acquire a draft of a peace agreement with russia as a state responsible for the international crimes it has committed, and the modalities of this responsibility are clearly written out, and the specificity of responsibility for aggression is that the aggressor state must not only compensate for all economic losses that suffered by the state that was directly affected by the aggression, as well as those states that will participate in the age of aggression. i mean the state of the anti-putin coalition, that is, the states suffered losses using sanctions, economic losses against aid losses suffered by the states of the rande podilskyi coalition supporting ukrainian refugees in the west, and all

these losses must be compensated by russia as a state and aggression, this is in addition to the fact that they, uh, that russia must compensate for the economic losses they suffered ukraine, and in addition, the model of the responsibility of the aggressor state, it provides, well, this is international law, this is not my invention , it provides for the limitation of the sovereignty and international legal subjectivity of the state of aggression what does this mean, it means that there may be provisions in the peace treaty that oblige the aggressor state to hide its armed forces, not to deprive it of the right not to equip the armed forces with weapons of mass destruction and weapons prohibited by international humanitarian law, especially as we

see today that russia without any er restrictions and er would be violating all norms and rights and morals uses those types of weapons that are prohibited by international humanitarian law and uses these types of er weapons against the civilian population, you understand we thank you. thank you. we apologize. we need to finish the broadcast already . i think your favorite part will follow. dear tv viewers, when vitaly portnikov will already answer your questions, so

wait, in order to quickly help with back pain, you need a powerful action against pain dolaren gel comes to the rescue and relieves pain tolerance gel strength against pain some creatures hunt washing machines and we are from ukraine and insure our machines online at hotline -finance the first place still goes to war war and our victory seven days a week from monday to sunday seven different spheres of

human activity sports culture politics eight presenters of express - journalists experts opinion leaders in in real time about the most relevant events through the prism of war every day author's projects on espresso duties of the vpu internally displaced persons have both rights and duties indicate only reliable information when receiving a certificate of benefits and guarantees provided for internally displaced persons inform about changes in life circumstances if you change your place of residence, report it within 10 days at the new place of arrival, your certificate will be replaced if you decide to return to the place you left residence contact the social

protection body of the national people's republic of ukraine or an authorized person of the local council no later than three days before departure or within three days after returning to the abandoned permanent place of residence . defense day and night desperately and confidently they swim the way to our victory with armor tank troops the pride of the armed forces of ukraine we continue the political club program on the

espresso tv channel angelika season vitaly portnikov with you so let's move on to the next topics where is vitaly portnikov will give us his professional comments and opinions about each of them . we will start with the general diplomatic solution to the russian-ukrainian war, is it possible, after all, and about security guarantees for ukraine directly because it was presented by the head of the president andriy yarmak and former nato secretary general anders god rasmussen, these are the recommendations regarding the kyiv treaty on security for the strategic partnership of ukraine and the state guarantors . the communiqué of march 29 is significantly different from these guarantees, because then we undertook to give up, well, even becoming a nuclear state. so now we have given up with the budapest memorandum

, we have given up on the e strategy to nato, in fact, in that communique, everything is already the opposite, you know so well for ukraine, it consists in the fact that the sanctions against russia have been presented, the signatory countries cannot cancel until reparations have been paid to all courts, until the troops are withdrawn, it is clear, and we are also obliged to provide and funds for the defense budget and to train our military and there are very, very many rules written there . in your opinion, this is realistic. in general, i think that the istanbul stonewall and this kyiv security one , what do they call it, a convention or some other word ? they were, to call a spade a spade , they just don't want to use the word memorandum so that there isn't some kind of comparison with the budapest one. well, it's mom, that's the essence of it, they're similar in that it's our wish, you and i don't know

by the way, they did not know during this istanbul victory. and with someone else, you agreed on this. you can write from the western experts to suggest that it is absolutely obvious that every government, especially now the government of ukraine, and it is simply a popular government, can involve in such work any the number of former western politicians and well-known experts because from the point of view of reputation it is just good to work with kyiv now it increases your shares in the future of course so does political business ambition if a person wants to be a member of boards of directors of some leading western companies, and this is better than at the time when these people wanted, well, i mean, not once, monsoon , in general, to bring down poroshenko, people wanted, say, to be members of the boards of directors of russian companies, it did not affect their reputation in any way. and now it is completely different that's why i trust the integrity of these people and their good intentions. i have no doubts, but the essence of such things is always important

when decisions are made related to the wishes of other countries, we can offer to whom whatever, whatever, the son of diplomacy in general , volodymyr zelenskyi, his team has been trying for the last two years to change it, the meaning of this does not change in closed negotiations, that is, the presentation of an open document - this is very good, and it looks beautiful, you can put up soffits, you can give a lot an interview can be invited to some journalists associated with you so that they take a comment from you, you can write dissection articles of reality from this no longer becomes reality, it consists in something else that we saw that the united the united states and great britain, they are in finland. shvets essentially provided a security guarantee for the period between the submission of their application to donato and joining nato. this is

, in fact, a really concrete guarantee. russia will attack us, we will defend ourselves, and they can simply provide us with a certain amount of such and other weapons. the question arises if, after all, we will be aware that for russia the conquest of the territory of ukraine is such an exaction. thing and that the russians are considered their territory, that they are not going to stop before that, you just have to sit down and count how long he has endured such situations and we will find some kind of war yes. in principle, we will no longer have a population capable of resistance, it will either be destroyed or expelled or will be lost. if you want the will to such a war, it's just possible and not like that. israel, in principle , endured five such wars, and ukraine will endure the same amount, we don't know, the main thing is that it's not related to guarantees

security, security guarantees, they consist of a simple thing. so when vladimir putin will know for sure that if he presses the nuclear button in this situation, the answer will not come from us, because there are two states in the world that can really destroy each other, the united states and the russian federation, these are two in the middle of nowhere, everyone else plays the role of extras. in this theater, we can win military victories over russia at will, clear our entire territory, destroy even the possibility of the russians attacking this territory, but if in the kremlin they will make these decisions, you know, they are fed up with us. let's destroy kyiv after all. at this moment, we can't do anything. kyiv disappears from the political map of the world, whether it's kyiv or lviv or kharkiv. it does n't matter what or what military object it is, and after that, it all starts. another life if it turns out that the united states is not going to respond to this and they just say that china should

introduce sanctions against russia wait for a new nuclear bomb in a week because of sim and nagas china will still support yes yes until which these people will reach the level of idiocy. we do not know whether china will support russia in the event of its use of nuclear weapons. i am not ready to speak here for all the bells and whistles. nuclear weapons are such a thing that changes politics fundamentally, even beyond recognition . president biden is absolutely right-wing. this risk and then i apologize why do you even have to check it didn't want to mean this is a security guarantee everything else is pr for security guarantees that is the answer by the united states is a guarantee of security united states or great britain should act with ukraine according to the same scenario according to which they acted with finland, if the united states says that they are not ready to give such guarantees to ukraine because they do not want a direct conflict with the russian federation,

then consider that ukraine will fight with the russian federation or to its the death or death of the russian federation and this is such a reality that one of these states will remain on the political map of the world. i am not even convinced that i risked it. the russian federation of russia can also there may be some kind of internal conflict , collapse, humanitarian disaster, but you just have to understand that such a long war between two peoples claiming the same territory usually leads to the collapse of both, and the task of civilized education is to stop it with such security guarantees that will not give russia's ability to fight in the future is actually cheaper and safer than provoking the continuation of these military conflicts to the last russian or to the last ukrainian . unfortunately, he does not have and does not have an understanding of how to get out of this situation. and i have such an understanding. i

say once again that we must convince the west that it is much safer, because once again i assure you that as soon as russia decides to actually use nuclear weapons, no one will know how to get out of this situation, in principle, because the question will always arise. mozgov such articles will there not be or will it be limited to some other actions? it is a good question, the truth is that everyone will ask themselves and there may be a large number of such questions. vinata and the united states will believe that in the event of the use of nuclear weapons by russia, they will be responsible and we would after

a nuclear strike on ukraine receive a strategic or tactical nuclear strike on moscow this will definitely increase the security of the united states or european countries i am not sure, that is why i say the best thing to do in such a situation is not to lead to the fact that tens of millions of people will disappear from the face of the earth in a few weeks, and after them a large number of states and peoples may disappear and never appear again. the reality would be to prevent such a situation at all, any security guarantees they should be aimed at preventing the situation of human deaths in general, the function of any government and any policy is that wars are not allowed, i always said that a government that allows war is bankrupt, and this applies to any administration that is now talking to a ukrainian, if we do not have these guarantees , if we do not join nato, we will not go bankrupt because we are already at war, what are these guarantees working for us? they were not given because they would endanger collapse and disappearance. in fact

, they are compatriots. it seems to me that this is just such a simple alphabet. and how do we convince them? you say that the ukrainian authorities now have to convince the west with what arguments? it seems that they are talking about it, it is possible that the united states is not ready yet, but i see people who are beginning to realize the global danger. do you not think so, let's say that the speaker of the house of representatives of the united states congress, nancy pilotov, who was in kyiv, who was in taiwan , and now where is she in yerevan? the moment that she begins to understand the global nature of the danger because she travels with the zeal of a 20-year-old student and not an 82-year-old politician because she realizes that she is obvious as a responsible person wants to leave a peaceful land to his grandchildren, this is logical, and i think that there will be more and more such people, and i think that such people should be relied

on. about the fact that the creation of rz security measures will not solve this problem, this is a huge problem and, as we heard from mr. vitaliy, it is impossible. i think that it was not implemented in this form, and then again, there is no question of the most important thing in these istanbul e-e guarantees it's also very strange, on the one hand, we refused nato and talked about neutral status, but on the other hand, we invited our security guarantors of russia, china now has no russia, no china in these documents, we will leave china, the question arises. can the west provide security from russia itself. if russia does not

guarantee us security and the west does not want a direct conflict with it, then what is the essence of security? russia is not the guarantor of our security, but the west is the guarantor of our security, but there is no intention to act against the russian federation in why security then? how to feel this security, let's say security to finland. i feel because i mean that the first russian tank will cross the border of finland, it will not cross, but i am simply saying that it will meet with the united states of america, this tank is conventionally speaking with power. feel the security of poland clean, they are protected by the fifth article. and where is this security in the fact that there will be more weapons? of course, yes , yes, and now they give me weapons, it's already hot, it's already a guarantee, but anyway we decide this ourselves the problem, right up to the moment, let's say,

putin doesn't think he can raise rates, but even when the shelling of civilian infrastructure begins, we're already wondering what will happen tomorrow. is playing with ukraine in such pseudo-special operations that he thinks to himself that this is not a war for him, the armed forces are special operations , but in russia they are already starting to talk about war, russia is already starting to talk about mobilization about self- mobilization, recruiting a criminal, we understand that they don't stop, and if they don't stop , we need these security guarantees that will stop them, to whom they will clearly say that no, you won't get anything here, you will only lose, i would also like to discuss two aspects in this topic with you, vitaly, an average ukrainian woman, what do they usually say putin will die and this is a guarantee of supposed security for ukraine, but

this is not the case, because in the russian federation, first of all , the population is imperialists, and secondly, everyone. so far, at least the opposition politicians do not look like democrats either. well, i think that against the price politicians, we can't say if this is real positioners, the question is not whether they look like democrats or not. they are not going to use force, i am not interested at all. to be honest, what mr. navalny thinks about the right of ukraine to join the european union or nato is important to me that he is not going to to convince the ukrainians not to go somewhere with the help of the russian army, russia has the absolute right not to supply someone with energy carriers, as it is currently doing from europe, tell ukraine, you know, we

will not supply gas through your gas transportation system, you lose billions of dollars in it, in general, in any sovereign state many rights, some rights. she can speculate. she may not like it. you can say that it is our right to join nato, and your task will be to preserve our transit status, but these are all conversations that take place at the level of diplomats since we talked until 2014 with nerves scandals with intrigues with bribery with corruption with the invention of some intermediate companies that created special mechanisms for the supply of this gas and corrupted the ukrainian political summer , all this was not one of the russian tanks on our land of russian missiles over our cities , the russian politician who clearly believes that russia cannot use force in relations with other states, that it can convince other states only at the table, is important to me

negotiations where, like any civilized state, we have such a guarantee, because politicians usually act on the record, let's say to the electorate, if the russians want to destroy the ukrainians, and now we see at least from their violent reactions when they fly towards us , they still want to, i think that relative to the russians - the use of the word electorate is also to a certain extent political, which suggests that you did not live in the russian federation because if there was a real electorate in russia, no real electorate would have elected in 2000 the president of russia volodymyr volodymyrovych and that says it all, well, how come the ukrainians chose the television comedian volodymyr zelensky as their president there, what is the difference between the russians who were elected by the guts . all his life you can

say young zeros young young people have seen zelenskyi on television screens as much as they have 100 questions in that they want to elect zelenskyi they do not want to elect correctly the television actor of the president is correct, it is already a matter of their choice. they have every right to decide what they consider to be a necessary issue . i mean something else, they at least choose a person who is not an avatar for them, but they like him and liked him the day before yesterday and i can watch it tomorrow - this is a known person for them. he is everywhere in advertising on the tv screen, anywhere, and they vote for a person they know very well. he is not a politician. she says that we know. he is a television comedian. they say: we know, and who is vladimir putin? i would like to ask the people who voted, there was even such a question, do you remember the fuck with mr. putin because you russians voted for anonymously and elected anonymously as the president of the russian federation. i remember very well the memories of one of my friends

who was commissioned to write a book interviewing putin like this a small book and she deciphered this book. it was an early putin, who in general, let me tell you, used one literary word in a sentence, and they and we, as an anecdote, repeated this story that there is a mother, a very intelligent woman, who came from coffee and croissants were brought when she was working and heard a recording on the tape recorder, and it struck her as interesting because she had never heard such a thing in her world. well, this is the real putin. well, no one has ever seen him, but it means that this electorate is because boris pokalevich yeltsin that's what boris mykolayovych yeltsin said, because his rating at that time was 5%."

we all the time accept i am very surprised by this, we perceive putin's departure from power approximately as the death of stalin i am surprised that stalin died in 1953 god knows when there were people who were at all adults when stalin died, there are practically none now , these people who are still there, they will be children then, but this magical event simply affects even our analytical abilities, we for some reason believe that here is putin, and it will be march of the 53rd year, and these heirs of his will come to the podium of the mausoleum they will say that now there will be a peaceful coexistence of peoples that it is putin himself who is evil and not the collective putin who

surrounds him. immediately, but it was definitely an unchangeable evil for good, then we all saw the historical death of leonid brezhnev, which is much closer to us. it is certainly not putin, but this person led a war in afghanistan, and when she died, her successors were yuri andropov , konstantin chernenko, then mikhail gorbachev, for a long time this the war did not end, gorbachev nevertheless dared at some point during his tenure as the president of the russian union that at that time the head of the verkhovna rada, the head of the starost, would withdraw these troops, but it took several years, let's imagine that russia will really drift in this direction , what do we have to fight all the time is to conquer while there is president patrushev, then president medvedev, and then some president valya matvienko will still

decide that it is necessary to withdraw troops from ukraine thank you very much valentina ivanovna, but i am sorry , i do not think that is this a way out, or should they break away from us during putin's life and work, it is desirable right now, because this is the way out. it is for putin that they must understand that they cannot come here, because if they don't understand it, it will always be putin's temptation will remain. you see. well, how about gorbachev, the soviet union collapsed, the bastard brought troops from afghanistan. and if our dear lady and yury volodymyrovycha, especially yuliyovich mandrupa, were alive, then he would have won in afghanistan and the soviet union would not have collapsed . i want to convince you that if biandropov had withdrawn the troops from afghanistan, the effect would have been much greater than during gorbachev's time. soviet and russian patriots would no longer explain this as treason , they would understand the real level of degradation

the soviet society androport did not bring it out because he wanted to preserve this empire despite all the political laws and this is an important moment. i understand that everyone very seriously connects the situation with the personality of putin, but i see all these people with their views and their attitude towards life how is it so obvious a continuation of putin or can even putin be a continuation of them? again, he is anonymous, he no longer came to power because he was the leader of this clan. and they nominated him. then they all gathered around him precisely because he corresponds to their view and this is a completely different mechanism for creating an environment than when you are a leader, you understand. there is some gorbachev, he sits in the field of the bureau. he is the leader and he then selects for himself people with whom he worked, namely zelensky. he comes and finds people from his quarter whose life knows he was an administrator, they

were there somewhere and he creates his entourage from them and then, well, i apologize, well, his the highest level of real e-e connections, the vice mayor of st. petersburg for a short time, with whom , that is, in fact, some random people who there were with a failed cooperative, this is not a joke, who worked with him at the leningrad branch of the fsb, who were with him in some judo gang in the team, well, this is not the same and it is not the same system when he is the leader of these people because they the patroshok was his boss and he was not the boss of the patrubsho, as you understand from uhorbachov , zelensky didn’t have anything with his associates, he didn’t take some people who managed him, you understand, and they all work together to prove it, so this is all an important moment and who he became nunem putin we are now everyone sees the dictator as a criminal. it seems to me that this is always the case with us. to be honest, they are simple