attack israel, i don't think it 's because the russians are somehow very sympathetic to israel, but because they might fear that a strike back would destroy all their efforts in iran, say, destroy an iranian nuclear facility, say that nuclear facility in tanzi, which can be used for the production of nuclear weapons, that it should be prevented, because if iran gets rid of the main scapegoat of its war with the west, then of course russia's position can be weakened. we still are, by the way. don't know what iran is up to because we can see that tehranis said that they were about to strike israel, they were counting the hours until this strike, but then everything somehow stopped, maybe because the iranians received the results of the investigation into the circumstances of the assassination of the head of the hamas politburo, ismail hani, because there are many theories and there is also a lot of talk about the fact that haniya became a victim of internal political clashes in the leadership of hamas itself. because he had disagreements with

hamas-gazi leader yahweh sinwar over how to proceed in the war, whether or not to seek a cease-fire, in they had different positions there, someone accused haniya that he does not want peace talks and a ceasefire, someone from sinwar, in any case, that sinwar is unexpected for everyone, his candidacy was not even named, he became the new head of the hamas politburo . says that the destruction of hania was not an exclusively israeli-israeli act of revenge for the 7th massacre, but could be the result of widespread idleness in iran itself and in the ranks of this terrorist organization itself, and that is why iran can think that israel did not really kill haniyeh, we will shoot at israel, we will look like idiots in the eyes of our own allies, this is one, the second is the danger of retaliation, the third... iran may think

that it is able to use at this stage other terrorists of the hezbollah organization, who also wanted to get rid of their chief of staff , foad shukr, who was killed in berlin by an israeli missile attack just a day before ismail hanni, and they may just take their time, and they may discuss all this with shuigu, but that does not mean that russia that's just how it will be there with iran will not fight on this front, it is interested in the development of events, but they can... events differently than in tehran, precisely from the point of view of consequences, you understand that when you make a certain effort, you think about the consequences, but before things, regarding russia's interest in igniting this conflict even more, and anywhere else in the world, well, you and i are used to saying that it is always beneficial for russia, on the other hand, now iran can ask russia, and how will you repay me for the drones technologies that i have endowed you with. and similar things, russian

the federation can already send the s-400 to iran, they are allegedly asking about the su-35, modernized fighters, that is, russia, which is now extending the line of combat with ukraine, and everything is happening very intensively, on the other hand, iran can get it, which also will ask her for additional resources, is the course of the conflict beneficial right now in the russian federation? i think that russia will in any case supply iran with what it does not need on the russian-ukrainian front. it has its own system of priorities. iran is definitely not the first part of this system. the second is that russia may benefit from a major conflict in the middle east, which would divert attention from ukraine. but again, such a conflict is important for russia, which would not lead to serious problems related to the security of iran itself. ugh. and that's why the russian intelligence services can , of course, really. to analyze the situation precisely from

the point of view of what will happen to iran as a result of its attack on israel, perhaps, by the way, that is precisely why the secretary of the security council of the russian federation went to tigran, and not the minister of defense, this is also to some extent a sign that we are sending you a representative of the security forces, but the secretary of the security council, who should share some secret information, discuss the general directions of interaction, and not discuss. armaments, because this is precisely the prerogative of the minister of defense. yes. and in this regard, of course, it is now very difficult to understand where is the balance that russia would like to maintain, on the one hand, inciting instability, and on the other hand, fearing the results of this instability for its allies. new a week on espresso, a weekly summary information and analytical program, a clear understanding of the key events of the past week, analysis of the causes and consequences of these events from experts, forecasts of the development of the situation for the current week. the opportunity to ask your own

questions and join the discussion. spend the final monday evening with us and confidently step into the new week. the new week project with khrystyna yatskiv and andriy smoliy. every monday at 20:00 at espresso. events events that are happening right now and affect our lives. of course, news the tape informs about them. however, it was not enough to know what was happening. it is necessary to understand. antin borkovskii and invited experts soberly assess the events, analyze them, modeling our future. every saturday at 13:10 with a repeat on sunday at 10:10. studio zahid with anton borkovsky. this is saturday's political club, thanks for coming to espress. vitaly portnikov talks about the most important events that are currently developing in ukraine and in the world, and at the end of our program we would like to touch on the rather

powerful and heartbreaking events that took place in bangladeshi. literally in july, again from the promotion. students there actually took place, a revolution started, which achieved its certain results, and the prime minister, the prime minister of this country left the country, now the interim government is headed by a nobel laureate, it is interesting, by the way, also a peace prize winner, mohamed yunus, he has already taken the oath , which was the trigger for the information that is public'. this is a job quota, if i'm not mistaken, mr. vitaly, and we can see how it all grew quite quickly. a lot parallels these days were drawn with the ukrainian maidan. i don't know how relevant this is, but still, the events in bangladesh, how do you see them? you know, i think that

bangladesh is primarily the arena of the great geopolitical confrontation between india, china and the west. and it is interesting that all the instability in bangladesh really started after prime minister sheikhasina, who is a sincere friend of india and has maintained warm relations with indian governments for many years, is a close, i would say, such a friend of the prime minister of india on render mode she visited beijing asking for some big loan for bangladesh and actually came without the loan. and after that, such a tension began to build up in... gladesh, i will not say that the government of sheikh hasina did not make some mistakes with this quating, and with this rather serious, i would say, misunderstanding of the mood of the society, which led to repressions, to the dispersal of student demonstrations, it was a serious problem,

especially as we understand that when you create inclusive opportunities for all, it is one history, when you single out a group of people who are ee na... the descendants of those who fought for the independence of the youth from pakistan in the 70s, these people have some priority, when in fact the participants of these events themselves have long been out of the labor market, this is a completely different story, but one way or another, as we understand it, beijing was interested in overthrowing this essentially pro-indian government, the sheikha had a chance to negotiate with beijing on beijing's terms, she didn't do it, and then she went like this ... .said: the line of serious tension which ended with the fall of her government. what will happen next is quite difficult to say because there is actually a real political vacuum in bangladesh. the party of sheikh hasyana, it is compromised, but it is a big party with a serious infrastructure on

the ground, it continues to exist. bangladesh nationalist party, led by an old rival. of the prime minister, she too, i would say, can be considered such a political force that the youth are already bored, and one must understand that the prime minister is the daughter of the first president of bangladesh, and her main competitor, she is his wife, in fact the main heir, both were killed, both majuburhman and zyaur rahman, and here the question arises, maybe some change of the political elite, and who will fill this vacuum, and who will take advantage of this vacuum, china, india, will there be any government capable of cooperation with western countries, the students wanted muhammed yunus, the nobel laureate,

the man who is known for the invention of microcredit, he won the nobel prize for that, he invented microcredit, that is, if you just want to get some small a loan so that you... well, i don't know, buy a coffee machine to sell coffee on the street, they will give you a microcredit for this coffee machine, you will only get money for this, and you will be able to go out on the streets of dhaka and sell coke there. and then return this loan, in principle at one time it simply lifted millions of people from bangladesh out of poverty, but sheikhasyana was very afraid of the authority of this person, they expelled him abroad, accused him of corruption, and now he is back, but we do not know how it will be then, just yesterday , sheikh hasina's son emphasized that she remains the legitimate prime minister of bangladesh and that she will return to the country when parliamentary elections are announced. that she does not yet know whether she will return to politics or not, but she will return to the country, i understand that sheikh

hasina's task is to continue the power of her party, not with her at the head, but for awamilik to retain its majority in parliament , because this is the impossibility of prosecuting the leaders of this party and the final dismantling of this system, which was created by this political force in 25 years, well we'll see how it looks soon, but by and large it's pretty serious. pakistan is also an ally of china, by the way, now more so than the united states, and of course, in this situation, we can talk about a serious success for those who think that they will be able to reorient bangladesh's policy for the future, away from new delhi, but will it succeed? we really don't know. mr. vitaly, thank you for a wonderful evening spent together, as always, it was a saturday political club for espresso, analyst. geopolitical events and events within our country. be with us

every saturday glory to ukraine, dear tv viewers, on espresso tv channel, west studio program. we will analyze the most important ones. events of this week, in particular we will talk about the use of drones as tools for organizing political assassinations, but the key topic of our conversation is different interpretations in the so-called peace plans, and of course we will analyze what our enemy is preparing. today's guests of the west studio are mark fagin and daniel frith. now the legendary american will work on the espresso tv channel diplomat, former coordinator of the state department of the united states. states on sanctions policy, a person who can be called the flesh and blood of american

diplomacy. glory to ukraine, mr. ambassador, glad to see you. glory to ukraine. glory to the heroes. well, the key story is the huge election drama in the united states. yes, we understand that there has been an extremely important replacement of the democratic primary candidate. we in ukraine sympathize with the democratic camp, of course, not all of them, and we cannot express this... publicly, but president joseph biden allowed us to withstand the russian invasion, russian aggression, we appreciate it, yes, but we just don’t know what to expect from donald trump, and even if we do know, we don’t like this story completely, but in any case in the case of the united states, frontline racing , enemy activation, so what do you think the raids show? and what will be the ukrainian policy of kemela geris? i don't

know vice president harris very well, but i do know her national security adviser, phil gordon. we already know each other for several years, judging by her speeches and what i know about phil gordon, kamal garis as president will continue to support ukraine from the us. in this. there is no doubt that vice president kamala harris met with president zelensky days before the full-scale invasion. she attended the munich security conference in 2022 and met him there as well. they also had joint meetings later. i will say that this year's speech by garis at the munich security conference is worth it reread to me, it fits into the american tradition of supporting the free world. which, as president biden said, continues from harry truman and ronald reagan,

all presidents, with the possible exception of president trump, have followed this strategy, and i'm sure she will continue to do so. dear mr. ambassador, do you have the feeling that everything in the world is so serious that one can seriously wait for the outbreak of the third world war. to what extent is iran interested in what is called... another world war iii site, we we understand that some dictatorships, such as the russian one, do not have the opportunity to economically change the rules of the game, they tried to change the rules. 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 death sites, when we talk about the middle east, it can be in the interest of those players who want to change the world system of acceptance in general decisions, and

here we are not talking about some possible new yalta, here in general we are talking about changing what is called fasting. the yalta world, whether it is good or bad, but we live in it, yes, and when global disturbances begin in general, it can lead to consequences similar to those experienced by european and world humanity in 1914-1918 during the first world war. i don't think iran is capable of becoming a global player because as long as iran is in...within its current political system of theocracy, its economic development will be stunted and its industrial and business connections with the outside world will be limited, so iran will be limited those in the opposition will supply weapons and drones to russia, as well as help russia and itself avoid sanctions. iran will not become

a serious global player due to its economic limitations. you mentioned the new yalta, that is, the international one. 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 like ukraine would fall into the sphere of influence of one or another great power. america in its prime wisdom opposed such arrangements. roosevelt agreed in yalta with stalin, but almost immediately regretted his decision. act. harry truman would not agree to a soviet sphere of domination in europe, neither over poland nor anywhere else, so i emphasize that the united states stands for a free and independent ukraine, able to choose 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 a clash of two worldviews: the problem with... from the point of 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 put up with this, the ukrainians will not put up with it 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. the usa, starting with woodrow wilson, strives. and not without mistakes, try to promote the idea of ​​a free world system, a system of rules, a system in which smaller countries are protected from aggression by larger ones. we simply know how it ended for the whole world that the united states did not ratify either the league of nations charter or the corresponding changes on the european continent,

as a result of the american policy of isolationism, 15 years later in europe. hitler came, well, now hitler in one or another of his incarnations came much earlier, and we in ukraine are trying to stop him, mr. ambassador, frit, at the same time there are other stories about a possible second peace summit, there are various plans, in particular voiced by former secretary mike pompeo and so on and so forth, that is, a certain process is underway in the russian federation, for example, what are they waiting for the most? 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, how do you are you evaluating now? it's good that you mentioned mike

pompeo's plan, because you've probably concluded that there are different views within what i would call... trump's world. trump himself often advocates the division of the world like yalta, for the distribution of spheres of influence, where he and putin will simply agree at the expense of a country like ukraine. however, there are other personalities in trump's world who advocate for most of the governments in europe, have addressed people in trump's world and tried to convince them that ukraine's case is also our case. ukraine's success. will also mean the success of the united states, so i think you are very apt to mention pompeo's plan, his article is not the only one, and yet it is much better than the plan proposed by the general. keith kellogg, the starting 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 only discussions. trump may or may not win the election, but it's good to see that in trump's world some are still advocating for, shall we say, a reaganite road map. of course, sanctions are not enough. the key story is forcing russia to sit down behind the change table and change certain parameters that they constantly aggravate. that is, all their negotiations are reduced to their ultimatums, and this means that they are not ready. and they hope that during this winter they will cause our people simply indescribable pain and indescribable suffering, and after that... indeed, they hope that ukraine will become more compliant, and various signals are coming, when many politicians there say, well, what everything depends on the ukrainian

people, and when i hear that, i understand what it is to a certain extent, pharisaism and cunning, so this history is the history of all civilized humanity, repelling russian aggression with all available possible resources, but we see that this is not completely successful, i cannot... understand how to explain it, yes, because we are in ukraine, now the month of august has begun, and we are already living and trying to understand what awaits us this winter. i agree that the democratic, free world should increase economic pressure on russia and increase military aid to ukraine by intensifying the provision of weapons and withdrawal restrictions on its use. in my opinion, ukraine... should be limited in the use of weapons only by the laws of war, which are binding on 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 may think that he can negotiate a better deal with trump. we can only assume, but it is possible that he is counting on this. if we will increase the pressure on russia, if ukraine continues to successfully defend its territory and inflict heavy losses on the russians, if ukraine is able to continue strategic attacks on russian facilities and with the help of air defense means to limit the impact of russian strategic attacks on the ukrainian energy system, then the situation for ukraine may . to improve ukraine has never refused 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. she 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 tell the ukrainians what and when to do. there is mike pompeo's proposal, which we discussed with you, and there was a phrase about a five-hundred-billion loan lease for ukraine. we understand that it sounds very convincing, especially in ukraine, there are 500 billion dollars for weapons and so on and so on. but there are other realities of the united states. the way you see the situation with the biden lendlease and whatever the situation is, for example, with the trump lendlease or with some other lendlease, we understand that

six months ago we were going through an extremely, extremely terrible situation, because we did not have the resources and the money to these resources, now the situation has improved, but this is war, war always devours and burns money. pompeo proposed lendless, in part because trump and some in his circle said we should lend ukraine money, not finance its defense just like that. now i think that supporting ukraine by 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 landlis name than have none at all. aid, so i think that's what mike pompeo is referring to. there is an additional source of support for ukraine, it is about 300 billion frozen

russian dollars. assets, many europeans oppose the transfer of these funds, therefore they agreed to use the interest on that amount, which accrues over 20 years, which is almost $50 billion to help ukraine, and that's pretty solid, that's a really good step, and i think the details are being worked out right now, even though ukraine currently without access to the rest of these frozen finances, i am convinced that the pressure will... gradually increase. in the end, i believe that the support of ukraine from the us and europe will be continued, as it should be, because it is in the interests of freedom, it is in the american interests. and i think that this is also the case in european countries interests as well. plan b in any situation should be plan b and plan c. i do not believe that, for example, donald trump will become president, but i cannot rule it out,

we understand. that our friends on the european 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 a story not only about money, it is a story about human resources, and we would very much like to make that successful a project that 100 years ago, in in 1920, he put the bolsheviks literally on the brink of survival, it is about the polish-ukrainian security alliance, in simple terms, the pact between petlyura and pilsutsky. yes, unfortunately, it was not brought to the end, and we understand that the fault in this is not even only one or another political elites, it was a great fatigue after the first world war, everyone wanted to end the wars as soon as possible, and the polish

national -democracy also... actively implemented its other plan. i believe that polish-ukrainian friendship and union have crucial 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 zaporozhye sich to cooperate ultimately worked in moscow's favor. poland was and is a faithful and consistent friend of ukraine. poles persistently push the american. government and the biden administration before providing 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 is friends with ukraine has been around 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

pilsutskyi 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 followed. and the last question, dear mr. ambassador, you generally see the light at the end of the tunnel, as they say here. in ukraine. it is not known how this war will end, but there is a well-founded prospect of ukraine's relative success. 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

facilities, and if they. will be able to limit the effectiveness of russian strategic attacks on ukrainian objects, this will also testify about'.