[000:00:00;00] a nation that is used to speaking is faced with an action that is mysterious in this sense, it has such an effect that we saw on the example of pelosi who cried, but i want to say that mainly this is a very positive thing. the voices of the country are positive in the sense that many americans are beginning to recognize a few ukrainians are doing is connected with freedom and it forces them to rethink the essence of freedom, it reminds them that freedom is something for which you need to act, that it involves responsibility to act and not just that something is given to you freedom is a failure it is an action and that

the truth for everyone is the truth for you, but this truth is also positive for everyone in the sense that ukraine is now the only topic that everyone in my country can support, this is connected with the feeling that something unacceptable is happening, how ukraine reacts has something very human life therefore, regardless of our political beliefs. we can often talk about ukraine. this is a very dramatic word , i would rather use the word model. it is nice to see that people began to lean towards the values ​​of this world. it is also very important because there are certain points of contact with the previous one. in response to the decline of the west, it is very important that ukrainians not only act, but also speak. it is very important that

zelenskyy speaks, that he continues to speak, that he continues to try, and also that ukrainians in general try to communicate with americans and everyone else. zelenskyi's arrival in washington was a sign, that's true , but the sign was also in the way he spoke, as well as the symbolism in the things he did, he gave a flag made of bahmut and so on mout first of all, i am glad to see you here, my question is about leadership in these troubled times we we see how important it is to have a strong leader in ukraine, we have zelensky, but as for the rest of the world, what is the current situation with leadership in the us and europe? who do you think is a strong leader today, apart from the ukrainian

president, i want to use this opportunity to talk about zelensky because i think that in in this hall, there are probably many people who two or three years ago did not think that zelensky was a strong leader, as many of them talked about it, so before we move on to the opinion that he is a strong leader, i want to think a little about what exactly makes him a good leader wonder because there are actually some really interesting things about him as a person that can be instructive for the 21st century

trying to do everything if you think of a strong leader you might think of someone who is at the top and he gives orders to everyone what to do, but in fact he does not try to do everything, he is convicted, for example, he does not make any mistakes, which putin makes when trying to tell the army what to do. and he also generally recognizes the role of the ukrainian of civil society, so one of the versions of a strong leader is that i must have control over all institutions , while zelensky plays a completely different game, he understands that ukraine is made up of thousands and thousands of small groups, and one of the reasons why ukraine as a state is now stronger than it was before is that the civil society and the state are more or less moving in the same direction and this is something

good for civil society, but i noted something good in that the president generally allows this to happen and of course he should continue to do so, another thing is when you use the word strong, you can think that this is someone who always has his own opinion, but this is not about zelensky, many people contacted him, but i was deeply impressed. when i spoke with him during the counteroffensive in early september i was very impressed by our conversation, he is the president of the country, there is a war and it was a counteroffensive, and your guys were in the kharkiv region. it seems like minutes . they were conquering more and more territory.

important people, but he was still very happy to say what you want to talk about. i want to talk about the philosophy of freedom, and we ended up talking about that. so , he has a special ability to adapt to another person and listen to him. i am playing with the idea of ​​a strong leader . because i think that being a strong leader of a medium-sized country in the 21st century requires many different types of skills, and we should note which ones , so obviously it is about communication zelensky is trying very hard to understand where other people come and i see that every time he meets different foreigners he tries to understand where they came from so he doesn't talk to people from above he shows a certain pride for his country it's

more like country pride than i'm the most important person in the conversation it it is very interesting and very important when people use the phrase strong leader they can mean putin and we should think about what is different between putin and zelensky then he tells people what to do and he is always right and never wrong this is one of the versions of what a strong leader is and when people talked about putin for many years they emphasized this very thing so so so russia is a mess but they have a strong leader and now we have to ask ourselves what do we mean when we say strong what does it mean to be a strong

man , a strong woman, or a strong leader? important in the world we live in, when i think about biden, whom i consider historically the best president, and in my opinion, america has not had a better president since roosevelt, so when i think about what is good in biden, i see a certain coincidence , it is obvious that he is different and many older, but when the war in ukraine started, he tried to convince everyone that it was real and then asked for help, and this was very different from the traditional behavior of americans, which is that we can do everything ourselves , we are going to invade iraq, do you want join us or not but we are doing the right thing

and maybe you want to join us like what biden did and it is very important he warned the europeans that war is coming and said that we will not be able to handle it alone and he is absolutely right we cannot handle it with her on her own this is what was really the defining question who is a strong leader i understand it as who is a good leader actually biden has shown himself very well in many different aspects that may be less visible here but he keeps the issue of the war in ukraine at the center he did a really good job of american politics, which directly depends on the ability to change his opinion. biden is not a young man. one of the stereotypes about older people is that it is difficult for them to change their opinion, but about ukraine. i have already watched him change his

opinion several times, and it is very it's important because if he didn't do that if he thought same as two years ago so your situation was completely different i want to explain my position i'm constantly disappointed with the american government constantly i want them to move faster i think they are too slow but when i look at it from a certain distance they actually see very good leadership we have a really strong leader you can see good leaders mostly women in their 30s i mean an impressive demographic that supports european parliamentary systems are far from ours where young people can become government ministers or even prime ministers i think the most impressive leaders in our western

world are in countries like finland estonia slovakia and even in germany because some ministers and government officials in germany are actually very impressive personalities that in a world where a 70-year-old man started this war, many people who talk the most about the war outside of ukraine are young women who are prime ministers -by the ministers. by the ministers, these are my observations, professor. i want to thank you for the course about ukraine that you developed and teach. my family listens to this course at dinner. the youngest listener is 2.5 years old. you looked, you said that european countries lost their last wars, and my question is how this experience of losing affects their

current foreign policy, now i have a different theory of europe than the europeans, my study of european history is actually directed against the narrative of the european union , because the eu is not about defeat a about peace, while i believe that defeat plays a decisive role happened in 1945 with the germans there was no peace what happened in may 1945 with the germans was a defeat the broad coalition completely crushed of the germans, their leader committed suicide, the surrender was absolute. and then everything changed. when i think about the german

peace movement, i wish there was a german movement for defeat, where the germans openly claim that it is very important for empires to be defeated because they once defeated them. this is the lesson. i would like them to remove from their history because we all want peace for another when i make the argument that europe depends on military defeat i am trying to remind western europeans of what they have removed from own history in the history of the european union was the second world war and then everyone realized that war is bad and started trading with each other. in my opinion, in fact , then germany lost the imperial war, which was mainly about ukraine, the french lost their colonies in southeast asia and north africans, the portuguese and the spanish lost their colonies in africa and

after losing the war, they settled in europe, but europe also became an excuse to not remember what actually happened in this war and even before that i worked a lot on my vision of history partly because i believe it to be true and partly because i think it is important to inform politicians because if you think about what russia is doing. i already said the only way for russia to win is to lose i.e. the empire must lose their last war they must lose their last word and realize that this is a final failure before

they try anything else with the west europeans, i will answer that i do not think that they realize that the european union is based on an iron by no means, and that is why i constantly try to convey this opinion to them . defeat and we should wish defeat by the russians, even if we are not indifferent to the fate of russia. i understand that they are appealing to the ukrainians now, and this is not what you are worried about, but i am also appealing to all germans who care about russia. so, if you do not care about russia it is necessary for this war to end as soon as possible and with a clear defeat of russia, because this is the best chance for the russians to start moving forward, this

war forced europe to return to the second world war, to return to its own myths of origin, and i hope to resist them a little like ukraine, which since 2014 has been a means communication of the real history of europe because the ukrainians understood the essence and they must understand it because of your position, they must understand that we wanted to move from empire to integration and that makes sense the transition from empire to integration will help us build our state, our state has problems, and integration will help, and this is what happened to the europeans, this is what happened to the spanish, portuguese, italians, and poles. they had one or another imperial problem that they solved by joining the european union, and the ukrainians i think they intuitively understand that there is a certain choice

, one way or another, and the russians, by the way, also understand it. putin understands it differently, either integration or empire, and he chooses empire , so i am trying to convey to the europeans that integration must win, and returning to your question about america, we have our own vision that freedom and democracy just appeared. and the europeans believe that integration happens by itself, but this is not the case , it happens because people lose wars, it happens because of other dramatic moments about which later forget questing from the front thank you very much for this question from the front from mykola tysenko, a historian who asks about the chinese president who recently visited russia because the partnership is stronger and

growing, what in your opinion is the role of china in to the russian-ukrainian war. thank you. first, i will talk about what, in my opinion, ukrainians should report themselves because it is really important for how americans and europeans see the world. what worries us, what worries us in the 21st century, we worry about china and how we worry china is that china is going to invade taiwan, now thanks to you we have become less concerned about it but we do not give you credit for this, the logic is that since ukraine is

resisting russia, it is not so sure that they can just enter taiwan if moscow cannot simply enter kyiv, then it is possible and for beijing it will not be an easy task , this is just one of the many manifestations of how the ukrainian resistance actually made the world more peaceful and less risky. when there is a war between ukraine and russia one of our impulses is to think oh this is very scary and then we shift the focus to our own fears but in fact the world has become safer in my opinion it has become safer because of this war when you

ukrainians are told that you sacrifice yourself for the sake of other people. sometimes you don't even realize how true this is because it has consequences all over the world, in particular with regard to china, that we are now less afraid of the scenario with taiwan. ukrainians should emphasize how many ways you make the world safer one of them china another europe to me world of the war scenario between nato and russia has now burst like a soap bubble who are the russians i mean that finland can well i shouldn't talk about such things

but in particular the idea that russia is going to invade finland now is absurd, as well as the fact that russia can attack poland . to be honest, they would not be able to cope with the polish army in any way now, even the scenarios of unification into a single baltic state are much less scary than a year ago, and all this is thanks to ukraine, that is, ukraine made the rest of europe much safer you know what i'm talking about ukraine made the lives of the germans french spanish and so on much better because the risk of war in europe decreased because you basically absorbed the war in europe on your on your own territory you took the entire blow of the russian army on you europeans can talk about how scared they are but in fact you made europe safer continuing this topic i will add about nuclear war

people in the west sometimes fall for russian nuclear propaganda because we like to think that it is possible for us one should be afraid, but the ukrainian resistance actually made a nuclear war much less likely because the ukrainians show that nuclear blackmail can be resisted and that the war may not go beyond the conventional framework this is a rather long argument but basically i'm trying to say that if i were a ukrainian and i was talking about the chinese, the first thing i would say to my western partners was, you know, we made the situation much more profitable for you than it was before because it 's really true, we americans are not going to say that, we don't let's say we need to hear it but we will never say that because from america's point of view we are a great power and

china is a great power and everything that happens in china has to do with us but actually there are certain things you can do to influence to china, which we would never be able to do, you reduced the risk, he is not from taiwan, as we never dreamed, you did it not entering into a confrontation with china, in general , there is no direct confrontation with china, on the contrary , zelenskyi constantly talks about the ukrainian official position we would like to have better relations with china come to visit why not another thing about china and russia, you need to remember that the chinese actually have nothing to do with russia from the point of view of beijing russia is just a large african country that has natural resources russia exists in order to

the russian internal elite could be mocked and manipulated just like they do with the african elites, that's who russia is in their eyes, they don't take russia as their equal, they can try to convince the russians of this, but in reality they never thought about russia like that for them russia is another client state or a place where there is water wormwood bark natural gas and oil they think of russia as a country with a dysfunctional central government that barely extends to siberia they will talk about russia is trying to please putin a little, but they do not think that russia is anything like them, the russians would like to believe it, but the attitude of the chinese is different, and from this point of view of china, it is somewhat uncomfortable that russia loses, it is uncomfortable when your good partners and clients lose, but the chinese really do not care that the russians die this is my opinion that i was asked to express and

not everyone shares it. however, the chinese do not care that russia is weakened by the war. they just like it. they like that russia is weakened by the war, because going back directly to i don't think that there is anything like a partnership between china and russia. i think that i visited russia and told the russians that this is not a partnership for them and that the longer the war lasts, the weaker russia becomes, that's why it claims that it's a multipolar war, that it's just a conflict and so on, they benefit from the fact that russia is weakening. of course, they will never say this out loud, because it will offend the russians, but it is obvious that such a situation is in their hands, and as a result of their agreement with russia

, they are becoming better and better in all matters. do not mention putin now. as a geopolitician, because i have been repeating this for a long time, putin is a terrible geopolitician, because if he really cared about russia, if he were a real leader , he would understand that it is necessary to maintain a balance between china and america or china and the west. i would like to always be able to say okay americans i'm going to china or ok beijing i'm going to washington and what did putin do as a leader since 2014, he has made it impossible to cooperate with the naive fallen west in the west there were a lot of people who agreed with putin be it for gas or for anything else, and we tried to reset our foreign policy during the obama era, people really wanted cooperation with russia to be impossible, all this with its invasion of ukraine, what does this mean for

russia in a strategic plan, it means that china is the only possible partner and this is a terrible position because if you claim to be in a multipolar world then why do you want to be dependent on one of the poles, it would be logical to be able to jump from one pole to another but this option now not because of putin, he became dependent on china because he distanced himself from us and from the europeans and tried very hard for this , historically it turned out that putin was not perceived as peter the first or catherine ii, so that they did not think about them there, they clearly knew how to build russia, they had my global vision of russia, i don't think that putin has it, he made a terrible mistake by creating a situation in russia that depends on china and , in general, this whole story about russia and the west , it's all so fake, they know putin knows

solovyov knows, they all know that the west is not is a threat to them in any serious sense, they all know it well, but they pretend that it is not so , and deep down they also know that china is a threat to them, they know it, but they do not talk about it because their political and private careers that made them very rich and successful depends on what they say about protection and how silent they wake up , but if putin was a true russian leader, he would care about china. as for china's aid to russia, let's go back to biden and the fact that biden is good president, the biden administration is concerned about this and is trying to convey to the chinese that such support can have economic consequences, the chinese regime is not democratic, it is not as unstable as in russia, but it is not

a democratic regime. i am not an expert on china and there are people who will have a more informed opinion than me. but my intuition tells me that the chinese communist party depends on economic growth and economic growth depends on exports, and therefore they are vulnerable in a world to which the americans and europeans feel they must direct their economy and away from china they are vulnerable to this even more than russia because the russians do not expect to become richer every year and the chinese expect that the biden administration is right and the europeans should also pay attention to this to make the chinese understand that if you arm russia and fusion and our the golden began economic consequences will be not far away this is the line that

should be drawn that was not laconic to thank 13th hour in ukraine news time on the espresso tv channel in the studio iryna koval welcomes all viewers and to the most important events just now, due to the russian shelling, more than 20 settlements were left without electricity