to thoroughly analyze what is happening, but again, as far as i'm concerned, we don't have official data, clear data, they don't provide us with it, there are objective reasons for that, we understand it perfectly well, but to analyze very colorful information from the public, i apologize, but in my opinion, the information hygiene of ukrainians is at the highest level, mr. oleksiy, and if you go through the interesting details that have appeared and are already evident in the context of this stage of the confrontation between russia and ukraine. to be honest, i'm absolutely amazed how innovative drones have been used recently, they shoot down russian helicopters, they cause damage right in flight, our drones shoot down russian drones, and this is also, in my opinion, an interesting know-how. can we talk about... a really new degree, a new

stage in the use of these unmanned technologies? well, drones, they are not dominating this war yet, but they have begun to have a significant impact, they will be perfected, here i do not even see anything strange in the fact that they began to shoot down those, well, for example, russian helicopters, which get into the zone where this bodyless person can work, we understand that he was guided by... the rator, he did not make decisions there independently, and in the direct vision zone, it is tens of kilometers, well, depending on at what height, which drone, but we have seen how komikaze drones attack, maybe we can see directly now, they attack targets that are on the ground, moving targets, if the target is in the air, it does not maneuver actively, it does not gain high speed, that the drone can't can't catch up with her, so and if he... curtain, well, as they say, just doesn’t

move, or moves slowly, then intercept him with a drone, well, what’s the difference, him, or an armored car, or a tank, for the operator, what’s the difference, and it depends on the specialty the operator, how trained, how experienced he is in operating a drone to direct it directly at an enemy target, the same applies not only to helicopters, to enemy drones, reconnaissance drones, there is no need to look here for... some, you know, we we often use the words there are the latest technologies, know-how, there is artificial intelligence, well , we collect all this in order to somehow raise our own feelings of importance for the fact that we are so smart, we are like that, no, these are ordinary things, eh, let's look at it a little easier, there is nothing so sacred here, it's normal, even in our country. can

shoot down a kraatur with a kolomet, i'm not sure that uh, drones will be used as means of air defense, because it's a small range, but if someone flies something, is the drone russian or russian a helicopter in the field of vision, let's say a drone through the eyes of the operator, why not, if it does not maneuver, if it does not fly quickly, it will be destroyed, but... this should not be considered as an additional means of air defense, it is rather even more and more like an exception to the rules, because if this helicopter was not very far away, it was easier to shoot it down from the pez. ukrainian drones are already visible to the belarusian dictator lukashenka, by the way, in the context of recent events, he ordered to strengthen the grouping of troops on... tactical

directions, all this is the border with the kyiv and chernihiv regions, actually sending iskanders and polonaises there, these are reactive systems as well, but is it possible in some way a situation where we and belarus will also take some active actions to destabilize the plans of the ukrainian army , iskanders... against drones, well, this is lukashenko, he was scared, so seriously, such a skander is against, well, what is this , the point is that this fear of his, well, you can be sure with a high probability that no in the near future actions with they will not be conducted on the territory of belarus, especially on sukhadol, because then we can use article 51 of the statute.

nations about what self-defense is, and we have the right to attack any military objects on the territory of the aggressor, for this we do not need any additional permits, well, if we our partners agreed not to use certain types of weapons at their request, then our own weapons, forgive us, we are guided by the articles of international law, that is, in this case , the articles of the united nations nations lukashenko understands that if he leaves his territory, at least something will be done from the territory of belarus, and not only something will fly there, then we will immediately strike back, and he sees now that this strike back, well, the belarusian army with all its ... sorry for the points, lukashenko, it will be broken very quickly, and okay, and today it also became known about the destruction of one of the so-called boyka towers in the black sea, information about these

towers periodically appears, we remember as in 2023 the main thing intelligence has been talking about getting back, no, not even getting back under our control, but about... knocking out and actually knocking out russian control of some of these facilities, and today the navy reported striking one from gas towers in the waters of the black sea. spokesman dmytro pletenchuk said that there are dead occupiers, and also some of the equipment used on these platforms was destroyed. what does this mean? does it make it easier for us to feel more comfortable in that part, at least black the sea, i will remind you that it is also interesting to us for economic reasons, for reasons of civil shipping, including, yes, look, the actions of our special operations forces, our

teams that attack from the sea, that attack coastal areas, that attack towers a fight, other objects at sea, well, this is... these are asymmetric actions, which we often talk about in order to achieve success, the same operation on the kurshchyna, the same actions, well , you know, for some reason all believe that, well, not everyone, but many believe that the war should take place, i don't know, in the days of caesar's legions there, one must be built, there are others on the other side, and who will kill whom, we , the village analysts, the military leadership, have said many times that we do not have as many forces and means as in our enemy, so we have to act asymmetrically, everyone wants us to act symmetrically, if from their side 50 00 climbs there, then we also have to put 50 and we will fight head-on, well, we will not

fight like that, these blows and we just kind of bypassed smoking, although i think we will talk about that too, about what is there is not happening from the point of view of the analysis of some telegram...publics from the point of view of the essence of what is happening there, there is a lot of interesting things to talk about, that is why these actions, skirmish towers, strikes on the crimean, on submarines, strikes by means of air defense, strikes on lithuania, on the oil refinery, this is all our symmetrical response, and this is a whole set of measures that gives us the opportunity, at least for today, to deter a very powerful russian offensive, at least in the eastern direction and in the future. about which many say foreign analysts, but not journalists, but military people, because these are more military people, after all, they understand military affairs than very respectable journalists and some analysts there, that we have the prospect of intercepting a tactical initiative on the battlefield this year, it is very

important , and what happened at the chicken house will simply go down, as they say, in the history books, because it is a unique operation, it is a unique operation, and mr. oleksiy, you said that at this stage in the course operation there is a lot that you can to analyze from a purely military point of view, what upset you the most, what upset you the most? first of all, let's do it, because it's a symmetrical response, what we did, we're russians, here in the south, when our counteroffensive action was, they built the syrovikin line, which was very ... difficult for us to overcome, now the eastern at the front, through which they advance, they build a fortification behind them, i understand that a counteroffensive is possible, and so that they have somewhere to defend themselves, no such fortifications were built in the kurs region there were, this is the first, the second, there were no troops

there with combat experience, there were even conscripts who immediately began to surrender, the question arises, why should we not strike at that city, where the russians have no weaker defense, this is not exactly a counterattack, it is exactly a counterattack, it can even be considered as an element of active defense, because defense is not only positional, it is active, that is , mobile, maneuverable, point and so on, that is, people in the army they... howl according to protocols and rules, and not according to some know-how, or sitting inventing something on the window for god's sake, the army must fight according to protocols and follow clear rules, and the commander's duty is to use exactly those rules, exactly those tactics that are most convenient in this place, at this time, at this time of the year, and so on and so forth, taking into account the forces and means. the second thing that is interesting is that during the offensive on kurshchyna there is a possibility, it is quite possible to assume that we can reach... go to the kursk nuclear power plant, then the situation with our zaporizhia

nuclear power plant will look completely different there, and that is already the money and the head of magat is already starting certain conversations about what should and should not be done there, and exactly what can be interesting, look carefully at the map, here you don't need to be a great strategist to understand that if we move further from the korsk direction, for example to the south, then we will enter the tolya simply and... the kupinsky grouping and the pokrovsky grouping. it's that simple. ugh. mr. oleksiu, thank you. i hope that we will have more opportunities and reasons to analyze what is happening now. indeed, the historical scale of the event. how not to cool. oleksiy hetman, a reserve major of the national guard of ukraine, a veteran of the russian-ukrainian war, joined the saturday political club, which continues, and necessarily continues with conversation. with vitaly portnikov at the end of the current hour, and before that we will have a few more conversations with

distinguished guests, ihor eisenberg, professor of new york university from the states, and vadym polishchuk, historian, political observer, will be in touch from the studio. let's talk about the situation in the middle east. not switch a journalist who joined the armed forces, a political expert who became a special agent. taras berezovyts in a new project on espresso. the real front is this. analysis of the main events. reports, comments of leading specialists and experts. analytics from the major of the armed forces. how to make sense of disturbing news and distinguish truth from hostile propaganda. the real front program with taras berezovets every saturday at 21:30 on espresso. the saturday political club continues. my name is khrystyna yatskiv. thank you for being with us, and we continue to talk about... breakneck the origin of the russian-ukrainian war, the events in the kursk region, once again emphasizes that in

the historical perspective since 1944, this is the first time that the russian federation is faced with the fact that it has problems of a military nature directly on its territory, and not as they like to periodically incite, incite military conflicts of a completely artificial nature in neighboring territories. states, or states in general that can help them control a specific region. now i am glad to include igor eisenberg, professor, in an important conversation new york university, united states of america. mr. igor, i congratulate you, glory to ukraine. glory to the heroes, i congratulate you, ms. kristina, i congratulate all viewers of express. already in a few days i wonder what has changed. we understand that... for quite a long time , our key partner, the united states of america, was very careful when it came

to the work of the defense forces of ukraine on the territory of the russian federation, at first this work was very veiled, so we talked about some incidents of bavovna, though understood what we were talking about. then we began to insist on because we need to process the hostile you. because it is from there that they start their aggression, it is from russian territories that their planes take off, from russian territories their convoys go, and so on and so forth, and they had a careful taboo from the united states on at least the use of long-range weapons and weapons that can reach the locations of interest to us . now we are watching a real ground operation of the defense forces of ukraine in kursk oblast, and we are seeing a very... very, very restrained american response to

what is happening, i will just quote the adviser white house national security communications director john kirby, i think i'll leave room here to allow ukraine to talk one way or another about its military operations, we're in touch with our ukrainian counterparts, we're working to better understand what they are doing, what are their goals, what is their strategy, he refuses to characterize the situation in the korsk region, he explains. is it worth waiting until washington has a better idea of ​​the events in the territory of the russian region, that is, and we in general if not sure that we fully understand what is happening there, it's a game, mr. igor, that is... rhetorical figures, can you imagine a situation when this operation was planned without the agreement of a key partner? you know, i would also add what, say, the deputy spokesperson of the pentagon, sabrina singh, said, she simply approved the actions of ukraine, said that ukraine has every right to defend itself,

including what it is doing in the kursk region, as well as no problem applying for this america. which weapons, and and approximately state department spokesman matthew miller said the same thing, i would say that it's not surprising to me at all, because you know, all the restrictions that the united states has imposed on, say, supplying ukraine with this or that weapon, or the use of that or other weapons, they were due to what we all there call escalation, such a euphemism, because... really, of course, in the united states, escalation means russia's inadequate response, that is, in the form of, say, the use of nuclear weapons against ukraine, and the united states, of course, constantly wants to avoid this, but i would, you know, i would mirror what your colleague

vitaliy bortnikov likes to call the tactic of selyami on the part of russia, that is, when russia thinks... that it can cut off piece by piece of ukrainian territory from ukraine, but the west doing pretty much the same thing, the united states in particular, piece by piece all the time, allowing ukraine to do more, sending ukraine more weapons, more types of weapons, i think it's just that the united states thinks that by taking these steps step by step, they're doing it , thereby achieving a very important that is, that russia, it will not react inadequately, i am more than sure that this reaction of the united states to this operation of the armed forces in the korsk region, it shows that american intelligence is absolutely sure that no inadequate response, let's say, in the form of russia will not use nuclear weapons for this. mr. igor, we

have been watching the transfer to ukraine for a long time. specific weapons, weapons that actually belong to, let's say, some european country, but the manufacturer of this weapons is the united states, then that country had to ask for permission from the united states to transfer those weapons to us. now we are watching how in germany, accordingly, the head of the security committee declares that from the moment we handed over the tanks to ukraine, even though they are german-made, they are already ukrainian tanks, they can use them. consider it necessary, that is , this interesting moment is happening again, when, in principle, we are not aware of it, but they give approval to what is happening, in your opinion, how it will affect the overall situation, and of a political nature in the united states itself, does it already have an appropriate

response in the hearts of americans, who are also voters, they have to do... in the near future make the appropriate decision of an electoral nature this fall? in the united states, this is the operation of the armed forces of ukraine in the kursk region, it is very true, it is covered in the media, with details, with very great details, there are many articles in leading newspapers, and there are television reports, corresponding comments on television, there are articles on websites, news tv channels , goes the key word here is humiliating putin, humiliating russia, and approving the actions of ukraine, that is, the americans are perceived accordingly . as for what significance this will have for the american election campaign, you know, foreign policy and generally everything that

is done in the world is traditionally not the subject of an election campaign. of the presidency of the united states, and this election campaign, it is, well, practically, it is no different from the previous ones, that is, it will revolve around internal affairs, around the actual protection of democracy, or or opposition to democracy around various social issues, around economic issues, economic policy, and that's what the voters are most... concerned about when they 're electing a new president, and that's not going to change this year, so let's say kamela harris and tim waltz , they performed in recent days. key for elections in the states, foreign policy matters were not discussed at all in their speeches, and this will be the case until the end of the election campaign, because the most important thing for

americans is economic policy, social policy, and since there is such the confrontation between the forces led by trump and the liberal forces is also a question of protecting democracy, or on the contrary, not protecting democracy, so to speak. what is meant by trump. ugh. mr. igor, we understand that we can expect a debate between donald trump and kamala harris in the near future, perhaps we are talking about a debate that will last several years. what are your expectations from this purely pre-election campaign? we understand that even before they were officially nominated by their parties, donald trump and biden met at a debate, and this actually led to to the heartbreaking, heartbreaking changes in the situation, what to expect now? debates in general, they

've been held against the last 50 years, by the national debate commission, and trump has refused debates organized by the commission, a long time ago, that is, he said he will not participate in such debates, and the debates that were held between trump and biden, and which have also been proposed by ... the abc channel for september 10, now it will be a debate between trump and karis, and this is a debate in a different format, that is, this is a debate without an audience in the hall, only with moderators, hosts and debaters, and whether they will be, i'm not sure, by the way, that they will be, because trump said just a week ago that he will not participate in any debate with harris, except for the one possible on fox channel at participating in... mon, on thursday he said something diametrically opposite, that he will participate in the debate on 10 september, which is organized by the abc channel, frankly, i do not

expect anything that special, because the debate itself, well, it is such a television product , which is well understood by television journalists, why such a television product exists popular among viewers, but for voters, well , voters already know... their candidates, and it is unlikely that a large number of voters, thanks to the debates, can change their point of view about the candidates, decide to vote for the wrong candidate for whom they planned to vote. i think kamala harris has every chance to, well , beat donald trump in a debate because , you know, it's going to be a debate, as kamala harris herself, a professional prosecutor, with a criminal who was. reoffending, no, not so, not so long ago, 34 criminal offenses grand jury crimes, but i don't think that's going to have any significant effect on

voter sentiment, certainly the trump -biden debate on june 27th, well it did have a big impact because joe biden lost that debate and ultimately it led to the fact that he got off the course. but in the harris and trump debates, if they are, well, this will not happen, that is, trump will be trump, he will behave the way he always behaves, and like ariss, if she prepares well for the debate, then she beats him, but let's say hillary clinton also beat trump in the debates in '16 but lost the election, let's say mitt romney beat obama in the first debate in '12 but lost the election. ronald reagan narrowly lost the '84 debate to walter mondale, but won the election. that is, the debate does not determine the winner of the election, after all,

the winner is determined by the vote. it's interesting, you actually noticed, and even made a little distinction between tv viewers and voters, as if they are two completely different categories that do not intersect with each other. it's interesting for me from the point of view of the fact that in 2019 we actually watched the elections here in ukraine, and... which television and the actual television activity of our current president played a certain role, and i am not sure that if it were not for this plane, then it would be possible to count on some high high points there, but it's such a small trailer, sorry, sorry if i can, i don't want to interrupt you, but i just want to add the same thing in the united states, look, only on thursday. two events were happening at the same time: kamela garis was speaking at the meeting of the trade union of car manufacturers in detroit, and at the same time donald trump held

a press conference, that's all. tv channels broadcast live, why do you think trump's press conference? well, because it definitely allowed them to increase their rating, because many people, they, they willingly look at trump, even those who do not like him, willingly look, well, because they want to see something like that, unusual, and it's like to me, this is a problem, a big problem, because that's how people watch tv, a lot people are watching... visor, but journalists should be responsible for the product they publish, and at least when the elections are held, tv channels should ensure that there is no advantage of one of the candidates on the television airwaves, even if it brings rating of tv channels , i think that this is wrong, because it is necessary for tv channels to position themselves as neutrally as possible towards the candidates for election positions, and finally... in short:

the united states and the situation in the middle east, the possibility of a response, iran , in fact, to the events that took place last week, in particular in tehran. can we say that the united states is waiting and, in fact, knows, traditionally knows what to do in this situation, in a situation of escalation. the united states, i think, is also in anticipation and they are preparing for possible iranian responses, but they are very active on the diplomatic front to prevent a major war, to prevent possible iranian responses, possible iranian attacks on israel, because the middle east - this is a region where you can light a match, and from this there will be such a fire that simply, simply , it can turn into the third world war,

so of course that... the states are absolutely not interested in this, and so the commander of the us central command, let's say, he was in israel, he discussed with the chief of the israeli general staff, the minister of defense, joint actions in case of an iranian attack, but at the same time the united states does a lot of diplomatic outreach, the united states does not have diplomatic relations with iran, but through intermediaries, through countries that have relations with... in the morning , the united states is trying to do everything possible to prevent the flames of a very large war that could absolutely have unpredictable consequences. mr. igor, thank you for joining the saturday political club igor eisenberg, a professor of new york university from the united states, on the air of the spresso tv channel, and continuing the topic of

recent developments. east and the possible response of iran and israel to the events that took place in tehran, actually in the context of the inauguration new president, so far information is emerging, including from the telegraph, which cites unnamed aides to the iranian president, the current president of iran, masoud pezeshkian, offers less radical options in contrast to the islamic revolutionary guard corps. that is, there are certain different interpretations of those events that will develop in the near future, if they will, of course, develop. queer is traditionally in favor of more drastic actions, but the president has a more restrained view. about this and not only, we will talk now with vadym polishchuk, historian, political commentator from israel. congratulations, mr. vadim, glory to ukraine. glory, good evening. yes, actually, on me, in

what form? now the situation is directly in israel, when we talk about , on the one hand, hamas being beheaded in a certain way, on the other hand, we already understand that there are new contenders for leadership of both a military nature and a political nature, on the other hand, hezbollah and the lebanese side, everything this is in the context of the threat from iran. i ask you to speak. well, the country of israel is now waiting for something will iran and its proxy hizballah dare in this situation, or the events of the persuasion from the united states to reduce the intensity of the possible response, and i also think that the idea of ​​persuasion of israel.