we will be a response, this covers many types of activities that in february, colleagues started work on the protection of cultural heritage, these are small projects that are quickly implemented and this work is now actively underway , colleagues also launched projects on the psychosocial support of students, schoolchildren suffered from the coronavirus for two years, and now there is also a war, it is terrible thus, we have many similar small projects. we support a significant number of public organizations. we also fight against disinformation. the second tool we use in ukraine is the eu advisory mission. my service provides funding for the eu civilian advisory mission, they are operationally managed by another part of the foreign affairs service, but we are responsible for funding, and of course, in the context of the

war, we had to adapt, the need for armored vehicles increased, employees travel to and from the country, etc. the third element we deal with is european the peace fund of the country went to gis, they finance part of the weapons that they send to ukraine, that is why we have such a neutral name foreign policy instruments we are not policies, but are tools that we manage to support a certain policy, we implement what the member states have agreed on. my colleagues are sending the first request to the member states to make a payment to the budget, since this activity is not part of the regular eu budget and we manage this money, and they agree accordingly who gets what part of the compensation

so we are working on three such big directions and are also actively developing a few more, in particular, we are currently discussing rommy and some other issues of euro military aid what is the margin of safety in the european union, can ukraine count on the fact that military aid will continue until the end of the war until the victory of ukraine. in my opinion, there are three dimensions to this issue, the first is purely technical. my colleagues and i can implement this tool as long as funding is received, as long as we can continue to supply weapons, secondly,

my meaning is the willingness of the member countries to invest money in it, and often it rests also on national budgets, this instrument is off-budget and therefore not financed from the usual previous of the agreed eu budget, these funds come from member states additionally. therefore, this is a rather special instrument, and for the first time in its history, it will be able to supply military equipment and weapons, which is clearly excluded for other instruments. and we can do it, so the ability to receive funds is a very important condition. next comes probably the most important presence of political will and there is good news right now in brussels the meeting of the european council is taking place and we expect that the heads of states and governments will be confirmed during this meeting they will continue to support ukraine and the restoration of ukrainian power in all territories

, providing the necessary means for this as long as it is needed, these are really three such levels, technical capacity, the financial component, a decision that each country makes separately, and political will and political will is definitely present, this motivates us continue to work we are already hearing from some eu member states that they are running out of stockpiles of weapons and equipment that they could transfer to ukraine, or is the european union somehow replenishing these stocks so that there was an opportunity to support ukraine in the future. i am from a generation that still served in the military and one of the principles on which we were not brought up was not to talk too much about such things in public, of course we actively assess the situation and again here there are several levels, the first is an understanding of the expectations of the

ukrainian side, we have to know exactly what is expected from us and also an understanding of what the member states can provide because the eu itself does not have any weapons for the member states. we also need to purchase additional weapons and here we will already see what they can to make industrialists is the third element, because it is not a simple weapon. ukraine is not asking for knives or something like that, we are talking about extremely complex weapons systems, as you say, stocks may run out and production may take some time, so here the question is how quickly does industry adapt but here, as with other issues i don't think it's worth making speculative assumptions . personally, i'm optimistic about it in any case. thank you for explaining the mechanism. how everything is arranged . another way in which the european union can support

ukraine in wartime is sanctions against russia. one gets the impression that each new package of sanctions is more and more difficult to adopt in general, the estonian prime minister has already publicly acknowledged this case, but it may still be useful to you. when i started working in ukraine in a different capacity in 2015, every six months we had questions about whether we would be able to extend the sanctions, because at that time the procedure was such that every 6 months they it was necessary to actively renew, there was a lot

of tension, discussions and so on, if you look at what has changed over the years, now we are faced with the question of what you say we want and can do more, and this very question already shows that we have already done a lot, that we have largely on the same page with the americans, this is an important point, the world community as a whole is united on this issue, the sanctions of different countries are very coordinated among themselves, and the second point is that sanctions do not pass without a trace, also for eu member states and for others countries, and here my colleagues and i naturally try to plan them as intelligently as possible in order to maintain a balance between the pressure on the aggressor and the pressure under which those who protect ukraine with the help of sanctions find themselves. again, i would like to cite such a

seemingly separate story, but it is tangential to the long-term development of how we should move forward, we have always proven that we can introduce new sanctions, there is the rest of the international community that is working on this introduces additional sanctions every time there is an escalation of the conflict, despite the fact that from the first day people had a question about how long the sanctions regime would last, so this topic is being discussed, sanctions affect member states in different ways, and accordingly their position also changes every time, but in general we succeed to support what we have started eu countries have their own internal difficulties and tests of the recession, the price of energy carriers under the outlook, we can hope that the support of ukraine will be maintained at least at the level it is now

the difficulty of influencing the position of the eu leadership regarding how this war should end is normal . public opinion in democratic countries affects those who make decisions. what is happening in general in politics affects politics everywhere, but as far as i currently see the results of public opinion polls, ukraine with eu members is very i am comforted by the impact of the sanction, which is already very often felt in the member countries, a very large part of the population believes that we cannot stop supporting ukraine, well, weekend not people, this is possible, a somewhat speculative assumption, but if look at the data and i, as a political scientist, was taught to

do this in situations where something needs to be understood. i currently do not believe that the level of support will change significantly in the near future. ukraine hungary blocks the adoption of some decisions or is the european union still a union especially when solving such complex issues i think we manage to make decisions on complex issues and we move together if look at some of the changes that were introduced , they all required unanimous decisions, i understand why people have questions, and i believe that we

have evidence that despite the difficulties, it works, i don't know if you would like to talk about it in more detail , i already explained it using the example of sanctions but i can give other examples. we have member countries whose constitution prohibits the supply of weapons to any other countries, but for such cases there is a solution, for example, positive retention, and of course questions may arise: why does a country not votes together with everyone but each country has its own situation, and in the union there are currently 27 countries, there will always be some historical, political, geographical or any other reason not to vote. conclusions that we are observing significant progress, we mentioned the european peace fund, which is used to supply weapons and military

equipment to other countries, currently we supply lethal weapons only to ukraine, but as for military equipment. for the first time in the history of the eu, we also supply it to other eu countries. we were recently in mozambique, where the first batch of aid for their armed forces was transferred, so we moved his and from that point where he was , say, 5 years ago, when it was difficult to even imagine even a year ago it was difficult to imagine what is happening now, the member countries make decisions about everything about each individual tranche unanimously we move forward thanks to unanimity from the latest news we recently announced 3 billion euros in support, and we are talking only about that part of the support that

is provided through the european peace fund, as much as oleksandr, when we talk about some discussions, disputes within the eu, in particular, regarding the situation in ukraine, we are talking about ordinary discussions, not some existential problem, of course, and an existential discussion these are two extremes between which there are still many options for discussion, i don't think that the discussion is existential at the moment, but she showed us and there is a discussion about this that sometimes we need to go beyond what we are used to now in we are having a discussion on the topic is it good for the future of the general future, not only in relation to ukraine, we always discuss principled decisions or should we make exceptions to the principles. i remember very well the discussions that took place seven or more years ago, then president juncker tried

to renew them, but it was similar to the fact that he throws a stone and does not hear luna in response, now these discussions are returning because of the situation in ukraine, but also other events that prove that we have to do something both now and in the past it was possible to observe that under pressure it moves much faster than one would think, i was very interested in one of his speeches in october . china and russia in energy resources and

the market and that in some places the eu perceived the sources of prosperity separately from the sources of security in view of this speech, are we talking about some fundamental change in eu policy, in particular under pressure russian-ukrainian war, as you understand, it is inappropriate for me as a high-ranking official to interpret the words of my boss. i was present during this conversation . since we are part of the european commission and at the same time the only part that reports directly to vice president borel. he has two roles. he is a high representative who represents the interests of countries- members and also to the vice-presidents of the commission, i report to him as the vice-president, but we are located in the building of the foreign affairs service of our diplomats, our

unit has a very special status. so i was present, and then a lot was written about this speech, as i understood it, one should pay attention to the audience, this is not a speech in front of a group of students or at an award ceremony , this is a speech to ambassadors. in my opinion, mr. boril concentrated in it many ideas that he had already talked about before, i did not notice any paradigm changes, at the same time he spoke very concretely and very practically, since he was listened to by the head of the delegation, from whom he demanded certain actions, he presented all ideas in a very practical way. he spoke about the need not only to announce intentions to do something, but also that every time there should be an answer to the question when not only should we be told, but also explain why

his speech seemed to me to be very practically oriented to the audience but it was a summary of a concentrated version of his ideas and of course three years ago such a speech would be impossible if the situation were different, but this is a reflection of the changes that have taken place over the past three years, although, again, i would not say that each of the individual elements of this speech is sensationally new, that is the giant cricket situation in recent years, can it be said that russia is no longer a business partner of the eu, we talked about it many years ago when we began to stop cooperation with russia on many issues, there were 5 principles that we followed in many areas, there were contexts before that ceased to exist when you

say business, do you mean business purely in the economic sense or cooperation in general? i said that in the economic sense, we see that now there is a lot of effort to reduce such ties with russia, finally, the leaders who simply they are waiting for all this to somehow end and it will be possible to cooperate with russia again, they are observing it in the form you are talking about, and i would also say that i cannot afford such speculative assumptions in my position. my last question will be about my last question will be about the prospects of ukraine's membership in the eu how do you assess

this prospect ukraine ukrainians aspire to join the european union how long can this path last? ukraine requires a lot of decisions and work, it will be necessary to convince 27 member states that this work has been completed and that the country is really ready , so this question remains open . with ukraine in 2015, together with the ukrainian government and civil society, we tried to develop our vision, of course the idea of ​​joining in the long term was present, but very few people talked about the terms and very few people voiced this issue so clearly, it

was before the great war, at the same time, the decision of the member states to accept ukraine's application for the status of a candidate for membership is not based on the work carried out since february 2022, which was done during the last 20 years, including the very intensive work after the euromaidan, which led to a lot of changes in a lot of areas in ukraine, and this is how i said it when i was in my previous position until the beginning of 2020, in many areas, changes are happening more slowly than one would hope, there are still many problems and considering the large size of the country is also a problem by definition, but we also observed significant changes. of course, there were discussions, negotiations, but all these changes in the anti-

corruption system took place. however, i can also talk for another hour about examples of very significant positive changes, the situation is still not the best, but it has improved a lot, this can be said about many areas, many people outside of ukraine did not know this and it is important continue to report this video ukraine is one of the few countries in this region that has a fairly systematic history of peaceful democratic change of power, this is not so common in the world, particularly in this part of the world. that we delandscape of ukraine is of great importance in ukraine is very full of

diverse competitive media landscape in some places with oligarchic influence but you did not always have diversity competition for ideas etc. it was always impressive that you had regional and local snakes if you look at the wider region around ukraine i don't know if there are any countries with such a strong and diverse media landscape and it will also be very important for us to preserve these strengths that now there is a war for certain reasons certain things are happening otherwise, this war must be won and will be won by the ukrainian people, but it is very important not to forget what made ukraine stable: decentralization gave ukraine strong regions and the joint work of the world

heads of regional administrations and the population that we now we are observing everywhere in the country, this is the result of 30 years of development and political discussions, this is a legacy , and we need to be careful that, for example, because of excessive centralized process, rebuilding does not reduce this dynamic. now, during the war, the tv program, the media work in a certain way, but at some point it will be necessary to return to the normal mode of operation i think that there is a lot of work to be done in ukraine back if it is not opened back ukrainian society until february 2022 was really filled with various mobile in many ways very modern, now you have to fight in the war and this requires other qualities in my opinion.

it is important that the future narrative of the country is modern , oriented towards the future and not the one that, unfortunately, you have to use now because of the war , the ability of ukrainians in ukrainian society to switch from one regime to another world and can only theoretically imagine how difficult it will be, taking into account all the difficulties , the large number of dead and wounded people, separated families who had to leave for their russia will and all other things that are happening for society, it will be difficult, but ukraine will have to return to pre-war narratives considering what it wants and what the eu expects for now, it's worth remembering. thank you

for this sincere conversation, mr. vatner. we are going to my grandfather and grandmother, who have a ukrainian oven, where we bake bread for our boys for the zsu. the girls get up at 5:00. it's already o'clock it was climatic good morning

good morning good morning our bees say to grandfather get up to visit the place they are the bread of the month knocking you can’t talk too much cutting you can’t bread i like the silence and the heat somewhere there are 2.5 buckets of flour going to this pot somewhere put it here how long will you be something here almost here only 7 minutes ago on february 27, there was a place for half an hour to knead, well, i'm sorry, that's two things, not all

the coals of a dream when they announced that the fuck started and immediately began to announce that she was behind this products they started collecting everything. well, on the 24th, and we are the first time, you know, when we took the bread and on the 26th, the military duty

and let it light up, and then we put more wood on it and let it burn until it is built. we can put the bread there and sign it. write well you can see them, you can see them, you can see them, you can see them, the kalushis are good,

hmm, it’s scary, the daughter-in-law called and screams, the war is not free, and we only hid it very much, tanya, what a war, kiev was bombed, and lord, have mercy on the curtain and ours. oh, and they sat in the cellar at first, they sat and baked the map, threw cucumbers, vodka there only there was no grandpa. oh, no, no, oh, i’ll come . i would have stolen jokes, jokes. and this is such a pain , i’m going to cut it into 25. well,

somehow, how can i say, well, spontaneously, yes, i would somehow . the boys’ hostel has a braid, not the carpathians, a bread loaf. holy, oh . it will be hot in your hands, you had to throw it out, come on, come on, lunch is not very good. come, because the heroes don't hurry, baby, don't hurry it up, sun , don't shout, lyudochka. well, what have you already said?