would not agree to the 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, 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 a clash of two worldviews. the problem with the russian view of the sphere of domination. lies in the complete lack of stability, because russian domination over poland and ukraine would mean for these countries poverty, slavery and subjugation. 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 an unjust world, it is not a prosperous world. the usa, starting with woodrow wilson, strives and, not without mistakes, tries. 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 or corresponding changes on the european continent as a result of the american policy of isolationism, after 15 years hitler came to europe, well for... hitler in one or another of his incarnations came much earlier, and we in ukraine are also trying to stop him, mr. ambassadors frit, at the same time there are other stories about, perhaps, a 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 , america, of course, is waiting for the most... elections,

on 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 assess it now? it's good that you mentioned mike pompeo's plan, because you've probably come to the conclusion that there are different views within what i would call trump world, myself. trump often advocates the division of the world like yalta, for the distribution of spheres of influence, where wars 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, in my opinion, was an attempt to influence trump's world to support ukraine and move. in a more

reaganite direction. there are many things in mike pompeo's article that i disagree with, yet let's ask ourselves, is his plan overall 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's 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 address the people in trump's world and try to convince them that ukraine's business is also our business. the success of ukraine will also mean the success of the united states. that's why i i think you have very aptly mentioned pompey's plan. his article is not the only one, and yet

it is much better than the plan proposed by 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 still advocate, shall we say, the reagan road map. of course, sanctions are 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 ukraine will become more compliant, and various signals are coming, 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 hypocritical and cunning, so this history is the history of all civilized humanity, the repulsion of russian aggression with all available possible resources, but we see that this is to the end it doesn't work, i can't figure out 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 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 binding on everyone. 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 will be able to agree with trump on the best for him agreement we can only assume, but it is possible that he is counting on this. if we 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, limit the impact of russian strategic attacks on the ukrainian

energy system, then the situation for ukraine may improve. ukraine has never given up on negotiations, at the beginning of the summer it... held a rather successful peace summit in switzerland. russia, as you say, is not interested in serious negotiations, it puts forward 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 certainly not the americans who should tell the ukrainians what and when to do. mike pompeo, which we discussed with you, and there was a phrase about a five hundred billion loan lease for ukraine, we understand what it sounds like it is 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, the way you see the situation with biden's lendlease and whatever it would be. for example, with the trump lease or with some other lease, we understand that six months ago we were actually experiencing an extremely, extremely terrible situation, because we did not have resources and money for these resources, now the situation has improved, but this is war, war is always consuming and burns money. pompeo suggested lendlis, in part because trump and some of his entourage said that 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 landless brand than have no help at all. so i think that's what mike pompeo is getting at. there is an additional. in support of ukraine, it is about 300 billion dollars of frozen russian assets. many europeans oppose the transfer of these funds, so they agreed to use the interest on this amount, which will accrue in 20 years. and this is almost 50 billion dollars to help ukraine, and it is quite solid. this is a really good move. 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, 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 interests of american

interests and i think it is in european interests as well. plan b, in any situation there should be a plan b and a plan c. i do not believe that... that, for example, donald trump will become president, but i cannot rule it out, and we understand that our friends in the european continents are also seriously preparing, but understands. that france alone or germany alone, their willingness to support ukraine will not be enough, because this is a story not even just about money, it is a story about human resources, and we would really like to do the successful project, which 100 years ago in 1920 put the bolsheviks literally on the verge of survival, is about the polish-ukrainian security alliance, in simple language... the pact between petlyura and pilsutsky, yes, unfortunately, it was

not completed, and we understand that it is not only the political elites who are to blame for this, 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... the 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 zaporizhian 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 it both publicly and... and privately. poland's special ambassador to ukraine, pawel kowal, is a longtime supporter

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 pilsutskyi and petliura understood the need for close cooperation between poland and ukraine. this need remains. still relevant, 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 last question dear mr. ambassador, do you generally see the light at the end of the tunnel, as they say in ukraine? how this war will end is unknown, but there is a reasonable prospect. relative success of 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 is also evidence. about the potential for success. ukraine manages to practice successful attacks, especially on russian facilities in crimea. if it can maintain this momentum and if the west gives it the support it needs, there is a reasonable prospect that russia will not be able to continue its war in ukraine. the minister of foreign affairs of poland said that in two years russia's potential may decrease, although it is a long time and not easy. and yet this is a potential outcome. are you asking about the light at the end of the tunnel? yes, it is not easy for him

expensive, but it 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, then... it could make putin either unwilling or unable to continue the war. it is not for me, as an american, to dictate what ukraine should do, instead, it is ukrainians who will have to make these decisions. by the way, i believe that the future ukraine should be in nato 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 an independent country, a part of greater europe and a member of nato. could russia

be defeated in its attempt to conquer ukraine, which could have a profound 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 about it is known however, i see a reasonable perspective relatively. thank you very much, mr. ambassador fried, for this extremely important conversation for all of us, i would like to remind our viewers that espresso was working on the air now. ex-coordinator of the united states state department on sanctions policy, a prominent american diplomat. two hours in the company of favorite presenters, presenters who have become like relatives to many, as well as distinguished guests of the studio. 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, not emigration, a famous vlogger, ex-detat of the state duma, glory to ukraine, mark, glad to see you, glory to the heroes, glad to welcome all the viewers, congratulations anton, will be working on the espresso tv channel now. the attack on ilya ponomaryev, so 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 this... of course, maybe concern not only the current situation, the near future, well but in any case, the kremlin added a note of water and they don't say anything about it. as for the attempt on ilya ponomarev, it was completely predicted, among the people whom the kremlin would like to destroy, with the help of russian emigrants, oppositionists, ilya ponomarov

occupies an honorable place, and he is not the only one, there are several others, and there is operational information that provide services. who provide the project, who are actively looking for ways to destroy some effective part of the russian opposition abroad, in relation to a certain number of persons, this it is known that this is not a secret, especially since drones have already flown to the house of ilya ponomarov in the kyiv region. it is difficult for me to say anything about the technical side. perhaps it is more difficult to cover the kyiv region with air defense means. kyiv itself - yes, and to prevent attacks on the kyiv region, the means may not be enough, and the danger is higher there, but the address is numbered. 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 came to kyiv, spent the night at home, they could have informed some agency 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 destroy the building, so they get some information quickly

from some agency, maybe in kyiv, ilya ponomarov is writing to me just now, therefore, 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 assassination attempts, some people will be sent. here, what is important, it would seem, why would you kill him, what is his danger or the same? this is a wrong assessment in general, they do not assess from the point of view of specific dangers arising from a political leader, they need to demonstrate to everyone that you will not engage in such things, support ukraine, contribute to the russian federation. speak out against what moscow is doing in ukraine and not putin, as his enemies, only spread information. it is necessary to demonstrate this, this is the main goal, not a specific danger from an individual, as well as some kind of danger from navalny, especially when he was in prison, there wasn't, but he had to be killed, there it had to do with the exchange, there

you still have to show everyone what will happen to you if you get involved in any activity at... any level against the regime in moscow. well, ukraine is an enemy. they are simply killing ukraine. and the russian opposition is the same enemies and the same targets. it is necessary to draw very important conclusions from this. therefore, the defense of ukraine, as i often say among my colleagues, russian oppositionists, is the redoubt before your death. protect ukraine is necessary, in addition to its ideological positions against war and against putin, also because you will be next. this is very important to understand. therefore, for the russian opposition, for all those who are against putin, the possibility of protecting ukraine is an opportunity to postpone one's own death. failure to understand this leads to very sad attempts by some of the russian opposition to play the 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 is very deceptive, very criminal

link, and people who accept it will be recruited sooner or later. this is very... important to understand, the parameters of the list, mark and who exactly do you think wanted to demonstrate something with this and that attempt, yes, because strange murders happen in ukraine, the strange murder of iryna farion, yes, no one took responsibility , there is a suspect, but the question of motives is the key story, so when these or other assassinations or political attempts happen, should someone take this responsibility? the second option, perhaps, indeed, if it is the work of the kremlin, well then they can simply prepare some broader scenario, i.e. cascading deaths and, accordingly , then an attempt to reformat. the same, i don't know, public discourse, or simply correcting it in this way, they have always been engaged in this, correcting the consequences

of the physical removal of some public elements that interfere and create problems for the discourse, this is part of this program, 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 in they have... their own considerations, this is a right-wing discourse mainly, 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, put a lot of pressure 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, it needs to stop. fire, armistice, etc., because there are conditions, both external and internal, internal ones we do not fully understand, perhaps moscow's reserves for the continuation of the war are running out, and

it is increasingly difficult to fight further, for many reasons, and the number of people who want to go has decreased for war, industry, defense, it is not known how it works, all this is a secret, but what nabibulina, the head of the central bank, declares, already gives a reason to say that there is a lack of money for war, there are also external factors, they consist in the fact that... moscow cannot remain under sanctions and pressure for too long is increasing in addition, moscow, obeying these factors, seeks quick negotiations. and who is against negotiations in ukraine? this is important. in ukraine, these are the right, these are nationally oriented forces, that is, the majority needs some effect so that the influence of these forces, their radical position , has less influence on public opinion. i also believe that negotiations now on the terms put forward by moscow are absolutely unacceptable for ukraine, because they will not end the war. in the best case it will be postponed, in the worst case it will be extended, that's all on me point of view, because if we agree to moscow's conditions, we can talk about this in more detail, then this means not 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 this 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, probably... detractors and inside ukraine, she cursed with the army, especially with the russian-speaking part, should shut up, she not alone yes, right? and how big can this potential blacklist be? yes? well, i think mark you're also in it with regard to the sentence, is there a charge drawn on you so to speak, how old are you seven or eight years old, or 13, i was given 11, uh, 11 years for for attorney fagin , yes, yes. "i have already been convicted in the first instance, it has been several weeks, they still do not give the motivational part of the sentence to my lawyer, it will be very interesting to read it, there are three

episodes, i think, and three interviews where i said that there was a genocide in buchi, killed ukrainians by the russian military, i was convicted for that, so i am on this list, but i am protected by the french police, and my safety is ensured in this way, they do not know whether a drone can fly to france, this is unknown to me. but in terms of security, yes i am on that list, but there are many people on it, i am not the only one, it would be too presumptuous to assume that they singled me out as a single target, again , again, they do not rank efficiency by degree of significance, to what extent a person influences the russian audience or not, although i have a big channel, i have been known in russia for many years, no, it still needs a demonstration, even an attack on ponomarov's house is also a demonstration for the rest, be afraid. sit down and do not interfere, let us do what we want, and disappear from the political field altogether. yes, this blacklist contains people in ukraine. it is more difficult

to do in ukraine, it is possible only remotely, at the level of drones, although contract killings are also possible, there are specifics here, it is a question 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 revitalization, that is , the activation of similar 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 government, which it considers illegitimate, well whose cow mooed, so to speak, but clearly it is 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 hoped that trump would take power from biden even after november, accordingly

, the kremlin scenario can work. at the same gate, that is, with the ultimate imposition on ukraine of what they say, so to speak, they want in the kremlin and will agree on this matter, perhaps with the trump administration, well, i am grossly oversimplifying, but the situation is getting complicated for the kremlin, so to speak, the autumn scenario can be put in a certain so-called long drawer, and that is why they are counting on what, for the spring, that is, the energy scenario, shaheds, missiles and a set of measures. yes, and after there will be, as they say, immeasurable 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 if there is istanbul-3 or abu dabi 5, or some other platform out there, how do you see it, i don't think we 'll see direct talks or any direct action in the fall that will contribute to that, by direct action, i mean

action from... the united states . the first and the most important factor - there is no certainty as to who exactly will rule the country. it will be the same democrats, their line or trump. it is quite obvious that this is possible, even diametrically opposed positions, because the uncertainty gives rise to the uncertainty of the settlement plan that the parties will agree to. i mean democrats or trump. kamala harris, if she becomes a candidate and wins the election, will, of course, continue the biden line. this is moderate. the line of pushing ukraine to negotiations, but at the same time with a firm position of supporting ukraine, giving it military and financial aid, etc., without making it a condition: aid in exchange for participation in negotiations. trump has it, i mean what he himself has said. i 'm going to talk about mike pompeo's plan separately now, but still, what he's saying and what we're hearing from him, or senator vance and others, up to his son, is more likely to be interpreted as if he's

willing to negotiate with... putin himself, no formats are needed, neither swiss, nor jeddah, saudi formats, nor chinese, and why, he says: i will meet with putin and agree, that is, any shuttle missions of orbán and others, this is all the quality of action that serves the position of trump, that is intended to involve him in some peace process, some format, istanbul, for example, he does not need it, he says: i am with i will personally agree with putin, but why can't they agree? we heard the parameters of... a plan closer to trump, according to which he does not refuse assistance to ukraine, but makes it dependent on ukraine's readiness to participate in peace negotiations, that is, we will help militarily, but ukraine must agree to peace talks, whether it is a parallel or a substitute process, but quite certain. i want to say that this cannot happen before january 20, because trump will be inaugurated if he wins the election only on january 20

, 2025, and then, closer to spring, he will hold meetings with putin and something will be decided, whether they can agree or not, in principle , all the rest of the arguments that the ukrainian government is not recognized because after may 20 president zelenskyi is not legitimate, all this is done by moscow through ipso in order to lower dumping the authorities in ukraine, but no more, realizing that in reality this is not an argument, after all, they will talk to the authorities in kyiv, of course, they will conduct negotiations, if they do start, which... applies to all these formats and the swiss one about the peace formula, and the previous one istanbul, and the initiative of saudi arabia, which took place on the fifth of august 23, and the next one is planned, and the chinese initiative on a peace conference with the mandatory participation of russia, it seems to me that this is just a smoke screen, really, that's all after all, the game is played by both sides, and the usa is playing, and kyiv is playing, somewhere there it says, well, we are ready for negotiations, understanding that in such

a format that moscow puts forward. preconditions, and putin put forward his three important preconditions before the summit in switzerland , which he believes should be implemented regardless of the start of negotiations, the lifting of sanctions, the non-aligned status of ukraine and the liberation of the unoccupied territories of four regions, donetsk, luhansk, zaporizhzhia and of kherson. these are unacceptable preconditions. moscow theoretically, it is possible not to put forward these conditions somehow, to enter the negotiation process without these preliminary conditions. what does moscow demand? a cease-fire is needed, it needs preambles for a truce, because it is different, it is not just a cease-fire, a truce always has guarantors, the parties can cease fire, but the guarantors must facilitate a truce, at least temporarily, then negotiations directly about the details of some agreements, agreements, etc. currently, i do not see any conditions for solving this problem, kyiv and moscow cannot simply meet somewhere without intermediaries, and such agent...