of the ukrainian plane to think about where they want to be or the civilized world that they want to be on the side of the 8 evils you mentioned and i think that a significant part of those protest actions that today appear and are in iran, they definitely use this moment because it is independent of religion, but you know, respect for human life, the value of human life, it is inherent in any religion, so i am sure that muslim iran will be able to understand the tragedy related to human lives related to what russia is currently doing in ukrainian land , therefore it is necessary to use it. but given the current circumstances, the current government in iran, i do not think that it will be fast enough, sir, do you think that such public pressure can be used to protest to influence the position of the ukrainian government regarding the

ukrainian issue of supporting armed russia or to change the top of the government there, the illusion that iranians will think exactly about the ukrainian tragedy and more than they think about the tragedy inside your country, you know that there is currently a serious conflict between the orthodox and those people who want greater freedom, including freedom of choice in iran, and i understand that the ukrainian issue can only be an element of solving these internal conflicts and misunderstandings but i am also sure that as a country that is a member of the united nations and eventually to other international structures, i understand that the united nations is currently not fulfilling its main functions, it is not able to prevent conflicts, crimes, wars, for which it was actually created and is not able to

effectively solve these issues for a day, but at the same time, i am sure that it will look for and find tools with which it will be possible to bring to justice and establish elements of order, including in this country. i am sure that the rank and file will want, and iranians in order to have prosperity, to have a perspective for their country, for their future, in the end they will want to be among those who choose the rules and choose the future chooses the economy and not decline and death for the nation, in principle, poverty for everyone thank you ivan varchenko security expert in direct contact with our studio thank you mr. ivan many interesting questions have been considered well and now we will see the plot it seems that we already have the next one there are colleagues who would like to contact us, george tuka, deputy minister for temporary occupied territories and internally displaced persons of ukraine from 2016 to

2019, public figure, mr. george, we congratulate you glory to ukraine glory to the heroes good day, good day, in fact, there are now so many forecasts regarding when and how our territories can be de-occupied, respectively, how not only they will return, but also the people who live on them, how do you feel about such forecasts in general, and can we give them now, taking into account the fact that we do not know how the political situation will change in the countries that are our partners from yes, we do not know what level of military support will be for us , well, and a number of a whole bunch of important arguments, i ask for all these forecasts in principle, it is negative and i myself try not to resort to them precisely for the reasons that you have just mentioned, e.e., there are a huge number of factors that

can influence the development of events, this also applies to our internal situation in our state, and this also applies to a huge number of possible events on the outside it concerns the choice of a union in the united states and the events related to iran and the position that seems to have started to change in china, israel, and such factors can still be glued. forecasts there in the spring we will be in donetsk and in the summer er give an interview on the yalta embankment well, i consider it to be mild, to say the least, to often irresponsible if we talk about the united states for example, our key partner about the united states literally from the 15th attempt there finally elected the speaker of the house of

representatives, this is, in my opinion , an absolutely historical record for some period of time, and there is an opinion that in fact, one of the compromises that had to be made with such ardent, i would say, trumpists in the republican party was a reduction defense spending programs in general, and here, accordingly, aid for ukraine. i would like to ask you. is it because of this situation that something will change in the states? to work in the event that the military aid packages, the current format, will no longer be relevant, well, first of all, i would like to uh say that i do not have any information, i just uh, yesterday morning was the last time i communicated with our american

partners who report directly to the leadership of the republican party, and there are no objective reasons yet to assert that the situation in the relations between ukraine and the united states can somehow radically change. the fact is that , unfortunately, from my point of view, our media in our politics some completely inexperienced people of their time began to build a rather unconstructive and not far-fetched stamp in ukrainian society, saying that the democratic party is for ukraine and the republican party is against ukraine, which in principle is absolutely correct in fact, only a small part of the republican party, whom we call you call them trumpists, yes, there really is such a group in the american parliament, in general, there

seem to be 20 or 21 of them, but they received the so -called golden card in the majority of the republican party and, well, they are trying to use it politically because they it will work out, we'll live through it and see how it is. the president, the acting president, joseph bidde , a representative of the democratic party will meet with a representative of the republican party, and this should first of all testify to the intra-american society, to reassure people that this is really the crisis, the political crisis that we just witnessed during the election of the speaker from the republican party

party that this is an exclusively internal political matter of the united states and even in the lives of ordinary citizens of the united states in this rather complicated relationship within they will not be reflected in the parliament in any way, the majority, the vast majority of the members of the republican party, as those who are directly elected to the us parliament, such average citizens of the united states, they support the struggle of ukraine against the russian federation and occupation, moreover, quite often they reproach the representatives of the democratic party for insufficiently effective provision aid to ukraine therefore well, it 's not worth making some er forecasts and sowing some panic mood from my point of view - it's very premature, to put it mildly, yuriy let's return to our de-occupied

territories and to the current de-occupied, we know the future to the occupied, today we had an interesting conversation with larisa voloshyna. we talked about what to do with the collaborators and how to separate them from those who should be responsible for this collaboration, who should not be responsible and she is there expressed the opinion that according to various international conventions , if, for example, a person worked somewhere in the fire safety authorities, then he is not responsible for collaboration because well he only supported the life activities of the population that remained there in the occupied territories, they even reached the point that if the precinct officer did not persecute ukrainian patriots there and therefore did not engage in torturing people, then he too can be released from responsibility even if he betrayed his oath there and went to service at the russian ministry of internal affairs in the occupied territories. how do you feel about it? what am i? how can we later understand after the deoccupation who collaborated with the enemy and who immediately who betrayed ukraine and who the other way around ?

of responsibility for the fact that he worked there under the auspices of some local government there, for example, in a library or a school or a museum, well, we have such a broad discussion, i did not completely agree with larisa voloshina's opinions, you can review them later, but i can understand how documents yes and the fact is that this is a question in principle yes it lies not primarily in the legal, but in the political plane from the very beginning of the society in ukraine must recognize somewhere with these questions and then let's say so society's attitude to these issues, society's attitude to these issues must be transformed through the government into one or another legislative act. i perfectly understand that there is no single point of view in society at the moment, well, there is no such issue, and that is why such a

discussion is taking place, that is why, in fact, a certain discussion took place between larisa and you, dear ladies and gentlemen, presenters, what about the concept of collaboration in general, collaboration means cooperation, cooperation can take completely different forms. therefore, it is necessary to pay attention to the specific actions of a person, and from my point of view i emphasize and make certain decisions about any collaboration with my, well, my personal attitude must bear responsibility, the person responsible must bear responsibility for collaborative actions, but if we are talking about criminal responsibility, this is one article. and if we are talking about, for example, political responsibility about the deprivation of certain civil right, it's a completely different thing

if, for example, they touched on the issue of the precinct , yes, indeed, this representative is a former, most likely , a representative of the national poli betrayed the oath, he was not at the same time engaged in the persecution of ukrainian-minded citizens during the occupation. thus, from my point of view, a compromise solution can be the release of this person, the anger of the national police, the deprivation of the opportunity for future ones. meant in the electoral process to elect or to be elected, but with regard to criminal responsibility for deprivation of liberty, it is a person. well, i think it should probably not be applied to others

questions absolutely parallel to these questions will be raised in relation to, for example, doctors to teachers to social service workers. it is considered a rather difficult issue. it has been facing society for far from the first year. i know larisa's attitude to this very well. first of all, from my point of view, this issue should be resolved by society during a broad public discussion, see e-e p georgia for many years, in fact, we talk about it as we will return our territory, which we will return these people, and these people have been living under occupation for many years, someone sincerely supported ukraine all this time, but was forced to take over the russian ausweiss for 8 years, you live and you still have to somehow

come into contact with the realities that are and some of your very ordinary everyday actions can be reduced to collaborationism and that - every story, every person, every position, and indeed every life will have to be considered separately, for sure, among those who lived over these eight years on in the occupied territories, our special services are ready to accept this challenge. why do the crimeans ask me, for example, they ask me, we are ready for questions, we understand that ukraine is coming back, we are waiting for it well, i have such a contingent of acquaintances, in principle, but they say what should we prepare for, my life circumstances are such and such then i am for ukraine, who will be considered a collaborator or a tikhushnik or who will i be at all i do not understand i am ready to answer all questions pass all checks just

tell me what to expect i absolutely agree with by your formulation of the question and before answering this question to the people, we are the inhabitants of the free territory, those who are now defending the independence of our country and giving their lives for it, we must decide their fate in the first place, and this, from my point of view, has to take place during a broad public discussion, because this concerns, among other things, the issue of not only the residents of the occupied territories, unfortunately, we have in the entire territory of our country, starting from kharkov and ending with uzhgorod, there are enough people who from my point of view, the activities of which have signs of collaborative activity, but quite

even a significant number of these people are not just on state facades, but they are also now in the walls of the verkhovna rada, but i understand the discussion on this matter that, well , at least analyzing what i see on the facebook pages, the discussion is quite heated, but as for the verkhovna rada, for example, well, just blatant cases, as far as i'm concerned, when both representatives of the homeland and representatives of the ruling party actually refuse to deprive deputies of their mandates from my point of view, such actions do not meet the public demand for yury, not only in the parliament but in local councils

. professional block of zaporizhzhia. and balytskyi himself is still a deputy of the zaporizhzhia regional council and the regional council does not deprive him of his mandate because, as our experts there say, our people who live there they say because then it will destroy the structure of the leadership of the regional council, and until the regional council is not going to hold a meeting at this time, it is easier for the executive executive body of the regional administration, then it will be easier for them to squander money, relatively speaking, and financial flows, no one. without control, uncontrolled, uncontrolled, uncontrolled management takes place through these financial flows. that is, it is not only at the level of the parliament , and at the level of the regional council, the city council of zaporizhzhya , the sharia party is still there , people from the sharia party are sitting there, and everything is fine, and apparently everything does not bypass anyone, and i ask that the regional administration is profitable for them. i understand that it is profitable for the president to have these people sit in the parliament, and since they also vote this way. how well, how should you

vote? in the liberated territories, there are a huge number of questions to those characters whom the current government appoints to various government positions, mostly in the joint civil administrations of yuriy, but there is still a moment regarding the return of people and how collaborators or not, there is a huge number of people who left those territories precisely so as not to live under occupation. and now they will return to the same crimea. it seems that several tens of thousands were forced to leave crimea. and now they will return and they will be told good day we were waiting for you, now we are you, you and i have the same rights, you were only in exile and running away from the russians, and we lived for the russians, we collaborated, we received a salary

, we lived as in principle without any restrictions, and these people are bad because they received a salary if they did something not illegal, well , elementary. i think that these people who will return will not be very comfortable living next to collaborators and have the same rights and the same services and services from the state as with those who lived there in processing this is also the question of the question of examining the police who stayed in mariupol and someone took his weapon to the people, we have not given them the answer to these questions until now and this is a big problem. when you are still the head because you are in my point of view, i am a huge fundamental difference between the situations, namely in in this context for example, between the situations in crimea and well, for example, in the zaporizhzhia region. and the fact is that when the process of liberating crimea

begins, another question will be raised, about which they are somehow shy and trying not to talk at all, because the vast majority of people who are currently on the territory of the temporarily occupied peninsula they have the citizenship of the russian federation. and after all these tragedies, is ukrainian society ready to tolerate the abuse of believers on its own territory behind the backs of the citizens of the country of aggression in our legislation it is said about citizenship that of course the voluntary acquisition by a person of the citizenship of another country is the reason for the argument that depriving him of ukrainian citizenship on the other hand well, right now, this is the question.

okay, thank you, the responsibility of the decision on the air and to talk about it because this is a very important issue, this is a question . in principle, the circle of specialists has been discussing since the first days of the 14th year, from the first days, the direct capture of settlements in crimea and donetsk region from luhansk region, but there is still no unified point of view, so this is a very difficult issue thank you georgy tuka deputy minister of internally displaced persons of ukraine from 2016 to 2019 now a public figure thank you we are going further and we are already in touch andriy teteruk officer of the voluntary formation free ukraine people's deputy of the preliminary eighth convocation andriy, good day, i wish for stronger health for our ukrainian nation, mutually. andriy, you probably heard our

discussion about the social rights of the public and, in general, what to do with those people who partially collaborated partly simply lived in the occupied territories partly received russian citizenship after the de-occupation of all ukrainian territories well, now we do not have any common vision, only discussions are going on about what to do with these people and how to distinguish between those who really betrayed those who collaborated and those who simply lived under occupation how do you answer this question for yourself, well , first of all, the priority of consideration of issues should be clear for our ukrainian nation, the first is victory after victory, we we have to understand that we will have a certain transition period of adaptation from life in a state of war to life in peace, this period is exactly when we have to find answers to these difficult questions that you have just discussed with george

, or in general that are on the agenda before our ukrainian state, and here we must understand absolutely clearly that we must act in a legal way, because many people want to play, you know, with such a conventional or real north and solve complex issues simply by developing the gordians knot, but in fact it will simply cross out our victory, to which i am leading to the fact that the issue is a violation of the criminal code of ukraine, collaboration with the enemy or assistance, it must be clear, first, the investigation, and secondly the assessment was made in a legal manner and the person who contributed to the enemy must serve the sentence in designated places behind bars in conditions where the person was rescuing his or her close relatives, for example, he or she received a passport there because otherwise

this citizen of ukraine would have lost it of this citizenship simply corrects the situation, well let's say the previous situation that according to the constitution he has a single ukrainian citizenship and the rest of the many issues must also be resolved exclusively in a legal way, because if we allow ourselves some emotional swings, then the enemy will simply get revenge by discouraging ukrainian society after the victory and dividing us on those who, er, remained ukrainian and those who slandered themselves , er, with any, let's say, er, not 100% ukrainianness, therefore, this issue , er, must first be resolved er, on a cold mind is a very clear definition of whether or not a person is guilty of committing certain acts or actions and only after

that should we understand or treat him as a person who violated the laws or the value system of ukraine or such is not and therefore does not deserve any punishment or even moral condemnation, now it is necessary very very clearly, you know, to measure not seven times, but even 10 times, than once a segment yes, but the question is that even the question, as you say , exit from citizenship, it is enough it is difficult, because the judicial authorities of russia will decide on renunciation of citizenship . anyway, a person will write a statement and it must be approved by the ministry of justice of the russian federation on renunciation of citizenship, and until this decision is made, russians will consider all these people citizens of the russian federation, just as they now automatically consider even the residents of zaporizhzhia, and even when it was never under russian occupation in the 14th year. not now, and the residents of kherson are russian citizens, because that is what is written in their constitution, and we, if not

there will be a complete, so to speak, complete capitulation of russia, and there will only be access to the borders and a peace agreement with russia, there will not be a complete disintegration of russia, we will never put an end to all the stories p andriy, encroach, that is why i was a people's deputy back in the 16th last year submitted a draft law that would clearly define that people with multiple citizenships should be affected in their rights to occupy certain positions with the performance of state functions before entering into state secrets and or to be elected and be elected to any species civil service from village councils to ending with the verkhovna rada or the president of ukraine, we must clearly understand that if a person has, in violation of the constitution, not a single ukrainian citizenship, but multiple, then such a person has deliberately allowed himself , first of all, to disrespect the ukrainian constitution, and

secondly , secondly, her rights should be affected for 10-15-20 years, this should be determined by ukrainian legislation. unfortunately, in the 16th year, there was not enough political will to proceed to the consideration of this draft law, because it was practically frozen and did not find its implementation although it would be an effective tool and safeguard against the onset of such negative consequences of aggression by the russian federation against our state, where it uses part of the ukrainian territories as practically instruments of blackmail, and indeed, as of today, five oblasts of ukraine have been included in the constitution of the russian federation, which for me is one of the er markers of how and when the ukrainian er russian war will end by the fact that they will refuse to encroach on ukrainian territory by rewriting their constitution one of the closest stages that we will

celebrate is the absolute destruction of the russian occupation forces that are on ukrainian territory, but the second stage, the final stage of the end of this aggression of the russian federation will be to bring the russian federation to a state where they will rewrite their constitution and cease to have legal rights to issues on the ukrainian territory, which are now de facto found in the constitutions of the two countries of ukraine and the russian federation, these are very, very difficult issues, they do not have an unambiguous solution or military or diplomatic, it is obvious that this will be a combination of e-e means to achieve and restore the status quo of ukraine before the beginning of the aggression of the russian federation in february 2014, that is, the restoration of our sovereignty, our territorial values ​​and a guarantee of e-e security against the repetition of a similar

scenario in the coming years we have already introduced the tools that would allow ukraine to have these guarantees, this is the accession to the european union and to the nato bloc - this is a defensive union, although the russian federation is trying in every way to impose the opinion that nato - this is just a threat of an offensive nature, although no such uh, let's say, fantasy is embedded in the activities of the nato bloc. on the contrary , uh, it's all a defensive alliance for a country that understands the danger that the russian federation is. well, in the past, it was the soviet union. therefore, we have what to think there is something to think about in order to form the agenda of the activities of our state after our victory because it is very important that we do not waste this way of achieving our victory with

endless quarrels without understanding solve correctly - solve today's complex issues that must be solved by us, because if we do not solve them, they will continue to poison and destroy our consciousness, our peaceful life, and most importantly, the opportunity to rebuild ukraine as a democratic and legal state what the russian federation categorically opposes and tries to prevent. it is from the development of ukraine in the legal direction in the democratic direction. this is a systemic struggle for values. they want to drag us into the former conditional gulak. we want to live in a country of the democratic world of the western dimension of values, and that is why we cannot afford to act in the way that the russian federation imposes on us, these are very important valuable things