the closest well, let's assume that there are several thousand people who are under him and the establishment and there are people from below. i think that all of them are from the establishment. well, almost , let's say 90%. i leave 10. they understand everything. these are people who have been accumulating money for tens of years without giving up, real estate, mobility, money, airplanes, etc. and so on, these are all rich people, these governors, it may not be all of them deputies of the upper lower house, the cabinet of ministers, deputy ministers of ministers, and so on and so on and so

on, they understand everything, they understand everything, they understand that he is no longer an alpha male, that he does not have the advantage of victories and only fear, only animal . when putin is in power, there is a habit of that fear and fear itself. well, because when from time to time people fall out of windows or poison themselves or end their lives in some other way, and we see that many very rich people end their lives just like that the last 7-8 months they understand everything, they are afraid from below, where the people are, those who are ardent anti-ukrainians, i would even call them anti -future people, these are people who comfortably live in

yesterday, who are used to yesterday, they are used to such an established situation when everything is fine more or less, you can buy bread, you can spread butter , you can put cheese on top, and you can take a loan from the bank. well, you can buy a car in a shorter time, but these people also share, there are swamps. as always, this is a traditional history. we don't touch anyone and everything is fine and i love putin and stay away from me and--and i don't know anything есть другой how is this есть есть другай точка but they have some sayings that we lived, they trained for 8 months, who is against putin and these are young people, these are intellectual circles - these are people with a high education, not always. i am not saying that only if you have a high education, then you are such an anti-putin, no, a-a. that's

what you mean about putin's people, and these are usually small towns, villages, people who are not people who have other sources of information are those who watch tv russian here they are. i think that about 20% are against putin, about 25% are for putin. maybe 30 and the rest is a swamp that is a swamp which means no no they don't need anything if there is bread and butter there is good and everything is fine ideology can explain but it will take a lot of time that's why this one about putin's people about putin's people arises in russia paternalism is natural, now they will give me some aha aha, i have to tell everyone that aslom, where there will be no

connection between us, but there will be igor and he will take away whom we often see here, he is a professor of new york university, i.e. washington will be canceled instead of washington, there will be new york, go on, my ears will tell me when we will already have a connection with the united states. those around putin obviously understand everything and the defeats at the front and the isolation of russia, i.e. the total and impossibility of development and closed markets and closed supply of scientifically capable elements for any fucking machine, plane, equipment, wherever it goes there is no end to the missiles. we spoke with mykola knyazhytskyi today. he says that we have to

wait until the missiles run out and they won't create new ones. in short, there are many problems, everyone understands everything, and the main thing is that, you know, putin has started this metaphysics. i will finish the conversation now, then we will let's talk about igor. i, we, that physical moment that i just feel because i have been in this profession for a very long time and i remember the soviet union, i remember the transition from the soviet union to the non-soviet and non- union, but every politician has a moment when something he didn't do anything, he didn't succeed, and i'll show it to the older generation. the younger generation knows this. there was a period when you didn't speak against gorbachev. no one would listen to you. you said that you were an idiot and gorbachev was god. then gorbachev began to decline. and they didn't talk about how he would give out $10,000 to each of them. they would still say a fool and a goat and an idiot

and a bastard and the age of yeltsin came and then so that no one told yeltsin what a bad person he was, no one wanted to listen no, you are bad and yeltsin is beautiful and then the period did not come when ueltsin did not do yeltsin is still a fool, now putin's era is over, when he didn't do it, everyone clapped their hands and said what a great man, and now if he didn't do it, everyone will say he's an idiot, well, not all the swamp will be silent, supporters will support, but the number of people who doubt will grow on the mountain already doubts in the valley, not all of the people still doubt but every day there will be more and more doubts because there are no victories. so ihor eisenberg, professor of the university of jura, i hope he is already there, they tell me that i see already now i see mr. igor good health, mr.

igor, good health, mr. mykola and all the audience and the press, yes, i have one for you . well, a fiery passion, as they say in classic russian literature, i seem to constantly put the first question in the first place one in even yesterday , there was a discussion here with italy, portnikov, and there was a discussion with you about what to do with russia, is there any marshall plan or morgansau plan, and these are two different plans, the marshall plan - this is help, and the marginal plan, which was before the marshall plan, dismemberment the combination of the investigation of germany, which was still fascist at the time, this is the plan of the 43rd year and the reduction of germany to an agricultural country with a super weak army, police, etc.,

etc. so similar. and today we see that if russia remains a nuclear weapon, it remains a player and an aggressive player, what to do with it, there are some intellectual reflections in the united states on this topic, to put it very nicely, i have not seen any such reflections to do with this, that is, how to rid russia of nuclear weapons . there is such an opinion that if russia loses this war, and if it does lose, it will be weak, it will

be greatly weakened, that is, we will be very weak conventional armed forces, they will remain nuclear weapons, but on the one hand, the conventional armed forces of the nation will be greatly weakened, on the other hand, the economy will be greatly weakened uh, so that you don't say anything sanctions are heard and will continue to work, and if russia, uh, let’s say its end, ukraine has liberated all its territory, if russia has the desire to rejoin the world, that is, to become, well, so to speak, normal, put it on the way to being normal, then western countries will be able set her terms, under what conditions and will aid be provided, under what conditions will the sanctions be lifted, under what conditions will she be able to

gain access to western technology again, and i think that hmm, the united states and western countries should don't miss this moment because, let's say, after the collapse of the soviet union, the western leaders, all of them, the entire collective action of the united states, that is, the smallest country of the european union, they absolutely believed that now russia has become a normal ukraine, and they helped in all kinds of ways, everyone also contributed to they made a lot of concessions and even included it in the big seven, which probably eventually became the big eight the country has become normal, of course, it was not

possible and could not be trusted, i still have a question for you, i apologize . the state department is such a philosophy to accept e p - to solve the solution to look for a solution as the problem comes in. when you say this, i think about it in ukraine. well, maybe because missiles are flying around, what will happen to russia you you say that there is no such discussion in america, that is, i understand correctly that this is the answer to the question of why we did not add some weapons to the war, that the americans are sitting and this is the philosophy of the american slaving, that if the bombs start going to kyiv, we are going to take weapons. when the collapse of russia begins, we

will start talking about it to think in advance, we just never thought well, such and such a norm of behavior, i also understand it, she has the right to live, it hurts ukrainians because of such a norm, but well, this is an american norm, i don’t think that this is a norm, i think that it is us the result of miscalculations, let's say, including the american one, because ukraine did not provide weapons to ukraine until the end of january of last year, they did not begin to provide a large amount at the beginning of this year, but when the first aid package for 200 million at the end in december of last year, they did not provide it before that. well, because the assessment of american intelligence by american analysts was such that if arms were provided to ukraine, it would provoke russia to start a big war hmm, well, so they were wrong

by the way, they admitted that many of their assessments were directed at russia's actions and ukraine's ability to fight aggression. what about that? now look, i would like to draw attention to the national security strategy of the united states, which was published last week, and there to the fact that is happening now and can it happen in the future in the relations of the united states with russia? what russia is doing is aggression against ukraine - it is the destabilization of the countries of the world, it is energy blackmail, it is stated that this is putin's policy , or putin will not change, and that is why the united

states will deal with russia when the russian people constitute such a power that will change the policy, that is, this is a completely similar approach to the approach of the administration of the heroes, but when she came to power, there is one more question. the first tuesday after the first monday a-a er-e means november and there are such rumors that maybe among the republicans there will be more people who are not against aid to ukraine and about p p p p they will talk about reducing this aid so that's what i have a question about laws in america, they have the opposite effect, because even if you imagine that the democrats lose their majority, but the previous composition of the parliament

has already approved the land forest and gave baida a free hand to continue helping ukraine, then the new composition of the government may be the worst composition of the parliament alternatively, if the democrats go to both the upper and lower houses and people who are against ukraine go there, they can cancel lend-lease and take these cards, these opportunities from biden . after the elections on november 8 in the house of representatives, not absolutely regardless of whether the republicans will have a majority or not, there will be significantly more representatives of the far-right wing of the republican party, which, in particular, they are

by opponents of aid to ukraine. why would this happen? well , because i am the republican party is moving very strongly to the right and because many moderate republicans simply refused to run because they could not win the primaries from those who were supported by trump and, uh, others stole the primaries. that is, there there will be much more of such far-right republicans and right-wing populists , it is on the one hand, on the other hand, eh, now in the current congress, which will work on january 3, eh, elections will be held on november 8, the congress of galicia will be to work until january 3, and he will work very intensively after the election, but now he is not working because everyone is engaged in the election campaign, there is no session now that it is immediately after the election, they returned and will work, and a group

of democrats has already proposed to adopt a law on aid to ukraine for the financial year 2023, in which to allocate 50 billion dollars for various types of aid to ukraine - these are weapons, ammunition, and financial and economic aid, so that this aid operates until the end of the next fiscal year, if this in principle, the next congress will take place. well, he will not be able to cancel this budget if it is adopted as an additional entire budget and in this way aid will be financed even in a larger amount than it is now . the incision is very short in ukraine, many people consider the members to be a place something like what happened during the second world war , that there were american weapons there, such a

continuous flow of any american weapons, it is going to go to ukraine, in fact, it is not so because, unlike during world war ii, the american military industry does not operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. increased, for example, the law on the superscript gives the president the right to transfer weapons to ukraine and possibly to the countries of central europe bordering ukraine, if necessary, in order to fight against russian aggression with weapons and ammunition and various military equipment, and the president, where can he get

these weapons, he can take them, he learned the weapons are at the bases of the pentagon, that is, that is it, or he can order them from weapons manufacturers, but for the latter, budget funds are needed, which means at the base there there is no such thing as an unlimited number of weapons, because there are, well, for each type of weapon, there are certain standards for how many of them should be there, but it cannot be less than provided for by these standards, but the president for the president, after all , it gives him an additional mechanism for to transfer weapons to ukraine, there are a lot of questions from ukraine, usually why does it work? i answer it very simply. well, if there is a mechanism today that allows ukraine to receive weapons for free for itself, weapons and ammunition, this is what ukraine has received so far. there is no payment to the center for this. not now, not in the future, this is help, it's just help at the expense of

american taxpayers, it's good that it is so, because the cut law provides for the conclusion of a contract for payment for payment in the future, but it should be a contract for payment for each weapon that appears. well, if we assume that even if the congress can't pass a law on aid to ukraine, i hope that i can. well, but let's assume the worst, it won't be able to. if there is a majority of republicans, and because of that that there will be many right-wing republicans, they will be against allocating money to help ukraine, the president still has alleles from which he operates until the end of the 2023 fiscal year, he will then be able to give weapons to ukraine by signing and i am

sure that ukraine will not be without help , moreover, i am almost sure that the concrete will be able to pass the law on a special allocation for assistance to ukraine of 50 billion for the 23 fiscal year and i really wanted to to hope that these allocations will be enough to ensure a victory in ukraine, so that the united states can smoothly help ukraine, and always have a very powerful, strong army, against which russia is already never no no no no will not dare to conduct any battles listen it was wonderful i was already worried and thought whether i will regret this question or not and now i do not regret but rejoice because mr.

professor of the university of jura told us in quite detail and quite systematically and i would have to say thank you, thank you. i really need to answer the questions because otherwise there is no point in sending me questions, so i'm sorry if you wanted to say something else. i hope you don't take offense. i hope to see you again in my and on other people's airwaves, you really help ukrainians to understand american politics, as they said in soviet language, honor to you and praise for that. thank you very much, soar. what this decision can mean and what consequences will have bad consequences for citizens i think that this looting you know soviet troops during the

second world war usually issued an order to stop looting after three days with the exception berlin is berlin in 5 days, and this, as the russians say , by default meant that you could come to berlin and for five days rob berlin, steal, kill, do whatever you want, rape, and so on, and if it is königsberg, for example, you could do all this for only three days i think that martial law is such a provision of russian soldiers with everything they need at the expense of ukrainian civilians. you can enter someone else's apartment and settle in. you can take it from the apartment, drive or from the store, you can , you can, you can, you can, because martial law is and

yes, russia, where everything is understandable, everything is allowed. and if you are in power, ladies, it is clear that the army is the power, and now it is legalized, now there is a law on martial law, and no person can replace it, and it is so difficult to replace the russian one, because how did it fall under a trial for some kind of robbery or rape but is it murder and now it is still normalized, so i think this was one of the reasons for what is happening, what putin wanted to say. well, let's move on, what can be done in ukraine, what will protect its borders from invasion in the long term russia well, we that's exactly what igor iceberg said ukraine can't do anything, and the world can fight against such

invaders as russia, the whole world can fight. so when the world starts to fight, understanding the consequences for itself, not only for ukraine, for itself, and what is happening, then yes, it can be some in what way in what way is the right to be deprived of the right in this un what way is it to be removed from the permanent members of the soviet nations what is the way to eliminate the nuclear danger and all this is possible only thanks to only when there will be external management of russia if ukraine leaves ukraine alone to russia and if to say well, it remains a nuclear country. it gave now there are no tools. yes, now there are no tools, but the world is changing, time is changing

, such tools may appear, thanks to which the world will be able to rid the russians of russia . that ukraine can't do anything, but the world can. how realistic is the threat of an attack from the territory of the belarusians in the next two or three months, which areas can become targets lukashenka, well, since i will answer the first part of the question in a negative way, i will say that i am not a military expert personally, but some kutsianaliz, which i can afford, says that it is difficult for me to imagine a serious attack from the north, even if it is an attack by belarusians or this there will be an attack by the belarusians against the russians, you understand

, in addition to the fact that we have already been at war for a long time and know how it is done and keep a large number of troops there, in addition, there is also nature for ukraine, there was such a huge number there, very few roads, all these the roads are shot up not the first and the second not the third not the 20th month the rest of the roads are mined in short, well, i don't know who to be to fly through the north to ukraine it's just a terrible danger of defeat or getting stuck, i'm saying only materially and intellectually, morally not a fact that belarusians will want, it is not a fact that belarusian soldiers will fight against ukrainians, let it not be a fact that belarusian officers will fight, they will want to fight there will be a very weak front and this is in

favor of ukraine, weak fronts are always in favor if ukraine has a weak front, it gives opportunities for a counteroffensive , repulse, etc. it is obvious that military actions, well, it is difficult to imagine these military actions against ukraine, which will be strong , effective, and sensitive to ukraine and will leave everything in belarus as it is today here, i do not believe much, so i do not think that within two or three months from the north there is there is some danger there is only one danger we are holding the front there we are holding the front of the ukrainians there and it would be good if we did not keep this front there and

concentrated on the south and east of our country . i want to force a road accident. what else are they going to do after the energy infrastructure facilities for gas ones? no , they won't because they don't have that many missiles and there isn't that much industry that can create these missiles, that's why there is a problem. and it's systemic and she is essential and it won't last long, obviously it won't last long, but it will damage ukraine still enough unfortunately, this is an absolute fact and we don't know if she is ready for it, i'm not, i'm not yet convinced that she is and just now eisenberg spoke about it

. we don't know if there is such a possibility, if there are weapons in the warehouses, or if there are weapons for ukraine in the united states, we don't know. i think there is not. if they would have given it, the war will not end tomorrow, and i think that in a month, too although miracles do happen at this i want to say that iryna koval is already sitting at her workplace and i will now get up from my workplace, so i say goodbye to iryna and i say goodbye to everyone goodbye but in different regions of ukraine and also wait for an unusual auction