hi, i'm home.

there is also my fault.

listen, tomorrow no one can know, surely we have one what's the difference? what role is who? i want to take it by the throat, this disgusting living, lazy, stupid swaggering empire so it is so equal to the farthest corners.

imagine what a storm will rise, surely you will lose the beginning will be better to wait. return time to be angry. preparing a coup take me. soon on the ground and right now nakion. good

evening on the air the big game is official today representative of the russian ministry of foreign affairs maria zakharova said that at the g20 summit, which will be held next week in bali, the russian delegation, which will be headed by foreign minister sergey lavrov, will present an initiative to increase gas cooperation with turkey and to supply large consignments of grain and fertilizers from russia to world markets primarily to developing countries. that is, just on one of the most pressing issues of global governance related to world energy food crisis american zhitikation. this summit will be chaired by president joe biden, who delivered his midterm speech last night, and biden is in that speech. he made a number of statements, including on the ukrainian conflict on the one hand. he said that with

the onset of winter, quote both sides will decide whether to compromise, but the us, they say, as biden said, will not tell them what to do? biden, on the other hand, said that at the g20 summit . he intends to discuss with other world i quote leaders. what could be the next steps, while volodymyr zelensky will not be at this summit. in fact, as soon as the mid-term elections were held, the united states , not only behind closed doors, but even openly and quite officially, began to persuade kiev to accept diplomatic solutions to this conflict. it seems to me that this important change in american politics, at least a change in american rhetoric, as well as the results of the midterm elections and how they will affect the policy of the united states, we will talk today with president of the center for national interests dmitry simes and first deputy chairman of the state duma committee for the commonwealth of independent states, eurasian integration and

relations with compatriots konstantin zatulin dmitry konstantin fyodorovich good evening. good evening dimitri well, although there is no midterm yet, votes are still being counted in some states and districts. the overall picture is already clear. and this picture, as it seems to me , is that the defeat of the democratic party and a decisive victory for the republican party did not occur, despite the very poor state of the american economy. the most record inflation in 40 years , despite the rise in crime, despite illegal migration, despite the fact that biden's rating. oh, it is extremely low, but, nevertheless, it was not possible to completely defeat the democrats. yes, the house of representatives is passing under the control of the republican party, but they will have a very small majority in the senate there, it will not be completely clear yet. uh, second round of elections to the states in the state of george on december 6th. well,

now a in the republican party decides. who is to blame and answering this question, apparently guilty. donald trump was appointed and it is said that if it were not for trump and if he did not push his candidates for these elections, then the result for the republican party would be much more positive, and therefore concludes that trump would not it is worth going to the presidential elections for 24 years, but it is worth giving the road to the young and as the most promising the candidate as the favorite is called exactly the desantes. uh, the current governor of florida here. do you agree with dmitri with a solid assessment that trump spoiled the results of the republican party. do you agree that he will be ready to leave? it 's kind of like it doesn't fit the character, but trump, while he claims the opposite. and in general, what

conclusions do you draw on the basis of the results of the midterm elections, what do they mean, firstly, i don’t think so. the results for the republicans are so deplorable so far. we discussed the poll with you. public opinion of previous programs. in general, rather a gap on public opinion between the popularity of republicans and democrats. i want to remind you that there was 1%, in republicans, 49 democrats, 48 ​​such a gap did not imply a catastrophic e, the defeat of the democrats further, almost the entire company, even the republicans admitted that, most likely, the senate would remain with the democrats. these are the last 2 weeks when more optimistic questions began to appear for them. they began to talk about the so -called reddsinami red prices. uh, red-

this is the color of the republicans. these have been the last two weeks. and it was from my point of view very, if you want not seriously. because with 40 million americans voting by mail and voting up these latest trends in public opinion, what is the obvious vote? uh by mail was supposed to provide additional resources. that's right, the democrats. and you are absolutely right that the republicans are likely to acquire less seats in the house than expected, but in general it was considered to be 20-25. now they say 18:20 over it is not such a serious difference. and most importantly, from a practical point of view. this difference only matters in one sense, that it will be easier for the democrats to retake control of the house in the next election, because they will have to

get rid of fewer republicans, and at this stage. at this stage. puts will continue to be speaker of the house kevin macardi, he is now republican minority leader powers from what he will have smaller difference in the number of votes. uh, there will be absolutely no difference with his powers, but unlike the state duma, the winning party receives the posts of all committee chairmen. all of us are much more democratic much more democratic for this point of view. yes, and as a result of this, for example, the republicans will not only seize control of the committees, but given that the winning party appoints 2/3 of the employees, and the minority only one, this means that the republicans can

immediately recruit, and thousands of people to the congressional apparatus . and know who they are going to initially. to a greater extent, they have already predicted not budget specialists, not foreign policy specialists or road construction specialists, but investigative specialists, that is, they will investigate the democrats and specifically the bidens on a large scale and knowing who will become the chairman of the committees. this has already been announced by republican committees. i can say that they will have a lot of desire to drink blood. what does this mean for russia ukraine it certainly does not mean any fundamental changes from my point of view in american foreign policy in the united states, er, there is a political consensus that russia is an adversary and ukraine is a heroic ally, that one of the

main foreign policy tasks of the united states is to stop and weaken russia, and that ukraine is a very useful tool in this. i don't think this will change. here's what i think will change. it is a willingness to please. uh, blind is zelensky's desire, no matter how much the united states can even afford it, and i can immediately predict one question that will be asked by a representative of the administration, when they are called to explain the situation in ukraine, there will be a question asked. how much did you spend on ukraine how much do you spend on guarding the us border with mexico, how many millions do you keep talking about ukrainian refugees. refuse. how many millions of illegal immigrants crossed this border and you say that there is no money to protect it.

look at crime in chicago in new york and scary crime now in washington dc where the police, from my point of view, have practically refused to fulfill their duties. there will be a question. you have no money for this. if you have money for this, then why are you not fulfilling your duties. and if you don’t have money, then why is ukraine more valuable to us than our own country and the second question will be asked? and what about political assassinations in ukraine and what about terrorist attacks? what about someone who gets jailed in ukraine for believing that when america actually becomes a bilingual country in ukraine eradicate the russian language, all these questions will be asked those questions that directly relate to money, concerning america, i think, will be the most important, but nevertheless, blind to the top

of ukraine, it will end a little dmitry, i completely agree with you, of course, the house of representatives, which will come under the control of the republicans. it does not define american foreign policy and foreign policy. priorities. they are responsible for the budget laws and for the investigation, and in fact, using these tools. they will be more rigorous to the issue of allocating money to ukraine and anticipating this development biden already in his yesterday's speech. actually, he declared that the united states does not issue people with an open sum for ukraine. moreover, biden emphasized that the united states did not and are not going to give ukraine long-range missiles for hammers. he mixed up the distance there, but nevertheless the meaning is clear that they will not give those missiles with which you can, uh, get deep into the depths of hitting deep into russian territory as well the pentagon has announced that it is rejecting a request

to provide kiev with reconnaissance strike and drones. eagle gray for the same reason, because they can strike deep into, uh, russian territory, but beyond that, a tougher approach to allocating money. it seems to me that as soon as the mid-term elections are over. already, even the rhetoric of the biden administration in relation to the ukrainian conflict has begun to change, firstly, in washington they openly started talking about the fact that this conflict has there is no military solution. and that none of the parties can win in plain text, they began to talk about it just the other day. the need for a complete victory for kiev, secondly , more evidence began to appear that the united states is still putting pressure on ukraine and inclining it towards a diplomatic settlement policy. here is the nbc channel, citing sources in the us government and e. ukraine stated that it was precisely this pressure in kiev that jake sullivan, the national

security adviser, was dealing with when he was recently in kiev talking with zelensky a and e with other representatives of the ukrainian leadership. here, listen to what e nbc writes. insiders say a number of u.s. and western officials believe neither side will be able to achieve all of its goals in the ukraine conflict and see a slowdown in hostilities over the winter as an opportunity to start a diplomatic settlement between moscow and kiev two witnesses to the meeting and ukrainian government officials said that jake sullivan proposed an option for ending the conflict and discussed the possibility of resolving the situation through diplomacy, a representative of the ukrainian government said that during negotiations with zelensky , saleman raised the issue of the need for a diplomatic solution to conflicts, noted that if kiev demonstrates openness to a conversation with russia, ukraine's position will not weaken, but rather strengthen ukrainian officials said that, according

to sallion, kiev will secure more support from its western allies if its will be perceived as aside trying to end the conflict with the help of diplomacy dmitry here it seems to me that this is a very important wording. i would like to highlight where ukraine can retain more support from the west if it presents itself as seeking diplomatic regulation. that is, if ukraine does not present itself as shooting towards a diplomatic settlement, then it will lose the support of the west and this line of pressure on ukraine from jake sallin, dmitry nu she would probably not want his action to be so interpreted by him already and since it is in criminal softness in regards. you can imagine russia at harvard, and he was associated with people like the gauls. he is a well-known , uh, grms, who is considered to be salem, as it were, by the leaders of the realistic school. well, not to the

end of his own, because he still has common sense. but now e is more serious. of course, you and dmitry rightly emphasized that there is a difference between rhetoric and concrete actions. for me, a specific action was that the biden administration didn't see fit to have a serious dialogue with russia a in the upcoming g20 forum, because the administration can tell you exactly with that idea. if you want to play, so there were different opinions about it. this was seriously discussed when the administration said that nothing has been decided yet, but they can discuss it, if there is, how would the administration talk about the exchange of prisoners of the two countries, this was not said from the fatherland, because such a possibility was considered if they started talking about

prisoners, it is clear that they came to other topics. it is necessary to the administration, i did not find it in myself, if you want. internal strength prepare for a serious dialogue with russia, uh, at the g20, that is, uh, serious conversation serious dialogue with moscow has not become a priority for the war administration. i have no doubt that there is interest in such a dialogue. and that a well-known dialogue with the help of sallion is already underway, but here, uh, the readiness to prepare a serious, detailed summit meeting, we did not discover this. this must be remembered, but you absolutely right, that some signals, but we see new trends, and you know, uh, a very interesting statement by the general or the chairman of the committee of chiefs in tobot. let's hear what he said. when there is an opportunity to negotiate,

when peace can be reached, take advantage of it to seize the moment there must be a mutual recognition that military victory is probable. in the truest sense of the word, it may be unattainable by military means, therefore, other methods must be resorted to if the front line stabilizes in winter, a window of opportunity for negotiations to end the conflict, but of course there is. eh, as it seems to me, undoubtedly an element of politicking. uh, general miles. uh, all those months of obama's rule was on display. see the reign of uh, obama through the biden so, uh, through all these months in the continuation of the administration. uh, obama or uh, showed his loyal support for the democratic regime and uh, he was remembered too.

in fact, he politically attached and criticized president trump, who was then his supreme and that's why i think that milly is not unreasonably thinking, how in a few months he will have to testify in the committees. e of congress, where he will be asked. what are you doing to stop this war? how much american money are you willing to spend. or maybe you decide to pay with american lives if there is an escalation. and what about nuclear weapons, and i think this is such a preemptive diplomatic political attack by the general mile. she talks about the new climate washington, but mr. zatulin, i don't have to tell you that climate is one thing - it provides an opportunity, but it does not always mean real change. and it was very interesting

to know your opinion, to what extent it seems to you that these new expressions of dmitrievsky 's keys are the pressure of new breaths. to what extent do they seem to open up real opportunities, at least for serious negotiations. i'm not talking yet. i'll have to be a warm thunberg, in this case, that is, to express skepticism. pretend that you want to negotiate and really take negotiation seriously as a way to resolve conflict. this is how we found out two big differences, as they say in our beloved odessa, it’s obvious to me that when president zelensky complicates the task of his friends in washington , i sign a decree that never under putin,

never. that is, after all, they believe that she is his gene. never say, he never drives himself into a dead end by saying that i will never negotiate with this president of russia, as if he is resolving the issue. to whom the president of russia be, who doesn't? he further expresses in this case the standard condition that the commencement of negotiations must be based on a withdrawal. uh, russian troops from all these territories, including crimea, donetsk luhansk , and so on, and it is obvious that no one in russia will go for it. garikasparov could do this if he were the president of the russian federation , but i think not. if someone out there in the united states thinks so now, i want to convince them that gasparov will not burn as the president of the russian federation, so, uh, as far as, uh, me

it is clear that, firstly, i absolutely agree with you here and, in my opinion, the majority. we do agree with that, well the party consensus is politically against russia on average in the united states which doesn't allow us to count on something that's in the spirit. so to say , political primitivism is about to come, uh, trump supporters will come, and they will immediately take our side and so on. we had to. uh, including on television on the eve of these. manual elections don't at least argue with some people who very optimistically assumed that now there will be a complete turnaround or something else, but in this case there is no reason to talk about it now, because, as we know, the election results are not so. uh, impressive for the republicans, as many of us instinctively believed. it is a fact. we must admit this , i want something to change in the attitude of the united states towards russia, they would

understand us better if we were ready to support what was said by general or, but then there was no need in general, to start a special military operation, if everyone in this case had a desire to resolve the issue peacefully, and this would be demonstrated. after all, such proposals were made, it was said that it was the experience of the eight-year normandy format that worries us, during which we, uh, sought to achieve. well, at least objectivity from the outside, but, if not the united states, then in their partners ger and france in the norman format, when it came to obvious things, the execution of signed minsk agreements, none of this happened. and it seems to me that now what you yourself said was some kind of intrigue regarding possible negotiations during the g20, and it is an intrigue. she went to no. this once again shows that, it seems to me, in the united states there is still

no obvious desire for this conflict to be ended in the course of some kind of peace negotiations. it's all rhetoric. this is nothing more than rhetoric, because the united states believes that so far. as they see it, the strategic the initiative, it is still in the hands of the ukrainian troops, who are attacking the russian and the russian ones, leaving the right side of the dnieper in kherson, they are moving into strategic defense, that is, we cannot objectively say that the initiative is in our hands, we need to return trust to the capabilities of the russian armed forces forces and all of us to win here to advance and so on in this situation. it seems to me that e is not formed in the united states. here is the request for negotiations. it is clear seasonal fatigue from what is needed it is necessary to find money, uh, to send weapons, all the more so, more and more, these homeric

applications for this weaponry. will have to answer. as you rightly said to the critics, but inside politically the critics who are here to say you are not spending money that way. you spend money on the wrong one and so on. it's all there. but above this, above everything , everything that was said in the question exists. so, please, everything you said, i think it's common sense and very informed. uh, and i agree that in america there is an impression that ukraine now there is an initiative? i wouldn’t necessarily call it strategic, maybe tactical, but there is some, and uh, of course, in america, uh, let’s say this turn of events welcomes, yes, but then why did these new moments appear? flexibility in american policy towards ukraine i have now expressed to you only my

assumption, but not even my conviction about the assumption. the assumption is that although russia vehemently denies any plans to use nuclear weapons in ukraine, russia says that in this regard there are no fundamental differences between strategic and tactical weapons, but since russia has such weapons, in america, contrary to the previous concept, more and more voices appear, including leading retired generals who say the guys do not need to drive russia into a corner, because who makes us? it's completely unpredictable. no , we don't see any signs that ukraine is preparing to use russia's jordanian weapons. well, there are such weapons . she has. i agree with you. i just

i want to say, on the one hand, look at the desire, it’s quite natural with ours today. uh, confrontational relations inflict as much damage as possible and harm russia as much as possible , including through the hands of ukraine, so that russia would be put in a more difficult position in any promising negotiations or in some other way, but on the other parties understanding that to drive russia into a corner and encourage russia to mobilize in full, that is, roughly speaking, they want us to come to an agreement with forty-second year they don’t want us, they don’t want us to live up to forty-fifth and win with all the consequences of this victory, they want it now when it arose, here’s such a uh, well, as it were, relatively relative stabilization at the front after our retreat after so to say our offensives, our retreats, all this, at this moment, when there is no decisive victory, at this

moment you need to prove that there can be no decisive victory at all, and you are now on these. precisely for ourselves, difficult conditions must be negotiated, after all, we we can easily find out whether negotiations are possible or not. if we turn to the negotiating positions, we declare them to be ukrainian, it means to completely return to the territorial integrity of ukraine during the ukrainian ussr, in which crimea is part of ukraine and sevastopol is located there and yes, no, and lugansk, let alone zaporozhye from kharkov and kherson. and in which one in russia? as you know, decisions were made that these subjects are part of the russian federation, this is how negotiating to start real negotiations, it is very difficult here, and from this it is clear that it is more like a desire to look like peacekeepers than

to actually be one? well, dmitry, i want to ask you a question. and uh, konstantin said it was a wish. uh, it looks more like myrrh is related to them being you said it's a change. if i understood you correctly, mostly rhetoric, and you will not agree with a slightly different way of posing the question, so that washington is not ready to seriously talk about peace in ukraine, but is ready not only to soften a little rhetoric, but are ready to seek, together with russia, more serious guarantees that the escalation will not get out of control, and dmitry i agree that washington is primarily concerned about the risks of escalation, but not only that, to be honest, i have a slightly different interpretation, and maybe more broad. apart from the escalation of the statement that i made to mark mil , which is that eight months of a military campaign in ukraine showed that it is impossible to defeat russia. russia, due to the availability of

resources, due to the development of its the military-industrial complex, due to its human potential, can afford to continue conducting a military special operation for an indefinite long time without any defeat of russia, but for the united states and its allies, a long continuation of this military campaign will mean not even tens, but hundreds and hundreds of billions dollars that will need to be spent on the life support of ukraine, hundreds of billions of dollars are already being spent, much more will be spent. can the united states afford such spending in an indefinite future. especially considering that the united states is constantly and increasingly talking about the need to concentrate forces on china, the need for a new arms race from china, the need for a general strategic reorientation towards confrontation with china. it seems to me that the answer is correct, i will say one more

thing. uh, about how the russian army is perceived in washington. i mean the russian armed forces and uh their supreme commander in washington there were hopes that, when, uh, moscow collides with the unprecedented unity of the collective west with truly unprecedented unity, which the old man, biden, managed to organize significant measures, then the old man turned out to be quite an effective political figure. and secondly, when they see how ready the collective smell is not just to arm the ukrainian army, but to share intelligence data with it directly train ukrainian military personnel and most importantly, take an active part in planning ukrainian military operations. generally. this unprecedented for the country that claims. that

it is not part of the war and there was hope that when all this is done openly enough. moscow will sag a little, and what's more, it hasn't happened before. i want to say in order to be objective that we have the same sins. they are connected with the fact that each of our sides overestimates its own and underestimates the capabilities of the enemy. in this case, under the enemy. i mean, not ukraine, only ukraine together with the collective west, but this reassessment is ours refers to the first phase of events now, as far as i understand, it is not, and the overestimation of the west refers to today's part of this entire special military operation in both cases, an overestimation of one's capabilities and an underestimation of the enemy's determination and readiness to resist or attack. that's the problem. here dmitry really these months have shown that it is impossible to

defeat russia on the battlefield once and for all. western resources today, which are not infinite, secondly, it is impossible to defeat russia economically, the sanctions that the west imposed did not bring down the russian economy with all the difficulties that we are now facing. but then i would like to ask konstantin fedorovich. next question. still, having been a little bit in the role of the devil's advocate. and ukraine says that it intends to go to the end and knock russia out of the borders of the ninety-first year, at least, while the person from whom he actually makes the tactical and technical decision on the supply of weapons to ukraine is more than anyone else in the american the establishment is involved in this war from the outside the united states speaks in clear military terms. no, it's impossible to win. this is the first and second. ukraine, as i said, is on a life support system. west jake

sullivan, according to the nbc channel, told zelensky in plain text that the maintenance of this life support system depends on whether zelensky will be flexible and willing to negotiate or not, if this life support system is turned off wasp lebanon hinted at this all a corpse so to speak, um i don't even believe if you wish, isaleva to disable something. yes , firstly, i don’t see such a desire, i know a little about the nuances, uh, from people who were related to the burnout, what was said and i think that there was a general direction, the one you described, but the external nuances, but they are missing and the main thing was that it was constantly said that there is such a possibility of disappointing ukrainian inflexibility, but, of course, it doesn’t exist yet. and while the administration and the war image the image of the heroic ukraine, the west helps in the name of the good of justice

international relations of everything else and just get rid of this image together with zelensky with all the desire, even irritation of zelensky and so on, no one will go for this, because this is a political process for the americans. there are some about the zelensky delusion. don't be fooled now, of course. everything accumulates, including weariness from spending, weariness from the time that has thus arisen. but there is a prize of 300 is that in this way we put russia in its place with the hands of ukraine we don’t put it ourselves, but with their weapons and help to those who are ready to fight to the last ukrainians, how not to use such a chance. here they are using it. of course, there is some limit, there is talk that we are striving for peace, that only through peaceful negotiations. everything can end and so on, but on what conditions do we go back to the map and look at the

map. what the west agrees to in this case for zelensky and what zelensky agrees to well, this is still about the idea of ​​washington some leading experts associated with the administration. which one is styled now in captcha? uh huh, the idea that you can just start? e from a truce, and then gradually build some other possibilities on this basis. well, this is one of the options that, uh, is on the table all the time, namely, some kind of freezing at some lines, that is, fixing some positions. and well, on the one hand, there are not enough enough victims, there are many, and so on. no desire for their knives and so on and so forth. there is fatigue, there are problems with both sides. let's freeze this conflict, that is, we have not decided not to sign a peace treaty. we will not agree on a full format, but simply time to

freeze it. this time, for example, uh, in the case of the nagorno-karabakh conflict lasted from 1994 to 2020, and in the korean and so on. let's create such a line of demarcation, as it is called forty in korea. seventh parallel. yes , thirty-eighth, second, eighth, you see, i got it mixed up, but, uh, such an option is quite probable. the question is, among other things, our political leadership considers it to be the right step for us in this situation or wrong. for example, i'm not at all convinced of this, which means, but in fact, a refusal. here are the goals of this special military operation, as they were stated at the beginning of the finish. we today confirm these goals or not? this is a question that the military-political leadership of our country must answer. and, of course, in the short and maybe even medium term, american policy will not change and moreover, the fundamental one will not change radically, but i would like to emphasize two very important theses. the new ones, which were announced by

the united states, are the first thing that, according to the american leadership, it was openly said that it is impossible to defeat russia in this company, that is, there is no military solution. and if there is no military solution, it means that it is necessary, maybe not now, not tomorrow, but still, the politician should look for a diplomatic solution, and the second thing salvam transparently hinted at with all the political restrictions, and american and western support for ukraine is not unconditional. it depends on the behavior of the presence or lack of flexibility that kiev will demonstrate because the administration declares publicly. and this, it seems to me, is very important in zelensky's place. i would have thought about it for 10 years and time will tell dmitry if you hear a female one share dmitry konstantin fedorovich thank you very much for a very interesting conversation, and the big

game will return to the studio in a few days. he blew up russian literature created his own unique style. before him, no one wrote like that. and what if, for example, napoleon happened in my place in order to write well, one must suffer, he will say, dostoevsky nevertheless gave him a colossal capacity for work, some, let's say, so negative qualities, for example, epileptics, the extreme irascibility of the fate of the three main dostoevsky's women will intertwine together, they die and quarrel over him this money. get on the roulette table. and as much as possible. i went with the thought to win back at least something and lost everything, anya, he loses his wife's skirts pawn at 6 o'clock in the morning semenovsky on a planchette with his

head uncovered, listens to the sentence of death and shooting, which flashes through his head at that moment. dostoevsky 2001 between hell and rhyme tomorrow at pervy i pay, and you bring me oh, and i only have a credit card. i can't translate. from me i will take a commission of crazy interest on the loan. and i can credit card tinkoff platinum do not take any commissions for transfers. how can a credit card.ru and transfer money without commission tinkoff he is the only one for smooth heels evil profi and cream-wax cracks on the right and not only with discounts up to 50%

the vtb team will offer a solution to worry. you don’t have to be calm about your savings, you can do it with a high rate if it’s a fee from a reliable vtb bank up to 9.5%. this is what they opened for you for you. now you. open the flag up to 9.5% on vtb.ru. go to tv and that's it, you get a sale, 11 11 on yandex.market instant coffee and egoist with it for 399 rubles. from 9 to 11 november healthy can not be delicious. we have prepared for

you something convincing without excess sugar, healthy programs delicious recipes from simple and inexpensive products calorie calculator articles with healthy recommendations. apply for osago on sravni and save up to 5,500 rubles. if insurance, then compare angstren designer living rooms from 39.000 rubles. choose your style. angstrom don is changing. life is updated monday is not a gift. the mood falls already in the morning, so on mondays they receive gifts from the subscriber. tele2 gifts. we have prepared a lot. choose three at once look at your smartphone. everything is already there inside of you mood. everything will be all right, monday and a gift. we know that monday is a gift tele2 gifts other rules, that here with a terminal with a pocket dilemma in technology, a microcircuit with a credit card from rosbank suddenly burned out this is not a problem when buying. remove, transfer 120 days

without interest rosbank real opportunities sleep badly or before. horror. accept it. we fly with valerian and hermit, hawthorn and mint. only from november 11, homemade suit for 199 rubles. hand mixer for 299 rubles. children's designer for 149 rubles. we have always admired. those who build not a business, but the future of you is already 25 million of those who trust us and we are doing everything to have the right to say tinkoff bank photo in russia sale 111 on yandex.market robot vacuum cleaner robot vacuum 2 lite

for only 11.000 990 rubles . from november 9 to november 11 installments from the bathrobe card, but imagine that this is the price of anything down payment. no, just cut for 18 months and no interest. map installment halava island relevant behind this sign is the real shirinsky school of batula and a really interesting activity in the point of growth, where real people are passionate about their first discoveries more than 9,000 points of growth in small towns throughout russia, so that these guys have a truly bright future national education project what is important here and now. the four

big game which it receives from the west and the help, without which ukraine, in principle, cannot exist , neither militarily nor economically , and with this help. at least with its volumes already there are problems. as for american aid, then with the transition of the house of representatives under the control of the republicans, problems may arise both with the volume and with the speed of disbursement of aid, but with european aid, there may be problems. have arisen now and recently , the vice-president of the european commission openly stated that the european union is not in a position to to allocate to ukraine those 3 billion euros that it promised out of 9 billion back in may, while hungary blocked a tranche of 18 billion euros to the e-ukraine branch. to cover current expenses for the next year, it was

assumed that the european union would allocate 1.5 billion euros to ukraine per month precisely for current expenses. what is called life maintenance, this requires a consensus of all member states of the european union. hungary vetoed and no matter how hard it tried the european commission in recent days to explain to hungary that this is not about grants, we are talking about long-term loans, by the way, to future generations of ukrainians, all this should be paid off, yes, but it didn’t work , and here the head of the office of the prime minister of hungary, egerya gulshash, said that budapest is against granting preferential loans to ukraine jointly by all countries of the european union approval from all members. yes, including hungary the european court cannot transfer the appropriate money to ukraine for the next year alexander mikhailovich what now? well i guess what's happening is the economic problems are accelerating and

political hungary demonstrates to the whole of europe that it is a country that is really aware of the problems, not even of today, but of tomorrow, and they are well aware that not only without energy. in general, without upsetting a normal dialogue with russia, it will be very difficult for europe, after all, in fact. americans today. we have already talked about this on your program. they are thrown on the altar of their own interests. not even a victory of self-interest. whole europe and we understand perfectly well that the destruction of the economy not only of germany but also of the whole european economy translation. moreover, the undisguised transfer of many types of production to america means that the americans are solving their own problems at the expense of their current, quite recently reliable partners. but this, by the way, gives us the answer. what should be expected in the near future? you mentioned that the americans will suffer from or there will be restrictions or they will have problems with the provision of assistance. well, in my opinion. this is, uh, misleading because. uh, they have a reliable printing press in their hands, and

they will not think for a second about when and how much to issue these dollars, because for them these dollars are worth nothing, and for everyone else who consumes these dollars who tea economy depends, including those related to the implementation. this dependence will be realized in the fact that both weapons and everything else will go into e. in ukraine, of course. europe , it can also print its euros. but it's here there are already other problems. this means that at the moment the consensus problem means that there are still sensible forces that are able to at least try to stop this flow, but you know that after the announcement and blocking of hungary, uh, this european trance will not be good right away. so we will give credits to this they raised the level of decision to another. that is, they raised the decision itself and the mechanism for its adoption to another level, thereby ensuring readiness anyway. they will do it to ukraine, because for them easier to pay off all these problems. if only

not to touch, really. uh, in direct conflict with us not only on the battlefield, but also in other issues that exist, i agree that there is a political will in brussels since there is a political will in washington, that is, a political will in brussels to allocate uh, extra money to ukraine and i also agree that the americans have a printing press, but how endless is this printing press, given that the united states is really, but trying to concentrate more and more resources on china, and moreover, you correctly noted the political moment, and the political factor for the republicans. it is very important that they are called fair distribution of time. and if the europeans fail, if the europeans give less or with pauses, or somehow immerse themselves in their own disputes, then the republicans will speak. and why should we give, and a billion is hundreds of billions of dollars. to ukraine, despite the fact that the europeans cannot even provide 18 or 20 billion dollars there, and this will

drive. well, at least to pauses in them will increase europe's dependence on this, because they are not in vain pushing them to this, as soon as the europeans. they say that they stop there or there is some kind of delay. they immediately understand that they are already increasing europe's dependence on america. yes , they say, we will help you well, and i do not provide financial support and, most importantly, that they supply these weapons for them. hanging the burden of responsibility of calculations on europe itself, therefore , here after all, you compare the numbers of internal and america's external debt and the figures that they finance today ukraine yes, this is ridiculous, you can't even compare. they can print and print. i've come across one very interesting idea that, as he said, that in order for us to solve some problems we need to acquire. we need to launch a whole range of economic mechanisms there, which are connected with the receipt of these dollars at the expense of the products and so on of the americans, press the button and that's it. therefore, here in my opinion. expect it straight some serious obstacle will be for the

americans. well, we discussed before the break about the new whiffs in american rhetoric regarding the ukrainian conflict, mark milet's statement and publications related to the recent visit of jake sallion. e to kiev and now, it seems to me that these breaths have already been caught in europe and the minister. the italian defense guida to rosetta is the new italian defense minister of the new italian government. today he said that italy is stopping the supply of weapons to ukraine until the new decision of nato and the european union, and we are talking about supplies, in including those promised by the previous government. yes, but the new government does not promise new deliveries for all, so to speak, about the ukrainian orientation. george is the melody of the new head of the italian cabinet, and french president emmanuel macron is already dreaming of a post-war world order in europe yes , here it is again. it seems to me in the context of changes in pose. under the united states, he made a remarkable tweet yesterday. why, after

the establishment of peace in ukraine, we will have to build a new security architecture and restore stability and control over armaments in europe, which, by the way, implies a certain dialogue with russia, ivan vasilyevich. what is it like? e cat from the house of the mouse to the dance. that is, the rhetoric of the united states and the europeans changed a little, they immediately decided to take advantage of this and also, but they change their position or i am too optimistic. i look at these things. i really like your optimism, but i really can't share it. unfortunately, dmitry vyacheslavovich, it seems to me that these statements that you are quoting with something that, uh, may be in music is called a loss. yes, that is, it is some kind of transition from one to another. this is something that needs to take time in pa-pause, because really. uh, everyone is watching

europeans now. well, a significant part of the rest of the world is looking at the american elections and is trying to understand what they have done in their politics. what will be the result of the alignment following the results of this election, in general, they will fight there, or vice versa, the democrats will be the republicans. uh, they will agree to trample trump or not trample trump and so on and for a while. let's say the americans really loosened the reins. yes, the vozhe was weakened and uh, i would say that the europeans took advantage of this in order, as you said, to start dancing to start their own game. yes it would seem that if your master weakened vozhe, well, try to do something for yourself. something you believe. uh that's right, maybe that's hungary really for moving in it in that direction. you can interpret her actions,

maybe italian actions can be interpreted. like today said learn that i will go for the imposition of sanctions against russia only if they hang the sword of damocles over me, that's all, if the knife presents nowhere to go to the throat, so maybe the italians also felt that the sword of damocles was a little weakened. all we mean, we can, uh, well , do not obey a little old men for sure. but france is completely different. here is france in this case, here is the macron's statement. these are just empty words. here he does not understand what is happening, but as a person who now carries this, as it seems to him, french pride, although he in the last year and a half, numbers on the international arena, has been very much discredited and practically no one now takes him seriously either in europe or in america, and even more so, we cannot take him seriously, nevertheless. he puffs out his cheeks. and that's what he needs. here's something to say to fill the pause. i

believe that his statement is precisely, namely, about this. and here are, uh, hungarian and italian statements. it's more of an attempt. well, he won’t start his own game until the americans weakened a little, well, so a little to evade the american game, but if the americans pull it again, then, i think, they are among their vassals in the order of e in sight. well, here's what i completely agree with. that e the united states, regardless of the further development of even the military conflict in ukraine, will not stop the hybrid war against russia, it is of a long-term strategic nature, indeed, the united states is interested in further weakening russia and e, will use this tool, among other things, will use other tools to a weakening russia in the long term. and here is a very important reminder of this. it seems to me to be a recent article by two-pronged representatives of the

american foreign policy mainstream. the article was published by forinfs, and this is andrei kendall taylor, a researcher at the center for a new american security, who, by the way, at one time was even considered for the position of jebiden's special adviser on russia at the national security council and senior researcher at the center for naval analysis michael coffman, a renowned military expert . listen to what they write about. under putin, russia will never be a member of the european security system in the short term washington and its allies should continue to reduce the risks of escalation, especially the risks of a nuclear exchange and reduce russia's ability to wage war the us should also pinch and contain russia in order to prevent its aggressive actions beyond its borders, in order to reduce russian power, washington needs to continue its course started after the russian invasion of ukraine, in

particular the united states should continue to help reduce europe's dependence on russian oil and gas, as well as help them fulfill the stockpiles of weapons that the europeans transferred to ukraine to washington and allies, it is extremely important to monitor the implementation of sanctions by ensuring export controls and anti-corruption measures introduced against russia to contain moscow to the united states. their european partner also needs to maintain engagement with india and other neutrals. countries. in africa and the middle east, which help russia stay afloat, elena vladimirovna note yes, they recommend that, regardless of the end or even freezing of the ukrainian conflict, continue the policy that the united states began after the start of this conflict quite right. and although there are discussions in america about certain tonalities of nuances, everyone agrees on this main point, and not so

long ago, many commented on the well-known article of the merchant. in america about what needs to be done negotiations and so on, but in the same article he spoke about the same thing, that we must continue to contain moscow and so on. and this is another confirmation that it is the main trend . and no matter what they say in europe in america , they set the tone and order the music, just in washington, even the speech of the macron at the naval base in tun, she showed that no matter how he he beat his chest with his fist, no matter how he puffed out his cheeks, but in fact he repeated it again. here is the same question asked by washington that it is necessary to restrain e russia, he agreed there to the point that geopolitics is now.