we are, of course, complex bloody battles, we are talking not only about the donetsk region, but in general about the front line, if we analyze the preparation of the enemy for large-scale actions, what will they be, in your opinion, and in the opinion of military experts of various western countries. in fact, it is quite difficult to judge now and i will try to explain why: firstly, the situation on the ukrainian front was not the best in the last 2-3 months. there were failures in many places, but if you look at the map on a large scale, the number of lost territories in compared to the size of ukraine, it is actually quite small, but of course no one likes to lose villages. so, the russians managed to advance, but in the south , the ukrainian troops on the east bank seem to be holding up pretty well, despite the loss, they manage to hold their positions, and this... there are

even rumors that there are a lot of russian deserters in the south. on the other hand, the russian side is not as strong as we imagine. at the moment, the biggest concern is the talk that russia may launch an attack and dynamically develop it. my contacts say that russia is indeed massing troops for a potential attack somewhere probably to the east or south. bakhmut, however, should wait and see if the russians have enough strength for such an offensive, given the significant number of casualties and the loss of weapons and equipment they have suffered. there is also talk of a possible attack from the north, specifically on kharkiv or sumy, but again, i haven't seen any intelligence from the us or uk that would indicate any significant troop movements in this. it seems that these

the rumors come mainly from the ukrainian general staff, not from the international community, which probably has access to satellite intelligence. the key question now is how much aid will flow to ukraine over the next few months, and where it will be used. analysts cannot predict this, since the government and the general staff do not disclose their strategic plans regarding. where and how they are going to put pressure on russia. however, they must act in the central part, because it is unacceptable to continue to retreat, both from the political and from military point of view. it is necessary to put pressure on russia, whether through a counteroffensive or in some other way. perhaps it would be worthwhile to pay more attention to the south, in particular to the kherson region. as for zaporizhzhia, it is now.

a special region with strong defenses and a rather static situation. it is unclear whether russia will try to do something there? we know that russia will continue to press, it is not known what and it is not known where. we also do not know where ukraine will direct the aid it will receive from the united states and europe. so you can make a lot of predictions, but most likely we will see a dynamic one. developments over the next few months as both sides put pressure on each other, possibly in current venues or elsewhere. hopefully, over the next three to four weeks, we'll start to get more information and understanding of what's really going on. well, we understand that the classic russian scheme is an offensive until the end of the offensive impulse, that is, in simple language, when... the personnel

ends, so we understand that the russians have now prepared a certain number reservists, trained them, and here is the key story, in your opinion, mr. colonel, will they be ready to open additional hot lines of the front, yes, those lines that could, well, until a certain time, they were as if asleep, in particular, for example, will it apply to kharkiv and the kharkiv region, yes, in addition to the kupinsky direction, they can also use certain areas of the front. there is also the issue of the sumy region, this is midnight, and of course the zaporizhia direction you already mentioned, but the key story if we operate with the number of russian interveners, prepared and already present on the front line, as it is, whether they will have enough strength, and at the same time we are also aware of the fact that, most likely, russia is not just entering the may-june offensive campaign, rather, we are entering a new phase war question:

we know that they have been mobilizing, and you mentioned training, but if they didn't have time to prepare people properly, and basically, we haven't seen any up to ... quality training from the russian side in the last period, then did they manage to spend vocational training now. i mean, the crews of tanks and armored personnel carriers obviously do not know their way around. this can be seen in the videos where the soldiers do not act in a coordinated manner. therefore, russian tactics at the moment are to destroy the front as much as possible with the help of its artillery and guided aerial bombs. to make it impossible for ukrainian soldiers to stay in the trenches, and therefore to attack with as much cannon fodder as possible. i don't think any of this will change. what can change is the possibility of the ukrainian side use artillery and counter-battery fire to destroy

the enemy's artillery potential. however, where are they going to attack? i have no idea. they may not even know it yet, but you can be sure that... if they have enough strength, they will continue to attack where they think the weakest position will be. such is russian policy, they push through, probe, and then consolidate success. it's hard to say right now because we analysts don't have enough information, in particular, how much ukraine has soldiers in various directions. of course, there are weak points. we know this because soldiers report it. on facebook and elsewhere, but i don't know if the russians understand where these weak points are. we will only know when they attack and where they direct their energy. until that moment, i think, we should not make empty predictions. is there already

an understanding, for example, that the enemy with artillery barrels has artillery systems? yes, perhaps there is also an understanding that the enemy has a difficult time armored vehicles, as we understand it. that the offensive impulse is not only about manpower, but also about equipment, so we understand how many enemy armored vehicles and artillery systems were destroyed by our fighters. this is a very good question. my answer is this: if you take into account the current way of fighting, then yes, they lack armored vehicles. they don't use their machines in the way we usually imagine in the west. they operate with ones and twos, which... indicates their deficiency. nowadays they produce more but it remains an open question whether they will continue to anger them along the entire front line or, on the contrary, concentrate them for concentrated armored attacks. however, to carry out such attacks requires

properly trained personnel, which they clearly lack, and it is not just a lack of armored vehicles, since there is probably still enough of them. in the shortage of trained crews who could manage it. the loss of experienced tank crews, in particular due to injuries, resulted to reduce their number. is russia making a significant effort to covertly train personnel, perhaps, as there is no satellite evidence to indicate such an effort. previously, american intelligence effectively monitored activities in russia, but since 2020, the first year , no such reports have been received. this suggests that they may be conserving their armor until they can muster enough personnel to make a breakthrough. in the coming months they will most likely will deploy all

the means at their disposal on the front line. however, the mobilization of a large number of vehicles is associated with certain difficulties, as there is a high risk that ukrainian intelligence could ... detect and neutralize such a concentrated deployment. thus, their advancement is not an easy task. the key story is the goals of war, so in order to plan and deploy certain military capabilities. a couple of days ago, in a conversation with me, matthew bryza, the former director of european and eurasian affairs at the national security council of the united states, yes said that the russians will advance during this year, the next 25th year, may... wait for a counteroffensive from the armed forces of ukraine. subsequently, this information was confirmed literally in a couple of days by jake sullivan, president joseph biden's adviser on national security. and the russians have already voiced their threats in case of supplying ukraine with f-16s. they

somehow compared it even to the prospect of using or using nuclear weapons. that is, this story is much more serious for them, and they are afraid of it. what difference does it make which has whom? plan? the priority was and remains the ukrainian plan. it's not about london, berlin or anyone else. it is about ukraine. i don't see that... someone is going to use nuclear weapons because of the f-16. russia didn't use nukes when tanks came out and didn't use them when atakams or hymars or anything else came out. so i don't see that it will change anything. i also don't think that f-16s in ukrainian skies will bring victory. they are definitely important, but not as much as everyone expects. and yet we are must be very careful when talking about a counterattack to conduct. an effective counteroffensive, you have to have a surplus of resources, that means you have to have

more resources than the enemy, and that you have to have trained people, and we still haven't gotten to the point where we can say that the ukrainian fighters have passed the proper for the counterattack of the universities. so, in order to have enough people for a counteroffensive in 2025, we have to mobilize and recruit them now, but at the moment almost all of the mobilized are leaving. straight to the front because the front line is thin. ago, if we want to make a counter-offensive, it must be a very different state of affairs from the one we have now. 2025 is still a long way off, we have to survive 2024 first , but i don't see a nuclear threat. there is no such coordinated plan in the event of the use of nuclear weapons. obviously, there are action plans in place in the event of an attack. russia to a nato country. these plans are being implemented, and now,

for example, the baltic countries and finland are undergoing intensive training to be ready in case russia continues to advance. i don't take things lightly putin's threats, in particular, taking into account the fact that they are preparing to conduct exercises of non-strategic, tactical nuclear weapons, and the so-called southern russian military district will be in charge of that. the southern... military district is actively involved in aggression against ukraine. we hear a lot of different optimistic scenarios about how, i don't know, the mausoleum will catch fire in response. mr. colonel, you have the floor. as i said, i don't think putin will use nuclear weapons, because i think that would be unwise. he has no prepared troops that could withstand the consequences, so it would create as much, if not more problems for him than for... the first thing that will happen in response is a massive counterattack by air forces along the russian

front line, because the west in this case there's no point in hitting with a wedge, he has a lot of ground and air options to react, so these things are practiced and they know what to do. in this regard, i believe that we pay too much attention to putin's rhetoric. since our time. there was quite a few conversations important events. macron said he would be ready to deploy ground troops under certain circumstances. it is not clear what the circumstances are, but at least he made such a commitment. in addition, poland will probably agree to such actions. great britain has stated that it will be with ukraine as long as necessary, offering contractual obligations, financial assistance and support. the president of lithuania has announced... plans to deploy military personnel to ukraine for training support, these are significant positive steps on

the western front. i think we should spend more time on the coherence of the west's response and less on what putin says, because putin often talks nonsense when pressed. now he is clearly under pressure, despite his mobilization and increase in personnel. he is clearly concerned about the situation and i am sure we will see more signs of internal problems within russia in the coming months. how seriously and to the end will the president of france, the british king, i don't know, president biden, or maybe his successor, go to the end together with ukraine. this brings us back to what i already mentioned: the situation boils down to potential... two factors: the first - if there is a significant russian breakthrough, then all european capitals

will face difficult questions, but there is no fixed solution on this yet, and this is obvious because some countries such as italy show weakness in this matter because they do not feel directly threatened. so, the first factor, if there will be a big russian breakthrough, the second factor - will there be an attack by russia? on nato. now in zmi, the intelligence services of many european countries assume that russia is planning powerful hybrid attacks on the european capital, and not a campaign on europe. and this may be a separate issue since article five has always been about responding to ground invasions, however putin seems to be focusing more on other tactics such as missiles, communications disruption, intense cyber warfare and anything that can undermine the ability of european countries to support ukraine. this

has not yet led to the application of article five or even article four for negotiations, so we're not sure about... how strong the collective european responsibility will be if the war turns in russia's favor. and yet i am sure that they will reach a common denominator in this regard, because poland, germany, france and great britain will be afraid that the situation will worsen and affect them. there are no concrete plans or solutions at this time, there is an acknowledgment that we may have to take more serious action. however, i... believe that there is not only recognition, but and readiness for such actions. recently , the president of the united states signed macroeconomic aid for ukraine, more than 61 billion dollars. the amount is huge. on the other hand, we are also aware that the russians also throw huge money into their defense industry. well, actually, if you try

to compare these proportions, it is not about money, but about specific military equipment. i don't think the russians manage to even out any proportions, they can only keep doing what they are doing now, so for now we just have to assume that whatever russia succeeds in, it will be something close to what they are doing now, because in order to implement something radically different and complex, it is necessary to have completely different training and equipment systems, so russia will continue to act in its spirit and pace, especially if the new... sanctions from the european union and the united states will really increase the pressure on iran, north korea and all those countries that support russia. the list of these countries includes switzerland, austria and china. so i think we're going to see a change in the coming months, huh namely increasing sanctions pressure to try to reduce and stop

russia's ability to do anything different than what it is doing now on the territory of ukraine. personally , i would really like to see a lot more focus on supporting soldiers on the front lines because we are still losing too many because they are not properly equipped. i constantly communicate with people at the front who simply have no one and nothing to fight for. in my opinion, we spend too much time constantly focusing on one big thing. how much we talked about tanks, how much do we talk about f6 fighters. how much money did we spend on the unknown ? let's not forget about the construction of ships for ukraine in turkey. it turns out that we wasted time and money, although in fact, if we had immediately started making grenades, grenade launchers, mortars, mortar ammunition, that is, basic things, we would not be where we are now, because russia would not have been able to break through the defense lines,

the ukrainian the warriors would have something to stop her, so for now we are worried. about the f-16 and other big things, i would like to have 3-4 months of energy aimed at providing the front with the ammunition and weapons necessary to hold positions, fight and at the same time preserve the lives of soldiers, because without good soldiers there can be no successful counteroffensive. professionally trained soldiers are worth their weight in gold, they are the ones who form the locomotive that will manage to break through the enemy's defenses. it is almost impossible to do this with those who lack education. thank you very much, mr. colonel, for this extensive and extremely deep analysis to our tv viewers, i want to remind you that colonel was currently working on the spresso broadcast retired british army military expert glen grant. thank you very much.

there are discounts represented by coco discounts in may on dolgit cream 150 g 20% ​​in pharmacies plantain bam and oshchad. hello, this is svoboda ranok, an informational project of radio svoboda. top guests every day. this is the shipping district of kherson live. we are somewhere in the vicinity of bakhmut. we tell the main thing on weekdays at 9:00 verdict with serhiy rudenko from now on in a new

two-hour format even more analytics, even more important topics, even more top guests, foreign experts, inclusion from abroad, about ukraine, the world, the front, society, as well as feedback, you can express your opinion at any time of the day with the help of a telephone survey, turn on and be included, the verdict with serhiy rudenko every day on on weekdays from 20 to 22 for espresso. the football format changes the time of airing. from now on, you can immerse yourself in the atmosphere of football every monday at 22:00. professional analysis of matches, exclusive interviews, goals, goals, emotions. the project is for experienced fans. and simply for people who appreciate the non-committal view of football, football format every monday at 22:00 on espresso tv channel.

great return of great lviv, conversations, discussions, search for solutions, ukraine's largest conversational format in the evening prime time. in general, i believe that we need two things: money and weapons. we did not start this war, but we must finish it and we must win. every thursday at 9:15 p.m. in the project , velikiy lviv says the most important things on the air of the tv channel. mark fegin, a figure of the russian opposition in emigration, will now work on the air of the tv channel. former state duma deputy, well-known video blogger. glory to ukraine, mark, congratulations. glory to the heroes, i am happy to welcome all the viewers. well, nothing particularly strange. happened, putin crowned himself and made several extremely powerful throws, we did not feel anything positive there, but this means that the line for war will most likely

continue, yes, putin is in power, his politburo is in power, well, they threw a man into the shoiuga from the cage, but , but, but, mark would ask you now to analyze the most important, most dangerous putin messages. first of all it should be noted that there are three new factors in the connection. with this inauguration, protocol-wise there was nothing special, everything was the same, a set of words, slogans, etc., but from the point of view of the political situation, there is a peculiarity: firstly, this inauguration took place during the war, that is, putin took part in such events, continuing his power, but still not against the background of a full-scale war in eastern europe. it makes a mark. in his speech, he again spoke about the heroes of the svo, about respect for their military work, etc. and secondly, he is in in 2020, he extended his mandate in a fake referendum, and this is the first time that he simply resets the previous term, changing the constitution to suit himself. we saw this

with lukashenka and in other places. maduro the peacemaker once did this in venezuela. for putin, this is also an important step, it is the transition to a totalitarian system finally, and according to the personalist type. and such an inauguration means the final attempts at... which he wrote for himself, this is an indicator of the same. and probably the third. look, this is the first such inauguration, where it is not a silent recognition its legitimacy is determined by the attitude towards it and the march 17 elections of representatives of western countries. representatives of the french embassy were among the most important ones present, because... they were instructed to do it, not because they wanted it, but they were there on behalf of the eu . among some additional features, the fourth important point is the prayer service. to

the kingdom, the orthodox leader promov kirill. of course, they are employees of one of putin's institutions, but this is already a sign of some divine anointing. it was not immediately after the inauguration either solemn prayer service, once it was separate, here it is specially protocol. kyrillo addresses putin with two metropolitans and says that, for the first time, an orthodox person himself and this and that is actually starting the transformation of a totalitarian system into a dynastic one, in my opinion. dynastic - it means that power becomes unchanged according to another principle. so you have to invent something, here they are already getting close to justifying why putin and his family, or those who belong to his closest circle, dignitaries will remain. even on

may 9, there was nothing strange, that is would take and combine, you know, the prayer, may 9, the shoig on camels and the spirit of ungern sternberg over the red square, let's say so, i think they need to double these events to increase attention, otherwise they held everything in one day and that's it. on may 9, there will probably also be some sort of throne speech by putin, as the inaugurated first official. now they are watching. to make immortal regiments, parades, suddenly a drone will fly, but apparently it is ideologically beneficial for them to disperse these events in order to raise his status as a a military leader, as the head of a country waging an aggressive war against ukraine, etc., that is, the task here is broader, so they did not combine in order not to simplify the situation, to diversify a little, today

only the russian orthodox church is a full-fledged ideological institute in this... topic, in united russia, what is the ideology there, steal and run, but the russian orthodox church is still an ideological institute. let's start with the fact that i generally believe that religion and ideology are one and the same. they say that god exists, this is already an ideology. catechism - some orthodox, dogmas, a sufficient set for ideology. the roc justifies putin's power much more than united russia - the ruling party. what can she justify? there is only bureaucracy. what can they invent, and the russian orthodox church says, we are a new ideology, according to which the current government has a direct entrance to god, it is a direct reflection of him: the orthodox kingdom, the russian world, the whole set that we hear from time to time, but it is in no way cannot be assembled into a single puzzle, and this inauguration, if it has any significance, is not so much protocol as ideological, war and the immutability of this power in a totalitarian system become the main tools.

leaders of this ideology: the war increases, that is, we protect the homeland, although we can see the quality of these defenders, if you have criminals returning from the svo zone, raping boys, recent events, some catastrophic percentage of recidivism among people participating in the svo, but ideology can ignore it, completely close your eyes, because only putin needs a high justification, the rest is slag, from this point of view , taking into account all this. you know the first the term when he changed the constitution for himself, and molebin and the rest are indicators of some kind of renewal that leads the country to the abyss, even more, but for putin it creates an ideological cushion that he really needed. well, mark, look, there is another moment that is very characteristic, that is, of all the tools or institutions of putin's legitimization, he still has what, strategic nuclear weapons and tactical nuclear weapons, and here they decided to spend.

certain exercises, this is about the southern military district of the russian federation, the district that is directly involved in the war against ukraine, but if we talk, for example, about the broader palette that you talked about, then the russian orthodox church, putin, so to speak, anointing the future, well, we understand that they have to return to the concept of the so-called great patriotic war to complete the picture , the great patriotic war against napoleon in 1800. the 12th year, and then, of course, we move on to stalin, who, let me remind you, in the 41st year, so to speak, addressed the soviet citizens with the call of brothers and sisters, well and behold, accordingly, i'm waiting for everything, maybe not this week, maybe in a month, in general, yes with regard to nuclear weapons, this is definitely the cornerstone of the ideology, nuclear weapons, possession of them, these six hundred warheads become.

nuclear rhetoric, constantly threatening russia, because they are constantly exploiting this as a foreign policy tool , conducting training in the western district, including lukashenka, this is the main threat to the west, but it is also an ideological threat. we will get our way, using the nuclear theme, to what extent they are ready to use nuclear weapons, the question is open for now, because it is a one-way street, after using nuclear weapons... you won't turn around and it will have the opposite effect, but they use this nuclear rhetoric to intimidate, primarily the west, there is no point in intimidating ukrainians, they are not afraid, but they summoned the british and french ambassadors, because of their statement that the means supplied to ukraine, in particular missiles, can be used for any purpose for shelling the territory of russia or not, it is up to ukraine to decide.