[000:00:00;00] we do not understand this because we live in the system of a survival society, european society or american society, it is different, but we like to repeat as a mantra that our president spoke before the parliaments, he means that he said that he strengthened the image of ukraine , public opinion, polar president, a symbol of support, this is not the case at all, the president bach really did a great job with his appeals. there is no court . imagine if there were no such appeals and there would be no president. i can explain to you illustratively. i always think about it because one of my russian acquaintances once told me that when i was a young man he told me that he met a girl in germany. well , we were walking, we met, and then the girl invited him to visit him. how did he pass? this is an intellectual and a moscow boy thinks that

he was invited here to see them pleasantly and when they were already sitting there they were drinking champagne at her place everything turned out so well and the tv was working and suddenly they started showing the news it was a war in yugoslavia, about silver, about some genocide of murdered children, and the girl burst into tears, turned around and told him i'm sorry . we'll have to stop our date today because i wasn't there and he left. for him as for a soviet and a post-soviet person . it was just unpleasant news. well, why not postpone life when we have such good news

. this is how we are in principle and inside our country . this is how we live now, at least the president zelenskyi spoke about this today, but it is simple to understand that when an ordinary person in germany or the combined state sees anything, she has no doubts, but we saw that we looked at a sociological survey in germany regarding eighty percent of germans who believe that ukraine should be helped out of this 80%. there 79-35 believe that they are not helping enough, this is public opinion, people like scholz look at it and understand that they can put anything they want and something what do you want well , what about the germans in general after the second world war pacifists, but wait, how did they become pacifists, they were not shown the germans who were after the war, these germans who were after the war did not want to know about it, they did not want to know, you know

, they were taken to the cinemas, they showed auschwitz, they simply turned away from the execution , all these conversations came back that the germans repented, they don't tell anything, they just didn't want to know it because it was such a horror, she says we are victims of nazism . it was a lie, but their children are the children of the grandchildren. they were not born, they already perceived it completely differently and they perceived the war as evil, precisely because their grandparents and parents had to commit such terrible crimes that were absolutely impossible to explain, and now they are being shown to these germans the post-war period, it is not these

germans who served in the wehrmacht that committed the same crimes who were convicted , the russian soldiers of their high intelligence are doing it, and so in every country, the french, who know that such crimes were committed by the germans on their land , killed resistance figures, shot those who help them, and suddenly they see how it is part of the national myth, how it corresponds to reality is another question, but it is part of the french national myth, when they see that practically what is happening in ukraine, empathy begins, and what is important is as soon as the europeans start doing something to find a common language with moscow .

we should not give those weapons, russia immediately thinks that this is a weakness and immediately starts or bombards ukraine, the image of dark kyiv or dark lviv appears, people see how peaceful cities are immersed in this darkness and how the russians are happy about this on television, that is, they themselves are doing everything they can to support this european empathy, not we , we can at all, yes, we could do nothing. i think it is very good that we are doing that the president speaks, that the representatives of the government speak, that the representatives of the society speak but the main motive is not that we got emotional what we heard about the language, the main motive is that we are angry that we saw a crime , you understand, and we don't fully understand it either, because we didn't behave like that we

didn't, we didn't have such empathy for the country which there were no similar wars because we are a part of the post-soviet society, a part of the survival society where people are only interested in their own tragedy and not interested in other people's. we were very surprised when the president of georgia said exactly what they did and that the peace agreement between russia and ukraine should include all issues of georgian territories ours so far. and how is it, they don’t help us , and they don’t supply us with weapons, and they obviously have a completely strange position in the current georgian government in relation to this war, a position that i would say is morally incompatible even with this position held by the leadership of ukraine in 2008. our president was one of the few leaders of countries who flew to tbilisi when there were not many russian troops stationed near tbilisi. there were leaders there, the leaders of the baltic countries of poland and ukraine and moreover, this did not increase our

president's popularity in our country itself . but it was solidarity that should always be remembered. i think that with this gesture of solidarity viktor yushchenko simply entered the european of history, but the issue of abkhazia of the southern session is not a georgian issue, it is an issue of international law, we ourselves should want russia to give up all its claims to foreign lands, because if we say oh, you give us crimea, do what you want in abkhazia, they will return to crimea because they will know that it is only a temporary problem, but does this mean that we can ask, i am not saying to demand that georgia somehow join the process, these are not related to each other, we just have to believe that the result of the defeat of russia should be uh restoration of international law here are two ways, or international law is restored and this is the guarantee

of our security, so this is a conditional international conference at which international law is restored, the territorial integrity of ukraine, moldova, georgia is guaranteed, there can be a separate conference that should not concern russia, that will normalize relations between azerbaijan and armenia, and this is the case the soviet union is finally closed or not then this is another conference in which it is said that let georgia recognize the independence of abkhazia southern session moldova will create a federation with transnistria of my recognition of the independence of the territory whose accession to russia and let ukraine recognize the fact of the russian status of crimea and donetsk luhansk kherson zaporizhia oblast can already go this way which way do we want to go i think we should go the way of international law i am for the first way but to think that it is possible to be half pregnant, to say that we will take what is ours by war , and if they do not want to fight, then let it

remain russia, i repeat this, give russia the opportunity to return for what it considers and she will consider it no matter what. well, that means we need to make a more serious army, develop the military industry, if we cannot use nuclear weapons , what is it because china does not like it? yes, we need a modern army, in 10 years we will be ready to destroy this ukraine whether or not in 10 years we will be ready for the conflict, knowing modern technologies to strike so that in 5 days nothing will be left of them or so that they know that we can have such a military moment that the president of ukraine himself will come to moscow and sign the act of surrender because either you sign or in 72 hours you will be gone and such a simple surrender will join us and everything will be fine русский язык русский мир so i believe that this danger for the future is very serious and this danger must

be fought precisely by returning to international law, russia must admit that it has no right to rob someone else 's territory, it is obvious that the people living in abkhazia have their own desires, the people living in south ossetia have their own desires, they are living people but that russia once gave opportunities to people living in georgia, to people living in abkhazia, they prey on people, can we talk to each other without russian supervision or not? and all because these countries have never had their independent will in their lives, their e-e armed forces are incorroborated armed forces of the russian federation. i am absolutely sure that if there was a negotiation process between georgia, abkhazia, south city

mediation of the euro, he would not immediately, but after some time he came out to understand how the caucasian region should look, and the people who live in sukhum did not live in this 85th year, in which they were frozen there for the rest of their lives, these same people also have the right to live in in the modern world, people who live in teraspol have the right to live in the modern world, not in the soviet union . in 1974, it is also necessary to understand that russia stopped the development of all these territories for ten years. people are waiting there . the population is small, nothing is developing there. standing with i would say with broken windows, you know, this is what the kaliningrad region of the russian federation looked like for a long time . roy yes, russia never believed that it was for long. how strange and only development, everything that was there was simply exported to continental russia, and all these stalinist high-rise buildings in in kyiv and all this was built of stone in a tuning assembly and in east prussia, the poles believed that it was given to them

forever, they built gdansk, they built elblong szczecin, the russians simply destroyed the kaliningrad region almost there there were nothing, there were castles, they turned into nothing, when a new generation of people appeared, who began to rebuild these castles and castles, they were always perceived by everyone else as strangers only after the 75th year , after the helsinki act, which confirmed that the borders in soviet europe would not be violated the leadership decided that the kaliningrad region can be developed in some way, that they are not sentries there by the method. and not always, and here too it is very important. when they occupy abkhazia, when they occupy southern education, when they buy the ukrainian lands of transnistria, they do not know how many years did they come there, it's still not their territory, you understand, and that's why you don't invest money here, they're just looking at

how it's efficient to rob everything in a quick time, but mr. vitaly, in a row of all these uh territories that you just named, one piece of it is knocked out crimea is occupied by russia and it would be untrue to say that russia did not invest in crimea all these years and did nothing there. why is crimea an exception in this series because crimea is propagandistically perceived as a sacred territory for the russian federation for of the russian people, this is an eternal myth because it is a peninsula of eternal defeats and for a country like russia it is very important to turn these defeats into victory, firstly, secondly, i don't think you can say that crimea developed very seriously economically these eight years, until they built a bridge to bring some is needed in the essence of the city that helped turn crimea into a military base from

the economic point of view. as you can see, the main idea was to create a corridor, in particular because crimea means nothing without the mainland. they are possible to develop, in addition to developing as a military base, this is true because crimea was taken in order to take the south of ukraine, and therefore, of course, they built roads for tanks and military equipment , but to say that enterprises were built there , the economy was not built there. but russia invested a lot there, and all the others the regions are not a bridgehead for us, there is absolutely no need to invest money in abkhazia so that it is a bridgehead for the offensive of nagruz or southern city there and so the tank brigade will reach transnistria in a few hours, just like you you understand, it does not need any development in this situation because, first of all, it does not have a border, there are no borders with ukraine, but if the russians took over the south of ukraine, you

saw how transnistria is developing as a military base in order to keep romania under wraps, why does russia need it at all like ukraine, if you think like this only from the point of view of the territory of the development of sacredness, there is no corridor to europe. imagine what people like putin lost when they lost not kyiv , not kharkiv, but uzhgorod, but the people who live in transcarpathia, they do not live in war, but they must be aware of what is being thought of them every 24 hours when you have a tank brigade in uzhgorod, where did the soviet army go to czechoslovakia in general, it is similar to 1968 , it went from there it is very fast you can quickly get to any central european country when the leaders czechoslovakia, which was then in the czech republic, slovakia, poland, hungary and romania, know

that there is a large russian tank army in transcarpathia, otherwise they will surely build their relations with russia, that's why it's bad for us without uzhgorod, for us without uzhhorod, it's like two without hands without a third hand, as a military expert says, and therefore, of course, in this situation, if we cannot own all this territory , we are not their masters in europe. i remember it all perfectly, and what do you remember from 1991 when boris yeltsin told me how do you want me to lead a country where there will be ukraine without ukraine? i am the president of an asian country, and with ukraine a european country. and what does this mean? it is not just a european country by territory. everything is simple for you and everything is so easy. oh, when i heard something like that, give him crimea, give him donbas, what does it mean to give it

? it seems that he turned a blind eye to donbas. were limited to the black sea in europe to work on the kno. this is not about the black sea , but about the baltic sea, about the swedes as pigs, why are the russians now doing everything possible to prevent the swedes from joining nato, we see that this is such a joint game, not the finns, but the swedes, because gotsman island, which is located in the center of the baltic sea, is actually a window that peter made and closes forever as soon as sweden becomes a member of nato, no one will be interested in the fact that russia is on the shores of the baltic, why does russia need all control over the azov sea in order to have full control over the black sea over this pool to threaten georgia, ukraine, turkey, romania, and bulgaria

. why did russia try to turn montenegro into an independent state, even against the wishes of its brother serbia, because it believed in delusion but i remember it very well. because the representatives of the russian leadership told me aloud at the time that political montenegro will be the only mediterranean country where the russian fleet will be stationed, and thus everything will actually be paralyzed by the fact that there will be invincible russian ships in the black sea bays. it didn't work out. i would say that the north atlantic union beat russia, but do you remember that russia planned a military coup in montenegro. they wanted to kill president milladjukanovic, they were ready for anything just to put these ships there, well, monaco remains. as they say there, i don't think that the prince of monaco wanted to see, uh , instead of the yachts of the russian oligarchs, some russian russian girlish russian ships

, yes, in this regard, russia lost the mediterranean and that's why yes, it is necessary syria, dad. all this is far away, of course, but at least somewhere there, and they wanted it here in europe, and this war is the beginning of this expansion. that is why it is so important to knock russia out of all ukrainians, the term ugh and not to miss a single ukrainian dot. one interesting point seems to me, is something changing at least so far , the rhetoric of the old, new, whatever, of the leadership of the state of israel, benimin will not tanyagu , speaking with emmanuel macron, the french president noted that he will think about giving ukraine, perhaps, some kind of military face. well, we know this from the times newspaper the prime minister of israel himself did not say this . but this is a signal, and you do not understand the people who

ruled israel, the daughters of the minister anatoly bennet and there are people who treat politics as a tool protection of national interests, he treats politics like a chessboard. well, he looks like the president of turkey. and if russia makes a move here as a chess piece by strengthening military cooperation with iran , iran supplies russia with drones and ballistic missiles. this is another move, and they turn these drones into ballistic missiles ukraine for a large military laboratory, the results of which can be used in the war in the middle east . the greeting of the disease is two moves. the first is isfahan and other military facilities. i say you see, in principle we can destroy everything because we know where everything is and the second

move he is making towards moscow here you will continue to help iran you will buy weapons from him good we also have something to offer the ukrainian side, they are not strangers to us and russians now of course they will start knocking on the door of the prime minister 's office, it is not known what he will say there, you understand. if you don't want it, please remove the frame of your arsenal weapon, if you don't remove it, well, we will consider the ukrainian proposals next i think that in ukraine any of the options is suitable in principle. i think that this is not the end of the option, because here it is still a game of the united states, because if you were the secretary of state of the united states, anthony blinken, this is also a move that made its move it is necessary to openly criticize yahu for his certain actions on the domestic scene and in relations with the palestinians, but he said that of course we understand your concern about iran and you

have er. we will be together, but you should help ukraine more. so what is this step? in the direction of the united states, this is such a multi-step game and the material is one of those politicians, i cannot call myself his big supporter, but he is one of those politicians who knows how to see the whole board , this is a great experience. well, when a person manages the government of a country like israel for many years , it has to be learn this until when you are just learning to be the prime minister of israel, how was it with the brand, i will go badly, you are taking a simple step. we don't want a confrontation with russia now, so we will also supply ukraine with humanitarian aid, and about military even if something happens, let no one know better, we will keep quiet and it will be easier for us, so we will not force the palestinian issue now, so that we will not be attacked from washington, and then we will not have to escalate this issue of supplies to ukraine in order to

appease the americans. as if we came out of the water dry and then it turns out that we didn't come out dry, something didn't come out dry in our country because ira appeared here as a result of this policy , ira appeared on our doorstep very close, well, that's it and we have to deal with it to deal with italy and not for him, it just plays differently and the whole history of the state of israel from its strong prime ministers is the history of these chessboards about signaling in the same way that he can think about mediation between russia and ukraine in the event that if it is the will of all parties so to say well, he is not the first to say it. and i don't think that this is his desire . it is simply considered that he is a person who has known putin for many years, who has his own personal relationship with biden. do you know how

many years they have known biden, they were still when they got rid of both of them as young guys. that is, they are there for some 30 years, they are not there. yahu, it is 40 years of biden’s life, or like his father, he is not there. i go with biden and there, well, that is what it is . he worked for him for many years in the united states . that is, he is a personal acquaintance. one greeting has his personal relationship with zelensky, he was familiar with him, he was looking for zelensky became the president, who was the prime minister, yes, he met him, so it is also obvious that there is some element of trust, plus a common jewish origin, which is also capital in this case which creates some kind of trust unexpectedly three means if we have putin if we have biden if we have zelensky then in principle we can be mediators, well, that is, i , you can't, on the other hand, i perfectly understand that i have nothing to mediate because i i see what's happening but i can't say you know i don't want i say i want but you all have to want it putin biden and zelensky you have to tell me that

i have to meet with you as a mediator for me or you have a good one i can't tell you you know i'll come, i'll make you all a politician this is not how it is built, it is a question of your goodwill. if you want to find an understanding between yourselves, i will talk to you. this is classic shuttle diplomacy. by and large, kissinger is not the king. he only says what he says. what if you want, then i will do it if you don't want it, i won't do it. well, by the way, the experience of prime minister bennett, who was basically a mediator because they asked for it in kyiv and were ready to meet with him in moscow, but as a result of this nothing happened in as a result, ben was also criticized for what he brought to zelensky, she was on his way. he was asked to speak with putin . well, he didn’t hear anything good there

. zelensky reported it, and there is absolutely no need to be, unlike benet, i would. said the person who brings bad news, no , he was created in such a way, or he can only bring good news , he is a winning politician, not a messenger politician , and therefore, of course, i think that it should be reformulated, reformulated, no, yahu alone of those world politicians who can talk to all participants in the conflict, another such politician is undoubtedly the president of turkey and its prodan. but he does not have the same level of relations with the united states as the prime minister of israel, usually the level of relations with the united states is many times higher and not tanya can have a lobbying influence on american politics olga is not on this, in

principle, we cannot have a trusting relationship with putin, i looked at the relationship with zelenskyi, i am also not sure that putin trusts putin in the house talks to him, no, he can in principle trust no one. well, yes, too, but i think that there is a greater common language of civilization because every person who talks to a vidogan perfectly understands that the rdagan never reveals even one of his greeting cards , he can reveal two of which one will be completely detached from his real intentions but this is already a game and therefore of course a mediator is better than erdoğan but again what is there to mediate about that at the moment there are clear formulations of russia connected with the fact that

ukraine will fall sooner or later that this is the question time and time for russia to talk about . territory. at this stage, there is no possibility for dialogue. will this opportunity arise in 2025-2026? maybe you can in 2027. will netenyahu anatoly med become the prime minister of israel? coincides with the fog of war. then maybe at that moment it will be needed as an intermediary between the president of the united states and the head of the people's republic of china because there can only be several wars at the same time and the war in taiwan may seem much more interesting than the war in ukraine , which everyone will already forget about as a priority

there a year said mr. burns march 27 said 27 this is all without can speak 27 i can speak 26th - it's all absolutely nothing about the war can absolutely calmly end this year because there are no predictions of the war well yes, we understand that we entered into a long-term trade conflict, but it very often happens that something happens that crosses out all our analytical challenges, we work with numbers and history works with facts, you understand, yes , one more very short comment of yours, today 116 of our defenders and russian e -th sources say that the united arab emirates joined this exchange, this is such an exceptional story, they don't always join, the last time it seems like this was when we were returning the defenders of azovstal they always go to turkey, khrystyna, when there is no real trust between the parties. they are looking for a mediator who is as far away from

the conflict as possible, and therefore they can trust him . that is why turkey is why saudi arabia is why the united arab emirates as a hub for solving such sensitive issues. i am very glad that we still saw a number of our defenders at home today and we wish them a successful rehabilitation and a return to peaceful or military life as they decide their fate life thank you, we are finishing the saturday political club program thank you khrystyna yatskiv thank you vitaliy portnikov and stay with