in the center of the main events, buy at press outlets. there are discounts that represent unbreakable discounts on mmolium of 25% in psyllanyk, pam and savings pharmacies. mecha lev allergy will be overcome by citylev. cetrelev neo protects against the most common allergens. there are discounts representing unbreakable discounts on eurofast softcaps, 20% in pharmacies for travelers and savings. the verkhovna rada regularly passes new laws, but how do these changes affect our lives? we have analyzed the new resolutions to inform you about the latest changes in ukrainian legislation. as legislative norms change our lives, what to prepare for? leading lawyers of the aktum bar association will answer these and other questions that concern ukrainians. see that tuesday o'. 55 in the

legal expertise program on the espresso tv channel. 101 countries and organizations participated in the global peace summit held in switzerland this weekend. at the same time, the final declaration was signed by significantly less than 70. eight participants. this is without iraq and jordan, which withdrew their signature after the event. why? was the summit successful for ukraine, will they be involved russia to the negotiation process and what is the role of china? we are talking about this today. this is svoboda life and my name is iryna sisak. the western press reacted to the large-scale event initiated by ukraine. visually, it was an impressive meeting - writes the german publication spiegel. they note that outwardly the summit was a powerful event in support of ukraine, and... the final

communiqué looked clearer than one could have hoped. at the same time, whether it was successful is a difficult question, notes spiegel. after all, if the first task is to unite the surrounding countries of zelenskyi's peace plan, despite the absence of china, ukraine mostly succeeded, so as for the second start of peace talks, conclusions can only be drawn with time, and the success of the summit will depend on the situation on the battlefield and the actions of both russia and ukraine - believes spiegel. perceives zelenskyi's peace plan , which includes the creation of a special tribunal for russian war criminals, as an invitation to surrender, and conversely, this week vladimir putin made a peace offer that is tantamount to a call for ukraine to surrender. kyiv managed to get engaged with the support of the majority of the participants of the summit, but the result was spoiled by russia-oriented saudi arabia, india and south africa, which did not sign the final declaration, and china was generally neglected. this is already written by

politico. the article notes that the specter of russia loomed over the summit following putin's ultimatums the day before the event. although they were quickly dismissed, the kremlin's statements reinforced the reality that russia will eventually have to deal with them, the publication writes. the american one emphasizes the fact that the key states rejected the final document channel cnn, there they recalled russia's trade relations with india, saudi arabia, south africa and the united arab emirates. about this. the financial times also noted. at the same time, the politician notes the important consensus of the summit declaration. the war in ukraine must end with a just and lasting peace, not peace at any price. but the terms and plans for the next meetings of this format remained unclear, the publication adds. meanwhile, putin may be invited to the next peace summit, even though the international one is criminal the court issued a warrant for his arrest. this was announced the day before by the president of switzerland , viola amgert and others. it can be arranged, it

is possible under our law, of course we have to do it together with the international criminal court, but as a host country we can make exceptions in this matter. if the presence of a statesman is necessary for the conduct, then an exception can be made, and this would be possible in the case of peace negotiations in ukraine with russia, but this should be a decision of the swiss government. and joins our broadcast kostyantyn yelisiev, head of the center for new solutions and ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary of ukraine. good evening to you. i congratulate you. mr. kostyantyn, let's start with the results of the peace summit. what are your impressions of the event? what has ukraine managed to achieve, or perhaps

failed to achieve in switzerland? well, the first position is to express gratitude to switzerland as host for its support, help and concern. and an active position, we should also thank all the countries that sent their representatives to participate in this summit, it is really very important, and it very important from the point of view of strengthening the coalition of the international coalition of unity in support of ukraine, this is what ukraine has been doing since 2014, and it is very good. the second position, the summit, as you know, was intended to unite the positions of the event, which will definitely support. supports the provision of weapons and the withdrawal of russian forces from the territory of ukraine with the position of the so-called global south, and it was supposed to unite around the idea of ​​the victory of ukraine. to what extent it succeeded is a rhetorical question,

unfortunately, the third position here is the peace summit, in fact the hundredth became a summit on negotiations, negotiations with the russian aggressor, and it became clear in switzerland that the world is waiting not for the victory of ukraine, but for the fastest negotiations with the putin regime, unfortunately, but another question is how powerful the position of the global south was, unfortunately, this is also not the case, because the key regional leaders did not sign this joint communique, but that's exactly what i wanted to ask you about, regarding the final document, which of the 101st countries and which organizations took it. only 78 participants signed the communique, which may indicate that some countries, such as brazil, were in the status of observers, but, for example, india or saudi arabia, several key countries that are oriented towards russia never signed. the western

press is also paying attention to this, can you explain what is the matter here? you know, this is a very deep question, why? because for me it is the basis for achieving justice. sustainable peace in ukraine, the basis should be the resolution of the un general assembly, which was adopted in february 2023, and for which 141 un member countries, i emphasize 141 countries, voted for things, among those countries that supported this resolution were saudi arabia, and iraq, and jordan, and pakistan, the same, by the way, china was quiet then, that is, it did not object in principle to... that resolution, let me remind you, that resolution also discussed the withdrawal of russian forces from the territory of ukraine, the prohibition of the use of nuclear weapons and the release of prisoners, and so on, that is, in my opinion, this should remain the basis for further work, secondly, everyone is talking about

international organizations, i wanted would that we not changed the concepts when we refer to international organizations, in particular the european commission, the european parla. the european council is not an international organization, it is an eu institution, so it was also artificially drawn to the number of countries you mentioned, brazil, in particular, india there, you saw, they chose a neutral status, they chose the position of such an outside observer, hoping for some new changes, but the three key results of the mir summit for us are as follows: first, the formula... mir zelenskyi is no more is the only non-alternative form of settlement, that the countries of the world are ready to spill other proposals, secondly, that peace is still very far away, and the third position, the conclusion of the summit that, unfortunately, all

the majority of countries, especially in the global south , see the settlement of the situation in war between ukraine and russia, only dialogue and only... direct negotiations between ukraine and russia, to what extent it is acceptable for us is a big question, but i consider the key lesson of the summit to be positive. he showed that only the strengthening of the armed forces of ukraine, strengthening sanctions against the aggressor, increasing putin's international isolation, providing more weapons, can strengthen the argument, our argument, respectively the position of these neutral countries in our favor, in order to still not only get peace. but also to win, and why do you say that zelenskyi's peace formula is no longer the main one? it seems to me that in the communiqué, well, in principle , it says that everything is based on zelenskyi's formula, did i misread something ? well, look, if we are talking about three points, and i will remind you once again, it is about food security, it is about nuclear

security, it means that zaporizhzhia as would be under ukrainian sovereignty, and the third, about the exchange of prisoners, is the so-called humanitarian one. component, all these things are in the resolution of the un general assembly. i believe that the resolution of the general assembly has more political weight than, with all due respect , komenyak. moreover, on the resolution. we can refer to any international authorities, international criminal court and so on. and secondly, when we talk about communiques and these three things, i have an idea question: when we talk about nuclear security, in particular about zaporizhzhia es, why was not the director general of magat grossi at the summit, why was there not the secretary general of the un, when we are talking about food security, why were there no representatives of the world food program, why were there not representatives or chairman. of the red cross, i believe that it is precisely these shortcomings that we must correct, precisely

their absence indicates that today, it seems to me, there is still not one hundred percent support in those issues that we want to settle. well, on the eve of this summit, there were ultimatums from putin, which he voiced literally a day before this summit, i will remind you that there was a refusal to join ukraine in... nato, as well as the withdrawal of ukrainian troops from donetsk, luhansk, zaporizhzhia and kherson regions. do you think anyone could be influenced by these statements that were made before the summit? well, the participants rejected them, but did it work for anyone? just? just by his statements, putin would encourage that this summit, well, i hope, maybe the following measures should focus on two fundamental problems, namely the withdrawal of the russian occupying forces from the territory of ukraine and the restoration of the territorial objective. of our state, this, this is the key problem, all other problems with all due respect, and food

security, and the security of our nuclear power plants, this is all a derivative, again, of expelling russia from the territory of ukraine, and in my opinion, the keys to before peace no longer lay at the peace summit, switzerland, burgenstocks, but they lie, in my view , at the summit in washington as of now, which... will take place on july 9-11 this year, it seems to me that ukraine has a strong strong position there - the support of partners, and the first step is the invitation of ukraine to nato membership, which will be the key foundation for our victory and the victory of a civilized the world mr. kostyantyn, another important point regarding the summit is still in switzerland, china was not there, ukraine refused to go when it became clear that russia would not be involved in the process at the same time. well, china could be, for example, in observer status, like this brazil did, or not to sign

the communiqué, as many other countries did. this is such a demonstrative position of china, what does it mean? well, it means that this is a challenge for the ukrainian diplomat, as well as a challenge in part, it seems to me, to the unsatisfactory position of the countries of the so-called global rooster. pay attention, we only have 10 or 15% of african countries signed the chimneys. only 10% of asian countries, this is the failure of our diplomacy on these tracks. unfortunately, all the promises that are made to open, for example, ten embassies in africans did not lead to anything. therefore, china is also an equally important challenge. i do not agree that china is not included in these processes. i will remind you once again in the resolution of the general assembly of the 23rd year. china participated in its development and even abstained, did not vote against, abstained on this resolution. this shows that it is worth and necessary to work with china. as a first step towards working with china, he considers the fact that literally a week ago, for the first time in the last

three or four years, if i'm not mistaken, we had bilateral political consultations in beijing, so i think we need to further promote this narrative, try to involve china, i understand, it is naive to think that we will be able to bring china to our side, but at least to neutralize its support for the aggressor country, this is quite realistic. well , this applies to brazil as well, i think we need to work more strongly with brazil, try to involve them in our dialogue, the diplomatic process, and i think that we will be able to achieve this goal precisely through diplomacy. mr. kostyantyn, just about the involvement of china. despite the absence of china at this event, switzerland is going to discuss the results of the summit with him, and not only with china, but also with russia, the swiss foreign minister says that they are communicating with the russian embassy. but do you think it makes sense to discuss the results of the peace summit first of all with russia, what is expected in this

case? i think that it is necessary to talk about the results with all the countries that were not present, including china. by the way, recent data on the trade and economic balance testify to the fact that our relations with china are now being built. let me remind you that in the last four months of this year, our trade with china has increased by 25%. so again. and china also thinks in terms of economic categories, so i say once again, china is not yet a utopian story, it is worth working with china, it is necessary to urgently convene meetings. which for a long time there was no ukrainian-chinese inter-ethnic commission from the trade and economic commission and to work, you are absolutely right, we need to pull the brics countries to our side so that russia remains there alone, so that brazil, and china, and couples were on ours side, and india is very important. one

more quick question in closing, switzerland has said that they may invite po... to the next peace summit despite the warrant for his arrest, so the west is coming out ready to make an exception and effectively turn a blind eye to this warrant to bring russia into the negotiations, is this correct, how to understand it at all? well, you know, it's better to ask the swiss, i think that they, you know, with such enthusiasm, that they managed to prepare a successful, as a host, the first peace summit, they decided, as they say, to... try to go further, but as for me, you have to be realistic and understand that the dialogue with putin should take place only on the battlefield, and the key diplomat in this dialogue, with all due respect to switzerland, is the armed forces of ukraine, and precisely one other result of the summit, especially for western partners, should be the strengthening

of sanctions, including against russia, including against rosatom, should be the provision of... more powerful weapons, the acceleration of the provision of f-16s, the cancellation of any - any restrictions on the range of western missiles against russian ones legal, illegal goals on the territory of the russian federation, and only then can we, after we improve our negotiating positions in this way, we can already from a position of strength, seek restoration. international law and restoring the territorial integrity of ukraine, only in this way can we then talk about any kind of peace. mr. kostyantyn, thank you for your thoughts, this was kostyantyn yelisieev, head of the center for new solutions and ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary of ukraine. thanks. well, we can recall the main points of the summit, yes

it was monitored by radio liberty correspondent zoryana stepanenko, her final report from... the protocol ceremony of the peace summit was corrected by the prime minister of canada, which has supported ukraine since the first days of the invasion. not everyone responded, but everyone who came to switzerland was united by the desire for the war to end. we managed to get there together. vision here in bürgenstock, we send a clear signal to the people of ukraine and to all those directly affected by the consequences of the war. much of the international community is eager to change that. among the hundred delegates, those who cut off contacts with moscow, but also those who support them. ukraine is ready to listen to all

opinions and proposals, that's why the summit, but relying on international law, which... protects its territorial integrity. the un charter is the basis for us, and then, when the plan of action is on the table, agreed by all and transparent to the peoples, then it will be brought to the representatives of russia, so that at the second peace summit we can record the real end of the war. now we start this journey together. for a significant. progress towards peace, russia is needed at this table, the president of kenya, top diplomats of turkey and saudi arabia, for whose favor ukraine is fighting, said in particular. when the saudi prince called for difficult compromises, without specifying which ones, there was complete silence in the hall. it is important that the international community encourages any

move towards serious negotiations that will require difficult compromise within a road map to peace. this is important. emphasize that any reliable process will require the participation of russia. ukraine understands that we will have to talk with russia, but not in the language of an ultimatum - said the head of ukrainian diplomacy. kuleba said that putin's demands for ukraine to declare neutrality and withdraw from four regions, including the territories under its control, did not arouse any appetite at the summit, and he does not see a problem in the statements of delegates from the global south. it. not such an event, where russia likes and likes to bring everyone together and have everyone speak, as they say, in unison from the russian federation, just so frank, through such a frank dialogue we we can... come to the right decisions. western partners of ukraine expectedly and consistently expressed their support for it. the united states allocates 1.5 billion dollars to

restore the damaged energy infrastructure. norway - 103 million. canada gives 15 million for the return of ukrainian children. europe and the usa criticized the kremlin's updated terms and called them unacceptable. no responsible nation can say that this is a reasonable basis for peace. this is against the un charter. it. goes against basic morality, it goes against basic common sense. the summit ended with a joint declaration, which included points of discussion that were on the agenda. the participants volunteered, nuclear power plants, including nuclear power plants, should work under the control of ukraine. its agricultural products should freely reach where they are needed, and prisoners of war should be released through a full exchange. as it follows from the declaration, specific measures are being prepared with the involvement of all parties. despite the absence on the agenda of complex, as volodymyr zelenskyi said, items of the peace formula, signatures of all participants of the summit under the final the communique is still lacking, out of a hundred delegations , 80 countries and four

international organizations supported the declaration, and among those who did not do so, not only the countries of the global south. armenia, india, saudi arabia, the united arab emirates and others did not join the declaration, but they have room for maneuver, they can support the communique later, in particular... those who were not at the summit. according to the president of switzerland, the question of how and when to include russia in the process remains key, considering that two sides are needed for a solid decision. with switzerland. zoryana stepanenko, marek hayduk, radio liberty. by the way, as i mentioned at the beginning, iraq and jordan later withdrew their signatures. thus, at the moment there are 78 signatories of the final communique. really? this is how the ukrainian side in the president's office is finding out, they say they will contact switzerland to clarify the list, oleksandr bevs, adviser to the head of the president's office , told rfe/rl about this. listen.

we will contact our colleagues from bern today and discuss the entire list once again of the countries that joined, because yesterday i was personally present during the announcement of the results, because the accession to the communique and these countries were indicated on the final scoreboard in the hall where the plenary session was held. therefore, we are in no hurry to make any announcements. as to which countries have seceded or joined, the communique remains open for any country to join, and we expect that the number of its participants will only increase. oleksandr merezhko, people's deputy of ukraine from the servant of the people and chairman of the parliamentary committee, joins our broadcast committee on foreign policy and interparliamentary cooperation. mr. oleksandr, good evening to you. good evening. last week, you and i discussed the prospects of a peace summit. now it has already taken place and we have the text of the communique. in the first paragraph, in particular, the term " russia's war against ukraine" was used. do you think that the role of russia is sufficiently well described in this

document? perhaps these terms could have been sharper, or are these formulations acceptable anyway? well, of course, one could say that one would like to see more sharp, well, i wouldn't even say sharp, it is about such legal international legal precision. it would be more accurate to call it aggression, so russian aggression or war of aggression, that is, a war, an aggressive war against ukraine, but even what is, what has been achieved, it is already such a political, weighty, political and even legal success, that is things are still called by their names, and it is not, let's say, china uses such a term as we know the ukrainian crisis, which does not correspond to reality at all and is well incorrect from the point of view of... legal qualification, this is about russia's war against ukraine, this is already an international legal qualification and about the negative consequences of this war, that is, everyone will understand that based on

the context, it is about russia's aggression against ukraine. by the way, it seems that earlier in the previous version of the document it was exactly aggression, it was changed to war, if i am not mistaken, okay, how do you generally evaluate this final document, we have a common position. on nuclear and food security, on the return of abducted children and prisoners of war, this is a declaration, but how to force russia to fulfill these points? well, first of all, it is very important that progress has been achieved, at least when it comes to the three points of president zelenskyi's peace formula, and these are precisely the points on which there is a broad general consensus, that is, we understand that all states are interested or have.. . to be at least interested in nuclear security, this is extremely important, and it already knocks such trump cards out of the hands of putin, who

tried before and may in the future. to try to use nuclear blackmail, i.e. now there is a clear international document that has found the support of the vast majority of states, and a very representative summit on this matter was held, i.e. this is already significant progress, but we hope that there will be more peace summits, that there will be a continuation and that it will be successful to expand the circle of those points that are included in the president's peace formula for... but here is actually an interesting moment when we talk about these three points, in this context , kostyantyn eliseyev, who was on the air, just mentioned that, for example, in plan there for nuclear security there was no representative of magathe, for food security there was no un secretary general, and there was no red cross dealing with prisoners of war, how could this happen? well, it is not necessary, because the united nations organization was represented, and let's say, magat is, well, in fact, it is such a ...

urn component of the un, that is, it was enough that the un was present, this, this is the most important thing, and there were other international organizations are present, including the european union. garast, the swiss authorities announced the day before that who will discuss the results of the summit with the russian side, will they be called to implement the points of the summit declaration, or what is the purpose, do you think? well, first of all, we understand that russia already knows about... the results, perhaps from a formal point of view, the organizer of this summit should officially address russia, present the results, but everyone in the kremlin and in russia knows very well what is happening, they reacted very nervously, one might even say in such a hysterical way, putin proposed the day before a literally absurd, so-called in quotes a peace plan that has no support whatsoever. and

we saw this contrast, we saw that there is a plan that is being promoted by ukraine, which is followed by a large number of states, and there is a peace plan of putin, the kremlin dictator, who does not have the support of any state, but could this plan influence anyone at this summit, that is, is it possible that someone from the countries changed their position, because we see that, for example, out of 100 participants, only 78 signed the final communique, well, i would n't say only, i would say 78, at least a... the fact is that those who did not signed by me i am sure that they still agree, at least they have not stated that they are against any of the points, the communiqué or the key points of president zelenskyi's peace plan, i will cite as examples such principles of international law as territorial integrity, sovereignty and not the use of force, that is, no country, not even china, they will never openly declare and have never

declared. and in the future they will not declare that they are against these fundamental principles, including when they affect ukraine. as for what switzerland is going to do talk with russia about the results of the summit, maybe they want to discuss potential participation in the next peace summit, how do you generally assess the prospect of russia's involvement? well, this perspective remains, but what is important here is that we have certain frameworks, political and legal frameworks that were created thanks to this. and behind which is the good will of a large, large number of countries, that is, if it is a question of finding a diplomatic solution, then it must correspond to these frameworks and not violate, in particular, the territorial integrity of ukraine, not violate the sovereignty of ukraine, the sovereign right of ukraine to join any international organization, including nato, not to violate the principle of non-use of force and the threat of force in international relations

... then when russia as a state matures to understand that there is no other way out, then maybe they can start serious negotiations, so far there are no such signs, and we see that putin is reacting inadequately to these peace proposals. and apart from that, what could be the conditions for russia's participation in the negotiation process, so that they would be acceptable to ukraine, what could it agree to do? well, there are already such. document as a resolution of the parliamentary assembly of the council of europe, which quite clearly states what i am quoting from memory, it literally says that peace talks, that is, peace negotiations with russia can begin under two conditions, one of these conditions is because such negotiations must take place...