[000:00:00;00] sometimes they comment that, well, they were no less surprised . if we manage to get out , well, nothing, when we get to the coast of the sea of ​​azov, that is, we will cut off the supply by land with the mainland of russia of everything necessary for the waging of the war. well, in the conditional environment, there will be only the crimean bridge on which equipment can move, but it is also not eternal, it can be destroyed very quickly . well, the only thing left is to transport something by water in the crimea. well, they even calculated such an option, the russians in novorossiysk was rebuilt by those amphibious ships on which they transport marines in i still found transport works on which they will bring something or an educator of people directly from the island. well , let's imagine that they

were trained in this way. which point inside the island there is nowhere to hide, then we should not talk about negotiations, we should deliver an ultimatum, as they said before , the surrender of russian troops located in crimea, this is called the surrender of visas that were surrounded in case they refuse to surrender, we will destroy them without even entering the peninsula, because we have enough missile artillery systems to do this, what does victory mean, what kind of negotiations, with whom to negotiate again - this is an ultimatum to the encirclement, surrender or you will be destroyed everything what do negotiations mean, well, if you call it an ultimatum, negotiations, if this is what is meant, then let it be negotiations, negotiations , but for some reason these negotiations used to be called ultimatums, well, that's what it is. thank you, oleksiy, for the conversation. it was oleksiy hetman

he is a veteran of the russian-ukrainian war, a major of the national guard in the reserve, friends, we work live on the tv channel, the press, and also on the youtube and facebook platforms. those who are currently watching us on social networks and on youtube can like this video , subscribe to our pages, and vote in our to the survey today we ask you about whether it is necessary to ban the rpc branch in ukraine yes no your option there are three options for answers, well the third option is the one you will write in our comments under this video we are interested to know your opinion please write and at the end of the program we will sum up the results of this vote further on we will have oleksandr khara diplomat expert on foreign and security policy of the center of defense strategies i congratulate you mr. oleksandr and i am glad that you joined our program, thank you for the invitation , let's start with the last message that was circulated with the armed forces of ukraine just a few minutes ago, they officially

report the possible preparation of provocations on the territory in the near future of the zaporizhzhia npp on july 4, according to operational information, foreign objects similar to explosive devices were placed on the outer curve of the third and fourth power units of the station. nato is a dutch admiral. he says that if there is an explosion at a gas station there, it will affect not only ukraine and russia, but the whole planet in general, and europe, in particular, according to your opinion, if russia dares to any provocations at the zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, perhaps at the kursk nuclear power plant or at some nuclear power plant located on

the territory of the ukrainian state, how harsh will the world's reaction be and whether it will not be the red line that the west always talks about, but here there is no way russia will cross these red lines so that they feel even tougher sanctions, even tougher treatment, even tougher conclusions. well, you know , i would like deterrence so that the northern barbarians themselves do not resort to another a war crime of such a scale, because we saw with the kakhov hpp, er, it seems to have normalized. i wouldn't say that somehow our western partners reacted in such a way that it was painful and that the russians thought about not doing their business anymore with regard to the zaporizhia nuclear tatar station , of course i would like the position, first of all, of the united states, as well as other allies , to be as it is defined in the draft

resolution of senators graham and buntal, and the resolution is not binding, but it is not important, it is an important signal, so far i have not yes, it says that any strike of a nuclear weapon or a dirty nuclear bomb or something interactive at nuclear power plants will be considered and it does not matter whether it is russian troops or belarusian or proxy forces such as wagner will be considered in fact an attack on e- nato member countries and will require a response , which is provided for in article five of the washington treaty, that is, a collective response, and actually i hope for such clear signals from the united states, above all, that this is a terrorist attack on a global scale, it will simply be will cause such an attack on the russian infrastructure that it will not be able to corrugate before that, you remember very well the same benhodges said that as soon as russia

uses such a weapon, the united states can deliver an asymmetric strike, that is, with non-nuclear weapons and conventional weapons, but in terms of force it will be equal to a nuclear attack and he called the black sea fleet of the russian federation and its russian military infrastructure in the temporarily occupied territory of crimea among the targets, so i hope that it will not come to the point that these crazy people commit such an act terrorist once again, and actually they are restrained by the readiness of the united states, first of all, to well, you saw the reaction a few days ago, sincere espresso, i spoke with general ben hodges, i asked him a fairly simple question: if putin is a terrorist, and he is a terrorist and the person who seized the zaporizhia nuclear power plant and blackmails the whole world is blackmailing with tactical nuclear weapons , for some reason, putin will not act like a terrorist, as

is usually done all over the world, that is , no one negotiates with terrorists, they will simply be destroyed, why will the world not take this extreme step he didn't give me a clear answer. maybe you know the most important answer. of course it's a nuclear weapon. of course, this person sitting in the bunker is afraid of his physical death. of course, this is actually a red line when putin can press there is a button although all other threats and we have seen it since the beginning of a large-scale invasion, or rather, even since 2014. well, let's remember that peking then he admitted in an interview that he had given instructions to bring his nuclear deterrent forces into combat readiness. well, actually, since february 24

last year, they brought them into combat readiness several times, then conducted extraordinary training, that is, in fact, in this way, he constantly reminds that he has this weapon and that he can do something. well, actually, this is the main answer to why some tamahawk or some other smart missile will not fly there this creature from history hmm was simply used because of course it is nothing. this is something to hope for . something like this should not be done exclusively in the event of an armed conflict between the russian federation and nato countries, one can hope that such a plan will be the representative of nato secretary general jens stoltenberg announced today that the term of his mandate at the head of the alliance has been extended for another year and his mandate will expire on october 1 , 2024. in fact, these mandates were extended by all the members of the alliance, but today

stoltenberg informed about this. does this mean, mr. oleksandr, that stoltenberg can become the secretary general of nato who will welcome ukraine to the north atlantic alliance, well, god forbid, in principle, it is very interesting, first of all, i want to remind you that he already extended this term, and it was connected with a large-scale invasion. and they decided not to change the secretary general this time, in fact . the same motivation, since on the one hand he is not in the topic, he works quite effectively, and on the other hand, nato did not want them, well, you can say such pre-election races because there are interesting candidates there and the prime ministers of the european countries , the zinki and powerful names in the security plan , especially decided to leave him. and by the way, he

is second in the middle, well, in nato history, for it is necessary for the longevity of his stay in this position. he probably won’t be able to overcome the 12-year term like his predecessor in the 70s. that’s it, but it seems unlikely . well, let’s say that we have legitimate demands to the alliance to give a clear signal and for ukraine to become a member of nato immediately after the end of this war with a victory. and to be honest, i hope that such a formula will be found , but on the other hand, most likely, such a formula will not be something better than bucharest 2008. but it is unlikely that this will be a clear signal. little girl the door is open to that. it seems to me unlikely that this can happen except under the conditions of a defeated offensive by the ukrainian armed forces and a collapse of the russian front , which will cause a chain reaction in

the russian federation itself. er, the russian federation looks like a powerful totalitarian state, a state with such bloody but still leaders , but in fact it is a cry inside and if there is a strong enough blow one by one, it will start pour down and precisely under these conditions, of course, the possibility of ukraine joining nato will increase when there are certain destructive processes and , for sure, i hope disintegration in the russian federation, then there will be a historic chance open for ukraine to become a member and in order to hold back russia, yes, no let's say, reclaiming what belongs to us will take place in the vilnius of the north atlantic alliance, where the president of the united states of america, joseph biden, is also planning to come, and before that, before

the summit, volodymyr zelenskyi repeats the fact that the alliance must give a positive signal to ukraine, otherwise there is no point in ukraine in general, there are any negotiations or, er , there is no point in developing any activity . what do you think will be a victory for ukraine during this, what will we consider as positive news from vilnius? well of course, the maximalist position is a clear signal that ukraine does not just have the right. and if the door is open, and that it will become a member of nato immediately after the end of the war, and of course we do not demand that nato accept us and then fight with the russian federation, which is nuclear we want to liberate all our territories from e-e and then become a member of the alliance, on the one hand, to receive, first of all, a nuclear umbrella, and on the other hand, to be an important contributor to european security and

deter the northern barbarians from any thoughts about the baltic states of poland or romania or in other directions of course it will be positive for us, and this seems to me to be the sweetest part of this bitter pipe that we can get at the summit, it will be the commitment of the nato member countries, if they say so, their long-term and legal commitments to assistance to ukraine as, to be honest, i did not use such a phrase as a security guarantee, because we already had security assurances in the budapest memorandum, and of course that until the fifth article of the washington treaty does not apply to us, that is , an attack on ukraine means a collective response of all nato members e- in this sense, any agreement cannot be called a guarantee of security

, but a guarantee of security assistance. a month, a year or longer. we still need certain capabilities that will allow us to defend ourselves and deter future aggressions of the russian federation, and as far as i know, the ukrainian side has already conveyed to our partners exactly the vision of the defense forces that we want to have in order to be sure that any aggression from on the russian side in the future, it may be actually overcome and ukraine will be victorious. and actually this is the most important result that i hope we will get from this summit in terms of financial obligations from the point of view in terms of what capabilities they will give us, starting with what we already have and artillery and tanks, ending with conventional long-range missiles and e aviation and actually access to, including intelligence means , what we do not have and we lack, we

will leave extremely from e-e from our western partners to intelligence, the purpose of the directive, that is, everything that makes high-tech weapons so effective and, accordingly, gives us an asymmetric advantage , so i hope that this will be a powerful package legally binding on all countries and which they will perform and, accordingly, the ukrainian defense will increase its ability to materialize. it is clear that this is already the final point of these negotiations and some decisions, and it is possible that the fate of these documents, which you are talking about, which will be recorded and signed at the summit, will be decided these days. we remember that a year ago, when sweden and finland announced their intention to join nato , they received temporary guarantees from several members of the north atlantic alliance, in particular

great britain, or could this formula be used for ukraine well, unfortunately, it cannot be used yet, do you remember how the ukrainians, uh, asked nato to close the sky so that , uh, russian missiles would not aim at ukrainian uh, maternity homes and residential quarters, and actually the factor of nuclear weapons and the reluctance of our western partners to cause a direct conflict between nato and the russian federation, which could lead, as diplomats say, to unforeseen consequences. bearing in mind in this case, of course, the use of nuclear weapons, that is why such guarantees should be provided guarantees that we will be supported. let's say certain capabilities . i mean, first of all, armaments and equipment. well, as well as financial assistance, such guarantees as you say are not yet possible. by and large, guarantees

of ukraine's security can be three first - it is actually a nuclear weapon. i think that it is not needed, considering that it has a large number of nuclear weapons, it has a fairly powerful nuclear weapons system, despite the fact that, let's say , it is quite powerful, at least moscow is well protected, but of course, our uh, armed forces show the possibility and ingenuity of bypassing this system, but in any case, in the calculations of nuclear weapons, let's say so , it is necessary to assume that they will be able to intercept a certain number of carriers; secondly, this is actually the agreement between the united states of japan when an attack to japan will automatically mean the participation of the armed forces of the united states on the side of japan, and the third is the fifth article of the washington treaty

. taking into account the nuclear factor. but after our victory, the situation will be somewhat different. i hope that the defeat of the russian federation will be painful on the territory of ukraine, it will cause internal destructive processes, and when this chaos begins in moscow and in russia, i hope that the traditional riot will be merciless and senseless. are loved in the russian federation. that is when the opportunity will open. and in fact, then ukraine can also receive temporary guarantees until the parliaments of the nato member countries ratify the relevant documents on the accession of ukraine and, accordingly of our membership and at the end of our conversation dudka, if possible, about the situation around saakashvili, the ministry of foreign affairs of ukraine asked the ambassador of georgia to go to tbilisi, well, in fact, for consultation, as it was said after he was summoned to the ministry of foreign affairs, georgia zakaraashvili, and

hmm, because his condition worsened of the imprisoned citizen of ukraine mykhailo saakashvili, this saakashvili case, does georgia properly respond to our requests for our reaction to this case, or in principle those who are in tbilisi, they are now under by some influence of the russian federation, in fact, this whole story of saakashvili is a continuation of this influence and the strengthening of the influence of the russians in georgia, so you are absolutely right and it looks like, well, it’s a pity that this kartveilo er means that the people of er georgians are er absolutely pro-ukrainian and anti-russian, taking into account that 20% of their territory is temporarily occupied, but unfortunately the government is such that it is what it is and it resorts to such things, well, it is really very painful to look at this person, it does not matter what

she did, that is, she definitely did not do what she behaved inhumanely, and according to the demands of ukraine and our partners, they are absolutely legitimate and of course there should be a certain reaction. on the other hand, by actually offering him 48 hours to go to tbilisi for a consultation , the georgian was actually deprived of the possibility of a contre de mar, so that it would be traditional if something is not liked in the relations between the superstates, it is the same step to recall the ambassador for consultation an indefinite term is an indicator that the relationship is almost on the verge of breaking diplomatic relations, and therefore it seems to me that it was done very correctly , because unfortunately we do not have any tools to influence this process more than we can. well, of course, what do we have

again any fault of this person, but he definitely does not deserve to be killed slowly. thank you, mr. oleksandr. this was oleksandr hara, diplomats , foreign and security policy issues, center of defense strategies, friends, we work in live on the espresso tv channel, as well as on our platforms on youtube and facebook, for those who are currently watching us on youtube and facebook , please like this video, subscribe to our social networks. well, you can become a sponsor of the espresso channel. now we will show you a qr-code by going to with which you will find detailed instructions on how to help develop our espresso youtube channel, we will be grateful for any help because we work for you, also read our news on the espresso tv website, we work for you 24 hours a day 24/7 for more timely information

from ukraine, the world and the frontline chronicle, everything is on our website espresso tv well , then we have mykola knyazhytskyi , people's deputy of ukraine p. mykola i congratulate you and i am glad to see you on our air. to see on the air, let's start with the situation surrounding the kiev-pechersk lavra and the eviction of moscow monks. on july 4, the commission of the ministry of culture again came to the kiev-pechersk lavra to seal some premises. this whole story has been going on since march 29, 2023. believers and the monks of the uoc mp did not give the commission access to these buildings, which were supposed to be sealed, in what way do you think the state should act here, i.e. evict or not evict these monks, in what way to use force and show that in ukraine there is still a state and the government power institutions and the decisions of these power institutions must be implemented, well, look, decisions

must be implemented when these decisions are fully in line with the law, international conventions, the practice of the european court of human rights, obviously there are no moscow monks not only in the kyiv-pechersk lavra, but also in pochaev, in all other churches, and that is why my colleagues and i submitted bill 8221, which prohibits the activities of the russian church in ukraine, given that it poses a threat to national security and there is no other way to limit its influence of this church, in addition to adopting this law, we know that there is also a government bill that is much weaker, which will again drag all these stories into the courts for several years, but even this government bill does not want to be adopted by the council. it is precisely because all this is decided in the courts it takes a long time to decide, this gives the moscow popes every reason to speculate and show the ukrainian state as weak and unable to protect the national security of ukraine

from the influence of the activities of the moscow church . it seems to me that unfortunately the representatives of the ukrainian state went down the wrong path, having absolutely positive wishes to limit the influence of the russian church, but not it is possible to do this in pieces by cutting off the tail bluntly in parts of the sides , it squeals a lot, and many people get the impression that there is some pressure on the activity of this churches but if this church is actually a representative of the aggressor country, a branch of the russian army, and its leader is sanctioned, then its activity is of course undesirable , therefore, from my point of view, it is all either an imitation by the government of its activity, and this is very bad, because when people see that during the war, the government weak they start to doubt themselves or really the government lacks legally correct steps in order to solve it one way or another it looks shameful and these russian priests cannot be there instead if they really renounced the influence of the russian

churches with ties to moscow, they could continue to serve or they would also go to the ptu, but for now, as we see, they are not going to do this, we have already mentioned your draft law, which you are the author of, on ensuring the strengthening of national security in the sphere of freedom of conscience and the activity of religious organizations that are supposed to actually ban the activities of the russian orthodox church in ukraine, and was there any reaction of the authorities to this draft law because, well , when the authorities need it, they can pass this draft law very quickly, considering on the fact that the majority in the verkhovna rada is pro-government and the president can eventually help in this process or have there been at least some steps in this direction, well, first of all , among the authors of this bill, besides me, there are many representatives of the pro-government faction, this is an inter-factional bill, it is a party bill

it was signed by many people's deputies , despite the fact that there was an order for the president to develop the kaminov draft law on december 1. i criticize him, but despite the fact that i criticize him, i would vote for him. well, for him. by the way, even the moscow church would vote, because at the all-ukrainian council of churches, she supported this bill knowing that it would not have any serious consequences for her, but even in spite of this the support of the russian church itself is not brought to the hall, because there are a lot of people in the hall, and where this church is, in particular, in the provlat faction , but not only among them, they are not ready to vote , and because of that, the government should bring it to the hall, because these people are not ready to vote for it and in this with from my point of view, the problem is very big, obviously the president should understand this situation, uh, meet with the authors of two draft laws , one author, the cabinet of ministers, as i already said , initiated by the minister of justice, the other author , a group of people's deputies, should

meet with a group of these deputies to hear different points of view and we should optimally find a way out of this situation so that the state does not become so ashamed as it is happening now, but so far nothing like this is happening, that is, the current government. i understand that it is going to rely on the of the moscow church, because we understand that there are a lot of parishes in the branch of the russian orthodox church in ukraine. well, according to the survey of the razumkov center in may 2023, 45.7% of respondents answered the question: can the state interfere in church affairs until the liquidation of that or other church structure gave the answer yes, but in exceptional cases, for example, when it concerns national security. that is , it turns out that 54% are against the state interfering even in exceptional cases. how do you

explain these figures? why do people who understand that the russian orthodox church blesses the army, the russian army for killing ukrainians, ukrainians themselves believe that this church cannot be banned as such, which acts against the national interests of ukraine. well, you know various polls, i see polls that almost 80% of ukrainians believe that the activities of the russian churches in ukraine should be banned and as a rule there are several gradations in polls. therefore, even in this poll, for does not mean that the majority is against. of ukrainians obviously supports the closure of the russian church in ukraine. and this church, which is so to speak, i am in unity with it. if this unity is broken, then it can calmly work and continue to be great in ukraine, and i also support it. because we have, there really should be freedom of conscience, but it does not break this unity and continues to be a tool of the russian aggressor, that's the whole problem, i don't think that the government wants to ask about

this electorate now. i think that they relied on it when they went to the elections and what do we mean by the government? i mean significant part of the deputies from the servant of the people faction, not the majority, but a significant part. and this is exactly the part that relied, they now do not want to vote for it. the cultural policy of mr. mykola is also part of our security. especially during the war, and it is obvious that we are talking about broader powers and more the extensive activities of the ministry of culture and information policy during the war, because it is also a separate front, how is the ministry of culture dealing with this now according to your opinion, and how do you feel about the fact that the public signed an appeal to shmygel about the resignation of the minister of culture and information policy oleksandr tkachenko and shmygal well, he did not accept this petition and said that in principle there is nothing to talk about yet . well, you see. unfortunately, the ukrainian parliament does not currently have the practice of eavesdropping

on the cabinet of ministers and members of the cabinet of ministers because to the monument, which should be added to other ministers, which to mr. shmygel, there are a lot of different questions and i would like to hear the answers to them in the parliament, why is there such a large number of ukrainian works of art was exported, why was such a quantity destroyed, how should we restore all of this, how many were destroyed in general, for example , monuments of the history of the same scythian mounds, how many museums were destroyed , well, the ministry sometimes talks about this, but it is calm and conversations there was no meeting with deputies on this topic, but it is extremely necessary because it is part of our heritage that should become the basis of our future and should become part of the recorded crimes committed by the russian occupiers on ukrainian territory , obviously all this was not done when we we talk about how ukrainian culture