to inform you about the latest changes in ukrainian legislation, how legislative norms change our lives, what to prepare for, these and other questions that concern ukrainians will be answered by leading lawyers of the aktum bar association. see that tuesday at 7:55 in the legal expertise program on the espresso tv channel. glory to ukraine, dear tv viewers, on espresso tv channel, studio zahid program, we will analyze the most important events of this week, in particular, we will try to predict how the american, and therefore global politics as a result of the no longer ephemeral coming to power of donald trump in the united states. our guests today are matthew bryza and andriy pionkovskyi.

bryza, ex-adviser of the united states secretary of state, former director of european and eurasian affairs at the us national security council, will be working on the tv channel. glory to ukraine, dear mr. ambassador, glad to see you. glory to the hero, thank you. well, assassinations, an attempt on candidate donald trump. we understand that there are many questions in this story more than meets the eye, but the key story is how it can affect. not just on domestic american stability, how it can affect global world politics and, in particular, on the russian-ukrainian war, we understand that now donald trump, thanks to his injured ear, he now feels almost the winner of the race, and this also worries us, because the current president of the united states can act as a so- called lame duck, this is a dangerous situation primarily for ukraine. "i think that

the impact of the assassination would not be long-lasting in terms of the sympathy it would generate among the american electorate. so the immediate effect is of course to energize trump's supporters, and i think he's probably attracted a lot of undecided voters by looking so strong and determined, but the real problem is president biden's weakness, the physical and mental weakness, who is now unfortunately suffering from...coronavirus, i think that after the debate with donald trump, biden looks too physically weak to americans to do your job, or even win an election. i think that's how it is. as long as biden remains the democratic nominee, i think it's almost 100% certain that donald trump will be the next president, and the democrats still have some time to either nominate another candidate, like camila garis, she's the most obvious. or

hold something short like mini primaries, where several democratic candidates could compete against each other and try to become the nominee, but for that requires president biden to agree to resign. so, again, to sum it all up, the assassination of trump gave him some short-term support, but i think in a few weeks people will forget about the assassination and all they'll remember is that trump seems much stronger. yes, i agree, both candidates are, so to speak, not of the first political freshness, but the situation can be, well, just kidding, critical for ukraine, so we already have a new vice president of the united states, and we understand that he is not belonged to sympathizers of ukraine. donald trump promises to offer his plan, donald trump's plan is always going to rest on what and who is right... in the kremlin, yes, it's, it's a very, very

difficult situation, but as you see the situation unfolding now, when we talk about the ukrainian issue and the russian-ukrainian war in the united states, that is, now there are several extremely hot, extremely hot months, they can be decisive, and putin will never miss this window of opportunity. yes, sorry, forgot to answer to this question. first, on the cautiously optimistic side. it is important to look very closely at what vice presidential candidate j.d. vance said about russia's war against ukraine and the nato alliance. the good news is that jd vance, unlike president trump, has never questioned the importance or value of the nato alliance, nor has he ever said that he does not want ukraine to win the war, or that he wants so that russia does not lose. he didn't say such things. his main argument was: ... that the united states should not

to give ukraine such a disproportionately large amount of aid, much more than the european allies of the us, because the european allies live next to ukraine. he makes the argument that if european allies had continued to spend on defense after the cold war for the past 30 years at the same rate they have, they would have spent, he says, about $8.6 billion more on defense than they have, and so he states that if the us spends about 1 trillion dollars a year on defense, and the europeans in general lag behind by 8.6 trielna, then they should. catch up , in other words, they have to catch up with the us. however, in any case , it is clear that jd vance will support president trump's position on ukraine. yes, trump has repeatedly said that even before he takes office, he

will essentially put pressure on both sides to push for a cease-fire, regardless of whether that means ukraine having to give up the territory it has been occupying russia, and you know. which trump obviously always had sympathy for vladimir putin, as well as for other strongmen of this world, such as viktor orban. it is currently unknown what exactly is included in trump's plan, but orbán, as we know, visited trump right after the nato summit, he said afterwards that he was aware of trump's plan, and therefore orbán went to meet putin. it seems that orbán is trying to play some kind of intermediary role in the implementation of trump's plan, but the bottom line is that if trump wins, ... we definitely won't see the level of support like the $60 billion that was ultimately acceptable for ukraine. cool, we in ukraine would not like to be cheated by big and powerful global players. we understand that the issue of the russian-ukrainian war is not only a bilateral russian-ukrainian issue, it is

an issue around which the whole world is currently working, only a significant part of that world, unfortunately, can support putin. and accordingly, what should we do right now so that we are not replaced by those people who will support this plan of viktor orbán. in fact, this plan is most likely agreed upon and in moscow and beijing. it is not easier for us in ukraine because of that, and we just have to survive, and we have to win. actually, i would like to ask you what is the danger of viktor orbán's so-called plan, and whether in general there are prospects for this plan to be pushed through, promoted, and imposed. in ukraine, those environments that may be related to trump, may not be related, but if orban's plan is being talked about so much in different cabinets, the european union completely rejects it, it means that this may be a certain trade offer from kremlin. orban is not

announced publicly what exactly his plan contains, but it can be assumed that it will be a kind of ceasefire, under which ukraine will definitely have to give up some territory, maybe i don't know. it may be something similar to the so-called istanbul proposal in march 22, according to which ukraine agrees to remain neutral, never to join nato. russian troops will have to withdraw their units from the territory they have occupied since the full-scale invasion, and the future the status of crimea and donbas will be determined in the future. this was a preliminary offer. i don't know what orbán's proposal includes, but it doesn't really matter. i don't want to sound impolite. but i will say that viktor orban is nobody in this matter, just the leader of a small central european country. he has no authority. charles michel, the president of the european council, came out and said the same thing. he said that orbán has no authority. the legal department of the eu

stated that orbán violates eu policies and rules of the european union and eu legislation. therefore, he has no authority to negotiate on behalf of anyone. and, as charles michel also said. nothing can be decided about ukraine without ukraine, so orban's plan is irrelevant, it will only become relevant if trump is elected, who will accept it and try to impose it on ukraine. but i don't think the european allies of the us are like that, and how is this difference of opinion between, say, donald trump's washington on the one hand, and brussels, paris and rome, for example, and then london, on the other hand, will be drawn. i can't predict right now, but i personally think that orbán's plan means nothing if trump doesn't support it, and orbán just makes it clear that he is not a friend of the transatlantic family. yes, i agree with you, but on the other hand, everyone is aware that orbán does not play, orbán as orbán,

he does not play any important role, yes, here i completely agree with you, but he is an emissary, he brought what what was agreed in moscow and... in beijing, i don't even fully understand yes, because the so-called istanbul agreements or negotiations, or rather, yes, they were based on the fact that russia withdraws its troops from our newly occupied territories. of ukrainian territories, yes, the issue of crimea is pushed aside somewhere, well, and accordingly, the complete disarmament of ukraine, but putin is now returning to the so-called istanbul negotiations, but he is completely changing them, actually changing them and bringing them to an absolutely absurd form, which consists in , that they are going to annex those territories that they have not even captured, that is putin's current talks about the new istanbul are absolutely correct. but irrelevant to what was said then and so on, we understand that putin is playing his game, and the current situation

for him, this is just a new platform that he wants to land on, after, possibly, donald trump would become the president , that is, i see exactly this unfolding of the current situation. i completely agree with you, if we recall march 2022 and the istanbul statement, then the main representative of ukraine at... in the negotiations said that ready to accept a compromise on the spot, but his russian counterpart had to go back to moscow to get approval, which he never got, so now putin, as usual, is lying and pretending that russia was ready to accept the previous wording. now, as you just said, mr. borkovsky, putin is not even talking about the original istanbul wording, but about his method of action. in an interview with tucker carson, putin said something incredibly outrageous. perhaps for an american with polish roots like me, he said that poland attacked russia or

the soviet union in september 1939, again completely twisting history as in the case of katyn, so he does it again. putin pretends that ukraine should have agreed to the annexation of these territories, which russia did not even occupy, and tries to appear peaceful, hoping to create the necessary momentum with the help of an emissary. orban, and yet i think that he will not succeed, the truth is on the side of ukraine. another thing about orbán: over the years, his appearance the policy was based on special relations, including economic and currency relations, both with moscow and beijing. a former hungarian official responsible for this policy told me that they didn't want to talk about it publicly, but it was something they did with their hands, to a large extent it was just money flowing. dear mr. ambassador bryza,

what are the prospects for holding the so-called second peace summit, we understand that the kremlin says one thing publicly, behind the scenes they send other signals, so there is a feeling that one or another indirect negotiations between the main capitals of the world are ongoing, yes, well, i did not want it to be at the expense of ukraine, but in any case, the prospects for it to be successful, the second. a peace summit, something like what happened in switzerland, but with a very specific fixation of certain parameters. i don't think it has any prospects at all if success means a deal that ukraine will accept. i remember how worried i was during trump's first presidency when it was obvious that he was trying to reach a deal with putin on behind ukraine, which was a kind of compromise, maybe like the istanbul statement in exchange for... some cooperation from putin in syria. there is always the danger that if trump

is elected, he will try to make such a deal with putin without consulting ukraine, but this will certainly not happen at the peace summit. this is an agreement that does not correspond to the interests of ukraine. and it is obvious to me that as an organization the european union and the vast majority of its member states do not want ukraine to be forced to stop war, if it is not yet ready for it. there will be some pressure in this direction if there is another such peace agreement from some participants, but i do not think that the european union and nato support forcing ukraine to end the war without liberating its territories on its own terms. dear mr. ambassador bryza, what is the right thing for ukraine, our president, our ukrainian government to do in the current situation, right? well, because we understand that donald trump is not donald trump per se, and he is not even a republican. we understand that in the republican the party of the united states has very different approaches, so donald trump is also boris

johnson, yes, elon musk recently met with him, and in general, he represents a certain economic and global environment, so we understand that he will voice certain things , maybe on its own, maybe it will be some kind of collective decision, a collective manifestation of a certain political will, and i really would not like donald trump to say, listen, well... you are there in ukraine, i will give you two or three months there negotiate something with the russians, otherwise i won't give it to you aid, so we understand that not to give ukraine aid is to stab us in the back, that is, the situation is unpleasant, but given the way trump can conduct negotiations, this may happen, and therefore we must act as soon as possible. first, boris johnson doesn't really have any influence because donald trump has all the power. even elon musk may be the richest man in the world and have more followers on twitter

or x than anyone else, but he has no real political power. now he decided to support the course of donald trump. trump is the one who will make the decisions in the united states government and he can actually do exactly what you mention. in my opinion, ukraine can continue to do what it is doing, but perhaps it should be stated more clearly: we are a sovereign country with a democratically elected leadership. therefore, dear mr. trump, if the united states, god forbid, were attacked by mexico, canada, or anyone else, you would... insist on the right to fight as long as necessary to restore your territorial integrity. at some point, the ukrainian leadership will need to clearly state this. at the same time, of course, ukraine must win on the battlefield. yes, we, the us and europe, must provide the promised weapons systems, but ukraine definitely needs more soldiers on the

battlefield, which is a very difficult domestic political issue in ukraine. so, i would advise u... to speak clearly and clearly, and b) win on the battlefield and continue to put pressure on the us and europe. put pressure on europe in particular because trump and owens are actually right that europe hasn't spent enough for too long for its own defense and relied on the united states to carry the burden, which is essentially a huge tax imposed on the united states by its allies. president zelensky would be wise to find a way. to strengthen this argument, the us has done a lot for us, but europe, maybe trump is right, you need to do more too. if president zelensky had made such an argument, trump might have been more sympathetic to him in the event of his re-election. well, i recently spoke with the former marshal of the polish senate, bohdan borusewicz, and when i said that the european union should

give more money, yes, because there is a situation that can become critical later. the arrival of trump and after he will conduct his negotiations, well, to which borusevich said, yes, well, we understand that the united states is still richer and its budgets are larger, that is, it is a kind of story, yes, and donald trump, i don't think that he will come up with some new scheme, newer than what i will now voice it, that is, he will say to our official kyiv: listen, you have to do this and that, or i won't give it to you, he will say to the russians: listen, you have to go to negotiations, otherwise we will give ukraine up to... weapons, lethal and perhaps allow us to strike deep into russian territory, not 100 km, 500 or 1000 km, so it will generally raise the stakes, but knowing, for example, putin, he will just, i don't know, conduct another ballistic or tactical or non-tactical nuclear weapons training, after that we will be on the verge of a caribbean crisis,

after that everything will go down, the level of stakes and the level of aggression , but i have fears, that it will all happen. at our expense, i just don't see that putin is ready to concede anything, maybe i'm wrong. returning to the comment of the ex-speaker of the polish senate, it should be noted that it does not completely cover the whole picture. the economy of the united states is not as large as that of the european union. the european union has a stronger economy. the problem is that member states have decided not to have large defense budgets like the united states. that's exactly what it is. what trump is talking about: you have money, you just choose not to spend them on defense because you rely on us and our own welfare to cover your defense needs. so, european union, you need to use more money to take care of your own defense needs. that's the whole argument. if the polish politician does not interfere with this, it means that he does not really pay

attention to the political realities that will come after the election of trump. if putin agreed to such a possible agreement. i agree that most likely this would be trump's approach, although we don't know for sure. we can analyze what is happening now and what happened yesterday, but predicting the future is very difficult. and yet, let's say this scenario were exactly this: yes, i agree that putin will make more threats with nuclear weapons, but i'm less and less worried that those threats will work. as my former colleague wrote in... "look at how putin is behaving in the black sea. ukraine actually, without having a fleet, destroyed or removed from power a third of chornom". fleet and forced russia to withdraw such a large part of it from the crimea back to russia, that now naval experts in great britain say that the black sea fleet

is essentially no longer operational. putin threatened nuclear retaliation if force was used and there were attacks in crimea, but in the end he did what any moron does, gave up and backed down. i don't think there's any chance he'll ever use tactical nukes. he will never apply. serious nuclear weapons, but if he used tactical nuclear weapons, it would change everything dramatically. let's remember how bill burns, the director of the cia, was about a year and a half ago so he went to warn him that if russia were to use tactical nuclear weapons, the united states would not stand aside. of course, there will be some nato countries that will step in and destroy the russian armed forces occupying ukraine, but that's not the scenario that anyone wants to see, and i don't think that...that we'll ever get there, well, we just see , how hysterically putin is in a hurry, that is, if putin is in such a hurry, we can see it based on the situation on the front line, he does not spare the people now and

constantly drives them to attack in the donetsk direction, this means that putin wants to meet his certain deadline, both literally and figuratively, well, actually, what is putin's deadline, i think that the presidential elections in the usa are definitely an important milestone or marker for... putin. i don't know if they represent a specific deadline for him, but he really hopes that everything we just talked about will happen if donald trump is elected president, and then, from his point of view, support for ukraine will be much less, and it will give russia more chances to avoid defeat. but there are also internal uncertainties timing, no one knows what's really going on. putin probably doesn't know, but now, as vice-presidential candidate j.d. vance noted in an article. which he wrote last february, russia produces more artillery shells and basic weapons than the united states and the eu combined. i

mean, it's about three or four times that, so the us and the eu have allowed their defense industries to reduce capacity by investing in non-military defense, but we're seeing things start to change. the first german companies say: oh yes, we should to produce military products, weapons and artillery shells. then, as in the past, it was always a kind of political taboo for german companies, meaning they stayed away from the military context because of germany's nazi past. so gradually american and european factories start to produce more and more weapons, it will take some time, but russia is able to produce so much ammunition and weapons because putin took 6% of the entire gross domestic product of russia into the defense sector. he reorganized the russian economy so that... it was completely military-oriented , and it could last for a very long time. for how long, who knows, but the russian people also suffer from the fact that they have much less

money for health care, much less money for elderly care, much less money for education, and even a dictator like putin should not to forget about the possibility of revolution. there were many revolutions in russia. no, russia is not on the verge of revolution now, but he knows that he cannot... continue the intensive militarization of the russian economy, every day when the whole the russian economy is focused on the military, this is another day away from russia being able to modernize its economy and acquire the technology it needs to compete on the world stage, after this horrible invasion of ukraine is over, i don't know when that deadline is will be in putin's head, or when this deadline will come in russian society, i don't know, but exactly where it is... thank you very much, dear mr. ambassador bryza, for this brilliant conversation and for this extremely important analysis on the air

tv channel, i would like to remind our tv viewers that matthew bryza, ex-adviser of the united states secretary of state, former director of european and eurasian affairs at the us national security council, worked for you. glory to ukraine. glory to heroes. oh, i remember, you see, although they say that our memory weakens with age, but i am attentive and remember everything. we take dr. tice's memo effect and feel the difference. the active substances of memo effect improve the functioning of the nervous system and contribute to the normalization of mental activity. memo effect by dr. ty improves memory and attention, helps to think. the discounts are the only discounts on eurofast softcaps. 10% at travel pharmacies. in the latest edition of the magazine ukraine. interview with eustratius zorya about challenges for the ukrainian church. the problem of the institute of reputation in our

society is an example. in the article by viktor boberenko. lada vvedenska about the difficulties and challenges of military medics. the country is always at the forefront. search at press outlets or pre-pay online. there are discounts representing the only discounts on foam steel 15% in travel pharmacies for you and savings. fm: galicia listen to yours. exclusively on the air of our channel. congratulations, friends, the politclub program is on the air on

the espres tv channel. the most relevant topics of the week for nato member countries are huge arsenals, and russia is already on the verge of exhausting its resources. topics that resonate in our society. this is the question of trump's victory, what is it? analysis of the processes that change the country and each of us. what else can the russians do, are they able to use, say, the resources of the lukashenka army allied with them. vitaly portnikov and guests of the project, read stacking thank you, it was difficult, but i was just curious, but it was absolutely not , they help to understand the present and predict the future, they offered the united states to conclude a bilateral security agreement with us. a project for those who care and think. politclub every sunday at 20:00 at espresso. because maria gurska

meets with the head of the committee on foreign affairs of the polish sejm , the representative of the polish government for the restoration of ukraine, pawel kowal. as always, we talk about the most important thing that happened recently week in poland, ukraine, europe. what is being said about ukraine in the eu, how should we perceive the statements of european politicians and what will our accession to the eu look like. in the project close to politics , close to the world with maria gurska. every sunday at 15:30 with a repeat at 22:00 in cooperation with eu sisters. andriy piondkovskiy, a famous political scientist who is in washington, will be on the air of the espresso tv channel. glory to ukraine, andriy andriyovych, glad to see you. glory to heroes. well, an attempt on trump is much more serious than just this or that a prank by the killer or the madman. thus , we understand that this generally raises the problem of the internal reorganization of america to an unprecedented level and trump's victory is already becoming

a reality, although the current incumbent president. joseph biden is holding his own, but in the united states there was another rather significant, symbolic election. trump has already appointed jaydy vance as a potential vice president, and this figure can also testify to certain parallel lines voiced by the same viktor orbán, that is, everything is extremely serious, and we see how actively putin is in a hurry. yes, you are right, yes, you are right. this is a very important political event, a very important election indicator, trump's choice of vice president. we remember very well his activity in blocking aid to ukraine. he hates ukraine the most in the american congress. for the last five months, he has not left the television screens, from the meetings of the congress commissions, spreading all kinds of lies and hatred towards ukraine. about the fact that aid is stolen, that in the totalitarian

state of ukraine... 20 parties are banned, that prominent christian preachers are imprisoned by the authorities of ukraine, it was he who influenced the republican fundamentalists, of whom there are quite a few in the congress, and in fact, he did not add any electoral advantages to trump, because in the party itself we know very well about the report of the heads of the three commissions, mccall, rogers and turner, about how to defeat ukraine, they sharply criticize biden for insufficient support. ukrainians, from the point of view of ordinary voters, never put pressure on trump to be against ukraine. for the overwhelming majority of trump supporters, ukraine is not at all exists, they hardly know where it is located. and the republican establishment, in the person of the leaders i named, very strongly supports ukraine, so the appointment of this person shows how dependent trump is on...