by anton borkovsky naispresso february 24, the date that changed us, the date that changed the world and now what interests us most is our victory, when we defeat the enemy, so predict the course of the war, the saturday political club program returns to the espresso airwaves to help understand the events and predict the consequences of saturday vitaly portnikov and maria gursk will discuss the most relevant issues in order to draw appropriate conclusions. if you want to know how what is happening today will affect our tomorrow, watch the saturday political club every saturday on espresso when little hryhoriy skovoroda took his first steps in 1723, no one could have imagined that this person would be able to explain complex things with such simple

words unequal seven equality different streams pour from different tubes into different vessels standing around the fountain less vessel has less but in that it is equal to the bigger one, which is still complete, we are all equal in the world of being ukrainians , big things begin with small steps, the next step is your state - it's us, so that ukrainians don't think about it, no matter what they talk about in the first place anyway war is coming war and our victory days a week from monday monday seven different spheres of human activity sports culture politics eight presenters of express journalists experts opinion leaders in real time about the most relevant events

through the prism of war every day author's projects the most express wild creatures ca n't choose anything else in ukraine we like to choose everything, even if it is insurance on hotline-finance hotline finance insurance, of course, online if you are allergic to the drug cetrin, it does not matter what kind of pet you have what flowers do you like or what do your children secretly eat, these are three, well, it is important to block allergic receptors and protect the body from an allergic reaction in just 20 minutes, these three work in the allergy center, glory to ukraine, this is a program, the verdict, my name is serhiy rudenko, everyone, have a good day and good health today is the 155th day of the heroic resistance

of the ukrainian people against the russian occupiers, a restless morning appeared throughout ukraine, at dawn the russian occupiers struck kyiv region, chernihiv region, kharkiv region, mykolaiv region they fired missiles from the territory of belarus , the strategic aviation of russia launched missiles from the territory of the russian federation. well, the calibres were fired at the black sea fleet from the waters of the black sea all over the territory of ukraine , more than 20 missiles were fired this morning alone, meanwhile, the occupiers continue to lose manpower and equipment in ukraine, at the beginning of the great war, the russians had already lost 40,230 people, 1,742 tanks, 397 armored vehicles, 894, and these are leria systems, 256 rocket launchers, 117 anti-aircraft weapons

of defense 222 aircraft 190 helicopters 2832 units of automotive equipment 50 e-e 15 ships and boats 175 cruise missiles 729 drones 73 units of special equipment about belarus as an aid to russian terrorism gas blackmail from russia regarding europe the expected telephone conversation between blinken and lavrov today my guest is oleksandr hara, the director of the center for military legal research, is a diplomat. good day, mr. oleksandr. i wish you good health and thank you for participating in our good day program. yuryivna, the center of defense strategies is... you mean an expert, but it's not as important as it was. i think that from an expert to a director is one step ago. i hope i'm not mistaken somewhere. so, early in the morning on july 28, ukraine

was hit from the territory of belarus. currently, it is known about the arrival of nine missiles. on the territory of the honchariv community of the chernihiv region, which fell into the forest massif, today the enemy launched an attack on one of the infrastructure facilities in the vyshgorod district of the kyiv region, the general staff of the armed forces of ukraine says that the attack on the kyiv region caliber missiles from the waters of the black sea, the most important thing here is that in the current format, in this morning, belarus is actively using the territory of belarus again to attack ukrainian territory, and i understand that belarus is preparing a plan for the future offensive of the russian army, a possible e-e from the northern m-m border from the northern front of ukraine, taking into account what is unfolding now,

how is it unfolding, should ukraine continue to maintain diplomatic relations with the republic belarus, which is actually an accomplice of the russian occupiers during the current war. well, you actually answered your question. i would like to remind our viewers of two political and legal documents . there is armed aggression, and this definition was transferred to our law on defense in 1992, and the actual provision of one's territory to a third state for the purpose of aggression is already a fact of aggression, that is, on february 24, 22, even if there would not be a single belarusian soldier on the territory of ukraine with weapons. belarus has already become an aggressor country. the second point is that they often

manipulate it. well, belarusians first of all, but sometimes even our media say that belarus does not seem to have recognized the illegal annexation of crimea . belarus was among the 10 putin's friends in 2014, in march, on march 27, when the vote was taken, it means the resolution on the territorial integrity of ukraine in words. well, we know lukashenko is a liar, he definitely said that he supports ukraine there and all the same, i want to end this war as soon as possible, but in fact, from the very beginning, he was absolutely on the wrong side, on the other hand, there is truth and injustice and international law, and it was strange to me under the previous president when they told me why it was not necessary to develop diplomatic relations with russia the federation supported a proxy war in donbas during the illegal annexation of crimea, all these republics were created on the territory of donetsk

luhansk, and now i am surprised that relations with belarus are not actually developing. if before, well as soon as the war started, it became clear that belarus became such an intermediary. i am not talking about the so-called minsk agreements - it is a shameful thing that we agreed in minsk to negotiate with the russians the parameters of ending the armed aggression of the russian federation, that is a separate topic. and the fact that belarus actually became such an intermediary for trade with the russian federation and suppliers to ukraine, well, at that time, extremely important critical things, for example, diesel for our military, but i 'm sorry, quite a lot has already arrived since the 14th year it is time to re-rent to other suppliers of critical resources for ukraine, primarily energy. that is precisely why any arguments now in favor of maintaining relations with belarus are

simply completely irrational. we cannot consider these relations positive because diplomacy is needed in order to solve problems and somehow improve relations - this is not the case with belarus. we cannot perform more precisely our ukrainian mother in minsk cannot perform such an important function as conveying the truth about this war to the belarusians, since there are no mass media in belarus, there are a lot of propaganda tools, and certainly our diplomats cannot fulfill the function of proving such an opinion in meetings with the opposition or, well, with the general public, because of course they are in the regime, let's say so tough counter-intelligence and definitely that anyone who remains in favor of belarus on freedom, they are exposed to danger if they meet with ukrainian diplomats. that is why this is also a point the consular point also disappears. by the

way, with the russian federation, all these eight years, since our consuls can protect the interests of our citizens exclusively using the law enforcement and legal system of ukraine , stay again. neither russians nor belarus are legally democratic states. therefore, these tools are unavailable to us. that's exactly why anya's consular presence, anya's diplomatic presence in belarus, i just don't see the point and i don't understand why we haven't severed these relations so far. by the way, oleksandr, oleksandr, what i want to say is that on june 30, after syria recognized the so-called independence of the so-called lpr and dnr, the ukrainian side announced the severance of diplomatic relations with the syrian side. well, they introduced trade embargoes and economic sanctions against syrian legal and physical of people, one of the leaders of the so

-called dpr, denys pushylin, was on the territory of belarus yesterday. he was received there by the official belarusian authorities. belarus has not yet officially recognized the so-called lpr and dpr, but it is obvious it's a matter of time, but we don't see any sanctions against belarusians starting from february 24, 2022 , nor against legal entities, not to mention physical persons, and they were right about the visa regime, because from july 1, 2022, for russians er, the visa regime for entering the territory of the ukrainian state has been introduced. does this mean that the ukrainian authorities still do not want to create certain problems , especially for the belarusians, not the self-proclaimed president of belarus? and for the belarusians, who theoretically and practically can become our allies in the struggle

against the russian occupiers. well, and against the belarusian leader. well, you know, for this , first of all, it was necessary to support the movement of the belarusians that we observed and with joy when they protested against the illegal and falsified results of the elections of the president of the republic of belarus . we could also support the oppositionists who are now, unfortunately, they were forced to leave and are not on the territory of ukraine, there is poland, lithuania, and other countries, of course, that would be correct, because you know from the very beginning do you remember very well that the orange revolution and then the revolution of dignity was a bone in the throat of the last dictator of europe and he constantly talked about it by the way, and unfortunately, when we

looked at belarus, we elected the so-called pragmatism, but we see how it is useful to us , that is, in fact, this is this country, and this is a tyrant, let's say so, he returned to us and under the face of what it actually always was, and we tried to do it like this. we didn't want to notice. therefore, on the one hand, i understand and definitely we have to support the belarusians, of course, there are certain signals, for example, the same ones, let’s say damage or sabotage. what are the citizens of belarus doing on the railways in other places, who are trying to protest or actually not give the russians a chance at a preferential time? to sort through and use the territory here to carry out aggression. but on the other hand, we cannot. well, not to react. political and legal, you know, was very strange at one time. this is our agreement

on the sea of ​​azov in 2004, and the ukrainian government popera and this one got from this agreement and said that well , it is necessary, because it will remove the sea of ​​azov from international law, and actually then the russians will cut off our oxygen and will not give us the opportunity to export uh, that means comrades from mariupol, berdyansk, and of course that, well, it was nonsense. it was it's a matter of time, when the russians did it , starting from may 2018, they began to quietly suppress our azov region, and it seems to me that this is a constant, such a catch-up, we are doing something in hindsight, we are smart, uh, not without understanding it that there is a certain trend and we know very well what russia is and what lukashenka's belarus is, and therefore it seems to me that we need to be more proactive and in support of it i mean and from

the point of view of the introduction of e-e visa restrictions , you can introduce visa restrictions and make relaxation for those who speak out against the free, that is , uh, chased in belarus by this regime for the oppositionists who remained there, public activists and other people. for the rest, well, it is absolutely clear, and to be honest, i don’t know. i don’t have any statistics at all. i do not know is it at all possible to cross the border with ukraine from the side of belarus? i think it is impossible. since we are in the last war, and the airspace is not closed either, that is, they cannot come to us, let's say yes, by airplanes. actually , the theoretical question remains that they can get to us from the territory of third countries, but this can also be regulated. well, i found information that on february 26 there was a decision of the cabinet

of ministers of ukraine, which decided to temporarily close the crossing points across the state border with russia and belarus, at the same time ukrainians who are in russia and belarus and want to return will be able to go to ukraine without any obstacles, but we are talking not only about its practical content, but also about certain rituals that are when one the country is subjected to aggression against which the aggression is subjected and it is a country that must act in accordance with wartime because it is clear that if rockets from the belarusian state arrive from the territory of the belarusian state, then the belarusians and the proclaimed president of belarus must understand that it can also fly there, but during those five months of the war, we are watching how russia

and belarus basically do this without reservation , that is, they fire at us, but we in response, uh, there were several strikes on the airfield in millerova, if i'm not mistaken, and uh, something is flying in the border uh, and it's not clear who is firing at whom , can ukraine, in this situation, be prepared to strike uh, in the answer to what can this lead to, i ask this question because uh, i think that this in the morning about belarus as a possible target there are russian occupiers, russian planes, russian chants, millions of ukrainians were thinking, and they still don't have answers to these questions, which i actually don't have, that's why i'm asking, well, from a legal point of view, definitely because these countries are aggressors and definitely military facilities on their territories are a legitimate target ah, the question is somewhat different, do

we have such means, if we are talking about border artillery, and of course, even ordinary artillery in them, speaking of uh, these um, uh, uh, what katsaps like heimers, it’s free, it would be possible to do something to do if we are talking about targets more in the depths of the russian federation or belarus, it is more difficult here , the maximum thing that can get us there is point u hmm, there is a 120 km radius of action, but definitely we remember that the russians have tightened air defense systems and on the territory of belarus itself, and therefore the question is whether it is possible to do this effectively in order to hit the target, there are certainly bairaktars who can do it there in belgorod. we can only speculate because it seems to me

very correctly, our military, er, they do not confirm or deny such facts, and whether it was ukrainian helicopters that struck belgorod, or it happened there by itself, yes, and i think this is a very correct approach. and about other things, well, literally the other day, aspin, there was such a security forum, you should have the national security adviser of the united states, jaxelivan, actually explained his approaches to the russian federation and why ukraine will not receive these operational-tactical missiles to these hymars that can hit up to 30% of kilometers because he does not want the third force of that war and of course that um as part of the agreements with the united states when we received hymars with a range of 80 km there is something that we will not strike on the territory of the russian federation. i don't

know if belarus was mentioned there, but i think that here we will say that it is definitely a deterrent in relation to american weapons. what other weapons are ukrainian or turkish ? on the one hand, let's say that it is clear that belarus is hesitating , lukashenko does not want to attack ukraine, because he is definitely a scumbag, but he is a fool and he understands that it is not actually russia during this time that has been able to achieve any strategic goals some serious operational goals, and therefore just now to join this invasion, well, which will not exactly be successful, and this makes sense, but on the other hand , it may not be asked in due time, that is, there is such a hesitation. and that is definitely why our political military leadership, it calculates that

, for example, if an attack is made on the territory of belarus against belarusian propaganda, it can show that it is an attack on belarus, not a defense . in order to legitimize the entry into this war. but on the other hand, you know, wait there or there are 12 battalion-tactical groups. well, at least in the open access they say about such a number of belarusian military that has already been formed, which is being prepared they are preparing even these body-backs, what are they called, they haven’t bought these bags for uh, for corpses yet, and that is to say, to hope that they well, they definitely won’t go if we don’t strike , that’s the second time. it seems to me, well, that’s a big mistake our american partners, first of all, that they give us certain means. well, including there, they

promise to give air defense. but they say that it is not necessary to strike in russian territory, so it is more reasonable to strike at the accumulation and strength and means of russian along the border or on the platforms that are striking ukraine, if america does not want to create the prerequisites for the third world war and does not want to close the sky over ukraine from russian missile strikes, then why not provide such means that would help us hit the platforms from which such strikes are carried out, and by the way i always say this if we talk about crimea, and crimea and the city of sevastopol is not recognized by the world community as russian territory, the black sea fleet is located there, which, in principle, is the main such fist that hits us every day since the 24th numbers, first of all, caliber missiles, these missiles and these means were primarily created not for ukraine, but actually in order to threaten western

europe, and therefore if we are given such means that will allow us to sink not only moscow, but all these submarines of the varshavyanka class, missile boats, missile ships of the black sea fleet, we will solve the issue of the security of our cities and the loss of our civilians and civilian infrastructure, and we will indirectly help the europeans to protect themselves from a future conflict with russia the federation is also in principle relevant for belarusians, because what the russians want to create there is a fist directed against us now, but mostly against lithuania. the territory of belarus, including those capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. and this is not an unconditional threat to us, but it is definitely a threat, first of all, to, say,

central and eastern europe there, and in principle it will also reach western europe, so if we we will clear their territory of such means, we will show that they cannot actually attack the cities in ukrainian without orders, it seems to me that this would be in the interests of our western partners, and to be honest, i do not see any escalation between the west and the russian federation, well, it is obvious what the west thinks the world, and in particular the united states of america, about the current situation, the development of the lower situation, we will already know after the telephone conversation between anthony blinken and sergey lavrov, such a telephone conversation is planned for today, we know that starting from 24 in february, there were no contacts between the states of the united states of america and the minister of foreign affairs of ukraine and, in general, russia, forgive me, and in general, and washington and moscow, well

, practically did not communicate from the moment when putin started a big war against ukraine. what do those who expect these talks say that the pancakes are not lavrop will talk about the release of two illegally detained citizens of the united states of america in the russian federation, vala willana and basketball player brittney greiner as well the subject of the export of ukrainian grain through the black sea, eh, it is obvious, eh, the conversation between lavrov and blinkin is not limited to these two issues, because eh, it is unlikely that washington has my attention and the situation in ukraine, eh, what can we expect from this conversation, and can it be assumed that moscow some god is going with washington and washington is with moscow because everyone understands that it is necessary to stop the hostilities in ukraine,

how to agree on something and get out of this situation . let's put it this way, so that russia e saved as the west of the face of a-a ukraine says got the victory well, i listened to blinkin's press conference yesterday and it seems to me that the two main topics are actually what the american citizens have already called it and there is internal political media pressure on this administration to release these people, they are talking about the possibility of an exchange for mr. but who was sentenced to 25 years for arms trade and he is a fundamentally important person for putin, for his regime, they tried to extract it in various ways earlier and the second issue is grain, although damn he expressed such skepticism he says that he will definitely hear

from lavrov that western sanctions mean other things. they are the reason for the rise in food prices and this impending famine, not the actual armed aggression of the russian federation. moreover, they will tell you, he will tell you about this special military operation. that is, i do not think that blinkino expects some serious discussions and assurances from lavrov. moreover, we perfectly understand that lavrov is not the person who makes decisions or can influence mr. putin, he is an ordinary highly qualified propagandist to propagandists and those who travel around the world or speak there say how white and fluffy russia is. more precisely, he said in this very cool bbc interview that we are such as we are and we have nothing to do with this , they will also talk about the war, but blinkin he immediately said that the united states supports ukraine, including by providing arms there

to 8 billion, the total figure has already reached a and the purpose of this is that ukraine should be in much better conditions for negotiations with the russian federation, and this shows that the united states states for them, it is fundamental not to put pressure on ukraine in the matter of when and under what conditions we can talk, but on the other hand, he absolutely clearly understands that the demands expressed by the kremlin are simply absurd and absolutely unacceptable. also, i i think we can say that he is a diplomat, of course, but he is definitely. he has access to uh, spread information and you don't understand that such a very interesting moment is happening right now, especially in the south of ukraine, when we actually , with the help of heimers and with the help of heroism of ukrainians, we are creating the prerequisites in order to

liberate these, well, at least kherson, and then throw the russians into the sea there, and in the east, the situation is much more complicated, but let’s definitely say yes. i think they are definitely sure that what is called this steam from a steam locomotive this russian one has already come out. and somehow it is not possible to somehow escalate something, to put more pressure on us, to seize something from them. that is why, most likely, now is not the most profitable time for ukraine to hope for some kind of victories, on the contrary, russia is interested because now the maximum of what she captured and still holds on to. she will only lose people and equipment, of course, they do not count on this, but still, this means that the military plans and military goals that they can implement are limited. well, the second territory , especially in the south, is key for them, and it

seems to me very correct that our military leadership actually concentrated there and there and it is somewhat easier because the shoulder of supply, especially after we destroyed the bridge, it narrowed and definitely that for us it was to secure mykolaiv, odessa and definitely ensure our presence in that, let's say yes, in that geographical location, because during this time, here i am well, i think that all pragmatic people understand that we cannot liberate the entire territory of the occupied russian federation and donetsk, luhansk, unfortunately, and also the autonomous republic of the republic crimea, but we need to control the access to the isthmus and be closer to the crimea in order not to give water there and to prepare, including military means of liberating our territory, that is why i definitely i think that's it