of course, you know, going back to the topic of recruiting ultra-orthodox people into the army, there is a very big problem here, and the army is ready to accept 300 this year, but how should they serve, where should they serve, and where will they live, where they will sleep where they must pray, because they must pray. it's their food, it has to be kosher, isn't it, isn't it the first, isn't it the first religious jews to serve in the israel defense army, it's always been settled with the religious zionists, they also prayed, ate kosher food always, you are a little wrong here, because there are just jews who are very religious, they serve, they have so-called knitted tips, ugh, and these are ultra-orthodox people, as you already said, they do not perceive israel at all as state, but their menu is the same with these people who serve, which or? it happens the same,

it happens not, but with them, the most important thing is that there should not be female soldiers, girls, and we have women and girls everywhere in all units, no matter what they are, top secret, our women still serve there - girls, that's for them it is also very ugly that they will also walk near them there, well, in a word, there are a lot of problems with such people, because they do not treat women the way ordinary citizens of israel do, well, they do not treat them like that. well, that was a politically correct answer, listen, and what happened with the warrant of the international criminal court for the arrest of prime minister benjamin netarnyaho and minister of defense yulant, i understand that he somehow slowed down, he has slowed down so far, and i think that the reason great britain came here, which put forward its own claims to this international, to this international criminal court, and to other countries. they appealed to other countries with the fact

that they also have the opportunity until july 12 to express their claims to the international criminal court, saying that they wrongly want to issue an arrest warrant and accuse israel of having committed a war crime against the residents of the gaza strip. but excuse me, when you, you are alive, when they come to you, they attack you, then you have to defend yourself and defend yourself... act in such a way that you, well, enter that territory, where did they attack you from, israel entered the gas four times, was in the center, in the south, in the north, and of course, peaceful people die, as we say, but how can you distinguish between them, they are peaceful or not peaceful, and when schools, hospitals, you know, were located in the underground tunnels, in those offices where the managers were located. of the terrorist organization hamas,

how is it possible, you are walking down the same street, gas, a woman or a man or a boy is coming towards you, as you know, he is dressed in civilian clothes, although, what does he think, whose side is he on, he who is being protected, we cannot know, nothing is written in front of the eyes, although you know, it is very, very difficult to lead the israel defense forces without being blamed. that they are killing the civilian population, because the palestinian authority and the gaza strip do not have their own army, and all those people, people, this is what i said, very figuratively, belong to the terrorist organization hamas, they are all civilians, and when their defense army if israel is destroyed, killed, it turns out that they are committing a war crime against civilians, because there is no army there. so.

thank you, ms. svitlana. svitlana glas, an israeli journalist, was in touch with us. thank you for participating in this broadcast for clarification. the results of the first round of the national assembly of the french republic have just arrived. they were waiting for this. so, the right-wing, radical national union party, led by marina le pen, is the leader of this first round, according to exit polls. in her 34% of the vote for the popular front, the new popular front that united all the left-wing forces of france 28% of the vote, in the party of president emmanuel macron 20.3% of the vote for the republicans, the right the conservative party, which was created in support of charlie dagol, once got 10% of the vote, well , that's basically all, all the previous ones. we

will return to them at the end of our program, and now we will take a break for a couple of minutes and after this break we will start our conversation with the former minister of foreign affairs of ukraine, vadym prystayk, who will be with us in the studio. a journalist who joined the armed forces, a political expert who became a special agent, taras berezovyts in a new project on espresso. the real front is a thorough analysis of the main ones events reports, comments of leading specialists and experts, analytics from the major of the armed forces. how to make sense of disturbing news and distinguish truth from hostile propaganda. the real front program with taras berezovets every saturday at 21:30 on espresso. we continue the politclub program, vadym prystaiko, former minister of internal affairs of ukraine and ambassador of ukraine to great britain , we are on the phone, we are in the studio, mr. vadym, congratulations, good evening, let's start by searching

for an answer to such a question that i have a little confused why these days all of a sudden such serious conversations began at an unofficial level about models of transition with moscow, president volodymyr zelenskyy said that the only... model is this, the grain agreement model, when they talk through intermediaries, and it seems to me that there is logic in this, so that if zelensky does not recognize putin by decree as a negotiating partner, but putin does not recognize zelensky as a legitimate president, how can they still talk, but there is also the statement of your successor as minister of foreign affairs, dmitry koleb, who says that he is ready to talk with sergey lavrov and that russia will be at the negotiating table in the future, well, in general, there is a lot of dmytro kuli. you say, i don’t see anything bad, for this, in principle, the ministers of foreign affairs pay them for a plateau and pay from our taxes, no, i’m not asking about the bad, i’m asking about the model, you know, it ’s a mystery to me what zelensky is for in principle adopted this decree, ban, closing the door to possible negotiations in the future, perhaps this is what a diplomat who is always ready in principle is telling me

i will sit it down before the time, it could have been an emotional reaction, it is a pure emotional reaction, but is it clear that this happened after the first stage, which is this peace summit, the peace summit is over, another convincing victory has not been achieved. but everything is clear to everyone that it is necessary to move on, a normal step for our government to move on is to say that, well, it may not be ideal, but the next one will definitely be perfect, so what will it be next, everyone heard the signal, starting from the swiss, ending with the south, this global south, that everything will be fine talking with putin, it is extremely unpleasant for us, and it did not fit into our plans, but it did not work as planned, that is why the authorities, in my opinion, are looking for an option, how to explain to the ukrainians that now they can... no, well there will be next time, wait, and i want to gather this year or the next to sit putin directly at the table this year, and why will he sit down? i also, to be honest, do not see a particular reason for putin to sit down, especially if we are just entering the summer, summer is a normal period for big maneuvers,

especially difficult ones, like the russians have tanks and everything else, and that at least until the end of the war season there is no point for them to negotiate much, and to be honest, it is not a fact that it will be immediately after the end of the war season, because to me ... it seems it is becoming more and more obvious that both sides are at an impasse, putin can be there telling that he will release more and more, but both sides are at an impasse. i don't believe in peace talks, i do believe in stopping this war, which i've been talking about in principle from the very beginning for years. well, this one the model that the president talked about, that this is a model through mediators, is a realistic model, how difficult it was even to talk with mediators, sitting at the same table, i was just conducting negotiations in minsk according to ours. our team, and it was already difficult, obviously, each country thought that the intermediaries were a little on someone else's side, not on your side, but it is possible to work through intermediaries, as it was done in agreement with the grain, but we must remember the result of the grain agreement, it ended up being just a voluntary decision, when we realize that it is not works, and in principle it was done correctly,

it was a dead end and a step in all directions before it led to the collapse of our export component of our economy, we had to take steps, there was a certain risk, we did the right thing. on those who did not agree to the continuation of these endless compromises and negotiations, something like this, i am afraid, awaits these peace negotiations in the end. if we talk about the changes in the political process that everyone is waiting for now, this is what donald trump is proposing, how realistic is that? we need to see the plan which offered to trump, by his advisers, well , in general, i am sure that there will be more than one plan, and more than one adviser, and you remember, we also had a lot of people before the election. who presented themselves as advisers, there were many plans of all kinds of creative ideas, then i remember president zelensky saying that i don't know what they are talking about, i think that trump is the same, he basically, as they say, nodded his head, when the plans were presented to him, he may have thought that he had ruled out the praza at that point at home or something

something like that, but seriously, i can't believe that such a simple, primitive one-liner has a right to exist at all, i don't even have to dig deep into the details, but... the very idea that you sit down at the negotiating table if you if you don't sit down, we will give you weapons, and if you don't sit down, then we won't give weapons to ukraine, well, this is extremely very primitive, there is no next round here, relatively speaking, so sit down. and if nothing is achieved, we get weapons, we don't get weapons, and so on, and so on, and so on. well, if we talk about the washington one the nato summit, in principle, what, what can be expected realistically from this whole story, they say that it will be a bridge, not, not an invitation to membership, but a bridge that should lead to membership. what is the diplomatic practice of walking across this bridge? i don't know, i worked in diplomacy for a long time, but let's talk about the bridge. to some organization, you know, we 've been talking to us for a long time about the membership action plan, both the last and the way to nato, and it's

true because this enlargement document, which envisaged the enlargement format, he introduced such a thing, as it was called map, in fact, it was introduced to those eastern european countries that could not immediately meet the high criteria, and since traditionally the decision in the alliance was made purely politically, no one particularly dug for a long time in the priory in standards and everything, such a way was invented . but for certain reasons that are not entirely clear to me, for example, we abandoned this plan until membership, we believed that in general there was just a door in front of us, not a road, but a door; now, in addition to the road, we are offered some kind of bridge, which we have, we have to reach, well, i don't know, we had to see and understand how this bridge will look, but, to be honest, i'm not particularly optimistic about this summit, it's just not very clear how the west sees itself security guarantees for ukraine, which have the fact that russia will no longer fight, if on the one hand there is no desire to accept ukraine into nato, at least in

the foreseeable future, and on the other hand there is a desire to ensure some kind of peace in europe, i am not sure that they even see this, i i am sure that these proposals for agreements were signed under the pressure of the ukrainian side, and all those who sympathize with us, just okay, well, agreements, do you want agreements, there will be agreements, but conditionally, which ones? north macedonia with its population of less than 2 million and many other countries of the alliance can provide, but now the agreement with slovenia has been postponed because the ukrainian side did not like the content, obviously there was simply nothing there, it was purely ceremonial. so the thing is, i know that our delegation took as an example those two agreements, which were provided in finland, sweden, but they were given security guarantees until the moment of physical entry into the alliance, that is, the alliance was afraid that they would already... this thing, well, it's cool,

only we had to say to ourselves, it concerns two countries that a month, a place will be chosen for them there, the allies will seat them, because the table is already round there, they must be moved apart, that is, they will actually come in, their offices will be created, they will have a command there, and so on, they will have to hold out for a month in case russia, they lasted two years, sweden 2 years well, no one thought that this would happen, it could have been predicted, you are right with the turks, but no one saw it that way, as a result, they were given a normal fifth article, which was just introduced, by the way, in 2000, i think we tried it in the eighth year already ukraine to make such an agreement with the united states, we simply as the ministry of foreign affairs rewrote the north atlantic treaty, replacing the word nato with the united states, and so even leaving the fifth article number five and so on and so on, we offered the united states conclude a bilateral security agreement with us. it did not happen, we were offered a strategic partnership commission in response, once a year the ministers will meet, we are now due to

the fact that we did not know, that we do not often know what was done next, we are now trying to do the same, but these agreements, they good ones, well , what he once again tells us we will support, the finances, which are already given to us separately from these agreements, will be given further, which is no less than a subsidiary reboot of the political systems in each of these countries, that is, the parliamentary one... in the big britain, which will now take place, they will lead to such a complete reset of the government, but in any case, it can be said that the new government will treat these security problems of ukraine in exactly the same way as the old one, or will there still be adjustments? in our , you know, information space, britain has occupied a specific place, and it sometimes seems to us that it is an island, it really is an island formally, not only figuratively, in which our interests are so protected, and we are really very grateful to our partners. british they are the closest everyone you and i called allies, well, maybe our baltic friends, but for completely different

reasons, and we, frankly, miss this danger, which in principle carries any reset of power, despite the fact that our liberian partners and colleagues say all the right words, i'm sure that there will be some changes, now everything is said correctly, 3 billion pounds per year are pledged, that 's almost 4 billion dollars, it's almost the japanese norm. this is very good, we obviously understand that weapons, physical weapons are left in warehouses, there are fewer and fewer less, but britain was and remained for us the biggest partner of our accession to nato. and i hope that a couple of things that were traditional and that we valued in communication with britain will remain, for this we need not to lay hands, after all, to work even with those who would seem to already know, they say, what is there for preach to converted, why call on those who have already believed, no, in britain we need to work on all hryvnias and , first of all, with the electorate of now liberals, well, i understand that politicians have already appeared,

directly in the establishment, who are against this aid to ukraine, such as nigel farage, this was also not so loud in the taco. it was not, no one allowed themselves, i remember it from my time in britain, so it was so against the social consensus that existed, when even the crown said that russia must lose and ukraine must win, which 200 years there did not take part in political life, and nazha farish, well, we understand who he is, obviously we see that his success will be very limited, but it shows that someone allows himself in the country, which is to our partners and the number one support, and the red car blues were all over britain, someone finds in... an audience that says: listen, well, maybe we'll think about it, maybe we don't have to, but at the same time, they don't talk about that they don't give up on principles, you know, what worries me about trump is that even when talking to biden, he talked about 61 billion, about something else, he didn't talk about principles, that 's what really should stress us , well , this is trump’s logic in general, he talks all the time about the logic of such things, yes

i agree with transactionalism every time, and he doesn’t change himself here, he doesn’t, but the republicans, who have always been a more ideological party in this sense than the democrats, could in principle, well, i won’t say choose another leader, but definitely not shape the agenda only based on the expectations of one specific leader, after all , no one has canceled their actions yet, that's right, but what can the republicans do now, when they have no other candidate, the vast majority of supporters of this party want to see donald trump in a white suit, amen, i'm with you from... you know, when i was in the united states, working in 2009-12, i remember my partners, the americans, mocking us, me, saying : well , how can you take such a president as you, well, twice tried there for rape, in particular, it's some kind of shot in the hat, it 's impossible in our country, we eat a great political culture, absolutely, the dep state and everything else and the army and well, the elite , well, like me then, i

should have said that more emotionally, well, wait, you haven't yet complain, who knows, please, the first president in the history of the united states of... "prison, but this is theoretically possible, he can even pardon himself, well , only on federal charges, not on charges of the states, that's right, but for this there may be a very fine line, as who, who takes responsibility for specific cases affairs, and this is not the last thing, as well as a wonderful time the vice president that i watched, biden, who was... under a young, active, bright, you know, president obama, well, really an experienced person who restrained, who directed, i watched and thought, well, will we ever have something like this , please, we have everything, a good model, but if we talk about really about trump and in principle, we can somehow influence now at least

the republican elite, if they will prepare some plans for trump, so that all these principles exist one way or another . in their vision reality, if trump wins, this is the question of trump's victory, what it is, we definitely don't have enough, there is tentatively senator mccain, senator dorbin, senator, i don't know, a couple of other people like that who really were, now the worst there, i i don't know, and they could direct all this traditional post-military elite, such baby boomers in power, and they are now republicans, they are so overburdened with the need to survive. win and save the party, what we need, we will have to, not what we need, we will have to give them a certain moment so that they can turn and figure it out i am the only one, i hope that this elite, this deep state that exists, the military elite, they are still clearly aware of who is really the enemy, he can say anything as the president, there is a congress, there is this deep estate, there are all people

who work and understand where the enemy is and where their friend is, the question of money, well, a little more connected, well... the question here is that trump is already saying that he is able to negotiate not only with russia, but and with china and with north korea, it's frankly strange to me, because if we talk about china and north korea, there is a much tougher attitude towards the united states than in russia, if, if you look at things realistically, maybe he just likes, you remember, he always liked strong and such charismatic leaders, and for some reason he thinks that it will be more comfortable for him to exist in such an environment, well, maybe you also remember his decision, the first decision when he... became the president last time with one push of a button and 54 barks flew to syria, completely destroyed this airfield , like the russians were based, some rivers were based, people were bombarded with chemical weapons, that is , the decision was made and very... he constantly reminds us that what obama pulled even juvelins, he gave us juvelins with one decision , there were trainings, exchange of intelligence, intelligence data were , that is, maybe

, in fact, if we develop our strategy correctly and talk not only about ourselves, but about the interests of the united states and trump, we can find that common, common topic on which we need to promote, well, by the way, this is difficult for us, we all we generally forget time about other people's interests before their own, it may seem to us that they have no problems, but they also have problems. and in fact, with all due respect to our victims, they still have the same china that you mentioned, well, the trade and the united states is gradually slipping away, even from their immediate environment, canada and mexico, which they traditionally trade there with 2 billion dollars a day, monstrous sums there, well, huge, they are moving more and more to southeast asia, they understand where the future is for their economy, and apparently they have to defend their interests there by military means. europe, what trump says, clearly tells everyone, europe should need itself, that is, it is not the center of their economic interests anymore, not the center of interests at all, and moreover, europe, in their opinion, stood on its

own feet, and some , by the way, in europe too, he will be happy to learn one day that the american military has become less, it is not a fact that this will lead to increased security, well, but you know, people do not always understand and do what is actually in their interests, well then the question arises about the role of ukraine, you know, because in this situation, if... you want, ukraine becomes one of those european countries that are clearly oriented towards the usa. there are few such countries in europe. who, maybe poland? well, we should become poland. we have an endless number of problems with poland, but if we talk about where we should make efforts in our immediate environment, it is obviously poland. we were now focusing on orbán, but we were very clear about who orbán was before that. he was like that a long time ago, you remember, blocking you in nato. the last decades, at least, exactly the same, nothing has changed even in the requirements, change such a law, give access, such, there, let raise the flag over the village council, everything is

the same, our task is to become poland, we are approximately the same countries in terms of power and for the future, if we show our future to the same trump, well, i remember when trump was in power, the poles even planned to call the base ford trump, well, it was already too much, they refused, somehow it was named differently there, but they were obviously going. in the channel of this country, i want to remind you, the poles also followed the same path as germany, which was the closest partner in europe, germany, most of the money for poland and to the government of the party of law and justice, there are problems, there are problems, i agree, but poland is just fine she brilliantly knew how to get the maximum for the maximum help, financial and everything for the plant, we just need to become poland, but do you understand that if we become such a country with very close relations? and the united states, then all the wonderful chinese investments that many dream of ukraine will have to forget about them, very much either there or here, well, if you remember,

some countries tried, there were 16 +1 or 18, then +1, formats, someone there, even normal large countries, those they went to britain, therese bey went there herself, tried, they did all the tests, some tried to flirt with the great silk road, sold their desks and so on and so on, so no... china, unfortunately, with financial issues, pulls a lot of ideological in general, everyone is concerned about the problems of the direction, just the ones about those things that are important to us are proposed in the west, in principle they coincide with our understanding and with the vision of our people, in what way we are ready to develop, there is a difference, but in principle we accept it all well, what is being proposed now by russia and china is also not suitable , we have already passed it, in principle we are no longer interested in it, we are moving on, well, maybe another problem is that for russia we are a state... with limited sovereignty, if it may not exist at all, and china somehow calmly perceives it such a vision, they are in some you know, in some, at some stage, the chinese in principle accepted this, well, look, they

will play even with belarus, the truth is, they spend their political forces, their political capital, some resources there, attention to going to belogus , or to accept the dictator’s bulb, that is, they are still looking for a partner, they looked at me now, it reminds me very much in miniature, we even had here in the first years of independence... the embassy of north korea, in three by four years, you didn’t understand that kashi is not with us guess what, it was in the early 90s, and they took away the embassy, ​​it remained only in moscow, here is about the same alternative, maybe china, the embassy will definitely not reach, but it is obvious to the chinese that we are moving along the same path as european countries are moving, and russia does not move in this way, it remains a partner for them, resourceful, political, for international politics , global is no longer so important, the main thing is that it remains a partner, we do everything we can... how serious do you consider the hopes that china can play back some role in the negotiation process between.

russia, ukraine, and does china really want to play this role when it comes up with its proposals, china already has some kind of plan now, unlike trump? to be honest, i don't really understand the infatuation with china, i myself once worked in the department of the asian region in the early 90s, when we thought that this was our salvation, economic, financial and everything else, it didn't work out that way, and i was, to be honest , somewhat surprised when we so much actively started to conditionally invest, but we understand that if you invest. in some development of the country, you will have to look for compromise solutions, that is , our way was much simpler, for example, visa-free, we knew that ukrainians wanted to travel abroad without visas, yes, there was a long list, a list of requirements that had to be fulfilled, everything it's just very, very clear, china does not make such demands at all, but russia has now started formulating, but the number one requirement is that you do not have, well, it is very difficult to implement this demand, it is simply not implemented,

we do not even have clear terms with china. what they want, just like, by the way, here is the flag of india, the same for india, it's just that it does not so aggressively promote its interests and, in principle, is not interested in us so much, it can trade, it can not trade, well, china too may trade, may not trade, as far as i am concerned, our volume speaks for itself, we do not have a stable, stable nomenclature of our trade, we have nothing, if we analyze our products product groups, positions, we will see that there are no unique positions without which they depend, well, conditionally, i don't know any minerals, anything like that. there is no such thing here, in the worst years, when our governments could not come to an agreement with the united states, there was always, for example, the issue of food security, the americans always knew that the guarantee of a stable existence on the planet was global, in particular, the ability to remind people around the world, then they will not migrate, they will not raise a rebellion among themselves, overthrow its regimes and everything else, it can remind a couple of countries, ukraine was among them, it was important to say that something is important to china from you and me, we do not

represent the market now. our labor force has become, well , no less comparable to the chinese one, that is , there is not even any advantage here, if any of the chinese wanted to take a risk and try to open their mass enterprises here, this also does not happen, and we can say that from the point of view from the point of view of food security, china also began to reorient itself since the beginning of this great war, so it is possible to say that we were one of the most important partners of china, it is no longer the case, as far as i understand it, first of all, even look, if you analyze the american agreement, few saw in it that there is a clause that we will closely monitor exports. technology, particularly from a political point of view, that was our problem, if you remember, when there was no legislation that would allow us to stop private trade negotiations because they violate certain of our ideological, political, others, that's just us now we are approaching this, the americans just gently reminded us of this somewhere inside the documents, and this is another barrier to our interaction, for example, in sharing with china those technologies that until now, despite the fact that they they do, they don't

have enough, missile, aviation there. special materials and so on, that is, they are not very interested in this either, well, that is, they would actually be interested in precisely what would have previously allowed to bypass various american sanctions, let's say so and with ob you can talk about what you know, our association agreement with the european union allows us to locate enterprises and trade duty-free with europe, but in fact it seems to me that everything is much more prosaic, china is interested in our ability to be. a problem for the west and russia, the possibility of maintaining a low level of conflict here will allow china to solve its issues , including with taiwan, shifting attention, creating precedents, creating analogies, weakening the parties, the need to reach compromises, including political compromises, this is a subtle game, which is all the more so because no one expects anything from china, well, what about them, if they don't supply anything to russia, then

there won't be such special sanctions, well... there are a little sanctions, but it can be done more calmly treat this, may not provide details for russia, and all sanctions will eventually go away, well, in general, how interested is china in russia really getting some serious advantage there in this situation, or does it just want to cook it on such a slow fire , like a frog on fire, ukraine has it a very popular opinion is that russia is of interest to china only as a raw supplement, a raw material, and if russia were to be destroyed, then the parts would be attached, well... i think that maybe someone with particularly hot heads in beijing has such a vision, but in reality, i think, everything is done much more simply, they do not want anything so special for russia to lose, they do not want to invest too much in the victory of russia, they simply do not have such resources, they have slightly different interests, but to have their partner , they are all there in the security council and especially those like russia, again, they understand that from a military point of view, russia is a serious threat, china is still not at the level

technologically. especially when it comes to mass impression.