[000:00:00;00] questions for both before last year with the un they prepared an agreement against e grain on the 17th does this agreement expire or is there any road map in this regard in order to extend it and besides o-o-o in march on march 22 2018, meetings were held with the two sides in our we continue our work on the grain corridor and in s- after july 17, as far as we can continue we are also working on this

, our wish is that it continues more than once every two months or at least although at least once every three months it's us we expect it and we will our efforts to apply to this and try to extend the term of this agreement for a period of two years, again, this, uh, this issue we discussed today with the president with and god willing, in the future with putin and the phone and uh, tet-a - tet, we will be able to personally discuss this issue as one of the most important issues on the agenda, in the same way in africa, poor countries are looking in our direction, uh , they are waiting in them, they are waiting in the evening

, today we also discussed the issue of 12 ships that are blocked in ukrainian veparts and dast god, these ships will also be released, they told us that they will make efforts for this, and these are turkish ships and our businessman , uh, it was also reassuring when these vessels will uh, uh, be released, and for the continuation of the grain corridor, uh, we continue to work and hope to get a result i didn't hear this part of your question because there was no translation. unfortunately, if you repeat it, please. i just don't know what you asked, and the first number. well, the first part of your question was about

grain, and i can say that the whole world interested in making the grain corridor work, and it is very important and very important that we start acting with partners in such a way that the life of the grain corridor, which means from the lives of other people, as mr. president said, on other continents, including africa, because this life does not depend on the mood with which the president of the russian federation woke up, we are all independent states, we have this corridor today, it is not free, but it is structured in such a way that it is difficult due to the fact that russia blocks the black sea. i believe that there should be different corridors, and when we talk about the release of ships, unblocking is very necessary so that russia simply does not want to destroy and not shoot at this ship so that it is possible

to release these ships and unblock them. this applies to our mykolaiv region and we do not need to gather in us, there are a lot of different problems and challenges. we can't gather every time to think about how to live the next two months for the people of the world

. good night. we wish you that we had enough strength to stop the mountain at the beginning of the war. every day we find the strength step by step to return ours and we will definitely have enough strength

to reach victory. and we stand, there will be green, and we will sing, the water will go away, and hatred will remain , the forest will turn into a sea, the enemy will disappear, and we will win. ukraine stood ukraine stood ukraine will stand glory to ukraine glory to ukrainians human trafficking

sexual or labor exploitation real due to loss of homes lack of funds confiscated documents means of communication restricted movement access to medicine rest food forced or induced to act of a sexual nature drawn into financial dependence due to debts all these are signs of falling into a situation of human trafficking found themselves in danger or you see that found others call learn more about safety rules and opportunities to help national telethon the only news continues and we are now starting a discussion studio we will to discuss the approaching of such a fateful event for ukraine, this is the nato summit, which is to be held next week in freedom volodymyr zelenskyi, take part in it, said secretary general natagen stoneberga, we can say that this is the first major official

statement of this level about the participation of the ukrainian president, and i will say that kyiv is officially participating the head of state at this summit has not yet confirmed at the bank repeatedly stated that zelenskyi's trip depends on specific decisions that can be made in vilnius. so what does stoltenberg's statement mean and what ukraine can hear at the nata summit, today we will talk with our experts, the studio reminds us of our opportunity to look ahead a little and talk about what we will be offered, what will suit us with what we will be offered, and what we will stand for , actually, as we understand, disappointment is very often it depends on the fact that we have either inflated or other expectations, that is , on what expectations ukrainians should prepare for the summit, where the real betrayal is not to disperse immediately, that we were not accepted that means everything has disappeared, the alliance must disperse the air alarm about this, please get your bearings, we want to talk about it with our

guests, please get to know us taras horodnyi , managing partner of the national anti-crisis group, we welcome you ihor chemnyi, head of the permanent delegation of ukraine to nato, people 's deputy of ukraine from the partner e nato people's deputy of ukraine faction servant of the people we congratulate you good evening well, petro brukovsky executive director of the lyalka kucherov democratic initiative foundation congratulations congratulations let's get started from the last event today, the president is in turkey, we know that turkey is a very difficult country for many countries that are moving into nato. this way if it can at least not be a hindrance well yes antennas let's start with you here turkey is really a military ally of ukraine and uh does much more than some

countries turkey we have so far from our partners such a weapon system and such. well, we saw that despite its behavior , including with russia, well, turkey did the main thing at the beginning of the war, it prohibited the entry of warships of the russian federation into the black sea, although according to the montreux doctrine of 1934, it was not obliged to do this because article 20 or 21 reads as follows: if there are military actions on the territory of the black sea in the waters of the black sea and it does not directly threaten turkey, then it own discretion does not they made this decision, as well as this one, in fact, it greatly eased the task of defending our coast. of course, it is very difficult, not just difficult , mr. erdoğan is a person, but he is the president of turkey, he is not the president of ukraine. in our country, the president of ukraine protects the interests

of ukraine, and the president of turkey protects the interests of his own states. i think that it was about nato. i think that it was about the grain corridor. it is not excluded that the expansion of the supply of weapons is possible, because we already see turkey on the battlefield , and we already see turkish armored vehicles and turkish mlrs. a lot of other things, so there can be different options and well, of course, the horde is a direct way of communication with putin, he maintains this functionality and any method should be used in order to keep including one's own interests, including with such difficult partners as turkey , okay nato, what can turkey do to help or want to, because we know that turkey always plays only on its side. well, there is sweden, if we speak objectively, there is a completely different story there, it is related to the fact that sweden, as such

a liberal country, supports the kurds. even if i am not mistaken, there are several deputies from the kurds, and this of course worries turkey very much, because the kurds, if you look at the map, cover almost a third of the territory of the ethnic bodybuilder, he is in cancer in several countries, including in iran and turkey and syria in including that there is, of course, that turkey looks at this issue quite painfully, and there is more of an internal political issue and the issue that turkey defends in its own way, or do i think that they will reach an agreement with sweden because turkey has already received what it wanted from them the supply of european weapons, which they wanted to do for a long time, and i think that in the end they will reach some kind of agreement , they will be given something by erdogan, they will get an additional resource for themselves, and i think that it is more likely that some concessions can be made now, as many countries as of today have already officially announced

their support for ukraine's accession to nato, because in recent weeks they have watched such a parade of these applications for official support, how important is it in general for the entire procedure? a political invitation and this is a political decision, a political decision of all the countries that i have in nato, because all decisions in nato are made exclusively by consensus, and the more countries that publicly advocate for ukraine in nato are on our side, the more i think the pressure will be on those who hesitate and but he hesitates, let's emphasize here that they are hesitating not not native ukraine in nato but how and in what way and when it will become a member of nato now, well, i will not reveal the secret to anyone that the main position of the united states today is dominant in this in this issue so far we have not heard from the united states a direct direct invitation but there are certain signals

let's say from the hills there are certain signals from the white house that ah this will definitely be more than an open door policy we emphasize that it should still be a political invitation, possibly with some stipulations that it should be after a-a or when the security conditions allow, for example, that's why i believe that there are 20 one country that has already spoken and it really creates pressure there , including to the united states and to others countries, and i think that this is a fairly positive dynamic that we will already see in vilnius , the results of which, peter, to you. then the question is: how do you see the position of washington and the position of the kora now, are they on whose side? i think that politics and what, by the way, has done in the last 16 months shows that it considers russia as a strategic rival, but not as an enemy, and this is explained by the fact that it erdogan can

call putin, then he can call erdogan. well, they have very different interests , they are rivals in the middle east, in the balkans in the transcaucasia and in the black sea, and in order not to strengthen their rival, they did not launch these ships, not because they like ukraine, and of course they would not want russia to fully control the entire northern coast of the black sea in the north. to erdoğan yes, what is the air doing in kyiv now, unfortunately, as far as the united states is concerned, well, you see, i think that a month ago, let's talk with turkey on turkey , is it profitable for ukraine to join nato or not? benefit when successfully completed as if the offensive of the operation is now in the south, that is, turkey will wait until the end of the summer-autumn campaign, maybe

a winter one, but they want ukraine to give the attacks slipaks and so on. certain planes are given to turkey, that is why ukraine is given, so this is the argument that the planes were issued, of course, but you do not want to give them to the allies who are part of nato, well, it is unfair, it is beneficial for them that we strengthen that's right, but uh, they will delay the decision, because we have nato, that's why washington is here, unfortunately, what we see when we look at the united states, there are two parties, the party that believes that ukraine's victory in the war, a decisive victory, will give biden chances to be re-elected and strengthen his chances another party in the white house believes that the continuation of the war increases the risks for the united states and may have a bad effect on biden's electoral chances , that is, the main thing here is for us and this pressure that we create that the closest allies of the united

states say, do you understand the question - it is not the question of the election is not a question of the election campaign, it is a question of the future of europe, if there is no security in europe , then we will not be able to buy your debt obligations, your investments will not be able to come , there will be no trade, you do not want to preserve transport, antique trade, you want to save the world economy from the crisis, help ukraine to win war in russia, this is a very strong argument from among the twenty-one countries that have already spoken in favor of granting the ukrainian mrs. yehor e-e rights and giving political consent to the political entry of ukraine, gentlemen, we are now talking about a new agreed entry into the alliance, the entry of nato, and quite recently it was literally three or four months ago in ukraine at a bank presentation of the ukrainian security agreement , the frontmen were yarmak and rasmos, then the former secretary general of nato came to kyiv specially and i spoke with him then because there were many very skeptics about this kyiv

security agreement . that the agreement will be in effect until the day when we will become full members of the alliance, and thus it would supposedly have to support and protect us before we become what is nemenata , but then rasmus said that after kyiv he is going to gather support to sign this year and the most important thing is how he said that as soon as the united states signs this agreement, they say that the number of people who will be ready to sign will increase; time has passed, we hear nothing more about the kyiv security agreement. what do you know, what happened to it? next. and the fact that it collapsed, so to speak, does it mean that the states never agreed ? well, first of all, regarding nato, joining nato is always politics, when they start talking about the criteria, it's not all you know for

weaklings, relatively speaking. when they took nato portugal in 1949 was actually an authoritarian dictatorship that was very similar to mussolini's dictatorship until 1973. there was no democracy there. turkey, when it was in nato in 1952 , did not meet anya's criteria in terms of corruption and not authoritarianism and democracy, but the bosphorus, the dardanelles, and specialists in such uh-uh influence on the middle east and so on from the latest political decisions , this is what kolbania is if you look at albania there, yes, when we are reproached that we have some problems there, there are problems there, yes, i look i don't understand something, but who else here differentiates, they don't have an army. but why was it accepted because it is the adriatic coast and why was montenegro also taken because of corruption there are many issues of authoritarianism but why is the adriatic coast the only place where china

and russia go what could turn on its base like this that is why we must understand that it is always politics when all these conversations start . we can face each other if we start playing these games, we can face the fact that the decision to join or not to join nato will not be made by turkey, but by urban in hungary, who has built a corrupt regime, an authoritative regime that will twist our hands, you know. we should not, you know, on such conversations and investigations are conducted because you know how to trick the world, also the builder regarding the security of the exit, this is the right move , so we must always integrate large , large systems. we must be part of a large system. when zelensky says that

we must be part of european security , this is the right approach because it is not about ukraine and where it is about the security of all european countries and even not only eastern and central europe, because it is clear to everyone , it is becoming clear, including europeans in including the americans, but we must understand what else is the contradiction between europe and america now , after all the events, europe now considers russia as stable because they still fear the collapse of the russian state, even the events that have taken place have not gone anywhere with the entrance hall with the handsome beauty, they have not moved their position yet. why, because it is very inertial, the fears of the americans, and here it is necessary to add to that, no, they are not yet. that is correct, in every interview when zelensky speaks and says that the government is weak

there, everyone is so rotten. in other words, you were afraid that after the victory of ukraine, russia would begin to fall apart, begin not to control its own territory, and so on, dear, we have bad news for you. even with a live chip, he can no longer control some processes , our partners are already saying that it is necessary to prepare for this. that the british here play the main role in our wars, they ignite them, including, you know, there is a starter, and there is an engine, and the starter always works for us great britain well , they also have experience in building an empire, everything else. asked the question what are we already preparing for the collapse of the russian federation, this is the russian state, we should discuss this question, by the way, there may be another question in

vilnius, dear ones, and what will you do when chaos begins in the russian state, say this disintegration is controlled, yes, the word is not controlled, then we insert our functionality into it, we say give us more weapons. we must be stronger if you have problems, for example, on the territory of the border territory, so ukraine can form peacekeeping contingents, for example , citizens of the russian federation. well, there freely russia, with which we have no relations. and if you have problems with the control of nuclear weapons, which do you also have? well, please. we also have people who can do it. well, there is a center and the sbu who can to take control of these warehouses and this was understood by the functional and this was understood by the functional, including for the anglo-saxons, it is necessary to throw these things at them, and mr. taras, let's see what america really thinks.

president freedom house 94th 2004 welcome you live 1+1 we are just talking about the expectations from the nato summit about what the position of the united states will be. well , by chance, i want our editors now they showed what materials, well, not even material, but an advertising column appeared in the newspaper for the washington post today, organized precisely by our volunteer fund together for ukraine , written by ukraine in the tone of my history joe ukraine, take ukraine to nato right now , let them call on biden to create history p andriana what do you think will create biden's history in vilnius his position is unlikely to be in the works in vilnius maybe in the works for the 75th anniversary of nato in april in washington but i think that there is still some uh-uh some

progress in the statements of stoltenberg today who, i think, also put forward the thesis that the war does not necessarily have to be an obstacle for the integration of ukraine into nato and there are many presidents er where one can even imagine that there were presidents in the history of nato where there were er formed certain developments that converged with certain realities for 20 years until the federal republic of germany did not recognize the gdr. the federal republic was a member of nato, having territories that it considered to be part of its heritage. it is that they are the heirs of precisely these territories that they considered to be temporarily from

limited by them and will be integrated in the future , that is why nato had a country that was only partially protected by the s---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- some departments, such as martinique and réunion, which were not considered although they were considered by france to be departments and part of france, they were not considered to be under the cover of nato, so i think that this is a certain shift, it indicates that even if ukraine is not recapturing the entire territory and even if there is no agreement, it is already beginning. i think a different orientation. i think that nato and nato leaders understand that if they expressed the demands that the integration of ukraine depends on peace with russia, russia will wage

war forever. if you do not express that the entire territory of ukraine must be integral, they would have to too, and russia would also understand that it is necessary to hold on to these territories in order to actually prevent this. i think that there are certain such shifts here and everything is going. i think it is in the right direction, although it must be said that there is. i would say the remnants of this mentality that arose in the era of obama, which, by the way, members of his administration are very obamaed administration continue to influence the foreign policy of america and this and this idea that russia has an escalating advantage in relation to ukraine that russia will be ready to make more efforts more to take steps to protect one's interests and one's vision in relation to ukraine than

the western world. i think that this idea is still echoing a little in the administration. i think it has not moved, but still it is there somewhere. nuclear blackmail is the fear of the possible fallout of the nuclear countries of america and russia, and that's all a little bit, it's all to be clarified, after all , a little fear or not, because i want to quote another publication, the new york times , recently printed an article about what happened , stop nau where it was clear it is stated that the victory of ukraine and the collapse of russia, and here we see this article by thomas friedman that a victory that will lead to the collapse of russia can be worse for america and for the whole world than the loss of ukraine, but such voices scare us very much when they are heard all the more on the eve of the sinking itself, is there really anything left? what part of politics, in particular, we in the white house, who sees this red line, what will be better

? what will happen if only russia does not disintegrate . i think that there is a certain feeling that even biden himself believes that ukraine should win back its territory, but you are afraid that ukraine will cross the line and stop - will - start more large-scale military operations on russian territory , and i think that all these decisions regarding the supply of the necessary equipment to ukraine, they are restrained precisely by this. but i think that ukraine can agree with the main allies on a certain certain behavior and rules of the game as it conducts war and overcome these uh these reservations about the stability of russia , unfortunately yes i think we have we are facing

this idea just as we have seen it for 33 years therefore, when the collapse of the soviet union and when bush came, bush sr. came and warned the ukrainian elite against the danger of the dissolution of the empire, the world somehow coped with it. i think that this is a smaller problem. i think there is a bigger problem that are afraid that russia can use tactical nuclear weapons or that russia and america can directly enter into the conflict, but here i think you can find different ways to avoid it, even including the fact that america and other countries give e-e security guarantees of the security of ukraine, for example, america can use