e with the powerful means that he has. here, once again, thank you, do not fantasize. we thank you very much. thanks for your analysis. oleksiy hetman, reserve major of the national guard of ukraine, veteran of the russian-ukrainian war. well, onward, colleagues from the bbc. in switzerland, ukraine calls it historic and is already preparing for the next one . in the kremlin, they talk about failure, but at the same time they do not reject the idea of ​​dialogue. so is peace any closer? we analyze in today's edition of the bbc. i am olga palomaryuk. the largest and strongest international meeting since the beginning of the war, that's how the west talks about the peace summit that came to switzerland. indeed, the scale of the summit, as well as the number of participants, were impressive. more than 90 countries of the world. heavyweights on the... international scene like

the united states, india, saudi arabia and par. long before the opening of the summit , observers said that one of the key criteria for the success of the meeting would be the number of participants, which is why the ukrainian side worked for months to attract as many countries as possible. russia is not at the summit were invited, representatives of china also did not come, but even those who were present at the meeting signed the joint communique, which is the final document. not all, how it all happened, says the bbc's sarah rainsforth. hundreds of politicians came here to the swiss mountain resort to talk about peace, to discuss ending the biggest armed conflict in europe since the second world war. the result of the summit was a joint declaration that confirmed the right of ukraine not to be invaded, but some including saudi arabia and india, have not signed it. despite this, volodymyr. zelensky

calls the summit a great success and emphasizes that the world must respond to the full-scale invasion of russia with full-scale diplomacy. you are worried that international support for ukraine on the battlefield, support for victory is weakening, because of this you talk about peace. it is not because we are weakening that is why we talked about peace, we have always said peace, we have always appealed, it has been almost two years since we proposed a peace formula at the g20. just at the peak war on the battlefield, ukrainian troops are on the brink. before the start of the summit, vladimir putin proposed his own terms of peace, which essentially called for surrender. instead , official kyiv is trying to seize the initiative. the hardest day was my birthday. and this is a conversation about agreements that can really be reached, in particular about the return of military and civilians from russian captivity. i was beaten and tortured. maxim was in

polonia for 11 months. he is sure: an attempt to develop a peace plan is not a rejection of resistance. we have enough people, we have enough will and courage to continue the struggle. all we need are weapons. ukraine did not receive the unconditional support it had hoped for. however, she was able to convey the main message. russia understands only force, as on the battlefield. in diplomacy and even before the beginning of the summit, while developing the agenda, the organizers thought about which issues to include. in the end, they chose three points from the so-called zelensky formula. these are food security, radiation and humanitarian issues. and then we thought for a long time about the formulation of the final one document and literally weighed every word. even so, such important countries of the global south as india, mexico, parta,

the communiqué did not sign. russian propaganda has already begun to use this fact as proof of the failure of the summit. so can we really talk about success? my colleague svyatoslav khomenko observed the summit for two days and here are his impressions. the main thing in evaluating the results of the peace summit in bürgenstock is the management of expectations. that is, if there is any person who expected that here in switzerland world leaders will gather, they will sign some final document, and as a result , the war in ukraine will end. immediately, well, such a person is obviously in for a lot of disappointment. on the other hand, in the third vice of the full-scale aggression that russia is waging against ukraine, i think there are actually no such people left, so we can approach this issue from some more realistic positions. so what it's about is that the process of ending the war is a two-track process. one track is military, this is if one side defeats the other on the battlefield. the second track is diplomatic, it is about the conditions for the end of the war.

politicians are fighting each other, and on this diplomatic track here in bürgenstock, ukraine managed to at least seize the initiative, it was ukraine that put forward the formula a year and a half ago. fair end to the war, zelenskyi's formula, this is ukraine, during these one and a half years it was promoted on all possible international platforms, and now ukraine has reached the point that representatives of certain of its provisions came here to bürgenstock about 100 states and international organizations, including dozens of representatives of the global south, who arrived here, despite the fierce opposition of russia and china, the result of which ukrainian diplomacy calls the results of the bürgenstock summit their little one. first of all, we are talking about the wording that found a place in the final document of the summit. first of all , it is about the fact that the events in ukraine, called in it "war of russia against ukraine", are opposed to the amorphous formulation, the conflict in ukraine, which

the same china likes to use. it is about wording about the need to respect the territorial integrity of ukraine. the document says that for... the ska nuclear power plant should be transferred to ukraine's control, it also says that russia should release and return to their homeland thousands of children illegally taken from ukraine to russia. why is this important? because until recently, before the summit in bürgenstock, all these points remained the kind of good wishes of kyiv. now, after they found a place in the final document of the summit, it is officially supported dozens of countries of the world, including a representative. the negotiating position of the global south itself, which will be on the table in the near future, let's say in the ministry of foreign affairs of russia, the peace summit was also monitored and in the kremlin the decision not to invite russia to the summit was called illogical, the result of the meeting, putin's advisor

piskov, was almost zero. a day before the peace summit, let me remind you, vladimir putin made a speech in which he named his conditions for ending the war, these are the four ukrainian regions of zaporizhzhya. kherson, donetsk and luhansk, refusal of membership in nato and cancellation of sanctions. however, volodymyr zelenskyi, speaking about this statement, called it ultimatum and added that with it the kremlin canceled all previous statements about the possibility of negotiations. so what does this statement by putin before the summit indicate? here's how melinda goering of the atlantic council comments on it? zmi was informed about the alleged potential negotiations. prices thread putin says he wants ukraine to give up its rightful four oblasts that russia illegally annexed. he also wants crimea and wants ukraine to give it up your aspirations, join nato. this plan is doomed to fail. he shows no desire for any honest negotiations. hopefully no one will be introduced to oman.

moscow has no desire to honestly negotiate an end to the war. this war, unfortunately, will continue for a long time because vladimir putin has no intention of withdrawing his troops. putin plays very well with weak positions, and when he is in a corner, he resorts to empty threats. he has been doing this over and over for the past 800 days. when he loses military support, he resorts to nuclear threats. it is very predictable. when the west is going to send heavy weapons, or a large sum of money for military aid to ukraine, it threatens to use nuclear weapons. and now, when the west has decided to allow ukraine to use interest from russian assets, it doesn't like it very much, because it shows that western countries are serious about ukraine's victory, and moscow doesn't like it. the week was very good for volodymyr zelenskyi, very good for ukraine. important things happened. g7 allocated 50 billion dollars. it a huge amount of money and with that money comes flexibility. they can be used for humanitarian purposes, they can be used for reconstruction, for weapons and to keep

the state alive. the last category is controversial. the us congress passed a $61 billion package. and most of this amount will go to weapons to support ukraine in the struggle. approved assistance. in addition to the fact that this has become a visible way to declare, there are many countries in the world that have united around supporting ukraine and against russia in this war. the problem, however, is that putin's statements in the last few days indicate a degree of at worst insanity, at

best uncertainty about what he thinks the consequences of an invasion might be. and before ukraine and the west can start substantive negotiations with him, putin will have to return to when it comes to the final communiqué, all such documents are always very interesting in their choice of words. what they do not say, and what is the real meaning of such meetings, is what happened behind closed doors, and which is not recorded anywhere, at least in the published parts in my opinion, it's a growing support or a deeper consensus that we've had in the last two years, which is that ukraine should be given enormous aid and support. i think zelensky is getting this support, it gives me optimism, i only hope

that this message will be conveyed, i only hope that this message will be conveyed to the russians, they are not stupid and understand that they talked about much more at the summit than that , which has been announced, yes, and russia will still have to be involved in the negotiations, experts say that, he understands that. and in ukraine, but how and can the summit in switzerland become the first step, a bridge to peace? volodymyr zelenskyi believes that it is necessary to develop a plan for negotiations from now on and has already talked about the next peace summit. so what's next? svyatoslav khomenko continues. what will happen next is currently not very clear. on the one hand, most of the participants of the bürgenstock summit believe that this document, the results of the bürgenstock summit, created a negotiating framework to which russia will join at a certain point in time , and that's when substantive peace talks will begin negotiations that will be able to end the war that

russia has unleashed against ukraine. on the other hand, well, we see what putin is doing, we hear what putin is saying, and these statements of his, these ultimate demands of his, essentially the capitulation of ukraine, which he voiced literally on the eve of the summit, well, this is a greeting to its participants, this is a sign of , that he is not interested in any substantive negotiations is a sign that... he wants to fight, which means that at least for now the priority is the military track of ending the conflict, which means that the main the negotiator on behalf of ukraine is its armed forces. on the other hand, this position of putin is slowly becoming a problem for himself. volodymyr zelenskyy spoke about this at the final press conference. he talked about the fact that on the sidelines of the summit he spoke with many world leaders, with many leaders of the global south, and it was these statements by putin, these ultimatums of his for... ukraine to surrender, that led them to think that his earlier statements, about the fact that he is ready for

negotiations with ukraine, he wants peace, well, they dissipated like smoke, they turned out to be multiplied by zero. as volodymyr zelenskyy said at his press conference, sometimes our enemy's big mistakes are our big victories, and right then he repeated that he considers the results of the bürgenstock summit to be a big victory. so, going back to the diplomatic track we talked about here in bürgenstock, ukraine has taken the first step. on this diplomatic path to the end of the war, it can even be called the diplomatic path to the end of the war, so uncertain everything looks so far, but one fact alone is that this the step was taken with confidence that it was supported by dozens of countries of the world, including representatives of the global south, gives us modest, but reasons for optimism. yes, and you can read more about sviatoslav khumenko's impressions of the swiss peace summit in his summary. on our website bbc.ua, the first, but not the last, why the swiss peace summit postponed the peace to

the next time, this is his article, i highly recommend you read it. so this weekend , the first global peace summit was held in switzerland, initiated by ukraine. his results kyiv evaluates positively and calls the meeting in this format historic. in russia, which was not invited to the summit, the reaction was negative, we say. it will not be possible to achieve without the presence of russia at such meetings, and they once again talked about openness to dialogue. according to our correspondent at the summit, this is the first step towards real peace talks after victory on the battlefield. so subscribe to our pages in social networks so as not to miss the most important news. we are on facebook, instagram, tiktok, youtube, you can watch our release if missed it on the air, turn on our program tomorrow. as always at 21, good luck,

we're back live, new week, new thoughts. ki, a new vision of what is happening in ukraine and the world, and we now have an hour of our thoughts, our analytics, and communication with you, which is important and communication, yes. we will answer the questions that you, you, at least, asked us in social networks, on the youtube channel of the espresso tv channel, and we remind you, of course, about our survey, it sounds like will the global peace summit lead to real peace, you can pick up your phones,

call these numbers that are on your screens, if you think that global... peace will lead to real peace, then dial 0.800-211 -381 if you think not then dial 0.800 211.382 all your calls are free and well and i think we also need to talk about the global peace summit, the implications, what ultimately it will bring to the. .. ukrainian politics, into world politics, whether there will be peace or not, is this, i think, we need to come down a little from heaven to earth, or is this purely, conditionally speaking, a political measure that is simply unifying and political, but khrystyna has her own

thoughts, please, i suggest scanning how people reacted to here the final photo of a large number of countries that are represented at such a high level, ukrainians. the fact is that, as it always happens, opinions are very divided, and each side has its own arguments. what is it about? let's remember, this is an age-old video about how the final was made to the global peace summit, photo. glory to ukraine, glory to you, well, a large number of people, very tall, tall people, people who decide the fate of the world, this is absolutely no exaggeration, and here i would like to quote the writer oksana zabushko, she

writes: "i love the transitions of the profane into the symbolic". don't say anything, but it's really majestic when... about 100 countries against the background of harsh alps pronounce glory to the heroes in ukrainian, well, it really does look triumphant, but nevertheless, under this post of ms. oksana, ukrainians started to express their opinions and many reasonably, to be honest, in some sense i can absolutely agree with this, remark that they do not understand why the ukrainian president is in this photo. the head of the president's office, andriy yermak, must be present, they say, it's not like that, it should be, someone thinks that it doesn't matter who is from ukraine in the photo, it is extremely important, and we need to, well, rise above situation and see how much

reality has changed in the historical perspective, here it would be appropriate to quote olga, the decision from the media initiative for human rights, the absolute importance of who stands there, or would stand in the center, for this moment, generations of ukrainians have paid and continue to pay with blood, this is recognition of the nation's several hundred-year struggle , and i personally take my breath away from the fact that our generation fell to be participants in this long-suffering and long-awaited process, that's the story, andriy, can we still be surprised by the presence of andriy yaermak on similar ... in similar episodes, or one wonders whether it is possible to admit the reality and honestly say to yourself, yes, a person whom no one elected, a person to whom no one delegated decision-making or any diplomatic functions, still performs all this work, well, there is probably no wonder, wonder, why, because,

because andriy yermak actually took part in the huge. number of events, that is, we see that he is present in the united states of america, at j7 meetings, and at other, including bilateral meetings, at the signing, in particular, of the same security agreements, yes, so well i do not know why here it is already surprising, relatively speaking, but the other side of the medal, it consists in the fact that we are really asking ourselves the question, but a person with... whose status, that is, what status, why such a representative office, and why not the prime minister - the minister of ukraine, for example, yes, why, why, why, maybe there is not a parla speaker? so, in fact, there are many questions, but this is the choice of the president, that is, we must understand that it is the choice of the president, that specifically andriy yermak is present at such

events, and here, as they say, with this choice, you do not argue, because such his choice and such is his decision, but the reactions that exist, in particular in the ukrainian segment of the network, don't they indicate that a certain, certain part of ukraine. and now we are not talking about the majority or the minority, but this is a specific and prominent part of her hearing, does not understand and increasingly asks questions, why, why actually, and i repeat once again, a person who did not delegate the ukrainian people, any power at such a level not just present, but actually conducts certain negotiations on behalf of the state of ukraine, i understand why such questions are asked, because people, especially the conscious part of us. society, that part, that part of society, which, which reads the laws, which can open google, go in, analyze the current

legislation, analyze the current constitution, that's why they usually ask their questions, and how does it happen, why does it happen, why, why does it happen like this , that in fact, well , representation, it is not proportional to the current legislation that we have in the country, yes, that is, that is why people ask questions, maybe not because it is yermak, let’s say, any other surname, yes you can to substitute here, but people really do not understand, we also have other issues, people similarly do not understand why we currently have a reduced status of the parliament, why our parliament does not quite make those decisions, at least in some discussions, in the formation of the agenda . which should be in the country, why in our country the parliament very often does not resolve the issues that it should have resolved, that is, as

of today , the ukrainian parliament in the parliamentary-presidential republic does not have the status that it should have according to the constitution and the initial legislation , this also, this is the same problem, similar to the question regarding in principle this vertical of power, we have practically not come to the parliament for two years. government officials went, they did not report to the parliament, there were no hours of questions to the government, i apologize, the situation turns out to be such that very often the verkhovna rada summons some official to give an account, because the verkhovna rada of ukraine elected this official, this minister or the head of another department, but in response, the person simply does not come, that is, it is... lowering the parliament, and this is a crisis of state institutions. and is this acceptable in a situation where we will soon be talking about our steps to join the european union,

so literally at the end of june it will be about how our closest western european partners see us next to them, in what role, in which format, what we can give... to the union, and what it should give us, because this, this should be movement along the road, as we understand it, in two directions, yes, in two directions necessarily, and in this situation we we understand that after the elections in the european parliament, when the main trends became clear, even after the exit polls, everything is going to the point that in france, in the end , emmanuel macron decides to dissolve ... because it does not quite correspond to what the electorate showed in the elections to the european parliament, that is, so much , high officials, in particular

the president, and in general the heads of the state are so sensitive to the opinion of their own citizens that they are ready to make important decisions and again, as we often say in ukraine, throw their state into the election. yaganin, pre-election processes and so on, for us it is always insanely stressful, but we remind you that this is precisely why democracy is carried out, well, if we are talking now, then of course we cannot hold elections , that is, we understand that we cannot compare the situation in france and france and the situation in ukraine, unfortunately, now despite the fact that many people, perhaps there or some people would say yes, elections should be held, but there are many technical and legal issues. nuances that we cannot do it, as of now, although there are also here a certain discussion in society, but less with what they say, we have what we have, but,

for example, when you talk about the movement of two institutions, the state of ukraine, as a large institution to the european union and vice versa, this is a movement that go one to the other, and here we must understand that ukraine, despite the fact that we are now in a state of war, that we are now in slightly different conditions in which we were until february 24 , 2022, everything one thing... ukraine must take those steps to harmonize its legislation so that ukrainian politicians, the ukrainian system in general, the ukrainian elites, met the requirements and the spirit of the european union, the spirit of european integration, when scandals occur in our country regarding mass media, when in our country, i apologize, entire tv channels are switched off from the digital network.

when we have a scandal with a public broadcaster, which was recently, then this is not exactly the movement, and by the way, this is what is included in the demands, if you look at the demands of such and such a report that was presented in november last year, it was clearly stated there about freedom of speech, and we also saw the report of the state department of the united states of america, which also... indicated this, so we want to, we don't want to, but we must understand that the issue of freedom of speech, the issue of freedom of expression of opinion, it must take place , but, i'm sorry, let's not do it now, compare or equate the freedom of speech that concerns the russian world, here there should be an x, as they say, here, here not, here, you understand, there is no here, here in relation to this should

be another. you know, andrei, even before the large-scale invasion, i several times received such comments, with a very skeptical tone, from people who consume the television product, i will say this, about what freedom of speech and comprehensive coverage of opinions you can talk about on espresso, but you do not have regionals, well that is, they are part of the ukrainian parliament, their electorate. some of the ukrainians, and this is a large part of our people, why do you not give them a word, and here i would like to note, i always answered, you know, the truth is not somewhere in the middle, the truth is where the truth is, and if, if you give the word is simply based on the principle of covering all absolutely participants in the process, then it is not always about information hygiene, not always about...

national consciousness and not always, as we see, and i was right in this, about the interests and national security of our country, to i am summarizing this gently, actually, what is meant, we will mention medvedchuk, yes, you can, you can mention medvedchuk, by the way, mention it in the context of many things, because on the one hand, putin issues ultimatums to ukraine, so in particular, putin declares that ready to peace talks medvedchuk, in particular , said in an interview with a russian news agency that odesa and other cities must be occupied if ukraine does not agree to the same capitulation that putin is now offering. now we see this quote on the screen: "russia's security interests dictate the need for further military action to fight the neo-nazi regime in order

to achieve complete demilitarization and de-nazification, while it is clear that the interests of the zelenskyi regime and the interests of the ukrainian people are directly opposite. ukrainians want peace, and zelensky is with the western puppet masters of war, even at the cost of exterminating the ukrainian people, and this people must be freed from this criminal nazi government, i emphasize once again that this was said by putin's best man, medvedchuk, a person who was actually... engaged in to destroy our country for many years, and this statement, it correlates with another statement, putin's statement that he made on friday, and on friday, putin said, let's also see, he said that he is ready for peace talks , but for this...