you are talking about these borders, well, not about borders, he was talking about the borders of the state on february 20 and 24, 2022, bowing to putin regarding the russian language, and also that putin can return to the big eight, that is, without russia - this is a big seven, seven plus russia, and what do you think, is this the game of boris johnson himself? or is it donald trump's game just voicing her johnson now. well, here, it seems to me, two points, mr. serhiu, well, you know, in any negotiations you have to show the potential partner the batik, but at the same time show a carrot, well, which can encourage him to at least start talking, and then we'll see. for some reason, it seems to me that boris johnson, as... it is attributed, we still

do not fully know, that he stopped the capitulation in istanbul, then he should be offered to ukraine so that we, let's give up what was as of february 24, 2022, well, this is simply illogical from any point of view, the russian language is even more so, well, that is , it seems to me, or it is just such a throw-in, and what, what... well, ukrainians don't like it they will agree, but maybe the idea is that they say, let's try to drag russia into negotiations in this way, and then we'll see what will come of it, especially now britain, well, the most powerful partner that gives weapons, that helps to actually demilitarize crimea, the loss crimea, you and i have already spoken more than once, this is the beginning of further bad processes for putin, that is, such an option is also possible, but you know, sir. i think that now

, by the way, another column by pompeo, ex-secretary of state, another plan has appeared, trump is already there, destroys putin to zero, everything is already there by way of lindleys, 500 billion, well, that is, another option, that is, you know, it can all be a game, that is, look, here one powerful friend of ukraine says, well, look, we will do this, well, russia for now... keep quiet, well, keep quiet, okay, then that means the second option, and now we’ll give you something so that you’re cold, this whip is pulling out, then there was, then there was, then there was a carrot, here’s a whip, and here we go, but you know, it's all bad, actually, why is it bad, because we're always waiting for some plan from someone, well, the question is in the problem, but we are so weak that we cannot formulate our plan, well, they will say that no, there is, there is a formula, we... it’s not even about

that, it’s a formula, it’s an idea, it’s a thesis, and it’s correct, that is, well who will say something against the thesis about territorial integrity, yes, it is absolutely logical, but let's simply decipher it and write what the restoration of territorial integrity means, well, it's simple, again, like an angle of 90°, that is, for this you need to get. appropriate military assistance, for that you need to get adequate financial assistance, for that it is necessary to strengthen sanctions against russia, for this it is necessary for ukraine to start production of its weapons in a powerful way and so on, for this it is necessary that we have the appropriate force, so to speak, manpower that can use all this in order to get victory and say, we have these factors because of the enna. some days we will get a completely

different situation in crimea, and then in the south, and then in the east, and so on. remember, the republicans kept saying what are we spending 60 billion on, where is the plan, well, finally we can sit down to write their plan, which will be presented not just as a plan for ukraine, but as a plan for the west's victory over russia, they are really beginning to understand that this is the greatest evil. look in the washington document. nato summits. russia is the first enemy. the previous one was china. so, they already understand that china is needed here, so be it, we'll see later. russia today. so let's unite and create a non-ukrainian plan for ukrainian victory from this. and the joint western-ukrainian plan, so to speak, of joint victory over the enemy it is that the task is impossible, and we do not have people who can write what is needed. well, maybe. president zelensky

claims that he should have his personal plan, this is development, mr. sergiu, this is the development of his ideas, this is not a denial that there will be another plan in place of such a plan, no. we simply take these theses that are key for us and write them down and make it so that it is clear to everyone, both in ukraine and abroad, then the republicans will say, yes, let's correct this point here, let's here, let's change this one, let's go, and then this is our joint plan, you understand, and then we, and then we tell everyone, guys, no, you don't ask us such questions, don't ask us such questions, this is our joint plan, victory over over the enemy, you already mentioned mike pompeo, i will still tell our viewers... i will quote what he wrote for the wall street journal, he said that if he wins the presidential election, trump will introduce a land list for ukraine worth 500 billion dollars and will lift restrictions on weapons that pompeo writes. this is what a successful plan for ukraine might look like. introduce real sanctions against

russia, strengthen american defense, revive the nato organization, create a program analysis for ukraine in the amount of 500 billion dollars. ukraine can also be accepted to us. and the eu, in pompeo's opinion, it is beneficial for america, because then europe will assume more obligations regarding the security of ukraine, and we have the synchronicity of donald trump, the candidate for the presidency of the united states of america, who said on fox news that in a conversation with president zelensky, he told him about the need to end the war. let's hear what trump said. the president called me. in front of you is a military machine, they are constantly fighting, they defeated hitler, they defeated napoleon, they are waging war. it seems to me that trump is not accurate enough

about who defeated hitler. of course, it cannot be attributed only to stalin, there to the soviet union, after all, it was a collective victory, especially to russia. russia, because you asked, he, rather, writes about lendlease, and if there was no lendlease during the second world war war, with what the soviet union would have beaten the same hitler, so that's all, well, let's leave it to trump, he's an eccentric, he's a person who speaks so emotionally about something, maybe it's not entirely accurate, but the thesis is correct, that is, he actually says that with russia, with this... russia, it is necessary to finish, because it is the biggest threat to everyone, and again, you and i once said that we do not study the psychotype of politicians, trump is a businessman, that's how he is speaks for itself, if we take ukraine into nato and the european union, then the question of provision

security will be largely entrusted to the europeans, and we will pay less, that's what i say all the time, you just need to understand who you are dealing with, prepare for these negotiations very seriously. and offer those arguments that will be understandable to the partner and that will give him a benefit, do you remember somewhere in some regular plan, and this is boris johnson, it was said that the americans could be replaced in europe by ukrainians, and it was about 70 thousand ukrainian soldiers, and you can imagine what this amount is for the american budget, yes, that's it really it's not tens, it's hundreds of millions of dollars, so if trump counts every penny, says, i don't want to spend it on something that we don't need, well yes, well, in the end, why not, why not help to him, that it is necessary to rearm all of europe, well, look,

there is a queue for not the f-16 in europe, for the f-35, there are queues for air defense systems. and at the same time they are standing, well, only zelenskyy says to us, we need 125 of these patriots, how many of them do we need in europe? but it's not 125, it's, it's, it's 500, probably 25, but each of them is worth 1 billion 200 million dollars, that is, if you look at what it can give to the american economy, the economy, then believe me, i think you don't even have to be trump to understand that it is profitable. so that's what i'm getting at, we need, when we formulate our goals, to understand very clearly and clearly with whom and what we are talking about, we understand what to talk about with trump, you understand what to talk about with trump, and what to talk about with kamalo and garis, because in the current situation, well

, it turns out that somewhere after the debate between biden and trump, it was clear that trump there are better opportunities to win... the presidential campaign of 2024, here biden does not go to the elections and takes perhaps the most unexpected step, perhaps not only for the world, but for himself, because... kamala harris is 19 years younger than donald trump, and all this rhetoric that was prepared by trump for biden, that he, they say, almost has dementia, that he forgets, that he cannot run the country, it just simply falls apart, and obviously, well, this is sociology probably will show there in august, which ones prospects in kamala garis, or. the policy of the united states of america will change significantly if kamala harris becomes the president

of the united states, you know what i would talk to her about, well, i think about only one thing, that it is necessary to put an end to the indecision of the democrats in matters of security , because if she continues this line of obama, biden and further, then we will wait for six months again. decisions about this or that supply of weapons and so on, but with this pseudo-pacifist line, the democrats must really finish, and if the matter were to turn to practical negotiations, then i think that we need to convince her that such a line will not be a winning one for her, but a losing one, and the fact that she now has a good chance, well, about that, how they say, only a lazy person doesn't talk, because... she's a woman, she 's black, she's a prosecutor, she has, so

to speak, every chance to show that she offers a just america, against the background of the fact that, well, trump is on a stretch now, really he, he is accused in no less than four cases, and she is the prosecutor, that is, the role prosecutor and under investigation. who will you vote for me as a representative of law, justice and order, or for a person against whom four cases are currently being conducted and it is not known how they will end, and there is also sexual harassment, that is, all these sexual things and the like , then you want the president to be someone who will attack women and the like and so on, humiliate them and everything else, then you know, well, it's a matter of technology. and i think there are many people there who can tell her what she needs to do, it is our business not to interfere in these

processes and so on, but now she really has a good chance to turn the situation in her favor. at the very end of our program, mr. volodymyr, i would like to ask you about the statement, uh, by the minister of defense of poland, władysław kosyniak kamysz, that ukraine's accession to the eu...depends on the resolution of historical issues, and he stated that in polsat news, what he said, in my opinion, real politics should issue an ultimatum without solving the volyn issue will not ukraine's accession to the european union, that is what it means, that is, we have to apologize to them, and we have already apologized many times, and there were kneeling in front of these monuments of victims, those historical events, and they should not apologize to us, well, this re-examination is historical, it

will be long, just, you know, this is just evidence in my opinion that in the polish political system there are, well, the problems of the past, they are really sitting, well, i would like to ask a simple question, but why the volyn tragedy happened and on which territory is the main thing, and why should ukraine apologize? you just need to look at, you know, the historical duration of all these processes that took place on ukrainian lands, why they happened, to remember the role of russia, which in volyn, actually at the beginning of the 20th century , actually shaped the russian peace, and why, say, the same volyn the peasants met the bolsheviks with bread, salt and the like, and how they prepared them for the fact that the poles are enemies and the like, there are a lot of problems. but it seems to me that during the times of kuchma and yushchenko, by the way, we are

found ways to communicate normally, and our presidents went there, as you say, stood on their knees, i saw it with my own eyes, everyone came here, did the same thing, and we gave completely different signals to society that there were tragedies, no one can't say now that they weren't there, we define, we apologize... and we ask for forgiveness for this formula, which is really relevant today, although it was born many, many years ago, there is no other option if we will hear such here statements, then that would mean... that we would just be again and to approach the wall again, behind which there is simply no way out, because no one will ever prove that he was not the first, well, yes, well , we also have neighbors, poles, hungarians, and everyone will say that you cannot go to the european union, you should apologize, you have

to give the hungarian language more there in transcarpathia, well, that is, we will always have claims from other neighbors, that is... the thing is that we should take a clear position here, it seems to me, well, now it is good, for at the beginning of the negotiations, it was necessary to make certain verbal concessions to the hungarians, but i i do not think that this is the moment that should determine the basis of our bilateral relations. thank you, mr. volodymyr, for the conversation, friends, this was volodymyr ogrysko, diplomat, politician, minister of foreign affairs of ukraine in 2007-9. let me remind you that throughout our broadcast we conduct a survey, today we ask you about the following. do you think the third world war is inevitable, so what are the preliminary results of the poll, because it is intermediate, 57% yes, 41%, or 43% no.

if the throat is not ok, make a snicker, make it ok, taste choose, take without pain, eucalord, sweet lod, there are discounts represent the only discounts on eden, 20% in pharmacies plantain, you and save, there are discounts represent the only discounts on norvent express forte, 10% in pharmacies plantain, you tausha. vasyl zima's big broadcast, my name is vasyl zima, this is a big broadcast on espressu tv channel. two hours of air time, two hours of your time, i and my colleagues will talk about the most important thing, two hours to learn about the war, about the military, front, component, serhiy zgurets, and what the world lives yuriy fizar is already with me, and it's time to talk about what happened outside of ukraine. yury, good evening, two hours

to keep up with economic news. time to talk about money in wartime. oleksandr morchyvka with me and sports news. i invite you to talk. as well as distinguished guests of the studio, mustafa dzhemilov, the leader of the crimean tatar people is in touch with us, mr. mustafa, i greet you, good day, the events of the day in two hours, vasyl zima's big broadcast, a project for intelligent and caring people, in the evening on espresso. great returns of great lviv, conversations, discussions, search for solutions, ukraine's largest conversational format in the evening prime time. in general, i believe that we need two things: money and weapons. we did not start this war, but we must finish it and we must win. all the most important, every thursday at

21:15 in the project velikiy lviv says on the air. espresso tv channel. every week, the saturday political club helps to understand the processes taking place in ukraine and the world. vitaly portnikov, khrystyna yatskiv, andriy smoliy and invited experts based on facts give their assessment and forecast of the development of events. if you want to understand how our today will affect our tomorrow, watch the saturday political club every saturday. on espresso. verdict with serhiy rudenko from now on in a new two-hour format with even more analytics, even more important topics, and even more top guests. foreign experts, inclusion from abroad. about ukraine, the world, the front, society, and feedback. you can express your opinion on the bad day

with a phone survey. turn on and turn on verdict with serhiy rudenko. from tuesday to friday from 20 to 22. 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 talk about extremely important international negotiations that took place at various diplomatic tables. at the same time, we will talk about a new concept of war. and new doctrinal approaches were announced. our guests today are roman bezsmertny and glen grant. our first guest is a retired british army colonel, a famous military man. expert glen grant. glory to ukraine, dear, mr. colonel, god save the kin. glory to the hero, god, protect the king. thank you. an extremely important speech,

the london speech of general ambassador valery zaluzhny. so we understand that he outlined the strategic perspective and very clearly indicated what things we should change and what we should prepare for in the event, he said. russian aggression against ukraine in the current phase of the war of transition, i would like to ask you now to analyze the most important messages that gave by general zaluzhny and how they were read in the west, in particular in london. it is important that people understand that this speech was of great importance because it was delivered at the royal joint institute for defense studies, which is a think tank. of the british government on defence. this institute plays a similar role in great britain as the rent corporation for the american government and the pentagon. the speech was important and the hall was

completely filled. numerous high-ranking officials from the ministry of foreign affairs were present affairs and the ministry of defense, as such performances are quite rare. therefore, since it was his first such speech and since it took place immediately after his arrival. what he said would be received with great attention. what did he say? above all, he outlined the challenges of war at that time. he then touched on the topic of transition, stressing that while current warfare is similar in many ways to world war ii and world war i, modern tools such as drones and electronic warfare are changing the way of waging war, as we directly fight on the field'. the essence of war does not change, people still die and will die, and there will always be a bloody battle between opposing sides, but the overall structure of how

war will be fought is changing. now the significance of this will be whether people will believe it, that's the first thing, whether people really believe it, even though the former head of the defense department says: there are a lot of people in the west who still think that the... how the west currently conducting military operations, will remain unchanged in the future, in other words, the use of tanks, the use of armored vehicles and other uses of drones, but not like now and not in the same amount as now in ukraine, because people will see that there will be a lot more aircraft, helicopter gunships and artillery from the west than there can be from side of ukraine. this will change the balance towards how the west would like to fight. but and that's a big but, if the lunatic is right, and i suspect he's largely right, maybe not 100%, but even if he's only 60% right, it still

means that most western armies are very are very, very behind in their processes of change and in their understanding of how they think war should be fought. this has serious implications for military training and personnel selection. for example, britain does not select it specialists for battalions, while, as in ukraine, each battalion is looking for its own it specialist, its own engineer who will manage drones and other technologies. we don't do that in the uk, and what i'm wondering is, after this conference, are people going to go away and say, we need to change our thinking, or are they going to go away and say, no, he does not understand how strong we are and how we intend to fight. i agree with you, this is an extremely serious challenge, on the other hand, i do not want to draw parallels with events that took place 100 years ago, so we understand that we are talking about the so-called little entente, we are talking

about the polish-bolshevik-ukrainian war, so 1920 year, so we understand that poland also wanted to receive more help then 100 years ago, so unfortunately, a lot of things turn out to be incomplete, not... implemented, and accordingly, we need to understand, yes, whether the story about a powerful, military, central european power, will be supported by the appropriate amount of resources, i.e. not only by these or other political statements, but by concrete military resources, yes, if we will wage war until our victory, i.e. regardless on what will happen in the united states, whether trump will come or gerisk will come. but so on. we have to understand different scenarios. war is also about resources. human resources is currently being developed by the personnel department of the general staff

armed forces of ukraine. yes, this is when we talk about mobilization, but a long, long war that would work to the depth of the enemy's strategic defense, it requires very clear coordination, it cannot be something that we were promised and not given. you make a lot of points, i think if the history of the last two years has taught us anything, it's that we won't get everything we 're promised, i'm sure that will continue to be the case. the promises will often be greater than what is actually done, but let me dwell on one point: the f-16. all there is talk of delays with the f-16. these delays arise exclusively from the ukrainian side, and not from the west. the problem is that there is a lack of pilots who know english to conduct training, and there is also a lack of technical staff and engineers who can learn the necessary skills. i know from

my own experience that... there are engineers in the armed forces who do not get into the program and that is because the personnel system in the defense forces is not working, not only is it not working, it is broken, despite the efforts of the ministry of defense to change the situation, the general staff itself does not changed his approach to work with personnel, this can be seen in the work of tsc. let's consider these questions separately. ukraine will not get all the equipment it wants. some will come, but much slower than expected. this means that... the general staff has to start planning ahead exactly what won't arrive and why, and how we can manage on our own. the biggest problem, in my opinion, is the front. it is on the front line that we lose people, there are retreats. this is because the units are not properly equipped. here there is no doubt. they don't have everything they need. i understand that there is a shortage of 155 mm ammunition. no one could

have expected that there would be such a great need. in them, no one in the world expected this, this is a problem that needs to be solved, but we knew that the soldiers on the front lines need drones, armor plates for body armor, new boots, food, there are hundreds of essential items that they are not getting properly , and at the same time they still have to fill out a huge amount of casualty papers, and this is done by battalions, thus we're wasting the time of front line officers who should be spending time with their... soldiers fighting, they're actually spending time filling out paperwork. soldiers spend time digging trenches that should be ready by now, because money has already been spent digging them. this is all due to the fact that the system does not work properly, that is, the system does not foresee these problems. why? it's very simple: the general staff deals directly with the introduction of battles, instead of planning for tomorrow. the war must be waged

unitedly. headquarters, not general headquarters, it the work of the joint staff, to be responsible for the battles directly, not the chief of the general staff, who runs around the brigades and helps them, not the general staff, who spends his time on today's concerns. so there's a big problem area here that you talked about at the beginning: all of these systemic issues that have to be addressed if we're going to move forward because we're not going to get all the equipment that we need, so how well are we prepared to provide... projectile munitions, mortars, grenades, anti-tank ammunition and anti-aircraft ammunition. not all these things will come from the international community, we have to find ways to produce them ourselves, it requires careful planning and organization, i don't see it happening the way it should. we spend too much time thinking about big f-16 projects, naval drones,

attacks on the kerch bridge. sufficient attention is paid to ensuring that every soldier of ours is alive and properly equipped to fight tomorrow. this war will not be lost at sea or in flesh, it will be lost on the front lines when the soldiers die and resources will run out. we simply cannot deal with the mass of soldiers coming at us from one place or another. we are doing well at the moment, but how long we can maintain this level of performance depends. lives on whether the soldiers on the front lines are properly trained, equipped and led by the best officers. i took a lot from what you said at the beginning, but we are in a transition period. i suppose you might want to know my thoughts on syrsky's recent article, but we have a lot more to say need to be done and most of these tasks require careful planning, c