weeks are extremely important, they give a clear signal to moscow, the west will not retreat and will not leave ukraine, but is this enough for our victory? until now, many western leaders preferred to avoid this word altogether, hiding behind phrases like moscow must not win, or ukraine must not lose. at a joint conference with zelenskyi, biden was intrigued by the statement that the us is negotiating with ukraine on a victory plan. this is not an abstract. declaration, and the law on additional military aid to ukraine, which should be submitted for consideration congress. however, for now it is only about a draft of the document, and it is unlikely that the congress will deal with this issue before the presidential elections.

congratulations, friends, the politclub program is on the air on the spresso tv channel, vitaly portnikov is with you, two hours of conversations about what happened this week, about the prospects for the next with our experts, and my first interlocutor mykhailo samos, military expert, director of new geopolitics research network, expert of the army, conversion and disarmament research center, congratulations, mr. mykhailo, i welcome you, so let's start with such an important topic as the security agreement between ukraine and the united states, which in principle it really provides to ukraine, even under the condition that it is not an interstate agreement that is ratified by parliaments, but an agreement by and large at the level governments well, in fact, i would say that the signing of such agreements, it forms a club of countries that commit, in principle, it can be said such a word, commits anyway, at the moment, multilaterally, comprehensively, i would say . in english

comprehensive, to help ukraine, to help ukraine, precisely oppose to oppose in the war against russia and call a spade a spade, that is, we are talking about military aid, military-technical aid, defense-industrial cooperation, well, in principle, military-political aid, that is, the leaders of these countries with which we sign security agreements, they do not shy away from calling things by their names, putin as an aggressor. and so on, that is, when we talk about the peace forum, the number of participants is much larger, but not all the countries that are ready, well actually stand with us in the war against russia, just the signing of security agreements, especially by the united states, this is extremely important from those components that i mentioned, the united states is the leader of the western world, if the western world still exists, this is a philosophical question, but on the other hand side, it was precisely from

the united states that we expected, perhaps the first signal, when these formulation processes were just beginning, what is this security agreement in the situation or in reality, when, if we speak realistically, we will not join nato while we are at war with russia, it is obvious to us this is always openly discussed in principle , and the summit that will be held in washington in july, it... it is now clearly clear that there will be no further invitations or promotions of ukraine to nato membership, and in these conditions it is really important to have such security agreements , which should not be confused, of course, with nato, this is absolutely not the same level, and what's more, what i saw today, sullivan himself frankly said that the next president of the united states can really just tear it up, and in fact, this agreement is still in effect. .. in power president biden,

this agreement and other approaches to relations between the united states and ukraine will be reviewed later. and in principle, if we talk about the determination of the united states regarding military aid to ukraine, regarding permits to strike on russian territory? can we say that there have been some serious changes in the situation now? to be honest, no, that is, if, if they fought back, serious changes took place. then it could be said that the united states began to give us everything it has, in principle, that was just the plot, and the president biden said, we will hand over everything we have, but i’m sorry, we know how many are in warehouses in the united states, at the bases for storing aircraft, tanks, armored vehicles and so on, there are thousands of units of all the named types of weapons and military equipment, they are being handed over to us there, well, for example, 31 tanks, or one

patriot complex is handed over to us there, well, somehow it does not coincide with the fact that we will hand over everything that we have, and at the same time we are handed over, well, units. moreover, we remember half a year of turbulence in the congress, when we at all nothing was transmitted, and it really was, well , we can talk about various conspiracy theories, but it looked like this, well, almost like a passport to putin, look, now you have a chance to change the situation, if you force ukraine to surrender, then we will decide it is somehow already for under other conditions, but ukraine continues to fight, and it is very interesting here, when... again they say, is the united states really helping us to the end, i am not talking about the conduct of troops or the participation of american military, but if we compare what is happening in russia, then russia has already almost exhausted its warehouses and storage bases, they are now sending

t-62s there in the fiercest battles in the kharkiv direction, almost without any modernization, that is, these are old tanks that they have almost completely looted their bases, but... the united states there are thousands of such tanks in the states, not such, or rather, much more modern, and if the united states treated us finally as an ally, they would have to hand over to us hundreds of such tanks, which would quickly begin to change the situation on the battlefield, because simply, even not just asymmetry, it's simple symmetry with russia. unfortunately, such symmetry has not yet been observed. by the way, when you say that russia has almost run out of stockpiles and has no weapons. why do our politicians scare the west from time to time by saying that if russia defeats ukraine, it will go further west, when you yourself say that nato member countries have huge arsenals, and russia is already on the verge of exhausting its resources only in the war with ukraine, then how

to fight with other countries, the stocks are exhausted, yes, the stocks are exhausted, but first of all, they have production, yes, it is small, well, about 150-200 pieces of tanks per year, for example, this is about... nothing, but in fact, when i say that the warehouses have been exhausted, they still have equipment, and they which ukraine, for example, damages on the battlefield, it again repairs, restores, modernizes and sends to the battlefield, in addition, they still hope to uncover the arsenals of, let's say, their allies, this is north korea, maybe china, maybe iran. which can help with certain types of weapons, well , in principle, putin is constantly talking about some peace talks or a freeze, conflicts or no freeze, he calls it differently, but obviously he needs a pause in order to release new equipment and create a new fist

to attack ukraine, obviously they are not in the best situation, and somewhere in the 25- this year, they may actually have a shortage of armored vehicles, even now. you can feel it when they go to attack on motorcycles, or on some buggies, golf carts and so on, that is, it means that they really have problems with armored vehicles, and with regard to our allies, i was just saying about the united states, our european allies don't have a lot of technology, and that's obvious, and that's why when you say that our european allies have to prepare for war, that's true, because they're completely unprepared, when we talk about the united states states that's another matter, but again, no one knows how the united states will behave in terms of its alliance commitments, not just to ukraine, to its nato allies after the elections later this year. and how it turned out that europeans have so little common sense

techniques? what happened to her all these decades? well, you remember, 30 years ago, the wall fell, everyone was very romantic , peace was forever from... portugal to vladivostok and so on, that is, there were a lot of naive thoughts, ideas, nato in general lost a little bit of itself in a certain way on the eve of 2010 year, for example, they didn’t know what to do at all, that is, they had a certain period of fighting terrorism, but in 2010 , especially in europe , defense budgets just started to fall, politicians simply had it is not profitable to speak in words. not even that defense, security, and well, in countries such as slovakia, hungary, the czech republic, defense budgets fell by 40% annually in 2010-12, that is , they were simply cleaned out, well, in germany in general at that time, in fact, the army was more so

symbolic, and we now clearly see that there are very few serviceable tanks, and few personnel, few planes, and so on, and this is germany, and what can we say about other countries there. spain or the same portugal, which i already mentioned in another context, well, that is, 30 years europe was preparing for peace, and even, i remember a very cool expression, european armies are preparing for peace. to peace, not to war, and this was their credo, which they successfully implemented, but in fact now they are in a very difficult and difficult situation, i understand that everything is now being revised in such an emergency way, laws are changing, even terms are changing military service and changes to the approach to military service, even in such countries as germany, but now it is happening, of course, well, this new law, where martial law, they will mobilize for 18 years. well, there is no mobilization for military service, but there is mobilization for both labor and military service from the age of 18, and with

the germans, i think that everything will be much tougher than in ukraine and more clearly, the evasives there will not feel that way, somewhere there because some river will not be crossed to france, but i think that such processes, they are going on all over europe, everyone actually understands that ukraine has faced, ukraine as a democratic european state. encountered with a huge challenge, if we are talking about mobilization itself, precisely about those formats when society, european society in the 21st century has to solve, to solve such a difficult task, when you just go and die on the battlefield, it is, well, i am talking to europeans, they say, in our country in general there could be a catastrophe, that is , surveys were conducted corresponding to... in germany, it seems, 20%, and in the czech republic 20% are ready to go to war, but imagine, when

mobilization is announced, what they can there will be conflicts, which of course russia will have use. in general, indeed , the production of defense by the defense industry is also increasing now, we know not only munitions, and missile programs are being implemented there, the same thing, rheinmetall, for example, is increasing the production of tanks and armored vehicles, the french is trying to do the same. the netherlands and so on, well, that is, the only thing is that it will be very difficult for europeans, for now, without the united states, to implement some concepts or doctrines for conducting a strategic defense operation against russia, so in fact, ukraine is now carrying out an extremely important role, buying time, including for europe, so that they really in emergency mode at least try to prepare, especially if the new president of the united states says that we are leaving a nuclear umbrella over you, and

i'm sorry, the russian-ukrainian war is our problem in general, we deal with china, we have other problems, so please, you rich countries, as trump always says, for example, you have a lot of money, pay for your defense and good luck, well, from this point of view it turns out that the west may be interested in ukraine not losing, the war continuing, but not ending, because it weakens russia. it takes time, well, of course, if we look at how the war will end, of course we will, if we look at the real situation, of course we will end then, well, it is possible not to end, in such cases there are options, well, first of all, europe pays , well, they pay at least in money, finally there are certain funds that will now be in nato and the european union, including this trick, i would call it frozen assets. russian ones after all europe, including not only the united states, europe also provides us with economic stability, well, in principle, also

military, economic stability, because obviously without our european allies we would not be able to fight, but of course one can find motives such as those that are super-strategic, that if ukraine continues to wage a war of attrition with russia, then at some point russia simply will not be able to continue this war and... in this way it will be possible to simply, well, i don't know, throw it somewhere in the middle ages and then try to solve it this is a russian question in a mild way, without causing some kind of chaos that can hit europe, but still more predictably, but on the other hand, well, in principle, i don't think that the majority, even european politicians, politicians would like to fight there 10 or 20 years. nevertheless , they have a need to move on to more

familiar problems in their political life, especially since if you look at the processes and trends that are taking place in europe and the united states, that is, the right-wing bias, the bias towards conservatism, this means that those politicians who they are talking to us now, they are losing influence precisely because the war is not theirs, let's put it this way, well, not only not theirs. this is an inconvenient topic that does not give them dividends in the elections, and the right plays absolutely on this, on the contrary. on this topic and are getting more and more seats in the parliaments and governments of different countries, well, because people are afraid of war, obviously, yes, especially in europe, in europe people were pacified for 30 years, and now they are trying to prove that war is normal , that, that you have to join the army, that you have to clean weapons, what, what do you need to produce shells, in germany, for example, maybe you know that

there were cases when communities forbade building on their territory weapons there... pasture factories, although from a pragmatic point of view these are taxes, these are new jobs , but actually pacifism, it has taken root deep in europe and it is normal for the 21st century, anyway, we in the 90s of the 20th century thought it was normal when the wall came down and there would be no more wars, but it turns out that we they were very wrong, and it is difficult for europeans to realize it now. thank you sir mykhailo, mykhailo samoch, military expert, director of newgelita. the expert of the center for the study of the army, conversion and disarmament was in touch with us, now we will take a short break, but please stay with us, there are interesting dialogues ahead, the verdict with serhii 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, and also feedback, you can express your opinion on the bad day for help... phone survey, turn on and turn on, verdict with serhii rudenko, from tuesday to friday from 8 to 10 p.m.

every week, the saturday political club helps to understand the processes taking place in ukraine and the world. vitaly portnikov, khrystyna yatskiv and invited experts based on facts give their assessment and. forecast of developments, want to understand how our today will affect our tomorrow, watch the saturday political club, every saturday on espresso.

the football format changes the time of airing. from now on, you can immerse yourself in the atmosphere of football

every monday at 220. professional match analysis, exclusive interviews, goals. sails - emotions. the project is for experienced fans as well as for people who appreciate a non-committed view of football. football format every monday at 22:00 on espresso tv channel. kanal spresso and ukrainian pen present their own title project with myroslava barchuk. a series of conversations with ukrainian and western intellectuals who analyze and comment on the most relevant social debates. which ones... will not be analyzed by the guests of the project this week, and actually who will a guest of the studio, we will find out already this sunday, definitely, the topics will be relevant, the guests will be special, their own names with myroslava. barchuk. sunday: 17:10 on ereso, we continue the political club program on the espresso tv channel.

oleksandr kraev, expert of the ukrainian prism foreign policy council, we are in touch. congratulations, mr. oleksandr. yes, congratulations, good evening to you. well, the summit in switzerland is over, the communique has been signed. president zelenskyy says that a new summit can be held in a few months, and on russia will already be at this summit and there will be a pro... the path to peace laid out there, but after such statements the question arises: how, in what way, what has technically changed since the arrival of statesmen at this truly representative summit in switzerland, which makes it possible to believe that russia will come somewhere, agree to some negotiations and end the war. well, in fact, there are no adequate reasons to think so. unless the bar for entry to this summit was set so low that almost anyone could join it, because it is about the issue of nuclear safety, the issue of exchange. captives, the issue of food security, these are precisely those three topics that interested everyone as much as possible, and then we saw a fairly significant outflow of people, after the final communiqué was nevertheless

rearranged so that there was also a mention of respect for territorial integrity and pro-borders of the year 1991, i.e. russia initially, here it is worth reminding our viewers, they wanted to involve already after a working group has been set up for each of the nine points, and as soon as these nine working...groups will be able to come to an understanding of how to arrange the 10th point, i.e. documentary consolidation, the end of aggression and the impossibility of repeating such aggression, and only on this point it was planned to involve russian representatives, conditionally speaking, putting them in front of the fact, in front of what fact do we want to present to the russians now, i personally do not have an answer to this question, but really, if we want to have negotiations with them so quickly, if we want to have a second summit quickly enough, then... until then we need to have time not only to pass these three points, but also to actually complete 90% of the agenda, which i do not consider simply possible. well, well, if they even fulfilled 90% of the agenda, why

shouldn't the russian federation ignore 90%, as it will now ignore 30? that's a good question, and really the only fuse that could have made russia react in any way was china. and in fact, at the very beginning, as you remember, during the meeting of advisors in jeddah. even during the raniki meeting in malta china showed a certain interest, and the presence of the chinese in jeddah, in principle, then still gave us hope that in fact everything could return to the right direction, and china would involve the countries of the global south more actively, and there was a belief that only the presence of china and its setting on some kind of dialogue will force russia to come to an agreement at some point, but after scholz's visit to china, when china announced its so-called four points, now that china was not at the summit, i personally... do not understand what can make russia look in a different way to the results of the meeting in switzerland, especially considering what putin said the other day, that this is all profanation, this is an attempt

to undermine russian-chinese unity, this is an attempt to aggress against russia from, as he said there, the western hosts of ukraine, his favorite wording, that is, how we want to involve russia in the second summit and at what cost, i repeat, i simply have no idea, but if we really want to, then we need to... work, at least to fulfill what was planned before this, but maybe chinese the representative of lihui was at a meeting of advisers on national security issues in jeji, maybe he just thought that it was ukraine that would be ready to change its position, accept the conditions offered by china, there is freezing, cooling, lack of any guarantees, neutral status, and so on then it is possible, because china will facilitate such a conversation, well, they saw that there is no such thing, that ukraine continues to stand on its position, they lost. the statement of our ministry of foreign affairs, which was in chinese, did not help at all the formula has points that agree with our vision and we need to talk further.

in fact, the most important question for me, as it seems to me, now arises in this equation between china's own formula, china's attitude towards our western vision and china's attitude towards the russian vision, because these are three completely different approaches, and although the russian approach is a little... appeals to what the chinese said, but it is much more radical, and so far we have not heard or seen the real position of beijing in relation to the russian plan, and therefore, to understand whether china will be ready to work more with us, whether china will be ready to fully support the russian position, although now we see from the supply of weapons that china is possible and ready to support the unspoken russian position, or whether china will work on the same initiative china brazil, which they wanted to do in the format of a bilateral summit. of ukraine and russia in saudi arabia, while the position of china remains unclear for us, it is not yet clear what interests it will pursue from these three parallel formats, i remain

just guess about what we should really bet on, perhaps the fact that we are promoting the continuation of the peace formula, the second summit as soon as possible, the involvement of russia as soon as possible, this is precisely an attempt to show china that our plan is the only one that is advancing, is the only one that has at least some perspective, or maybe china is interested in such a solution as a simple ceasefire, they don't want anything, they don't say anything, let's decide this way and that way, will you recognize donbas as russian, or should russia agree to... . stepped into nato, you become neutral, or russia is there, let them agree that your territorial integrity will be ensured by your demilitarization, they just say, cease fire, and then talk. yes, indeed, china's position in this regard is very straightforward, but china's position is not actually mentioned, well, in such formulations, neither in our plan, nor in the russian one. before the ceasefire, the russians want the ukrainians to surrender more than a third

of their territories. we want to talk about the fact that a ceasefire is only possible when we will have security guarantees and an understanding that in the future we will be able to liberate the territory, and in the future, even if the territory is free, we will be able to cement the non-repetition of aggression, and therefore, in this regard, it is possible to emphasize that negotiations with russia must to start as soon as possible, china will be able to use it to say, well, if you want someone faster, as they said before, let's sit down somewhere... maybe china will play on this narrative, but it is repeated, so far there are no hints from the heavenly side in us was not, in principles, if we talk about the terms, why it was necessary to hold a summit at the level of the heads of state right now, you understand, here is the expediency, why right now, what were the expectations, something might happen, you know, it's like in that old joke about two

political analysts, that... i can explain it myself, well, you understand what is really happening, and it seems to me that the explanation is completely, well, let's say, built into a logical chain, that we need to start a format that will become unalternative, in perspective, as desired would see us in our positivist thinking, and that is why we need to have the first summit at the level of the heads of states, heads of governments, so that everyone can see the importance of this, so that as many countries as possible join, work groups are launched, and then in the future somewhere second... third , the fourth, fifth, sixth summit, we have already come to some kind of vision, that is, this was the obvious logic of our leadership, but was it expedient to hold such a summit right here and right now as soon as possible, realizing that china will not , realizing that a significant part of the countries of the global south refused to participate, realizing that many regional leaders of the global south also said literally at the last moment that they were not ready to

participate in such a feasibility summit. there was no such thing, that is, the logic is to launch this format and continue to promote it, if you proceed from the very positivist thinking of our leadership, well, there was such a logic, but was there any practical value, well, the practical value disappeared at the moment when china decided that he and i are not on the same path, in principle, for by and large, why then did russia and china struggle so much with this summit, or was the main struggle really around? the very presence of china, it seems to me that china fought only by the very fact of its absence, it understood that huge bets were placed on it, both in ukraine and in the west, and the global south would turn on it, that is, china constantly understood, that he is the king maker here, it is he who can decide how successful this or that initiative will be, simply because his decision depends on the participation of

dozens and it depends in principle on understanding how much pressure it will put on russia, so what china did is absolutely clear, it saw that for it such complex formats and such intricately connected formats with the western view are inappropriate, it came out with an alternative opinion , this alternative opinion was not listened to to the extent that china wanted it to be listened to, and china decided to divert its attention to this format of the ukrainian peace formula for the time being, and as for... russia, russia mainly, as we have seen , conducted an active anti-summit policy and actively promoted the narrative that the summit would fail at a time when preparations for it were still underway with the involvement of china, still with the active involvement of india, and still with the active involvement of many other partners of russia in the global south, that is, for russia, this issue was more difficult than for china, if china had the opportunity to choose, then russia was obviously afraid that...