in pharmacies plantain, ban and oskad. greetings, this is svoboda live on radio svoboda. we have already approached the serpent himself. the following shots may shock you. news from the scene. live kamikaze drone attacks. political analytics. objectively and meaningfully. there is no political season, exclusive interviews, reports from the hottest points of the front. freedom life, frankly and impartially. you draw your own conclusions. vitaly portnikov, khrystyna yatskiv and invited experts based on facts give their assessment and forecast of the development of events. do you want

to understand how our today will affect our tomorrow, see the saturday politics club that saturdays on espresso. greetings, this is svoboda live and my name is iryna sysak. gur claims that this night special forces of ukrainian intelligence destroyed two russian boats in the occupied crimea, two more were damaged. the agency also showed a video of its attack on the released boats, as it is claimed, the boats are attacking ukrainian magura vi5 naval drones. on the approach to buska bay , the russian military tried to neutralize them. for this

in crimea 32 times combat aircraft were allegedly lifted into the sky, in particular su-type aircraft, migs and helicopters. these are details from gur. according to preliminary intelligence information, they managed to sink two tunets high-speed transport landing craft, two more of them were damaged. data on the destruction of boats in russia was not officially commented on. i must also note that it is currently impossible to independently verify this information. at the same time, an attack by ukrainian drones. along the narrow bay in chornomorsk in the crimea, the geolocation of the published gur-video confirms. after researching this footage of the attack, the russian service of radio liberty reports. explosions that night also rang out in occupied kerch, where the kerch bridge was even blocked. in more detail about the night in crimea, now we will talk with igor tokar, a journalist of the crimea realia project, who joins our broadcast. igor, i congratulate you. congratulations. let's start with the situation in kerch, what happened there that night, there is information. that a dozen explosions rang out, and

then the occupation authorities reported a rocket attack and damage to the ferries, or only the ferries were damaged? well, about that night it was definitely restless in kerch, confirmed not only by information, let's say, social networks, this information is confirmed to us by our own sources who now live directly there on the territory, in particular, the first explosions occurred around 3 p.m., they were there according to different information . from six to 20, that is, it depends on who lives in which part of the city and what they heard, in particular, the ministry of defense for the ministry of defense of russia said that it was some kind of combined attack, that eight operational-tactical missiles from the territory of the sea of ​​azov, of course, they were all apparently destroyed, and there were also eight uavs there and some unmanned boats there, i want to note that in... in principle, this

information may partially correspond to the truth, because if you take the range from kerch to the territories controlled by ukraine, the distance there is about 250 km, this is the zaporizhzhia region, the range of the atakams, as far as we know, is about 300 km, so these data are correlated, as for the damage, the information in particular has already sounded from the adviser. controlled by russia the head of crimea kryuchkov, and he stated that two ferries, one car, one railway, were apparently damaged, and apparently there were also some broken glass in some buildings there, no victims, no injuries, apparently everything is fine, but with information appeared in various sources that two non-car ferries were seriously damaged... and it is worth

noting that these are the only railway ferries left in crimea. and the vanguard itself, it is damaged quite badly and seems to have even run aground, and there are injured members to the crew, to what extent this information is true, we do not have the opportunity to check yet, but we have what we have, in fact konrotrader was damaged less, but there were also victims, the only thing i want to note is that the avangard itself, what is interesting, because it is quite still a new ferry, manufactured in 2009, and to understand the value of these vessels, let's say that these ferries, they brought not just cargo, but they could transfer 27 railway cars in one trip, that is, in fact, as the crew say, yes

if we exclude these two damaged ferries, then in the port still has five ferries, and these are... two small car ferries and there are three large car ferries, as far as they function, as far as they can meet the needs, it is difficult for me to say, we have information, so what do we have, and also by the way there was information that, by the way, the russian media made public, but official sources have not yet confirmed or denied it, including ukrainian sources, that a pilot boat was destroyed, a dream, what a pilot boat is, what a vessel it is. which takes the pilot, takes to some other ship, mostly a civilian one, which aims to pass through the kerchenikal canal, and in particular under the same famous arch of the kerchensky bridge, because no ship, it can pass,

let's say so, on this road without a pilot's escort, but there is information, that it was also destroyed, but unfortunately we do not have video or photo confirmation, you say that the russian public was informed about it. and is there any information from the official russian side, are they possibly reporting on the destruction of this boat or ferries? no, they do not report, and so on in general, i can say that just before preparing for the broadcast, i went to our map of military facilities in crimea, and we have a category there about explosions and damage in crimea, and i looked at what explosions and damage were in this territory and in none of the cases, although there are such and even visually confirmed, but... neither russian power structures, nor military structures, nor official political structures there, we can say so, they never confirm sightings, they always say that all attacks there are repulsed, all drones were destroyed, and the missiles were intercepted, just for example, you mentioned the black sea,

the vuska bay, for example, literally there less than a month ago, on may 6 there was visual confirmation that the naval drones of guru. destroyed the speedboat mangus, it can be seen flying straight into the center of the port side, and it is clear that after such an impact, even if there was no explosive substance, and it was there, the boat would hardly have survived, but russian official sources deny this information, they say nothing like that, just the same there was a defeat in the same narrow bay on november 10, 23, the project boat of the akula project was destroyed. and serna, that is , again, all these video confirmations, they are on the network, you can view them, along the kerch strait, there were also damage, here i am looking, on the night of march 4 to 5 , the patrol ship serhii kota,

igor, and by the way , you mentioned kerch again, ukraine did not comment on this rocket attack on kerch, do you have any guesses as to why , well, these are purely my guesses, maybe just this one. various agencies were involved in the attack and, conditionally speaking, vur dealt with the fact that the attack was carried out on the narrow bay, and some other defense forces of ukraine, they dealt with the attack on the ferry crossing, and given that it was possible there a drone attack or a missile attack, visual confirmation of this attack is more difficult to get, and therefore to publish just words, probably, they may not have decided. we have already mentioned the attack on the boats, in particular, four boats were hit, two of them were destroyed, according to the reports of the main intelligence department, we saw the video, what are the characteristics of these boats in tunisia, what did russia use them for, how big a goal is it for ukraine? well, first of all, i want

to say that the tunets were hit this time not for the first time, they were hit back in september 23 , and then, by the way, they used, in... an aircraft known to ukrainians as the b2, in particular , i won't say that it's a fat target, it's such a - a small vessel that uh... holds up to six people there, it's considered there, it can be used for amphibious operations, but its price is not so great, but if in in rubles it is 6.9 million rubles, and if you quote, for example, in dollars, it is less than 100 dollars, there, if my memory serves me correctly, it is about 70 thousand dollars, that is, it is as such a pretty good suv, but even not premium class, thank you, thank you igor, it was igor tokar, a journalist of the radio liberty crimea reality project, thank you. the president

of the united states of america, joe biden, is close to changing his position and allowing ukraine to hit russian territory with american weapons, the new york times writes about this. noting that such a decision could become one of the most important for the us president in the russian-ukrainian war. pressure on biden to lift the restrictions is growing from advisers and allies, the journalists said. and biden is weighing fears that such a permit would lead to an escalation with a nuclear-armed russia, but after months of calls from ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyi, the white house has begun a formal and apparently swift reassessment of whether to take the risk, the report said. also on the eve of the change in the us position regarding secretary of state anthony blinken also hinted at attacks on the territory of russia, noting that the united states government can, i quote: adapt and adjust its... position as needed. end of quote. at the same time, the new york times writes that biden's permission to

use american weapons against russia may have limitations. listen. some of his advisers, who declined to speak officially about discussions at the white house, say a change in his position is imminent. but if the president does change his point of view, it will most likely be accompanied by harsh measures restrictions on how ukrainians can use weapons provided by america. limitation. its military objectives are directly within the borders of russia, from where attacks on ukraine are carried out. joe biden will most likely retain the ban on the use of american weapons for strikes deep into russian territory or against critical infrastructure. at the same time, the united states is concerned about ukraine's attacks on russian nuclear strike warning systems, the washington post reports with reference to its own sources. such attacks can, i quote, dangerously worry moscow. especially against the background of discussions in the white house regarding the permission of ukraine to strike on russian territory.

an american official told the publication about this on condition of anonymity. the washington post reminds of last week's attempts by ukraine to attack russian radar stations, and at least one of the strikes in the krasnodar region's armory caused damage, the publication writes. a ukrainian official said on condition of anonymity that russia uses these radar stations for tracking activity military, instead, sources among american officials suggest that such strikes could, quote, harm the strategic stability in relations between the united states and the russian federation, the article says. hear about it. these facilities were not involved in supporting the war against ukraine, but they are sensitive sites because russia may now see its strategic deterrent forces as a target, which could undermine its ability to maintain a nuclear deterrent against the us. it should be obvious to everyone that the us has no intention of using nuclear weapons against russia, but there are certainly

concerns about how russia might perceive its deterrent forces being targeted, early warning systems being attacked. previously , 11 countries allowed ukraine to use their weapons on the territory of the russian federation - these are great britain, france, canada, denmark, sweden, finland, the czech republic, poland, lithuania, latvia and estonia. by the way "ukraine will be able to use danish f-16 fighters to strike targets in russia, he said the minister of foreign affairs of denmark, lars luke rasmussen, is in brussels today. we talk about this further with oleksandr musienko, a military commentator who is now joining our broadcast. oleksandr, good evening to you. good evening. rfe/rl has prepared such an infographic, where we can clearly see how far and with what western weapons ukraine will be able to strike on russian territory if it eventually receives such... permission, can you analyze what

the lifting of restrictions will change for ukraine and the situation on the battlefield in general , in particular from the side of the united states of america, depending on which restrictions will be lifted, i.e. what objects we will be able to strike, i.e. whether we will have completely free hands and we will be able to choose any military objects, including and airfields where russian aircraft are or may be located or will be removed . only by those forces and means that are in a certain range there, for example, in a hundred-kilometer zone or 150-kilometer zone, as proposed, in fact, that we will be able to cover. there is a course the belgorod part of the rostov region, and accordingly, in principle, to oppose those troops located along the border line, which russia uses to conduct offensive actions against ukraine. well, in any scenario, whether it is the first or the second, it will do a lot for us, because it is important, because we will be able

to use the arsenal of weapons that we have, and, well, for example, the russian troops are 10 -15. from the border, grayvoron is very close there, where they are now concentrated, in the area of ​​the belgorod region, well, if hit with cluster bombs or atakams with a cluster warhead, you understand, they will simply be forced to withdraw, that is, we will force the enemy to withdraw from ukrainian territory, we will be able to hit the s-300 launchers, we will be able to hit manpower, we will be able to hit the accumulation of equipment , and russian troops will be forced to leave. deep into the territory of russia, and accordingly this will lead to the fact that, at the very least, it will spoil it, it will delay it or even completely level it and, let's say, make their offensive plans impossible to the ukrainian territory, to the kharkiv region or the sumy region, and even if they do not abandon these plans, they will have to go from the depths

of the territory, stretch out in columns, they will not be able to move already in assault groups, as , for example, they moved... to vovchansk, starting there an offensive on kharkiv oblast, and by stretching out their convoys, this means that armored vehicles or other vehicles will be going, which are just as vulnerable, and therefore, even if they decide to attack ukrainian territory, they will be able to do it with much smaller forces than they can, for example, to do it now, plus it's losses, plus it's damage, of course, and it potentially gives us the opportunity to talk about the creation of such a zone in... actually controlled, which can be maintained under fire control by ukrainian troops, well, at a range of 100 - 150 km, that's for sure, and it's actually a lot, you're talking about if the united states of america gives permission, that's right, because 11 countries have already given permission to strike on the territory of the russian federation to ukraine, and can we somehow see

the results in fact now from these permissions, or are these just statements so far? well, i understand that these are statements, then... so far, obviously, we do not see, if these were further statements, we would be able to use them, and we must understand that 60-70 percent of the weapons that ukraine uses one way or another, it is either made in the united states, or the components and elements in these weapons are so american that without the final say of the united states, we cannot use them, from f-16 aircraft to 155 mm shells. or self-propelled artillery installations, which the missiles can be produced in the usa or any other type of weapons, well, with the exception of course there are stormshadow, scalpig missiles, but they are not used now, apparently, maybe because there are no final approvals and instructions yet, and everyone is looking somewhere at washington and they are still waiting for a decision from them, but washington

is already writing about the fact that, even if biden makes such a decision, there may be restrictions. that is why i said this, because these restrictions are being discussed, they are not being written about for the first time, they are being talked about in the west expert circles, well, as you heard, probably president macron too, when he showed this map at the meeting with chancellor scholz, he too , there were drawn launchers, well , the s-300 are similar, that is, they said, well, you can strike at these installations, according to these, that is, even from the maps that are shown, it is already clear that some restrictions are being prepared, well, so be it, i will tell you that... even with restrictions, there should not be any betrayal here, it is certainly worse than without limitations, i agree, but even so, it greatly improves our position than compared to what is now, well, significantly. oleksandr, and one more question, can you explain the fears of the american side regarding strikes on russian radar stations, i already mentioned this, there was such a news, eh, why

are they so worried about this, well this... again and the very program that exists, i mean the program of nuclear deterrence, as well as the prevention of risks of escalation by the potential use of nuclear weapons, in principle , theoretically speaking, these early warning systems and in the horizon detection, on which the drones successfully worked, quite successfully, which, by the way, opened the eyes in general, you see, it demonstrated a lot of things, but it demonstrated that these radars are vulnerable, they are not covered, that they can be... hit not mi- missiles that cost 3, 5, 10 million dollars there and it is not known how many are needed, and they can be hit by much cheaper drones that can fly up to 200 km there. and this has exposed a lot of this , in fact, in many respects rotten system that exists in russia, protection, notification and so on. but at the same time, in fact, these systems, in

principle, are included in the systems of russia's nuclear deterrent forces, strategic missile forces. i think washington's fears might be how russia might react and how they might interpret it, and whether or not they will interpret it. as in fact an attack on military and nuclear infrastructure facilities, which can already trigger the use of nuclear weapons according to the russian doctrine, a retaliatory strike with nuclear weapons. you know, such caveats, they are always present, except in ukraine, no one has done this before, no one has struck, no one knows what to do, no one knows what the reaction will be in the west, everyone is wary, and all these warnings go hand in hand, but at the same time, look... in russia, it seems to me that no one even commented on it, as if it never happened. oleksandr, thank you very much, thank you for your thoughts, it was oleksandr musienko,

a military observer. thank you. thank you. and what do you think about strikes by western and including american weapons on the territory of russia? please write your thoughts in the comments, and also like this issue and subscribe to radio liberty social networks and our youtube channel. we continue to discuss the topic of strikes by western weapons on the territory of russia with oleksandr kraev, an expert of the ukrainian prism foreign policy council, who joins our broadcast. good evening to you. yes, congratulations. discussions about attacks on the territory of russia in the states became especially active after anthony blinken's visit to kyiv. and today the american media are already writing about the fact that biden is almost ready to change his mind. why, really? well... the states can change their political position on this, do you think they really can, and on this, if before it was only hinted at from foreign policy, because the allies gave us this right, because

the determination of the ukrainian armed forces showed that the russians are not ready to react, even a strike on this so-called long-range target detection station, which is allegedly part of russia's nuclear deterrence block, it showed that the russians can take even such a provocation as they call it... and not react , now also in an internal political factor is added. we see the statement of mike turner and other republican congressmen, which directly appeals to the white house and the pentagon to grant such a right to ukrainians, because let's remember the bill that the republicans just pushed to finance ukraine. in addition to actually providing our state with more than $60 billion, it also contained several levers of pressure on biden and his administration. in the context of providing atakams for 350 km with a single combat unit, and also in the context of providing a strategy for the victory of ukraine within 45 days, that is, the question

of striking with western weapons on the territory of russia, it is now not only a question of what the americans are supposed to do within the limits of their foreign policy. for the biden administration, it is now also a question of elections, it is a question of ratings, it is a question of the image of the biden administration, because so far he... against this background, precisely in the rhetoric of the trumpists, in the rhetoric of conservative republicans, biden looks weak, and they are pressing precisely to this point, that the issue of ukraine is not so important here, the issue of taiwan is not so important, because it is also connected to this, the important thing is that the administration of the american president does not seem decisive, and the opponents of america can use this, so it seems to me that that the discussion regarding such a permit has moved to the level of elections, has moved to the level of what is really important for... both the biden administration and his opponents, indicates that such a decision may be adopted soon enough, and from a price point of view, not because , that they love ukraine or our

partnership so much, and because it is a matter of electoral points, it is a matter of image in an election year. mr. oleksandr, you are talking now about the domestic political context of the united states, and what is the role in these discussions of other countries that have already begun to grant separate permits to ukraine, as i mean great britain, france, it could somehow... that could affect america's position? it really can, because this is how american military diplomacy works, this is how american information security works. let's remember how the americans handed over all new packages of military support and all new types of weapons back in 22-23, this applies to howitzers, this applies to tanks, this applies to mlrs systems such as hymars, the allies were the first to make such transfers, that is, the first before , as the hymars gave us, the british... gave ukraine two mars-2 systems, which are british analogues of the hys, before the m37, well-known american, began to arrive in ukraine by the dozens, the first were the british and the germans, who

gave them to us. .. the first artillery complexes, the same was the case with tanks, first the british announced the challengers, then the germans and other allies handed over leopards of various models, and only then did the american abrams go, and in this case the americans clearly profess the same doctrine, that is, if the allies pave this fairway, if russia does not react to what the allies are doing, the americans can now do it safely. the logic of this approach lies in the perception that america has had since the end of the cold war. that supposedly anything america does in russia is perceived as a threat in the third world, anything done by partners and allies is not so threatening in the eyes of moscow. and based on this logic, the americans have always waited until the allies first take provocative, escalating, or even some kind of deliveries or steps. as soon as it becomes obvious that russia will not react to it, the americans themselves will come to the same opinion and will also start doing it. it seems so, as well as in granting the right

to strike on russian territory. their weapons, the americans also profess this principle. but by the way, you mentioned allies, not all of them the allies are ready to give this permission to give this permission to strike on russian territory, i mean germany, to what extent the opinion of the united states can influence scholz, who has been strongly opposed to this for a long time, because, for example, politico wrote that the chancellor germany is already advocating for permission to strike the territory of the russian federation with western weapons, and the german government. are already so careful to withdraw their reservations, how can you comment on that? well, it's actually very good that the germans have now gone ahead americans, because earlier the germans professed the same doctrine that the americans professed, but in the context of the americans themselves. that is, let's recall the discussion about tauros. scholz's key argument was that as soon as the americans are ready to take this step, as soon as the americans will be able to provide ukraine with attackers with the same range of strikes as

the taurus and with inseparable. combat unit, then they say that he himself, chancellor scholz, will be ready to hand over taurus to ukraine. that's why, for example, when we received the first batch atakams with a cluster warhead with a range of 150 km, and chancellor scholz once again fell into the cold, literally, and said that this is not the case, you misunderstood, these are not the missiles we were waiting for, and therefore the taurus for now whatever will happen, the fact that the germans are now taking the initiative in this regard is a very, very positive signal, it really shows what scholz said. in its political era, that is , the change of eras, the change of times, that is, times have changed, and now germany, as well as other allies, will be ready to revise their, seemingly unshakable positions in foreign policy, therefore, as soon as we see activity on the part of the americans, activity is meant both in terms of granting the right to strike on the territory of the aggressor, and in terms of granting us attacks at a distance of 350 km, perhaps we will see in the future and the transfer of taurus to us and

a more proactive position. katslor scholz. alexander ultimately, the last question is: how long can these discussions last in the united states? they will not delay as with military aid for six months. fortunately, in this case, the question now stands only in executive power. that is, if we are talking about military aid, it was a matter of political reason. that is, as long as the ukrainian topic brought biden points of support and popularity, the republicans received this help, accordingly, trying to lower biden's rating. as soon as his ratings began to rise, despite his passivity on ukraine, we saw trumpists take over the issue of ukraine, draft their own bill and push it through parliament. now, when the congress is putting increased pressure on the presidential administration, for this one weapons were granted, and to grant such a right, when the pentagon is already starting to change its own point of view, the state department is already actively lobbying for ukraine to be granted such a right, the decision remains only for the presidential

administration, that is, for... even from a procedural point of view, there are currently no reasons this decision is delayed, and accordingly, when a limited number of people are involved in the decision, the process can obviously go much faster than when such a decision has to go through a joint legislative body such as, say, congress. let's continue monitor the situation in the united states. oleksandr, thank you, it was oleksandr krayev, an expert of the ukrainian prism foreign policy council. thanks. thank you. an informal meeting of nato foreign ministers is taking place in prague. these days , the international columnist of radio liberty. rostislav khotyn works at the event and now joins our broadcast. rostyslav, i congratulate you. tell me, please, are they talking about ukraine within the framework of this event, what are they saying, and is it actually about strengthening support for ukraine?