the rules of the game, they tried to change the rules of the game of the world chessboard with the help of weapons and aggression against ukraine, and they got bogged down in the war, and accordingly the appearance of fundamentally new additional format sites of death, when we talk about the middle east, it can be in the interest of those players, who want to change the global decision-making system in general, and this is not about some possible new yalta, this is generally about... changing what is called the post-yalta world, whether it is good or bad, but we live in it, yes, and when global disturbances begin in general, this can lead to consequences similar to those experienced by european and world humanity in 1914-1918 during the first world war. i do not think that iran is capable of acquiring the status of a global player. because as long as iran

remains within its current political system, a theocracy, its economic development will be stunted and industrial and business ties with the outside world will be limited, so iran will be limited to being in opposition, supplying weapons and drones to russia, and will also help russia and itself avoid sanctions. iran will not become a serious global player due to its economic limitations. gave about the new yalta, that is, about the international system. so, the russians, the chinese, and i think the iranians would like to see a world in which there are spheres of dominance. russia would have its own sphere, china would have its own, iran would have its own, and countries such as ukraine would fall into the sphere of influence of one or another great power. america , in its years of wisdom, opposed such agreements. roosevelt agreed to yalta with stalin. but almost immediately

regretted his action. harry truman would not have agreed to a soviet sphere of dominance in europe, not over poland or anywhere else. therefore , i emphasize that the united states stands for a free and independent ukraine, capable of choosing its friends and its place in the world. russia wants, and ukrainians know this well, for ukraine to belong to russia, that is, to completely rule over it. so, we have to collide. two worldviews. the problem with the russian view of the sphere of domination is the complete lack of stability, because russian domination over poland and ukraine would mean poverty, slavery and subjugation for these countries. the poles would not accept this. ukrainians will not accept this either, and they have every right to do so. the world of empires and spheres of influence is not a stable world, it is not a fair world, it is a non-prosperous world. usa. starting with

woodrow wilson, they strive and, not without mistakes, try to promote the idea of ​​a free world system. systems of rules - systems in which smaller countries are protected from aggression by larger ones. we just know how it ended for the whole world, what happened in the united states did not ratify the charter of the league of nations, nor the corresponding changes on the european continent as a result of the american policy of isolationism. after 15 years , hitler came to europe, well, now hitler in one or another incarnation came much earlier, so we in ukraine are trying to stop him. mr. ambassador, frith, at the same time, there are other stories about a possible second peace summit, there are some plans, in particular those announced by former secretary mike pompeo, and so on and so forth, that is, a certain process is underway in the russian federation. for example, they are waiting

most of all, of course, the american elections, in which trump would win, and then they would start playing four-eyed, yes, vladimir vladimirovich with donald fridrikhovich and so on, and we are also extremely worried about this in ukraine, this is a negotiating moment, as do you rate it now? it's good that you mentioned mike pompeo's plan, because you've probably come to the conclusion that there are differing views. inside what i would call trump's world. trump himself often advocates the division of the world like yalta, for the division of spheres of influence where he is and putin will simply agree at the expense of such a country as ukraine. however, there are other personalities in trump's world who advocate a more reaganite, so to speak, policy and greater support for ukraine. michael pompeo's article in the wall street journal was, in my opinion, an attempt. to influence trump's world

to support ukraine and move in a more reaganite direction. there are many things i disagree with in mike pompeo's article, but let's ask ourselves. overall, is his plan a useful and effective approach to ukraine? i will answer that it is quite possible. i repeat that i do not agree with everything, but that is not the point. the fact is that mike pompeo is pushing back on support for ukraine, which makes him closer to the biden administration than he himself would like to admit. however, it suits me. in trump's world, there are debates about these issues. i think it would be very good if the representatives of the ukrainian government, the polish government and all the governments in europe would reach out to people in trump's world and try to convince them that ukraine's business is also our business. ukraine's success as well would mean success for the united states. so i

think you've made a very good point about pompeo's plan. his article is not the only one, and yet it is much better than the plan proposed by general keith kellogg. departure the point of which is a ceasefire on the current front lines, plus a us promise that ukraine will never join nato. this is undoubtedly a much weaker position, so i think pompeo's starting point is much better. however, these are just discussions. trump may or may not win the election, but it's good to see what's going on in the world for trump, some are still advocating, shall we say, a reaganite road map. sanctions, of course. not enough the key story is to force russia to sit down at the negotiating table and change some or other parameters that they constantly escalate, that is, all their negotiations boil down to their ultimatums, and this means that they are not ready, and they

hope that during this winter they will inflict to our people simply indescribable pain and indescribable suffering, and after that, of course, they hope that in... the country will become more tolerant, that is how various signals, when there are many politicians who say, well , that everything depends on the ukrainian people, and when i hear this, i understand that it is to a certain extent pharisaism and cunning, so this history is the history of all civilized humanity, repelling russian aggression with all possible means resources, but we see that it doesn't quite work, i can't figure out how to explain it, right? because we are in ukraine, now the month of august has begun, and we are already living and trying to understand what awaits us in this land. i agree that it is democratic and free the world should increase economic pressure on russia and increase military aid to ukraine

by intensifying, providing weapons and lifting restrictions on their use. in my opinion, ukraine should be limited in the use of weapons. only by the laws of war, which are mandatory for all civilized countries, but there should be no additional restrictions other than that, we should help ukraine and put more pressure on russia. as you said, this could change putin's negotiating calculations. now he is also waiting for the us elections. he can think that he can negotiate with trump on a better deal for him. we can only speculate, but it's possible that... that's exactly what he's counting on. if we increase the pressure on russia, if ukraine continues to successfully defend its territory and inflict heavy losses on the russians, if ukraine can continue strategic attacks on russian facilities and, with the help

of air defense, limit the impact of russian strategic attacks on the ukrainian energy system. then the situation for ukraine may improve. ukraine never refused from negotiations at the beginning of the summer, she held a rather successful peace summit in switzerland. russia, as you say, is not interested in serious negotiations. it makes demands that are deliberately too categorical to be taken seriously. but everything can change. we in the free world must do what depends on us, and then we will see. i do not rule out any negotiations, but it is definitely not the americans who should speak to ukraine. what and when should they do? there is a proposal by mike pompeo, which we discussed with you, and there was a phrase about five hundred billion loan lease for ukraine. we understand that it sounds very convincing,

especially in ukraine, there is 500 billion dollars for weapons and so on and so forth, but there are also the realities of the united states, as you can see. the situation with the biden lendlease and whatever the situation would be, for example, with the trump lendlease or some other lendlease, we understand what we were going through six months ago. actually an extremely, extremely terrible situation because we didn't have the resources and the money for those resources, now the situation has improved, but but this is war, war always devours and burns money. pompeo proposed lendlis, in part because trump and some in his circle said we should lend ukraine money, not fund its defense just like that. now i think that supporting ukraine by giving it... giving it money for defense and giving it weapons for defense is in american interests. i

support that position, but i'd also rather have a loan under the landless brand than have no help at all. so i think that's what mike pompeo is getting at. there is an additional source of support for ukraine. this one is about about 300 billion dollars of frozen russian assets. many europeans speak out. against the transfer of these funds, so they agreed to use the interest on this amount, which will accrue over 20 years, which is almost 50 billion dollars to help ukraine, and it is quite solid, it is a really good step, and i think the details are being worked out right now , despite the fact that ukraine currently does not have access to the rest of these frozen finances, is convinced that the pressure will gradually increase. eventually. i believe that support ukraine will be continued by the us and europe, as it should be, because it is in the interests

of freedom, it is in the american interests, and i think it is in the european interests as well. plan b in any situation should be plan b and plan c. i don't believe that, for example, donald trump will become president, but i can't rule it out, yes, we understand that our friends are on... what continent are also seriously preparing, but we understand that france or germany alone, their willingness to support ukraine will not be enough, because this is history it's not even just about money, it's a story about human resources, and i would really like to make the project successful, which 100 years ago in 1920 put the bolsheviks literally on the brink of survival, it's about... the ukrainian-ukrainian security alliance, in simple language , the pact between petliura and pilsudski. yes,

unfortunately, it was not brought to the end, and we understand that it is not even the fault of these or other political elites, it was a great fatigue after the first world war. everyone wanted to end the wars as quickly as possible, including the polish national democracy also actively implemented its other. i believe that polish-ukrainian friendship and union are of crucial importance for the security of both countries and for europe as a whole. we can go back to the 17th century, when the inability of poland and the zaporozhian sich to cooperate ultimately worked in moscow's favor. poland was and is a faithful and consistent friend of ukraine. the poles are persistently pushing the american government and the biden administration to... provide aid to ukraine. they do this both publicly and privately. the special

ambassador of poland to ukraine, pawel kowal, is a long-time supporter of polish-ukrainian friendship. he has been friends with ukraine for many, many years. and there are many such poles across the political spectrum. there are historical issues between poland and ukraine, but you are absolutely right that pilsutski and petliura understood the need for close cooperation. between poland and ukraine. this need remains relevant to this day, and not only in the name of our own national interests, but also in the interests of european security and the entire free world. that is why i think that this tradition should be remembered and imitate. and the last question, dear mr. ambassador, you generally see the light at the end of the tunnel, as they say in ukraine. how will it end? this war is unknown, but there is a reasonable prospect of relative success

for ukraine. if ukraine can hold its territory, limit russian gains to a minimum, and achieve very high losses for russia, this will indicate the potential for success. if ukraine can continue and intensify its strategic attacks on russian military targets, and if it can limit the effectiveness of russian... strategic attacks on ukrainian facilities, this will also indicate the potential for success. ukraine manages to practice successful attacks, especially on russian targets in... crimea, if it can maintain this momentum and if the west gives it the necessary support, there is a reasonable prospect that russia will not be able to continue its war in ukraine. poland's foreign minister said that in two years, russia's potential may decrease, although this is a long time and not an easy prospect, but it is still a potential

outcome. you ask about the light at the end the tunnel, yes, it's not an easy road to it, but it's... is there, are there other options? yes, there is we in the west, the united states and europe, have the opportunity to influence the outcome if we do our job and support ukraine as much as possible. if we put pressure on russia and give ukraine the weapons it needs, it could make putin either unwilling or unable to continue the war. it is not for me, as an american, to dictate what... what ukraine should do, instead, it will be up to the ukrainians make these decisions. by the way, i believe that the future of ukraine should be in nato, in order to prevent russia from agreeing on a ceasefire, and then regrouping its troops and attacking ukraine again. it is quite possible that ukraine will emerge from this war as a free, independent country,

a part of greater europe and a member of nato. russia may be defeated in its own. try to conquer ukraine, which can have a deep and beneficial effect on russia itself? so, you ask if there is light at the end of the tunnel, the answer is yes, but there is a thorny road ahead. the tunnel is long and difficult, and you, without any experts, know about it. however, i see a reasonable prospect of success. thank you very much, mr. ambassador frith, for this extremely important conversation for all of us. i would like to remind our tv viewers that ambassador daniel frith, ex-coordinator of the united states state department on sanctions policy, and a prominent american diplomat, was currently working on espresso. vasyl zima's big broadcast. my name is vasyl zima, this is a big broadcast on the espressu tv channel. two hours

of airtime, two hours of your time. me and my colleagues let's talk about the most important thing. two hours to learn about the war, about... the military, front-line component, serhiy zgurets, and what does the world live for? yuriy fizar is already with me and it's time to talk about what was happening outside of ukraine, yuriy, good evening, two hours to stay up to date with economic news, time to talk about money during the war, oleksandr morchivka on the field with me, and sports news, i invite yevhen pastukov to a conversation, two hours in the company of favorite presenters, about cultural news, alena chekchenina, our art viewer, ready to talk, kind the evening of presenters, who have become familiar to many, is already next to me, ready to talk about the weather for these... 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 congratulate you. good day. events of the day in two hours. vasyl zima's big broadcast. a project for smart and caring people. espresso in the evening. mark

fegin, a figure of the russian opposition in emigration, a well-known video blogger, ex-detat of the state duma, will be working on the air of the tv channel. glory to ukraine. mark, nice to see you. yes we understand that the enemy used shakhet this time, well, accordingly, this immediately raises many questions, and perhaps hints at many answers, when we talk about the so-called strange arrivals, and of course this can apply not only to the current situation, to the near future, well but in any case, the kremlin added water and nothing about it. as for the assassination attempt on ilya ponomarov, it was completely predicted, among the people whom the kremlin would like to destroy and the help of russian emigrants, oppositionists, ilya ponomarov occupies an honorable place, and not only he is one, there are several more, and there is operational information provided by the services that provide the project, which are actively looking for ways to destroy some effective part

of russian oppositionists abroad, regarding a certain number of people, this is known, this is not a secret. especially since drones have already arrived at the house of ilya ponomarov in the kyiv region. it is difficult for me to say something about the technical side, perhaps the kyiv region is more difficult to cover with air defense means. kyiv itself - yes, and to prevent attacks on the kyiv region, the means may not be enough, even there the danger is higher, but ponomeryov's address was not a secret, drones, shaheds or gran-2, as they are called, have already flown there, so this is not news, there is something else, as far as i understand, he arrived in kyiv at night. at home, some agency could have informed that he was in the house, i know that he was in america, and the drone is sent when they want to kill a specific person, and not to destroy the building. so, they receive some information... promptly from some agency, maybe in kyiv, ilya ponomarov is writing to me just now, so i i think, most likely, such attempts will continue in the future, where possible, at a distance, with

the help of drones, and somewhere there will be attempts to kill some people, they will send, what is important here, it would seem, why would you kill him, what is his danger or such themselves, this is generally a false assessment, they do not assess from the point of view of specific dangers arising from a political leader, they need. demonstrate to everyone that you will not do this, support ukraine, promote russian connections, oppose putin as his enemies, spread information about what moscow is producing in ukraine and not only, it needs to be demonstrated, this is the main goal, there is no specific danger from an individual person, nor was there any danger from navalny, especially when he was in prison, but he had to be killed, there it was connected with ob'. there is still a need to demonstrate to everyone what will happen to you if you join any activity at any level against the regime in moscow. well, ukraine is the enemy, they

just kill ukraine, and the russian opposition is the same enemies and the same targets. it is necessary to draw very important conclusions from this, therefore , as i often say among my colleagues, russian oppositionists, the defense of ukraine is the redoubt before your death. it is necessary to protect ukraine, except for its ideological ones. because of the fact that you will be the next, it is very important to understand, therefore, for the russian opposition, for all those who are against putin, the possibility of protecting the country is an opportunity to postpone its death. failure to understand this leads to very sad attempts to save some of the russian opposition a game imposed by the kremlin, that it is impossible to support the military resistance of the russians on the side of ukraine, because it is vlasivshchyna, treason to the motherland. it's a very... alluring, very criminal reference, and people who pick up on that will be recruited sooner or later, that's very important to understand. the parameters of the list, mark and

who specifically do you think wanted to demonstrate something with this attack, yes, because strange murders are happening in ukraine, the strange murder of iryna farion, yes, no one has claimed responsibility, there is a suspect, but the question of motives is the key story , yes, well, when those... other assassinations, political assassinations happen, someone has to take this responsibility, or the second option, maybe, really, if it is the work of the kremlin, well, then they can simply prepare some kind of wider scenario, that is, cascading deaths and accordingly , then an attempt to reformat the same, i don't know, public discourse, or simply adjust it in this way, they always did it, adjusting the consequences. physical removal of some public elements that interfere and create problems for discourse, yes, it is part of this program of this work, ipso and the rest. many do not

understand the connection between these things, for example, the discourse that opposes the negotiation process as such in ukraine, because they have their own considerations. this is a right-wing discourse mostly, but not only. it consists in the fact that one cannot stop at the binding conditions of the agreements, at the ultimatums that moscow puts forward. it is now necessary to create the most comfortable situation so that ukraine does not have this as a defining thesis in public opinion. that is, if you, for example, press hard on the radicals, let's tentatively call them that, from the side of moscow, then this public opinion will be able to be swayed in the right direction. moscow needs negotiations, a ceasefire, a truce, etc., because there are conditions, both external and internal. we do not fully understand the internal ones. perhaps moscow's reserves for the continuation of the war are running out, and to fight. then everything is more complicated, for many reasons and the number of people who want to go to war has decreased, industry, defense, it is not known how it works, all this is a secret, but what declares

nabibulina, the head of the central bank, already gives a reason to say that there is a lack of money for the war, there are also external factors, they consist in the fact that moscow cannot remain under the sanctions and pressure that is growing for too long. in addition, moscow, obeying these factors, seeks quick negotiations. and who is against negotiations in ukraine? this is important, in ukraine it is the right, it is nationally oriented forces, i.e. the majority, some effect is needed so that the influence of these forces, their radical position has less influence on public opinion. i also believe that the negotiations are now under the conditions that put forward by moscow, are absolutely unacceptable for ukraine, because they will not end the war, at best they will postpone it, at worst they will prolong it. that's all in my opinion, because if we agree to moscow's conditions, we can talk about this in more detail, then it means not about... just a concession, but programming and seducing the aggressor to take new actions to occupy the territories and end the sovereignty of ukraine. a signal will be sent to moscow that this is possible, that it works, and from this

point of view, it is necessary, of course, that people like farion, although i do not think that she was too influential, she probably had detractors inside ukraine as well, she cursed with the army, especially with the russian-speaking part, they should shut up, she's not the only one like that, right? and how big can this potential blacklist be? so? well, i think, mark, that you are also in it by the reckoning of the sentence, or there is drawn on you, so to speak, the charge, how many seven or eight years are you there. or 13, i was given 11, uh, 11 years for for attorney feigin, yes, yes, i was already convicted in the first instance, it has already surfaced for several weeks, they still do not issue the motivational part of the sentence to my lawyer, it will be very interesting to read it, there are three episodes, it seems, and three interviews where i said that there was a genocide in buchi, ukrainians were killed by the russian military, and i was also responsible for this convicted, yes i am on this list, but i am protected by the french

police and my safety is ensured in this way, i don't know if a drone can fly to france, i don't know, but from a security point of view, yes, i am on this list, but there are many people in it, i am not the only one, it would be too much it is presumptuous to believe that they chose me as the only target, again, i repeat, they do not evaluate kkd by the degree of significance, how much a person influences the russian audience or not, although i have a large channel, they still know me in russia for many years, no, it's all the same... a demonstration is needed, even an attack on ponomarov's house is also a demonstration for the rest, get scared, kneel down and don't interfere, let us do what we want, and generally disappear from the political field. yes, this blacklist contains people in ukraine, it is more difficult in ukraine to do, it is possible only remotely, at the level of drones, although contract killings are also possible, there are specifics here, it is a matter for the ukrainian special services, how they work with this, they probably have secrets about

this. if this is really the case, then it means that there is a revival, that is , the activation of such things indicates some other parallel processes, and you very correctly said that the key story is the kremlin's interest in getting what it wants. yes, in particular, in a diplomatic way. but, if we talk about parameters, the first parameter, yes, the kremlin immediately announced the story that it does not want and will not communicate with our authorities, which it considers. illegitimate, well, whose cow was mooing, so to speak, yes, it’s clearly not the kremlin’s, but this is one moment, another moment, the situation in the states, we understand, it will be hot in the states, and the kremlin was hoping that trump would take power from biden , and after november, accordingly , the kremlin's one- way scenario can work, that is, with the ultimate imposition on ukraine of what they said, so to speak, will want to in the kremlin and agree on this matter, possibly

with the trump administration. well, i’m oversimplifying, but the situation is getting complicated for the kremlin, and the autumn scenario, so to speak, can be put in a certain so-called long drawer, and that’s why they count on what, for the spring, that is, the energy scenario, shahedis, missiles and a set of measures, and so on after there will be, as they say, the immensity of the suffering of the ukrainian people, as my american friends formulate it, then the kremlin would like to... so to speak, impose, i don't know, there is istanbul-3 chibi-5 or some other site there. how do you see it? i believe that in the autumn we will not see direct negotiations or any direct actions that will contribute to this. by direct action, i mean action by the united states. the first and most important factor - there is no certainty, who will rule the country, will it be the same democrats, their line or trump? quite

obvious. that it is possible, even diametrically opposed positions, because uncertainty creates uncertainty about the settlement plan, what the parties will agree to, i mean democrats or trump? kamale harris, if she becomes a candidate and wins the election, will of course continue the biden line, this is a moderate line, pushing ukraine to negotiate, but at the same time with a firm position of supporting ukraine, providing it with military and financial aid, etc., without making it a condition. aid in exchange for participation in the negotiations, the trumps have this, i mean what he himself has said, i 'll talk separately now about mike pompeo's plan, but still what he says and what we hear from him or senator vance and some others, up to his son, rather it can be interpreted so that he is ready to negotiate with putin himself, no formats are needed, neither swiss, nor in jeddah, saudi formats, nor the chinese, and why, he says: