it's also exposed deep political division inside the united states. right now, further american military and economic assistance to ukraine is blocked by partisan warfare on capitol hill. my guest today is ukraine's un ambassador, sergiy kyslytsya. does kyiv now feel betrayed? ambassador sergiy kyslytsya, welcome to hardtalk. well, thank you. nice to see you. ambassador, do you think that, right now, ukraine is facing

the toughest times it has seen since those early weeks after the full—scale russian invasion? it's yes and no. yes, because we have entered a new stage where the factors are very different and we have to find a new modus operandi both inside the country and outside the country. but the very first hours and days were exceptionally difficult, and i'm proud that both my people and my leadership have done the best. how closely do you, sitting here at the united nations in new york, follow the front line fighting? cos i'm guessing that, if you do, you have deep concerns right now about what is happening in the east, particularly around the city of avdiivka, where it seems, after months of hugely costly attritional fighting,

ukrainian forces are in retreat. i think that... i'm not a military expert, but my humble view is that... ..those retreats, as you call them, they are very incremental. and the costs for the russians are much, much higher than for the ukrainians. so i would not really use this retreat to support the defeatist narrative that we increasingly face every day. but it's not... if i may say so, it's not defeatist just to look with a cold eye at the realities on the ground. we know, from the words of ukrainian soldiers on the ground who post on social media, that they are being massively outgunned — for every shell that the ukrainians fire, the russians fire eight to ten back. they're outgunned on the ukrainian side and they are outmanned as well.

and this is a situation which appears to worsen week by week. that might be true, and that perhaps is true. but... well, it isn't really "perhaps", is it? - as a ukrainian official, do you do not need to front up with your own people and the world about the degree to which, right now, you simply don't have the men or the ammunition to match the russians on the front line. but we had even less men and ammunition in the first hours and days of the invasion, and, nevertheless, we managed to stop the invader. so you should not really undermine the spirit of the ukrainian soldiers, no matter how the numbers are looking in the front line. it is, though, a question of how ukraine deals with the realities. it is interesting that president zelensky has chosen to replace the chief of the ukraine army at this particular time, and it seems that he was angered

by general zaluzhnyi saying that the war had reached a stalemate. why would that be so infuriating to president zelensky? well, you may have a chance to ask president zelensky himself. i mean, for the purposes of myjob, i see it as the constitutional right of the president, because he is the chief commander. he is the commander—in—chief of the ukrainian army. and i think that the whole body of army and the whole ukrainian society should work holistically, and there should be total synergy between different parts of this body. the context in which we speak of the problems facing ukraine today is clear here in the united states. your chief backer, your chief supplier of military materiel — the united states — is no longer giving you what you need. sitting here today with me in new york, the united nations ambassador,

do you feel betrayed by the united states? i...feel... i have a very complex feeling because, on the one hand, when i sit with linda thomas—greenfield, who is the us ambassador to the united nations, and she's also — important to be mentioned — a member of the cabinet of president biden. so i see how she personally is dedicated... ..to do everything possible to help ukraine. and, infact... but, with respect, an ambassador�*s feelings are irrelevant. that doesn't deliver you one new missile... ..one new tank, one new shell. still, it is very important because, as i said, she's a member of the cabinet and she takes part in the meetings in the white house and she can make her personal input in the discussions, also based on the discussions

here in new york around other conflicts. when i asked you whether you feel betrayed, you paused, you tried to find some words. it suggests to me that there is a large part of you, ambassador, that does feel a sense of betrayal. no, iam not... i have not reached the point where i think i can say that i feel betrayed by the american people and by the overwhelming majority of the political leadership of this country. i'm very anxious. i'm quite frustrated, as many people are. but, i mean, that would be quite a stretch to say that, at this point, i am betrayed. as we speak to each other, the biden administration is hoping against hope that the us congress will find a way to authorise passage of legislation which would deliver $60 billion of new assistance to ukraine. it's in the senate right now. it may emerge from the senate. it may then get to the house and fail, or it may get to the house

and some sort of agreement may be found. but it could take weeks. every single day, ukraine is falling short in terms of ammunition, new supplies. i can quote to you a host of republicans in both the senate and the house of representatives who are adamant that the united states should send no more money to ukraine. that's the stance of senators likejosh hawley and rand paul, and some go even further — marjorie taylor greene, an extreme trump supporter within the republican party, has called the idea of spending tens of billions of dollars more to help ukraine as, quote, "sick". when you hear that... so i regret...| regret that, in my opinion, although i'm not ukraine's ambassador in dc, that, in my opinion, those statements go against the intrinsic national and security interests of this country. what do you think is happening in this country,

to make that sort of opinion dominant in a sector of the republican party? a sector which is able, right now, to block furtherfunding. it's not the first case in political history where the minority voice is the most loud voice and the minority has a controlling leverage over the decision—making. so i don't really find it exceptionally — from the political history — exceptionally unusual. you know what people like marjorie taylor greene say about much of the money that has been sent to kyiv, as well as the milita assistance? they say that much of the money ends up in corrupt hands. they say it's being siphoned off. and then they cite reports from inside the ukrainian government — for example, the defence minister, mr umarov, on january the 9th, saying that an audit had uncovered corruption worth roughly $260 million over the previous four months. they're painting your government as deeply corrupt.

i think that she is clearly either placed unaware or she's not aware where the majority of the money stays, and the majority... most of the money stays in the united states. so, i mean, it's both technically and politically and factually not correct. 90% of the money that is allocated by the us congress for ukraine stays inside of this country, and in particular in midwest, where the military industrial complex produces the weapon systems. it's easy, i guess, to focus on those who are blocking funding right now, which, as we have discussed, is primarily from the trump wing of the republican party. but when you assess the biden administration's approach right now, do you also sense that there is a backing off... ..from ukraine amongst some of the senior advisers around joe biden? they said... from the very beginning, from those days when you were

standing up at the un, defending ukraine's interest against a russian invasion, they said that, "we will be with you as long as it takes." do you think there's some second—guessing? i'm not in washington, dc, to have this kind of assessment cos you need to talk to those people directly every day. i think that the discussions inside the administration, however, are very intense. but i don't believe that this nation, as a nation and as a government, is really backing from ukraine. let's talk about the "economic squeeze" that the west said it would put upon russia to the point of crippling the russian economy. again, you sit inside the united nations, you talk to your ambassador colleagues from very different parts of this western alliance — in europe, in asia, wherever. are you satisfied with the measures that have been taken to isolate and punish russia? no, no, no, i'm not.

i'm not satisfied. i'm not even satisfied within the scope of responsibilities that those ambassadors and, in particular, ambassadors in the security council have when it comes to such cases, like, for example, the sanctions that were approved by the security council on iran or on north korea, because the united nations, and the security council in particular, they failed to enforce the sanctions that they themselves approved. and we know very well... you're referring about sanctions concerning arms trade with north korea and iran? arms trade, exactly. well, you know ijust spoke to the russian ambassador a few days ago. right. he absolutely, categorically denied there was any evidence that russia. . .— ..is being armed by north korea or iran. well, i'm not going to dignify his bunkum and balderdash. i mean, it's beyond my...my dignity. anyway, no, it's a matter of fact that the security council failed and the united nations system failed to enforce

their own decisions when it comes to transfer of weapons and technologies between iran and russia, between north korea and russia. so i'm not satisfied. i mean, we also see that european trade with, if i can put it this way, potential third countries who trade a great deal with russia has also increased massively in the last year. i'm thinking about, for example, just one example, the car trade between germany and a country like kazakhstan. or kyrgyzstan-— all of a sudden, people there became so affluent and rich that they could afford, like, a 500% increase in buying bmws and mercedes. yes. i mean, in essence... exactly. ..it seems that third countries are enabling russia to bypass sanctions. and it seems you and others, who are trying at the united nations and elsewhere to tell the west to tiuhten u-... , ..the sanctions regime, you're not being listened to.

i cannot say that we're not being listened to or we are not heard. what i'm saying is that those sanctions are not as efficient as everybody wished them to be or as we were promised them to be. i mean, you are right — the volume of trade with kyrgyzstan, kazakhstan, georgia and other countries in the vicinity of the russian federation skyrocketed. and those figures are undeniable. i mean, you can see that. and i mean, all logic and common sense indicates that everything shipped to those countries is then simply forwarded to russia. do you think that the engagement, of even those countries that are most supportive of ukraine in this war with russia, engagement has been affected by the world's attention focusing on the conflict in gaza over the last three months and more. has it affected the way in which ukraine

gets its message across? right. it's affected. and there are several reasons for that because, first of all, the magnitude of the conflict is incredible. and then let's go back to 2022, for example, and see how the war in ukraine hijacked the attention from other conflicts. when the war started in ukraine, when the full—scale aggression started in ukraine, how many of them were talking about syria, sudan and others? so that's kind of a natural cycle and logic of how the attention is concentrated, right? but indeed, it has affected. but what is very important is that we are not in competition for the attention, because it also corresponds to the intrinsic interests of ukraine that the conflict in the middle east is contained and that there is no spill—over. but isn't the most fundamental problem that many people

across the world... ? and surely you feel this at the united nations, where you talk to colleagues from the so—called global south, as well as your western partners. many see the exposure of a profound double standard when it comes to the western response to russia's military invasion and occupation of territory in ukraine, compared with the western reaction to the prolonged israeli occupation of lands which the palestinians claim for themselves. two different forms of occupation, and two very different forms of response. right. but i would not put neither the etymology or history of those two conflicts in the same basket. they are very distinct and the root causes are very different. i'm simply asking you whether colleagues, particularly in the global south, say to you, "there is a real problem here, "and there is a problem

taking seriously the west "and its insistence on upholding international law "on one crisis, in one conflict, "but not so much in the other." the thing is that the west is not as united on gaza as the west — so—called west — is united on ukraine. because when you see the difference in the position, for example, of paris and washington, london and paris, i mean, or other countries, the west itself is not as united on gaza, and that gives our opponents and our enemies additional tools how to manipulate with western position on two conflicts. i want to turn it back to ukraine itself. we talked a little bit about mr zelensky�*s decision to replace zaluzhnyi with syrskyi as leader of the armed forces. "the idea," said mr zelensky,

"was to find new approaches." this is a quote. "the generalship must be reset. "the army's actions must become "much more technologically advanced." what is the "new approach", do you think, that zelensky is looking for? i think that... i can only presume, because i've never had a conversation with the president on that issue. but i can only presume that we really need a technological breakthrough and we need new tactics in our military... ..planning an operation on the ground because, as you said yourself, i mean, the human resources of ukraine and russia are not comparable, right? so if we have much limited human resources than russians do, then we have to have a technological superiority. and that's why, among other things, before zaluzhnyi was replaced with syrskyi,

there was another decree and decision by the president to establish a new branch of armed forces that would specifically deal with the uavs. do you think...? that's—that's the military prospect and outlook. what about the political outlook? i see that president zelensky�*s approval ratings have been slipping rather dramatically. according to polling inside ukraine, trust in zelensky is down from 84% to 62% in a year, whereas trust in the military is still sky—high. do you think, as petro poroshenko, a former president, put it, that the decision to remove zaluzhnyi is less about military and strategic considerations, more about political emotion and possiblyjealousy? i think that president of ukraine fully realises the responsibility for his actions

and he acts responsibly. and i don't think that's the time to approach the kind of issues purely from the point of view of politics inside the country, no. i think it is a very cognisant decision, based on a very profound and thorough analysis of many factors and the need to... ..maintain the unity of all branches of the government. wars do end. they end when the parties decide it is in their interest to talk. now, the russian ambassador here at the un, mr nebenzia, told me the problem right now is russia is ready to talk, but the ukrainians have actually passed a law, making it illegalfor the ukrainian government to speak to vladimir putin. at some point, would you, as a diplomat, recognise ukraine will have to talk to putin? it was not the law. it was the executive decree passed by the ukrainian side, by the ukrainian government.

it has the same effect. yeah, it has the same effect. but i mean, imagine the russian side... ..accepts the principles that the general assembly passed on the 23rd of february 2023. the principles ofjust and sustainable peace. if the russian side accepts these principles, then we may discuss, in theory, who we are talking to in the russian federation and whether the authority that we are talking to is a reliable authority that can deliver, but not only have conversations. but i guess the point is that, at some juncture, ukraine probably will have to abandon its maximalist position, the idea that there can be no peace until every inch of ukrainian territory has been restored — that, of course, including crimea. is there an acceptance in kyiv that that maximalist position

can be adapted, may have to be adapted? i think that it's not a maximalist position. i think that the reports that you refer to, they also support that premise that no peace at cost of territorial concessions. and it doesn't mean that all the territories can be liberated simultaneously. you know? but i don't think that any serious politician in ukraine can survive if he or she proposes territorial concessions. but you are a diplomat based in the united states.- you see which way the wind is blowing in this country. we don't know what will happen in november, but we do know that already donald trump, who, it seems, will be representing the republican party, has said that he would bring the war to an end within 2a hours. and it is quite clear that he means by that he would, in his view,

force zelensky to a compromised peace with putin. we've got others in europe — the new prime minister of slovakia saying this, that there'll have to be a compromise. "what do the ukrainians expect, that the russians leave "all of crimea, donetsk and luhansk? "that is unrealistic. " there is a politicalfeeling that ukraine will have to face difficult decisions. you know, i live in new york, and the weather changes in new york —5 to +15 within 2a hours. so the winds are not the beacon for us. you know? the principles are the beacon for us and the values are the beacon for us. and there is...there is a way how trump can... ..force an individual or even a group of individuals. but trump, or other politicians for this matter, has no means to force the entire nation.

and the nation has made a choice and the nation is fighting for freedom and for liberty. and it's not it's not up to a foreign president or prime minister to tell the mature ukrainian nation how to develop and how to build its nation, with my all due respect. of course, it is the choice of the slovak people or the americans. to elect their leadership. or the americans to elect their leadership. but it's not the choice of the americans or the leaders of slovak, or whoever, to tell the nation of ukraine how to go ahead. and, so far, the nation of ukraine is very brave and it's paying with blood for the choice that the nation has made. we have to end there. ambassador kyslytsya, i thank you very much forjoining me on hardtalk. well, thank you for stopping by the ukrainian mission. thank you very much.

hello. it's wet, it's mild. if anything, it's going to get even milder across some parts of the country. but this story is not true for scotland — it's been quite the opposite. at the moment we've got clear skies. it's very cold in the highlands. and early on wednesday morning, temperatures in some spots could be as low as —8 degrees celsius, but not in northern ireland, england and wales. the air current is coming in from the southwest. weather fronts are crossing us here. a lot of cloud and outbreaks of rain. so the clear skies will be across scotland through the early hours and this is where we've got also light winds. we recently had some snow showers as well in the last 2a hours. so hence the temperatures are pretty low, close to the ground. but just to the south of that, we have the weather fronts, that thick cloud, layers of cloud, outbreaks of rain. 10 degrees in the south,

around about 6 by the time we get to belfast and a couple of degrees above freezing in the morning in glasgow and edinburgh. so here's the forecast for wednesday. now, these weather fronts or rain—bearing clouds will be shifting northwards through the course of the day. again, some wintriness across the highlands. i think to sum up wednesday, rain possible almost at any time, almost anywhere across the country. but also one or two glimmers of sunshine. temperatures should reach 14 or 15 degrees celsius, i think, across parts of england. and then on thursday, a more substantial area of rainfall crosses scotland. this is actually a cold front, so the air behind it is slightly cooler. ahead of it, here around east anglia, lincolnshire, the south east, where the sky's clear with a bit of sunshine, it is possible that temperatures may reach 16 or 17 degrees celsius. not unheard of this time of the year. in fact, it's happening more and more often. so, why so mild? well, if we track this airstream, you can see the air�*s coming in all the way from portugal and spain, in fact, the canaries. and you can even trace it back all the way into the subtropical atlantic — a really mild air mass streaming our

way over the next few days. but i mentioned something about a cold front. here it is, as it moves over the uk during the course of friday and then introducing something a little less mild. it's not going to get cold, it's just not going to be as mild. let's have a look at the outlook, then, over the next few days. so, the peak of this mild spell will be around thursday. but after that, it looks as though those temperatures will ease a little bit. staying on the mild side, and overall, the weather very changeable with rain at times.

welcome to newsday, reporting live from singapore, i'm arunoday mukharji. let's get you the headlines.. a long—delayed $95 billion bill gets the us senate's approval for aid to ukraine, israel and taiwan. polls open in indonesia, where more than 200 million voters get ready to choose a new president.

as the situation remains desperate in rafah — american, egyptian, israeli and qatari officials meet in cairo to discuss a possible ceasefire and hostage deal. you're watching newsday. we start the programme in indonesia, where voting has we start the programme in washington — where the us senate has approved a $95 billion aid package after months of political wrangling. the package includes $60 billion for ukraine, $14 billion for israel's war against hamas $10 billion for humanitarian aid in conflict zones including gaza. plus there's more than $8 billion for taiwan and other us allies in the indo—pacific. senate republicans remained divided on the bill