining this standard, but if the russian language is in tiktok, youtube, then it is unlikely that anything will change, of course, it means that there should be more ukrainian-language product everywhere, and i say this again, it is this ukrainian-language product that needs to be popularized and sponsored by the state to relevant cultural institutions . the second point is verification. we began to live in the time of anonymous news and... the time of artificial intelligence, i can create an anonymous youtube channel for you in half an hour, which will be called something correct, honest and give your speech, where you will say in pure russian that you like putin, you are still sure that russia will win this war, because you have such and such calculations, and soon it will be ... full

informational reality , all the technical possibilities to do this already exist, the vast majority of ukrainians have switched to telegram and anonymous sources of information, and people don’t even understand the difference when you tell them: listen, well, there is, let’s say there, i don’t know, there is whatsapp or telegram washington post channel, but what it is written there, the editorial office is responsible for it, it is a legal entity, we can sue it, we can win millions of dollars, after all, this editorial office values ​​its own. reputation, if she publishes some anonymous information, it is information from three or four sources that must be verified, and about these sources the journalist must inform the administration of his publication, otherwise he will lose his job, not only there, forever, but if you just open some crap, you say: i think it's true because i heard that this channel…