understanding, what parallels, if ukraine is alone, the point here was precisely that all the allies united, that is, i lacked a phrase, not what is there about russia, but i lacked a phrase, together we will not only stand with ukraine, and we are now, we are now involved in this matter, that is, now the day has come when we cannot simply watch as the ukrainian people... bleeding, fighting for our european security, we cannot watch , to be on the sidelines when the ukrainian people are there now, while we are here celebrating, fighting, we have to enter this war and win, well, this should have happened, but it did not happen, but the anti-putin coalition also entered the war more than once, and it has been 5 years since the beginning of the second world war to this day.

almost 5 years and this is also a question, that is , if we already draw these analogies, then we are now with the second world war, so what stage are we at now? well, you know, it’s better than me that all these analogies limp, that is , i see recently a lot of comparisons with other moments with the soviet-finnish war, that is... there are just a lot of analogies closer to us, and in principle, to put it briefly, such countries that individually cannot actually, well, i admit it, asymmetry with russia and a nuclear country, many times more territory , many times more population, weapons, that is, it is obvious to me that the victory must be collective. and

actually, these countries dragged on for a very long time, waiting for the soviet union to take its steps, and then, with smaller human costs, to push from all sides, i think that if what i said is from finland, then they often say that it is necessary to stop there at some stage, to agree to fixation. situation, because there were many victims, the winter war in finland just showed that the soviet union, when it received this agreement to an armistice from finland, it immediately did what it did, after literally a few days it began to demand more, and did not allow finland to even sign the agreement with sweden, that is, then he demanded that his proteges take over the leadership of finland, and then finland was forced to receive support, or followed. such a step by the fascists, that

is, in fact, after the distribution of the spheres of influence, after the second world war, finland found itself on the other side, and then it lost essentially all the territories that it once gave to the soviet union, that is, these analogies must be understood by those who now thinks that if we fix the situation somewhere, as putin wants, then we will win something there, some kind of pause, and analogies... from grandfathers is victory, victory, what i said, it must be achieved together, together with allies, for today you know there is no ally in ukraine, because an ally is someone who signs an alliance agreement with you and enters the war, the supply of weapons, aid - these are not allied relations, they are partnership relations, this is all very well, but such wars of this scale are not won and do not complete. without the inclusion of all forces, and it

will be, and what you say, at which stage we are, well, unfortunately, we have not yet reached the dead day, as it happened there, we are somewhere waiting until the final understanding comes to all these of our partners, what is needed before this dday to come already, but the fact that there were no russians this year and at this anniversary already in the 80th anniversary, this already shows that... that no one will ever agree on anything with putin, or is it just that in the current situation 80 - things are happening this way, because the 70th anniversary of the landing in normandy was the first meeting, as far as i remember, between president poroshenko and president putin after poroshenko was elected president, and i remember how poroshenko simply did not want to approach the putin, and there they were simply brought together, so that they could at least say hello, exchanged a couple of words were exchanged there, well

, if i remember those days, i was really there and i remember them very well. all these moments, who approached whom, to whom, and of course, then there was putin, and now there is no invitation, although the french talked about the fact that they probed the soil, how it would be perceived if he was invited, well, of course not putin, because for putin, then an arrest warrant should be issued immediately, someone else, that is, for russia to be present, because russia or, say, those people... who were from the rsfsr in the soviet union, they took part in joint actions with the ukrainians, with the belarusians, with others, all our peoples of that period in the victory over nazism, simply, well, in fact , russia now took advantage of this victory in

its own mind, on may 9, they did it with some kind of fascist march, this is very strange. historical changes have taken place, and that is why they really perceive it differently now, somehow everything has turned around, they perceive it completely differently, well, if there were no war against ukraine and crimes and the already issued warrant by the hague court, of course it would be in a different way, but be that as it may, then the illusions that were then. and indeed, you correctly remembered, i think, on the seventh, it was precisely the inauguration of president poroshenko, and before that there was a meeting in normandy, and there was a hope, on the one hand, of the europeans, that they could somehow push putin to

a realistic assessment, and on the other hand in the same place, what else happened, that in fact barack obama gave this consciously, how he gave this initiative, or, in fact, pushed these problems away from himself, handing them over to the europeans, and this was a mistake, and this mistake is not repeated now joseph biden, although he worked with him as vice president, but you compare what barack obama said then and what joseph biden is saying now, because 10 years have passed, 10 years have passed and illusions about the intentions of putin and the regime are no longer there , therefore... maybe these years were needed for understanding, sometimes we say that in that period or another it could have been done in one way or another, well , periods are made by people, and that's what i say even today, what was wanted would be, so that it would be so, that there would be determination, well, not ready, not

ready, these are all a lot of factors for this influence, that is why normandy now and normandy 10 years ago are two completely different situations, two different situations. the only thing that is repeated is that ukraine was alone then, and now it still remains alone. come on, then, of course, we fought for there to be some kind of pause, to get the production of weapons in ukraine, you know, then many programs were launched, which, among other things, gave us the opportunity and now somewhere to advance further on neptune, on our missiles , and we... there started the same manpads, the same javelins the americans got, that is, we still used that period, so you don’t talk there, but today is a different stage, it is at a new level, if they were needed then,

it is possible to immediately provide these weapons in such a quantity as now, they would have stopped the war , if we had not been given this amount of weapons then, of course, it would have stopped us. putin, because he was standing, he had 175-180,000, now, well, according to estimates, 550,000 in ukraine around ukraine, that is, a completely different situation, so this is another such lesson that everything should be done in advance, preferably, without waiting for any actions , then the reactive position, by the way, now a lot of people are discussing exactly that, not even the amount of support to ukraine, but the dynamics, timeliness. that it is necessary not to react to the actions of russia, but to anticipate these actions. well, today zelenskyi spoke before the french national assembly, he said that he rejects the possibility of territorial concessions to russia until the end of the war. let's listen to what the president of ukraine said.

can putin win this battle? no, no, because you and i have no rights, no rights. lose, can this war die out on the lines that are now? no, for there are no lines for evil, what 80 years ago... what now, and if one tries to draw temporal lines himself, it will only give a pause before another war. now it is the same as when evil unleashed its aggression against its neighbors. in the 1930s, hitler crossed line after line, and so does putin today. mr. valery, the president of ukraine says that you and i have no right to lose, and again, well, despite everything

, the thesis about how we should win this whole war both in the current conditions and with the participation of a country that is a nuclear country, but there is n't one. how does ukraine propose to end this war, or do you understand what zelensky means when he says that we have no right to lose, but how to win? well, what the president of ukraine stated is, in principle, the official position, and it is a statement of two things, firstly, that if there is a pause, the war will not go anywhere, that is, it is an illusion that there are some agreements on freezing, that is this is an illusion, then everything will be the same, it will be even bigger,

will unfold more, and then it will be very difficult to avoid complete encroachment by the russians and the putin regime, and the second point is that he calls on his partners to realistically assess the situation and make efforts now, this is the official position regarding the occupation of the territory and access to the borders, it not change this is what the president of ukraine emphasizes, because a lot has been said about the fact that on the eve of all those peace summits there they have narrowed down the issues, well, here such an emphasis is clear in france that no one refuses these positions, but secondly, as, well, i have my vision, it is not that, let's say, today there is an opportunity for it to be implemented right now, but well , i am sure that such a war, it, outside the framework there, international legal, it

is considered a local, between a large country, such an asymmetric, local war, but regionally it already exists in some manifestations, it is global and in cyberspace, that is , this war is so multifaceted, and this type of war at this stage can be won by engagement. coalition of countries, that is, it has already happened more than once, when there is a coalition of countries, when there is aggressor, and this coalition adopts a set of measures in the form of economic sanctions, well, that is , an embargo, at the same time political isolation and a military coalition with the involvement of powerful countries, including those that have nuclear weapons, that is, in principle, it is clear, it should be... the coalition of countries that protect european security, which coalition of countries that

protect european security, at least is nato, which includes the united states, which includes canada, and there are european participants, including nuclear countries, the united states, britain, france, i.e. this is the formula for victory unequivocally, i.e joining forces, it means, it means, well , the fact that they still can't sleep in any way'. pour, but they will not come to this, at some stage, this is actually entering the war on the side of ukraine, because putin's ultimatum was not to kyiv, he was to washington and brussels in the 21st year on december 15, these documents are this ultimatum was made to them, and in some parts it has already been destroyed, well, first of all, by the lack of an answer to it, if such capital. capitulation, and secondly, sweden and finland are already members of nato. there is still some left accept ukraine and you can close this whole

story. so i think it will not be otherwise. that is, there are two ways. there are only two ways in this war, well, in the war, i mean in the confrontation, which is difficult to determine in the period, how long it will be. but one is the capitulation of ukraine, and the other is the defeat of russia through joint actions. a coalition of countries led by the united states, the same france, germany and britain, that's all. when we get down to it, this is an important question. everything boils down to the fact that... i have no doubt about victory, i have no doubt, i just a big problem, the resources of the country of ukraine, they are not, well, you cannot restore the lives of people, and professional, military, and those who are motivated and know how to fight, you cannot bring it back, that is why the logic that our partners have that we will to attrition now

, and i can already see it for next year, it is wrong, i think that they need to... think about the situation better, and concentration of efforts and bold actions can absolutely lead to a result, and it must be done as to convince them of this, you see, when they were afraid that it might come upon them again territory, supplies of weapons for us have gone, as soon as they see that war can come to their home, some steps begin, so we have no choice, we cannot... conditions under which they let an invader through their territory to he hit somewhere else, which could have been, by the way, unfortunately, here he is near us, so we have to convince, we have to show these scenarios, and for me they are obvious, here is the obviousness that nato will collide with russia, for some reason they think that they will avoid, the general secretary declares a direct threat, why not

a direct threat to russia, nato, because ukraine. distracts all these forces, just as the commander of the norwegian army says, we have two or three years, because in fact all those who stood by us, about this land component, all of them were dismembered by the ukrainians, that is, russia removed everything from all points , well, excuse me, yes, if so, then now ukraine comes out, provides and guarantees the security of nato countries, where have we come? there were also bravura statements then, well , excuse me, again, weapons, weapons are wonderful, and without them there is nowhere, and your help important, but they don't win like that, that's why they will be here, sooner or later in this war there will be nato troops, and america will be, well, maybe i don't know which countries, but the europeans will definitely be there, only our neighbors will definitely be there, because if

poland, romania , slovakia, the baltic countries, if they delay, then... war will come to their territory, that will be all, only it must be faster, otherwise the exhaustion of ukraine, well, it is not in the interests of us ukrainians, let's be honest, that's why i i want us to share this responsibility for the future of europe, not single-handedly pulled this strap against such a strong, in principle large country with nuclear potential. mr. valery, literally in the last two weeks, ukraine has received permission to use western weapons for strikes on the territory of russia, biden confirmed that the americans give permission to strike missiles 200 miles deep, well 300 km deep into russia, and he says that, well, we did not give permission for strikes in moscow, in the kremlin,

apparently, they have not been given yet, but macron has already said... that france will transfer mirage 2000 fighter jet to ukraine and will conduct appropriate training for ukrainian pilots as part of new military cooperation with kyiv to counter the russian invasion. let's listen to what the french president said. tomorrow we will launch a new program of cooperation and announce the delivery of the mirage-2000 series of french combat aircraft that will allow ukraine to defend its land and airspace. starting tomorrow, we will begin the pilot training program and deliver these aircraft by the end of the year. mr. valery, what do you think motivated ours western partners to move to a new stage of cooperation with ukraine, to grant permission for strikes on the territory of the russian federation.

the situation with kharkiv, the offensive in kharkiv oblast, or some other reasons that led to reconsideration. position of our western partners? well, i think there are three main factors: the first - the one i already mentioned, is the fear that the war will come to them, that is, well, let's be honest, they began to analyze the situation, that if ukraine is not helped in this way, this is the situation, excuse me, give it all, pull with the planes, like us again we can see, that is, f-16, even if the planes come there or something is already there. then the pilots now have a question, that is, well, the mirages said that everything is fine, so why only now, that is , before they said that f16. only mirage is not needed, because it is necessary to consolidate all this and f16. we adopted such a position, now it suddenly appeared, although i know that the training of pilots on other planes was already in france,

so maybe it will somehow go faster than with the f-16. further, why then the swedish hryvnias, then it was not possible, which taurs can raise, they said, because f16, that is, you know, well, it is clear to me, it is clear to me that it is all complicated. we understand that this is mostly not a part of logistics, that only 12 pilots can be trained by the end of the year for the us f-16, when i hear this, i, well, it makes me uncomfortable, because, well, once again, the us can train 12 pilots by the end of the year, well, what are we talking about, well, the usa and 12 pilots, well, what, well, who are you telling all this about, it’s only a political decision and... that’s it, now the french president declares, by the end of the year already mirages, well that is, look, from the beginning of the summer to the end of the mirage year, and what else at the age of 16, a year and a half come to us, then i have a question, that is, they

need to end all these games in this strategy of regulated escalation, it can end badly for them, for them, not only for us, i.e., this is the first moment, the second, indeed , on the border there is no order, when there are no opportunities, on the territory of the enemy, and there the weapons are accumulated and strikes are launched from there, then, of course, according to international law , this is allowed, if we have political such were the decisions, they were, we know, publicly even we said that we negotiate with the americans, that is, how we use these weapons, not only with the americans, with all countries, it is true, this is a very weak position, very weak, and i mean in agreements, for example, security ones.. i would by no means prescribe all the obligations of ukraine not to attack russia with these weapons, as is the case, for example, in the assembly agreement, on the one hand, they give f16, on

the other hand, it is not allowed on the territory of russia, but how, in what way. shoot down with missiles those planes that drop guided bombs on kharkiv, which, he should hover over the border and what to do next, well, for a non-military specialist it is absolutely obvious that this is... a delusion, who will calculate which f16, belgian, danish or dutch is flying, that is, what we are talking about, this i'm so tired of all these maneuvers, i'm tired of these conversations, because it's often, well , a bluff, it's fast, if it's in terms of supplies, and we don't know everything, that's great, great, but let's see what's being done, on to each website of the ministry of defense, the us pentagon, france, germany, they are each how many times are published. weapons have been provided, i understand that not everything is published, but mostly they publish it all, what kind of thing is this ? do you remember this during the second world war, when hitler fought for the allies to show

the germans how much they were transferring to the political party, the numbers, where, in what terms, well , to be honest, i am very worried about this, because on the one hand, this is a report in front of the taxpayers, i understand, but no taxpayers, i remind you, pushed for these... all the lists to be on the websites of the ministry of defense, it's kind of a strange story, they, when they saw, for something like this , such blows are inflicted uncontrollably and hit on civilians, in kharkov, there in the sumy region, then of course they were forced to do it under pressure, now i would say that, well, now the good side, well, they are considering there, that you can't hit the kremlin, moscow, but it's 320 km deep. of russian territory around the entire border, because i did not see any objection anywhere, around the entire border with russia, this zone will become a buffer zone in the future,

because it is impossible to get closer, of course it would be good at the distance of iskander, there strategic bombers, i would for the urals, of course, drive them if possible, well, it worked out, but for 320-400, so that the iskanders would be there somewhere on the edge, yes, this is in the future. in the future, i’m not saying now, but in the future to see, this will be a very important element, because then ukraine creating on the territory of russia, well, not us, but allies, when there is victory, creating this buffer zone in the agreements, there will be some guarantee , that they from russia will not repeat these strikes on kharkiv, on sumy, on other border towns, on donetsk, on luhansk, that is, what is important for us to record now. so from the position of not hitting the refinery, even with ukrainian weapons, to the position that it is possible for 320 km, i think, if it is in

a month. have passed this way, it’s already good, well , we need to remove this conversation about these bans altogether, wars are not won like this, they will not be won if you have any agreements with the russians about non-escalation in the future, well , i think that period has already come , when putin and this regime crossed all the red lines, that is , where to go if they threaten you with nuclear weapons weapons, if they send ships to cuba there, it is not known what will be transported there in these ships, that is, you understand, the historical parallels, what, what signals putin is sending, that is, in this too, in this position he will show weakness, well, it is first , it will be a historical mistake, and secondly, it will lead to problems for all these countries, not only ukraine. i'll remind our viewers that we're live and we're doing a poll today, we 're asking you about the lights today, are you ready for long blackouts, yes, no,

it's pretty simple, if you 're watching us on tv, pick up your smartphone or phone and vote if you're ready for long blackouts, although i don't know how you can be ready for that, but at least we'll ask you 0.800 211 381, no 0800 211 382, ​​please write in the comments under youtube, under the broadcast on youtube, what you think about this, and of course... tune in to our broadcast, we read your comments, we are interested to know what you think about what was said and heard on our broadcast, let me remind you that today at the diplomat, extraordinary plenipotentiary ambassador of ukraine valery chaly is visiting us, and you already, mr. valery, were told that putin is constantly trying to blackmail, and nato countries understand that sooner or later

putin will go to war. on the north atlantic alliance, on the countries of the north atlantic alliance, at a large forum that took place in st. petersburg, the so-called economic forum, the russian dictator once again threatened western countries with nuclear weapons at a meeting with foreign journalists, let's listen to what he said and how he said it , it's like that, it's like that very tough that... the united states is the only country that used nuclear weapons during world war ii. hiroshima, nagasaki - 20 km. our tactical nuclear weapons are 70-75 kton. this is such a tactical nuclear weapon. let 's not argue not only about use, but also about the threat of use. for some reason , the west believes that russia will never use it. we already have a nuclear doctrine.

look at what it says: if someone's actions threaten our sovereignty and territorial integrity, we will consider possible, use all the means available to us. you can't treat it lightly, superficially, you have to treat it professionally. i know, mr. valery, that you don't really like to comment on putin, and in general, what he says, but i will still ask, what does it mean to become a professional? on the topic of nuclear weapons in putin's variation, how should the world professionally discuss this with him? well, what he translates, what he said, if you think that i'm not crazy enough not to give this order, then you 're wrong, i've already made a visa in order to will drag everyone behind them, look at me, you see what a maniac i am, then i can go

further, that's... what he told them, in his understanding, is a professional assessment, because in fact, if we speak professionally, what was said there , you can’t threaten, at the same time they do this all the time, they don’t just threaten, there his deputy on the security council declares that he announced the launch of a strategic nuclear weapon attack on london, on paris, on i don’t know, he called washington, and what is it, it is forbidden by all the conventions that how about... professionally if regard to this, then after such a statement it is necessary to use conventional weapons to completely bombard everything that they supply here, supply, if it is professional, then there should have been a professional response, he mocks that there is no professional response to his threats from the west on...