he is still enough to go to the elections, and later, let's say, in the fall, that is , the tendency is for the conservative party to lose in the majority among the british voters, so that was his, so to speak, calculation, calculation, what now it is more profitable for him to hold elections than to hold them at the end of the year, but i think that, let 's say... let me predict, it is unlikely to save the conservative government and the conservative majority in the parliament, but we already have a tendency today, yesterday 80, so to speak, members of parliament great britain from the republican party announced that they will not take part in the elections that are planned. now

it's summer and this guy is talking about a mass exodus, what is the reason for this, it can be evaluated in different ways, in my opinion, they want to, so to speak, make those who will not stand for election, in particular, michael gove said this today, this such a very well-known conservative figure, to somehow take a break and not take part in the obviously losing ee such a losing struggle that awaits the republican party, but for something can change in ukraine if labor comes to power, or some policy changes, or will it remain as it is now, i think, definitely not, of course there may be some adjustments, but the policy of great britain is based on real support voter, on... the support

of the people of great britain, which is mostly on the side of ukraine, and speaks, and actually the policy of any party that is ruling now, and even the opposition party today as well, it means that these parties also stand on the side of ukraine, i.e. i don't expect any serious, whether there are any developments or changes, well , i don't know, there may be some nuances, but... well, let's not forget, we have recently signed an agreement between ukraine , a security agreement and great britain, which is signed in great detail, at least on the next 10 years and the political, economic, any other military assistance that great britain will provide to ukraine, ukraine, and i do not think that anything will change, that is, the framework of this agreement even. well, hardly

anyone will be allowed, so to speak, to change the general, general policy of this great britain in relation to ukraine. thank you, thank you, mr. volodymyr, volodymyr khandogiy, president of the ukrainian association of foreign policy, former ambassador of ukraine to great britain, and now to the middle east with ihor simovolos, director of the center for middle eastern studies, congratulations, mr. ihor, congratulations, congratulations, another one has happened the decision of the international court of the un on the situation related to the army'. israel's operation against hamas, the court is now trying to stop israel from continuing its operation, which is connected with elimination of the terrorist position in the southernmost city of the gaza strip, rafah, the only place that has a border crossing with neighboring egypt. how do you think this decision of the international court can affect the situation at all, or can it? well, i think we have already heard statements from the israeli government that they will not comply with this decision. and

accordingly, it is unlikely that the military operation itself will be stopped in the near future, but the decision itself will undoubtedly affect the international positions after some time, perhaps even sooner than we think israel, i think that the non-implementation of this decision, and israel is a member of this international court. of the united nations, that is, according to the statute, he must comply with this decision, and this failure to comply with this decision will have legal and political consequences for israel. i think that the situation may come to the situation that was with south africa at one time. what does it mean? please explain to our viewers that this means that there will be sanctions against israel. and the united states will agree to it, you do you think americans? they will not

agree to this today, it is obvious, but the americans also find themselves in a rather difficult situation in connection with this. well, this is the decision of the hague court, it is rather... as far as i understand, it is political, or is it someone's, relatively speaking, such a whim, or is it still a certain collective, political decision, according to your point of view, why now , in general, this decision is legal, i do not think that the decision is political, the court decision cannot be political in this case, it is legal, that is why exactly now, because all the procedures have finally passed and a decision has been made, because the court does not accept. the decision is made immediately, but in accordance with the procedure for consideration of this issue. well, in principle, we understand that the situation cannot somehow be resolved by the decisions of international institutions, there is an impression that no one is particularly waiting for a solution to this situation, even the arab countries are not conducting

any intensive, i would say, diplomacy for that , to solve the problem of the war in the middle east, they are more involved in the situation related to the war in ukraine or. there is the un resolution on srebrenica than on the middle eastern situation, you see, the united arab emirates, saudi arabia, we hear all the time that they are talking about ukraine, that they are talking about the balkans, but somehow not so much about the gas sector , no, they say, i think, it's just that this information reaches us less often, and because it is less interesting to us, and yes, in principle, well, it is the most obvious and loud. an event that could have happened but did not is the agreement between the united states of america and the saudi arabia, which provided for the normalization of relations with israel in exchange for a palestinian state, and this indicates that the political

process is quite powerful there, another thing is that israel does not agree to this, this already indicates that the priorities have changed quite seriously . in israeli society and the israeli government, they now do not want peace, but want victory, well, the question arises, what will really happen to this process, for reconciliation with the arab countries, in case the operation against hamas continues, and even if to imagine that an arab, that israel will succeed in breaking the energy of this terrorist organization and destroy that base among the population, which has always fueled violence on its own territory. and in the gas sector, and we know, on the west bank of the jordan river, where the position of terrorists is also very serious among the so-called civilian population, which has always chosen terrorists over those who offered peace. well, let's imagine that there is security here, but what to do with the arab world? well, firstly, after all, not an imaginary civilian

population, but a civilian population, yes, and secondly, after all, before resolving the issue with the arab world, it is necessary to resolve... the issue with the occupation, i think, is primary, and relations with the arab world are already secondary, but israeli flights have always been the opposite, you have seen the last 10- 15 years, the approach was completely opposite, despite the fact that it is clear, because netanyahu has been ruling in israeli politics for 15-12 years, and it was precisely his approach that largely caused the situation in which israel found itself. mr. igor, one more solution, very interesting. maybe for someone controversial that happened this week, three countries: ireland, norway and spain have recognized the palestinian state, israel seems to have not yet recognized the challenge, they are going to recognize it, at least there the legal procedure has already

started, israel is summoning ambassadors, how do you comment on this, what kind of decision is this and what are the consequences, in the end , it will be a mother for israel. and for the palestinian authority, well, for now there will be no political solutions for israel, yes, it is clear that israel is lowering the level of relations now, i think that this is not enough, i think that israel should lower the level of relations with all 147 countries that recognized palestine, then it will be real, i will believe in their intentions, and as for what is happening, well, obviously politics. netanyahu proved that, in principle, the peace process no longer exists, and the israeli settlements and the ultra-right, which are in power, seek to seize all the territories in the middle east, it is the palestinian-israeli conflict that generates and

constantly provokes new conflicts and generates and grows new extremists, so these decisions are absolutely logical, every country. of course, they accepted them based on their own interests, their reasoning, someone talked about the two state solution and that this is such an important signal, someone talked about the fact that they are in solidarity. with peoples fighting for their independence, for some it was relations with arab countries that were more important, but here the considerations are completely political, logical, i think this is not the last recognition of palestine, but what other states do you think can join such legal procedures of the beginning recognition or full recognition, at least in the western world, i do not rule out that it could also be france. at least macron has already stated this about the possibility and willingness to do this, but let's analyze the real meaning of this,

because there are already many states in the european union and in nato that recognize palestine as a state, the soviet union recognized the palestinian state as a state back in the days of yasser arafat, we can say that with the assistance of the soviet special services, this process all began in a big way, ukraine is among those countries, practically all of them, probably former soviet republics, which recognize palestine as... well, that's right, because there was a representative of the liberation organization there palestinians in moscow, which later turned into an embassy, ​​so i understand correctly, so correctly, that means the third year is how many years, 30 years in fact, and ukraine recognizes palestine, russia recognizes palestine,

kazakhstan recognizes palestine, all recognize palestine, and the countries, and suddenly we find out that there are three more european countries, three countries, two of them are members of the european union, three members of nato, two members of nato, two members of the european union, two members of nato, there somehow , yes, that's right, norway, norway , spain in nato, ireland and... and spain in it doesn't matter to the european union, they also recognized the palestinian state, why such a reaction to what has long become an ordinary pro forma, and does not even take a step closer to the creation of this state, so what is the problem? i'm also curious, i'm also curious, why exactly this is the reaction of the israeli government, the israeli minister of foreign affairs, well, actually, well, it seems to me that in general, netanyahu's reaction to all the events that are taking place, that is, he actively uses the term... antisemitism, in fact, devaluing it, for all, for all

criticism of the israeli state, and this is the approach, it seems very counterproductive, but it is the right of their government to do so, domestic political motives, you think, first of all, no, of course, he is under pressure, who threaten to leave the coalition, and everything is fine. and in such an amazing, although, why amazing, very post-soviet aviation disaster, in

a helicopter that was apparently supposed to be flying, but was flying somewhere in complete darkness after the negotiations of ibrahim raisi with the president of azerbaijan, ilham aliyev, with a number of officials, a lot of conspiracy theories, but here's your impression, it's just a disaster, or should someone have gotten rid of this odious politician, well... if you follow the razors, then of course it's a disaster, because there will still be many theories around it with language and one of the key conversations, which i actually heard already from the iranians themselves, that in any case, if singh ali khamenei wants to take the post of president, and then claim the post of supreme leader, then they will still tell the whole morning that it was he who killed raisiya. to get rid of a competitor, in the best traditions of persian history, you can say, but it seems to me that this is again a theory of language, and

here it is simple, well, people are mortal, as you know, and sometimes they die very suddenly. do you think that this will somehow affect the political situation in iran, as in general reisei was not so much a president, but as a player, he was an important figure in the iranian establishment, well, he was considered as such, that is, in principle , he lost something, especially against the background of economic and political troubles. but he all the same, there was a person close to the corps, and the corps obviously had some kind of calculation on him, and there is no information about what is wrong. for example, he expressed some serious dissatisfaction with raisi, although reports have recently begun to appear, as if rsi was dissatisfied, but from the very beginning, his role was this, that is, to take on everything is not okay, so there is one nuance that is important in this situation, it is that the political groups, clans and economic-political

clans of iranian society, which are absolutely legitimate many are not satisfied with the fact that khamenei carries out a rather strict policy of vetting candidates, that is, not giving them the opportunity to access resources, it seems to me that at some stage, not now, a little after a step, but a certain consolidation of dissatisfied groups will take place, and then we can already see manifestations of political instability, yes, but turbulence is without a doubt in the near future... at times it is to be expected in connection with even 85 years of khmni, and he does not look like such a super healthy man. mr. igor, the question which probably worries many citizens of ukraine, this is actually iran's relations with the russian federation, the supply of certain

types of weapons to the russian federation, will this change in any way in the near future, and maybe... will it change after the election of the president of iran, that is, once again i emphasize, the supply of certain elements related to weapons, shaheeds of the same, and so on and so on. you know, it seems to me that it is not, because the key decisions are made by alikhmene anyway, and communication with russia takes place with his blessing, and this means that most likely only... the direct will of alikh minei can change the situation, i see no reason to change that will yet, given that the islamic revolutionary guard corps is essentially the backbone of the iranian regime, and without the support , and they are lobbyists to a large extent of such a situation, we remember what has been said since the time of suleimani, and i do not think that

alikhamenei will suddenly change his position, for example, the position of iran ... in relation to the united states of america and vice versa, here are possible any, at least minimal shifts, at least after the presidential election, i mean the same nuclear weapons that they talk about so much, will we also see the same belligerent rhetoric towards the civilized world, here i will add to andrii's question that i very interested, frankly, in the presidential election, because in iran it is such a ceremony, but i am interested in the american-iranian talks, which we hear about from time to time and do not understand what it is, what they are talking about there, yes, yes , no doubt, they continue, that is, maybe the level of these negotiations has decreased, that is, they are not official, as before, yes, delegations meet and are already privately discussing possible options for an agreement, but they

continue, and the agreement with the americans is... will continue, i don't think that the rhetoric accordingly, we should expect these sentences to change, because she is traditional, and she would demonstrate iranian courage, yes, well, i'm here, of course. exaggerate, but nevertheless, this, this is their style of behavior, negotiation, but i think they may recover after the month of november more actively, and given the circumstances, who will win the elections in the states, who will win the elections in iran, but it is obvious that

moderate politicians are unlikely to be allowed into power now, no one will take risks, so... the conservatives will believe again, here the question is whether they are messianic messianic, i.e. such as ahmedinijad, or whether they are able to negotiate and rationally thinking people, we have the whole conversation, everywhere you go in the middle east, all the time you talk about messianic sentiments, the question arises, how can states , which led by leaders with a messianic attitude to agree on something, it is difficult to agree on almost anything, yes it is true, here is another question, there is certainly such a controversial reaction, we have seen this reaction from many politicians, regarding solidarity itself. is the sympathy of iran and the representatives of the iranian authorities regarding the death of raisi, and many representatives of the european union, nato, sympathized and, as

they say, ran into criticism, this is a certain diplomatic language, this should be the case, or is this another attempt, as they say , to seem so friendly to that state which is very often shows aggression towards to the civilized world, well, i think, both that and that, that is, diplomatic etiquette, he is still such a leader of the state, well, the president of the state, not a leader, but a president, but the second point, not all european countries, let's say, are really serious about confrontation with iran, but one country, france, for example, definitely does not want to confront, conflict with iran, it has big business interests. and zalyub had business with iran, at one time, when the nuclear agreement was signed in the 15th year, in the neighboring capital

there was a whole bunch of french businessmen sitting, who were just waiting for a green rocket in order to take off in a tager for the next one, well, this is also an interesting moment, that on the one hand , iran is obviously playing the role of an ally of russia for once with... on the other hand, the iranians are talking with the united states, on the other hand, iran plays an important role in the south caucasus, because it maneuvers between azerbaijan and armenia and turkey, but president raisi met with aliyev before his death, and should have met with pashinyan, as far as i know i understand, also in this same period, and it is obvious that the role of iran in the south caucasus suits the united states and france, because it restrains azerbaijan and turkey by and large. what does it all look like then? well, it looks like iran is maneuvering, that its strategic culture involves forming around or reducing

the circle of enemies around itself and forming a circle of friends, it doesn't work out very well, but they are trying. thank you, mr. igor, igor semivalos, the head of the center for middle eastern studies visited us on communication in this ether. thank you, and we are moving on to the hour of communication with vitaly portnikov, we will talk about various topics, of course about russia, we will talk about this initiative of putin, about the alleged negotiations, we will talk and of course, i am thinking about iran, we will talk about the global peace summit, in short, we will discuss all the most important topics now, mr. vitaly, here... this week, putin will fly to lukashenka, they are talking about the illegitimacy of zelenskyi, they are talking about negotiations, there are a lot of different statements that are and

interesting, there are uninteresting statements, but of course, these are all things related to the alleged readiness of russia for negotiations, allegedly that zelenskyi is illegitimate there, allegedly that they are ready to discuss some things there, but only within the framework of the current one. the situation on the front line, what is it, it is putin who wants to influence the peace summit in this way, he wants to break some certain ground, maybe in relation to those states that are currently wavering, yes, whether to support ukraine or not, why today, why these statements now in this period why is putin flying to belarus and again, by the way, brandishing nuclear weapons. well, the fact that putin flew to belarus just during the period when the exercises are taking place with the use of non-strategic nuclear weapons, it is clear why, well, he flew

to belarus to show that these exercises really bother him and lukashenka, he gave the opportunity to express himself on this subject , lukashenka, all this, by the way, is taking place against the background of a discussion in western countries about the possibility of using western weapons in order for... ukraine to destroy military facilities on the territory of russia federation, to the sovereign territories of the russian federation. and you and i need to understand a simple thing, what are putin's tactics in general. putin's tactic is to deliberately raise the stakes. because in general , the one who stops raising rates will lose in this war. and so we started our program with this tragedy in the kharkiv region. i... want to remind you that the intensification of russian actions in kharkiv against kharkiv itself coincided with successful ukrainian drone strikes. on

the territory of the belgorod region, remember? whoah, whoah. there were strikes, the objects of russia's military infrastructure were destroyed. and what putin said, we will create a sanitary zone so that none of our regions are affected by ukrainian strikes, although again, when it came to strikes on the territory of donetsk, luhansk, kherson, zaporizhzhia regions and crimea, no one said such a thing. truth? that is, now with russian propaganda. some such amazing terminology appeared that this is the original territory of the russian federation, and it's not like, you know, new russia, new russia, new moscow, as you know, living in the new moscow is worse than in the old, despite the unification of these territories of the moscow region with moscow, it is more difficult to live in the new russia than in the old, because no one will take revenge, but this is the very idea that we should destroy kharkiv and create

a sanitary facility there. even if russia is not very successful, it is now coming to the west as a response to the successful strikes on belgorod oblast and the destruction of russian oil refining, that is , we will not simply respond as we they answered, we will simply destroy the city for them, so that they would know, so to speak, and this training with tactical nuclear weapons is a response to the discussion about whether it is possible to allow... to hit russian military facilities with western weapons, so that they understand that putin can raise the stakes even then, so you will allow us to hit the territory of russia with conventional missiles, and we will hit the territory of ukraine with an unusual missile, with a nuclear carrier, what will you do next, you have a plan, so to speak, how will you respond , that is, this is an invitation to further escalation, and by the way, you understand that it can affect western politicians, not

all of them are ready to agree that western-made missiles can be fired at the territory of the russian federation, who of all the western politicians spoke in favor of this , only one person in fact, this is the british foreign minister, david cameron, whose mandate ends in july, well , yes, somehow, jen stoltenberg said something carefully, but his name is not, he also said that not carefully, he said yes you have, but its extension. a mainstay, at least in the position of nato secretary general, and cameron in the position of minister of the roots of great britain, as a former british prime minister, he thinks about the legacy, he wants to leave this position, with dignity, but the current western politicians who do not think about the end of the 'er, they talk completely differently, and i

'll tell you more, we already see us. a bunch of people who have always been associated with russia, in the direction of no, but just today absolutely categorically against the possibility of using such weapons, said the vice prime minister of italy matteo salvini. you know that his league party has always been against the use of the west, western weapons, as such, to help ukraine. after 2022, he changed his position, another italian politician who is against the use of western weapons for strikes on the territory of russia is a minister. taiyani, he heads the party of the deceased prime minister berlusconi, that is, it really gives them opportunities, putin does not give such opportunities, to say, what, you will allow them to destroy a couple of russian airports, and what will we do with the airfields, and what will we do, if putin strikes at them with nuclear weapons, we have a plan, and it can paralyze the will of the west, so it is clear

why he went there, now regarding his talk about... he is clearly not alone, but in the company of the president of the people's republic of china , xizenping, decided give, one might say , zelensky a fight on the territory of the ukrainian president. why? in principle, as we understand, zelensky cannot act on the territory of the russian federation with the help of troops. the whole war of russia against ukraine is taking place and will probably take place on the sovereign territory of ukraine. but zelensky can start the attack on... the diplomatic positions of russia, and by and large this whole, i would say, story with the peace summit, with the previous meetings of the national security advisers, all this was connected with the desire to get as much support as possible for ukraine's view of the end wars, so that the war ends justly, justly.