nato believes that russia will be able to maintain its economy for at least another 3-4 years. and what 's next? does this mean that the war may end in a few years? well , the nato summit is on its second day in washington, which, according to some western leaders, may end. a certain disappointment for ukraine. what can nato offer ukraine to survive the war? we talk about this in today's svoboda live. sashko shevchenko works in the studio. we begin. nato believes that russia is capable of continuing the war in ukraine for at least another 3-4 years. about this was stated by a high-ranking official of the alliance during the nato summit in washington. according to voice of america, according to nato, russia is not sad. but

will be able to survive in the conditions of the war economy for at least another 3-4 years, so ukraine's allies are focused on providing kyiv in the long term. according to reuters, which was also present at the high-ranking official's briefing, russia currently lacks ammunition and troops to launch a large-scale offensive in ukraine, and for this it will need to provide significant supplies ammunition from other countries in addition to what it already has. on the battlefield, according to the official, russia suffers very large losses, but he noted that ukraine also lost many soldiers. after all, we should all be ready to continue supporting ukraine, even after 2025. we all understand very well, and as we have said for a long time, this is not a conflict that is likely to end soon, it will take years of focused effort. well, considering... the fact that nato as an alliance

is not yet ready to invite ukraine to its alliance composition, and, accordingly, to extend security guarantees to its territory, it seems that kyiv will continue to have to rely only on its own human resources, but even for effective defense the means provided by the west are not yet sufficient, - said in washington the president of ukraine volodymyr zelenskyi, who also arrived at the nato summit. according to him, the armed forces of ukraine are capable of dislodging russian troops from the south of ukraine if they have enough long-range weapons. and in order to effectively protect the sky , ukraine needs to be able to destroy russian aircraft already at the airfields in the depths territory of russia. also, the promised number of f-16 fighter jets is not enough to effectively counter russia in the air, zelenskyi said. the problem with the f-16 is numbers and dates. but, to be honest, if you are honest with yourself, and not just say that there is a solution. let's stop for a second.

russia uses 300 fighter jets on the territory of ukraine. they have more, but they use 300. we still have a solution for 10-20. even if we have 50 - it's nothing. they have 300, we, since we are defending, need about 128 planes. all of them our partners have these numbers. by the way, the us state department has already. stated that the first f-16s from denmark and the netherlands are already on their way to ukraine and will be used already this summer, but still, what should ukraine do if its needs in equipment and weapons cannot be met by western countries, and if the door to nato is open, but it is not clear how one can join them, which strategy of defense and possible counteroffensive is the most realistic, and will russia's ability to wage war really decrease in 3-4 years? we will talk about all this now,

we are in touch with vadym prystayko, ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary of ukraine, head of the mission of ukraine to nato in 2017-2019. good evening. good evening. let's start with this briefing, which was held in washington for journalists by an unnamed high-ranking nato official. according to him, russia will be able to maintain the war for another 3-4 years. how do you feel about this assessment and what it could mean for ukraine? we were expecting you. that russia will be able to continue the war for some time, given that, firstly, they have one of the largest armies in terms of numbers, and secondly, that this is one of the largest countries in the world in general, and starting to repel this influx from the very first day, we understood that this is not the only wave that they can catch up with, in principle, i see the words of the nato official, in principle, the positive side, they say that ukraine will be able to resist all these years, and they will help, that is, if we see the russian... i would see the same to

our viewers, i would remind that we should be grateful to our partners as well and to ourselves for the fact that all these years we have already continued and will be able to continue, certainly. it is pain every day and the loss of both civilians and military, but our ability to defend ourselves is not questioned by our partners, as it was, say, a couple of years ago. but is it possible here, if you want, so to speak, to wishful thinking, to conclude that 3-4 years will pass, and after that russia will no longer be able to wage war, or are these premature conclusions? i am sure that if we continue this war with you, our chances for peace will be the way we wanted it. grow as if we agreed to the conditions that were put forward to us in istanbul in the first month of the war, we would have been with you already, well, in the best case, something like belarus, our ability to resist and all this time to fight on an equal footing with a country that in five times more and 15

times more territory, this is already an achievement in itself, if they cannot resist and wage war for a long time, it means that we have imposed on them a strategic, you know, our vision of how the war should progress and.. . at this moment the moment may come, i i don't know, putin will change, anything will happen, all the reshuffles in european and our other partner countries will end, we are getting more support, you can see how much the escalation is growing, it is rising higher and higher, in response to the aggression of russia, our partners, who provided us with a strategic base for everything, for production, for supplies for survival , both financially and militarily, they continue and give more and more work... ukrainians and our leader say that this is not enough for victory, but this is enough already now, we could not dream that the support would be so strong and give us the opportunity to confront russia, and you think, you think that the amount of aid,

weapons and so on will continue to grow, i do not see so far 2.5 years of any example, except for the delay, which was a technicality with congress, but even then a delay. we knew the volume we were expecting, we were missing one specific solution, it could be a political problem given the changes we know in the united states, but up to this point we had not grown only the indicators are quantitative, but also qualitative, look, the weapons with which you and i are currently operating, our soldiers are fighting on the fronts, we could not dream of them, i am already silent about the anti-aircraft installations with which our cities are protected, ukraine can count on patriots well, i couldn't, it was like, i don't know, dreams, each installation costs 1.1 billion dollars, i'm not talking about the fact that the united states only supplies its closest partners, finally we are such a partner whose skies are protected by these anti-aircraft installations, in addition to others, which

provided by other partners. mr. vadim, i want to ask you about the future strategy of ukraine, because i believe that it is the same for our audience. it is important, because it is about strategic planning for years ahead, so taking into account these trends that we see in the support of ukraine, in the support, in particular of russia, by other states that probably want victory for russia, what should be prepared for, what is the current strategy here , whether to hold out, hold territories, whether to realistically expect counteroffensive actions, and ultimately, if the war will not end with the exit to... the borders of 1991, are there further scenarios in which ukraine will regain its sovereignty and be able, perhaps through diplomatic means, to achieve the return of the territory? at this historical moment, i would not rely on a diplomatic achievement, because our entire

previous, previous period of 33 years of our independence, these were attempts to gently, unobtrusively build our foreign policy in such a way that... it is possible was to make ukraine a western state, because these values, for the sake of which we sometimes remember but we don't always keep in mind what we mean, the possibility to develop democratically without corruption as we deem necessary. obviously, russia does not like it. the path to nato is dictated precisely by having a guarantee in the event of russia attacking us, a guarantee of protection. unfortunately, for all 33 years, we have not been able to for many different reasons, first of all, we must blame ourselves for not being able to overcome those shortcomings. our people did not sufficiently support the course towards nato and so on, secondly, our partners, who did not find them in themselves the political strength to accept us together, or so to say, around the time when they accepted our baltic colleagues, the republics that also withdrew from the soviet union. unfortunately, and our

viewers probably won't like it very much, we don't see the end of the war with you yet, but the way we are fighting this war, despite the losses, the very painful losses for a smaller country, for our country, we all exactly against... we stand and we have a chance to finish the wine on our terms, disagreeing not on what is on the floor of the measure, but on what putin offers us, this is just capitulation, wrapped in a more or less diplomatic wrapper, if we talk about... the ability of ukraine to recapture its territories, in particular , volodymyr zelenskyi said today that ukraine will realistically be able to knock out the invaders from the south of ukraine if it has enough long-range weapons . do you understand how many and what means may be involved and whether the western partners can once again accumulate enough resources to at least liberate the southern territories of ukraine from occupation. history of wars. in the first place, modern wars, such as the second world war, show that it is not only soldiers who win with their courage on the battlefield

or generals with their genius in planning military operations, this is primarily, this is primarily a war of resources, russia and not close approaching the resources that our partners can offer us, well , to put it mildly, russia's gross national product is approaching spain's, or half as much as britain's. or ten times less than the american one. our task is to convince our partners that there is a chance to solve the multi-year, ten-year conflict with russia now, helping ukraine not only to stand up for the sake of our independence and security, but for the sake of restoring what we call the world order. by the way , the same actors who do not support us, and the same chinese who do not participate enough in the negotiations, both turks and everyone else, also depend on this. in principle, i see a suf in the direction of the fact that there is indeed a camp that is forming around russia,

there is a camp to which ukraine belongs. i am convinced that as a result, at the end of the day, the camp in which ukraine finds itself, its future, is much more powerful for many different, different reasons than what russia can count on. with our sufficient stubbornness and readiness for war, we will be able to defeat russia. and under this stubbornness, actually in the negotiations with of ukraine, we mean that it all depends on kyiv, whether the negotiating talents will be enough, so to speak, to convince the western partners, in particular the usa, yes or no, it's just a matter of time when ukraine's partners themselves will understand that there is no other way. well, first of all, i would blame all our stubbornness, you know, such malice, on our opponents, the work that we have to do on my behalf. our enemies to those who have not yet found, did not understand why they need to choose values ​​instead of a price tag, let this energy

go there, our partners, our friends, yes, they need our explanations, they need our demonstration, our clear , a tough position, but i want to say once again, cruelty must be directed at our enemies. i see how the understanding of what is happening in ukraine is growing now, look at the countries that are parting with such important and for them... systems, which countries have units in their weapons, obviously they are weighing their responsibility, the leaders of these countries , weigh the responsibility before their peoples, but still find the strength to transfer these complexes to ukraine. an excellent example of this is britain, two days ago the government changed, a liberal one, a new one, which it would seem that he had no obligations towards ukraine, but the very first statements, the very first meetings with our president, show that britain, like other countries, remains powerful together with us. as well as other large countries, france, germany and all the others. it remains to be convinced that the united states

will remain the same, that is why the president is now in the united states. finally, i want to ask you about the f-16. volodymyr zelenskyi is in washington today and said that the number that was already promised is the same number fighters, which have already been promised to be provided to ukraine, are nothing, but the armed forces need 128 fighters in order to achieve parity. with russia, i emphasize here that he did not mean that he was not grateful for this help, he just tried to compare the real possibilities in the sky and concluded that this amount is not enough, according to what the westerners say leaders, it seems to me that 128 f16 is just some fantastic number, and well, that it is even possible and should not be hoped for, what do you think, i am sure that the president before that how to express such rather critical remarks had. from our military, who calculated the necessary or sufficient amount of weapons, i am not a military expert, i

know for sure that in our first plans there are no air battles with the same corresponding number of russian aircraft in space, that is, arithmetically, we may have less on the first stage, if we have a powerful anti-aircraft defense, and patriots, and cm, and all other missile launchers. that we have, this is exactly the approach that our western partners demonstrate, they realize that the f-16 is now being trained to engage long-range bombers, to prevent... bombing our troops and our border areas with these powerful bombs. the second task will be to completely drive away both helicopters and airplanes from our borders. for this first task, we may have enough, a couple of dozen f-16s. i am sure that there will be an opportunity to advance further, as soon as the partners

will see the effectiveness of the use by ukrainians. it is necessary to remind that the question is not only in machines, these machines... thousands were produced, the question is in the pilots, you see how painfully we wait for the preparation of these one, one whole year for the training of pilots. i remember last year, when the partners started talking about pilot training and said that it would take a year, we in ukraine could not believe that it would take so long, and why do we need a year? a year has passed, we persevered, the pilots are already ready, together with these machines, we just need to constantly train pilots, expand capabilities, prepare the infrastructure for this, airfields maintenance, armament, refueling, this is a serious, very serious mechanism and a very serious military organism that must be managed. thank you very much for joining our broadcast, vadym prystaiko was in touch with us, he is an extraordinary plenipotentiary ambassador, ex-minister of foreign affairs of ukraine and also previously the head of the mission of ukraine to nato. well, in

washington, as we already mentioned today, the main day starts. 75th anniversary nato summit. a ukrainian delegation headed by president zelenskyi has already been there. he, in particular, he should meet with his american colleague joe biden on thursday. in their conversation, the presidents will talk primarily about the us's support for ukraine. joe biden has already announced, as he himself says, the historic provision of anti-aircraft support systems to ukraine from the us and partners. four patriot batteries, three from the usa, germany and romania, one more jointly with... is taken by the netherlands with other partners, also italy will transfer an additional sumpti system. the european truth publication notes that joe biden allegedly misrepresented new air defense supplies, since four of the five systems he mentioned have been known for a long time, and one of them is already working in ukraine, shooting down russian missiles. and that's why, as the publication notes, calling it a new

supply is clearly incorrect. and only one pet system is fundamentally new. just the one the us should supply. in his speech at the opening of the summit, biden also said that ukraine will be able to stop putin. we are listening. but make no doubt, ukraine can and will stop putin, especially with our full collective support, and they have our full support. at this nato summit , ukraine is not expected to be invited to join. to the alliance, according to the media, ukraine may be offered a certain bridge to membership, i.e. , an outline of the conditions under which ukraine will be able to join nato, but the terms when this may happen will not be named. the minister of foreign affairs of poland, radosław sikorski , believes that there is a consensus among nato members not to take ukraine into nato until the end of the war.

nato believes that ukraine can join the alliance only when the war ends. but we do a lot for for this to happen. first of all, we will show that we are united. nato was created to deter aggressive russia. russia is aggressive again, nato won the first time and will win again. so, let's talk about who can block ukraine's accession to nato even before the end of hostilities. but what can the alliance offer kyiv in return? we will talk about this later. anna is with us. kubko is in touch, chairman of the board of the network for the protection of national interests ans. good evening. good evening. ms. hanna, let's discuss the wording of the final communiqué, rfe/rl has already had a chance to get acquainted with it, it is still a draft, but it is very likely that this will be the final document. it still contains wording about the irreversible path of ukraine to nato.

they talked about it the day before, but it is still not clear when and how ukraine will be able to join, what are your expectations from the formulation of the communiqué and how important is it? well, in fact, considering the fact that we are not offered a formal invitation, this is all unimportant, what is important is the help and formation of a coalition of the determined within nato, now in parallel, there is a discussion between the prime minister of denmark, the president of the czech republic, senator richey and kaya callas, who discuss that nato is not doing enough. for ukraine and that the threats to the alliance, despite the fact that everyone here congratulates themselves on the fact that the nato family has been replenished with two members, but nevertheless for... the threats to nato are not just hybrid, but existential, and the consequences of indecision, starting from budapest in 2008, when it was an attack on georgia, and

then the invasion of ukraine in the 14th, that is, from the illegal attempts to annex crimea in the 14th to genocide, which the aggressor is currently committing against ukraine, and as you said, secretary blinkin, austin , and secretary general stoltenberg just spoke, about the fact that they are reviewing... now they are giving china, which is already considered a threat to the alliance and they think, like nato, which not yet seen as a global alliance, but nevertheless how to contain china's ambitions in the indo-pacific region, because their partners japan, south korea, australia feel in danger, so let's make some evolution, as senato risch said, that nato, which was created in order to to prevent... us in order to deter the aggressors is now in the same situation as it was 75 years ago at the time of creation, and in fact, as far as

ukraine is concerned, from the time of the invasion, when it was the little green men in crimea, until , what is happening now on the battlefield, the use of artificial intelligence drones, robotics, electronic warfare, we see that in fact it is not just russia anymore. this is the axis of evil and almost all the speeches of the respected leaders of the states that we hear here today, and i had the opportunity to speak with the secretary of state blinken about the threat of china, because in ukraine, unfortunately, parts of the establishment still have a naïve understanding that china can somehow be convinced, made neutral, and that china will not provide lethal weapons, although china is already on the side of the russian federation, china 70 %... machinists, well, that is, machines that make various components for weapons, 90% of microelectronics, that is, china is already involved in the war and fully provides the russian

defense industry, ms. gano, i just wanted to clarify then, the threats have really changed and the awareness of these threats as well is changing, in this context i would like to ask, well, obviously everyone understands that one of the first, if not the first violin in nato is played by the usa, the president... president of france macron allegedly said that germany and the usa are the main opponents of the to accept ukraine into nato now. then, of course, the publication that reported this should have denied it, as if macron did not say this, but still, according to your information, who are the countries that are against and are there really so few of them, supposedly there are only two- three countries are against it, and if it weren't for them, then ukraine would be there are ready to allegedly join nato, or is that true? well, let's be honest, if the united states of america would say... that they are for biden, well , considering the situation with the presidential campaign, considering the threats to the national security of the united states of america, i decided to say that

that's all, this is a historic summit and the decision to invite ukraine , this is a geopolitical signal to the russian federation, to china, and this is our deterrence strategy, we are not afraid of escalation, because talking to various experts who clearly say that we have answers to all the i... blackmail or escalation of russia, the biggest thing holding back the white house and biden is the risk or fear of the unknown, what will happen, how russia will lose, and then one of the scenarios that is possible will begin, which is the disintegration of the russian federation, for which no one is ready, no resourcefully, not in a different political way, and this is what holds back, plus there are those voices that voice that by the end of... the 24th year or in the second half, perhaps the situation on the battlefield will be so complicated that one of parties will seriously consider the negotiations secefire

plan, in particular stoltenberg today about it mentioned that when the moment of the end of the war comes, ukraine will already have security agreements, which will serve as a guarantee that ukraine will sufficiently deter future attacks a second time and so on, that is, we can even see that... nato, somewhere towards the end, taking into account the fact that, despite the rule of consensus, there are those inside who understand how existential the threats have become, and that this is no longer about the war in ukraine, but about the hybrid attacks that russia has repeatedly carried out in the baltic sea, and sabotage on the territory countries of the alliance, and political interference, and cyberattacks, and they are becoming massive, there are those... countries that act as proxies of the kremlin, flirting with moscow and beijing, while others believe that they are somewhere far away, and nato

will protect them, so... and the demand to pay 2% of gdp, because the threats are growing, we see the same and the number of those countries, maybe this is a preparation for the fact that representatives of the republican party can lead the white house, and the main criticism, which previously sounded that nato countries do not pay enough aid, and they are guided by the fact that the main donor is the usa, therefore, without the decision of the usa, which is against giving to ukraine, we also see the position of germany, which is very reluctant. and opposes that it is not on time, well, these are key countries, if the decision of the usa was positive, i think that there would be arguments to convince scholz, as well as others who wanted to come up with some excuses, they say that if there is no political will in the key states in the alliance, well, it is obvious what kind of consensus or what kind of readiness nato is to seriously consider this the question can be speech. ms. hanna, in such

a case as you... until the end of the war in ukraine, there is no question of membership, accordingly , there is no question of security guarantees, and it is not about this principle of collective defense, is it a correct conclusion that until the end of the war ukraine is one-on-one with russia, possibly its allies, in particular the announcement that foreign troops from north korea may join, and it remains only to hope for its own human resources and the help of the west in the matter of money and weapons. well, actually, then it is necessary to work out the idea of ​​​​macron, who now has the olympic games in the summer, and obviously he is worried about the risks that russia and others can carry out terrorist attacks there, and that is why there is such a cautious position of france now, but there are other states that have not ruled out the readiness to send instructors, those who will protect the objects of critical infrastructure for us, because of the help that

was announced here. even with nato, there is a liaison office or others, well, you know, it’s like last year, when it was necessary to save face, they created a ukraine-nato council, but they did not of a formal invitation, so it is unfortunate that someone sees the lack of an invitation as absent, as, let's say, not contributing to escalation, at the same time , on the contrary, indecision from nato, this is a signal to russia that it is possible to continue the war and... just to ukraine it is necessary to form a decisive coalition among those countries that are in nato, plus outside, in particular to agree with south korea on part of the weapons, taking into account the last treaty, there is a comprehensive treaty between the russian federation and north korea, to communicate with japan, with taiwan, by the way, in nato, in innovafnd, taiwan cooperates, providing, in particular

, nato countries, modern. microelectronics, semiconductors, and ukraine must now understand that while membership in nato does not shine for us in the near future, we need to build those formats, those alliances, those coalitions of the determined that will provide us with resources, weapons, and finances, we must talk about complete economic isolation russia after the confiscation of assets and insist on the confiscation of 300 billion, well, nato member states, for example, greece, others, for example, even in the baltic sea, they should stop tankers that carry russian oil and continue to provide this war machine with money, and turkey, including where we know that oil and petroleum products come from, stolen grain from ukraine, therefore double standards in nato, this should also be one of the issues, in particular , as well as those countries that work against the interests of nato, having close contacts with the russian federation and china. within

the alliance itself, i am very grateful to you for joining our broadcast, we were contacted by hanna gubko, the head of the board of the network for the protection of national interests, ans, as well a former people's deputy from washington joined our broadcast and we discussed ukraine's actual prospects for receiving an invitation to join nato. thank you. well, after the debate between us presidential candidates donald trump and joe biden. the situation was not in favor of the latter, trying to prepare for them during foreign trips, the current president could not beat trump in eloquence. the conversation about whether the oldest president in the history of the united states will be able to continue breaking records and go for a second term is heard even outside america. what they say about joe biden's health and how